Specter expects primary challenge and raises a good point...

[Keystone Phil]

Good point: All those voters that switched (especially in the SE) from Republican to Democrat were his base. He has a good reason to fear losing his primary challenge in 2010.

http://www.mcall.com/news/local/all-a1_5specter.6419488may22,0,6818072.story

[Keystone Phil]

If Specter loses the primary, hopefully he'll pull a Lieberman and win as an Independent (Pennsylvania for Specter )

Pennyslvania has funny, yet really ridiculous, law that prohibits a candidate who ran for an office yet lost in that primary to run for the same office in the General. This was a recent discovery on my part.

[Keystone Phil]

If Specter loses the primary, hopefully he'll pull a Lieberman and win as an Independent (Pennsylvania for Specter )

In such a scenario it would most likely result in a Democrat victory.  But the good news is would no longer would have Specter's RINO ass around to vote with the DEMs.

Yes, instead of a moderate Republican, you'll have a Democrat, which will no doubt be much more palatable to you.

You don't know that especially if the Dem running is Allyson Schwartz.

In such a scenario it would most likely result in a Democrat victory.  But the good news is would no longer would have Specter's RINO ass around to vote with the DEMs.

Or to talk Craig into staying.  Or to investigate impeaching Clinton again.

his latest mission is investigating the new england patriots.

hopefully rendell will run and put this fellow out of his misery.

And while I understand people being pissed off about that being his new mission as a Senator, I really don't mind since I'm a huge Patriots hater. 

And Rendell won't run.

[Keystone Phil]

Novak alluded to a possible Rendell run.  Could a 2010 Rendell/Specter duel mirror the 2000 Carper/Roth contest -- the younger Democratic Governor upsetting the five-term Republican Senator?

Well a Rendell win wouldn't be an upset.

Against Specter, yes, it would be.

rendell has to be getting on up there in years.  didnt he first run for governor in 1986?

He's in his 60s and yes, he did first run in 1986 against the real Bob Casey. He was the very young Philadelphia DA at the time.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But the guy had a good name so this...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

...isn't going to be the case.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

FF

Anyway, Rendell won't run. He's made it clear that he likes being his own boss.

[Keystone Phil]

Novak alluded to a possible Rendell run.  Could a 2010 Rendell/Specter duel mirror the 2000 Carper/Roth contest -- the younger Democratic Governor upsetting the five-term Republican Senator?

This is probably what you were referring to - http://patriotpost.us/opinion/entry.asp?entry_id=41857

He doesn't go into much detail but there is one very important thing to remember (something Novak points out) - Specter and Rendell are actually friends.

There is also some talk that Specter may run as an Independent if he gets a serious primary challenge. And if that happens, whoever the Dem is would basically be a lock for the seat. Please remember, though, that he cannot run as an Independent after losing a primary.

[Keystone Phil]

Novak alluded to a possible Rendell run.  Could a 2010 Rendell/Specter duel mirror the 2000 Carper/Roth contest -- the younger Democratic Governor upsetting the five-term Republican Senator?

Well a Rendell win wouldn't be an upset.

Against Specter, yes, it would be.

Against Rendell, this race would immediately become a toss-up if not a lean democrat. I don't know what your definition of an upset is, but mine would be someone winning who was thought to have no chance. Certainly wouldn't be the case for Rendell or Schwartz.

Rendell (or Schwartz) would still have to beat a very tough incumbent. Schwartz winning would definitley be an upset. Rendell vs. Specter might be a toss up but, if anything, Rendell would be the underdog.

[Keystone Phil]

Step into reality. I agree, Specter is tough, but neither of those would be upsets.  Rendell would start out with 50/50 chance or better, while Schwartz would be something like 40-45/60-55 chance. Essentially, a win in a democratic state wouldn't be much of an upset.

Oh, the simplistic minds. Carry on, little boy.

[Keystone Phil]

Step into reality. I agree, Specter is tough, but neither of those would be upsets.  Rendell would start out with 50/50 chance or better, while Schwartz would be something like 40-45/60-55 chance. Essentially, a win in a democratic state wouldn't be much of an upset.

Oh, the simplistic minds. Carry on, little boy.

You don't know how old I am, besides aren't you like 19 or 20?

Ok, when was the last time Republicans won PA in a pres election?
20 years ago.
How many statewide offices do republicans hold in state government?
1, AG
The GOP also holds one of the branches of the legislature, although Dems barely hold the Assembly.

The GOP holds 1 of the senate seats and 8 of 19 House seats.

In sum:
Dems hold Gov, LGov, Treas, Audit, 1 Senator = 5 of 7 statewide offices
Dems hold 11 of the 19 House seats.
GOP hasn't won PA in pres election since 1988, or 2 decades ago. (although they can prob win it with McCain v Obama)
Welcome to reality, or are you just getting a bad education at your 4th rate college?

And let's go back to 2006 before the disastrous showing for the GOP:

The GOP had a comfortable hold on both houses of the State Legislature.
The GOP had twelve of the nineteen members of the Congressional delegation.
The GOP had both U.S. Senate seats.

Do you mean to tell me that the state was a GOP stronghold before the 2006 elections?

To use who holds the Governorship as a reason for a state being dominated by a party is laughable especially for PA, a state known for alternating which party holds the spot every eight years.

So, yeah, tell me again how we're such a strong Dem state.

Oh and by the way, to say that the university that I attend is "fourth rate" is the most hilarious part of your post.

[Keystone Phil]

PA is a state, that at least in recent history, tends to lean slightly GOP at the state level and slightly Dem at the national level.  Saying anything more than that seems like a stretch.

Thank you.

[Keystone Phil]

If you care to refresh my memory as to where you attend, but I seem to recall you don't attend Upenn or Carnegie. I don't seem to recall any noteworthy schools.

Temple or Drexel? West Chester? All of those are at least 3rd rate.

So because I don't go to UPenn I'm not in a first rate school? Instead, I go to Temple and it's is third rate? You're a real dope.

<begins rant about Penn> If you graduated from Penn, congrats -- you went to the school for rejected/wait-listed Harvard wannabes.

Hey, hey...I have quite a few friends at Penn and they could have made it at Harvard (only one of them bothered to apply there though).  

Yet that still says nothing to the argument that Rendell winning Specter's senate seat would be an "upset". It is ridiculous to suggest Rendell would be some sort of underdog winning out of the blue candidate.

Specter is a stronger than usual Republican and the incumbent. Get it yet?

[Keystone Phil]

Specter is a strong incumbent, but to suggest a Rendell win to be an "upset" is completely absurd.

Listen, it wouldn't be a huge upset but it would still be an upset. We're not going to agree on this. Let's just leave it at that.