Brown is unquestionably the better bet to win the senate seat.

Hackett should run for Attorney General and start building a democratic bench.

he is buying some insurance on his own neck at the expense of gaining a democratic majority in the senate.

there are several excellent available candidates in nevada: las vegas mayor oscar goodman, henderson mayor jim gibson (looking at governor's race), state sen. dina titus (looking at governor's race), and a couple of others that are slipping my mind.

the bottom line is that this race should be a top tier pickup opportunity: there is a 1st term senator who is not particularly popular or well known in a state in which bush is hemmoraging support. add a democratic advantage on major issues (iraq, social security, gas prices, etc) and good available candidates, and this race should be a toss up at worst.

it is outrageous that reid would let some gentleman's agreement get in the way of a senate pickup. if he were some backbench democrat it would be one thing, but as the democratic leader in the senate it is simply unacceptable.

i hope some senate democrat with a spine (if there are any) will tell reid to spend more time looking out for the caucus than himself

Your use of the stem cell vote is seriously skewing your project.

In a very rare move, the GOP leadership promised that they would NOT whip against the stem cell bill. Republicans did not try to persuade/force GOPers to vote against it - they explicitly freed members to vote their consciences on the issue. The vote had absolutely NOTHING to do with party loyalty (at least on the republican side, which you calculated) because the GOP said it would exert no pressure on members to vote the way the leadership wanted.

While I like what I hear so far about Barbara, there's no way she is going to have the Dem field to herself. While the other names listed have ruled out a Senate run, those decesions were made while Hutchinson was the incumbent, and 99.9% unbeatable (as she will be for Gov. if she manages to win the primary).

Considering Frost's active campaign for DNC chair, I think it is very likely that he will seriously consider this race once again - he does not seem content being outside of politics, and it would be perfect payback for him for yet another redistricted Dem to mount a campaign for higher office. My bet is that he gets in the race, and if he does, he will likely be a slight favorite to get the nomination.

The articles detailing this vote all say that not only did Rep. Castle (R-Del) secure a promise for a vote on this bill, but he ALSO secured a promise that the leadership would NOT whip against this bill. In other words, the GOP leadership did not try to persuade/force GOPers to vote against it - they explicitly freed members to vote their consciences on the issue. Consequently, it is hard to see how this would measure caucus loyalty, since the leadership explicitly refused to ask for loyalty.

Bloomberg is more progressive than Bill Clinton. You don't see Bloomberg cutting welfare benefits and enacting a host of anti-gay measures.

As a new arrival to NYC, I've been following the election closely, and I will proudly be casting my vote for Bloomberg, who also happens to be the first Republican I will have voted for.

Why exactly doesn't he deserve reelection? I just don't see what Dems have against him, other than the "R" next to his name. He is a good man, has done a very good job as mayor after coming into the job in a very difficult position, run a remarkably ethical and clean administration, and has been progressive on a whole host of issues. Hell, he's even endorsed Schumer and is close to endorsing Hillary!

All the complaining about the weak Democratic field is absolute nonsense. There IS a strong progressive in the race and his name is Bloomberg.