Why a (potential) GOP Senate could be short-lived

[wyldwolf]

Senate Democrats have long awaited the 2010 tea party wave to splash back on Republicans during the 2016 election cycle.

That moment is almost here.

After two years of obsessive focus on the teetering reelection prospects of red-state Democrats, the attention is about to shift in a major way to blue-state Republicans. Six of them who rode anti-Obama sentiment to office in 2010 are up in two years, and they’ll face the dual challenge of a more diverse electorate and potentially Hillary Clinton atop the Democratic ticket.

The leftward-tilting map means a GOP-controlled Senate could be short-lived if the party prevails on Tuesday. Even in the best-case scenario for the party, a Republican majority is certain to be slim.

A half-dozen first-term Republicans are up for reelection in states President Barack Obama won in both 2008 and 2012: Mark Kirk of Illinois, Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Rob Portman of Ohio, Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire and Marco Rubio of Florida. Obama also twice carried Sen. Chuck Grassley’s Iowa, but the longtime incumbent would be much tougher to dislodge.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/10/2014-elections-republican-senate-112369.html

[vi5]

1. Apparently it won't matter

Unless we take.....where is the goalpost now......80 Senate seats? 90? 110? I forget what the latest benchmark is for actually getting stuff done.

[Lee-Lee]

2. Is this the new defeatest meme?

Is "It won't last that long" the best we have now?

[wyldwolf]

3. I don't know, is it?

[MannyGoldstein]

4. Plus, there's our new secret weapon

Emails with doggie pictures, pleading for $3.

Between that and Hillary in the new and improved Liberal version, we're unstoppable.