Who's Next?

Jim Geraghty's Morning Jolt has some warnings for other Democrats:

Who's Next?

On-site at Brown's victory party, Ace of Spades reports the chant, "John Kerry's next! John Kerry's next!"

Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina e-mails NRO: "Republican state Sen. Scott Brown has won the special election for U.S. Senate in Massachusetts. The outcome of this race is truly historic and could be the beginning of a fundamental realignment in American politics toward common-sense, conservative candidates . . . Scott Brown defied the odds because he gave freedom-loving Americans in Massachusetts and across the nation principled reasons to support him with their time and money. He ran against government-run health care, he ran against Washington spending, and he courageously supported broad-based tax cuts to create jobs. He won this race because he was willing to push bold, conservative ideas that set him apart from the Democrat in the race. Scott Brown's victory proves that mainstream, conservative candidates can win anywhere in the country if they're willing to fight for the principles of freedom. It proves that conservative candidates can win in states like Pennsylvania, Florida, California, Illinois, and Delaware where the Republican establishment has said only moderates can win. This victory also shows that if Americans are willing to get involved in the political process and fight for their principles, they don't have to settle for second-best."

RedState's Erick Erickson: "I think from tonight on, we must all call Jim DeMint 'Wellington.' Because Obama has been crushed at Waterloo."

Bill Quick wants a wide battlefield: "Here's the strategy. We contest every race. The goal is to put as many liberty-minded conservatives into office as we can, and where that is impossible, to elect the most congenial Republican we can get. In Mass, that was a Scott Brown. In California, it may end up being a Meg Whitman, or a Carly Fiorina. But where a liberty minded conservative has a shot, then back that candidate to the hilt, either in the primaries (no matter what the national party decides is good for us), and in the general elections afterwards. Rubio in Florida is an example of what I am talking about. He is popular, he can win, and he is far more congenial to our cause than the currently anointed GOP candidate (who may no longer be so anointed in the wake of the Massachusetts Massacre)."

The New York Post saw complications for their appointed senator: "Many New York Democratic insiders are privately speculating that if the Democrats face a Martha Coakley loss -- or near-loss -- in Massachusetts to GOPer Scott Brown in tomorrow's senate election, it increases the odds of a Harold Ford Jr. candidacy."

The very smart Sean Trende: "With Scott Brown rushing toward the finish line with Martha Coakley in D+12 Massachusetts, apparently (if the polls are to be believed) ahead by a nose, you'd think that the political establishment would slowly wake up to the fact that we're in a political environment that is at least as bad as 1994. But amazingly, the establishment's slumber continues. The consensus among the political class remains that the House not only isn't in play, but that it is crazy talk to suggest that control could flip. These pundits are absolutely wrong. While I think the most likely scenario right now is that the Republicans will pick up somewhere in the neighborhood of 35 seats, Democratic losses could easily go higher. In fact, I'd say the GOP currently has about a one-in-three chance of getting the 40 seats they need to take back the House, with a bias toward higher gains."

Without question the GOP is going to be energized and the Dems demoralized in the months leading up to the November election. Every Dem seat...EVERY DEM SEAT...is in play. Look for a significant number of Democrats who decide in the next few weeks to "spend more time with their families".