electoral-vote.com now projecting 51 Dems, 49 Reps

[Poiuyt]

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2006/Maps/Nov04.html

He puts MO and VA in the Democratic side even though they are VERY close

[Eric J in MN]

1. From their lips to God's ears.

Also, let's GOTV with MoveOn's "Call for Change."

[Pab Sungenis]

2. Actually, his math leaves us 50-50

because we all know there's no way Lieberman's going to caucus with us. It's going to be 50 Democrats, 50 Republicans.

We need to hold those two AND flip Tennessee!

[sallyseven]

3. Lieberman will not give up his seniority

He is too vain.

[maseman]

4. Agreed

I know it seems Joe would flip to Repuke, but he would give up his seniority. No way. He will remain a Dem which chokes me to say "Thanks god."

[Pab Sungenis]

8. But if he controls the balance of power

he could wind up with MORE seniority and power in the Republican Caucus. That's what scares me. He's closer to them in general, so it would be a natural switch.

There's also the likelihood that * will finally fire Rumsfeld and nominate Lieberman to replace him. That would leave an open seat that Jodi Rell would appoint a Republican to.

WE NEED TO FLIP TENNESSEE AND/OR OHIO. WE CAN'T COUNT ON JOE'S SEAT.

[Bucky]

5. It is reality-impared to think Lieberman won't caucus with the Democrats.

I know we don't like him here, but he's winning his reelection because he's a smart politician. He'll caucus with the Democrats--that's where his power lies.

[LTR]

7. Besides

I don't think he'll have as much luck running as a Republican in six years.

[qazplm]

6. oh good grief

we all despise the man, but reality is what it is. Why would he caucus with the Republicans now when in only two years he could see a Dem president elected and no change or improvement in our hold on the Senate and then he will definitely be in the wilderness then for 4 years, when he can wait until 2008, see who wins, and then if so inclined switch THEN?