Why Bob Casey won't lose to Santorum

[MarkWarner08]

Rick Santorum is too extreme for Pennsylvania. You can’t support Bush 98% of the time in a state where Bush has approval rating at  hovering at 40% and still win.

Let’s break down Rick Santorum’s “uphill races.”

2000: Remember Ron Klink? Klink lost in 2000 because he couldn’t raise cash and Santorum was able to exploit Klink’s pro-life view to prevail in the Philly suburbs.

Why that doesn’t compare to 2006:  Philly Mayor and now Governor Ed Rendell wasn’t on the ticket and liberals didn’t target Santorum.

1994: Remember Harris Wofford. My mom knew Harris Wofford because he used to be the dean of Bryn Mawr College, my mom’s alma mater. Wofford had to run as an incumbent in  1994, a climate similar to the won Santorum’s facing. Santorum ran a nasty smear campaign against Wofford and only beat Wofford by 2%.

Why that doesn’t compare to 2006: Poor Santorum has to run as an incumbent in an anti-incumbent. How does it feel, Ricky?

1992: Santorum  won reelection against a weak, overly liberal and largely unknown Democratic foe

Why that doesn’t compare to 2006: Bob Casey is not a weak, unknown liberal running for Congress.

1990: Santorum ran as a challenger and beat an ethically-challenged Democratic Congressman in an anti-incumbent year.

Why that doesn’t compare to 2006:  This was not  really that much of an upset. Anyways, Bob Casey is not an ethically-challenged Democratic Congressman running  in an anti-incumbent year

Casey had ONLY ONE tough race. He lost that race because he ran against Rendell. Rendell is a near deity in Pennsylvania and Rendell would have easily ROUTED  Santorum this year. That’s like saying McCain is a poor candidate because he lost in 2000 to the eventual President of the United States.  McCain first tough race was against Bush – is he a loser in your mind too?


My point was that if he was really such a weak candidate, why did the Penn GOP cede the Treasurer's position to him? That either reflects poorly on your party, or well on Casey.

Do Republicans really believe that Santorum's going to win in a year with Bush's approval ratings in the tank, Rendell soaring to victory, an anti-incumbent tide, an anti-Washington mindset and a potential Democratic pickup of four House seats in the state. He's also never led Casey in the polls, he has low reelect ratings and he has to face a  Democratic onslaught of $5 million in ads in October?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Like I said in the other thread:

I challenge all who believe that Santorum will win to go place massive bets on Santorum on TradeSports. After all, if you're so sure, what do you have to lose? Plus if he does win, you'll make a 5:1 profit. Massively betting on Santorum should be a no-brainer if you're so confident of his victory.

[MarkWarner08]

Like I said in the other thread:

I challenge all who believe that Santorum will win to go place massive bets on Santorum on TradeSports. After all, if you're so sure, what do you have to lose? Plus if he does win, you'll make a 5:1 profit. Massively betting on Santorum should be a no-brainer if you're so confident of his victory.

Put your money where your mouth is. Agreed.

[Conan]

This thread should be, Where will Santorum work as a lobbyist in 2007?

[Eraserhead]

Hey, Santorum has a great shot...................at losing by double digits.

[Jake]

Casey had ONLY ONE tough race. He lost that race because he ran against Rendell. Rendell is a near deity in Pennsylvania and Rendell would have easily ROUTED  Santorum this year. That’s like saying McCain is a poor candidate because he lost in 2000 to the eventual President of the United States.  McCain first tough race was against Bush – is he a loser in your mind too?

Rendell is not a "near deity" in Pennsylvania, maybe in Philadelphia.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There were already two competitive GOP candidates on the ballot for row officer races in 2004. The GOP would've had to spend significant funds and recruit a strong candidate to run against Casey, all of which would've taken away money and time that could've (and was) spent trying to get Specter, Corbett, and Peters elected.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Are Santorum's though?

No.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This matters.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We'll see if this happens.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

See above.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Potential in which fantasy land exactly?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And Democrats have to face his double cash on hand advantage. Point?

[Eraserhead]

Santorum's ratings are in the tank or at least they are pretty bad. Not quite Bush bad but hey whos are?

[Speed of Sound]

Casey had ONLY ONE tough race. He lost that race because he ran against Rendell. Rendell is a near deity in Pennsylvania and Rendell would have easily ROUTED  Santorum this year. That’s like saying McCain is a poor candidate because he lost in 2000 to the eventual President of the United States.  McCain first tough race was against Bush – is he a loser in your mind too?

Rendell is not a "near deity" in Pennsylvania, maybe in Philadelphia.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There were already two competitive GOP candidates on the ballot for row officer races in 2004. The GOP would've had to spend significant funds and recruit a strong candidate to run against Casey, all of which would've taken away money and time that could've (and was) spent trying to get Specter, Corbett, and Peters elected.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Are Santorum's though?

No.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This matters.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We'll see if this happens.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

See above.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Potential in which fantasy land exactly?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And Democrats have to face his double cash on hand advantage. Point?

I agree with Jake. These 'factors' are limp. Give it time. Am I claiming guarunteed (sp?) victory for Santorum? No. Am I claiming that if theres anyone in the world that could blow this kind of a lead its Bob "I have the social skills of a bag of walnuts" Casey? Yes.

[MarkWarner08]

Casey had ONLY ONE tough race. He lost that race because he ran against Rendell. Rendell is a near deity in Pennsylvania and Rendell would have easily ROUTED  Santorum this year. That’s like saying McCain is a poor candidate because he lost in 2000 to the eventual President of the United States.  McCain first tough race was against Bush – is he a loser in your mind too?

Rendell is not a "near deity" in Pennsylvania, maybe in Philadelphia.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There were already two competitive GOP candidates on the ballot for row officer races in 2004. The GOP would've had to spend significant funds and recruit a strong candidate to run against Casey, all of which would've taken away money and time that could've (and was) spent trying to get Specter, Corbett, and Peters elected.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Are Santorum's though?

No.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This matters.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We'll see if this happens.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

See above.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Potential in which fantasy land exactly?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And Democrats have to face his double cash on hand advantage. Point?

Santorum's already spent over $7 million on TV ads, meaning both candidates are at financial parity.


The four seats Democrats may take back as ranked by Stu Rothenberg:

PA-06: PURE TOSS-UP
PA-07: PURE TOSS-UP
PA-08: TOSS-UP/TILT REPUBLICAN
PA-10: TOSS-UP/TILT REPUBLICAN

Does that make an inhabitant of "fantasy land"? I'm well aware that Republicans are better funded, better prepared for GOTV and better organized than the Democrats. 

 I believe this year will be different. There's a tide coming in -- a tide of discontent with Washington as usual. The Republican Congressman from Buckeye State to Bucks County will feel the brunt of it come election day. In an article in The Washington Post today, the writer said that  this election is rare in that it that the Incumbency advantage has been reversed.

I'm not in fantasy land. BTW, unlike most Democrats and some Republicans, I doubt Democrats are going to win any of the Connecticut House races.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Jesus Christ... do we actually need another thread like this?

[DownWithTheLeft]

This thread should be, Where will Santorum work as a lobbyist in 2007?

Here is Mr. Confidence again, Conan if there is something I admire about you, you are so sure and self-confident.  Hopefully that confidence won't be shot when Santorum and Kean win

[Jake]

Santorum's already spent over $7 million on TV ads, meaning both candidates are at financial parity.

Give me some numbers to back up that they're at financial parity.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes. Anyone who puts PA-8 or PA-10 as anything but Republican Favored at this point is living in fantasy land. PA-7 is also not a pure tossup.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Highlighted the key to the above paragraph.

[MarkWarner08]

Santorum's already spent over $7 million on TV ads, meaning both candidates are at financial parity.

Give me some numbers to back up that they're at financial parity.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes. Anyone who puts PA-8 or PA-10 as anything but Republican Favored at this point is living in fantasy land. PA-7 is also not a pure tossup.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Highlighted the key to the above paragraph.

Jake, You think Stu Rothenberg, Congressional Quarterly, National Journal, Ken Rudin, Charlie Cook, Larry Sabato and Chuck Todd are living in "fantasy land"?

Wow

[Jake]

If they think Fitz or Sherwood are in tossup races, then yes, they're in a fantasy land.

[MarkWarner08]

If they think Fitz or Sherwood are in tossup races, then yes, they're in a fantasy land.

I think Fitz will win; Sherwood is now in the slight lean towards the GOP column.

[Jake]

BTW since you're interested in the PA-10 race, the sign wars have begun here. I noticed Carney's team started putting signs out about two weeks ago, and last week Sherwood's team started as well. Santorum and Casey have yet to begin putting signs up in this area at all.

[MarkWarner08]

BTW since you're interested in the PA-10 race, the sign wars have begun here. I noticed Carney's team started putting signs out about two weeks ago, and last week Sherwood's team started as well. Santorum and Casey have yet to begin putting signs up in this area at all.

Thanks for the update. I wonderwhen the election time chicanery will occur. On my street alone, two lawn signs for our Govenor have already been stolen.

[Jake]

I saw Carney signs ripped apart yesterday driving home from Scranton. Methinks it's already begun.

[Democratic Hawk]

Yes, Casey will win as long as he doesn't rest on his laurels, especially now that Santorum seems to be gaining momentum

I actually think Casey is more in tune with PA as a whole, economically and socially, which is why he'll pull it off. Santorum would see off a stock liberal without too much difficulty

Dave

[MarkWarner08]

I saw Carney signs ripped apart yesterday driving home from Scranton. Methinks it's already begun.

What do you think about the news that Carney's new tax plan:

 Cut federal income taxes for the middle class.
- A $10,000 per year tax deduction for college tuition.
- A "new baby tax credit" to help parents with the expenses of a new child.
"We need to support our hardworking families with tangible measures -- bigger tax breaks for child care and lower taxes for the middle class," said Carney. "It is time to stop giving tax breaks to millionaires and start cutting taxes for our working families who need the help most."

Could it help win over fiscally conservative voters? Seems like he's got a shot of winning if he keeps running as the "Republican who's not Don Sherwood."

[J. J.]

Yes, Casey will win as long as he doesn't rest on his laurels, especially now that Santorum seems to be gaining momentum

I actually think Casey is more in tune with PA as a whole, economically and socially, which is why he'll pull it off. Santorum would see off a stock liberal without too much difficulty

Dave

Casey has no laurels to rest on.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Santorum may not be the best campaigner since Truman, but he is an excellent campaigner.

Casey, on the other hand, main campaign is "I'm Bob Casey's son."  That won't be enough.  Santorum in a squeaker.

[Jake]

I like the two deductions. A tuition tax credit would be a step in the right direction toward government subsidization of college education. The second one is fairly good as well. I'd like to see how this is made revenue neutral though. I'm sure he'll be putting out an awful lot of money with this system, money even that a repeal of the tax break for the wealthy won't generate. That may be the sticking point with fiscal conservatives.

What would be ideal is if the Democrats could've recruited an actual social conservative to run against Sherwood. Carney still has an outside shot at winning, but that chance would go up considerably if he could cut into the conservative base.

[Wakie]

Casey, on the other hand, main campaign is "I'm Bob Casey's son."  That won't be enough.  Santorum in a squeaker.

You know what's funny?  I've never heard Casey say that.  Not once.  Only the Santorumites are saying it.  If anything Santorum's campaign message has been "vote for me, I'm an incumbant".  Casey's response has been "and what a bad incumbant you've been".

[Bdub]

I have a pretty good felling that Casey is going to win.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Casey, on the other hand, main campaign is "I'm Bob Casey's son."  That won't be enough.  Santorum in a squeaker.

Since you live in the media market, I would assume you've actually seen the ads.

http://www.bobcasey.com/feature/record/

Gee, he actually mentions his accomplishments and Santorum's crappy record.

Casey, on the other hand, main campaign is "I'm Bob Casey's son."  That won't be enough.  Santorum in a squeaker.

You know what's funny?  I've never heard Casey say that.  Not once.  Only the Santorumites are saying it.  If anything Santorum's campaign message has been "vote for me, I'm an incumbant".  Casey's response has been "and what a bad incumbant you've been".

Based on the ads of his I've watched, I'm going to have to assume you are right.