So, who is going to be Hillary's running mate?

If the Dems want to keep looking at the White House from the outside, Hillary! is just the ticket. I don't think she's electable.

Anyway, they have another four years to figure out what works -- and they won't be up against an incumbent.

And finally, man, oh man, did Zogby ever screw the pooch with their projections yesterday. 311 or more electoral votes for Kerry? Virginia a tossup?

"So, who is going to be Hillary's running mate?" - Patrick

You mean, like, against George W. Bush in 2008? or perhaps against, um, George W. Bush in 2012?

I think Jeb will wax Hillary's hairy heinie in 2008. Maybe Jeb will be able to persuade Harold Ford to switch parties and run as his veep candidate. Ford is approximately the only sane ratsocrat in Congress.

You mean, like, against George W. Bush in 2008? or perhaps against, um, George W. Bush in 2012?

Ooh, a little upset are we?

I think it's interesting to note how there was a lot of hemming and hawwing to put it nicely over whether the electoral college was a good system as Bush did not win the popular vote in 2000. In 2004, there could be a possible turnabout IF Ohio is turned around in the "provisional ballots". IF that happens, Kerry would win the 20 electoral votes to win the campaign, yet he would NOT have the majority popular vote.

Tim, I think you are right on. Hillary would be a terrible choice from an electability standpoint for the Dems.

But as the primary system is set up with her "Star" power she has got to be the odds on favorite in 2008.

I heard the talking heads last night marvel that without a Southerner at the top of the ticket, the Dems have almost no shot with the South a near electoral college lock for the GOP.

Then they got to discussing the slow but steady transition of the Senate seats from mostly older conservative Dems to GOP seats - Isakson, Vitter, Burr, Demint and likely Martinez were all Southern GOP pickups in the Senate. Most of the House delegations are now solidly GOP (21 of 32 in TX, 5 of 7 in Alabama, potentially 6 of 7 in Louisiana, 18 of 25 in Florida). The only hold outs in the South are Arkansas with 3 of 4 Dems in the House and Tennessee with 5 of 9.

The dots they didn't connect were if the the Dems must have a Southerner at the top of the ticket and if the Congressional delegations are increasingly bereft of Dems, where will that candidate come from? Is anyone excited about Blanche Lincoln? Mary Landrieu? I haven't seen enough of Mark Pryor but I don't think he's the guy. John Edwards was a "rising star" but he's simultaneously lost his seat in the Senate and was on a losing national ticket where he failed to deliver his home state. I'd say Rep. Harold Ford is the best candidate but I think he'll aim for the Senate next.

I'd guess the Dems would look to a governor from the South but who? Surely not Kathleen Blanco? What's Mike Easley like? I guess it only takes one person, but right now I don't that one person.

I heard the talking heads last night marvel that without a Southerner at the top of the ticket, the Dems have almost no shot with the South a near electoral college lock for the GOP.

That line of reasoning is false. For one thing, Al Gore would have won in 2000 had he carried New Hampshire. For another, there were plenty of scenarios for a Kerry win that did not depend on Florida. The Gore states plus Ohio would have been more than enough, for example.

What pundits who spew this crap overlook is that the Democrats have an equal lock on the Northeast and the West Coast, for a total of 188 electoral votes (184 if you don't count NH as a lock), compared to 161 in the South. That doesn't count anything in the Midwest or the increasingly competitive Southwest (did you know that Democrats retook control of both chambers of Colorado's legislature yesterday for the first time since 1960?).

Sure, I'd like to see the Dems be more competitive there, but I'm not willing to see them sell their souls to do it. The South is a component of the goal, not the goal itself.

Qba'g ybbx abj, ohg gung nyyrtrq ybpx ba gur abegurnfg naq gur jrfg pbnfg vf rincbengvat. Ohfu ybfg Craan ol 2 cbvagf, naq ybfg ol fvtavsvpnagyl aneebjre znetvaf va AW naq AL.

Gur ovt vffhr sbe gur engfbpengf va gurve orvat rira cnegyl pbzcrgvgvir qrcraqf fbyryl naq pbzcyrgryl ba gur snpg gung oynpxf ibgr 90% sbe gur engfbpengf. Vg vf cresrpgyl boivbhf gung gur engfbpengf unir genqvgvbanyyl eha gurve cbyvpvrf gb xrrc gur oynpxf va obaqntr. V tvir Pyvagba perqvg sbe objvat gb gur varivgnoyr ol fvtavat gur jrysner ersbez ovyy ng gur guveq gvzr bs nfxvat, ohg uvf qrpvfvba rkcbfrq gur snpg gung gur engfbpengf rkcyvpvgyl naq pbafpvbhfyl erpbtavmr gung gurve punaprf sbe ryrpgbeny fhpprff qrcraq ba oynpxf ibgvat sbe gurz va erghea sbe unaqbhgf. Lbh pna frr guvf va gur ubjyvat sebz gur cbiregl cvzcf bs gur engfbpeng cnegl juvpu rehcgrq nsgre Pyvagba fvtarq gur ovyy.

Gur engfbpengf jba'g or noyr gb xrrc gur oynpxf rafynirq sberire. Nf oynpxf tnva va vapbzr naq nffrgf, gurl jvyy vapernfvatyl erwrpg gurve fynirel. Gurl znl fgvyy ibgr znwbevgl sbe gur engfbpengf, ohg ng yrnfg gurl jba'g or qbvat vg nalzber va erghea sbe tbireazrag unaqbhgf.

Vs oynpx fhccbeg sbe gur engfbpengf qebccrq gb rira 70%, gur engfbpengf jbhyq or svavfurq.

Gur enpvfz bs gur engbfpengf vf nccnyyvat, infg, naq fb vatenvarq gung gur engfbpengf ner cebonoyl pbzcyrgryl hanjner bs vg.

That line of reasoning is false. For one thing, Al Gore would have won in 2000 had he carried New Hampshire. For another, there were plenty of scenarios for a Kerry win that did not depend on Florida.

Chuck, that is true. Al Gore would have won had he carried New Hampshire. But that was in 2000, population shifts South mean that had Kerry won the states Gore won in 2004 and added New Hampshire, he still would have lost having added 4 for NH and lost 7 in reapportionment.

And I think you can't count on NH or WV to go to the Democrat every time, just like you can't count NM, NV and CO as sure things for the GOP.

Plus I think you have to recalculate to take into consideration the virtual lock the GOP has on the northern Rockies and the Plains. If you add in the reliably Republican states of OK, KS, NE, SD, ND, MT, WY, ID, UT, and AK (42 EVs) to the virtual Southern hammerlock the GOP leads 203 to 188 heading into the swing states of the Midwest plus the aforementioned stragglers from the Southwest.

Colorado was a serious bright spot for Democrats on an otherwise pretty dark day. Control of the Senate was thought to be in play and ended up with a +3 or 4 gain for the GOP including picking off Daschle. The GOP looks like they'll pick up 6-8 in the House thanks in no small part to Tom Delay's redistricting scheme...which personally I think is an affront to honest democracy. But it went so badly after such high expectations that I don't think McAuliffe will survive.

But the larger picture is what is more disheartening. We are becoming more fractured and divided in our political structure. Everything is a zero sum game and bipartisan collaboration is all but dead and certainly a "dirty" word. We have some systemic problems which are pushing us to nominate the extremists of our party.

I never thought I'd say this, but in a lot of ways, Louisiana's political system gets it right.

The GOP looks like they'll pick up 6-8 in the House thanks in no small part to Tom Delay's redistricting scheme

Actually, it'll be between 0 and +2 for the GOP, depending on two Louisiana runoffs. I think they'll wind up being split, with each party holding its seat (one vacated by Billy Tauzin, the other by Chris John) for a net +1 GOP. As that would have been +4 for the Democrats were it not for DeLay's scheme, it's hard to say that part of the day was a disaster for them.

I'm showing the GOP picking up the 4 Texas seats, KY District 4 and IN District 9. That's 6.

The Dems picked up CO district 3 and GA district 12. Making it net 4.

Louisiana District 3 and 7 are still to be decided and a split in those means it stays at 4. But the leaders in both races are GOP candidates. District 3 has 59% GOP votes while District 7 is about a 51-49% split. That one will depend on who gets out the vote, but Charley Boustany should have a better than fair shot against Willie Mount.

Dems beat Crane in Illinois, won the open seat in New York, but i think we lost Hill in Indiana

Yep, I stand corrected. You are correct about Crane and NY.

Ooh, a little upset are we?

Naw, just giving snark for snark. I am a bit uncertain just how many terms God's self-proclaimed prophet, George "God-speaks-through-me" W. Bush, thinks he can have. The amended Constitution says two. What say you?

Well, let's see: two for W, two for Jeb, two for Laura, then we get Laura to have Dick Cheney resign as veep, she appoints W in his place, and then she resigns, and he appoints her as Veep. So, there's one more. Maybe by then there'll be a bunch of Bush offspring who will run.

I don't recall anybody ever proposing a change to the number of terms a president can run. Trying to pin something else to blame on Bush?

Matt, don't sweat it. Just an attempt a humor on a rough day.

And speaking of humor on a rough day, last night's "The Daily Show" with John Stewart was very interesting, particularly the interview with Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York. There was a bit of a light bulb moment when both realized that maybe everybody in the country didn't view some of the issues particularly social issues, the same way that they did. Sen Schumer suggested that the Democratic Party had some serious "soul searching" to do and they need to examine if and where they had lost touch with the electorate.

The rerun of that show should come on sometime around 5 or 6 p.m. CST today. Catch it if you can.

Abelard: perfect name for a nutless wonder like yourself.

"ratsocrat"??? WTF is that?

Right wing humor?

Seems rather petty and juvenile. Try to show a little class and win gracefully, for once.

"Engfbpeng" vf n evpu, pbybeshy, qrfpevcgvir grez sbe gur yrsg-jvat snfpvfgf bs gur Qrzbpeng cnegl jub checbfryl naq pbafpvbhfyl chefhr cbyvpvrf qrfvtarq gb znxr Nzrevpna pvgvmraf qrcraqrag ba naq orubyqra gb gur srqreny tbireazrag. Abg nyy zrzoref bs gur Qrzbpeng cnegl ner engfbpengf, ohg gubfr jub jbhyq erirefr gur cuvybfbcul bs bhe sbhaqvat snguref, gung nyy evtugf orybat gb pvgvmraf, naq tbireazrag unf bayl gubfr cbjref rkcerffyl tenagrq gb vg, gurfr crbcyr evpuyl qrfreir gur rcvgurg. Gubfr engfbpengf jub cynpr cbyvgvpny znahrire naq crefbany cbjre nobir gurve qhgl gb gur pbhagel evpuyl qrfreir guvf fpbea naq qrevfvba pbairlrq ol gur grez. Gubfr jub, yvxr Wbua Xreel, unir ab svkrq cbfvgvba ba nal vffhr, naq jub ner jvyyvat gb fnl nofbyhgryl nalguvat gb trg ryrpgrq, gurl qrfreir guvf fpbea.