Many describe the Senators retiring or lost – John Chichester, Charles Hawkins, Russ Potts, Marty Williams, Brandon Bell and Benny Lambert -- as some of the most experienced and responsible members of that body. They suggest that the replacements for these Senators should mirror the bipartisanship and pragmatic problem-solving the six have stood for. That would mean that voters should elect the most accomplished, most thoughtful candidates district-by-district, regardless of party. Vote the person, not the party.

Others, particularly voters who took down Williams, Bell and Lambert in primaries, argue it is time for a change and more active partisanship. That term RINO, Republican In Name Only, is back. Democrats have their own activist wing reinvigorated by the upset win of then outsider, now U.S. Senator James Webb in 2006.

Those focused more on the goal of holding a Republican majority in the Senate see continuity in the extended leadership of Senators such as William Wampler, Walter Stosch, Ken Stolle and Tommy Norment. They downplay the disruptive effects of bringing more anti-tax or social issue Republicans into the majority. Everyone has to swallow a toad at some point, the argument goes, and the responsible Republican senators are going to keep the fringe in check. Strong financial backing from the leadership for all Republicans in competitive races already is taking the edge off those seemingly dangerous candidates, these observers suggest, and in any event, Senate Democrats just cannot be trusted with the majority.

Those who see a Democratic majority as a better outcome point to the danger of a sharp turn toward a more ideologically driven Republican caucus in the Senate if all Republicans in competitive races win. They see the potential Republican replacements for Senators Potts, Williams and Bell as less moderate and more partisan. They fear that the continuing battle over who represents the true Republican Party will destroy the sensible center that has kept the state Senate serving as a counterweight to the worst ideas of Governors and the House of Delegates for more than a decade. And they suggest that the continuity of that sensible center in the state Senate would be better served with Democrats in charge.

A Democratic majority would bring at least four new Democrats, who have proven records of service and accomplishment that translate into responsible governance, the argument goes. It would place experienced and pragmatic Senators, such as Charles Colgan, Dick Saslaw and Janet Howell, in charge of key committees, and bring more diversity into Senate leadership by including African-American Senators.

Then there are those concerned about regional clout. The Senators retiring or lost were part of the group in the Senate that viewed many, if not all, problems as statewide challenges best tackled with a spirit of the whole. The traditional Senate push for ambitious statewide transportation investments provides one example. The bipartisan, statewide approach helped Senators from all regions work together on a shared agenda -- business growth, jobs and investments in education, higher education and transportation and until this year, to smooth out initiatives that too overtly awarded regional advantage.

The potential regional shift in Senate leadership in some ways may be as important as the majority party shift that drives it. A Republican-led Senate in 2008 would have Bristol, Richmond, Virginia Beach and Williamsburg as focal points. A Democratic-led Senate would feature Northern Virginia, a region newly described by Richmond Times Dispatch editors on September 17 in these terms: “Northern Virginia is mainstream; it occupies the center.”

That center is represented by seven Democratic Senators and three Republican Senators now (eight and four, respectively, with a broader definition of the region). But the possibility appears to be growing that Democrats will gain two or three seats in Northern Virginia on November 7. A Democratic majority in the Senate would bring Northern Virginian Charles Colgan in as chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, for example, instead of William Wampler of Bristol.

Individual results, party majorities and regional clout are at stake for the Virginia Senate on November. But whether that means voters will swallow a toad, kiss a frog, try to describe an elephant or pin the tail on the donkey remains to be seen.