Note that while Bill Nelson's approval is at a weak 46%, his disapproval is only 38%. Katherine Harris I'm sure would fare much worse.

Also, I thank my lucky stars Mark Dayton is retiring. He is not in good shape, and with him out Minnesota simply becomes an open seat in a state very angry with Bush rather than an embattled incumbent in a swing state.

Bush's SUSA Poll numbers and Senator's poll numbers in states that have US Senate Races in 2006.

1)Arizona-(Kyl-R)
Kyl-R has a 48% Approval Rating and a 38% Disapproval Rating. Bush-R has a 40% Approval Rating and a 55% Diapproval Rating. Kyl-R approval rating being under 50% and Bush's Disapproval Rating being over 50% and Kyl having a credible Democratic opponent mean's Kyl is in the danger zone.
2)California-(Fienstien-D)
Fienstien-D has a 54% Approval Rating and a 35% Disapproval Rating. Feinstien-D approval rating being over 50% and Fienstien-D having no Republican Challenger means Fienstien-D is in the safe zone.
3)Connecticut-(Lieberman-D)
Lieberman-D has a 69% Approval Rating and a 27% Disapproval Rating. Lieberman-D approval rating being over 60% and Leiberman-D having no Republican challenger means Lieberman-D is in the safe zone.
4)Delaware-(Carper-D)
Carper-D has a 63% Approval Rating and 28% Disapproval Rating. Carper-D approval rating being over 60% and Carper-D having no Republican Challenger means Carper-D is in the safe zone.
5)Florida-(Nelson-D)
Nelson-D has a 46% Approval Rating and a 38% Diapproval Rating. Bush-R has a 41% Approval Rating and a 58% Disapproval Rating. Nelson(D)approval rating is under 50%,but Bush(R)Disapproval rating is over 50% and Nelson(D) has a Controversial Republican opponent. Nelson(D)is in the safe zone.
6)Hawaii-(Akaka-D)
Akaka-D has a 58% Approval Rating and a 34% Disapproval Rating. Akaka-D Approval rating is over 50% and Akaka-D does not have a Republican Challenger means Akaka-D is in the safe zone.
7)Indiana-(Lugar-R)
Lugar-R has a 65% Approval Rating and a 25% Disapproval Rating. Lugar-R Approval Rating is over 60% and Lugar-R has no Democratic Challenger means Lugar-R is in the safe zone.
8)Maine-(Snowe-R)
Snowe-R has a 79% Approval Rating and a 19% Disapproval Rating. Snowe-R Approval Rating is over 70% and Snowe-R does not have a Democratic Challenger means Snowe-R is in the safe zone.
9)Maryland-(Sarbanes-D)is Retiring
Sarbanes(D) would have been in the safe zone had he ran for re-election. 54% Approval Rating and a 34% Disapproval Rating. Bush-R has a 33% Approval Rating and a 64% Disapproval Rating. Bush-R Disapproval Rating is over 60% and Democrats have a credible candidate to replace Sarbanes(D),US Rep Ben Cardin(D). Ben Cardin(D) is favored to win the 2006 Maryland US Senate Race and become the next US Senator from Maryland.
10)Massachusetts-(Kennedy-D)
Kennedy(D)has a 60% Approval Rating and a 34% Disapproval Rating. Kennedy-D Approval rating is at 60% and Kennedy has no Republican Challenger means Kennedy is in the safe zone.
11)Michigan-(Stabenow-D)
Stabenow-D has a 50% Approval Rating and a 39% Disapproval Rating. Bush-R has a 33% Approval Rating and a 65% Disapproval Rating. Stabenow's(D) Approval Rating is at 50% but Bush(R)Disapproval Rating is over 60% and Stabenow-D does not have a top tier Republican Challenger means Stabenow-D is in the safe zone.
12)Minnesota-(Dayton-D)is retiring
Dayton-D would have been in the danger zone had he ran for re-election. 44% Approval Rating and 46% Disapproval Rating. Bush-R has a 39% Approval Rating and a 58% Disapproval Rating. Bush-R Disapproval Rating is above 50% and Democrats have a credible candidate to replace Dayton(D),Hennipen County Attorney Amy Klobuchar. Amy Klobuchar(D) is favored to win the 2006 Minnesota US Senate Race and become the next US Senator from Minnesota.
13)Mississippi-(Lott-R)
Lott-R has a 62% Approval Rating and a 32% Disapproval Rating. Lott's(R)Approval rating is over 60% and Lott-R does not have a Democratic Challenger means Lott-R is in the safe zone.
14)Missouri-(Talent-R)
Talent-R has a 51% Approval Rating and 40% Disapproval Rating. Talent-R Approval Rating is over 50% and Talent-R has a top tier Democratic Challenger- MO State Auditor Claire McCaskill. Bush-R has has a 39% Approval Rating and a 59% Disapproval Rating. Bush-R Disapproval rating below over 50% means Talent-R is in the danger zone.
15)Montana-(Burns-R)
Burns-R has a 52% Approval Rating and a 43% Disapproval Rating. Burns-R Approval Rating is over 50% and Burns-R has a top tier Democratic Challenger- MT State Auditor John Morrison. Bush-R has a 49% Approval Rating and a 49% Disapproval Rating. Bush-R Approval rating below 50% and the scandals involving Burns-R means Burns-R is in the danger zone.
16)Nebraska-(Nelson-D)
Nelson-D has a 63% Approval Rating and a 29% Disapproval Rating. Nelson-D Approval Rating is over 60% and Nelson-D does not have a top tier Republican challenger means Nelson-D is in the safe zone.
17)Nevada-(Ensign-R)
Ensign-R has a 54% Approval Rating and a 34% Disapproval Rating. Ensign(R)Approval rating is over 50% and Ensign-R does not have a credible Democratic Challenger means Ensign-R is in the safe zone.
18)New Jersey-(Corzine-D)elected NJ Governor.
Corzine is likely to be Governor of New Jersey in couple of month's. Corzine's potential Democratic replacement is either US Reps Bob Andrews-Southern Jersey,Bob Menendez-Northern Jersey,and Frank Pallone-Central Jersey. Corzine should appoint Frank Pallone to that seat. He is the safest choice. Pallone has a reliable liberal democratic voting record and his Congressional District is similar to Ben Cardin's District. Pallone's Congressional District includes Democratic leaning Middlesex County and Republican leaning Monmouth County. Bush-R has a 34% Approval Rating and a 64% Disapproval Rating. A strong Democrat like US Representative Frank Pallone is favored to win the 2006 NJ US Senate Race.
19)New Mexico-(Bingaman-D)
Bingaman-D has a 63% Approval Rating and a 29% Disapproval Rating. Bingaman's(D) Approval Rating is over 60% and Bingaman(D) does not have a Republican Challenger means Bingaman(D)is in the safe zone.
20)New York-(Clinton-D)
Clinton-D has a 63% Approval Rating and a 34% Disapproval Rating. Clinton(D)'s Approval Rating is over 60% and Clinton(D)has a weak Republican Challenger means Clinton(D)is in the safe zone.
21)North Dakota-(Conrad-D)
Conrad-D has a 73% Approval Rating and a 23% Disapproval Rating. Conrad-D Approval Rating is over 70% and Conrad(D)has no Republican Challenger means Conrad(D) is in the safe zone.
22)Ohio-(DeWine-R)
DeWine-R has a 45% Approval Rating and a 43% Disapproval Rating. Bush-R has a 37% Approval Rating and a 61% Disapproval Rating. DeWine(R)Approval Rating is under 50% and Bush(R)Disapproval Rating is over 60% and DeWine has a top tier Democratic Challenger US Representative Sherrod Brown,means DeWine-R is in the danger zone.
23)Pennsylvania-(Santorum-R)
Santorum-R has a 45% Approval Rating and a 48% Disapproval Rating. Bush-R has a 36% Approval Rating and a 62% Disapproval Rating. Santorum(R)Approval Rating is under 50% and Bush(R) Disapproval Rating is over 60%.and Santorum(R) has a strong Democratic Challenger PA State Treasurer Bob Casey, means Santorum is in the danger zone.
24)Rhode Island-(Chafee-R)
Chafee-R has a 56% Approval Rating and a 37% Disapproval Rating. Chafee-R Approval Rating is over 50% and Chafee's has a credible Democratic Challenger- ex-RI State Attorney General Sheldon Whitehouse and Chafee's is facing a tough Republican primary challenge. Bush-R has a 29% Approval Rating and a 70% Disapproval Rating. Bush-R Disapproval Rating is at 70% means Chafee-R is in the Danger zone.
25)Tennessee-(Frist-R)is retiring
Frist-R would be in the danger zone had he sought re-election. 49% Approval Rating and 45% Disapproval Rating. Bush(R) has a 40% Approval Rating and a 57% Disapproval Rating. Bush(R)Disapproval Rating is over 50%, Democrats have a credible candidate for the 2006 TN US Senate Race- US Representative Harold Ford Jr. means Ford-D has a decent chance of winning the 2006 TN US Senate Race and becoming the next US Senator from Tennesee. Bob Corker-R is the only Republican candidate that can win the 2006 TN US Senate Race.
26)Texas-(Hutchison-R)
Hutchison-R has a 58% Approval Rating and a 35% Disapproval Rating. Hutchison's(D) Approval rating is over 50% But the Delay indictment,Hutchison's(R) hypocrisy comment's about Perjury not being a serious offense can cause serious damange. Hutchison(R)is in the safe zone.
27)Utah-(Hatch-R)
Hatch-R has a 65% Approval Rating and a 29% Disapproval Rating. Hatch-R Approval Rating is over 60% and Hatch(R) does not have a Democratic Challenger means Hatch-R is in the safe zone.
28)Vermont-(Jeffords-I)is retiring
Jeffords-I would have been in the safe zone had he ran for re-election, 66% Approval Rating and 29% Disapproval Rating. Bush-R has a 29% Approval Rating,and a 69% Disapproval Rating. Bush(R)disapproval rating is over 60% and Democrats have a credible candidate to replace Jeffords-I,US Representative Bernie Sanders-I. Bernie Sanders-I is favored to win the 2006 VT US Senate race and become the next US Senator from Vermont.
29)Virginia-(Allen-R)
Allen-R has a 49% Approval Rating and a 38% Disapproval Rating. Bush-R has a 41% Approval Rating and a 56% Disapproval Rating. Allen(R)Approval Rating is under 50%. Bush-R Disapproval Rating is over 50%. What is needed is a top tier Democratic Challenger. We need Governor Warner to reconsider his decision or plan B should be US Representative Richard Boucher who represents the rural Southwestern Virginia. Otherwise Allen(R)is in the safe zone.
30)Washington-(Cantwell-D)
Cantwell-D has a 52% Approval Rating and a 37% Disapproval rating. Cantwell-D Approval Rating is over 50% and Cantwell-D does not have a top tier Republican Challenger means Cantwell-D is in the safe zone.
31)West Virginia-(Byrd-D)
Byrd-D has a 65% Approval Rating and a 32% Disapproval Rating. Byrd(D)Approval Rating is over 60% and Byrd(D) does not have a Republican Challenger. Byrd(D) is in the safe zone.
32)Wisconsin-(Kohl-D)
Kohl-D has a 57% Approval Rating and a 34% Disapproval Rating. Kohl(D)Approval Rating is over 50% and Kohl(D)does not have a Republican Challenger. Kohl(D)is in the safe zone.
33)Wyoming-(Thomas-R)
Thomas-R has a 62% Approval Rating and a 29% Disapproval Rating. Thomas(R)Approval Rating is over 60% and Thomas(R)does not have a Democratic Challenger. Thomas(R)is in the safe zone.

Democrats are favored to win Democratic held senate seats in
1)California
2)Connecticut
3)Delaware
4)Florida
5)Hawaii
6)Maryland(OPEN)
7)Massachusetts
8)Michigan
9)Minnesota(OPEN)
10)Nebraska
11)New Jersey(OPEN)
12)New Mexico
13)New York
14)North Dakota
15)Vermont(OPEN)
16)Washington
17)West Virginia
18)Wisconsin
and Democrats are favored to win Republican held seats in
1)Pennsylvania
2)Rhode Island
3)Ohio
4)Tennesee(OPEN)
5)Missouri
6)Montana
7)Arizona
and possibly Virginia and Nevada and Texas.

Neal - beyond PA, RI, and OH, the chances for the Dem challengers are rather sketchy. Tennessee is a long-shot for Ford, it is becoming more and more Republican every year. Missouri is certainly a real possibility, though only 50/50, putting it in the "Toss up" category. Plus the GOP incumbents in Montana and Arizona, while not in very strong positions, start off with large double-digit leads over their relative unknown challengers.

Virginia, Nevada, and Texas are Safe Republican. There are no credible Dem challengers in any of them. I like Radnofsky too, but looking at her polling and fundraising numbers she is little more than a sacrificial lamb to the extremely popular Hutchison.

To be fair, Radnofsky is getting a full DSCC fundraiser in D.C. in a couple of weeks.

http://radnofsky.com/press_release.php?items_id=171

I shrugged when I first heard of her candidacy, too, but apparently the more that Grassroots Dems in Texas hear from her, the more they like her. I'm keeping my eye on that race -- I think Radnofsky is a smart cookie. (Her forceful criticism of KayBay over her tolerance for perjury scored a lot of points.) Who knows? Maybe she could crack 40%?

I agree with Dan, beyond PA, RI, and OH the chances of the dems are rather sketchy. The longer Ford is in the race the worse he wears. Missouri is a possibility, but if the GOP get energized then it won't. At best it is a 50/50. Arizona and Montana are not great incumbents, but are in strong positions. Virginia, Nevada, and Texas are Safe Republican. No one in these states are credible challengers. Radnofsky may be a good candidate, but Hutchison is very popular and will win solidly. Radnofsky should then look at another state office after running against Hutchison then she may well make it.

Strong Democratic Hold-on
1)California
2)Connecticut
3)Delaware
4)Hawaii
5)Massachusetts
6)New Mexico
7)New York
8)North Dakota
9)Vermont(OPEN)
10)West Virginia
11)Wisconsin
Weak Democratic Hold-On
1)Florida
2)Maryland(OPEN)
3)Michigan
4)Nebraska
5)New Jersey
6)Washington
Strong Republican Hold-On
1)Indiana
2)Maine
3)Mississippi
4)Nevada
5)Texas
6)Utah
7)Virginia
8)Wyoming
Weak Republican Hold-On
1)Arizona
2)Missouri
3)Montana
4)Tennesee-OPEN
Democratic Pick-up
1)Pennsylvania
Toss-up
1)Minnesota(OPEN)
2)Ohio
3)Rhode Island

Democrats are favored to pick-up PA,RI,and OH. and hold on to open Democrats seats in MD,MN,NJ,VT,and competitive Democratic Seats in FL,MI,NE,and WA. +3D 52-47

possible upsets(AZ,MO,and MT)

During each Senate election,Their were bunch of surprised outcomes since 1996 for example.
1996 Nebraska US Senate Race between Ben Nelson(D) and Chuck Hagel(R). Nelson(D)was favored to win but ended up losing by a 14% margin.
1998 North Carolina US Senate Race between Lauch Faircloth(R) and John Edwards(D), Most polls gave Faircloth the advantage, but Edwards(D) ended up winning by a narrow margin.
2000 Montana US Senate Race. between Conrad Burns(R) and Brian Schweitzer(D). Burns(R) was supposed to defeat Schweitzer(D)by a wide margin but ended up winning by a narrow margin.
2002 Georgia US Senate Race between Max Cleland(D) and Saxby Chambliss(R). Cleland(D) was slightly favored to win re-election by lost to Chambliss(R) by a comfortable margin.
2004 Kentucky US Senate Race. Jim Bunning(R) and Dan Mongiorado(D) Earlier in the campaign, Bunning(R) was in the safe zone, as the campaign came closer, Bunning became more in the danger zone.

As for Missouri: you forgot the Blunt factor. Matt Blunt is at 36-60% approval. Bush is at 39-59%.
This is close to what would have happened in WA if Rossi had run: Savvy gubernatorial candidate who came close to winning and has good name recognition challenges a weak first-term senator who won by 1-2% points. Although WA leans Dem (just as MO leans Repub), Rossi would have stood a fair chance as will McCaskill.

McCaskill stands a fair chance but Talent is his own man and should not be blamed for any Blunt failures.

McCaskill stands a fair chance, but Talent is his own man and should not be blamed for any Blunt failures.

I agree, 21 - Talent is his own man and shouldn't be blamed for any Blunt failures. In a perfect world, that would be how it works. But Republicans ARE going to be blamed for the failures of other Republicans (read: Bush) in 2006. Talent just has the added bonus of coming from a state that has a governor with a low approval rating. We'll see how things pan out.

Talent shouldn't be blamed for Blunt's scandals (unless he is involved) but a lot of Democrats in 1994 got blamed for Clinton's failures and some pundits think that Bob Dole lost in 1996 because of Newt Gingrich.

What has Talent done in any scandal?

Also what are the scandals of the Blunt administration? All he has done is cut the budge to make end meet.

1994 was about votes and how the dems representative would vote when the got in Washington. It was an issue driven campaign. If it was about scandals, the GOP would have won in 1992. That is what is lacking in 2006. The dems have no issue they are running on. Just that the GOP is very corrupt and the dems are some how totally innocent.

Dole did not loose because of Newt. Dole lost because he could not form the confederation of libertarians, Social Conservatives, Fiscal Conservatives, and the business community. Mainly the social conservatives were not on board. That is what cost Dole. Besides he kept Clinton from getting a majority, thus making clinton a minority president.

Here's a link to a story from a Missouri TV station about Blunt:
http://www.komu.com/html/htmlSummer2005/BluntBureaus.htm
I never said Talent was implicated in a scandal and I'm not making any judgments about Blunt or the MO GOP, just that there are allegations of patronage floating around his office. Nothing like OH or KY yet.
Clinton's first two years were marked by the failed Somalia intervention, gays in the military and the infamous Hillary Care program that went down in flames. I recommend the books The Freshmen (Killian) which profiles current senatorial candidate Van Hilleary and Storming the Gates (Brownstein) as the best journalists' accounts of the class of 1994.
Don't forget the Perot factor - he took 8.4% of the vote that year. Also Newt Gingrich was somewhat unpopular nationwide after the publicized government shutdowns over the budget.

Most of the Perot voters would of voted for Dole. Just look at the 1994 election. The
Perot voter joined with the other GOPers to create the 1994 GOP revolution.

And what are the "allegations of patronage floating around". You can't just throw out
rumor and not give any supporting evidence. There is no difference in what Gov. Blunt
has done as to what former Gov. Holden did. “And during the 4 years of Governor
Holden's administration, his appointed fee agents made hefty donations as well”. This in
no scandal.

Missouri voters don't seem to be caring about scandal in the Governor's mansion. They're caring about bad governance out of the Governor's mansion. Whether the sour taste of a bad GOP Governor and a national Republican party embattled with scandal at every turn is enough to topple Talent remains to be seen.

What bad governing? You can't just spread rumors give examples.

actually, according to the exit polls from 96, Clinton would still have won if Perot had not been in the race.

"JEFFERSON CITY (AP) - Gov. Matt Blunt’s campaign acknowledged yesterday that it had failed to report nearly $6,700 of expenses for a sport utility vehicle during his 2004 election, despite previously closing down his campaign committee.

The filing with the Missouri Ethics Commission marks the second time that the first-term Republican governor has been forced to reopen his campaign committee after previously stating that all debts had been covered ...

The Ethics Commission in July found probable cause that Blunt’s campaign had committed a violation and referred the case to the attorney general for preparation of a formal complaint for the commission to consider."

http://www.showmenews.com/2005/Aug/20050826News013.asp

wasn't Blunt the one who proposed reforming the state's Medicaid program by completely ending it and replacing it with something else (though what, he never explained)?

No. Blunt never said that he would do away with the states Medicaid. Thou he did say he wanted to reform it to prevent abuse.

Kate, I read the article and I don't think this is as bad as you let on. Blunt voluntarily opened the account to voluntary report the expenses. It was done by a self audit. Some things the dem rarely do. I consider it very commendable that he Gov. would admit to some thing that would cause some embarrassment. Also this was supposed to be paid by a county committee of the GOP, but they could not pay so Gov. Blunt opened up the account and paid for the expense.

The dems are just casting doubt on a good man (far better than they). No dem would have done a thing like this. Just look at how Ms. Pelosi suddenly started reporting past expenses after Delay was charged. This exposes the dem hypocrisy more than ever. As to the appointments, the article also said that Gov. Holden did the same thing when he was in office. Don't accuse someone of some thing when you are guilty of the something.

You must be smokin' crack! Dem's like Feinstien, Kennedy, Durbin, Leahy, and Boxer have so emberressed themselves, how did you ever come up with such crazy approval figures? Sure like to know who you're talking to. I can't find anyone who'd vote for any of them. They embaress the nation! What losers!