Casey +7

[bullmoose88]

I don't know about the ABS vote.

Sure, it might exist...heck I might be one of em...but it may not translate into votes for casey...

especially if there are strong Libertarian/Green candidates out there...

Thing is, Casey is essentially fighting Santorum on Casey's home turf...Socially Conservative Democrats...The conservative/uber partisan republicans will stay with rick...the partisan dems with casey, the liberals may (stress may) back a green while liberal moderate republicans (unless arlen can sway)...will likely stay at home...or vote Libertarian [some will vote casey...but I doubt they will in decisive numbers].

Casey has a lead...he should...that name is quite valuable...for it to be only 7 right now...before Santorum has moderated his image or thrown mudballs at Casey is something that should be observed carefully...as the battle will be waged on democratic turf.

[bullmoose88]

Here's teh thing. If it was something like Casey 42 Santorum 35, you could argue Santorum wasn't in too much trouble. But Casey's almost at 50 this early. Santorum has a lot of ground to cover, he's going to need almost all the undecideds (since they break against the incumbent usually not easily) and going to sway a few Casey voters back. Anything can happen in a campaign, but having your opponent at almost 50 this early is not good.

The way I see it, the Casey name almost makes him the incumbent.

Lets put it this way...I think more people recognize Casey than Santorum...hell a very well educated, fairly liberal friend of mine confused Santorum with Specter...he certainly knows who Casey is.


Look at how Democrats have won and lost this state in the last 20 or so years....

Carter=fairly populist...lost in 80
Mondale=populist lost in 84
Dukakis=came close to winning in 88, lost
Wofford won a special election...but I chalk that up to no one wanting 3 different senators in a short time span

Clinton-Gore-Kerry-won 92-04

You guys haven't won a senate seat here (in a regular election) in God knows how long...

when you guys run libertarian like centrists (socially liberal, moderate on fiscal issues, Clinton, Rendell) you win...when you run liberals...you come close, or win (Kerry, Gore).

When you run populists you generally lose.

Now think of it this way

Conservative Democrats (likely the catholic target group) have a choice...a Republican (albeit conservative on fiscal issues) who has a lot of clout and is pro life...vs a Democrat who is prolife and is likely to be a backbencher [to borrow the UK term] and marginalized like his father was nationally (casey should run for governor, he can't be marginalized there)...

If you're voting on social issues, let alone abortion...who's the better choice?

[bullmoose88]

If you guys didn't have your heads up your collective asses...you would have run Casey against Specter, Hoffel against Santorum.


ah well.

[bullmoose88]

The way I see it, the Casey name almost makes him the incumbent.

No. He has more name recognition than a normal challenger, but almost incumbent he's not.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Interesting that you've not included '76 as well, eh?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

PA was actually one of his *better* states that election. Try again.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

One of his better states U.S wide actually. Relatively speaking it was an impressive showing.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Bubba did not run as a libertarian-like centrist

1) 1976: I chalk Carter's win up more to Ford's poor debate showing and his pardon of Nixon. Carter only won the state by 2-3 points.

2) So what if Pennsylvania was one of Mondale's "better" states...any state with a very large urban center would have been a "better" state. Walter still lost by 7-8 points. Reagan won in Pa because he carried the area necessary to win Pennsylvania...the SE (not including Philly...not that philly's not important...but its really the burbs around it). Maybe the 1984 election really isn't important to this discussion...as the 1976 one wasn't.

3) As for Bubba...maybe in 1992 he didn't run as a libertarian...but he wasn't a populist either. By 1996 he had become republican lite.

The point remains...despite the fact there are tons of populists in PA...particularly in the NE and SW...populists generally don't do as well as liberals/libertarians in this state.

And here's why...most of the votes are in the libertarian, or liberal Southeast.

[bullmoose88]

Is this going to turn into one of those absurdly parochial "debates" that people with oblong avatars (with a little strange thing in the top left corner) like to indulge themselves in?

By God I hope not.

Though (just to continue things a bit) I find the 2002 Democratic Gubernatoral Primary Map to be telling.

And what is wrong with my quirky oblong avatar? Don't knock Erie (not that I care too much...but Soult might have something to say)

[bullmoose88]

By God I hope not.

I suspect it's too late now... *looks worried*

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's interesting, but some of the statewide results from last year are interesting as well.
PA's ticket splitting habits make for interesting maps at times

Yeah.

I voted for Casey.

Go figure...a libertarian, voting for a populist...for state treasurer.

Casey, if elected, will be marginalized, just like his father was at the convention. That move pissed of a lot of conservative democrats...and a bunch of republicans who generally liked his late father...including myself (and my family).

Thats why he should just wait for a chance to run for governor.

[bullmoose88]

See. I don't know about that.

[bullmoose88]

note: if I was Santorum, I would hit Casey on judges. If Casey goes with Democrats in filibustering judges, pro-life judges won't be confirmed, thus negating Casey's value as a pro-lifer and keeping that vote with Santorum.
 

If I was Santorum I would hit Casey on his lack of interest in the U.S. Senate.  In reality Casey does NOT want the job.   He wants to be governor and everyone knows that.  He has already stated that he will not commit to serve a full term if elected.  That alone should make PA voters second guess voting for him.  I have a feeling alot of Democrats are going to be upset with the result of this race.  Im not holding my breath for a Casey victory, thats for sure.

I already mentioned that some time ago.  I think that the way Casey launched into this has hurt his credability.

He didn't run in '04 because, he said, he didn't want the job.  Now he turns around and runs, thus abandoning a job that he was voted and entrusted with by PA voters, including myself, and runs for a possition that he thinks will be a better stepping stone to the governorship, which everyone knows is what he really wants.

So you voted for him for treasurer too.

Don't you feel a little disappointed?


I think everyone knows my feelings about Rick. That aside, I've seen him speak in person. He's quite eloquent and intelligent. I found him to be rather impressive actually.

For Casey to only be up 7 right now, when all people know are Rick's negatives...well...those who are behind Casey right now (who knows, I might join them, or not...maybe I'll support Rick when its done)...better feel a little uncomfortable.