50 Dems...44 Repukes in Senate.....50 + Lieberman unless

[in_cog_ni_to]

he turns Republican. We still have a Majority in the Senate. That means the Repukes can't do shit from the House. They have to get through the Senate Dems and Obama's Veto pen first.

[Smarmie Doofus]

1. There's 5 seats missing. Which are they? nt

[in_cog_ni_to]

6. Nevada, Washington, Illinois and Colorado...... n/t

[tridim]

2. We're going to have 53 or 54.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2010/results/senate/big-board

[Ken Burch]

And we still have a good shot at taking the Alaska seat, which won't be in 'til later

Maybe not 'til DAYS later, given the write-in effect.

[cbdo2007]

3. the unknowns are - CO, NV, WA, PA, and IL - of those we should win 3

so yeah we should have 53 total

Not too shabby.

Hardly the tsunami they were predicting.

[de novo]

5. I just hate we lost Russ. But, yeah, 53 isn't as bad as it could have been.

At least we'll have the Senate running interference on the batshit crazy House.

[cbdo2007]

8. and it's looking like the house will be closer than they expected at least.

It wasn't a total tsunami. :)

It'll be ok. This puts us in a good spot for 2012.

Of course then we're fucked again in 2016 but it'll be fun while it lasts.

[Cetacea]

4. K&R

[Marr]

7. The Republicans are going to be AMAZINGLY good at moving their agenda with only the House.

Just wait-- the same Dems who've said they couldn't do anything with simple majorities in the House and Senate, and the White House, will now fall all over themselves to help the Republicans move mountains with a simple majority in one house of Congress.

Seriously-- get ready to start regularly seeing that thing that used to be considered silly; the Senate bending to the will of the House. I expect we're going to see a whole lot of "bipartisan compromise" from the Senate.