We are told North Carolina Democrats are quite excited that a former state senator who fought in Iraq, Cal Cunningham, has changed his mind and will now run for U.S. Senate against Republican Richard Burr.

I’m not quite sure they should be. Burr’s numbers are pretty “meh” for an incumbent, but the highest Cunningham has gotten in any head-to-head matchup is 31 percent. Would Republicans feel better if Burr were above 50 percent instead of in the mid-40s? Sure. But Obama’s victory in the state, driving up high Democratic turnout numbers, had a big impact on Kay Hagen’s Senate win last year. Cunningham is going to have to drive turnout himself, in what will probably be a much tougher environment for Democrats this coming year.

Could Cunningham win? Sure, but so far, 2010 doesn’t really feel like the cycle in which a not-well-known Democrat knocks off a Republican incumbent in a state like North Carolina.

UPDATE: A Republican following this race closely offers some more thoughts:

Cunningham has a lot to do between now and the May 4 primary. He is virtually unknown statewide and enters a three way Dem primary against Elaine Marshall (the first woman to win elected office statewide in NC) and Ken Lewis, who happens to be African American in a state where the AA turnout will probably be 35-40%.
Cunningham also has no money. The DSCC will help, but they are stretched pretty thin in other states as is, and Bob Menendez is no Chuck Schumer when it comes to money. Cunningham is getting in at a tough time fundraising wise, with the holidays upcoming.
Lastly, Richard Burr is no Liddy Dole. Erskine Bowles has repeatedly praised Burr for all he does for NC, and as I’m sure you recall from 04, their race was not exactly civil.
If Burr were as vulnerable as Dems claim, why would so many other potential candidates pass on the race?