[neverdem]

If we can get only one House, let it be the Senate. It's far more important.

[onyx]

Never settle for taking one chamber of congress.

The House is a MUST.

Too many squishes remain in the Senate and if Castle joins them, it’ll still take another election cycle to send more fossils into forced retirement.

Still, the thought of taking both chambers, puts a smile on my face, even with the squishes, but remember they can be traitors.

[xuberalles]

[dixiechick2000]

It’s a Wave.....

catch it!!!

[element92]

the good news is,
Bush is gone

[eyedigress]

David Letterman was funny in 1987. Does that change?

[counterpunch]

I adamantly disagree.
All we need is enough padding to ensure a filibuster in the senate. Having a slim majority (which I am predicting at this point) is no better than a slim minority. In fact, in some ways it may be worse because unrealistic expectation on a virtually toothless majority may follow. Democrats could filibuster, and 0bama could veto with no chance of an override.

The House, however, sets funding. With control of the House, Republicans could defund 0bama’s bankruptcy agenda. And Republicans would have the power of subpoena.

[sirchtruth]

The problem is if the repubs win WHAT are they going to do?
Does anybody really know? Do they even know?

[cmj328]

We need two cycles of WIN to do anything important.

Don’t let the wave crest this year. It’s important to win this year, but this year isn’t the goal.

Build for 2012, and 75% control of both Houses. And then let’s end abortion and gay marriage and liberalism forever.

[MNJohnnie]

Absolutely not. All spending bills start in the House. Must have the House. We have enough in the Senate to spike anything really nasty.

[avacado]

"If we can get only one House, let it be the Senate. It's far more important."

How is the Senate more important than the House? All money is appropriated in the House. The House can starve the Obama entitlement programs.

[southernnorthcarolina]

I think taking the House this year is both more achievable and more important. If we get close in the Senate, but fall short of a majority, we can prevent a lot of damage through the wonder of "extended debate" or threats thereof.

Though we should avoid counting chickens which are still in the shell, it is hard not to look ahead to the 2012 Senate elections without happy anticipation. Democrats will be defending 23 seats, Republicans only 10. And look at the red state Dems who will be trying to get reelected: the two Nelsons (Bill in FL, Ben in NB); McCaskill (MO); Tester (MT); Conrad (ND); Brown (OH); Webb (VA). If an unpopular Obama is at the top of the Dem ticket, a big GOP year may be possible.

[greeneyes]

I am not so sure about that. Can’t the House simply defund all the Obama garbage and prevent implementation that way?

[SunkenCiv]

Little-known insurgent candidates prepare to storm the Senate. It is starting to feel like 1980.