PA-SEN Dem Primary (Emerson/Hill): Fetterman leads

[wbrocks67]

I honestly don't know what to think of this b/c I've never heard of this Baumlin man who just dropped out today - or Alexandria Khalil

Fetterman 33%
Lamb 10%
Baumlin 9%
Kenyatta 8%
Khalil 3%
Undecided 37%

https://emersonpolling.reportablenews.com/pr/pennsylvania-2022-poll-republicans-are-undecided-in-senate-and-governors-races-mccormick-and-oz-tied-at-14-for-senate

[Canis]

Man Fettermans doing a good job maintaining that lead but theirs still a lot of undecideds and their definitely gonna decide this thing. id probably rate this race Lean Fetterman atm but its probably closer to a tossup then likely.

[Mr. Illini]

Hell yeah. Fetterman's gonna steamroll the primary and general.

[They not like us]

There is no chance in hell that Baumlin was going to get 9% even before he dropped out. Trash.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

As I said, never forget what the state establishment machine did to Kenyatta for the horrible crime of being a progressive.

[Arson Plus]

I presume Baumlin got 9% because his name was the first name in the poll.

[GALeftist]

The way Lamb got every PA machine pol in the known universe to endorse him and it didn't help at all

[Calthrina950]

The way Lamb got every PA machine pol in the known universe to endorse him and it didn't help at all

I've never been that impressed with Lamb. He's not going to win over Trump or rural voters with bland platitudes, given that they see establishment Democrats such as him as no different from the progressives. His underperformance in 2020, running behind Biden, makes this clear. I've said before that Democrats should nominate a candidate who is at least going to fight for their policy priorities, even if they lose because of the political environment.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Lamb is leading Oz by 3 pts and Fetterman is leading Oz by 9 pts Fetterman or Lamb can beat Oz, whom  it s going to be the Nominee not McCormick

[wbrocks67]

The way Lamb got every PA machine pol in the known universe to endorse him and it didn't help at all

I've never been that impressed with Lamb. He's not going to win over Trump or rural voters with bland platitudes, given that they see establishment Democrats such as him as no different from the progressives. His underperformance in 2020, running behind Biden, makes this clear. I've said before that Democrats should nominate a candidate who is at least going to fight for their policy priorities, even if they lose because of the political environment.

This talking point needs to be retired. It was literally like 0.4% or something.

[Calthrina950]

The way Lamb got every PA machine pol in the known universe to endorse him and it didn't help at all

I've never been that impressed with Lamb. He's not going to win over Trump or rural voters with bland platitudes, given that they see establishment Democrats such as him as no different from the progressives. His underperformance in 2020, running behind Biden, makes this clear. I've said before that Democrats should nominate a candidate who is at least going to fight for their policy priorities, even if they lose because of the political environment.

This talking point needs to be retired. It was literally like 0.4% or something.

It was still an underperformance. I'd be more inclined to believe that Lamb would be a strong candidate if he had done noticeably better than Biden. Given this year's political environment, any underperformance on his part could be potentially fatal for his campaign.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Trump was on the ballot I doubt Rs get 75 M votes like I'm 2020, we won't get 80M and it won't be 201o/14 numbers where only 82 M voters voted it's a 65/60 M Abbott is underpolling he is only ahead 42/40

Just because Rs got their numbers doemt mean we have number to contradict that

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

The way Lamb got every PA machine pol in the known universe to endorse him and it didn't help at all

I've never been that impressed with Lamb. He's not going to win over Trump or rural voters with bland platitudes, given that they see establishment Democrats such as him as no different from the progressives. His underperformance in 2020, running behind Biden, makes this clear. I've said before that Democrats should nominate a candidate who is at least going to fight for their policy priorities, even if they lose because of the political environment.

This talking point needs to be retired. It was literally like 0.4% or something.

It was still an underperformance. I'd be more inclined to believe that Lamb would be a strong candidate if he had done noticeably better than Biden. Given this year's political environment, any underperformance on his part could be potentially fatal for his campaign.

And he dramatically over-performed in tougher districts in his previous two elections.

[Calthrina950]

The way Lamb got every PA machine pol in the known universe to endorse him and it didn't help at all

I've never been that impressed with Lamb. He's not going to win over Trump or rural voters with bland platitudes, given that they see establishment Democrats such as him as no different from the progressives. His underperformance in 2020, running behind Biden, makes this clear. I've said before that Democrats should nominate a candidate who is at least going to fight for their policy priorities, even if they lose because of the political environment.

This talking point needs to be retired. It was literally like 0.4% or something.

It was still an underperformance. I'd be more inclined to believe that Lamb would be a strong candidate if he had done noticeably better than Biden. Given this year's political environment, any underperformance on his part could be potentially fatal for his campaign.

And he dramatically over-performed in tougher districts in his previous two elections.

But why couldn't Lamb repeat that in 2020? And why is it the expectation that he's going to do so this year, in this kind of political environment?

[Schiff for Senate]

Lamb is a weak, fake moderate whose schtick everybody can see through. He is uncharismatic and has few (if any!) real views. He is the Kyrsten Sinema of PA and has literally zero crossover appeal because of it (it only hurts him with the Democrats who see through his shapeshifting views on policy and his being akin to a chameleon). On the other hand, objectively, Fetterman is more liberal/progressive and he's actually got views, and charisma. I know who the better candidate is and clearly, so does PA. I like real moderates - not politicians without principles, which is the category Lamb falls into. And lastly, I think Fetterman's a much better candidate with a much better chance at victory - I could see him actually doing better in rural areas where his earnestness and progressive populism is regarded more highly than Lamb's fake moderatism and his being a lapdog of neoliberalism and corporatism. It comes to me as no surprise that Fetterman's winning big - hopefully he keeps the lead - and it annoys me that a single Democrat seriously supports Lamb over Fetterman. They are DINOs (stupid DINOs at that) who, ironically/fittingly, are close to being extinct (and are an endangered species). I detest Lamb's shapeshifting of views for political expediency so much I would probably support McCormick over him (because McCormick at least has some consistent beliefs) in the general if it came to that.

[Schiff for Senate]

The way Lamb got every PA machine pol in the known universe to endorse him and it didn't help at all

I've never been that impressed with Lamb. He's not going to win over Trump or rural voters with bland platitudes, given that they see establishment Democrats such as him as no different from the progressives. His underperformance in 2020, running behind Biden, makes this clear. I've said before that Democrats should nominate a candidate who is at least going to fight for their policy priorities, even if they lose because of the political environment.

This talking point needs to be retired. It was literally like 0.4% or something.

It was still an underperformance. I'd be more inclined to believe that Lamb would be a strong candidate if he had done noticeably better than Biden. Given this year's political environment, any underperformance on his part could be potentially fatal for his campaign.

And he dramatically over-performed in tougher districts in his previous two elections.

Lamb is a WEAK chameleon.
Fetterman is STRONG and has a record of actually winning (and, perhaps importantly, also a record of actually having views on policy that don't always change depending on which way the wind is blowing for him).

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Lamb is a weak, fake moderate whose schtick everybody can see through. He is uncharismatic and has few (if any!) real views. He is the Kyrsten Sinema of PA and has literally zero crossover appeal because of it (it only hurts him with the Democrats who see through his shapeshifting views on policy and his being akin to a chameleon). On the other hand, objectively, Fetterman is more liberal/progressive and he's actually got views, and charisma. I know who the better candidate is and clearly, so does PA. I like real moderates - not politicians without principles, which is the category Lamb falls into. And lastly, I think Fetterman's a much better candidate with a much better chance at victory - I could see him actually doing better in rural areas where his earnestness and progressive populism is regarded more highly than Lamb's fake moderatism and his being a lapdog of neoliberalism and corporatism. It comes to me as no surprise that Fetterman's winning big - hopefully he keeps the lead - and it annoys me that a single Democrat seriously supports Lamb over Fetterman. They are DINOs (stupid DINOs at that) who, ironically/fittingly, are close to being extinct (and are an endangered species). I detest Lamb's shapeshifting of views for political expediency so much I would probably support McCormick over him (because McCormick at least has some consistent beliefs) in the general if it came to that.

Silence, Republican!

The way Lamb got every PA machine pol in the known universe to endorse him and it didn't help at all

I've never been that impressed with Lamb. He's not going to win over Trump or rural voters with bland platitudes, given that they see establishment Democrats such as him as no different from the progressives. His underperformance in 2020, running behind Biden, makes this clear. I've said before that Democrats should nominate a candidate who is at least going to fight for their policy priorities, even if they lose because of the political environment.

This talking point needs to be retired. It was literally like 0.4% or something.

It was still an underperformance. I'd be more inclined to believe that Lamb would be a strong candidate if he had done noticeably better than Biden. Given this year's political environment, any underperformance on his part could be potentially fatal for his campaign.

And he dramatically over-performed in tougher districts in his previous two elections.

But why couldn't Lamb repeat that in 2020? And why is it the expectation that he's going to do so this year, in this kind of political environment?

I’m not saying he will, just that he’d be a stronger candidate than Fetterman.

[Schiff for Senate]

Lamb is a weak, fake moderate whose schtick everybody can see through. He is uncharismatic and has few (if any!) real views. He is the Kyrsten Sinema of PA and has literally zero crossover appeal because of it (it only hurts him with the Democrats who see through his shapeshifting views on policy and his being akin to a chameleon). On the other hand, objectively, Fetterman is more liberal/progressive and he's actually got views, and charisma. I know who the better candidate is and clearly, so does PA. I like real moderates - not politicians without principles, which is the category Lamb falls into. And lastly, I think Fetterman's a much better candidate with a much better chance at victory - I could see him actually doing better in rural areas where his earnestness and progressive populism is regarded more highly than Lamb's fake moderatism and his being a lapdog of neoliberalism and corporatism. It comes to me as no surprise that Fetterman's winning big - hopefully he keeps the lead - and it annoys me that a single Democrat seriously supports Lamb over Fetterman. They are DINOs (stupid DINOs at that) who, ironically/fittingly, are close to being extinct (and are an endangered species). I detest Lamb's shapeshifting of views for political expediency so much I would probably support McCormick over him (because McCormick at least has some consistent beliefs) in the general if it came to that.

Silence, Republican!

The way Lamb got every PA machine pol in the known universe to endorse him and it didn't help at all

I've never been that impressed with Lamb. He's not going to win over Trump or rural voters with bland platitudes, given that they see establishment Democrats such as him as no different from the progressives. His underperformance in 2020, running behind Biden, makes this clear. I've said before that Democrats should nominate a candidate who is at least going to fight for their policy priorities, even if they lose because of the political environment.

This talking point needs to be retired. It was literally like 0.4% or something.

It was still an underperformance. I'd be more inclined to believe that Lamb would be a strong candidate if he had done noticeably better than Biden. Given this year's political environment, any underperformance on his part could be potentially fatal for his campaign.

And he dramatically over-performed in tougher districts in his previous two elections.

But why couldn't Lamb repeat that in 2020? And why is it the expectation that he's going to do so this year, in this kind of political environment?

I’m not saying he will, just that he’d be a stronger candidate than Fetterman.

a.) I'm not a Republican. I'm an independent. "CentristRepublican" is just my initial username from the days when I was a RINO, and I still think it has a nice ring to it. I have no intention of changing it, but if you'd like to know my political affiliation, simply see my avatar.

b.) Citation that he'd be a stronger candidate than Fetterman? Fetterman actually has a solid record of winning statewide and a statewide profile. And you don't do well simply by being 'moderate' (especially not if you're very obviously not a genuine moderate and just an unprincipled career politician with views that change depending on which way the wind is blowing) - you also need to have charisma. Conor Lamb is very clearly an 'establishment' career politican and chameleon who will logically have less appeal in rurals than would the more charismatic, economically progressive, and populist Fetterman. And if you want other reasons as to why Chameleon Conor would be weaker in the general than Fetterman, just think of the attack ads by Oz/McCormick that would slam Chameleon Conor for being a chameleon with shapeshifting views and no principles (and they'd have a point). Also, the base will be a lot less excited to turn out for a guy like Lamb than they would be for Fetterman.

So...Fetterman is more liberal (and consistently liberal), is more popular with the base and can drive higher turnout, and might even do better than Chameleon Conor in the rurals. I don't understand how there can even be a question (let alone thinking Lamb is the answer to any question other than 'Which candidate is objectively worse?').

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Lamb is a weak, fake moderate whose schtick everybody can see through. He is uncharismatic and has few (if any!) real views. He is the Kyrsten Sinema of PA and has literally zero crossover appeal because of it (it only hurts him with the Democrats who see through his shapeshifting views on policy and his being akin to a chameleon). On the other hand, objectively, Fetterman is more liberal/progressive and he's actually got views, and charisma. I know who the better candidate is and clearly, so does PA. I like real moderates - not politicians without principles, which is the category Lamb falls into. And lastly, I think Fetterman's a much better candidate with a much better chance at victory - I could see him actually doing better in rural areas where his earnestness and progressive populism is regarded more highly than Lamb's fake moderatism and his being a lapdog of neoliberalism and corporatism. It comes to me as no surprise that Fetterman's winning big - hopefully he keeps the lead - and it annoys me that a single Democrat seriously supports Lamb over Fetterman. They are DINOs (stupid DINOs at that) who, ironically/fittingly, are close to being extinct (and are an endangered species). I detest Lamb's shapeshifting of views for political expediency so much I would probably support McCormick over him (because McCormick at least has some consistent beliefs) in the general if it came to that.

Silence, Republican!

The way Lamb got every PA machine pol in the known universe to endorse him and it didn't help at all

I've never been that impressed with Lamb. He's not going to win over Trump or rural voters with bland platitudes, given that they see establishment Democrats such as him as no different from the progressives. His underperformance in 2020, running behind Biden, makes this clear. I've said before that Democrats should nominate a candidate who is at least going to fight for their policy priorities, even if they lose because of the political environment.

This talking point needs to be retired. It was literally like 0.4% or something.

It was still an underperformance. I'd be more inclined to believe that Lamb would be a strong candidate if he had done noticeably better than Biden. Given this year's political environment, any underperformance on his part could be potentially fatal for his campaign.

And he dramatically over-performed in tougher districts in his previous two elections.

But why couldn't Lamb repeat that in 2020? And why is it the expectation that he's going to do so this year, in this kind of political environment?

I’m not saying he will, just that he’d be a stronger candidate than Fetterman.

a.) I'm not a Republican. I'm an independent. "CentristRepublican" is just my initial username from the days when I was a RINO, and I still think it has a nice ring to it. I have no intention of changing it, but if you'd like to know my political affiliation, simply see my avatar.

b.) Citation that he'd be a stronger candidate than Fetterman? Fetterman actually has a solid record of winning statewide and a statewide profile. And you don't do well simply by being 'moderate' (especially not if you're very obviously not a genuine moderate and just an unprincipled career politician with views that change depending on which way the wind is blowing) - you also need to have charisma. Conor Lamb is very clearly an 'establishment' career politican and chameleon who will logically have less appeal in rurals than would the more charismatic, economically progressive, and populist Fetterman. And if you want other reasons as to why Chameleon Conor would be weaker in the general than Fetterman, just think of the attack ads by Oz/McCormick that would slam Chameleon Conor for being a chameleon with shapeshifting views and no principles (and they'd have a point). Also, the base will be a lot less excited to turn out for a guy like Lamb than they would be for Fetterman.

So...Fetterman is more liberal (and consistently liberal), is more popular with the base and can drive higher turnout, and might even do better than Chameleon Conor in the rurals. I don't understand how there can even be a question (let alone thinking Lamb is the answer to any question other than 'Which candidate is objectively worse?').

a) Fair enough, although I was more referencing that you’d support McCormick (a corporatist Trumper) over Lamb (btw, comparing Lamb to Sinemanchin is objectively ridiculous; it’d be like me comparing John Fetterman to Cynthia McKinney in that it’s so wildly off base that it doesn’t even make sense).

b) Fetterman has never won a competitive GE in his own right.  He’s completely untested and even his primary win for LG was arguably a fluke.  While Lamb’s electability is definitely over-hyped, at least he has won three competitive GEs and over-performed twice on tough turf. 

c) I don’t want a moderate, I want the most progressive candidate who can win.  If Kenyatta had a chance in hell of winning the nomination or Cartwright were running, then I’d happily back either one over Lamb.  If Fetterman weren’t running such an astoundingly lazy, terminally online campaign then who knows?

d) Fetterman isn’t going to have any crossover appeal to WWC folks just because he has tattoos and LARPs at being working class.  People will see right through it and it is like Republicans who think someone like Allen West would over-perform with AAs just b/c he’s black.  The policy views are too wildly different.  I don’t see any group Fetterman would have crossover appeal to. 

e) The jogger incident could easily become a killshot once Republicans start really going after Fetterman about it. 

f) Some additional reading:

Saw an article lately praising McCormick and saying that Oz would lose the GE. WTF?
If I think of the perfect foil, the worst opponent for a progressive #populist rural democrat, it would be the owner of the world's largest hedge fund manager who made billions screwing over poor people, is wishy-washy on social issues, is a flip-flopping never-Trumper and is unapologetically pro-free trade and anti-jobs.

Oz seems to have the Fetterman problem, I don’t get the sense he’s willing to really put in the work.  I’m not saying McCormick is anything so great, he seems like a B-/C+ candidate, but the fact he’s actually spent some of his own money suggests he’s a bit more invested in seeing this through than Oz.  

Additionally, McCormick’s background is just far more palatable to the Republican establishment than Oz’s and IRC Oz has had trouble giving straight answers to county party committees on various issues during candidate interviews.

Anyway, here is how I see each of the major candidates (CQP=Candidate quality on paper; QC=Quality of campaign):

- Doug McCormick: CQP=C+; QC=B
Pros: Actually willing to spend his own money, seems to be better at this than the average first time candidate, working from the jump to appeal to multiple factions, very well connected

Cons: His corporate background can easily be used to paint him as a “screw the poor” rogue capitalist (think the Obama 2012 strategy against Romney), he’s not great at defending his background, he has told some pretty blatant lies about easily verifiable stuff, iirc he has made explicitly pro-outsourcing comments in the past, completely untested, and he can come across as an uber-establishmentarian trying to dress up as an outsider

Verdict: A generic Bush era Republican who is vulnerable to being Romneyed, but one who is also unlikely to implode or significantly underperform.

- Dr. Oz: CQP=D+; CQ=C+
Pros: Can legitimately claim to be an outsider, universal name ID, may over-perform at the margins with AA voters, can self-fund (unclear if he will), has experience performing on TV

Cons: Definitely has a temper (his aides need to manage this better b/c reporters keep getting under his skin), doesn’t seem to have realized just how much work he’d have to put in (although he does seem to be taking the campaign more seriously than I expected), by most accounts his interviews with county party committees went very poorly and he had trouble giving a clear answer on his positions Re: various issues, he’s basically chosen to make a schtick of playing a quack doctor on tv making his show a double-edged sword (any embarrassing moments or sketchy treatments he’s hawked will likely be used to paint him as a sketchy moron), ultimately the GOP establishment doesn’t seem to take him seriously (as opposed to merely not liking him), the promise forego security clearance so he can keep his Turkish citizenship is not a great look, and he is completely untested even compared to Fetterman

The Verdict: A high risk; mid-reward candidate.  I can actually see a scenario (albeit an unlikely one) where he over-performs at the margins (low-info voters, maybe with AAs at the margins) if he runs a really strong GE campaign and doesn’t turn into generic R in the primary campaign, but I can also see a more likely scenario where he completely implodes and ends up blowing the race.

Carla Sands, Jeff Bartos, and that one woman who ran in PA-4 are also running, but they won’t be the nominee and I don’t have much to say about any of them.

John Fetterman: CQP: B+, CQ: C-
Pros: Doesn’t look like a stereotypical Democrat, has good policy positions that will likely excite the base, best fundraiser on the Democratic side even though he isn’t the establishment pick, has a committed core of supporters, he’s on better terms with the state party than one might expect, and tbh he comes across as having a bit low key star power in his way.

Cons: Has run an astoundingly lazy and Twitter-esque campaign to the point where it comes off as though he thinks he is entitled to the seat and is afraid of answering non-scripted questions, the jogger incident (and more to the point, Fetterman has done an awful job addressing it thus far), completely untested, unlikely to have any real crossover appeal, probably needs to fire his campaign leadership team and rebuild it from scratch (except his fundraising team, they can stay), and the Philly Democratic establishment clearly opposes him in the primary which is going to be a major obstacle.

Verdict: High Risk; Low Reward but that could change.  Fetterman could have been a great candidate and there is still time to right the ship, but the window is closing.  He has run a remarkably lazy campaign and while it is good that he doesn’t look like a stereotypical Democrat, LARPing a working class voter isn’t enough to over-perform with that group and idk that he understands this.  Unless, Fetterman’s campaign really turns things around, I’m not sure he can win the GE, period.  Of course, I’ve been wrong before and Raphael Warnock is proof that sometimes folks who start off running a horrible campaign do course correct enough to end up shifting to an excellent campaign.  It’s just not the way to bet

Conor Lamb: CQP: A; CQ: B+/B
Pros: Battle-tested with several impressive over-performances under his belt, has run a solid enough campaign, would likely be harder to effectively caricature into some sort of far left boogeyman yet would also be a reliable vote in the Senate (I imagine he’d be a bit like Mark Kelly: makes some moderate noises every once in a while, but is always there whenever we need him), very well-connected, may over-perform in the Pittsburgh area (at worst he would stop any bleeding there), the fact that he won over the Philly machine so quickly despite being a Pittsburgh candidate is genuinely impressive

Cons: Didn’t over-perform in 2020 despite facing his weakest opponent thus far, is viewed (fairly or unfairly) with suspicion by the Berniecrats and will need to work hard to win them over, is not all that well-suited to go after McCormick’s vulnerabilities*, and while Lamb’s campaign has been fine (and certainly light years ahead of Fetterman’s), I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t a bit underwhelmed (again, it’s fine, but I expected better and it feels very Generic D)

The verdict: All the pieces are there on paper and I think he’s the most electable Democratic candidate in the race, but he definitely needs to sharpen his message.  Generic D isn’t gonna cut it this year and unlike some candidates, Lamb (and Fetterman, for that matter) should be able to present himself as something beyond just Generic D.  I worry that if he waits until after the primary, it’ll be too late.

Malcolm Kenyatta: CQP=C; CQ=B+
Pros: Has worked his a** off on the campaign trail, young and charismatic AA who can appeal to both Berniecrats and the establishment faction, could definitely over-perform with multiple parts of the base (as opposed to just Berniecrats)

Cons: Just can’t seem to get his foot in the door, probably doesn’t have a path to victory in the primary at this point.  

Verdict: For whatever reason, he just hasn’t taken off at all.  Little establishment support, weak fundraising, poor polling numbers IIRC.  He seems to be doing everything right, but I guess it just wasn’t his year.  Hopefully, we haven’t heard the last of him.

*My biggest concern about Lamb is that he might not go after McCormick’s pro-outsourcing, hedge fund manager/corporate shill background or might just half-a** it when that’s by far our best line of attack.  I’m not saying this will happen, but I do worry about the possibility.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

It's still a 3o3 map Biden is at 45/50 Approvals the Approvals showing him at 40/50 are HOGWASH that's very close to 50/45 he won by with Turnout it's not gonna be 100 seat net gain for Rs and 54R seats it's likely a 52(48 Senate with. A GA runoff us taking WI and PA and maybe LA and 8 seat loss in the H there are gonna be so many outstanding races in Gov and Senate and H races just like last time did to Provisional ballots