Washington (CNN) – Democrats in Congress, already worried about their dim prospects in the 2010 midterm elections, have been thrown in a tizzy about something else that could reduce their majority: retirements.

They are four departures down and worried about more members leaving districts that have grown more competitive. And they're right to be concerned: Districts without any incumbent running often wind up switching to the other party.

But there's much more to worry about. Consider the results of a recent "open seat" special election for the state senate in a Democratic district in rural eastern Kentucky: Republican Jimmy Higdon beat the Democrat Jodie Haydon by tying him to, of all things, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats.

"Congress is out of control," one effective ad intoned, "and [Haydon] will bring Nancy Pelosi's one-party control of government to Frankfurt."

Full Story

(CNN) – If you're a Democratic political adviser right now, you've got one major question heading into the 2010 midterm elections: Do voters worry more about the skyrocketing deficit or high unemployment?

The answer: unemployment.

In fact, according to a recent survey done by Democracy Corps, a Democratic research firm, Americans worry twice as much about jobs as the deficit: "...When forced to choose, voters embrace a bold jobs initiative over a long-term deficit reduction program by two-to-one."

Ipso facto, a new jobs bill is born.

Never mind that the first stimulus package has yet to truly kick in. Or that, within the next month, the Senate has to hold its nose and vote to raise the federal debt limit above its current $13 trillion level. That's a tough vote, even for big spenders.

Full story

(CNN) - Now we know what the 20 hours of Situation Room sessions were about. This was a forceful, methodical case for sending 30,000 more troops – with a clear exit strategy by July 2011.

A few important things:

· He made it very clear the safety of the American people is at stake, reminding us of 9/11 … and telling us that we have apprehended extremists on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border who were preparing to commit "new acts of terror" against the U.S.
· He also made it clear we are no patsies.
· And he noted that there is no blank check for Hamid Karzai, and the Pakistanis need to stop harboring terrorists.

What remains unanswered: if these nations don't cooperate and reform, what do we do?

(CNN) – Dick Cheney's decision to weigh in on the Republican intra-party battle in Texas - a rare primary season endorsement by the former vice president - is an attempt to help challenger Kay Bailey Hutchison shore up her conservative credentials and attract undecided GOP voters, according to two knowledgeable GOP sources.

The former vice president teamed up with Hutchinson in Houston Tuesday to officially endorse her gubernatorial bid. The Texas senator is taking on two-term incumbent Gov. Rick Perry in next year's Republican primary.

One source notes that Cheney and Hutchison have a longstanding relationship that goes back to the days when they were both in Dallas, a time when Cheney served as Halliburton CEO.

The political calculation behind Tuesday's move is the hope that Cheney can help the senator win over undecided Republican voters in a state where the Bush administration's seal of approval may hold more sway than anywhere else. "The two most popular people in Texas are George and Barbara Bush - and Cheney isn't far behind," says one source close to Texas politics.

Perry, according to his campaign, has already won a re-election nod from the person who had hoped to succeed Cheney - Sarah Palin.

But Palin's popularity won't necessarily translate into major support for Perry. Some rank-and-file Republicans are concerned about Perry's ethical imbroglios. The fact that his party lost seats in the statehouse in the last election has also contributed to GOP dissatisfaction with Perry.

Still, one controversy might actually pay dividends for Perry: His headline-grabbing remarks suggesting Texas, unhappy with the administration's economic policy, could want to secede from the union. "That helps him," according to the Texas source. "There's no love for Washington."

Despite his time in Washington, he adds, Cheney isn't viewed as a Washington insider - he's seen as a man who tangled with the city's establishment.

Gloria Borger says President Obama is trying to fix problems that have gone untouched for decades.

Editor's note: Gloria Borger is a senior political analyst for CNN, appearing regularly on CNN's "The Situation Room," "Campbell Brown," "AC360°" and "State of the Union With John King" as well as other programs during special event coverage.

(CNN) - In my next life, I'd like to be an opposition party leader. What fun to go to work every day knowing you will always be right, largely because your ideas will remain untested.

So you propose theories to your heart's content, with vague plans and proposals guaranteed to make any voter smile. If we were in charge, you sing, the people would have tax cuts! More money in their pockets! And no deficits! But more jobs!

And, oh, what about the great pleasure of taking on the poor guy who won? On any particular day, the president is either a socialist (health care), a captive of environmental greenies (climate change) or a dithering commander in chief who disagrees with his generals and can't make up his mind (Afghanistan). Name-calling. Can't beat that for a job.

All the while, you - the "serious" opposition - continue to intone to the public "we want to work with him, of course."

Of course, you don't.

Full story

Gloria Borger says President Obama faces a political problem of his own making on Afghanistan.

(CNN) – Sometimes, even in Washington, there's no way around a central truth: that in governing, there are moments when real, tough decisions must be made. No waffling. None of the usual "on the one hand, on the other hand." No hiding behind the votes cast by others.

There is one vote, and it belongs to the president.

It was that way with George W. Bush in December 2006, when, after conferring for three months with his generals and his Cabinet - not to mention the advice offered by the pooh-bahs in the Iraq Study Group - he decided on a surge strategy in Iraq. It was not a plan highly touted by many of his advisers, but by January, Bush told the nation "America will change our strategy ... [and] this will require increasing American force levels."

As it turns out, the surge worked.

Full Story

WASHINGTON (CNN) – First of all, let me stipulate that, as a purelypolitical matter, I take no issue with President Obama's concern that Democrats could take a shellacking in 2010.

I have no problem with his political aides recruiting candidates and nudging (er, pushing) others aside, such as New York Gov. David Paterson. And it's a good idea that they're paying attention to redistricting fights in
statehouses.

Boss Obama isn't a bad thing. In fact, it's a good thing. Of course, there is that small matter of post-partisan Obama. Remember that guy? He's the candidate who wanted to take us beyond red states and blue states. He wanted to work with Republicans, not simply defeat them.

It was always a leap of faith, this notion that somehow partisanship could be swept aside in a Congress populated by members elected in increasingly partisan districts. Or that, because of Obama's considerable powers of persuasion and popularity, Republicans would decide to join hands with their Democratic brethren to find solutions to our toughest problems.

Full Story

Borger: Obama was tough and determined.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - No-drama Obama morphed into an emotional, tough, determined leader in his joint address to Congress Wednesday night, making it clear that "the moment" is demanding health reform. Not just as a matter of care, but as a matter of national character.

Fearing the future, President Obama told us, is "not what the moment calls for."

The high moment, however, had already been disrupted by a low one: an out-of-order, childish, dumb taunt from GOP Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina, who shouted, "You lie," when Obama said that illegal immigrants would not be covered under his health care measure. The errant congressman later apologized, of course, but his infamous heckling would not be forgotten.

The angry outburst reminded us that this defining domestic debate has, at times, descended into a churlish display of acrimony. Hard to escape, it seems. But after Obama's speech, maybe a tad easier to ignore.

Full Story

Gloria Borger says the president has to lead the way out of the confusing health care debate.

WASHINGTON (CNN) – In a way, the president really has no other choice but to finally speak - and speak conclusively about what he wants in a health care reform bill.

After all, 67 percent of Americans told CBS pollsters over the weekend that the health care debate is "confusing." Only 31 percent thought they had a "clear understanding" of the issues involved. What's worse, the uncertainty cut across party lines. For once, in this polarized time, Democrats and Republicans agree on something: They're perplexed by this health care debate.

And so the White House has allowed that it's time for the president to weigh in, perhaps from the Oval Office or maybe in an address to Congress. No matter how he does it, this much is clear: better late than never.

It hasn't been an easy summer. And maybe, when this is all over, administration aides will look back at their initial strategy with some chagrin. You'll recall the plan was to allow Congress to legislate first, in order to avoid the mistakes of then-first lady Hillary Clinton 16 years ago. She presented a health care reform plan to Congress which then became a big, fat target. The bill died, and she was excoriated.

Full Story

The Central Intelligence Agency is under fire for harsh interrogation techniques used after 9/11.

Gloria Borger is a senior political analyst for CNN, appearing regularly on CNN's "The Situation Room," "Campbell Brown," "AC360°" and "State of the Union With John King," as well as special event coverage.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - No matter which way you look at it, the question is painfully difficult: What - if anything - do we do about the post 9/11 behavior of some CIA agents who worked feverishly to interrogate prisoners they believed had information that could save American lives?

First, we now know definitively what we always suspected - that agent actions were sometimes abusive, perhaps even illegal, as they tried to obtain information.

The just-released Justice Department report shows, among other things, that agents choked one detainee repeatedly and threatened to kill another prisoner's children. Not pretty stuff.

But here's what we also know, thanks to another report (purposefully) released by the CIA as a response to the Justice document: Some interrogations worked.

According to these agency reports, chronicling 2004 and 2005, the intelligence community gleaned valuable information in real-time - like tracking down a terrorist network and securing key information from the notorious Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the 9/11 mastermind.

The CIA's message is clear: Whatever we did helped us get what we needed to save lives. So get off our backs and let us do our jobs.

But here's the catch, and it's what complicates all of this: The CIA report does not draw a straight line between any specific interrogation methods and success. Indeed, the report says the "effectiveness" of any particular interrogation technique in gaining star-quality information "cannot be so easily measured."

That is an understatement.

So it's easy to see why the president, who doesn't need another political headache, was happy to toss the hot potato over to Attorney General Eric Holder for review. Holder is independent, the president reminded us. He is supposed to make decisions about whether to prosecute criminal cases without the president. That notion could provide a smidgeon of political cover, but it looks like it won't be enough.

Full story

WASHINGTON (CNN) – The giveaway was when they started calling him "Barack."

It was jarring, at first, to hear many in this group of 12 independent voters refer to their new president by his first name. But the more they talked, the more it made sense. After all, they are seeing a lot of him.

And they like it - or at least they like him. "There's a sense of intimacy, or relationship, that was there," says Democratic pollster Peter Hart, who conducted the focus group in Towson, Maryland, on Wednesday night. "[It shows] how unbelievably powerful his personal presence is. ... Don't get fooled by numbers alone. Something is stronger here."

So while the president's poll numbers start to dip, these dozen independents - including four McCain supporters and a lone Nader voter - are giving the president some leeway. They feel like they know him, and that he's "honest,' as one put it. And while they say the country is "broke," "worried" and "confused, they're not blaming Barack. If anything, they seem invested in his success.

Full story

Rahm Emanuel met with journalists Friday to discuss health care.

WASHINGTON (CNN) – In a session with journalists today, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel sounded more optimistic about health care reform than many of his fellow Democrats. In fact, he made a point of telling reporters that secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who spoke with the president today, said "I wish I was this close in '94," when she unsuccessfully attempted to shepherd her bill through Congress.

That said, Emanuel clearly understands the hurdles that lie ahead-particularly with members of his own party. Yet he insisted that the committees working on legislation in the House and the Senate are not as far apart on major matters as has been portrayed. Moreover, he added the status quo is unacceptable. Any measure, he said, must be deficit-neutral, bend the health care cost curve downward, and include one of the president's favorite plans, 'MedPac', which would empower an independent executive agency to curb health care costs.

When asked whether the president needs to outline a specific plan on health care, Emanuel made it clear the president is involved, and has no intention of doing so. "We made a choice...(to offer) broad oputlines and let the legislative process work," he said. "...(When you start with a bill) every change becomes a defeat. I've done that story line." But, he added, "don't think we are waiting...we are not sitting back like the Maytag man."

He went out of his way to compliment members for "working through a tough issue. "There's lots of members, lots of sausage making," he said-and went out of his way to compliment three GOP senators - Mike Enzi, Olympia Snowe and Charles Grassley - who are working to get a bill out of the Senate Finance Committee. "I have a great deal of admiration for their courage... in the face of a tremendous amt of political pressure they are acting …with a ...sense of public responsibility," he said.

He was less complimentary, to say the least, of those Republicans who are opposing any democratic-driven measure. "The prescription drug bill was 900 billion, and paid for on a credit card. You might not like the 'pay-fors,' but they're there....the party that is sitting there compaining about the deficit has nothing but a pool of blood (red ink) around them."

Not surprisingly, Emanuel predicted this Congress can get something done. He did allow that the peril of having the health care debate hang around over the August recess is that "the interest groups (could) come out and change course." But he reminded reporters that "the insurance companies have made a calculation that reform is better than not...they're seen as the biggest burden in the system as it exists."

In other words: jump ship at your own peril.

Jenny Sanford did not stand beside her husband when he publicly admitted to having an affair.

Editor's note: Gloria Borger is a senior political analyst for CNN, appearing regularly on CNN's "The Situation Room," "Campbell Brown," "AC360°" and "State of the Union With John King," as well as special event coverage.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - After years of watching those wives stand (sadly) by their men, there was something refreshing - and real - about Jenny Sanford's decision to be far, far away from the governor's apology tour.

After all, what would she have done when he rambled on and on about his love of his "adventure trips" on the Appalachian Trail when, it turns out, he wasn't hiking?

And would she have had to sweetly smile as her husband paid homage to her as a terrific "campaign manager"?

And what affect would she have had to adopt when the governor spoke about "that whole sparking thing" - his peculiar way of describing how an e-mail relationship developed into something else?

The accepted political guidelines for jilted wives (see: wives, jilted) have always decreed that the wounded ones be seen, but stay silent. They are the suffering partners willing to literally remain in the picture out of political necessity. Their very presence helps to suggest that this love is worth saving, because this man is so special - to all of us.

Well, forget it.

Full story

Even before President Obama chose Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court, he let it be known that he was looking for a justice with, among other things, something called 'empathy.'

By that, he said, he meant someone who understands "ordinary Americans so that everybody is heard." And that quality, we can infer, comes largely from life experience and background. Ipso facto, Sotomayor's up-by-the-bootstraps life story could well make her a more empathetic justice.

It's a notion that clearly horrifies conservatives. "It opens a grand debate of the president's own making," Manuel Miranda, chairman of the Third Branch Conference, told me. For conservative purists, empathy is all about feelings, which have no place in the law. It's also about experiences-even ethnicity-which should also have no place in the law.

As a defiant Justice Antonin Scalia said in 2007, "…just as there is no 'Catholic' way to cook a hamburger, I am hard-pressed to tell you of a single opinion of mine that would have come out differently if I were not Catholic." And I'm sure he's telling the truth.

But there's more to it than that. If empathy means you "understand what other people are thinking," says one senior White House advisor, "…you would think you would want a judge with empathy." That's also true.

So here are the questions: Can a justice have empathy and still rule dispassionately on the law? Or does empathy so control – and even corrode - our nature that it affects every intellectual argument? Or, conversely, would judicial decisions actually benefit from a dose of empathy?

The rap against Sotomayor on the empathy front is that she's over-the-top. The alleged proof of this is a statement she made at a symposium in 2001 arguing that a "wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who has lived that life." It was silly, to be sure, and more than a tad self-serving.

And when she was asked about it by the White House team, according to a senior advisor, she explained her answer by saying that "her life experiences" impact "how she sees facts that come before her as a judge." Not to mention the fact that she also pointed out that the landmark civil rights decision Brown vs. Board of Education was made by an all-white, all-male court.

No one can pretend that using the word "better" to describe the Latina woman's legal conclusions was a good idea; it wasn't. But how can anyone argue with the notion that who we are affects - in one way or another - how we view things? And on a collegial, multi-member court, isn't that diversity of experience a good thing?

Just ask conservative Justice Samuel Alito. When testifying at his own confirmation hearings, he was all about empathy. "…[W]hen a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant…I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position." Conservatives found no objection when Alito described his own brand of empathy.

And ask the more liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who recently told USA Today of her concerns about the male-ness of the court during a recent case involving a 13-year-old girl who had been strip-searched in an Arizona school when officials were looking for drugs. "They have never been a 13-year-old girl," she said. "It's a very sensitive age for a girl. I don't think that my colleagues, some of them, quite understood."

And then there's this: Can anyone point to a pattern in Sotomayor's opinions which are based more on 'empathy' than the law? Of course not.

And that's precisely the point: Unless Sotomayor's opponents can succeed in using her judicial record to portray her as a passionate, wild-eyed judge who depends more on emotion more than legal precedent, they're in for a tough time.

If they think empathy is a dirty word, they'll have to convince the American public.

A source tells CNN that President Obama was looking for a nominee with the ability to win over Justice Anthony Kennedy.

WASHINGTON (CNN) – Contrary to conventional wisdom, President Obama was not looking for someone to balance the more flamboyant conservative firepower of Justice Antonin Scalia, according to one senior administration official involved in the process of picking, vetting and promoting the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

He was looking for someone with the ability to win over Justice Anthony Kennedy, the crucial swing vote.

"[Obama] was very struck, when he met with her, about how thoughtful she was as a judge," says the source. "He believed she had a precise approach to cases that would be effective in winning over Kennedy when possible."

The president considered Sotomayor's opinions to be "rigorous, precise, not overly flamboyant." Reports have called her more workmanlike than visionary – a precision that impressed Obama, who is looking to turn narrow decisions his way.

As for getting Sotomayor past the Senate: A decision has been made not to go the route of picking an outside lobbyist, as Republicans often do, to play "sherpa" for the nominee. The model instead is the way the late Sen. Pat Moynihan helped shepherd Ruth Bader Ginsburg's nomination through the Senate.

This time, it's another New York senator, Chuck Schumer, who will be Sotomayor's point man. Cynthia Hogan will lead the White House legal team on this effort, making courtesy calls next week. She will joined by Susan Davies and Ron Klain.

How will Sotomayor do at the hearings? This source points out that she's "got the most experience as a judge than anyone who's been nominated for the court in 70 years." Republicans, he said, told the president to nominate someone with judicial experience, and that is what Obama did. "She is very effective face to face, and has been on the bench for 17 years," he says. "She knows how to deal with public advocates."

The source dismissed the "Latina" controversy, arguing that Sotomayor's statements about how the life experiences of a Latina woman might help her "reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life" don't reflect identity politics, but what she believes to be the reality of her life – that she had to work harder to get where she is today. He also notes that during the same speech, she noted that the court that decided Brown vs. Board of education was all-male, and all-white.

Not surprisingly, he argues that all of the stir - including descriptions of her as a reverse racist - is about the GOP trying to figure out how to oppose her. "They're nervous about the political consequences of opposing her," he says. "And any effort to disparage her or her professional credentials will be hard."

This source points to her "huge paper trail," and says that's what the hearings should be about. "Efforts to try and turn her into something she's not will backfire," he says.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - Heading into the selection process, Sonia Sotomayor was the Supreme Court candidate President Obama knew the least. But her six-hour White House visit last Thursday - including an hour-long meeting with the president - clinched her the spot, according to a senior administration offficial.

Obama was not asked about Iraq or Afghanistan.

(CNN) – It's astonishing President Obama was not asked more about foreign policy.

The president himself had to raise the issue of his Iran tape. There was some talk on Mexico and a tad on the Middle East, but NO Iraq and Afghanistan???

How can that be?

And when was the last time a president had a press conference without mentioning those, or without being asked about those?

(CNN) - The president didn not call for a permanent middle class tax cut.

A temporary one is in the stimulus package, but when pressed, the president outlined his budget priorities: health care, energy, education, and deficit reduction.

(CNN) - President Obama made it clear that Americans “are sacrificing left and right…”

And the folks who are getting the bailout money are going to have to sacrifice more.

He did take the turn to make it clear he still intends to pack his agenda—with health care, education and energy for the “longterm growth” of the economy.

Jury is still out on whether the public will buy that, given the economic mess

WASHINGTON (CNN) – When the White House first got wind of the executive bonuses at American International Group, the disbelief was palpable.

"You smack your head and you say 'You've gotta be kidding me,' " senior presidential adviser David Axelrod tells me. "It put another brick on the load we're carrying."

Or a concrete block.

Just as the White House readies its long-awaited plan to bail out the banks - having presented its plans for housing and small business - a new wave of anger is precisely what it doesn't need. And to make matters worse, it's a widespread anger that is not grounded in the more ordinary resentments between economic classes.

In fact, this new populism is almost unanimous: The banks were greedy and reckless. They took us down with them. So why do the bad guys deserve a government cushion?

Full Story

The president has a hard message to sell: Without aid for banks and Wall Street, we'll all sink, Gloria Borger says.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - In case you hadn't noticed, Americans are having a rough time with the New World Order as it applies to saving the economy.

That is, the ordinary moral instincts we use to guide our daily lives don't seem to apply to economic policy: We can't simply punish the bad guys. Alas, we have to help the bad guys - in order to help ourselves.

For most - angry at the stupidity and profligacy of both Wall Street and the big banks - saving that bunch is not an easy notion to accept. And if you're the president, it's even a harder notion to sell.

People are losing wealth every day. Those close to retirement are putting it off. So are those who want to sell their homes or get a loan. So what's a president to say: You need to root for the bad guys to get back on their feet first?

Well, yes. Someone needs to say it. The president dipped his toe in the treacherous water in his joint address to Congress earlier this month when he allowed, "I know how unpopular it is to be seen as helping banks right now, especially when everyone is suffering in part from their bad decisions. I get it. But I also know that in a time of crisis, we cannot afford to govern out of anger, or yield to the politics of the moment."

Exactly right. But why has the argument stopped there?

Full story

(CNN) - I'd give the president's performance tonight a solid B: Substantive, not inspirational. Sober, more programs than hope. Lots of promises - details to come.

(CNN) - President Obama has made his priorities very clear: health care, energy and education. The speech is more like a standard State of the Union address - with an added element of extreme urgency, given the fiscal crisis.

If it somehow seems that we have heard this before from Obama, it's because we have. Which raises the question: have we been seeing him too much?

My answer is no. We know where he stands and what he intends to do. Now voters can hold him to his promises.

President Obama has chosen pragmatism over ideology as he has navigated the stimulus debate.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - It is not unusual for a presidential candidate to try to win friends and influence voters. That's what elections are about, so we tend to excuse political posturing when we see it - because we have come to expect a certain amount of it. Besides, we like people who pay attention to us.

But once a president becomes president, we expect other things. We expect him to keep his promises (particularly if we liked them). We expect action and decision. And, most of all, we expect to come to learn who he is, and where he really stands - by virtue of what he decides.

And what we've been watching over the last few weeks is just that: the very public development of a new president who is more pragmatic than ideological by nature, testing his instincts against the divided realities of Washington.

It's been a balancing act - in which we've seen President Obama as both cheerleader and Chicken Little, as a partisan Democrat and a bipartisan negotiator and, finally, as both an insider leading a well-worn Washington-dominated Cabinet and an outsider railing against Washington's business as usual.

In many ways, the deck has been stacked against the president's instincts: Washington hasn't been hospitable to bipartisanship for decades.

Full story

Obama is holding his first prime time news conference. (Getty Images)

(CNN) - President Obama made the points he needs to make to the American public:  If we don’t act now, this economic crisis will become a catastrophe.

He also made the philosophical point that tax cuts alone cannot solve this problem, as some Republicans suggest.

He conceded that we can't depend on government alone to solve the problems, but made the point that only government is large enough to solve the problems of this size.

President Barack Obama has pledged to work with Republicans on his economic stimulus package.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - If there was one message that resonated loud and clear from the Obama campaign, it was this: Let's get past all of the partisanship and work together to get something done.

Turns out, President Barack Obama actually meant it. He's been meeting with congressional Republicans (and will trek to the Hill again Tuesday).

He's been listening to their ideas, incorporating some tax-cut ideas. And, yes, he's also been turning some down. After all, as he told Republicans last week, he was the one who won the election.

So what we're watching now as the stimulus package takes shape is the legislative equivalent of the first date: Republicans meeting with the new president, sizing him up. Obama deciding whether the GOP is serious about working with him.

"He [Obama] came to a conclusion early on in his political career that partisan polarization is a large part of the problem," says a senior Obama adviser. "Both in reality and in the minds of the American people."

Ah, but it's never that simple.

Full story

Some key Democrats are balking at President-elect Barack Obama's economic stimulus plan.

WASHINGTON (CNN) – Yes, it's early. Very early. Barack Obama hasn't even moved into Blair House yet.

But it's time - for an intervention.

How else to confront the oddly self-destructive behavior of congressional Democrats? How else to figure out why they seem intent on depriving their new president of a swift - and truly bipartisan - victory on his all-important economic stimulus package?

Watch Candy Crowley report on Obama's sales pitch

It's as if they haven't quite figured out what the public meant when it voted to change business as usual. Or that sometimes, in order to get something done, the perfect is the enemy of the good, as the cliché goes. Or to effectively cripple the Obama presidency in its infancy would be, er, bad for them.

Full story

(CNN) – Two sources close to the transition say that New York Federal Reserve President Timothy Geithner is “on track” to being offered the nomination for Treasury Secretary. The announcement will happen within days, possibly Monday, potentially with another member or members of the Obama economic team as well.

Current Defense Secretary Robert Gates is likely to stay at the post, a source tells CNN.

(CNN) – Barack Obama is considering a mix of Washington insiders and high-profile business executives to head various cabinet positions, one source involved in the cabinet gathering process told CNN.

For Secretary of State, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry is high on the list. Also on the list is Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd, a former presidential candidate who endorsed Barack Obama early in the Democratic primary season. New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and former U.N. Ambassador Richard Holbrooke are also interested in the job.

For Secretary of Defense, there are indications current Defense Secretary Robert Gates will stay at the post "for a certain period." Gates, the former CIA Director under the first President Bush, has been praised by members of both parties for his leadership at the Pentagon over the last two years. Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed, a former United States Army Captain and a member of the Armed Services Committee, is acting as the go-between with Gates.

Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, who also served as that state's attorney general, is said to be a "very real possibility" for U.S. attorney general. Napolitano, who also endorsed Obama early in the primary process, was named earlier this week to the Obama transition team.  She's also served as a U.S. attorney from Arizona.

For Secretary of Commerce, former White House Chief of Staff Leon Panetta, Time Warner Chairman Dick Parsons, prominent Chicago Businesswoman Penny Pritzker, and University of California economist Laura Tyson are all under consideration.

One problem: the Obama administration wants a diverse cabinet, and that means everything is still up for grabs.

(CNN)– It's very hard to see a path to the White House now for John McCain. He put everything into Pennsylvania, and it wasn't enough.
Obama understood his challenge in the state after he lost to Hillary Clinton in the primaries, and it became a turning point in his campaign.

While making the rounds in Virginia Thursday, Sen. Obama told reporters that he'd decided on a running mate but refused to say any more.

(CNN) - The VP choice was a difficult one for Obama, a source close to the Illinois senator tells CNN's Gloria Borger.

Watch: "I've made the selection," says Obama

Specifically Obama was "very hung up on the experience versus change,” the source said, and how his message of change may conflict with a longtime Washington insider.

The source doesn't know who Obama ultimately chose, but confirms Sens. Joe Biden and Evan Bayh, along with Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine are all in the running.