Actually, I think it will be Pataki, Rudy can't run for the senate and then turn around and run for president (especially against the same person).
I agree and I thought Pataki would challenge Schumer for the Senate seat in 2004. He is 1 year into his third (and I expect final) term, didn;t have to defend the Gov seat, and really had nothing to lose.
I consider Schumer more vulnerable than Hilly, though only marginally. I can see Pataki beating Schumer easier than I can see him beating Hilly, who I figure the females of the Empire State, in large enough numbers, will support no matter what. Just overhear any Lawn Giland soccermom convention after a 'day trip' to shop in Manhattan in Granc Central Terminal - it's Hilly country, people!
I just as soon see Rudy run fro President at this point - a Senate loss to Hilly in 2006 would take a bit of the 'shine' off him, but that being said, he needs to do something to keep the 'shine' on him for another 4 years if he is to be a credible candidate in 2008.
All this being said, while I think Hilly is a good campaigner who can raise a lot of $ in a national run, and has friends in both the right and the low places, I don't think she is nearly the 'shoe in' at the primary stage, nor the general election stage, as her fawners like to think.