I don't. Who is the incumbent in this district? What's his/her record? What program, if any, does Dahroug propose?

I agree that ending GOP control of the State Senate would be good. The GOP conference killed Industrial Development Authority reform, affordable housing legislation, family leave and more. But,

Every State Senate seat is up for 2008. Is this one you think people should concentrate on? Why this one? (only fundraising?) Why not the NYC GOP senators?

The 3d District is in southwest Suffolk County and is made up of the heavily Dem areas of Central Islip, Brentwood and Bay Shore. The incumbent is Republican Ceasar Trunzo, who is still very powerful in the community but whose failing health doesn't allow him to campaign as actively as he used to.

Dahroug is a good candidate who's worked his rear end off trying to take down Trunzo. 2008 is going to be his best chance yet, specially with Spitzer's goal of flipping the Senate.

Why not the NYC GOP senators? You want to put all your eggs in one basket? If we're going to take the State Senate, we have to take seats outside the City. If you're going to write about NY politics, you should know that by now.

Jimmy is running against Caesar Trunzo out in Suffolk County. (You know, you could have looked that up in the State House Directory.) Trunzo has been in office for about 35 years. He's old (early 80s) and corrupt and doesn't do much. And the District has become a lot less Republican.

Jimmy ran against Trunzo in 2004 and 2006. This is his third try. He's young - around 28 years old. He's smart and energetic and charismatic. He's especially passionate about education reform, particularly in regard to proper funding for schools that aren't getting their fair share. He was endorsed by Newsday both times he ran. He was also supported by a lot of netroots and activists from NDM and DFNYC.

The biggest thing that hurt Jimmy the last time was a lack of funds, so what Mr. Bouldin has reported is quite impressive.

So, yes, it is most definitely a senate race that deserves attention and support.

Of the four NYC Republican Senators, only one is in serious trouble -- Serph Maltese (15th SD, Queens).

Trunzo spends most of his time in Florida, and only comes up to Albany when he's needed for tight votes. He does nothing for the district.

Jimmy did raise a decent amount of money in 2006, but most of it didn't come until just before (or just after) election day. In addition, he had to empty his warchest fighting a primary that should never have happened.

The $40,000 includes $15,000 in loans, but even subtracting them from his totals, he currently has almost three times as much cash on hand as he had two years ago.

Additionally, if he faces a primary challenge it won't be nearly as expensive as it was in 2006. Also, he will probably [finally] get the support from the DSCC he should have gotten the last time (the DSCC backed one of his primary opponents, who had contributed to Trunzo in 2004).

chances of success is not a science. Whether in NYC or elsewhere, these districts have been carefully carved for partisan advantage. Thus, while not wedded to NYC strategy, I am curious how people pick their favorites.

I am concerned that the Democrats' NYS Senate campaign may unusually scattershot. For example:

Senate Minority Leader Malcolm Smith was up in Rockland today to announce alongside local Democrats that the 38th Senate District seat would be targeted in 2008 in hopes of getting the Senate under Democratic control for the first time in more than 40 years. The seat is now held by Thomas Morahan, R-New City, an amazingly popular senator who has gotten a lot of Democratic support from voters and politicians.

How did Rockland get on the Democrats hit parade?

When it comes down to it, I expect campaigns to be winnable based on the policy differences between the candidates -- even in those districts in which GOP support is strongest. For example, I am told that even in Vito F.'s congressional district, a solid majority wants US troops out of Iraq.

But so far I see no method to the manner in which people are picking their fights.

Sometimes I wonder how districts are targeted. Last year, the DCCC targeted over 30 House districts -- and lost all but nine of them. Meanwhile, over 20 Democratic candidates with virtually no DCCC support defeated Republican incumbents.

Moving to the state Senate -- the two most obvious districts are the 3rd (Caesar Trunzo) and the 15th (Serph Maltese).

In the 3rd: Last year, after a bruising primary battle, Jimmy Dahroug still garnered 44.5% to Trunzo's 53.4% (David Ochoa, Dahroug's main primary opponent, ran on the WFP ticket and got the remaining 2.1%). This time, Jimmy is far ahead of his fundraising levels from two years ago, and may very well sail through without a primary (don't bet on it yet, though).

In the 15th: Last year, with no base and no party support, Albert Baldeo ran a stealth campaign and got 48.7% of the vote. Of course, many people saw his name on the ballot and thought he was Italian or Latino -- but mainly they wanted a Democrat to vote for. This time, Joseph Addabbo, Jr. has entered the race -- whether he or Baldeo wins the primary, chances are Maltese is toast.

If Democrats pick up both seats while holding the rest, that's the ball game. Clearly, though, the party needs to look at two or more "cushion" seats that could be won. My guess is that they're looking at districts where a Democrat can raise a lot of money -- that's the usual way. It sucks, which is why we need a "Clean Money" system of full public funding, but that's for another set of blogs.

may want to review Liz Benjamin's Thursday partial round-up of Senate fundraising here