Friday is traditionally the day when politicians release potentially embarrassing stories. The theory is that nobody’s really paying attention on Friday afternoon, and by Monday the news will already seem old (especially in the days of 24/7 cable news networks and internet reporting).

But for those same reasons, Friday can also be a pretty slow news day.
Here’s what we’ve got: Charlie Cook writes about what to look for in 2010, saying, “Historically, midterm elections are referenda on the party in power, which, if true this time, would be bad for Democrats. But if the alternative party appears so unappetizing, does that make a difference?”

Meanwhile, at FiveThirtyEight, Tom Schaller (in Parts One and Two) tries to find a “general theory of democratic disgruntlement” — or why Democrats are less happy with Congress with their own party in power as compared to Republicans when their party was in power.

Can’t get enough of news about Joe Lieberman? Well now he’s said that he will support some Republicans in 2010. Lieberman, who was Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore’s choice as a running mate in 2010, became an Independent and supported John McCain in the 2008 presidential election last year, so perhaps this shouldn’t come as a total surprise.

But the New York Times looks at the blogs to see what people think that Lieberman wants.

CQ Politics takes a look at, in a story that seems fortuitously timed given tomorrow’s date, how dead people vote.

Depending on the state, absentee ballots are mailed any time from three weeks before the election, as in Maryland, to 40 days before the election, as in Iowa.

Some of those absentee voters die before Election Day comes around, however.

“This is a pretty small percentage of people,” according to Thad Hall, a voting expert at the University of Utah. “There are tens of millions of people who voted by absentee ballot in the presidential election, but there aren’t that many people who died right after casting their ballot.”

Not exactly something to get George Romero excited.

And the White House released some of the visitors to the White House. They call it an “unprecedented level of transparency” but Mark Knoller of CBS News says it isn’t very helpful. “No way to tell if a visitor is a famous person – or just shares a name with one,” Knoller says on Twitter.