[California Patriot]

I understand. We're really playing a word game here. Whatever the size of the natural advantage, it doesn't matter much unless it produces something. Right now, there are 55 Republican senators, several of whom are more like Democrats. And even if all 55 were good Republicans, the difference between 55 and 60 is huge in the Senate. If states voted for senator the same as they vote for president, we would have 60 by now. And we don't, and there is no prospect of it. Would we be much worse off in the Senate if it were proportioned by population? Probably. But that doesn't mean we have a large advantage in practice under the current system. Whether we have a large one theoretically is an interesting topic, but not one with much political significance that I can see. Rats are pretty good at fooling red-state voters, though our people have wised up a bit.

[AuH2ORepublican]

"Would we be much worse off in the Senate if it were proportioned by population? Probably. But that doesn't mean we have a large advantage in practice under the current system. Whether we have a large one theoretically is an interesting topic, but not one with much political significance that I can see. Rats are pretty good at fooling red-state voters, though our people have wised up a bit."

---

I think you are correct. But when someone writes "Bush won 31 states so we ought to have 62 Senators" he isn't claiming that we *will* knock off every Democrat Senator from a Republican state, he's saying that if we are able to transfer presidential votes to Senate votes (which is becoming easier to do, partly because conservatives are "wising up" as you said, but also due to a much greater polarization of the electorate), we should pick off Senate seats in ND, SD, MT, etc. one by one until we do hold over 60 Senate seats.

In 2004, John Thune stepped up to the plate and beat Senator Tom Daschle. Unless SD Governor Rounds loses his balls all of a sudden, he'll run against Tim Johnson in 2008 and knock him off---Johnson won't be able to steal enough Indian votes to survive. That's the way one gains seats, one at a time. I am extremely disappointed that, once again, North Dakota governors and ex-governors chickened out and did not challenge Democrat Senator Conrad just as it happened in 2004 with Dorgan's seat; that's the reason why 31 Bush states has not translated to 62 GOP Senators. But we have a big natural advantage in Senate races, no question.