Democrats poised for a big night in the Senate?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would prefer that it were Rehberg up 4 and Berg down 2, because in ND you can't definately make the case for a GOP underpolling, not as much for MT.

Their is a history of Montana being difficult to pin down before election day, I was certain that Tester would win by 15% to 20% in 2006 and it ended up being the closest raw margin in 2006 I beleive. You had a lot of Conservatives, overlook Burns' ties to Abramoff and stuff and come home at the end when it looked like it might determine the Senate majority. It won't this time but it is being billed as such in the media. Obama did really well there in 2008, then proceeded to rack up some high negative numbers there afterwards. There is the potential for a Romney to be underpolling by a point or two and with the race so close for Senate, that could be the difference.

I think Akin draws still closer then the polls are suggesting even, but still falls short by 1% or 2% and it will come down to his negatives being so high.

Flake probably has Arizona (ironic becuase three weeks ago IN was more solid then AZ), and Donnelly has Indiana.

I think the Republicans will have anywhere from 45 to 48 seats, probably 46 to 48 seats. A net gain of 2 is hardly a big night for Democrats. It is a disaster for a GOP that was poised to take over control of the Senate just four months ago when IN was likely secure (all Mourdoch had to do was shut up about eveything except Obama, Obamacare and Harry Reid and he would have had an 5%-8% win), VA was tied, FL was bobbing back and forth, Thompson and Scott Brown were ahead and Akin was at 17% in the primary.

I think the critical lesson going forward is not that OMG TP is horrible, but that incumbents and candidates in general regardless of faction need to take a much more sobering look at large early leads that can easily vanish overnight and focus on the mechanics and voting blocs in these primaries that will ensure that whatever happens and whoever surges, that they have deep pocket of support to carry them to a victory. That is in the end the only reason we are talking about Fischer by 5-8 and McCaskil by 2-4 instead of Bruning by 20 and Steelman by 12 is just that. Also, no freshmen House members as Senate candidates in targetted states. There were far better candidates in ND then a relatively untested Rick Berg.