Santorum and Obama - Who's Next 2005

[Keystone Phil]

If Hoeffel can do as well as Kerry, he can win. Seeing as his politics are similar, he could win. Klink lost because he couldn't rally up support. Hoeffel has the potential to do very well in the Philly suburbs. The Dems need the Philly suburbs more than the Pittsburgh area.

The Dems can have the Philly suburbs. If Santorum can pick up his numbers just a bit in the Pittsburgh area, Santorum wins. Hoeffel win NOT have the turnout that Kerry had. Hoeffel's liberal record will be known. Joe Hoeffel vs. Rick Santorum means six more years of Santorum.

The only candidate that can beat Santorum is Casey. It looks like he's considering a run. If he does run, that's when I'll admit that the Dems will pick up the seat. Under any other circumstance, Santorum wins.

Philadelphia's metro area is growing fairly quick.  A good number of these people are transplants from New York and north Jersey.  Most of these are Democratic.  Granted the city itself is declining.  Santorum is not a liked figure in Southeastern PA, which has a bulk of the population of PA.  I'll admit Santorum will pick up some of Klink's support out west though very slightly, but I think the Dems have bottomed out in that region to begin with.  He will lose drastically in the Southeast.  People will still have a grudge against Bush losing and Santorum will be the #1 target for the DSCC.  His being lock-step bosom buddy with Bush will be widely known and we will be just as energized to defeat Santorum as we were Bush.  Better hope the televangelists/RW Catholic nutjobs turn out for you guys. 

We don't need "nutjobs" to turn out for us. I still don't think you understand that you're average Pennsylvanian approves of the job Santorum is doing. Face it. Get over it. Accept the fact that if you guys don't put up Casey, you'll lose.

Your Howard Dean liberals of Montco and Chestnut Hill won't be enough to beat Santorum. They can be energized all they want. It won't be enough without Casey.

[TeePee4Prez]

If Hoeffel can do as well as Kerry, he can win. Seeing as his politics are similar, he could win. Klink lost because he couldn't rally up support. Hoeffel has the potential to do very well in the Philly suburbs. The Dems need the Philly suburbs more than the Pittsburgh area.

The Dems can have the Philly suburbs. If Santorum can pick up his numbers just a bit in the Pittsburgh area, Santorum wins. Hoeffel win NOT have the turnout that Kerry had. Hoeffel's liberal record will be known. Joe Hoeffel vs. Rick Santorum means six more years of Santorum.

The only candidate that can beat Santorum is Casey. It looks like he's considering a run. If he does run, that's when I'll admit that the Dems will pick up the seat. Under any other circumstance, Santorum wins.

Philadelphia's metro area is growing fairly quick.  A good number of these people are transplants from New York and north Jersey.  Most of these are Democratic.  Granted the city itself is declining.  Santorum is not a liked figure in Southeastern PA, which has a bulk of the population of PA.  I'll admit Santorum will pick up some of Klink's support out west though very slightly, but I think the Dems have bottomed out in that region to begin with.  He will lose drastically in the Southeast.  People will still have a grudge against Bush losing and Santorum will be the #1 target for the DSCC.  His being lock-step bosom buddy with Bush will be widely known and we will be just as energized to defeat Santorum as we were Bush.  Better hope the televangelists/RW Catholic nutjobs turn out for you guys. 

Your Howard Dean liberals of Montco and Chestnut Hill won't be enough to beat Santorum. They can be energized all they want. It won't be enough without Casey.

Newsflash.. I STILL LIVE IN NORTHEAST PHILADELPHIA!!!  Besides NE Philly, came out for Allyson Schwartz, a supposed "to liberal for the Northeast and the district" and spanked your girl Melissa Brown by 23 points.  And don't give me this weak campaign manager crap.  She had John Perzel as chairman.  People knew of her Section 8 "crusade".  NO EXCUSES!

Ok, remember 2000.  Klink still came within 7 and got virtually no supprt of the DSCC.  He had no money and was an unknown in SE Penn, which virtually locked the suburbs for Santorum due to Specter's support.     

[Keystone Phil]

If Hoeffel can do as well as Kerry, he can win. Seeing as his politics are similar, he could win. Klink lost because he couldn't rally up support. Hoeffel has the potential to do very well in the Philly suburbs. The Dems need the Philly suburbs more than the Pittsburgh area.

The Dems can have the Philly suburbs. If Santorum can pick up his numbers just a bit in the Pittsburgh area, Santorum wins. Hoeffel win NOT have the turnout that Kerry had. Hoeffel's liberal record will be known. Joe Hoeffel vs. Rick Santorum means six more years of Santorum.

The only candidate that can beat Santorum is Casey. It looks like he's considering a run. If he does run, that's when I'll admit that the Dems will pick up the seat. Under any other circumstance, Santorum wins.

Philadelphia's metro area is growing fairly quick.  A good number of these people are transplants from New York and north Jersey.  Most of these are Democratic.  Granted the city itself is declining.  Santorum is not a liked figure in Southeastern PA, which has a bulk of the population of PA.  I'll admit Santorum will pick up some of Klink's support out west though very slightly, but I think the Dems have bottomed out in that region to begin with.  He will lose drastically in the Southeast.  People will still have a grudge against Bush losing and Santorum will be the #1 target for the DSCC.  His being lock-step bosom buddy with Bush will be widely known and we will be just as energized to defeat Santorum as we were Bush.  Better hope the televangelists/RW Catholic nutjobs turn out for you guys. 

Your Howard Dean liberals of Montco and Chestnut Hill won't be enough to beat Santorum. They can be energized all they want. It won't be enough without Casey.

Newsflash.. I STILL LIVE IN NORTHEAST PHILADELPHIA!!!  Besides NE Philly, came out for Allyson Schwartz, a supposed "to liberal for the Northeast and the district" and spanked your girl Melissa Brown by 23 points.  And don't give me this weak campaign manager crap.  She had John Perzel as chairman.  People knew of her Section 8 "crusade".  NO EXCUSES!

Ok, remember 2000.  Klink still came within 7 and got virtually no supprt of the DSCC.  He had no money and was an unknown in SE Penn, which virtually locked the suburbs for Santorum due to Specter's support.     

When did I say you didn't live in Northeast Philly? Schwartz won up here because of strong straight Dem ticket voting. Section 8 wasn't mentioned enough. It's amazing how I can't have an excuse but you can cry "Oh Brendan....it was so unfair. The unions...they wanted Kenney..." when you said Boyle would win by about four points. What happened to NO EXCUSES?

Klink came within 7 points because he connected with the conservative Dems out west. Put up a liberal like Hafer or Hoeffel. I beg you to do that. They might have money but they don't connect!

[TeePee4Prez]

I just love how you said Allyson didn't connect, but hey she had the money and she won!  The Dem came very close last time with practically no money and almost won.  If a Dem equals on $$$ or even comes close, they usually win!

[Keystone Phil]

I just love how you said Allyson didn't connect, but hey she had the money and she won!  The Dem came very close last time with practically no money and almost won.  If a Dem equals on $$$ or even comes close, they usually win!

Hahaha! The money? She had strong pro abortion rights groups up here that gave her the money. Look at her entire campaign. You couldn't find a single person who wasn't from Maryland! People didn't know Schwartz on the issues. People voted straight Dem and watched Schwartz call Brown sleazy everyday. On the issues, Schwartz would have been laughed at in the NE.

The Dem didn't come very close last time. Klink lost by 7 points. Not very close at all. He connected because he was a more conservative Dem. Put up Hafer or Hoeffel, give them the money and I guarentee they still lose. They'll lose on the issues.

And finally, explain to me why you can make excuses for Boyle but I can't give reasons why I think Brown lost?

[Ben.]

Accept the fact that if you guys don't put up Casey, you'll lose.

Personally I agree... I don't expect Santorum to lose in 2006, he's by no mean a lock and a strong candidate could use PA's Democratic tilt against him... but like Tom Harkin or Jesse Helms he might not be an ideological fit for PA but he has a personal vote. If Casey ran he’d probably win, but the Dems best shot could be when Spectre retires in 2010 (If he does). 

[Keystone Phil]

Accept the fact that if you guys don't put up Casey, you'll lose.

Personally I agree... I don't expect Santorum to lose in 2006, he's by no mean a lock and a strong candidate could use PA's Democratic tilt against him... but like Tom Harkin or Jesse Helms he might not be an ideological fit for PA but he has a personal vote. If Casey ran he’d probably win, but the Dems best shot could be when Spectre retires in 2010 (If he does). 

Specter is done in 2010 and I agree that the Dems have the better chance at winning that seat though that could change.

Santorum's views are shared by many Pennsylvanians. Once again, look at the approval ratings. BacardiLimon says that he's close to the President. Well everyone sees that yet it doesn't hurt him when he gets rated by the voters so I don't see the point.

The Dems can win if Casey runs but who knows if that will happen. If he's not a candidate, my worries are gone. I'm not going to be concerned about Barbara Hafer or Joe Hoeffel or T.J. Rooney.

[PBrunsel]

What has Obama actually done to make him so admired by Democrats (besides beat Alan Keyes by 60-points )?

[Keystone Phil]

What has Obama actually done to make him so admired by Democrats (besides beat Alan Keyes by 60-points )?

I think it's amazing. The guy is a State Senator and gains nationwide attention and a great amount of admiration. I could never imagine my joke of a State Senator in Obama's position.

[J. J.]

What has Obama actually done to make him so admired by Democrats (besides beat Alan Keyes by 60-points )?

I think it's amazing. The guy is a State Senator and gains nationwide attention and a great amount of admiration. I could never imagine my joke of a State Senator in Obama's position.

Let's be fair to Obama.

1.  He is exceptionally articulate, overshadowing Clinton at the DNC.

2.  He has an exceptionally powerful "rags-to-riches" personal story.

3.  You might disagree with it, but he had a productive record as a State Senator.

4.  He packaged himself as a moderate in his speech.

It's a good start, but let's see how well he does in the Senate.

[Keystone Phil]

What has Obama actually done to make him so admired by Democrats (besides beat Alan Keyes by 60-points )?

I think it's amazing. The guy is a State Senator and gains nationwide attention and a great amount of admiration. I could never imagine my joke of a State Senator in Obama's position.

Let's be fair to Obama.

1.  He is exceptionally articulate, overshadowing Clinton at the DNC.

2.  He has an exceptionally powerful "rags-to-riches" personal story.

3.  You might disagree with it, but he had a productive record as a State Senator.

4.  He packaged himself as a moderate in his speech.

It's a good start, but let's see how well he does in the Senate.

I agree. Obama is a great speaker. He does have a great personal story. He's an impressive individual.

 However, the way I see it, he will become one of the Senators I dislike the most. He will end up having a voting record that I highly disagree with. In my opinion, Illinois will have the worst Senatorial delegation.

[J. J.]

I agree. Obama is a great speaker. He does have a great personal story. He's an impressive individual.

 However, the way I see it, he will become one of the Senators I dislike the most. He will end up having a voting record that I highly disagree with. In my opinion, Illinois will have the worst Senatorial delegation.

I'll reserve judgment.  He's better than Mosely-Braun, clearly. 

I can remember a line from his DNC, "It doesn't take a village to raise a child; it takes a family to raise a child."  Now, he said that with Hilary Clinton sitting there.

If he developes a more moderate voting record and distances himself from the Loony Left, he could be an exceptionally compelling national figure (and possibly a presidential contender).

[Keystone Phil]

I agree. Obama is a great speaker. He does have a great personal story. He's an impressive individual.

 However, the way I see it, he will become one of the Senators I dislike the most. He will end up having a voting record that I highly disagree with. In my opinion, Illinois will have the worst Senatorial delegation.

I'll reserve judgment.  He's better than Mosely-Braun, clearly. 

I can remember a line from his DNC, "It doesn't take a village to raise a child; it takes a family to raise a child."  Now, he said that with Hilary Clinton sitting there.

If he developes a more moderate voting record and distances himself from the Loony Left, he could be an exceptionally compelling national figure (and possibly a presidential contender).

Obama will not have a moderate record. Sorry. He might not be a vocal liberal like Ted Kennedy or Barbara Boxer because, as you stated, he might want to run for President. However, I still think he'll have a liberal voting record.

[J. J.]

Obama will not have a moderate record. Sorry. He might not be a vocal liberal like Ted Kennedy or Barbara Boxer because, as you stated, he might want to run for President. However, I still think he'll have a liberal voting record.

He won't be successful then. 

The Senate is not a good place to launch a presiential campaign, as Senators Muskie, Humphrey, McGovern (1972), Bayh (1976), Kennedy, Baker (1980), Hart, Glenn (1984), Gore, Simon, Dole(1988), Harkin, Kerrey(1992), Gramm, Dole, Specter (1996), McCain (2000), Lieberman, Graham, and Kerry (2004) can all attest.

[muon2]

I agree. Obama is a great speaker. He does have a great personal story. He's an impressive individual.

 However, the way I see it, he will become one of the Senators I dislike the most. He will end up having a voting record that I highly disagree with. In my opinion, Illinois will have the worst Senatorial delegation.

I'll reserve judgment.  He's better than Mosely-Braun, clearly. 

I can remember a line from his DNC, "It doesn't take a village to raise a child; it takes a family to raise a child."  Now, he said that with Hilary Clinton sitting there.

If he developes a more moderate voting record and distances himself from the Loony Left, he could be an exceptionally compelling national figure (and possibly a presidential contender).

Obama will not have a moderate record. Sorry. He might not be a vocal liberal like Ted Kennedy or Barbara Boxer because, as you stated, he might want to run for President. However, I still think he'll have a liberal voting record.

One of Obama's most interesting statements during the campaign had to do with his extremely left-leaning voting record. His response was that he was representing his district, and it's true that Hyde Park is one of the most liberal areas in Chicago. His lack of competition left unasked the question as to whether a US Sen. Obama would then have a voting record that reflects the broader views of the whole state.  I hope that he does.

[J. J.]

One of Obama's most interesting statements during the campaign had to do with his extremely left-leaning voting record. His response was that he was representing his district, and it's true that Hyde Park is one of the most liberal areas in Chicago. His lack of competition left unasked the question as to whether a US Sen. Obama would then have a voting record that reflects the broader views of the whole state.  I hope that he does.

There is this pattern.

LBJ's voting record became substantially more liberal in the late 1950's, when he was preparing for his run in 1960.

George Wallace actively, and successfully, courted the African American vote in his last election.

Let's not forget the candidate for governor of a southern state who publically refered to himself as "an ignorant and bigoted redneck," in 1970.  His name Jimmy Carter.  :-)

[PBrunsel]

What has Obama actually done to make him so admired by Democrats (besides beat Alan Keyes by 60-points )?

I think it's amazing. The guy is a State Senator and gains nationwide attention and a great amount of admiration. I could never imagine my joke of a State Senator in Obama's position.

Let's be fair to Obama.

1.  He is exceptionally articulate, overshadowing Clinton at the DNC.

2.  He has an exceptionally powerful "rags-to-riches" personal story.

3.  You might disagree with it, but he had a productive record as a State Senator.

4.  He packaged himself as a moderate in his speech.

It's a good start, but let's see how well he does in the Senate.

I agree. Obama is a great speaker. He does have a great personal story. He's an impressive individual.

 However, the way I see it, he will become one of the Senators I dislike the most. He will end up having a voting record that I highly disagree with. In my opinion, Illinois will have the worst Senatorial delegation.

Alan Keyes also is a great speaker with an amazing rags to riches story.

And, if you saw the deabtes, he ate Obama alive and spit out what was left to stomp on it.

Keyes creamed Obama in the debates, and that is why he didn't win 10 percent of the vote or something along that line.

[Akno21]

What has Obama actually done to make him so admired by Democrats (besides beat Alan Keyes by 60-points )?

I think it's amazing. The guy is a State Senator and gains nationwide attention and a great amount of admiration. I could never imagine my joke of a State Senator in Obama's position.

Let's be fair to Obama.

1.  He is exceptionally articulate, overshadowing Clinton at the DNC.

2.  He has an exceptionally powerful "rags-to-riches" personal story.

3.  You might disagree with it, but he had a productive record as a State Senator.

4.  He packaged himself as a moderate in his speech.

It's a good start, but let's see how well he does in the Senate.

I agree. Obama is a great speaker. He does have a great personal story. He's an impressive individual.

 However, the way I see it, he will become one of the Senators I dislike the most. He will end up having a voting record that I highly disagree with. In my opinion, Illinois will have the worst Senatorial delegation.

Alan Keyes also is a great speaker with an amazing rags to riches story.

And, if you saw the deabtes, he ate Obama alive and spit out what was left to stomp on it.

Keyes creamed Obama in the debates, and that is why he didn't win 10 percent of the vote or something along that line.

I watched those debates, and I had a much different conclusion. I think Obama exposed that Keyes biggest issues were religion and state legislatures choosing Senators, which are not burning issues now, to be sure.

[Akno21]

If Hoeffel can do as well as Kerry, he can win. Seeing as his politics are similar, he could win. Klink lost because he couldn't rally up support. Hoeffel has the potential to do very well in the Philly suburbs. The Dems need the Philly suburbs more than the Pittsburgh area.

The Dems can have the Philly suburbs. If Santorum can pick up his numbers just a bit in the Pittsburgh area, Santorum wins. Hoeffel win NOT have the turnout that Kerry had. Hoeffel's liberal record will be known. Joe Hoeffel vs. Rick Santorum means six more years of Santorum.

The only candidate that can beat Santorum is Casey. It looks like he's considering a run. If he does run, that's when I'll admit that the Dems will pick up the seat. Under any other circumstance, Santorum wins.

Why won't Hoeffel have the turnout Kerry did? Kerry did not run a good campaign, as you often say, but with Rendell at the top of the ticket, turnout will be good.

Hoeffel is a liberal, Santorum is a conservative, PA is basically split. It's neither liberal nor conservative. That means close election.

[J. J.]

Why won't Hoeffel have the turnout Kerry did? Kerry did not run a good campaign, as you often say, but with Rendell at the top of the ticket, turnout will be good.

Hoeffel is a liberal, Santorum is a conservative, PA is basically split. It's neither liberal nor conservative. That means close election.

In a word, geography.  Western PA likes having its own resident senator; the "T" doesn't want any one of the other regions to dominate the state.  This gives an advantage to candidate from the western part when running against someone from the southeastern part.

Also, do not expect Rendell to get a large turnout from the SE in the next election.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Scranton likes having it's own resident Governer ;-)

[J. J.]

Scranton likes having it's own resident Governer ;-)

Ah, there can only by one Governor at a time.

[Akno21]

Why won't Hoeffel have the turnout Kerry did? Kerry did not run a good campaign, as you often say, but with Rendell at the top of the ticket, turnout will be good.

Hoeffel is a liberal, Santorum is a conservative, PA is basically split. It's neither liberal nor conservative. That means close election.

In a word, geography.  Western PA likes having its own resident senator; the "T" doesn't want any one of the other regions to dominate the state.  This gives an advantage to candidate from the western part when running against someone from the southeastern part.

Also, do not expect Rendell to get a large turnout from the SE in the next election.

I see your point, but my main question is, if the candidates are politically the same as Kerry and Bush, why would Santorum win, and by a comfortable margin at that.

[J. J.]

Why won't Hoeffel have the turnout Kerry did? Kerry did not run a good campaign, as you often say, but with Rendell at the top of the ticket, turnout will be good.

Hoeffel is a liberal, Santorum is a conservative, PA is basically split. It's neither liberal nor conservative. That means close election.

In a word, geography.  Western PA likes having its own resident senator; the "T" doesn't want any one of the other regions to dominate the state.  This gives an advantage to candidate from the western part when running against someone from the southeastern part.

Also, do not expect Rendell to get a large turnout from the SE in the next election.

I see your point, but my main question is, if the candidates are politically the same as Kerry and Bush, why would Santorum win, and by a comfortable margin at that.

Well, because there is a difference between between a legislative post and a president.  It is not entirely do to ideology.

[Keystone Phil]

If Hoeffel can do as well as Kerry, he can win. Seeing as his politics are similar, he could win. Klink lost because he couldn't rally up support. Hoeffel has the potential to do very well in the Philly suburbs. The Dems need the Philly suburbs more than the Pittsburgh area.

The Dems can have the Philly suburbs. If Santorum can pick up his numbers just a bit in the Pittsburgh area, Santorum wins. Hoeffel win NOT have the turnout that Kerry had. Hoeffel's liberal record will be known. Joe Hoeffel vs. Rick Santorum means six more years of Santorum.

The only candidate that can beat Santorum is Casey. It looks like he's considering a run. If he does run, that's when I'll admit that the Dems will pick up the seat. Under any other circumstance, Santorum wins.

Why won't Hoeffel have the turnout Kerry did? Kerry did not run a good campaign, as you often say, but with Rendell at the top of the ticket, turnout will be good.

Hoeffel is a liberal, Santorum is a conservative, PA is basically split. It's neither liberal nor conservative. That means close election.

It was a Presidential election. If you think you'll have the same turnout or higher in 2006, you're crazy.

The way you just analyzed this election made no sense at all and demonstrates that you know nothing about PA politics. Sorry, Akno. It's not as easy as saying "One's liberal, one's conservative. The state is neither. There will be a close election." I won't comment any further because I am in disbelief that that's the way you think in regards to this race.