The Thread is an in-depth look at how major news and controversies are being debated across the online spectrum. Chris Dodd? Done. Byron Dorgan? Ditto. Bill Ritter? Him too. John Cherry? Out. Martha Coakley? Sleeping uneasily. Other than the apparently sempiternal Robert Byrd, is every Democrat at risk of political extinction these days?  The Thread is an in-depth look at how major news and controversies are being debated across the online spectrum.  Actually, the better questions to ponder might be whether the party should be overly concerned about the new year’s rash of retirements, and whether Repubicans should really count on huge partisan pickups in 2010. So many opinions, so little time, so let’s get going …  “Dorgan quitting is a disaster for his party, turning a very likely hold seat into a very likely GOP pickup,” says Think Progress’s Matt Yglesias. “This reminds me that if there’s something you want to criticize the Obama administration for, I would say it’s been his failure, qua party leader, to do a better job of prepping for the 2010 midterms. Democrats are not running their strongest possible candidates for Senate races in North Carolina, Iowa, Kansas, or Arizona and now you can add North Dakota to that list.”  “Surprisingly, no one has written commentary along the lines of ‘it is a tragedy for the American people to be losing statesmen of this caliber.’ Rather, they’re wondering ‘is this good or bad for the Republicans?’ Megan McCardle of the Atlantic points out. “I think the signal is good for the Republicans; they’re dropping out because being a Democrat no longer helps you win a tricky race. But it actually makes their immediate task harder, since Dodd and Dorgan now face no electoral pressure from a citizenry that isn’t so enamored with the health care bill.”  “Before anyone starts cheering this on the Right, keep in mind that Dodd would not have likely lost a primary challenge, but almost certainly would have lost the general election,” notes Ed Morrissey at Hot Air. “Whispers have come out of Washington for months that national Democrats have been quietly pressuring Dodd to retire in order to clear the field for a better candidate. With Dodd on the ballot, Republicans have a winning argument in the election based on Dodd’s corruption and incompetence; without him, the GOP may be punching at air just a little bit. That still doesn’t make this bad news. Dodd’s corruption and incompetence will not be missed in the Senate regardless of how he chooses to exit.”  B. Daniel Blatt of GayPatriot has a theory on the Dorgan decision:  By all accounts, the junior Senator from North Dakota is a nice guy. I met him once and found him to be a most pleasant fellow. He crafted an image of moderation on the Great Plains, while voting in near lockstep with his party when in the nation’s capital.  Until yesterday, he had given every indication of running for a fourth term in the Senate.* Polls showed him trouncing perennial Republican candidate Duane Sand, yet losing handily to incumbent Governor John Hoeven. But, despite much pressure from Republicans, Hoeven had (heretofore) not offered any indication of his plans for the fall.  Given the collegiality of politics in North Dakota, my sense is that Hoeven called his state’s Senator to alert him of his intention to contest his seat. It would be the gentlemanly thing to do, particularly given Dorgan’s service to the state and decency toward its residents (including Hoeven). Realizing that he couldn’t win against the popular Republican Governor in a Republican state, Dorgan chose to bow out rather than wage a campaign he was sure to lose.  “I smell desperation,” writes Dr. Melissa Clouthier:  The Democrats will be throwing everything at Americans in the next year. Health care, Card Check, Cap-n-Trade….the Triune of Doom(TM). They have one chance, perhaps a last one, to remake America into the socialist, Europe-lite dream they desire. They see power in socialism. Power for them. They seek to ensure that they have a stranglehold on governance forever, if possible, by sinking their claws into the American people…creating a symbiotic relationship where they need each other.  The American people don’t need the government. They don’t need Democrats. They need to believe in themselves. This health care fight is just the first battle in what is going to turn out to be a brutal 2010.  Other conservatives, like Karl at Hot Air, tread more carefully: “The retirements do not always benefit the GOP. Dorgan’s retirement is a likely GOP pickup, especially if (as expected) Gov. John Hoeven gets into the race. But Connecticut Attorney General Dick Blumenthal looks like a much stronger candidate than Chris Dodd, Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper (fmr. Sen. Ken Salazar is out) looks to be a stronger challenger than Ritter, and probably anyone could be a better candidate than Cherry. Granted, the fact that fresh faces apparently poll better than Dem incumbents does not bode well for Dems generally, but it demonstrates that an open seat is not always the best scenario for the party out of power, either.”  Still, he admits, apparent good news can be actual good news: “Retirements can be an indicator of internal weakness. After all, one might expect fewer retirements among the party in power than in the out party. In addition … in 1994, even if all of the Democrats who voted for the Clinton budget or the assault weapons ban had run for re-election, Republicans could have defeated enough of them to retake the House. It is too soon to say whether 2010 is shaping up as another 1994 — but the GOP does not have to win as many seats this year as they did in 1994, either.”  For a less partisan, more comprehensive and (as usual) somewhat bloodless assessment, let’s turn to the Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder:  There are individual, candidate-specific reasons for each withdrawal, but each candidate, because of the national environment, faced tough re-election campaigns. Dodd was in the most danger, his image never recovering from his association with Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozillo and an impression that he had abandoned the state. The Democrat who will likely replace Dodd as the Democratic nominee, state Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, is popular, and will probably be favored to win over either of the two Republican candidates, Linda McMahon and former Rep. Rob Simmons.  Colorado is a tough state for Democrats. Senate incumbent Michael Bennet has an even chance, at best, of retaining his seat, and Ritter has suffered from an erosion of his base support at a time when he’s been forced to make unpopular budget decisions. Democrats may fare better if ex-House Speaker Andrew Romanoff decides to run for governor and not challenge Bennet in the Senate primary.  Big picture, Marc? “Bottom line: from a micro perspective, the GOP gains nothing from today. From a macro perspective, anytime three major Democratic party figures retire…ain’t good for that party. The biggest lesson from today is psychological. There are a lot of Democrats who want to retire, and their colleagues, in essence, are giving them cover to do so. That’s what makes Democrats so nervous.”  One liberal who’s not nervous is Steve Benen of Washington Monthly, who has this “Quick quiz: Which party has more Senate retirements so far this campaign cycle, Democrats or Republicans? Follow-up question: which party has more House retirements so far this campaign cycle, Democrats or Republicans?” The answer, in case you haven’t guessed: “In the House, 14 GOP incumbents have decided not to seek re-election, while 10 Democratic incumbents have made the same announcement … In the Senate, six Republican incumbents have decided not to seek re-election, while two Democratic incumbents have made the same announcement. Is this evidence of a mass Democratic exodus?”  He answers his own question there, and blames the usual messengers: “This is, to be sure, exactly the meme Republicans want the media to embrace, and if the coverage this morning is any indication, political journalists seem anxious to comply.”  Chris Bowers of OpenLeft also does a little number crunching, but unlike Benen decides to toss in a little common sense:  Due to ongoing or emerging polling woes, Democratic chances of winning the Senate races in North Dakota (if Hoeven runs), Nevada, Colorado, Arkansas and Kentucky are virtually nil… This negative scenario puts Democrats in a four seat hole before we even start looking at the relative toss-ups in Delaware (if Biden runs), Illinois, Missouri, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Even if Dems sweep those five seats, that still gives Republicans a two-seat net gain. So, even in the realistic base-case scenario, Democrats will need two Republican votes to pass pretty much anything as long as the 60-vote culture remains in place. In other words, a year from now, Democrats won’t be able to [get] much of anything through Congress, even compared to current levels. Hell, if Scott Brown pulls off the upset in Massachusetts, they won’t even be able to pass the health care bill.  “The Dorgan and Dodd announcements raise two separate questions,” notes Greg Sargent of the Plum Line. “The first: What do the retirements say about the overall political environment and how difficult it is for Dems? The second: How do the Dorgan and Dodd retirements specifically impact Dem chances of holding their Senate super-majority? The fact that the GOP has had more retirements doesn’t materially impact the second question. The Dorgan retirement is very bad news for Dems. Yes, it may well be offset by Dodd’s retirement, which gives Dems a much better chance of holding the Connecticut seat. But nonetheless, the North Dakota seat is now all but certain to flip Republican, and before, it wasn’t.”  So, what does this mean for the makeup of the 112th Congress?  The point is that the debate over the number of retirements and over the Dem chances of holding the super-majority are two separate conversations. That said, when it comes to assessing just how bad the environment has become for Dems and whether Dems are “dropping like flies,” obviously the number of GOP retirements deserves to be part of the media discussion.  Also, on a separate note, it’s unclear to me how reliable an indicator of the political environment retirements are in the first place, particularly with nearly a year until Election Day. Genuinely unsure on that point. Anyone have a better sense?  Sorry, not me, Greg. Although it’s pretty clear that Chris Dodd’s going to be a lot more comfortable in his retirement environment than he has been in Washington the last couple of years.
Chris Dodd and plenty of others are hanging up the gloves -- but how much will it really help Republicans?