For someone who loves the intricacies of Senate races that cut very differently in neighboring states, who finds joy in discussing the survival skills of New England Republicans and Southern Democrats and their gerrymandered House districts, it is hard to imagine a better year than 2006 was. With 50 seats realistically in play in states as blue as Connecticut and as red as Wyoming, two years ago was a political junkie's heaven.

That is, until 2008 rolled along. This year, instead of just Democrats having a shot at picking up seats, Republicans are in on the act, and both parties' wins and losses will give us clues about the future and direction of each. Can Southern Democrats make a comeback? Will suburban voters still, or once again, vote their security over their wallets? And is the emerging House battleground in the Mountain West, the Upper Midwest or the Plains states?

Recently, finally, the national media is paying attention to the downballot contests that will play as much of a role in shaping U.S. policy as the winner of the presidential race. Will John McCain govern alongside a massive Democratic majority? Will Barack Obama have to compromise on many of his more progressive initiatives with moderate Republicans and the rising number of conservative Blue Dog Democrats? The outcomes of a few key Senate races will likely hold the key, and the way each party is competing in those states already offer clues to what will, and won't, work in November.

The most obvious lesson to learn from the early going is that Republicans are still in deep trouble. In the five states where incumbent Republicans are retiring, Democrats are favored to pick up three seats. In Virginia, New Mexico and Colorado, polls have shown Democrats Mark Warner, Tom Udall and Mark Udall running well ahead of their Republican challengers. Warner and Tom Udall are running so far ahead that their campaigns should remind themselves that the vote isn't until November before measuring drapes, while Mark Udall is engaged in a much closer battle with former U.S. Rep. Bob Schaffer.

Other incumbent Republicans face trouble, too. In Alaska U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens faces Mark Begich, the mayor of Anchorage, who just went up with his first television advertisements, and several polls have showed the Democrat leading the long-time incumbent Republican. In New Hampshire, U.S. Sen. John Sununu is running far behind in a rematch with his 2002 foe, former Gov. Jeanne Shaheen, as the Granite State turned out to be less rock-ribbed Republican than once thought.

Those two incumbents are in trouble for a reason. Thanks to a scandal that has already sent three Republican state legislators to jail and that features Stevens prominently, as well as mismanaged earmark requests like the so-called Bridge to Nowhere, the Alaska senator will face his most difficult re-election challenge ever. Sununu, who has routinely trailed by fifteen points or more in public opinion surveys, has only recently seriously kicked off his campaign.

Those five races offer an important point: The Republican brand is in deep trouble, and independent voters are not going to elect a member of the GOP simply because they are an incumbent, or simply because, in the case of both Udalls' opponents, they call their Democratic challengers liberals. In a void, Democrats are going to win this year, and Republicans have to find a way around that default position in which they find themselves.

Fortunately for the Grand Old Party, politics doesn't happen in a void. And several incumbents who should be in serious trouble instead find themselves favored -- in some cases overwhelmingly -- for re-election, through a combination of good politics and good luck.

Incumbent Republicans Norm Coleman of Minnesota, Susan Collins of Maine, and Gordon Smith of Oregon, are all running ahead of their Democratic challengers. The difference between all the Republican-held states Democrats are favored to win and the three where Republicans should hold on is that this year's Democratic-leaning states all voted at least once for President Bush (New Hampshire, the lone state to give its electoral votes to a Democrat in the last eight years, went for John Kerry in 2004). The states in which Republican incumbents are safer voted exclusively for Democratic presidential candidates against the President Bush.

Coleman, Collins and Smith all share something else in common: None are seen in the same partisan light as their fellow incumbents. Coleman is a former Democrat; Collins and U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman have worked well together on the Senate Homeland Security Committee, and Lieberman backs the Republican; and Smith changed his position on the war in Iraq after he interpreted the 2006 elections as a referendum on the issue. All three have distanced themselves from the Bush administration, and all three are emphasizing their bipartisan credentials in re-election bids (Smith went so far as to invoke his work with Barack Obama in a recent television ad).

Other Republicans are on the precipice of both approaches. In some cases, states that should not be competitive are, and the way incumbent Republicans run their campaigns will determine how much of a scare they get in November.

In North Carolina, a host of early polls showed State Senator Kay Hagan, a Democrat, running surprisingly close to Republican incumbent Elizabeth Dole. Dole consistently led, but the fact that she remained under the key 50 percent mark was troubling for a popular incumbent (After an initial round of advertising, Dole jumped out to a bigger lead, though she still hasn't broken 50 percent in live-call polling). Dole's first ads focused on her work on immigration, an issue on which she can brag about accomplishments but on which she will have trouble drawing contrasts with Hagan.

Perhaps most surprisingly, appointed U.S. Sen. Roger Wicker, plucked from his House seat to replace retiring U.S. Sen. Trent Lott, has seen several polls showing a close race between himself and his Democratic opponent, former Gov. Ronnie Musgrove, despite the fact that Musgrove lost his 2002 re-election campaign badly. If Democrats have extra money to spend, Musgrove could be the beneficiary, especially after the party shocked Republicans and the national political establishment by winning Wicker's old congressional district in a special election last month.

Wicker, Dole and the more endangered Republican incumbents could also take a cue from the most threatened Democrat running for re-election this year, U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana. After Hurricane Katrina, a significant portion of Landrieu's Democratic base fled the state, giving her Republican opponent, State Treasurer John Kennedy, a big boost. But polls have shown Landrieu leading Kennedy as the two-term Democrat emphasizes her work on hurricane recovery. Wicker, who is not from the Gulf Coast, would do well to emphasize his efforts on the House Appropriations Committee to secure funding for Mississippi's own recovery, and while Dole's state was fortunate enough to have avoided a Katrina-like storm in recent years, her own efforts to bring home money for various projects could be an important selling point for her campaign.

Polls have repeatedly shown that the number of voters willing to self-identify as Republicans is near an historical low, while the gap between Democratic and Republican voters soars to record heights. If Republicans like Dole and Wicker run base elections, they could lose, as Stevens and Sununu seem likely to do. If they, like Coleman, Collins and Smith, run a campaign focused on independents and bipartisans, the "R" behind their name doesn't have to be the unbearable albatross that brings them down. The direction of the Senate, and by extension the country, could depend on their campaigns.

Reid Wilson, national columnist for Politicker.com, is also an associate editor of RealClearPolitics.com and covers Senate, House and governors' races at PoliticsNation.com. Contact him at reid@realclearpolitics.com.