In California state elections, third parties get 10% of the vote when either Perot is running, or both the Republican and Democrat candidates are disliked by the voters (neither situation seems likely here). You are also assuming that third party candidates take votes away from challengers with no effect on incumbents.

Even with your assumptions, Feinstein might be leading only 49%-41%. An 8 point margin is certainly not what I would call a sure thing or a cakewalk.

Whether Sanders votes with the Democrats on certain issues or not, he will not be committed to the success of the Democratic party. And they could always put up someone with views they support who will back the party.

The Democrats shoudl be capable of running candidates against Sanders, without angering liberal voters. And not running, signals that either you are scared of being slaughtered or don’t care about the state.

No, that’s not a reasonable expectation. Within 1% is going to be within the margin of error in any opinion poll. Assuming she’s at 52% come election day, she would presumabely get between 49-55% of the vote. In a race that is likely to see third party candidates get 10% of the vote (and I’ll be part of that 10%), she’s in for a cake walk.

As for Democrats not challenging Sanders, they have no reason to. He’ll side with the Dems in caucus. The last thing they want to do is piss off Vermont’s liberal voters by running against someone as popular as Sanders. There’s no state as open to third parties as Vermont, and engendering bitterness now _could_ lead to turmoil in a future race that Democrats would otherwise be guaranteed.

And for what its worth, Chafee is the only Republican in the Senate I would contemplate voting for, depending on his challenger.

Not surprising, but all of the Democrats running for re-election in conservative states voted to end debate, and all of the Democrats whom are thinking of running for president, voted to fillibuster.

I did not argue it was unsatisfactory. Feinstein got 56% of the vote when her approval rating peaked at 57%. If her approval rating now is only 52%, it is reasonable to expect roughly 51% of the vote.

“even against an “unknown”, as its a sign that only 37% of the state will automatically vote Republican regardless of the candidate.”

It’s a sign that Republican candidates will always got a higher percentage of the vote than just the percentage of voters whom are Republican, even when only 40% of the voters know who that candidate is.

“And why the hell do we need a Republican senator from California?”

Even the most liberal Republican from California would be more conservative than Feinstein. As an example, I don’t especially like Lincoln Chafee in RI, but at least he votes against fillibusters, which is much more than we can expect from any Democrat from that state. And it is better to have Jeffords than Sanders as a Vermont senator, actually I’m surprised that the Democrats don’t plan on seriously fighting for that seat.

Bill Jones was pretty uninspiring and relatively unknown. I voted for Judge Gray, the Libertarian.

Solid D/R
Likely D/R
Leans D/R
Toss Up

And winning 56% to your challenger’s 37% is satisfactory, even against an “unknown”, as its a sign that only 37% of the state will automatically vote Republican regardless of the candidate.

Boxer wiped the floor with Bill Jones, isn’t the conventional wisdom among republican party hoipolloi that Feinstein is more popular/moderate.