Constitutionally, at least as originally written, gave equal weight to three branches of government: Executive, Legislative, and Judicial.

Citizens cannot vote for Judicial (except at the lowest level), and we've certainly obsessed over the Executive branch in several other postings.

Here are current projections for the Legislative branch, from www.voteprojections.com:

Senate:



House:



For example, here, in Oregon, we have a tight Senate race involving incumbent Republican Gordon Smith versus Democrat Jeff Merkley.

Here's a Gordon Smith commercial invoking Willie Horton:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaM6OtLiwgo&feature=user

Gordon Smith is the 10th richest member of congress with a net worth of $28.65 million and and once paid $1.25 million to buy four antique golf clubs.

So, obviously, it's a battle between a well-heeled Republican Goliath with an antique four-iron against a pro-rape Democratic David.


Any good races going on in your neck of the woods?

Dems will gain in both houses, but they're not picking up six in the Senate. And why does that map have NY listed as "Weak DEM?" We don't even have a Senate seat up this year.

As for your House map...



...I'm 95% certain that NY will gain at least one Democratic seat (the 13th, being vacated by This Douchebag.)

NY Senate is gray on my computer, meaning no race.

And WOW, you had a drunken Republican congressman named Vito?

Looks kinda bluish on mine. That explains it, though.

I imagine the Democrats will gain in both the House and Senate but it won't be at my state's expense. The only possible race here is between Pat Roberts and Jim Slattery (former House member about a decade or so ago). Roberts is too popular in the western half of the state for Slattery to win but he might make it kind of close. He should have waited until 2010 when Brownback's seat opens up he would have a chance then. I think he was afraid that Sebelius wouldn't get a spot in the Obama adminstration and would run for Brownback's seat when her current term of governor ends in the same year. Kansas elections are pretty predictable, Republicans always win the Senate (I don't think there has been a Democratic Senator in Kansas since I've been alive.). Republicans always win the 1st District (basically the western two third of the state). Democrats usually win the 3rd District (suburban Kansas City). Only the 2nd (Topeka and the rest of NE Kansas outside of the K.C. area) and the 4th (Wichita and SE Kansas) ever go back and forth between the parties.

Did "What's the Matter with Kansas?" sell a lot in your state, Unknown Pervert?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What%27s_the_Matter_with_Kansas

" Not long ago, Kansas would have responded to the current situation by making the bastards pay. This would have been a political certainty, as predictable as what happens when you touch a match to a puddle of gasoline. When business screwed the farmers and the workers - when it implemented monopoly strategies invasive beyond the Populists' furthest imaginings -- when it ripped off shareholders and casually tossed thousands out of work -- you could be damned sure about what would follow.

Not these days. Out here the gravity of discontent pulls in only one direction: to the right, to the right, further to the right. Strip today's Kansans of their job security, and they head out to become registered Republicans. Push them off their land, and next thing you know they're protesting in front of abortion clinics. Squander their life savings on manicures for the CEO, and there's a good chance they'll join the John Birch Society. But ask them about the remedies their ancestors proposed (unions, antitrust, public ownership), and you might as well be referring to the days when knighthood was in flower."

I would imagine it did okay. You can never have too much toilet paper.