Another Sign Of Republican Desperation: The Rats Are Turning On Each Other Now

I'm sure by now everyone has seen Trumpanzee's scolding tweet aimed at Paul Ryan yesterday. "I guess we all know who Trump plans to blame for our losses next week," a top Republican House staffer told me minutes after the tweet. "This guy is so fucked up... He's like an albatross around our necks." But it's not just Trump-- well, it's mostly Trump. Yesterday, conservative Florida Congressman Carlos Curbelo was on MSNBC saying he would never vote for Steve King, his neo-Nazi colleague from Iowa who is on the verge of losing his seat to a progressive Democrat in an R+11 district Trump won 61-33%.

It gets worse-- at least for Virginia Republicans. Senator John Warner, the éminence grise of the Virginia GOP, just endorsed Democrat Leslie Cockburn. After 3 decades of representing Virginia, Warner, a lifelong Republican seems to be fed up with the Trumpist extremism and what it's done to his party.

Warner endorsed Sen. Tim Kaine, also a Democrat, in his race against GOP nominee Corey Stewart in September. Warner appeared with Cockburn and Sen. Mark Warner (D) at a fundraiser at Kinloch Farm in The Plains Saturday.

“I’m still a Republican. I’m going to tell this gang, I’m still a Republican,” the elder Warner said in an interview before the event. “You can’t take that away from me. But you’ve got to have the courage to do what’s right for the country and what’s right for your state.”

Warner, 91, took out his iPhone to scroll through Cockburn’s platform as he talked about why he’s publicly backing Cockburn over her Republican opponent, Denver Riggleman.

Warner called Cockburn “an exceptional candidate” and said he agreed with her positions on health care, education and “commonsense gun laws.”

...Warner acknowledged the political tide might be turning in Virginia but called the state “fundamentally conservative.”

“The state stands for firm principles and leans a little bit on the progressive side,” he said.

Cockburn, who served on the board of the Piedmont Environmental Council for a decade, said her strong support for land conservation and environmental-protection issues has won her support among rural Virginia’s more moderate Republicans.

“There are many people who would consider that their very top issue,” Cockburn said of conservation. “And that’s why they would gravitate to me.”

Although the DCCC has finally added Cockburn to their Red to Blue page, neither the DCCC nor Pelosi's House Majority PAC has spent a dime responding to $832,152 worth on vicious smears by Paul Ryan's slimy SuperPAC and its allies. Cockburn is running for an open seat against a far right sociopath, Denver Riggleman, a gin and vodka distillery owner and devotee of Bigfoot erotica. The district has an R+6 PVI and Trump beat Hillary there by 11 points. Today this race is a toss-up and the only recent polling is from the unreliable and gimmicky NY Times/Siena poll, which found Cockburn ahead by one point-- 46-45%. Had the DCCC engaged, the district wouldn't be "toss-up" now by "likely Dem." I have no idea if Warner's endorsement of Cockburn will help on Tuesday but it sure isn't going to help Riggeleman with mainstream conservatives or independents who are already worried that he may be insane because of the BigFoot erotica. (He also wrote a book about Bigfoot.) Yesterday Cockburn was endorsed by John Legend as well!

And speaking of the whole "turning on each other" scenario, CNN reports that White House chief lawyer Don McGahn "ended his tumultuous tenure at the White House with one last encounter" during which the illegitimate "president" blamed him for Robert Mueller’s appointment. "In a face-to-face Oval Office meeting" Señor Trumpanzee "groused to McGahn about Mueller’s appointment made on McGahn’s watch as White House counsel, and the cloud the investigation has continued to cast over the presidency." One source said that "Typically you would have the incumbent stay until the successor was ready to take his place." But in this case, McGahn couldn't stand another moment of the asshole he was working for and the asshole was tired of McGahn. His Putin-Gate testimony and eventual tell-all book should be more than a little interesting.

Trump's racist new ad seems to have shaken up a lot of people. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) isn't running for reelection but he called it "a new low in campaigning; it's sickening." Reporters should ask Ted Cruz and Dean Heller what they think of it. Al Cardenas is probably best known as the former chairman of the Florida Republican Party. Others know him as the chairman of the American Conservative Union. A partner at Squire Patton Boggs, he is also one of Washington's top right-wing lobbyists. He seemed upset this morning:

A postscript to Howie's post (below) about the vote tomorrow on the Webb Amendment: Do we have a senator more useless than Holy Joe Lieberman?

"For some reason, the political establishment persists in seeing him as some sort of independent player when he has actually been one of the more destructive forces in the congress, using his status as elder statesman to give cover over and over again to the worst excesses of the GOP."
--Digby, in a rip-roaring, raging post, "Webb's Righteous Amendment," on Campaign for America's Future

Who's the "elder statesman" who's got Digby in a lather? Of course it's soon-but-not-soon-enough-to-retire Virginia Sen. John Warner, who actually said of fellow Virginia Sen. Jim Webb:

"I certainly support the concept he brings. But I am in the reconsidering posture."

{Hey, you can't make this stuff up!)

"Now we find," Digby writes,

that one of the great statesman Warner's last acts may be to pull the football out from under Jim Webb, whose Amendment to allow the military a decent interval between deployments is coming up for a vote. [See Howie's post, below.] Like clockwork, Warner, who had supported the bill is now saying that he may not since the Bush administration has agreed to his propaganda ploy to bring home a handful of troops for a big Christmas pageant, (which I'm sure the President, the Vice President and Senator Warner will milk for all its worth.) You could make big money in Vegas by betting on Warner to stab Democrats in the back every time and take some cheap shiny trinket from the White House as a reward.

The Webb Amendment is a powerful piece of legislation, backed by the Military Officers Association and many military families who are seeing their loved ones deployed over and over again until their marriages and their finances are at a breaking point. Although it may serve to force the administration to withdraw troops more quickly than they wish to, this is not a political ploy. Even before the surge, experts said that the Iraq war was breaking the military. Now it is far worse. Someone has to step in and do something about this problem and it's obvious it isn't going to be the Republican party.

Digby supports a common-sense proposal made by Mark Kleiman last week:

The Democrats should offer the Webb Amendment when the Defense Appropriation comes up. If the Republicans want to filibuster, fine. Don't pull the amendment. Just let them keep filibustering. As long as the amendment is on the floor, there can be no vote on the bill itself. Keep calling cloture votes, one per day. After a few days, start asking how long the Republicans intend to withhold money to fund troops in the field in order to pursue their petty partisan agenda.

If the Republicans in the Senate hold firm, it's their stubbornness that's holding up the bill. If they fold, and the bill gets to the President's desk and he vetoes it, then pass the same damned bill again. And start asking how long the President intends to block funding for troops in the field in order to pursue his petty partisan agenda.

As of October 1, there's no money to fund the war. So the usual move is to pass a continuing resolution, which keeps the money flowing until the appropriation passes. Fine. Pass a continuing resolution with the Webb Amendment attached. If the CR runs into a filibuster or a veto, ask how long ...

Really, this isn't very hard. With the voters overwhelmingly interested in getting us the hell out of Iraq, the Democrats can make full use of the power of the purse without worrying about a backlash, especially with Webb as the public face of the campaign.

Footnote Plan B is to pass the amendment in the House and let the Senate conferees accept the House version. Then it goes back to the Senate for a straight up-or-down vote, with the Republican dead-enders in the position of directly voting against money to fund the troops in the field. Not a vote I'd care to defend, especially if I were up for re-election next year.

Works for us, Mark. Senator Reid?
.

A SERIES OF REALLY BAD TURNS FOR THE SENATE REPUBLICAN CAUCUS

According to today's NY Times "Democrats are feeling bullish these days about expanding [their Senate] majority in 2008-- and with good reason." And the good reason goes well beyond the conventional wisdom that the Republicans have 22 seats to defend and the Democrats have only a dozen to defend. The good reason, in fact, has more to do with another perfect storm gathering for Republicans. There is a steady drum beat of scandal after scandal-- from Ted Stevens' financial improprieties in Alaska and Pete "Sneaky Pete" Domenici (R-NM) getting caught up in the purge of the U.S. Attorneys to Bob Allen's (R-FL) and Larry Craig's (R-ID) poor toilet training in public restrooms all over the country. Furthermore it wouldn't surprise me one bit if the South Carolina GOP doesn't see something in the next week or two that will make the Tom Ravenel cocaine bust last month seem like a tea party. And then there's the big advantage Democrats have in fundraising over Republicans lately ($17.6 million for the DSCC in the last quarter and only a paltry $8.6 million for the NRSC). Smart money knows giving to the Republicans is like flushing your contributions down one of Larry Craig's favorite toilets.

All this goes back to the public being sick and tired of Bush, Cheney, the lies, the war, the occupation, the incompetence... all the hallmarks of the worst presidential administration in the lifetime of anyone in the country. Mitch McConnell's policy of obstructionism in the Senate-- preventing popularly-backed legislation from passing-- is not going over well. The needless prolonging of the war to salve the bruises to Bush's ego isn't something the public approves of. The politicization of the Justice Department is something American understand-- and are revolted by.

Add to that heady mixture an exceptional string of good luck for Democrats and bad luck for Republicans, and you could see a changeover of historic proportions next year. Wayne Allard is far too extreme for moderate-trending Colorado and he probably couldn't have held the seat there anyway, but by retiring he's making it a lot easier for the Democrats to claim that one. John Warner, on the other hand, would have probably held the Virginia senate seat. But he's decided to retire and Democrat Mark Warner, who will announce officially tomorrow that he's ready for his coronation, will slaughter whichever hapless chump the Republicans decide to sacrifice. The latest Rasmussen Poll shows the popular ex-Governor swamping either of the two GOP front-runners, mainstream conservative Tom Davis (57-30%) or far right Jim Gilmore (54-34%). Even the overly cautious Charlie Cook calls Warner the "prohibitive favorite." Similarly, it is expected that New Hampshire's ex-Governor Jeanne Shaheen will challenge and beat John Sununu in a rematch. New Hampshire voters are very aware that several Republican operatives are rotting in prison after confessing to having rigged Sununu's previous win over Shaheen. When ARG polled New Hampshire voters at the end of June they picked Shaheen over Sununu by a prohibitive 57-29%.

Chuck Hagel (R-NE) is also bailing and could well be replaced by conservative Democrat Bob Kerrey, a well-liked ex-governor and ex-senator. And, of course, regardless of what happens in court or in the Senate Ethics Committee, Senator Craig won't be running in Idaho again.

The national trends remain auspicious for the Democrats, many polls suggest. As they were in 2006, (and we know how that turned out,) voters remain deeply unhappy with the Bush presidency, the course of the war in Iraq and the direction of the country, polls show. They may not be thrilled with the Democratically controlled Congress, which has an approval rating that remains strikingly low, but Republicans “continue to have big image problems” and the trend in party affiliation continues to favor the Democrats, said Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Research Center.

Certain regions of the country are especially restless, notably, the Northeast, where anti-war sentiment is strong. In the most recent New York Times/CBS News Poll, 77 percent in the Northeast said the United States “made a mistake” getting involved in the war in Iraq, compared to 52 percent who felt that way in the South. After the substantial Republican losses in the Northeast in 2006, some suggested New England was in the middle of a major realignment toward the Democrats-- not unlike what happened in the South, in a shift toward Republican dominance.

That will leave the Northeast with three Republican senators, Olympia Snowe (ME) and Arlen Specter (PA), who are not unwilling to work in a bipartisan manner with Democrats, and Judd Gregg (NH), who is likely to be defeated in 2010. And when the frontline for the GOP becomes a Kansas incumbent's seat, you know the Republicans are hurting... bad.

The only Democrat likely to be defeated is Louisiana's Mary Landrieu, who votes more frequently with the GOP than any other Senate Democrat other than arch-reactionaries Ben Nelson (NE) and Max Baucus (MT). Most progressives will be glad to see her take her pernicious brand-damaging self back to the Bayou State.

With Bush promising to appoint a hardcore partisan hack like Ted Olson to succeed Gonzales in the Justice Department-- and Harry Reid saying, figuratively at least, "Over my dead body"-- Democrats desperately need principled cohesion. Earlier today, Jane Hamsher pointed out even more reasons why it is essential to elect a strong Democratic Congress for the post-Bush era.

JOHN WARNER BEATS LARRY CRAIG TO THE RETIREMENT PUNCH

Genuine warmth between the future and the past in Virginia politics

Unlike Larry Craig, John Warner is not a backbencher. He's a major Senate player. He just announced, as expected, that he won't be running for re-election in 2008. He's given up on being able to impact the problems in Iraq and Afghanistan. He realizes he's too old (80) to do the kind of job he'd like to be able to continue to do.

The announcement is a surprise to no one.

"I will conclude my service to Virginia as a senator when I complete this, my fifth term, on January 6, 2009," Warner said. The former Navy Secretary and past chairman of the Armed Services Committee said he wrestled with the decision, which he came to "in the last day or two."

His decision to not run will probably precipitate a major party change, if not a name change, for that seat. Wildly popular ex-Governor Mark Warner (D), who had long said he had too much affection and respect for John Warner to run against him, will now declare and probably win the senate seat. He is likely to be challenged by conservative Congressman Tom Davis (VA-11), although it is likely that a far right extremist like Eric Cantor or that Gilmore kook will also consider running. If Davis gets the GOP nod, there is every chance in the world that his moderate blue-trending district will elect a Democrat, perhaps Andrew Hurst who held Davis to a 55% win last year. (Bush barely took 50% of the district's vote in 2004 and was won by Democrats Jim Webb and Tim Kaine since then.)

Tony Snow, Bush's latest mouthpiece, is also retiring. And Larry Craig needs to either do it or get off the pot. Sources say it could be within minutes this weekend.

WHEN WILL REPUBLICANS REALLY START ABANDONING BUSH ON IRAQ? I HOPE IT'S BEFORE MANY MORE DEMOCRATS HOOK UP WITH HIM

Not every Republican is interested in playing Russian Roulette with his or her political career. Polling is significantly against the occupation of Iraq everywhere, not just in cities, but in small towns and rural area, not just in blue states like Massachusetts, New York, Illinois and California but in red states like Texas, Arizona, Georgia and even Utah. The pathetic pygmies™ are getting very uncomfortable standing behind Bush. It's the reason why "None of the Above" beats Giuliani, Flip Flop Mitt, Thompson and the remnants of McCain in every single poll. GOP members of Congress are panic-stricken. This week we saw a lot of Republicans saying they would be retiring next year. Expect quite a few more voluntary retirements and then dozens of involuntary ones after November '08.

One who is likely to announce his retirement soon is Virginia's senior senator, John Warner. I'm betting his decision has been made and the decision is making him feel free to speak his mind. A former Navy Secretary and a loyal, if grumpy, Bush-Cheney rubber stamp 'til now he's threatening to vote with the Democrats on bringing the troops home if Bush doesn't stop screwing around. I doubt Bush or Cheney were happy when Warner appeared on Meet the Press today.

The Virginia Republican said Sunday it would be best for the president, not Congress, to make a decision on withdrawals and that overriding a presidential veto would be difficult. But Warner made clear his view that people are losing patience with the administration's strategy in Iraq, a significant change is needed in September and troop withdrawals were the best way to accomplish that.

"That's precisely what I said to the president. I said, 'Here is an option. You can initiate a first withdrawal. You pick the number, Mr. President. And it would send a signal to the Iraqi government that matches your words,'" Warner said. "His words being, `We're not going to be there forever.'"

"The president has got to put teeth in these comments that we're not there forever," he added.

Warner is a long way from recognizing and admitting to himself the overall venality of the regime he has served so slavishly. The only place Bush is putting any teeth into is the jugular of American democracy. Republicans may soon be taking a bite out of one their rambunctious puppets, Nori al-Maliki. Just the way the U.S. installed Ngo Dinh Diem as the leader of a faux-democratic Vietnam-- and then backed the coup that murdered him and his right-wing brother, Ngo Dinh Nhu-- things aren't lookin' up for Maliki, despite Bush's assurances that "he's a good guy" on Friday. (U.S. advisors had recommended that the rigged Vietnamese elections only give Diem 60-70% of the vote but he insisted on 98.2%. It went to his head-- so we murdered him.)

Many of us watched former interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi-- who couldn't even win the elections with massive U.S. backing-- on CNN this morning launching his, and the Republicans', campaign for replacing Maliki-- with himself. “I am not doubting whether he's a good guy or not a good guy,'' said Allawi who has been sitting out the recent troubles in Jordan. "But I am doubting the system of militias, of sectarianism, of trying to avoid the benchmarks which President Bush and the Congress have laid down for the government in Iraq." He's also admitted that "his party," which has moved aggressively to destabilize the Maliki government, paid-off a well-connected bunch of Republican lobbyists and p.r. flacks, Barbour, Griffith and Rogers, to make his case inside the Beltway. Sounds good, doesn't it? But don't believe a word of his well-crafted drivel. The right-wing Republicans and NeoCons want Allawi in and Maliki out because Maliki is trying to maintain reasonably friendly relations with Iraqi's giant neighbor, Iran. Allawi, meanwhile, sings from the NeoCon Book of Psalms on Iran.

American troops? Not so much. They just want this ended.

A call by Puerto Rico's governor for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq earned a standing ovation from a conference of more than 4,000 National Guardsmen.

Gov. Anibal Acevedo Vila said Saturday that the U.S. administration has "no new strategy and no signs of success" and that prolonging the war would needlessly put guardsmen in harm's way.

"The war in Iraq has fractured the political will of the United States and the world," he said at the opening of the 129th National Guard Association general conference. "Clearly, a new war strategy is required and urgently."

AND THE NEXT SENATOR FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA WILL BE... SENATOR WARNER

Unless Hillary selfishly asks him to run for VP, there will be a new Senator Warner from Virginia

But not the current Senator Warner (R). Robert Novak published today what everyone has been whispering about for months, that John Warner won't seek re-election and that wildly popular ex-Governor Mark Warner will waltz into the Senate.

Gloomy top Republicans in Virginia are privately predicting that a man named ''Warner'' will be elected to the Senate from their state next year, but add that he is likely to be a Democrat.

The state's GOP leaders not long ago were sure that 80-year-old Republican Sen. John Warner would seek a sixth term in 2008, but now they think he probably will not. That would open the door for Democratic former Gov. Mark Warner (no relation) to enter the race. Any Republican would be an underdog against the Democratic Warner.

Rep. Tom Davis is the leading prospect if John Warner doesn't run, but conservatives are seeking somebody to oppose Davis' nomination.

Extreme wingnut Eric Cantor is said to be sniffing around. The interesting thing about Davis, though, is that it is likely that if he runs, not only will the GOP lose a senate seat, they will also lose the 11th congressional district which has trended decidedly Democratic in recent years, helping decide the last gubernatorial election for Kaine and the last senate election for Webb. Bush only managed to beat Kerry with 50% of the vote and even Davis won the district with his smallest margin since first being elected in 1994, tumbling from a high of 82% in 1998 to a mere 55% last year in this moderate suburban district which has shown itself to be sick of GOP extremism. Cantor would be lucky to wind up with a third of the vote in this CD.

WHAT ARE LUGAR AND WARNER TALKING ABOUT? ARE THEY TRYING TO GET US OUT OF IRAQ OR JUST SENDING A LIFE PRESERVER TO THE HAPLESS, CLUELESS BUSH?

The news media was buzzing yesterday-- and, for a Saturday, today-- over this "whole change of strategy" meme being pushed by senior Republican senators, Richard Lugar and John Warner, both mainstream conservatives. I'm not as certain as the Associated Press is that this is a blow against the Empire.

Two top Republicans cast aside President Bush's pleas for patience on Iraq Friday and proposed legislation demanding a new strategy by mid-October to restrict the mission of U.S. troops.

The proposal, by veteran GOP Sens. John Warner of Virginia and Richard Lugar of Indiana, came as the Pentagon conceded a decreasing number of Iraqi battalions are able to operate on their own.

"American military and diplomatic strategy in Iraq must adjust to the reality that sectarian factionalism is not likely to abate anytime soon and probably cannot be controlled from the top," the Warner-Lugar proposal states.

Democrats and the White House were dismissive of the proposal. However, it could attract significant support from GOP colleagues who are frustrated by Iraq but reluctant to break ranks with their party or force the hand of a wartime president.

Bush is the biggest national security failure in the history of America. 9/11 happened not just under his watch but because of his gross and indefensible incompetence. His pathetic (and profits-driven) responses have made the United States far less secure on every front and in every conceivable way. Two days ago his incredibly annoying, proto-fascistic, costly and mostly useless homeland security policies were shown to be a complete farce.

Undercover Congressional investigators set up a bogus company and obtained a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in March that would have allowed them to buy the radioactive materials needed for a so-called dirty bomb.

The investigators, from the Government Accountability Office, demonstrated once again that the security measures put in place since the 2001 terrorist attacks to prevent radioactive materials from getting into the wrong hands are insufficient, according to a G.A.O. report, which is scheduled to be released at a Senate hearing Thursday.

Nevertheless Lugar and Warner think a non-binding resolution is just what the doctor ordered. Maybe 3 or 4 years ago. Impeachment, trial and sentencing are what's called for now. Instead their weak and toothless sop to angry voters is a "requirement" that Bush submit a plan by Oct 16 that would be ready in a year to "transition U.S. combat forces from policing the civil strife or sectarian violence in Iraq" to a narrow set of missions: protecting Iraqi borders, targeting terrorists, protecting U.S. assets and training Iraqi forces. Too little, too late-- way too late-- and it entirely depends on good faith from Bush and Cheney and the tooth fairy.

Still this morning's Washington Post calls it an acceleration of a "Republican revolt against President Bush's war strategy." Acceleration? Neither of these peaceniks voted to end the occupation when they had a chance a few days ago. They may have some credibility with a few conservative-- as opposed to fascist-- Republicans and with the reactionary Democrats like the Nelsons and Landrieu, but each is fast becoming, along with George Voinovich, a joke.

Despite the irrefutable sour public opinion on the war, there remains deep discord in Congress over the politics-- and substance-- of proposals presented during a protracted six-month Iraq debate in Congress. Lawmakers say the fact that Iraq has become a central issue in a spirited presidential campaign has also emerged as an obstacle to the kind of bipartisan accord that Mr. Warner and Mr. Lugar say they are seeking.

While Mr. Bush almost certainly commands less loyalty than at any other time of his presidency, the White House has kept enough Republicans from siding with Democrats to keep legislation from reaching the 60-vote threshold needed to pass legislation in the Senate-- not to mention the 67 votes needed to override a veto. At the same time, Democrats have often produced legislation that is viewed as hard for some Republicans to endorse.

I think the American people are understanding that the only way to end this war is to elect a Democratic president with a Senate and House that cannot be obstructed by partisan Republican tricks. Can it be done? Even assuming Lieberman officially joins the GOP or that the Democrats ever find the spine to toss him out, the Democrats would need to hold onto every seat (including Landrieu's, their most vulnerable one) and then take 11 more. Which 11 Republican senate seats are possible? Colorado, New Hampshire, Maine, Minnesota, Kentucky and New Mexico look like good shots. Oregon, Virginia, Alaska look possible. Texas, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Mississippi could happen, although it might take some Divine Intervention. But aren't we due some of that after bearing all this Bush crap for so long-- and under the guise of Who exactly?


UPDATE: ALMOST FORGOT... LUGAR AND WARNER HAVE RECORDS

The two born-again peaceniks have long voting records on Iraq and, as a matter of fact, a great deal of responsibility for the catastrophic situation the Bush Regime has created there. Including the 5 roll calls on October 10, 2002-- the Resolution Authorizing the Use of Force-- the Senate has voted on Iraq 32 times (including last week's this past Wednesday's vote on the Webb Amendment to give troops a respite from battle before being sent back to the front). Both Lugar and Warner were enthusiastic supporters of all 5 of the Oct 10 roll calls of course and they both voted against Webb's amendment to support the troops. There is no way to describe Dick Lugar's voting record or John Warner's voting record as anything but gross derelictions of the trust and duty their constituents placed in them. The media may call them "respected" or "wise" or whatever bullshit they want to invent to describe these two partisan hacks but no one can look at their records and claim they are not rubber stamp Republicans unfit to hold public office.

DEMOCRATS COULD TAKE VIRGINIA AND TENNESSEE SENATE SEATS NEXT YEAR

WILL JOHN WARNER'S EFFORTS TO BEQUEATH HIS SENATE SEAT TO TOM DAVIS, LEAD TO A VICTORY FOR SENATOR MARK WARNER?

This morning's Moonie Times indicates what DC Insiders have long suspected: that 80 year old fossil, Senator John Warner, will not seek re-election next year. In recent years the Virginia GOP has been torn up-- like so many state Republican parties-- by battles between conservatives and neo-fascist extremists. When the extremists win the primaries, they often lose the general elections.

"There has been considerable discussion about the possibility that [Mr. Warner] might delay an announcement of candidacy, then announce he wasn't going to run, to allow Congressman Tom Davis to build up at the beginning of the campaigns, which would give Davis an advantage," said Morton C. Blackwell, chairman of the Virginia's Republican National Committee and leader of the conservative Leadership Institute.

...Speculation about Mr. Warner retiring increased this spring after filings with the Federal Elections Commission showed he had raised only $500 during the first quarter of the year.

Another indication was the resignation last year of Susan Magill, who was Mr. Warner's chief of staff for 18 years.

Mr. Warner's resignation would likely result in a tough political battle to replace him that would begin inside the Republican State Central Committee, which decides how the party will picks its nominee.

Members could choose a convention or a primary election, which would likely benefit a more moderate candidate.

Among the unelectable extremists eyeing Warner's seat are Rep. Eric Cantor (VA-07), Rep. Randy Forbes (VA-04), and the as yet unindicted bribe taker Rep. Robert Goodlatte (VA-06).

Republicans hope for a candidate who can succeed in Northern Virginia where the party has won too few votes in three straight losses for top statewide office.

"I hope the George Allen election caught the attention of the rest of the state," said Delegate David Albo, Fairfax County Republican. "Republicans used to say, 'We are going to win big in the rest of Virginia, and try not to lose bad in [Northern Virginia.]' But when you have 90,000 people a year moving into [Northern Virginia], eventually that strategy is not going to work."

House Majority Leader H. Morgan Griffith, Salem Republican, agreed.

"We have to do better in [Northern Virginia] if we are going to win," he said.

Much of this would be moot if former Governor Mark Warner decides to run for the seat since he is widely popular and much admired throughout the state and could easily beat any of those Republicans who are unknown statewide. Mark Warner's close friendship with John Warner has keep him out of the race to date-- as well as huge speculation that he is Hillary's #1 choice for vice president.

AND TENNESSEE COULD BE SOME NICE FROSTING ON THE CAKE

Conventional wisdom lists Lamar Alexander's Senate seat in Tennessee as a safe one. But with 2008 shaping up to be a year of discontent with incumbents and a year of disdain for Republicans-- one that could make 2006 look like a dress rehearsal-- Alexander might not be that safe. He has, after all, been a craven rubber stamp for a Bush-Cheney agenda that is no more popular in Tennessee than it is anywhere else in America (not counting Utah). Tennessee Democrats and the DSCC are convinced they can win this one and they both have the same moderate candidate with crossover potential in mind.

Short of a Fred Thompson candidacy at the top of the ticket or a suicidal Harold Ford nomination by the Democrats, which will leave progressives sitting on their hands, Alexander could be vulnerable to a well-run campaign from a big-name Democrat. And this morning one of the savviest political pundits in Tennessee, Jackson Baker, is suggesting that Mike McWherter is getting ready to jump into the race. McWherter's dad was popular 2-term Governor Ned McWherter.

Fresh from his service as treasurer in state Senator Lowe Finney's win last year (taking back a Democratic seat from Don McLeary, considered by McWhrerter a "turncoat" after changing party affiliations in 2005), the 52-year-old activist is now focusing on Alexander, whom McWherter sees as a slavish follower of President George W. Bush.

"With one or two exceptions, he's done everything the president has wanted him to do. He's toed the party line," said McWherter, who has recently paid courtesy calls on ranking Democrats, both in Tennessee and in Washington, D.C. , informing them of his interest in running next year and soliciting their support. He is getting active encouragement from Gray Sasser, state Democratic chairman and son of an influential former officeholder himself, former Senator and Ambassador Jim Sasser.

Last week, the Nashville Post ran a similar story about the prospects of McWherter offering Alexander a serious challenge. The Post reports Sasser's enthusiasm. "Should Mike decide to run, he would be a terrific candidate for the U.S. Senate. I firmly believe that Sen. Alexander is beatable in 2008. Tennesseans, like the rest of America, are ready for a change and are disappointed that Sen. Alexander continues to back the failed policies of George Bush and Karl Rove, voting with the Bush administration more than 90 percent of the time."

WHICH REPUBLICANS ARE MOST LIKELY TO RETIRE NEXT YEAR RATHER THAN FACE IGNOMINIOUS DEFEAT AT THE POLLS?

Obviously Allard doesn't count since he already announced he won't run again, in effect ceding a Republican seat in Colorado to Democrat Mark Udall. The most often mentioned are Elizabeth Dole (R-NC), John Warner (R-VA), Pete "Sneaky Pete" Domenici (R-NM), Thad Cochran (R-MS), Ted Stevens (R-AK), and Larry Craig (R-ID).

My guess is that Cochran, though not eager to spend the rest of his professional life in the minority and feeling his 70 years, is one of the least likely of this batch to retire. He says he hasn't decided yet but will by December. In the unlikely event that he does retire, expect a fierce battle between extreme hard right lunatic Chip Pickering and populist Democrat Mike Moore, a former Mississippi Attorney General. I am also doubtful that Stevens will retire, although he's suffering from advanced and debilitating dementia and threatens to retire every time someone says the bridge to nowhere might never be built-- or in any way disagrees with him. Running at 85 years old, though is quite daunting. Recent exertions in fundraising make me think Dole wants to go out fighting. And rumors about far right extremists Cornyn and Inhofe considering retirement are too good to be true.

Now the ones who probably are retiring: Larry Craig (outed from his closet), Pete "Sneaky Pete" Domenici (senile and criminal), and John Warner (old and depressed). Warner’s first-quarter fundraising sum of $500 is setting off yet another round of speculation that the aging senator will retire, leaving an open seat in 2008. Both Macacawitz and Rep. Tom Davis are salivating at the prospect of replacing him, although if he retires, former Democratic governor Mark Warner will run and win the seat.

Domenici is falling apart physically and mentally and has been seen walking around the Senate halls in his underwear and pjs. He's also grown nasty, even vicious as his mental capacities have diminished. At 75, he doesn't want to give up his seat but his recent exposure as one of the villains in the firings of the U.S. Attorneys-- along with his protege, Rep. Heather Wilson-- he could well be defeated even if he runs again. He has been raising a real campaign warchest, nearly $400,000, most of it in corporate bribes from the Big Business interests he consistently serves.


UPDATE: THE FIX IS IN

Not really. But Chris Cillizza at The Fix has his early predictions up about which senate seats are most vulnerable next year. He thinks the 3 most likely states to switch parties are Colorado (where Allard is retiring), New Hampshire (where Sununu's extreme right voting record and rubber stamp demeanor are hopelessly out of step with the moderate and independent-- and increasingly blue-- state), and Minnesota (where Coleman has the same problem as Sununu).


UPDATE: LARRY CRAIG DIDN'T FILE???

The only Republican incumbent who didn't provide the FEC with a quarterly report was... Larry Craig. There can only be two answers to why: he was either too busy at Bergdorf's picking out a new wardrobe for his post-Senate career or... he forgot.

MARK WARNER MULLING VIRGINIA SENATE SEAT? HUCKABEE GIVING UP ON HIS POINTLESS RUN FOR THE WHITE HOUSE TO GO FOR PRYOR'S SEAT?

I think Mark Warner is Hillary's first choice for running mate. In the unlikely event that she doesn't get the nomination, Warner would be a great running mate for Obama. Edwards or Gore would probably look elsewhere. Hillary could also go with New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson. Warner does have another very inviting career option open to him, the U.S. Senate. Today's Washington Post looks at the possibility of a Warner v Warner rematch next year.

Schumer, head of the DSCC, is the biggest proponent of Mark Warner, 52, jumping in against John Warner, 80. The two Warners are on friendly terms and John Warner is flirting with retirement. He's old and he's tired, losing some of his mental faculties and dismayed with the Neocons and extremists who have taken over so much of the Republican Party. If John Warner retires, Mark Warner, who had an 80% approval rating when he left the governor's mansion, has told friends he's in for sure.

"One Republican active in Virginia politics said that Warner has told U.S. Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.) to prepare to run if the senator decides against another bid. 'Davis is actively calling people and is saying on the calls that he has been told by Warner to get ready,' the source said." By current GOP standards Davis is considered a mainstream conservative, not a lunatic fanatic like, say Virgil Goode, who also harbors pretensions towards that senate seat and, of course who be the best bet for Democrats' ambitions to take it away from the Republicans.

While my pal Cliff Schecter weighs a Warner v Warner race and has come to some conclusions, there's another potential southern senate race looming, this one more ominously for the Democrats. This one would also pit a popular former governor against a sitting senator-- Arkansas' Mike Huckabee against Mark Pryor.


Huckabee's presidential campaign is a dead-end and Huckabee is probably the only Arkansas Republican who could credibly challenge the popular and conservative-leaning Pryor. Huckabee ran for the Senate in 1992 and lost but, of course, he's way better known and much better liked now. But Arkansas has been trending Democratic lately-- they hold all 7 constitutional offices and big majorities in the state legislature-- and Pryor would be tough for any Republican to beat, even Huckabee. One of the problems there is that the extremist religionist faction of the GOP controls the primaries but their candidates repulse normal people and even moderate Republicans have a hard time embracing them and their backward and hateful agenda.