Pennsylvania 2010 - The Official Thread

[TeePee4Prez]

Here's my prediction for the Senate race for PA. Feel free to tear it down.

1. I think the card check vote will never get the 60 votes it needs to come to the floor. the Democrats said they would not call it to a vote unless they had the 60 votes. So Specter may dodge that one.

2. He will not switch parties. The more I read about this race and the more I learn about Arlen, I believe he will go into the primary as a Republican.

3. Luksik entering the race may fracture the conservative vote somewhat so it will not be uniformly behind Toomey.

4. Specter will have to go on a huge voter signup, switching a lot of those moderate Republicans who registered as Democrats for the 2008 primary back over. Otherwise, he's toast, and hopefully he realizes that (I've read his staff has acknowledged that).

5. I can't predict the result of the primary. I do think Phil may be short sighting PA's electorate between now and 2010. He is quick to remind us that the environment may change for the general, but it could also change for the primary too. I still think Toomey wins this thing, but it may not be as big a blowout as it appears to be heading for right now. If the Specter team can switch a good chunk of voters back over, he could have a fighting chance if the conservative vote is split, even, say 10% to Luksik.


Again, I'm not an expert on PA politics, and I am still reading a lot about Specter and this impending primary, but I think it's safe to say Specter will probably not leave the GOP. I haven't read anything pointing in that direction other than pundits saying he would have a much easier time winning reelection. I think Specter has a big enough ego that he could not back down from Toomey and would go on to face him in the primary even if it looks like he'll get his clock cleaned. The forces behind Toomey may be too much, as it appears as if the establishment may be lining up behind him, but we shall see. Things can change, and probably will before 2010. I'm still struggling myself to see who I want to win this thing. I'm not happy with Specter anymore, but I also don't think Toomey can win in the general in a left leaning state like PA, unless, of course, the GOP has a strong headwind in 2010. It's a choice of whether I want someone who will vote with the GOP 60-70% of the time or 20% of the time in a Democrat.

I don't think there will be much "switching back" of former GOPers.  Those voters have finally come home.  Mind you, those voters have views very similar to yours, but many feel the GOP has abandoned them and it is likely Toomey will win the primary. 

[Keystone Phil]

2. He will not switch parties. The more I read about this race and the more I learn about Arlen, I believe he will go into the primary as a Republican.

That makes...one of you. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If she was in a one on one with Specter, she'd be a contender. She won't have the money or big names behind her. If this was 2004 all over again, Toomey would lose comfortably. Toomey starts off with such an advantage that Luksik's candidacy probably won't mean much of anything. It doesn't help but it's not a disaster.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Like Flyers said, that's not happening. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No. Lunar brought this up before, too, and here's why it is a terrible comparison:

Specter is a known enemy to conservatives here. He's never been their guy. This isn't like the Presidency. There aren't huge events that can make up for Specter's antics and overall ideology. He'd need a near total makeover for the environment to change.

He doesn't have the big guns backing him. He doesn't have Dems switching back to the GOP is huge numbers. He has big votes hanging around his neck. He has a very strong challenger that almost knocked him off in 2004 even though Specter had a lot of advantages then, too.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He's not getting a big chunk back and it still wouldn't be enough. Take a look at the map I posted. See those insanely Pro Specter areas in the most conservative areas of the state? I'll give you two reasons and two reasons only for that: Bush and Santorum. Without them, Specter gets blown out. Sure, there aren't many votes in each county but have them each do a 180 turn and then add them up.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sorry but you're in no position to say that it's safe. People here can't even say what is a safe bet.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course his ego is a factor. Why would he choose a race that he's very likely to lose instead of a race where he'd win the nomination and then go on to beat him in the General? That way he goes two for two.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This isn't the Presidency, a Senate General election or even your basic primary. There are many reasons why Specter can't just bank on things "changing." It's thirty years in the making.

[TeePee4Prez]

Say Phil, great signature!  Question, which Senator would bother you the least: Schwartz, Torsella, Shapiro, or Matthews?

Off topic- Temple v. Xavier was a great game last night.  Duquesne also beat Dayton which is was stunned at.  I wouldn't take Duquesne too lightly.  Least St. Joe's is out!

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

2. He will not switch parties. The more I read about this race and the more I learn about Arlen, I believe he will go into the primary as a Republican.

That makes...one of you. 

There is still talk of him switching? I can't find anything on that except pundits saying he should switch if he wants to win reelection.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If she was in a one on one with Specter, she'd be a contender. She won't have the money or big names behind her. If this was 2004 all over again, Toomey would lose comfortably. Toomey starts off with such an advantage that Luksik's candidacy probably won't mean much of anything. It doesn't help but it's not a disaster.
[/quote]

I realize she won't be a huge factor, but she does fragment the support a bit that Toomey would otherwise have. Isn't she a single issue, pro-life candidate?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Like Flyers said, that's not happening.  [/quote]

So no chance people switch back over to vote in the primary to save him? What is Specter's approval rating in PA?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No. Lunar brought this up before, too, and here's why it is a terrible comparison:

Specter is a known enemy to conservatives here. He's never been their guy. This isn't like the Presidency. There aren't huge events that can make up for Specter's antics and overall ideology. He'd need a near total makeover for the environment to change.

He doesn't have the big guns backing him. He doesn't have Dems switching back to the GOP is huge numbers. He has big votes hanging around his neck. He has a very strong challenger that almost knocked him off in 2004 even though Specter had a lot of advantages then, too.[/quote]

I fully understand Specter has never been conservatives love. When I say environment, I mean that some of these GOP voters that switched to the Dems for the 08 primary may come back. I realize conservatives will never happily vote for Specter no matter what the environment is.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He's not getting a big chunk back and it still wouldn't be enough. Take a look at the map I posted. See those insanely Pro Specter areas in the most conservative areas of the state? I'll give you two reasons and two reasons only for that: Bush and Santorum. Without them, Specter gets blown out. Sure, there aren't many votes in each county but have them each do a 180 turn and then add them up. [/quote]

He probably won't, but it isn't completely out of the question. I guess if those Specter voters are just as content with a Democrat in there as they are with Arlen, then you're probably right. You know more about the PA electorate than I do.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sorry but you're in no position to say that it's safe. People here can't even say what is a safe bet.[/quote]

Alright. We'll see. I'd wager he stays in the GOP.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course his ego is a factor. Why would he choose a race that he's very likely to lose instead of a race where he'd win the nomination and then go on to beat him in the General? That way he goes two for two.[/quote]

Which is why I see him remaining a Republican. If he switches, he would look like he gave in to a challenge.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This isn't the Presidency, a Senate General election or even your basic primary. There are many reasons why Specter can't just bank on things "changing." It's thirty years in the making.


[/quote]

[Marokai Backbeat]

Say Phil, great signature! 

Yet he accuses others of having the obsessions..

[Keystone Phil]

Say Phil, great signature!  Question, which Senator would bother you the least: Schwartz, Torsella, Shapiro, or Matthews?

Torsella, by far.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Haha, I shouldn't say this but I didn't watch. 

There is still talk of him switching? I can't find anything on that except pundits saying he should switch if he wants to win reelection.

Look a little harder and, not to sound cocky but, my sources are a little better than your's. 

I'm not saying it is a definite but it's being very seriously considered.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, she's mainly a single issue candidate which is even more reason to believe that the powers that be (the donors, conservative big shots, etc.) will marginalize her.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I never said "no chance people switch back." Of course some will but not nearly enough.

His approval rating is somewhere in the mid 50s.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's not an "environment."

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, it is completely out of the question. Dude, Arlen Specter isn't encouraging thousands of people to switch back. He's not another Obama. He's not in a major race that would compell people to switch.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I hope you're right.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uh...and then, in his mind, he thinks he'll utterly destroy Toomey in the General so he "backed down" only to beat him when it matters. Your scenario makes no sense.

Say Phil, great signature! 

Yet he accuses others of having the obsessions..

I don't see how that's an obsession but mine if it is, it's in no way as trollish/obsessive as your behavior. That's why you keep making your signature something about Santorum or the Catholic Church and provide a link that only further proves your obsession.

Don't bring your trash in here though. Thanks.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I have no interest in getting into another round with you and listening to everything you have to throw at me, Phil. I was simply remarking on the amusing fact that you accuse others of obsessive behavior while obsessing over a politician for years now.

[Keystone Phil]

I have no interest in getting into another round with you and listening to everything you have to throw at me, Phil. I was simply remarking on the amusing fact that you accuse others of obsessive behavior while obsessing over a politician for years now.

Again, I'm really not obsessive but even if I am, it is in a healthy, political context.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

That brings me to another question: do the Democrats even want Specter? Why would they want a long time Republican in their caucus when they could just nominate an electable lifelong Democrat?

[Keystone Phil]

That brings me to another question: do the Democrats even want Specter? Why would they want a long time Republican in their caucus when they could just nominate an electable lifelong Democrat?

Because Specter is a strong force in a General and they know that their chances with someone like him are a lot better than with someone like Schwartz. Specter brings the name recognition (even though a lot of it isn't positive anymore) and the one advantage that everyone wants - money.

Specter has been a registered Republican for forty years but you guys are being purposely blind if you're only seeing him as a "long time Republican." The Dems have worked a lot with Specter and he's been with them when they really need him a lot of the time. His endorsements/support from traditionally left wing groups even in General elections prove this. Plus, please realize that Specter was a Democrat before jumping ship to get the GOP nomination for DA here in Philly in 1969. That was his chance at a political future in PA (and especially in Philly when the Dems were all split up). Hmmmm...sounds awfully familiar...

[Smash255]

That brings me to another question: do the Democrats even want Specter? Why would they want a long time Republican in their caucus when they could just nominate an electable lifelong Democrat?

Because Specter is a strong force in a General and they know that their chances with someone like him are a lot better than with someone like Schwartz. Specter brings the name recognition (even though a lot of it isn't positive anymore) and the one advantage that everyone wants - money.

Specter has been a registered Republican for forty years but you guys are being purposely blind if you're only seeing him as a "long time Republican." The Dems have worked a lot with Specter and he's been with them when they really need him a lot of the time. His endorsements/support from traditionally left wing groups even in General elections prove this. Plus, please realize that Specter was a Democrat before jumping ship to get the GOP nomination for DA here in Philly in 1969. That was his chance at a political future in PA (and especially in Philly when the Dems were all split up). Hmmmm...sounds awfully familiar...

If the Dems chances of defeating Toomey weren't that good then it might be something they would be more likely to do, but due to the Dems having a strong batch of possible challengers and having a very good chance to beat Toomey on their own, it limits the chance of them going hard to recruit Specter to jump ship.

[Lunar]

That brings me to another question: do the Democrats even want Specter?

Kos and the Unions are already behind him if he votes the critical #60 on EFCA

[Torie]

Some will come back as Pubbies in PA for Specter (I know a couple personally who switched registration to vote for Obama in the primary, including the founder of the Vanguard Funds, John Bogle), but others were really Dems all along, and registered GOP because the Dems were not in the hunt for local races. Those days in the Philly burbs are now gone, and thus the rationale for an ersatz registration ala Sam Spade registering as a Dem in Brooklyn, are now gone.

If Toomey is elected senator, that is bad news, because it means our economy in 2010 will still be in the tank. Other than that, I would be utterly amazed if he managed to get elected.

[Ronnie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Usually you are coherent, Torie.  This time, you are not.

[Keystone Phil]

That brings me to another question: do the Democrats even want Specter?

Kos and the Unions are already behind him if he votes the critical #60 on EFCA

The unions are always with him.

If Toomey is elected senator, that is bad news, because it means our economy in 2010 will still be in the tank. Other than that, I would be utterly amazed if he managed to get elected.

The guy has won by comfortable margins in a district well regarded as a swing district. He always scared off top tier challengers. This guy is not some nutcase extremist, people. You're really underestimating him. Eh, what do I care? I'll get the typical, "That's what you said about Santorum and Brown! LOL" response and we'll all just have to wait until November 2010.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Usually you are coherent, Torie.  This time, you are not.

Why? If the economy turns around, then it will likely be another Dem tilted year or neutral at best. If it is that type of environment, Toomey will not win. He needs a Republican environment to win this race in a state like Pennsylvania with his views.

[Keystone Phil]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Usually you are coherent, Torie.  This time, you are not.

Why? If the economy turns around, then it will likely be another Dem tilted year or neutral at best. If it is that type of environment, Toomey will not win. He needs a Republican environment to win this race in a state like Pennsylvania with his views.

If the economy turns around and things are "normal," there's also the chance that it will be your typical midterm - a slightly good year for the party out of power.

[Ronnie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Usually you are coherent, Torie.  This time, you are not.

Why? If the economy turns around, then it will likely be another Dem tilted year or neutral at best. If it is that type of environment, Toomey will not win. He needs a Republican environment to win this race in a state like Pennsylvania with his views.

Ok, I understand now.

[Smash255]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Usually you are coherent, Torie.  This time, you are not.

Why? If the economy turns around, then it will likely be another Dem tilted year or neutral at best. If it is that type of environment, Toomey will not win. He needs a Republican environment to win this race in a state like Pennsylvania with his views.

If the economy turns around and things are "normal," there's also the chance that it will be your typical midterm - a slightly good year for the party out of power.

Even if that was the case it wouldn't be enough to get Toomey elected, he needs a disaster.

[Keystone Phil]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Usually you are coherent, Torie.  This time, you are not.

Why? If the economy turns around, then it will likely be another Dem tilted year or neutral at best. If it is that type of environment, Toomey will not win. He needs a Republican environment to win this race in a state like Pennsylvania with his views.

If the economy turns around and things are "normal," there's also the chance that it will be your typical midterm - a slightly good year for the party out of power.

Even if that was the case it wouldn't be enough to get Toomey elected, he needs a disaster.

Smash, your parrot routine is getting beyond irritating now. We know that your only comment on this race is "If Toomey is the nominee, he can't win." We got it. Enough.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Usually you are coherent, Torie.  This time, you are not.

Why? If the economy turns around, then it will likely be another Dem tilted year or neutral at best. If it is that type of environment, Toomey will not win. He needs a Republican environment to win this race in a state like Pennsylvania with his views.

If the economy turns around and things are "normal," there's also the chance that it will be your typical midterm - a slightly good year for the party out of power.

I'd normally agree, but if things turn around, the media will claim Obama waived his magic wand and fixed our nation. If the DOW rebounds to 10,000 or more and unemployment begins to decline, I can assure you our party will not have a favorable year in 2010.

The sad thing is that the media and the Democrats created the feeling among the masses that we were teetering on the brink of a depression before Obama took office.

It is almost like 9/11 in the sense that if Obama steers clear of this 'crisis' as Bush led us through 9/11, his party could pickup seats again in 2010.

I'm in no way saying it's a guarantee, as no one can predict the future, but recent developments in the economy have me thinking that we will turn the corner at the end of the year. If we do, and 2010 we begin to see economic growth, the Democrats will be seen as the ones who fixed it (although it has fixed itself before the stimulus has had any effect). This will mean more gains, not like 2006 or 2008, but modest ones for the Democrats. That would not bode well for Mr. Toomey if he's facing a credible Democrat who can say "my opponent would've voted against the stimulus that saved our economy." In fact, it will hurt the GOP everywhere. The American people will believe Obama fixed the economy like they believe the New Deal got us out of the depression. Sad times.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I find it amusing how you're one of the least Republican Republicans on this site but you talk like you're a slightly more intelligent Sean Hannity.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I find it amusing how you're one of the least Republican Republicans on this site but you talk like you're a slightly more intelligent Sean Hannity.

How so?

[Marokai Backbeat]

I find it amusing how you're one of the least Republican Republicans on this site but you talk like you're a slightly more intelligent Sean Hannity.

How so?

You're not really a Conservative Republican or a hysterical Neoconservative. You're pretty moderate and honestly could pass as a Democrat, yet you act fairly partisan. "The media" praising "Obama's magic wand" is a fairly partisan Republican statement in my opinion, not to mention engaging in neoconservative-esque nonsense that the New Deal was a failure, the stimulus is worthless, etc. You score and seem so moderate and yet you talk like Boehner.

Not that I'm insulting you, I'm just surprised that you use such Rovian terms for things.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I find it amusing how you're one of the least Republican Republicans on this site but you talk like you're a slightly more intelligent Sean Hannity.

How so?

You're not really a Conservative Republican or a hysterical Neoconservative. You're pretty moderate and honestly could pass as a Democrat, yet you act fairly partisan. "The media" praising "Obama's magic wand" is a fairly partisan Republican statement in my opinion, not to mention engaging in neoconservative-esque nonsense that the New Deal was a failure, the stimulus is worthless, etc. You score and seem so moderate and yet you talk like Boehner.

Not that I'm insulting you, I'm just surprised that you use such Rovian terms for things.

I'm a moderate and I've criticized my party a lot, but I do have a partisan streak. That's no secret. Democrats just make me angrier because I disagree with them more so on economics, and those are the only issues I care about. I'm not a fan of a lot of the Democrats, but I am also not a fan of a lot of Republicans. I've also voted for a few Democrats in my life, and I've said if the economy turns around, I'll probably vote for Obama in 2012.

That said, I am just being honest. The media has been very favorable to Obama, and if the economy turns around, he will get credit for it, as will the Democratic Party. I don't believe his stimulus has had any chance to work yet, and all the good news of banks turning recently certainly hasn't been the work of the Obama administration.

I'm also being honest with Phil. If the economy turns around, he and the Democrats will get the credit and it will be another favorable year for them. The chances a conservative Republican such as Mr. Toomey wins a state like Pennsylvania in that kind of environment is extremely small.