Democrats control 26 governorships and must defend 19 in November. Sheer math, the sour economy and historical trends favoring the out-of-power party in midterm elections suggest big Republican statehouse gains.

"We are now tasked with remaking the political map," proclaims the website of the Republican Governors Association, headed by Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, a potential presidential candidate.

Republicans are hoping for eight or more pickups. "We can't wait until 2012 to start taking our country back," says Barbour.

Democrats are striving to minimize losses and pull off some upsets.

"We knew it was going to be a tough year just by virtue of the fact that we elected a Democrat to the White House in 2008," said Nathan Daschle, executive director of the Democratic Governors Association. "History shows the president's party loses 5.5 governors seats in midterm elections."

Furthermore, the poor economy and growing tea-party activism are weighing on all incumbents and those perceived as establishment candidates.

"In a year like this, no one is safe," Daschle said.

Underscoring the high stakes: The GOP governors association is poised to spend up to $65 million on the races; its Democratic counterpart, about $50 million.

Republicans' best shot for pickups may be a string of governorships now held by Democrats across Great Lakes and upper Midwestern states, including Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois and Iowa as well as Pennsylvania.

Democrats have fewer opportunities for gains, although they appear on track to pick up Republican governorships in Hawaii, Connecticut and possibly Minnesota.

Both parties were pumping resources into high-profile campaigns in populous California, Texas and Florida, all won by Republicans four years ago. Democrats hope to add at least one of those big three to their column.

These have been particularly trying times for governors.

On the front line of the economic crisis, many have been forced to cut services or raise taxes -- or both. And they've been bloodied by voter anger and the tea party movement sweeping the nation. Unlike the federal government, governors can't print money and many are barred from deficit spending.

That, along with term limits in some states, is why so few sitting governors are running. Only 13 incumbents are on the ballot.

And some standing for re-election are in close races, including Democratic Govs. Chet Culver in Iowa, Ted Strickland in Ohio, Martin O'Malley in Maryland, even Deval Patrick in Massachusetts.

Governors in 31 of the 37 states on the ballot will have a pivotal role in redrawing congressional and legislative district lines. Whichever party has more control over the process is likely to get a larger number of favorable districts.

Rust Belt and upper Midwestern states are among the hardest hit by the Great Recession and provide some of the best hunting grounds for Republicans.

President Barack Obama recently campaigned for Ohio's endangered Strickland in his race against Republican John Kasich, a former chairman of the House Budget Committee. Obama also stumped for Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, who is struggling to keep the Wisconsin post in Democratic hands and faces the winner of a Sept. 14 GOP primary.

In Michigan, where unemployment is at 14 percent, Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm is finishing her term with slumping ratings. Republican businessman Rick Snyder has a big lead in polls over Democrat Virg Bernero, the mayor of Lansing.

In Illinois, interim Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn is weighed down by the Rod Blagojevich scandal. In Iowa, Culver must contend with popular former GOP Gov. Terry Branstad. In Kansas, the seat formerly held by Democrat Kathleen Sebelius -- now secretary of health and human services -- is open and retiring Republican Sen. Sam Brownback has a strong lead.

In the Northeast, Republicans captured New Jersey in a 2009 off-year election and now hope to capture open governorships now held by Democrats in Pennsylvania and Maine. In Pennsylvania, polls put Republican Attorney General Tom Corbett ahead of Democrat Dan Onorato, who is Allegheny County's elected chief executive.

Democrats hope to pick up an open governorship now held by Republicans in Connecticut but face aggressive GOP challenges in two other New England states now held by Republicans: Rhode Island and Vermont. In Massachusetts, Patrick had appeared endangered, but he may be able to take advantage of a split in the anti-Patrick vote between a Republican and an independent candidate.

Democrats should be able to hold onto New York, with state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo as their nominee.

In the West, the top race is California, where Democrat Edmund G. "Jerry" Brown, a former governor and current attorney general, is running against former eBay chief executive Meg Whitman for the job being vacated by Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger. Whitman is breaking individual spending records, investing more than $104 million so far. Brown is one of five ex-governors seeking to get their old jobs back. Most polls put the race at a virtual dead heat.

In Colorado, Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, a Democrat, may be able to keep the seat in Democratic hands as Republicans split support between establishment GOP candidate Dan Maes and former Republican Rep. Tom Tancredo, who is running as an independent. Democratic Gov. Bill Ritter dropped a re-election bid amid weak poll numbers

Democrats could have a hard time holding open governorships in New Mexico, Oregon and Wyoming.

In the increasingly GOP South, Republicans captured a Democratic governorship in Virginia in 2009 and polls show them ahead in the race for the open post now held by Democrats in Tennessee.

Republicans also lead in polls for the open seat now held by Democrats in Oklahoma, and they appear likely to keep open governorships in Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican, is favored over Democratic former Houston Mayor Bill White, but Democrats are pouring a lot of money into the race and hoping for an upset.

In Florida, wealthy businessman Rick Scott won a bitter GOP primary by tagging Attorney General Bill McCollum -- a former longtime congressman -- as the establishment candidate. Scott, a political newcomer, is running against Democrat Alex Sink.

Democrats see the state as a pickup prospect. Most polls see a toss-up. Florida's governor, Charlie Crist, took office as a Republican but switched to independent in his Senate bid.

Governor jobs have long been known as fertile ground for future presidents, and there could some among this year's bumper crop of new faces. Four of the past six presidents were governors first -- Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

Once poisoned to near-extermination in the lower 48 states, wolves made a remarkable comeback over the last two decades under protection of the Endangered Species Act. But as packs continue to multiply their taste for livestock and big game herds coveted by hunters has stoked a rising backlash.

Wildlife officials say that without public wolf hunting, they need greater latitude to eliminate problem packs. Montana and Idaho held inaugural hunts last year but an August court ruling scuttled their plans for 2010.

"As the wolf populations increase, the depredations increase and the number of wolf removals will increase. It's very logical," said Mark Collinge, Idaho director for Wildlife Services, the U.S. Department of Agriculture branch that removes problem wolves, typically by shooting them from aircraft.

"You just have to accept that part of having wolves is having to kill wolves," he said.

But wildlife advocates and animal rights groups contend the response to depredating wolves has become too heavy-handed. They say a string of court decisions in their favor underscores that the species remains at risk.

"The draconian lengths they are poised to take really are a throwback, to when the same agency was gassing wolf pups in their dens almost a century ago and setting poisoned baits and trapping them," said Michael Robinson with the Center for Biological Diversity.

At least 1,700 wolves now roam Idaho, Montana and Wyoming. There are more than 4,000 in Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota. New populations are taking hold in Oregon and Washington, and wolves have been sighted in Colorado, Utah and New England.

Some of the most remote wilderness habitats are becoming saturated with the animals. As a result, packs are pushing into agricultural and residential areas where domestic animals offer an easy meal.

One of the more extreme proposals -- burying wolf pups in their dens and then poisoning them with carbon monoxide gas -- would be used only infrequently, in cases where the rest of the pack had been killed for preying on livestock, officials said.

More established practices, including shooting wolves from the air and ground, would be expanded.

In Montana and Idaho, officials hope to revive hunting seasons by rebranding them as "conservation hunts" or "research hunts." Also, Montana Democrat U.S. Senator Max Baucus wants ranchers to have more freedom to shoot wolves harassing livestock.

A novel, non-lethal approach to wolf control is being considered in Idaho, according to a Department of Agriculture proposal. After being surgically sterilized, pairs of wolves would be radio-collared and released -- "to maintain and defend their territory against other wolf packs that might be more likely to prey on livestock."

Killing marauding wolves is nothing new in some parts of their range: In the Northern Rockies, more than 1,400 have been killed by wildlife agents and ranchers since the first 66 wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho in the mid-1990s.

But Wisconsin and Michigan in the past avoided wolf killings, instead relocating plundering animals or taking defensive measures such as fencing in livestock. Under applications pending with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the states want new authority to remove up to 10 percent of their wolves annually, equal to about 110 wolves a year.

Government statistics back up critics' claims that wolves account for a small proportion of livestock losses caused by predators. They kill fewer sheep and cattle than coyotes, bears, mountain lions or even dogs.

Yet where packs get onto ranchlands, the results can be brutal for both wolves and livestock. That was illustrated in a string of recent cattle killings and reprisals outside the small town of Ennis, Mont.

Since late July, at least six ranches near Ennis have suffered cattle killings by a wolf group known as the Horse Creek pack, which lives at the base of the Gravelly mountains.

Within two weeks of the first calf being killed, wolf specialists with Wildlife Services killed two adult members of the Horse Creek pack in hopes of deterring the others.

One was shot on July 29 and the second on Aug. 6 -- just a day after U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy in Missoula, Mont. ordered the region's wolves back onto the endangered species list.

After the attacks continued and several more calves died, state officials on Aug. 12 ordered the entire pack removed. Another calf was found dead on Aug. 13, and two on Aug. 17.

Two more Horse Creek wolves were shot.

On Aug. 18, three more calves turned up dead, bringing the total dead livestock to at least a dozen.

The remaining four members of the pack remained at large late last week. But there was little doubt they would be killed, said Carolyn Sime, Montana's lead wolf biologist

"When we authorize it, we're confident they're going to get it done," she said.

Rancher Jerry Dickinson said the Horse Creek pack killed at least three calves worth a combined $2,400 on the Granger ranch, which he manages.

Their carcasses were found on the Beaverhead National Forest, where the calves had been grazing. Others have disappeared without a trace.

"If they take that pack out, we've bought ourselves maybe two or three years until another pack establishes itself," Dickinson said. "Eventually another bunch of wolves will move in there and we'll get the same problem all over."

So what will Glenn and Sarah be talking about at this upcoming event? No one knows. Glenn Beck mentioned on his radio program today that he would be speaking in Alaska, with Sarah Palin, "a week from Saturday." He didn't mention that a week from Saturday is 9/11, because Glenn Beck forgot about 9/11.

Oh, also! Next month is the Iowa Republican Party's annual fall fundraiser. And Sarah Palin will be the keynote speaker! She was invited to do this in 2009, but she never even bothered to get back to them. This year, apparently, something is different.

Either Sarah Palin is running for president, or she and Glenn Beck are just embarking on another of the money-making schemes that they are both deeply devoted to. Almost certainly the latter.

Only the next morning, as confusing early news reports that many observers initially disbelieved began to sink in, did it become clear that McCain had tapped the little-known first-term governor of Alaska. And almost immediately, it also became clear just how impetuous his selection of Sarah Palin was -- how little McCain and his team had actually known about the 44-year-old, and how little she knew about the world.

Not that it mattered. Palin was an instant political and cultural sensation -- and she's proven to be an enduring one, too. But as we mark the second anniversary of her national debut, it's worth remembering just how arbitrary the whole thing was. The only reason anyone knows Sarah Palin's name today, the only reason she's become a media and marketing powerhouse, the only reason she's become the most sought-after endorser in Republican politics, the only reason she up and left as governor in the middle of her term, and the only reason she might run for president in two years is because of the gut call made by one 72-year-old man.

Every four years, when it comes time for a presidential nominee to pick his or her running mate, we are reminded -- over and over -- that the decision is important because the running mate may soon be a heartbeat away from the presidency. And the months leading up to the pick are filled with media commentary about the potential electoral implications of every person thought to be on the running-mate short list.

But Palin's story shows how all of this can miss the mark. She and McCain never came particularly close to winning the White House, and for all of the attention she received, it's doubtful her presence cost (or gained) the GOP ticket a single state in the '08 election. But look at the role she's playing in politics today. The real significance of a running-mate selection, then, is simply that it marks the introduction of a new force into the political/media mix -- a force that could have a major and unanticipated impact on the country's future.

Palin is the most extreme example of this, since she was so thoroughly unknown and because she generated such strong personal reactions from voters. If McCain had opted for Pawlenty instead, Palin's presence in national conversation would probably be limited today to a handful of bloggers trying to draw attention to her -- and being met with a wall of indifference.

But even a well-worn pol can morph into a new force if he or she is chosen as a No. 2. The example of Dick Cheney leaps to mind. Politically, Cheney was an afterthought in the summer of 2000, when he headed up George W. Bush's V.P. search team. After his term as George H.W. Bush's defense secretary ended in 1993, Cheney had set out to run for president in 1996, but his utter lack of charisma yielded poor reviews and he worried about the implications of his daughter's sexuality, which wasn't yet public knowledge. So Cheney took a pass, moved to Texas, and racked up a fortune as Halliburton's CEO. His days as a candidate for office were over -- until Bush put him in charge of the V.P. hunt.

Spying an opportunity to jump back in the game, Cheney recommended himself to Bush. Ultimately, Bush's decision came down to Cheney and one other man: John Danforth, a former Missouri senator and ordained Episcopalian priest whose political moderation was fast becoming archaic within the GOP. At the time, it seemed as if Bush was picking between two boring white guys, and when he chose Cheney, he was saluted by the press for adding "gravitas" to the ticket by choosing a wise, seasoned party elder.

Of course, Cheney proved to be something far different as V.P., amassing and exercising extraordinary influence, especially during Bush's first term. In essence, Cheney seized on the vacuum created by Bush's inexperience and hands-off style. It's pretty much unimaginable that Danforth would have shared Cheney's obsessions with executive power and Middle East militarism, much less the backroom savvy that Cheney demonstrated in pushing his agenda.

Indeed, the most consequential foreign policy and national security voices in the Bush administration  belonged to Cheney loyalists, many of whom owed their slots to him: Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Scooter Libby, Doug Feith and John Bolton, to name a few. How different would Bush's brain trust have been with a different vice-president? And how differently might that brain trust have responded to 9/11? It's all the consequence of one midsummer decision by Bush in 2000.

Other recent running-mate picks have proven momentous. Take Michael Dukakis' decision to team up with Lloyd Bentsen in 1988. A conservative Democrat from Texas, Bentsen had briefly -- and disastrously -- sought his party's presidential nod in 1976. But by '88, at the age of 68, his White House ambitions seemed a thing of the past -- and they would have stayed that way had Dukakis instead chosen John Glenn, his other V.P. finalist.

But on the national stage in the fall of '88, Bentsen delivered one of the most memorable lines in American political history, his "you're no Jack Kennedy" rebuke of Dan Quayle. Bentsen's presence did nothing to help Dukakis in November, but he emerged from the race as something of a Democratic folk hero, his stature elevated in the same way Mario Cuomo's had been by his electrifying convention address in 1984. That, in turn, made Bentsen an unlikely White House prospect for 1992 -- especially when every other big name Democrat refused to enter the race, scared off by George H.W. Bush's post-Gulf War popularity. Had Bentsen wanted it, he very likely could have secured the '92 nomination, though he too passed on the chance to run. Still, he wouldn't have even been an afterthought had Dukakis not picked him, of all people, to join the '88 ticket.

To be sure, not every running mate turns into a star or assumes a mighty policy-making perch. Jack Kemp's stint as Bob Dole's No. 2 in 1996, for instance, was utterly unremarkable: Dole plucked him from the political sidelines that August, and Kemp promptly returned to the sidelines when the election ended, his reputation neither enhanced nor ruined. It was as if he'd never run at all.

Still, as Bentsen showed in '88, Kemp could have emerged as a new force in politics. The unparalleled visibility that comes with running on a national ticket gave him the opportunity. He just did nothing with it. Not so with Sarah Palin, though. She's been a phenomenon from the moment she and McCain held their first rally in Dayton two years ago. And she didn't need to run in any primaries to make it to that stage, nor did she need national name recognition or money: All it took was McCain waking up one day in just the right mood. In our quirky system, that can be worth more than a lifetime of work. 

I was surprised when, early Saturday morning, Beck introduced a rabbi onstage with him. As I wrote earlier this week, Beck expressly said he wouldn't hold his rally on a Sunday, so as not to force people to work on the Sabbath -- and since the Jewish Sabbath is Saturday, I observed that maybe Beck wasn't looking for Jewish involvement. But there he was, introducing a rabbi! God bless him. Then the rabbi stood silent, while Beck's first religious speaker praised Jesus Christ our savior.

Who was the silent rabbi? Not surprisingly, it was right-winger Daniel Lapin, friend of convicted Republican felon/lobbyist Jack Abramoff, and Tom DeLay, too. Media Mattters digs up Washington Post profiles of Lapin that make sense of why he was there. A 2005 Post profile detailed Lapin's web of Republican buddies:

Every few weeks or so Rabbi Daniel Lapin finds a reason to fly east from his home in Mercer Island, Wash., near Seattle, and spend a few days here. He might be leading a Bible study on the Hill, having dinner with his "close friend" House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, breakfast with Karl Rove. Last year he came for a private Shabbat dinner with President Bush. "The president recognizes my enthusiasm for his faith," says the rabbi.

Usually on these trips Lapin stays with Jack Abramoff, a lobbyist who is an old friend of the Lapin family….Abramoff is under investigation for allegedly defrauding his Indian casino-owning clients and for allegedly breaking lobbying laws. In a stack of e-mails released this week by the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, several scandal sidekicks made unexpected cameos. Among them were Daniel Lapin and his younger brother David, rabbis from South Africa who are heirs to a 200-year-old rabbinical dynasty and very updated ambitions.

A 2006 Post article revealed that Abramoff moved client money he wanted to hide through Lapin's foundation: 

E-mails show that Abramoff also moved client money through a conservative Jewish foundation called Toward Tradition, run by longtime Abramoff friend Rabbi Daniel Lapin. In January 2000, when [Ralph] Reed sent Abramoff an $867,000 invoice to be billed to a Choctaw official, Abramoff responded: "Ok, thanks. Please get me the groups we are using, since I want to give this to her all at once." Reed responded: "Amy, Grover, Lapin and one other I will get you."

Talk about restoring honor! Later in the rally, Beck featured the Rev. John Hagee, the bigoted right-wing minister who called Hurricane Katrina "the judgment of God against the city of New Orleans" because the city hosted a gay pride parade. What a way to commemorate the fifth anniversary of that tragedy. Hagee also called Catholicism "the great whore" and said all Muslims "have a scriptural mandate to kill Christians and Jews." Poor John McCain welcomed Hagee's endorsement in 2008, only to have to reject it as more of his hateful proselytizing came to light. I certainly hope the Catholic League's Bill Donohue, who bashed Hagee in 2008 and called on McCain to reject his backing, will denounce Beck and Palin as well now.

Speaking of McCain, Sunday is the second anniversary of his greatest accomplishment, making Sarah Palin a national figure. How did Palin do Saturday at Beck's big party? Well, the two preening GOP titans seem to disagree about big issues. Where Beck described his rally as "the beginning of the great awakening in America" and said Friday night, "This is going to change everything," Palin rejected those who want to "fundamentally transform America." Who's telling the truth? Of course Palin wasn't just contradicting Beck but violating the alleged non-political spirit of his event by attacking President Obama with everything but his name; she has repeatedly chided Obama for saying his campaign was about "fundamentally transforming" the country. She's so sly.

As Mark Benjamin reports, nothing terribly interesting went on at the Beck event. That's at least partly thanks to everyone who rose up to denounce it, and forced Beck to revise his plans, and make the day about honoring the military and religion and avoiding politics. Organizers asked attendees not to bring signs, so they wore T-shirts instead, and you can judge whether politics was involved, thanks to Think Progress. Beck got goofy talking about how he related to King because "we haven't carved him in marble yet. He's still a man."

But let's remember, also thanks to Media Matters, all of Beck's self-important delusional pronouncements when he was trying to compare his cause to Dr. King's:

In March, after healthcare reform passed, he told his radio audience:

"[W]hile Martin Luther King had to face German Shepherds, we have to face SEIU and leftist thugs. That's okay, we will continue to stand. We will continue to march forward. We will not pick up a weapon because our greatest weapon will be God." Beck also stated, "You may destroy me, but you will have to kill me to stop me from speaking out."

In April, Beck told his Fox audience:

"[I] wouldn't be surprised if in our lifetime dogs and firehoses are released or opened on us. I wouldn't be surprised if a few of us get a billy club to the head. I wouldn't be surprised if, you know, some of us go to jail, just like Martin Luther King did, on trumped up charges. Tough times are coming."

On May 26, he said about his 8/28 event:

"This is a moment, quite honestly, that I think we reclaim the civil rights movement. It has been so distorted and so turned upside down because we must repair honor and integrity first, I tell you right now. We are on the right side of history. We are on the side of individual freedoms and liberties, and damn it, we will reclaim the civil rights moment. We will take that movement because we were the people that did it in the first place."

"We were the people that did it in the first place." Yes, that's a quote. So when the predictable mainstream media voices say, hey, Beck wasn't so bad, remember that's because he was caught before he could be. 

A relatively dense and overwhelmingly white crowd stretched from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial out past the Washington Monument. Thousands strained to hear Beck and his most prominent guest, Sarah Palin, because they couldn’t get in range of the massive TV screens and speakers surrounding the Reflecting Pool. A friend of mine walked the whole stretch of the rally and counted 27 African-Americans -- three of them were onstage giving speeches. I could count the number I saw on my fingers.

Members of the crowd seemed genuinely enthusiastic, but when I talked to them, they uniformly resorted to clichés to explain what the rally was about.

Gerald Chester, a truck driver from Elkhart, Ind., said he came because of Beck. “What he is about is a good thing, restoring honor,” Chester said. “Bringing God back into Americans’ lives is important.” When asked what attendees should do to accomplish this, Chester replied, “That’s a good question.”

Kristine Sullivan said she was “here to take back America. I want it back. I want our country back.” She said the purpose of the rally was to encourage people to vote for “whoever is up there to support the American people.”

Alexander McGhee said he was “afraid of where our country is going.” He said people should “do absolutely everything and anything they can possibly think of that might further the cause of restoring honor to this great nation.”

“I believe in God and I think that Glenn Beck does, too,” was Joe Sheerau’s explanation. He said Beck is “trying to bring back what made this country great” and that he fears “a force in our society and in our culture that is trying to marginalize what made this country great.”

These were Beck’s people. Many whom I talked to mentioned his name without being prompted -- but none voluntarily brought up Palin.

The rally was controversial, of course, because it occurred on the same date and in the exact location of Martin Luther King’s 1963 “I have a dream” speech. Beck, who infuriated many last year with his declaration that President Obama is a “racist” with “a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture,” had said the timing was coincidental, but then drew fire for claiming that his rally would “reclaim the civil rights movement.”

At the rally, a Beck-narrated video displayed on the massive screens attempted to co-opt King’s story, calling attention to the supposed similarities between King’s struggle and Beck’s own vision for the future. In her speech, Palin wrapped herself in “the spirit of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.” The audience members I spoke with didn’t mention race at all, just a broad concern about America.

Here are some highlights from my conversations with rally-goers: