Florida governor Charlie Christ temporarily at least, generated some hope among Democrats that the coming red wave might be dissipated by primary in-fighting. Crist abandoned his quest for the Republican nomination for a U.S. Senate seat as it became clear that Marco Rubio was uncatchable, and annouced he would run as an independent. The polls seemed to suggest that he might have a chance of actually winning, and socialist pundits everywhere assured us that he would dilute the Republican vote and give whatshisname a chance to add one to the Democrats column.

Yeah, not so much.

Rasmussen Reports observes that Rubio now has a comfortable, state-wide lead over Crist and that Democrat Kendrick Meek trails badly at 18%.

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely voters in Florida finds Republican Marco Rubio with 39% support, while Crist earns 31% of the vote and Democrat Kendrick Meek trails at 18%. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.

Christ has lost seven points since his announcement. Twelve percent might seem like a large undecided cohort, but its completely normal this far from election day--they are simply people who aren't paying a lot of attention to politics at this point, not some latent voting block.

Speaking of out lefty pundit friends--remember when I said Crist's independent run was more of a threat to Meek?

Seems Charlie thought so too.

Crist, whose numbers had been in freefall in his primary match-up with Rubio, has been actively courting Democrats. But Meek now edges Crist among Democratic voters after trailing him two weeks ago.

Arlen Specter, the erstwhile Republican, now Democrat, soon to be retired Senator from Pennsylvania is in a dead heat with his primary challenger according to Quinnipac, but the White House bookies are betting against him, refusing to risk Obama administration political credibility on a losing proposition. Neither Obama or Biden are scheduled to stump for Specter or offer any other material support.

A number of my fellow Utahns have been confused about my support for Bob Bennett's write-in campaign. The typical rationale for voting against Bennett is that we need to send a message to Washington. I have some sympathy for that view, but realistically its a Shakespearean tragedy as in...

...a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing.

The problem isn't the people we send to Washington, but the political system they labor under. With a constitutional amendment unlikely any time in the near future, it seems to me that we benefit most from employing a Congressional delegation with significant seniority and demonstrated political skills. They simply don't come more qualified that Bob Bennett. Yet Utah stands on the precipice, ready to send one of two complete unknown quantities into the fray. The current situation borders on suicidal.

As an example of what I mean, consider the San Juan wilderness designation bill Bennett was shepherding in Washington. That plan is now in limbo, and you might ask why a bill that on its face, looks like its a sell-out to so-called environmentalists, is something to be mourned.

Because, in the Washington tradition, you name your bill exactly opposite to its intent. The bill does allocate some roadless land as wilderness, but more importantly keeps other lands open to the public, motor vehicles and smart uses.

Anyone who thinks that wilderness is an all or nothing proposition, just doesn't understand politics in this country, or the value of an experienced Senator to insure local interests don't get rolled. Its sad, but Utahn's may well be voting for a far more draconian outcome for land use--or should I say 'no use.'