I cant say how little respect I have for Ken Warren's analysis. This is the guy who said Russ Carnahan would blow away the field. He's made a number of idiotic statements in the past. I've never seen thoughtful, thorough analysis from him. The DSCC has a poll showing Claire straight up tied with Talent. his job approval is sub-50%, the % of people wanting a someone new is high, and Warren is proclaiming Talent to be "unbeatable" ?

a man who is going against popular opinion on social security and stem cells, who hasn't even had a full term to work with? Unbeatable? yeah right. Heck, even generic candidates are polling well against Talent.

It'd be one thing if Claire had already said no-- then its perfectly fair to argue that Talent has a big advantage over other comers (save Jay Robin and Joe, but they arent running). but thats not the case.

sorry Ken. you're a joke for spouting crap like this. you better be a heckuva classroom professor, because i honestly wonder why legitimate news outlets continue to consult with you for your opinion.

Despite Talent’s short tenure in the Senate, Ken Warren, a political scientist at St. Louis University, said incumbents rarely lose.

"My sense of it is … that Jim Talent is really unbeatable," Warren said.

I wouldn't mind seeing what Prof. Warren said in the ellipsis.

If was something like ". . . without a high-profile challenger, an imaginative campaign, an announcement by Labor Day '05, and a large campaign warchest . . ." who wouldn't agree with him?

Charlie Cook is calling the race "Likely GOP." C&E has it at 4:3 GOP. And, Tim Saler has it at "Lean GOP."

That's today. Tomorrow? Well, see above.

Ben is right and who care's what Warren says-his comments on election night TV are anything that any observer of the policitcal system can make.

Yes it will be tough to beat an incumbent. If the economy in Missouri continues to slump and the war gets no better a Democrat with a name and a big war chest could win-especially a Woman fitting that descriptions because she'd have a point or two advantage just being a women. H'mm can anyone thing of someone who'd do this for the party? And maybe even win?

Ken Warren is not smart.

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Talent defeat an incumbent to gain this seat? Doesn't the argument he makes actually refute the argument he makes?

I wish reporters would stop talking to this guy, who clearly couldn't find reality with Mapquest and a flashlight.