PA-SN 2022 megathread: Shrek vs. The Wizard of Oz

[Morning in Atlas]

Seriously, I fail to see how Fetterman or Lamb are supposedly weak because of one reason or another. They will perform exactly the same. No one cares about how many tattoos Fetterman has or how establishment the vibes Lamb gives off.

Not the point I was trying to make. It's less about how "establishment" Lamb is and more over the near-total lack of policy in his campaign and how its cornerstone is "Trump is bad".

As I see it, you have a choice between someone who's shown some concerns, three candidates whose electoral performances we don't know, or a guy who's run a terrible campaign that looks like the many terrible campaigns Dems have run over the years. I've made my choice.

[Morning in Atlas]

As an aside, it's funny how the anti-Fetterman crowd defaults to "Well you think everyone you don't like is a Manchincrat."

Ignoring the fact that I've never made the comparison about my Senators, who sold out minimum wage reform for a campaign donation. Or the fact that Lambchin has assigned his own outrageous labels.

[Thank you for being a friend...]

Do y'all feel that Dr. New Jersey is still going to win the GOP primary?

[swf541]

Do y'all feel that Dr. New Jersey is still going to win the GOP primary?

Given the lack of quality polling I have no idea, I do not think he is in anyway a lock-in tho.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

As an aside, it's funny how the anti-Fetterman crowd defaults to "Well you think everyone you don't like is a Manchincrat."

Ignoring the fact that I've never made the comparison about my Senators, who sold out minimum wage reform for a campaign donation. Or the fact that Lambchin has assigned his own outrageous labels.

With all due respect, there is no even remotely reasonable argument that Lamb is a Manchincrat.  He’s not even a ConservaDem.

[Pheurton Skeurto]

Seriously, I fail to see how Fetterman or Lamb are supposedly weak because of one reason or another. They will perform exactly the same. No one cares about how many tattoos Fetterman has or how establishment the vibes Lamb gives off.

Not the point I was trying to make. It's less about how "establishment" Lamb is and more over the near-total lack of policy in his campaign and how its cornerstone is "Trump is bad".

As I see it, you have a choice between someone who's shown some concerns, three candidates whose electoral performances we don't know, or a guy who's run a terrible campaign that looks like the many terrible campaigns Dems have run over the years. I've made my choice.

I mean, to be fair, he has been pretty strong in his advocacy to get rid of the filibuster to pass voting rights, BBB, $15 minimum wage, and I'm pretty sure he was a strong advocate for the PRO Act.

I'm with you that his stances on weed and health care and climate change are far too moderate, but I see him as more of a Klobuchar than a Manchin. He'll be reliable vote for the main line agenda, just not willing to go further where it's really needed.

[MT Treasurer]

I don’t think Democrats were ever going to win this race because of the "candidate quality" of the D field, especially in this environment — Fetterman likely has a lower floor than Lamb and is more likely to underperform generic D, but at the end of the day Republicans would need to nominate a seriously flawed candidate and inept campaigner to lose to any Democrat here, which is still very much possible, arguably more so in PA than in any other swing state race. Republicans may get away with a scare if they nominate a joke candidate in OH, but PA isn’t red enough for the GOP to rest easy with someone like Oz.

I have this rated as a (cautious) Lean R, like AZ and NV. Both parties likely need to win two of those three to win the Senate.

[Morning in Atlas]

Seriously, I fail to see how Fetterman or Lamb are supposedly weak because of one reason or another. They will perform exactly the same. No one cares about how many tattoos Fetterman has or how establishment the vibes Lamb gives off.

Not the point I was trying to make. It's less about how "establishment" Lamb is and more over the near-total lack of policy in his campaign and how its cornerstone is "Trump is bad".

As I see it, you have a choice between someone who's shown some concerns, three candidates whose electoral performances we don't know, or a guy who's run a terrible campaign that looks like the many terrible campaigns Dems have run over the years. I've made my choice.

I mean, to be fair, he has been pretty strong in his advocacy to get rid of the filibuster to pass voting rights, BBB, $15 minimum wage, and I'm pretty sure he was a strong advocate for the PRO Act.

I'm with you that his stances on weed and health care and climate change are far too moderate, but I see him as more of a Klobuchar than a Manchin. He'll be reliable vote for the main line agenda, just not willing to go further where it's really needed.

Yeah, all these things are true. I'm more concerned about 6-8 years from now, if PA shifts and we've taken the majority. When Lamb first ran he was against a $15 minimum wage - what's stopping him from flip-flopping again when Buttigieg or whoever retakes the Senate?

My point has always been that we've seen these types of calculated shifts in policy from Lamb before. If he does win and he stays closer, I'll never be more glad to be wrong. But as of now we can't afford to take the risk.

[Ferguson97]

Fetterman and Lamb will vote the same 99% of the time if they're elected to the Senate, so what really matters is who you think would be a better general election candidate.

[Canis]

Fetterman and Lamb will vote the same 99% of the time if they're elected to the Senate, so what really matters is who you think would be a better general election candidate.

I would not be too sure about that lol Lamb voted with Trump 68% of the time during his first term in congress. He takes tons of corporate and special interest money and it has influenced how he's voted on important legislation like the time he voted to gut Banking regulation.
https://twitter.com/kenklippenstein/status/1460262958974611457
 I also don't buy the narrative that Lamb is more electable in 2020 he was significantly outrun by 2 self-described socialists!
https://twitter.com/Fo4Afuture/status/1471304680894615553
What matters is electing a senator beholden to people and not special interests.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Lol Lamb or Fetterman will beat Oz it's a 304/234 ME 2 rule map

[wbrocks67]

OMG this whole anti-Conor Lamb thing is literally a Bernie flashback from 2016. Enough.

[Sir Mohamed]

While I'm rooting for Fetterman, it's still unfortunate Tom Wolf isn't a decade younger. Otherwise, he could for the seat and would probably be favored even in a bad midterm environment.

[😥]

https://twitter.com/JuliaTerruso/status/1483467589980413961?t=fiH1Q59AVsUHsXH_cA...

[Morning in Atlas]

https://twitter.com/JuliaTerruso/status/1483467589980413961?t=fiH1Q59AVsUHsXH_cA...

So it's all about stopping the only candidate that can win the general because he's Too Far Left.

Truly amazing stuff, folks. The grifters in power rather lose with their gravy train flowing than win and change the world for the better.

[Ferguson97]

https://twitter.com/JuliaTerruso/status/1483467589980413961?t=fiH1Q59AVsUHsXH_cA...

So it's all about stopping the only candidate that can win the general because he's Too Far Left.

Truly amazing stuff, folks. The grifters in power rather lose with their gravy train flowing than win and change the world for the better.

Aren't you basically making the same argument as he is? You think Lamb would lose and Fetterman would win, and we should all back the candidate who has the best shot at winning?

[Morning in Atlas]

OMG this whole anti-Conor Lamb thing is literally a Bernie flashback from 2016. Enough.

Funny how you were dead silent when your candidate was pulling the socialism card out of his ass but when we question his commitment to the party then the calls for unity come out.

You don't want unity. You want a Lambchin coronation.

[Morning in Atlas]

https://twitter.com/JuliaTerruso/status/1483467589980413961?t=fiH1Q59AVsUHsXH_cA...

So it's all about stopping the only candidate that can win the general because he's Too Far Left.

Truly amazing stuff, folks. The grifters in power rather lose with their gravy train flowing than win and change the world for the better.

Aren't you basically making the same argument as he is? You think Lamb would lose and Fetterman would win, and we should all back the candidate who has the best shot at winning?

Let's all be real here - Fetterman is one of the few candidates ideologically close to me. I've been an ardent supporter of his for about five years now.

But looking at Lamb's actual record (namely the strategy he's using and his inability to capitalize on the Parnell news in 2020), the talk about electability is objectively BS.

[Pheurton Skeurto]

Electability arguments one way or the other are stupid and circular. It is the least salient argument to make that one candidate hypothetically would do better than another one in the general. We saw this play out in large scale elections like Trump in 16, the Democratic primaries in 20, and in smaller scale elections like ME-Sen in 20. It's nonsensical to make this argument.

Primaries, as far as I'm concerned, should strictly be about ideology. If a candidate can win a majority or plurality of Democrats in a state like PA, all Democrats in PA should be willing to get behind them in the general. Anything beyond that is mere speculation. Vote for the candidate who aligns with your values and then push to get the Democratic nominee elected in November. It's that simple. Yes, from an ideological standpoint, I would not vote for Conor Lamb in the primary. Kenyatta, Fetterman, even Arkoosh align with my values more than he does. But Lamb aligns with my values significantly more than Oz, McCormick, Bartos, or whatever clown wins the GOP nomination would.

[Morning in Atlas]

In happier news:

https://twitter.com/JuliaTerruso/status/1483189581054988289?t=vN9r9_mYMqt9guycbx...

Always good to see a good Democrat get his endorsements. No matter what happens, Kenyatta is gonna have a good future.

[Schiff for Senate]

While I'm rooting for Fetterman, it's still unfortunate Tom Wolf isn't a decade younger. Otherwise, he could for the seat and would probably be favored even in a bad midterm environment.

Yeah, Wolf is extremely popular in PA, and I was surpised to see just how popular. I think he'd win by a decent amount even in this purple state even in a red wave. In 2018 he won by 17 points and won PA16 (which went for Trump by 18 points in 2020). If he ran in the 2022 senate race PA16 would most likely still go red but he'd probably win by a good amount.

Fetterman and Lamb will vote the same 99% of the time if they're elected to the Senate, so what really matters is who you think would be a better general election candidate.

I would not be too sure about that lol Lamb voted with Trump 68% of the time during his first term in congress. He takes tons of corporate and special interest money and it has influenced how he's voted on important legislation like the time he voted to gut Banking regulation.
https://twitter.com/kenklippenstein/status/1460262958974611457
 I also don't buy the narrative that Lamb is more electable in 2020 he was significantly outrun by 2 self-described socialists!
https://twitter.com/Fo4Afuture/status/1471304680894615553
What matters is electing a senator beholden to people and not special interests.

This is genuinely shocking. I knew Lamb has voted with the GOP on some things, but 68%? That's about on par with Collins and Murkowski, unless I'm wrong.

Electability arguments one way or the other are stupid and circular. It is the least salient argument to make that one candidate hypothetically would do better than another one in the general. We saw this play out in large scale elections like Trump in 16, the Democratic primaries in 20, and in smaller scale elections like ME-Sen in 20. It's nonsensical to make this argument.

Primaries, as far as I'm concerned, should strictly be about ideology. If a candidate can win a majority or plurality of Democrats in a state like PA, all Democrats in PA should be willing to get behind them in the general. Anything beyond that is mere speculation. Vote for the candidate who aligns with your values and then push to get the Democratic nominee elected in November. It's that simple. Yes, from an ideological standpoint, I would not vote for Conor Lamb in the primary. Kenyatta, Fetterman, even Arkoosh align with my values more than he does. But Lamb aligns with my values significantly more than Oz, McCormick, Bartos, or whatever clown wins the GOP nomination would.

All the same, you shouldn't delude yourself that all candidates are equally electable. For instance (and I know WV isn't PA, I'm just making a general point), Joe Manchin is in many ways a DINO and faced a primary challenge from a left-wing Democrat in 2018, and won. If you voted from an ideological standpoint, you would likely support that left-wing Democrat (Paula Jean Swearengin). However, this would run quite obviously counter to the bigger goal of making sure someone who you at least partially agree with (i.e., a Democrat) wins, since Manchin still won the race by 3 and Swearengin lost by some 40 points two years later when she got nominated. Of course PA is much, much, much bluer than WV. But the point is, look for ideological purity within the bounds of electability. Personally I don't think Lamb is necessarily much more electable than people like Kenyetta and Fetterman. In fact, that brings me to my next point: Fetterman and Kenyetta are about equally liberal/progressive, except (I think) Fetterman's much likelier to win. So, unless you perceive some massive difference between the two candidates, you should also consider electability. Ideology is important, but electability should hardly be ignored. Not all candidates are equal, and in some cases (NOT that this is necessarily one of them, since PA is swingy and elects enough liberal Democrats), you need to sacrifice your ideology for the greater good. I mean, right-wing Republicans in ME who voted to primary Collins in 2020 would probably be going against their own interest (i.e., a Republican winning), since only Collins can win as far as Republicans go. So, while it doesn't apply much to PA, this is the wrong takeaway, since electability is an important factor to consider, and should be far from exclusively pertaining to ideology, if the goal is getting someone who agrees with you on a healthy percentage of issues.

[Canis]

While I'm rooting for Fetterman, it's still unfortunate Tom Wolf isn't a decade younger. Otherwise, he could for the seat and would probably be favored even in a bad midterm environment.

Yeah, Wolf is extremely popular in PA, and I was surpised to see just how popular. I think he'd win by a decent amount even in this purple state even in a red wave. In 2018 he won by 17 points and won PA16 (which went for Trump by 18 points in 2020). If he ran in the 2022 senate race PA16 would most likely still go red but he'd probably win by a good amount.

Fetterman and Lamb will vote the same 99% of the time if they're elected to the Senate, so what really matters is who you think would be a better general election candidate.

I would not be too sure about that lol Lamb voted with Trump 68% of the time during his first term in congress. He takes tons of corporate and special interest money and it has influenced how he's voted on important legislation like the time he voted to gut Banking regulation.
https://twitter.com/kenklippenstein/status/1460262958974611457
 I also don't buy the narrative that Lamb is more electable in 2020 he was significantly outrun by 2 self-described socialists!
https://twitter.com/Fo4Afuture/status/1471304680894615553
What matters is electing a senator beholden to people and not special interests.

This is genuinely shocking. I knew Lamb has voted with the GOP on some things, but 68%? That's about on par with Collins and Murkowski, unless I'm wrong.

Electability arguments one way or the other are stupid and circular. It is the least salient argument to make that one candidate hypothetically would do better than another one in the general. We saw this play out in large scale elections like Trump in 16, the Democratic primaries in 20, and in smaller scale elections like ME-Sen in 20. It's nonsensical to make this argument.

Primaries, as far as I'm concerned, should strictly be about ideology. If a candidate can win a majority or plurality of Democrats in a state like PA, all Democrats in PA should be willing to get behind them in the general. Anything beyond that is mere speculation. Vote for the candidate who aligns with your values and then push to get the Democratic nominee elected in November. It's that simple. Yes, from an ideological standpoint, I would not vote for Conor Lamb in the primary. Kenyatta, Fetterman, even Arkoosh align with my values more than he does. But Lamb aligns with my values significantly more than Oz, McCormick, Bartos, or whatever clown wins the GOP nomination would.

All the same, you shouldn't delude yourself that all candidates are equally electable. For instance (and I know WV isn't PA, I'm just making a general point), Joe Manchin is in many ways a DINO and faced a primary challenge from a left-wing Democrat in 2018, and won. If you voted from an ideological standpoint, you would likely support that left-wing Democrat (Paula Jean Swearengin). However, this would run quite obviously counter to the bigger goal of making sure someone who you at least partially agree with (i.e., a Democrat) wins, since Manchin still won the race by 3 and Swearengin lost by some 40 points two years later when she got nominated. Of course PA is much, much, much bluer than WV. But the point is, look for ideological purity within the bounds of electability. Personally I don't think Lamb is necessarily much more electable than people like Kenyetta and Fetterman. In fact, that brings me to my next point: Fetterman and Kenyetta are about equally liberal/progressive, except (I think) Fetterman's much likelier to win. So, unless you perceive some massive difference between the two candidates, you should also consider electability. Ideology is important, but electability should hardly be ignored. Not all candidates are equal, and in some cases (NOT that this is necessarily one of them, since PA is swingy and elects enough liberal Democrats), you need to sacrifice your ideology for the greater good. I mean, right-wing Republicans in ME who voted to primary Collins in 2020 would probably be going against their own interest (i.e., a Republican winning), since only Collins can win as far as Republicans go. So, while it doesn't apply much to PA, this is the wrong takeaway, since electability is an important factor to consider, and should be far from exclusively pertaining to ideology, if the goal is getting someone who agrees with you on a healthy percentage of issues.

For the 115th Congress, 68% was lower than Collins and Murkowski
Collins voted with Trump 77% of the time and Murkowski voted 81% of the time but he actually voted with Trump more than Manchin did. Manchin voted with Trump 60% of the time.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/joe-manchin-iii/
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/conor-lamb/
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/susan-m-collins/
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/lisa-murkowski/

Lamb voted much more liberally in his second term because his seat got much bluer but to me, that just shows he has no ideological values he's flipped flop on many issues including the $15 minimum wage. Its very important Democrats select a nominee who will be a reliable vote and has progressive values and isn't beholden to Dark money and Lamb isn't that guy. Obviously, if Lamb became the nominee id support him because he's better than the republicans but seeing as how Bidens agenda is being held up by 2 democrats bought by corporate interests it should serve as a reminder that we can select someone like Fetterman or Kenyatta who wont be and will actually serve the people

[S019]

Fetterman has chosen to duck a forum, his main rivals in this race will attend (Street is completely irrelevant)

https://twitter.com/PASenateWatch/status/1483594027236737029

[libertpaulian]

Fetterman has chosen to duck a forum, his main rivals in this race will attend (Street is completely irrelevant)

https://twitter.com/PASenateWatch/status/1483594027236737029

Ignoring Black voters in a state where Black turnout can make or break the race seems like...a...plan...

[SnowLabrador]

Yet another piece of evidence that Fetterman sees the primary as his without having to work for it. This shows that he's a bad general election candidate.