What are the odds that Ben Nelson and Lieberman caucus/switch with/to the r's?

[playstation]

Just read this from Nate Silver-

...However, Republicans have roughly even odds of finishing the night with at least 49 Senators, in which case they could conceivably lobby Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut to join their party at some point after the election.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/02/republicans-are-clear-underdogs-to-flip-senate/

[Clio the Leo]

1. Nelson wouldn't survive a GOP primary, Lieberman wants his DOMA bill passed.

Even if they SWITCHED parties to give the GOP a majority, they'd lose their seniority, just like Specter did. They'd lose their committee chairs ... wouldn't be worth it to them.

[goddess40]

3. Repukes promises

The Repukes will promise them anything to get them to switch, including committee chairs.

[FBaggins]

12. And they could certainly promise Nelson that there won't be a primary challenge.

Of course that depends on him trusting that they can hold back the tea party.

[Recursion]

15. Like we did with Specter?

Good luck with that one, GOP...

[stevenleser]

21. Yeah, wouldn't happen. Nelson may be conservative to US, but not nearly conservative enough for

teabaggers. Not by a longshot.

[Tesha]

40. The Senate sets its rules with each new session; the new rules could easily...

...grant turncoats their existing seniority, especially if the Senate
originally organized with Nelson and/or LIEberman in a Republican
majority.

Tesha

[Me.]

2. Nelson Will Finally Show His True Colors

Nate's been doing a lot of what ifs and maybes lately

[ramapo]

4. Pretty good

It is difficult to say which one is a bigger snake...probably Lieberman. He is such a sleaze.

[donco6]

5. Does it matter? It's not like they vote Dem when we really need them.

Worthless fucks.

[Recursion]

8. Yes NT

[donco6]

10. Why? NT

[Recursion]

11. If their switch would give the Republicans 51, it's very important

51 votes decides the Senate's rules and committee assignments for the next 2 years.

A blue dog who caucuses with us beats a RINO who sometimes votes with us any day.

[donco6]

13. I see. Thanks. n/t

[FBaggins]

14. And don't forget staffing

The Senate majority controlls roughly 2/3 of committee staffing.

That's lots of laid off Democratic political servants looking for new jobs - all because one senator decided to CALL himself what he already was.

[wmbrew0206]

6. As long as the Rep are one or two seats short of 51, Joe and Bill will be allowed

to keep their seniority and committee chairs if they switch. Control of the Senate is that important to McConnell and the republicans.

[Recursion]

7. Lieberman might do it if the GOP takes the Senate without him

But he's enough against most of their agenda that I don't think he would flip the chamber.

[Jennicut]

27. He is probably toast in two years anyway. As an independent in CT his #'s are bad,

if he switches AGAIN his numbers will sink even lower. It is kind of pointless for him. A lot of us are sick of him in CT and he has a low level of trust from all sides.

[ProSense]

9. What's with all the bogus speculation?

None of these Senators have given any indication that they want to flip. This isn't like Shelby in 1994 or Specter, who was literally driven away by the GOP, in 2009.

[FBaggins]

16. There were a number of switches after the '94 loss.

Those in the House had just won their seats running as Democrats.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

17. When Did Shelby And Ben "Nighthorse" Campbell Flip?

I remember when Shelby beat Jeremiah Denton who was more of a winger than he was.

[FBaggins]

19. Shelby was just days after the election.

Nighthorse-Campbell was March of the following year.

[ProSense]

20. There were two in the Senate

Richard Shelby was just an asshole and Ben Nighthorse Campbell was targeted by environmentalists.

Lieberman doesn't fit the mold and Ben Nelson, while an asshole, had plenty of opportunities to switch. He simply doesn't have the same issues as Shelby or Campbell.

[FBaggins]

22. Nelson has had plenty of opportunity to switch?

Why would he switch from the overwhelming majority over to the minority side?

Shelby and Campbell didn't switch until they knew they had something to switch to (note that both happened right after the elections in '94). We know that they both delight in cashing in big bargaining chips for their own benefit (and to the detriment of the rest of the party). This is the biggest chip out there. We both know that there could be some "give me what I want or else..." from either or both of these guys.

But no... I agree that it's unlikely (or maybe that's just me taking up prayer?). What I have said is that I could see Lieberman brokering a power sharing arrangement (with himself in a key role of course) if the senate ends up split.

[ProSense]

23. Did he just become a Senator?

Why didn't he switch in 2003 or 2005 when the GOP controlled the Congress and WH?

[FBaggins]

24. His disagreements within the party didn't start in 2003 or 2005.

He has split with the party more frequently (and over larger issues) since then.

[ProSense]

25. His disagreements?

I'm sorry, did Nelson indicate that he's disgruntled and wanting to switch?

How on earth do you know what he's thinking when he hasn't announced any such move?

[FBaggins]

29. If he had ANNOUNCED such a move... there wouldn't be speculation about it, would there?

Did Shelby or Nighthorse Campbell announce a move prior to the election?

His disagreements?

Abortion?
His vote on Iraq?
The Gang of 14?
Kagan?
Who held us hostage on HCR?
Who is the only democratic senator to sign the "Taxpayer Protection Pledge"?
Who worked to cut funding for head start, schools, and early nutrition out of the stimulus and increase spending on the DOD?

Need I go on?

[ProSense]

30. Evidently,

you believe you know Nelson better than Nelson.

Feel free to continue to speculate, you might even change his mind for him.

[FBaggins]

32. He doesn't need me trying to change his mind.

If the senate to split and he makes the difference... he's going to have bribes all the incentive in the world (from both sides) trying to woo him.

Evidently you believe you know Nelson better than Nelson

Dodge all you like... but how many party switches in '94 could you have said the same thing about?

And once again... I said that I don't think it will happen. Just that it isn't "bogus speculation".

[ProSense]

28. In fact, here is what Nelson said

Sen. Nelson rejects switch to GOP, won't become independent

By Michael O'Brien

Saying "I'm very comfortable where I am," Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) indicated Tuesday he will not switch to the Republican Party — or become an independent.

Nelson, a centrist who's broken with his party on a number of key issues during this Congress, said he enjoys a great deal of flexibility as a Democrat, which wouldn't be the case if he were to join the GOP.

"I don't believe so," Nelson said on KLIN radio in Nebraska when asked if he'd become a Republican.

The GOP, Nelson said, "doesn't seem to be" a party with a very large ideological tent.

"Certainly, if you look at the partisan votes recently," he said, "it's been pretty much lockstep, and I'm not one who's comfortable being that way."

more

[FBaggins]

31. That was just as much a "shot over the bow" as anything else.

"I'll put it this way: I don't think you leave your party, your party leaves you. And my party hasn't left me," he said. "My party gives me a great deal of latitude to do what I think is right on the basis of policy and interests, rather than just what party philosophy seems to be. So I'm very comfortable where I am."

Translation? It's the same thing as the HCR stickup... if I'm the vote you need, then you're going to pay for that vote.

How much "latitude" do you think he's going to get when every vote is the difference between a win and a loss?

[ProSense]

34. Yeah,

"I'm very comfortable where I am"

"And my party hasn't left me," he said. "My party gives me a great deal of latitude..."

I can see where you read "shot over the bow" in that.

Now, all the GOP has to do is win the Senate to prove your reading-between-the-lines analysis accurate.

[FBaggins]

35. Oh no... they don't need to win the Senate... they need to LOSE it

but lose it by one seat. Then you may see a bidding war (potentially on both sides).

If republicans WIN the senate, then they don't need Nelson/Lieberman to switch.

Do you think Nelson would have held us up on HCR if we had 63 votes? Of course not. He would have no leverage.

If republicans win 51 seats, then the only reason Nelson would switch would be if he thinks it improves his chances of reelection. It's the narrow LOSS that gives him something to bargain with.

[ProSense]

36. OK, let me rephrase

Now, all the GOP has to do is reach within one seat of taking control of the Senate to prove your reading-between-the-lines analysis accurate.

Better?

[FBaggins]

37. Better... except that it isn't my analysis.

I said that I don't think he would do it.

It's just not an unreasonable speculation. It has happened in the past when politicians think that they understand which way the wind is blowing.

We talked about this a day or two ago. There's about to be a big debate on both sides (that some have tried to preemptively attack) re: "why we lost". With each side in each party (yep, at least four positions) trying to push their own position. There's no guarantee that all of the Democrats in the senate will agree on "why we lost". If we do lose nine seats there, that's almost half of the seats we had up for election... and there's a big batch coming up in 2012. How they read the exit polls is what's important.

You really going to tell me that it's impossible for Nelson to stab the party in the back given his track record? Again... I'm not saying I think it happens... but that it isn't a ridiculous thing to consider.

[PBS Poll-435]

18. Specter!

An easy lesson to learn.

[Jennicut]

26. I don't see Lieberman switching at this point. To do what, have 2 years as a Repub?

If he has any last chance to run again in CT in 2012 he can't switch again. One too many times. Lieberman also was not wanted as McCain's running mate. The teabaggers won't want to put up with him just like we don't want to. Look, old Holy Joe is my Senator. There has been zero speculation of him switching here in CT. Nelson I would see more but he might not survive a challenge in the primary against an even more conservative Repub. Lieberman wouldn't survive in CT as a Repub period.

[playstation]

39. He doesn't need to switch parties

he's an Independent now but caucuses with the Democrats.

[AlinPA]

33. Yes. nt

[RoadRage]

38. Nelson won't do it..

I live in Omaha, NE. The only people in this state who hate Nelson more then the Dem's are the Republican's.

His seat will probably go to Heinimin (our current R Govenor) in '12. Switching sides now will just make him hated more, and get him outed quicker in the primary instead of the general.

He'll stay put, and vote R anyway to try and save his butt. Ugh.