Huntsman, if he runs, will be running to beat Obama in 2012.  Nobody knows what looms ahead in 2016.  Your idea that Huntsman is actually doing this for an angle on  a 2016 run presupposes that Huntsman is a political genius able to predict political events 5 years in the future and is assuming an Obama re-elect.  Way to handicap yourselves.

history shows that most liberal activists who start blogging end up doing phenomanal work for the campaigns they end up working for.  Not to hype you too much, but you're a great political analysist, and I think you're going to be a great asset to the candidates you work for in the mid-terms.  

seriously?

I agree with everything else in your post, but given the current makeup of the US Senate, that's a bit of hyperboyle.  After all, he did help bring some Republicans over to stop a fillibuster on the Stimulis bill.  My vote is for retiring Sen. Jim Bunning, who over his 12 year career has done nothing for his state and has been completely uninterested in lawmaking unless it involves steroid abuse in baseball.

has been a television personality, rather than a serious political consultant, for decades now.  I mean, if you're saying you're through with the Democratic party because of hacks like Carville embarrassing the movement, you aren't in touch with what progressives have been doing to reshape the Democratic party during the Bush years.

lol.  But I'd like to see some better organizing for Halter's campaign.  It isn't happening yet in the polls, despite Lincoln running both for and against the Demcocratic patry's agenda in a Democratic primary.

worked for Romney's Presidential campaign in the past, right?  Yeah, I find his lack of conviction oddly compelling...

Beck is pretty damn serious about triangles, and inverted triangles.  I'll give him that.

lol -they're trying to repeat 1994 this year, remember.

I disagree -I don't think Meeks is a good candidate for Democrats in Florida, which is why so many progressives are pushing for Crist to get out of the GOP primary.  There are differences with Connecticut -I think the GOP will push for Rubio in ways that the Dems never did for Lamont in the primary.  But I also think Crist is way more mallable that Lieberman.

He'll pull a Lieberman and become an independent when he loses the GOP primary.  Given the considerable amount of progressive support for Crist as a viable candidate against Meeks, I suspect most Florida Democrats will vote for Christ in the same way most Connecticut Republicans voted for Lieberman against their own nominee in 2006.

I think the biggest problem with the Democrats is holding a majority in the Senate in 2010, where polls seem to be suggesting that the GOP is very competitive in winning a number of Dem Senate seats rather than House seats.  I think what Jon is pointing out is that, for the most part, Blue Dogs in the House are leading in the polls, or are at least competetive in really tough districts.  On the Senate side, Dems are trailing by double-digits in places like Delaware.  Which I think reflects the idea that most American people think that Senate incumbancy is a problem and a roadblock to governing.

the Democrats are really raising way more money than the GOP this year?  That's how they can beat the GOP.

You must have been pretty die-hard about Edwards, because I never thought the $400 haircut attack was a very effective campaign tactic.  I certainly don't think it derailed his campaign.  I think most Democrats watched him closely during the primaries, took his campaign seriously, decided he wasn't really Presidential material, and opted for Obama or Clinton instead.