« Coleman: Whoever Wins Senate Race Will Have 'A Cloud Hanging Over Them' | Home | Reid: 'Specter And I Have Had A Long Dialogue' About Party Switch »
Arlen Specter Switches Parties
Arlen Specter has announced that he is switching parties, and running for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary. This now puts the Democrats at 59 Senate seats -- and would be the magic 60 seats, assuming Al Franken is eventually seated from Minnesota.
A recent Rasmussen poll showed that Specter was trailing his conservative challenger in the Republican primary, 2004 opponent Pat Toomey, by a margin of 51%-30%. Toomey was heavily capitalizing on Specter's support for the stimulus package.
From his statement:
When I supported the stimulus package, I knew that it would not be popular with the Republican Party. But, I saw the stimulus as necessary to lessen the risk of a far more serious recession than we are now experiencing.
Since then, I have traveled the State, talked to Republican leaders and office-holders and my supporters and I have carefully examined public opinion. It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable. On this state of the record, I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.
I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary.
...
My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans. Unlike Senator Jeffords' switch which changed party control, I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture. For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change.
Kudos to Michael Crowley, by the way, for apparently getting this first.
Full Specter statement after the jump.
Late Update: I run through some of the math here, showing why Specter simply had to do it in order to survive politically.
April 28, 2009
Statement by Senator Arlen Specter
I have been a Republican since 1966. I have been working extremely hard for the Party, for its candidates and for the ideals of a Republican Party whose tent is big enough to welcome diverse points of view. While I have been comfortable being a Republican, my Party has not defined who I am. I have taken each issue one at a time and have exercised independent judgment to do what I thought was best for Pennsylvania and the nation.
Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans.
When I supported the stimulus package, I knew that it would not be popular with the Republican Party. But, I saw the stimulus as necessary to lessen the risk of a far more serious recession than we are now experiencing.
Since then, I have traveled the State, talked to Republican leaders and office-holders and my supporters and I have carefully examined public opinion. It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable. On this state of the record, I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.
I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary.
I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for re-election determined in a general election.
I deeply regret that I will be disappointing many friends and supporters. I can understand their disappointment. I am also disappointed that so many in the Party I have worked for for more than four decades do not want me to be their candidate. It is very painful on both sides. I thank specially Senators McConnell and Cornyn for their forbearance.
I am not making this decision because there are no important and interesting opportunities outside the Senate. I take on this complicated run for re-election because I am deeply concerned about the future of our country and I believe I have a significant contribution to make on many of the key issues of the day, especially medical research. NIH funding has saved or lengthened thousands of lives, including mine, and much more needs to be done. And my seniority is very important to continue to bring important projects vital to Pennsylvania's economy.
I am taking this action now because there are fewer than thirteen months to the 2010 Pennsylvania Primary and there is much to be done in preparation for that election. Upon request, I will return campaign contributions contributed during this cycle.
While each member of the Senate caucuses with his Party, what each of us hopes to accomplish is distinct from his party affiliation. The American people do not care which Party solves the problems confronting our nation. And no Senator, no matter how loyal he is to his Party, should or would put party loyalty above his duty to the state and nation.
My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans. Unlike Senator Jeffords' switch which changed party control, I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture. For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change.
Whatever my party affiliation, I will continue to be guided by President Kennedy's statement that sometimes Party asks too much. When it does, I will continue my independent voting and follow my conscience on what I think is best for Pennsylvania and America.
Advertisement
Josh
Matt
Eric
Hmmm. I like the theoretical 60 but mechanically does it really make much difference if he's a "friendly" rethuglican or a blue-dick^H^H^H^Hdog Dem?
April 28, 2009 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, it doesn't make one bit of difference in reality. And, in fact, will make it much easier for the media to proclaim about "Dems in disarray!!!!!"
I don't see this as big big BIG at all.
April 28, 2009 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Big difference between a moderate Democrat in the Senate versus a "friendly" Republican who is defeated in his primary by a knuckle-dragging rightwing Republican.
April 28, 2009 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have mixed feelings. He could be somewhat useful in the short run but in the long run this kills what looked like a great chance for a REAL Dem to pick up this seat in 2010. On balance I wish he'd stayed on his suicidal collision course with Toomey.
April 28, 2009 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Real Dem my ass. Best case scenario, another Bob Casey (not a bad thing by any means, but I know your standards of 'real Dem' conflict somewhat with that outcome- no offense intended of course)
April 28, 2009 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agree with holyhandgrenade. To feel ambivalent about Specter's switch requires an unrealistic optimism about the alternatives.
Three delusions:
1) That Specter would let himself be defeated in a Republican primary by a Rt Winger. Not Specter. Look at the way he's battling cancer. There's one thing Specter certainly is: tenacious.
2) That a left leaning Democrat could win in PA. No way. To be viable the Democrat would have to be a centrist Blue Dog.
3) That the Democrat would be a shoo-in. Wrong. If the Dem didn't have a good campaign or there was a scandal or such, it's entirely possible PA would opt for the hyper conservative Toomey. A real disaster.
April 28, 2009 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
To clarify (1)
I'm not disputing that Specter would lose the GOP Primary. I think it was always pretty likely he would switch, being moderate on a number of issues already, and given his tenaciousness and PA demographics.
April 28, 2009 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
But I doubt that knuckle-dragging troglodyte would have won election in the general.
And the Dems may have had a real Dem, rather than a DINO.
On the other hand, we probably won't have to hear Arlen "agonize" publicly over decisions, only to side with the Republicans at the end. . .
Don't get me wrong: I'm pleased he's doing this. I just don't see it as a big, earth-shaking change.
Unless the Dem leadership got a promise from Arlen to not vote against cloture. That would be big.
April 28, 2009 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yea i see it as now Specter needs to suck up the Democratic party to try to win his primary instead of sucking up to the Republican party. Which can make quite a difference.
April 28, 2009 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed! This means there will be some tactical votes that are made easier because Specter now owes the Democrats for accepting him, but on the most important key issues he will continue to be the runreliable rat he has always been. They should have refused to accept him unless he changed on EFCA.
April 28, 2009 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lets not forget Commitee assignments/ seniority on those commitees. Dems could easily say Spector starts from zero regarding seniority as he is the newest Dem in the caucus. Dems can hold a lot more over Spector than they could yesterday, and Spector can't hold too much over the Dems as it would be temporary with a primary on the horizion.
April 28, 2009 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wooo hooooooo!!!!
April 28, 2009 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
NO. NO. NO. NO. NO-O-O--ooooo!!!!!!
Not another fucking BLUE DOG! NO!!!!
Throw some ice water on it, kids. What the FUCK is the use of having a "majority"... make me laugh... if a goodly percentage of them refuse to vote with the Party's soul, and then force you to adhere to the ideologies of the opposing party (which: [a] failed; [b] are nowadays nothing but crass political obstructionism)???
You will thumb your nose and dismiss me, some of you anyway, but in the immortal words of Ed Koch: "The People have spoken. And now, the People must be punished."
(Granted, the "People" had nothing to do with this... but you have not yet learned the meaning of "frustration". You will.)
p.s... Opportunistic prick.
p.p.s... And fuck the Magic Bullet, too.
April 28, 2009 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Double fuck the magic bullet.
Still letting "Specter the Dem" ... sink in. Wow.
April 28, 2009 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed, but Spector knows that the Dems can still put up a challenger in the Dem primary(in Blue PA, where dems can prevail with a half-decent recruit) if Spector is too far out of line in the very important mean time.
April 28, 2009 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just heard on MSNBC that the Dems will not look for another Dem to challenge him, however, this doesn't stop another Dem from running if they choose.
April 28, 2009 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
It also doesn't mean that Dem's can't change their mind. I sure that is why the change happened this far out from 2010; to prove himself a proper (or acceptable) Dem for 2010. PA voters know what they want. They Want a Dem in the senate seat but like Spector's seniority.
April 28, 2009 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really dislike reading whiny posts like that. Why do people like you have such difficulty understanding how politics work?
There's basically three factors determining who fills Specter's seat and the effect that person has on national politics.
1) PA voter's political leanings. Which are basically that of Blue Dog Dems or Reps like Specter. If you don't like it, go to PA and start convincing people otherwise. But please stop whining.
2) Personality. That includes likability, loyalty, and familiarity. And while you and I may not be crazy for him, PA knows him well for 3 decades.
3) Party affiliation. When a pol is undecided they often opt for party affiliation loyalty in order to receive support for their own legislation down the road.
So all this whining from you about the "aprty soul" is just idiotic. There is no "party soul" and never has been. Politics is the art of compromise, and has been for millennium. Purists like you have always existed, and always been clueless and ineffectual.
April 28, 2009 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am laughin', laughin', laughin'!!!!! :) :) :)
April 28, 2009 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
WOW.
Not an automatic 60th vote, but probably more secure than some of the bluedogs, Lincoln, Byrd, et al.
Welcome Arlen.
Too bad Chris Matthews hadn't announced he was running for the seat, he'd be speechless this morning.
April 28, 2009 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Matthews speechless? That would merit an even bigger headline than this story.
April 28, 2009 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I saw this at the Daily Beast! My jaw dropped - I know this guy wants to get re-elected, but damn!
Then again, he'll probably just join the Blue Dog Democrats.
April 28, 2009 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Eh, I hope we can find a primary challenger. We can do better than this DINO.
April 28, 2009 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course, this gives even more incentive for Norm Coleman and the GOP to delay Franken's seating as long as they possibly can.
April 28, 2009 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
That was my first thought too. Coleman will apeal to the Supreme Court just in time for them(alito and Co) to say "Yes, we will consider this appeal when we are back in sesion in OCTOBER." Thus leaving Dems at 59 for months.
April 28, 2009 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
The republicans are increasingly becoming an irrelevant and obsolete party. Spector is not a guaranteed 60th vote, but his switch welcoming news for the President's agenda.
April 28, 2009 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seems like an attempt at political self-preservation to me.
April 28, 2009 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
With that interest in mind, I expect Cloture votes as mostly a given if he wants to hold seniority on commitees. (EFCA aside, he's been too far out on that one, I'm sure Dems see that as a failing item in the short term anyway, so no big change there)
April 28, 2009 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
This has got to be demoralizing for the already demoralized GOP.
Rats from a sinking ship.
April 28, 2009 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, that's the one upside... that and Al Franken gets to be the 60th Dem. Suck it down, Normy.
April 28, 2009 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yea, Republicans surely are in the proverbial "disarray." They really blew this. The smart thing to do would have been to keep Specter by promising him support and quashing challengers. As it was, the True Believers pandered to the base, and everyone else is just terrified of the base while hemorrhaging moderates. The GOP is heading into a death spiral. At least for a while.
April 28, 2009 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is this news big or BIG?
April 28, 2009 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks Specter.
He was a co-sponsor of EFCA when it had no chance of becoming law. Now that it has a fighting chance, he's switching.
Now he's switching to Dems and STILL won't cut labor a break.
These guys in their seventies need to realize that they have a few precious years left when they don't have to be yes men anymore
The same thing just kills me about Mccain defending the GOP pro-torture position - it's like Jesus Mccain, at your age you can be a free man.
April 28, 2009 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think he's in his 80s.
April 28, 2009 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Almost. 79.
April 28, 2009 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
He has said he would favor modification to the NLRA that somehow accomplish labor's ends without (a) card check for 50% + 1 creating an automatic bargaining unit & (b) binding arbitration to follow every abortive bad-faith negotiation within 90-120 days so that the employer can't just dangle those who put their faith in collective bargaining over the course of years.
How one does that, I don't know, but presumably the Democrats will exact some kind of toll for their support of him in the 2010 election. Maybe it will include EFCA, and maybe it won't.
April 28, 2009 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think this deserves the TPM wave, with a nod to our beloved Idiotic.
THIS
April 28, 2009 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
IS
April 28, 2009 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
GREAT
April 28, 2009 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
PIZZA!!
April 28, 2009 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
:(
April 28, 2009 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
IS
April 28, 2009 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
EXCELLENT
April 28, 2009 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
NEWZ
April 28, 2009 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
NEWS!!
April 28, 2009 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
FOR
April 28, 2009 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
HILLARY!!!
April 28, 2009 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
REPUBS!!!!!!
April 28, 2009 12:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
MITCH MCCONNELL!!!
April 28, 2009 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
MICHAEL STEELE!!
April 28, 2009 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Political Pundits!
April 28, 2009 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a shameless attempt to stay in power, no different than Lieberman's running as an Indy.
It is pretty stunning though how far the GOP has fallen. Losing Specter eliminates one of their last remaining "moderates".
April 28, 2009 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
This does appear to mean sixty. Blue Dogs such as Nelson may vote against the party in the final vote but rarely so, if ever, against cloture.
April 28, 2009 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thats all Spector has to be is a "Cloture Dem" he can vote against Dem proposals every time if his beliefs require it. Just help us to get to the Up/Down vote, otherwise vote as you see fit.
April 28, 2009 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ya know, jonny, it's a sad day when scenarios like yours are the only thing we have to cling to, in the face of certain disaster.
Excuse me if I'm repeating myself: PRIMARY THE FUCKER.
April 28, 2009 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not totally against you Re: the Primary, in fact that possibility may force him to vote closer to the way we'd like. Fine, Primary the F**ker as you(eloquently) put it, but lets use him for what he's worth now, because there is time for accomplishment in the mean time.
Beside's we put up w/ Nelson from Nebraska to have his cloture vote when we need it. I'd say that Spector would need to watch his A** more in Blue PA.
I too despise the fact he sheparded Alito and Roberts through confirmation, but it was up to Dems to stop their confirmation not Spector.
April 28, 2009 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
FYI, that's as "eloquent" as this fucker deserves.
He gave us a bogus fairy tale that a retarded 5 year-old wouldn't buy, about the murder of your President... which informed the psyche of an entire generation, and set the culture on a course of permanent distrust of government. But YOU go ahead and get all girly about my language...
I reiterate: there is no goddamned value in having 60 "Democratic" senators, when you don't have 60 goddamned Democratic votes. What part of this is mystifying?
And do you really think that every Blue Dog vote for cloture (assuming they all will do so, every time... BIG assumption!) doesn't come with an unacceptable price tag, that we never hear about, but can only surmise, down the road, when the Democratic Party does something inexplicably Republican?
(I think I'm getting a T-shirt made "PURITY TROLL AND PROUD OF IT!")
April 28, 2009 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
First, I meant eloquent to be "tongue-in-cheek. When speaking aloud I could make a trucker blush, but choose to be less confrontational in commentary, that just a personal choice. Unfortuanatly, sarcasm doesn't always convey in text.
Also, we are mostly in agreement. If reality plays out as you suggest, myself as well as Blue PA will ensure a proper primary challenger is sent up and backed as needed.
As far as the party disipline question. '60 dems not always equal to 60 votes'. It is a fair assesment and even if we gained Spector's seat with a solid Liberal Dem, this is still an issue w/ our Arkansas, Nebraska and Alaskan seats we hold. Would you really prefer the product of republican primaries in those states vs. the admittidly frustrating Dems we have currently? Would we really have prefered Leiberman to caucus with the GOP in 2006, or worse a Rebublican winning in Conn. in '06?
Let us agree to allow time for Spector to prove you (or myself) wrong and worry about the 2010 primary when filing deadlines approach. If he proves to be too far in DINO territory, this probelem will take care of itself.
Good luck to us all in the meantime....
April 28, 2009 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yuck. Unless the Dems are deal-making in the backroom, this is a bad move. I mean Specter seems to be talking like he'll vote the same way he always has, meaning the Dems are trading a solid Dem in 2010 (defeating Toomey) for a centrist vote.
I guess Specter was feeling too much pressure to vote with the party on all issues, while this will free him up to vote whichever way he really feels.
If there isn't some dealmaking this is a bad deal for the Dems.
I have to assume the "deal" would be an automatic cloture vote. You can vote whichever way you want, but you have to vote cloture.
April 28, 2009 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
The nice thing about an "undisciplined" party like the Dems, is that when the imprimatur is bestowed upon Specter in the primary, a "rogue" Dem won't mind running against him, anyway.
Primary the fucker. Send your bucks to anything with a pulse and a temperature who will run against him. Stick your thumbs in your ears when the party brahmins come on the teevee and cluck their tongues over the nerve of him/her (think Lieberman).
If it ends up helping elect another R, chances are more Dems will be entering the Senate anyway, so I'll live with it.
April 28, 2009 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Specter is getting primaried out if he stays in the GOP. What he chose to say was telling ... especially that thing about not giving the 60th vote. Everyone knows Franken will be seated. He's playing to the moderate republicans, trying to set the narrative.
He's in Pennsylvania ... Molly Maguire country. I don't see how he can get support in the democratic primary without moderating his position on EFCA. National party deals are unlikely to change that. There are a lot of progressives licking their chops for a go at Toomey. If Specter doesn't give them something good ... they'll mow right through him.
This still seems like a hell of a long shot.
April 28, 2009 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Never fear, Reid may be unassuming but he's makes deals with the best of them.
April 28, 2009 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Forget the purity trolls! This is BIG! The memo is in, no moderates welcome in the GOP. The Democratic Party is the big tent. Collins and Snow, it's your turn now!
April 28, 2009 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's a good point.
April 28, 2009 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's certainly good news, I just don't understand the Specter's need to place labor, which has been taking it on the chin for the past 40 years, on the altar as a sacrificial lamb to 'centrism.'
But yes, this is pretty darn good.
April 28, 2009 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
That could yet be fatal if he attracts a serious primary challenge. Here's hoping.
April 28, 2009 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
"PURITY TROLLS"?!?!?
Jesus Henry Christ III, WTF is so "pure" about not wanting to have a Republican enabler, throwing junk in the road at every mile, and giving the MSM and the Republican Party COVER?
Can you see the headlines now (h/t to another commentor): "DEMS IN DISARRAY"?
(No, you probably can't...)
April 28, 2009 12:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can.
Which is why I'm not as thrilled as most appear to be over this.
April 28, 2009 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
CT, why do I get the feeling that Harry Reid and the Democratic Party leadership don't play chess?
April 28, 2009 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because you've been watching politics for a long time?
The only chess player in the bunch sits in the White House.
And for that, we can be glad.
April 28, 2009 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
All you knee jerk progressives who think this is a bad thing have obviously never heard of Pat Toomey...
April 28, 2009 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually Toomey's unelectable in PA in the General. This is a gain we don't have to wait until 2010 for.
April 28, 2009 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Would that be the Pat Toomey, who would have run in the Republican primary against Arlen Specter, and... assuming the usual low-turnout, "base" vote... would have WON?
Thus, assuring that if Bozo The Frickin' Clown had run as a Democrat, HE would have won in the GE?
... nope, never heard of him. Gotta go jerk off my knee, now... :-P
April 28, 2009 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Collins and Snowe are as safe as they get, the (R) next to their name WILL NOT bring them down. They have been outwardly (which is different than honestly) moderate, in line with their electorate. You really can not ask for more from an elected figure. They have all the leverage they need with the GOP, and little to gain by going Dem. So, I say, better to have some people in the other party that CAN ACTUALLY be reasoned with and even used against the rest of the GOP when the political winds of the Northeast push Collins/Snowe to vote with Dems.
April 28, 2009 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anyone with common sense is either leaving or switching parties. I'd say the GOP closed door sessions must be completely intolerable these days.
I can imagine them now......
Random GOP #1: "So, who has ideas on how we can take Obama down?"
Random GOP #2: "We could always float the secret Muslim idea around. Just give Bachmann some talking points and let her loose."
Random GOP #1: "No no, we tried that already during the campaign and it didn't stick."
Random GOP #3: "Oooh, I know. Leak out to Politico the "whitey" tape has surfaced.
Random GOP #4: "I've got the perfect idea. Allow Palin to fling poo at him."
Random GOP #1: "I LOVE the Palin idea. All those in favor, say aye."
GOP in unison: "Aye!"
April 28, 2009 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK, welcome Arlen, your ornery bastard. My question is who had already announced would run against you as a Democratic candidate in 2010, because I don't live in Pennsylvania. Obviously, your clock will be cleaned in the Democratic primary, anyway, because of your record, age and orneryness. You would have been killed in the R primary, anyway, but I can't imagine you could win a D primary. You are no Wayne Morse, that's for sure!
April 28, 2009 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting his take on himself as compared to Jeffords. Jeffords went Indy and voted with the Dems, but Specter is going full on Democratic Party member, but says he plans to maintain his freedom. I don't really follow the logic there to be honest. I think he will actually be more loyal than he's letting on- if Reid, Durban, and Schumer have any spines at all, he'll vote with the party. If he wanted to maintain his 'freedom' he should have declared Indy. If he'd done it now, he wouldn't have been subject to PA's sore-loser law
That said, welcome home Arlen, I know you walked away decades ago, but its good to see you come back to the party.
April 28, 2009 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I feel like streaking down the cube farm in my office or maybe break dancing.
April 28, 2009 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are the workers in your cube farm Unionized?
If not, I'd make sure nothing swings anywhere, to where they could take a whack at it...
April 28, 2009 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
NFW--I do not believe this. WOW Far out. He must have figured that the repubs in penn did not like him anymore. ALL TEN OF THEM. HAHAHAHAHA
April 28, 2009 12:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another thing to consider is that assuming Franken gets seated any time soon and the Dems have 60 seats it takes the 60-seat boogeyman off the table come the 2010 Senate elections. The GOP was surely going to run on the need to be the "check and balance" and that a 60-seat super majority would be the end of the world. Now if Specter and Franken make 60 and the world doesn't end, and Obama doesn't force through legislation it will take this potential campaign point away from the GOP challengers and incumbents in 2010.
April 28, 2009 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's a good point.
April 28, 2009 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
MSNBC is now reporting that Specter and the National Democratic Party had extensive discussions prior to this. As part of their agreements, the party has agreed not to back or fund any primary challenger to Specter next year. Like it or not, Specter will have the Democratic nomination next year.
April 28, 2009 12:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I certainly hope they got something more from him than just switching his affiliation from R to D in exchange for this action.
April 28, 2009 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Harry Reid? Demandning more than just the "D" label from him? That's a good one. No, we just acquired another Ben Nelson. Yay us. I'm so thrilled ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.....
April 28, 2009 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
See? Told you so. Back room deals, and an imprimatur from the party brahmins.
Fuck the party brahmins. The netroots need to fund a primary challenger who knows where his/her bread is buttered. Ned Lamont... feel like moving to PA? :-)
April 28, 2009 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Time to pop over and see how the Freepers are taking the news ...
April 28, 2009 12:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please be sure to put on the haz-mat gear, ok?
April 28, 2009 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I remember Specter being a dick during the Holder hearing. I assume Leahy isn't going to give up Justice for him. What has Specter been promised?
April 28, 2009 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
No committee chairs. Mainly the promise of no primary challenger next year.
April 28, 2009 12:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank god we wont get Pat F@#$%ng Toomey
April 28, 2009 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, maybe what Frog Leg says is so...but how about big Pa. Dems like Gov. Rendell or Rep. Sestak taking on old Arlen? Hadn't someone already said was "exploring" a race vs. Arlen?
April 28, 2009 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rendell would NEVER run against Specter. Sestak didn't seem keen on running for the Senate either.
April 28, 2009 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
The party will do everything in its power to make sure there isn't a viable primary challenger. We're stuck with Joe Lieberman II for as much of his next term as he can stay alive, the only consolation being that at his age that might well not be all of it.
April 28, 2009 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah, the 'magic candidate' theory? He bounces around the Capitol, hitting different political parties along the way?
April 28, 2009 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Worked for Bloomberg. Must be a New Yorker thing.
April 28, 2009 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
CNN reports on Specter's switch:
http://www.gotchamediablog.com/2009/04/sen-arlen-specter-switches-to.html
April 28, 2009 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
1. This is huge.
2. Not quite Jeffords-huge, but still huge.
3. When the Toomey-Specter poll results came out, I found myself hoping Reid and Obama were working Specter over. I think they were.
4. I assume he keeps his seniority, but might have some trouble picking up a chairmanship immediately.
5. I assume the Dems clear out the primary field for him.
6. I assume he wins as a Democrat.
7. I don't assume he's already caucusing with the Democrats. I'm not sure we're at 59 yet. His statement says he intends to run in 2010 as a Democrat -- so he may delay the switch a bit until he's worked out his best deal with Reid.
8. On the other hand, McConnell may just throw him out of the GOP caucus and he'll be orphaned unless he heads across the street.
April 28, 2009 12:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
US government for $2000:
In the Senate it takes 60 votes to stop the Republicans from destroying the country.
And the Question is:
What is CLOTURE?
Cloture, cloture, cloture,
All we need is cloture.
April 28, 2009 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
And if 5 or 6 out of that "60" vote with the Republicans?
Tell me again (other than having committee chairs) the advantage of being a nominal "majority", if the Dems still can't get to first base?
April 28, 2009 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
"My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans."
So he will be a DINO? Or what? There's no basis for the "60 votes" now, especially with other Democrats or Independents not being party-line voters.
This is a desperate attempt to cling to fading power on his part. What Democratic Party principles will he embrace, and which old antagonistic principles will he keep? This is the worst side of politics as usual made public.
What are the Demos paying to get this face-lift to play?
April 28, 2009 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dems are giving Spector 1 last term as his age and health are unlikely to ensure a 2016 run. Spector is not a young man that could have recovered from the impending Toomey loss to run again. So I see this as, as much a gift to Spector as it is to Dems.
I do not doubt we will be frustrated by Spector at times. I'm also sure Reid and Co. explicitly told Spector he can hold out on EFCA without retrobution.
That said, Spector clearly is willing to what is needed to save his own skin, therefore in Blue PA Spector will need to conform to the leftward shift of the greater electorate(not to mention the primary) if he wished to continue to save his own skin.
April 28, 2009 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Folks - its all about cloture. Thats all the matters. Who cares how he votes when he votes, if he votes for cloture, this is huge. Peace out filibuster!
April 28, 2009 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is only one thing in this world that annoys me more than intolerant right-wingers and that is intolerant left-wingers. The former simply don't know any better; the latter do know better, but choose not to be as open as they purport to be.
I can't believe the vitrol being spewed at Specter. It appears he is making one of the most principled switches in either direction in many decades. I am a little "p" progressive. However, unlike some of the capital "P" Progessives, I can recognize that most of the country isn't as liberal as I am. Instead of rejecting them out of hand and as @#$(*&@#$_)@#&$Nazi#$*&#Corporate#(*@$&@)(*Fascists, I only reject thosse very far to the right of the mainstream and hope that over time I and others like me can persuade them of the power of our ideas. By any measure, Specter is not a right-winger. I wish he would party-line vote, but can respect that his views don't allow him to do that.
Here is a real question for the vitrol spewers: Where does the concept of "freedom" fit in your dogged insistence on ideological purity?
Another question: Aren't any of you old enough to remember where the insistence on ideological purity got us in the 1980s?
A half loaf is always better than no loaf.
April 28, 2009 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm With you, lets not be sore winners here.
Any way you slice this it is a net positive, at least in the short term. If Spector isn't on the Dem side enough for PA (consistantly blue BTW) than we support a primary challenger. If he proves to be tolerable or usefull, than there is no problems letting him cakewalk past Toomey in the General, which I'm sure he will take personal pleasure in, if nothing else this will ensure playing nicely in the democratic sandbox for now.
April 28, 2009 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I want a Gold Star for predicting that Senator Ben Nelson-(D) of Nebraska will also switch parties and join the Republican side. He's steamed enough over the President taking away his golden piggy-bank by stopping the banks from making passthru premiums on student loans. This was a HUGE part of his campaign finance trough.
Best laid plans of Mice and logical Politicians...
April 28, 2009 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am going to give this a little time before I decide on how this has worked out. On one level, it is the gentleman's club holding on to one of its own. Specter won't bring anything to the table except more moderate water to dilute the party.
On another level, it plays well politically for the Dems. An old stalwart Republican changes party affiliation because the party has moved away from him and not vice versa. The 60 vote scareosaurus will be off the 2010 fundraising table, and Specter's shelf-life is mercifully short.
And, finally, it secures a watered down Dem senate seat for several more years at pretty much no cost. Specter can win on name alone combined with the "integrity" of crossing the partisan divide. This allows the DNC to fund tighter races.
April 28, 2009 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
In another cost saving move, could we find out if Ned Lamont is still interested in a Conn. Seat as money for Dodd is looking like unwise investment and an untainted Dem should be able to walk away with the seat.
April 28, 2009 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
who needs spector, if he cant be trusted to stay in his own party what good is he to the democrats and whats even more stupid is he comes out and says that hes not going to be a dependable democrat and hes just using the party to get re elected. Come on is that being like a prostitute or what stay in your state spector, stay in your party, and if the people of your state dont want you why do you think the people of america would want you, your self interest, self serving and you cant even stand up for the american workers. Go home, retire, and if there was ever a better reason for term limits spector is it!
April 29, 2009 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink