One major thing that you are forgetting is the WAVE that hit this country last November 7. The same wave that hit us 12 years ago. Prior to that, three other Waves in the last 40 years.

You are forgetting that this was NOT a normal election cycle. Just like all those incumbent Democratic Senators & incumbent Democratic House members who were swept out of power in 1994.

Without the Huge Democratic Wave that hit our nation, Senators Burns, Talent & Chafee would most likely still be in power. And Tom Kean Jr. would have most likely defeated Menendez in NJ.

The very close margin of victory in MT, MO is proof of that. As for Chafee, ask any friend or relative in Rhode Island. The Chafee's are an Icon in Rhode Island. Their Family has NEVER lost a race prior to Nov. 7 despite years of Democratic voter advantages in the state.

His only sin, as he also repeatedly said, is being a Republican caught in a Nat'l Democratic wave.

Party activists are also talking that if indeed he does switch parties & becomes a Democrat, he will surely be back in power someday maybe as a Governor.

Same in NJ. Any New Jersey party activists would tell you that if not for the strong Anti-Bush Wave in NJ because of Iraq, no way would Menendez beat the popular Kean. In fact, Kean would surely be favored in '08 if he challenges Lautenberg.

That's exactly what a National Wave can do. ( As often warned by Rothenberg & Cook) Some Incumbents who would be safe in a "normal" election year, would find themselves swept out of power because of a very national current.

While Santorum & DeWine would have still lost, other incumbent Republicans like House members especially in the Northeast would have survived a strong challenge without the Anti-Republican Wave.

So Approval Ratings do matter. Look at all the High Approval GOP House members in places like Ohio, NJ & NY who managed to survive the national wave.

Or the High Approval of Gov. Arnold muscleman in California. Despite  the solidly Democratic CA, he handily won.

Unless you expect to see a National Wave every two years, Job Performance does matter.

You have to remember that your average voter out there is not like you & me. We are partisan, active, well informed, Democrats.

They don't vote & analyze things on purely party affiliation. The politicians individual performance is still what matters to them.

Most Independent voters ( who happen to be normal & not political junkies) don't vote based purely on ticket splitting. They still look at the individuals as opposed to voting based on party lines.

The only exception is a Wave. And who knows when the next wave will be.(

Good post. I made a similar comment in the senatorial approval rating thread a week or two ago, that state partisanship and specifically the number of self-identified liberals and conservatives are much more revealing of likely pickups than current approval rating.

Frankly, you can't make the odds high enough on ousting Cornyn, Inhofe or Chambliss. They would have to replicate the Allen and Burns implosive game plans, and toss in plenty of Bunning from 2004. You have to field a strong candidate in case that does happen. Just don't count on it ahead of time. I'll continue to assert our second tier pickup opportunities will come from the states more naturally favorable to us.

Missouri, Virginia and Montana are all in the same neighborhood, in terms of self-identified conservatives if not geophraphy. All are between 35 and 37%. There is a monumental difference once you jump from that level to a Texas or Tennessee, which are in the mid 40s. Just do the basic math, assigning the typical percentage of conservatives voting for the Republican candidate. A Harold Ford would have won easily if Tennessee had the same makeup of a Montana, Missouri or Virginia. If he were in a 40% state he wins. But the extra 4 or 5% is lethal.

I deal with numerical realties like that every day in sports. A college basketball team that allows 63 points per game is significantly more reliable at home than one surrendering 66. A pro QB with 7.5 yards per attempt is a star while 6.8 is a rank mediocrity. I guess it's not as obvious in politics.

In 2002 we stole the Arkansas senate seat from a troubled incumbent, fielding a popular Democrat in Pryor with a family history in the state. That's the only recent senate triumph in an open race or vs. an incumbent in a state with 40+% self-identified conservatives. In 2006 it was unfortunate we didn't have any of the races like Alaska 2004, Florida 2004 or North Carolina 2002/2004. Those potentially could have been won in a wind-blown 3 or 4% climate.

So how do Democrats improve those self-descriptive numbers, like bumping the number of liberals in states like Wisconsin and Montana while dropping conservative percentages in Missouri and Nevada? I have no idea, but I hope the party is working on it. I don't think you can sit back and wait for natural demographic shifts like in Northern Virginia, or sections of Colorado.

The only person i can see taking the second seat in Virgina from John Warner is Mark Warner.