Why Specter Did It -- And Had To Do It
So why exactly has Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA D-PA) switched parties?
It really comes down to electability -- specifically electability as a Republican. Specter's own statement acknowledged that his support for the stimulus bill has made his position untenable with the GOP:
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.
Probably the most important point is here is the demographic changes going on in Specter's home state. Pennsylvania is a closed-primary state, and the ranks of registered Republicans, the folks eligible to vote in the GOP primary, shrunk last year. In 2008, between 150,000 and 200,000 registered GOPers switched to the Democratic Party in order to vote in the contentious primary between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
Let's take a look at the deeper numbers -- and how the state's reduced GOP electorate has pulled harder to the right, making this move necessary as a simple matter of political survival.
Those people tended to be moderate voters -- Specter's people -- and without them he cannot win a primary. But with them staying as Democrats, he could actually start with a leg-up as a Democrat, just in case any liberal challenger might try to take him on in the Dem primary.
And the other side of this coin is that the folks who remain as registered Republicans are now proportionally much more conservative than the state GOP was before.
Remember that Specter only won his 2004 primary against conservative challenger Toomey by a 51%-49% margin -- and that was with the full backing of the Bush White House. So if we just made that demographic adjustment, Pat Toomey would have probably won the 2004 primary with all other issues being the same. And the stimulus is the final nail. The stimulus vote, and the lack of a powerful Republican establishment these days, made a defeat in the primary seemingly inevitable.
A Rasmussen poll from just a few days ago put Toomey ahead by a 51%-30% margin. Specter was viewed unfavorably by 55% of the GOP electorate, compared to only 42% favorable. The pollster's analysis also pointed out that 79% of them had a favorable view of the Tea Parties -- not exactly a receptive audience for a pro-stimulus Senator. This was the first poll since Toomey officially got in, but other polls before that also showed Specter way below 50%, with a high undecided number, and the only question was whether Toomey could pick enough support to pull ahead.
And finally, it's important to remember another aspect of Pennsylvania politics: If he had run in the Republican primary and lost, he would not have been able to pull a Joe Lieberman and run as an independent. They have a "Sore-Loser Law" that forbids that very maneuver. So his choices other than retirement were to run as a Republican and probably lose the primary, run as an independent and face some serious structural disadvantages, or to take a chance on going over to the Democrats. And given those sets of probabilities, switching to the Dems became the obvious choice.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Don't you all see?!? This is all part of Michael Steele's master plan. He's unpredictable baby.
Specter did not know what hit him. A wise one that Steele is.
April 28, 2009 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Specter is an obvious plant by Steele to infiltrate the Democratic party and foil their socialist agenda.
April 28, 2009 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL
April 28, 2009 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
A random sampling of comments by Republicans by and large are condemning Specter as a RINO, bitterly wishing him 'good riddance'.
Keep purifying your party, Republicans. Pretty soon it will be small enough to drown in a bathtub.
April 28, 2009 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Read the comments here and it's apparent that a lot of people want the Dems to follow the same path.
April 28, 2009 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then we'd have to have a 3rd party. I mean, the Independents would be the majority (Right Center majority, left-center majority? Doesn't matter what's the truth, they are there in the middle somewhere). They'd have to organize!
I think we are stronger with this coalition of lefties, new Dems, and Blue Dogs than splintered.
April 28, 2009 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. How anyone could argue that this is anything but a a good thing for Democrats boggles the mind.
April 28, 2009 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oooh, Rynato, "small enough to drown in a bathtub," I like, I like! I hope it passes across Mr. No-Taxes-Man's screen.
April 28, 2009 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, couldn't we drown them by waterboarding instead?
( Since I'm against torture, I'll have to settle for schadenfreude.)
April 28, 2009 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, no, no. Waterboarding is only SIMULATED drowning. We need the real thing. They may drown themselves, however, will all their lachrymose whining. (Leader Boner seems to particularly apt at crying.)
April 28, 2009 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, it's not the least bit simulated if you do it long enough.
April 28, 2009 6:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think for Dems the critical point is that regardless of Specter's final votes on policy, he'll vote with us on cloture. I think that's probably part of the back-room deal not to run anyone against him in the primary.
I'm starting to warm to this whole idea.
(dons tinfoil hat)
Did the deal with Lieberman get made in preparation for this defection and possibly others? Could the Dem leadership have decided to let Chokin' Joe off easy as a signal to other moderates that they will be treated kindly if they come toward the light?
(/tinfoil)
April 28, 2009 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
And even on the final vote, I doubt he'll be much, if at all, to the right of Senator Evan Bayeh.
April 28, 2009 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or Ben Nelson. Can't we do something about Ben Nelson?
April 28, 2009 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, if we could just get Olympia Snowe.
April 28, 2009 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, in his official statement, Specter says, "I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture."
April 28, 2009 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's the quote for the lazy:
But he's switching all the way to "Democrat" and skipping "Independent". I know he's trying to reassure supporters to stick with him. It's like switching companies, like trying to bring your clients to the new company I guess. Maybe he's seen the megaphone-like voice that Lieberman has (since he's a loose cannon) and wants to join in? So it'll be the "lefties", New Dems, Blue Dogs, and the Lieberites?
April 28, 2009 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
"For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change. "
Until cosmetic "changes" are made to his specifications. Labor has always been a crucial part of his constituency.
April 28, 2009 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's how I see it too. I think he can be persuaded to return to his original support of EFCA in exchange for a few, modest changes.
April 28, 2009 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope you're right about that, though I'm a bit more skeptical. But the key question, as Josh notes, is not how he votes on final passage but whether he votes for cloture.
April 28, 2009 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
after seeing this shift to save his butt you believe a statement is of any relevance???
means nothing.
every vote till 2010 has allready been cast.
if they were not you would not see the dems so accepting.
its all a done deal
April 28, 2009 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
He skipped independent because a Dem and him on the General Election ballot would split the vote and Toomey would have a chance of sneaking into the Senate.
He is a total wild card when it comes to votes, both cloture and on the bills themselves.
April 28, 2009 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why not? It's already changed once before.
April 28, 2009 6:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I believe that's called insight.
April 28, 2009 1:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think your analysis is dead on. Sure, electoral politics for him in PA is tough, and he's not ready to retire. But in the end I believe that Specter wanted assurances of the privilege of marching to his own drumbeat, and tolerance of Lieberman's outrageous behavior certainly greases the skids. His protestations notwithstanding, Specter knows he needs to heed the call for cloture. That's being a Democrat. Therefore the only way to get him to follow the Democratic agenda is to assure him a place under a very big tent.
April 28, 2009 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
According to his official statement Specter is still against EFCA. That makes this look like a move that really only benefits him, since he had no chance of reelection as a repub.
April 28, 2009 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is unfortunate and it brings home how stupid Specter was to flip-flop on it.
But as Josh notes, the real issue here will be how he votes on cloture.
My guess is that labor folks are telling him he'll face a well-financed primary challenger unless he agrees to support cloture.
April 28, 2009 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
The more the GOP blast away at Specter, the more they'll alienate moderate voters AND Snowe and Collins.
This doesn't change the votes on the Senate floor much, but it further radicalizes the GOP.
April 28, 2009 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah. All it did was transfer a few PSI of air from the repuglican life raft to the Democrat one. So we're riding a little higher in the water, but the repuglicans are close to having to bail out water to stay afloat until 2010.
April 28, 2009 1:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
You think? I'm not so sure about collins after getting mauled (justifiably) by SEIU for taking the epidemic money out of the stimulus and voting against the omnibus. She might be bitter.
Snowe is unquestionably more liberal than SC, who still likes to fashion herself as a fiscal conservative maverick from Maine.
What I didn't realize, is how instrumental Specter's stimulus vote was to providing cover for the two Maine senators, particularly Collins. Had he not agreed, there's a good chance Collins would have opted out as well. With Specter, she was able to claim that her vote was irrelevant since if push came to shove, Ted Kennedy could have been disrupted from the warmer climes of his rehabilitation in Florida to dredge up the 60th vote.
April 28, 2009 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS...
FOR THE GOP!!!
April 28, 2009 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK. I admit it, I was wrong. Back in December I thought there was a reasonable likelihood that this would happen. Then Toomey started looming large and I thought it was even more likely . . . Then Specter switched on EFCA and I said, "That's it, he can't switch now." Then the recent polls apparently made it obvious to Specter what we readers of TPM and 538.com have known all year. Grab the popcorn. This is gonna be fun.
April 28, 2009 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Still hope he loses. He opposes EFCA. Get his dumb @ss outta there, PA! Elect a REAL Dem!
April 28, 2009 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. If Specter doesn't want to support EFCA as a Democratic Senator in a blue collar state, he should be voted down in the Democratic Primary.
This move is about Specter saving his behind!! What guarantees that he won't switch back after the 2010 election?
April 28, 2009 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amen! I thought Specter made it clear in his press conference that he will remain a Repub everywhere it counts. Only if a bill is going to pass overwhelmingly will he vote with the Democrats. It is time for him to be voted out of office. It was time for that some time ago.
April 28, 2009 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I suspect his opposition to EFCA will dissolve quickly. Specter is not stupid, he'll change colors quite nicely.
April 28, 2009 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree and lest we forget, Specter was originally a Democrat.
April 28, 2009 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
As long as he votes for cloture, I don't really care. You can bet the unions and their supporters here in Pa. will oppose him unless he agrees to at least an up or down vote.
And to anyone who was prematurely gloating re the supposed defeat of the EFCA, suck on it! The friggin' EITC is not a substitute for the ability of workers to more easily organize for better pay and working conditions.
April 28, 2009 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree something will happen, but I lean more towards Josh's reader post that there will be a compromise. That some small concession will be made to Specter, with PA Dems and labor getting 80% of what they want.
Specter will definitely have to make some compromise, unless he wants to inspire the ire of both parties.
April 28, 2009 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
and can we define "moderate voters" in a more accurate manner, please?
"moderates" are people who don't read the news, don't have opinions, and generally have no idea what's going on around them at any given moment.
April 28, 2009 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, moderates are those who read the news, try to make sound decisions without dogma getting in the way, and often are more radical (or you would probably say "real") on some issues than others. I think Specter's change makes the Democratic Party a bit stronger, which gives them more of a chance to accomplish what you want done.
Why get angry--isn't his change a good thing? Going from a RINO to a Blue Dog is going from a "probably not going to vote our way" to a "good chance he'll negotiate and we'll get his vote". Glass half full.
April 28, 2009 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nope. "onceler" is 100% correct on this one.
April 28, 2009 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, he is. The glass is about 1/10th full. I only partake of glasses more than half full.
April 28, 2009 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Welcome to pennsyltucky.
If you think you're gonna get a so called "Real Dem" elected here you're living in a fantasy world.
April 28, 2009 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was raised in Kentucky and you're 100% on this one.
April 28, 2009 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, moderates just don't prefer Kool-Aid and occasionally order off the menu. They also like to follow roads that don't lead over cliffs, also preferring roads that have a bend or two to accommodate the local geography.
April 28, 2009 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gag me with a teabag Eric!
April 28, 2009 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unfortunatly this serves to increase Joe freaking Lieberman's power....along with the Blue Dogs. Every single democrat now has filibuster power.
April 28, 2009 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
April 28, 2009 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Doh, you beat me to it. I was kind of saying this on a comment above. You're completely right and of course this is one reason he switched. The Blue Dogs have power: The "not-playing-ball-not-going-to-negotiate GOP" has effectively given their power away.
April 28, 2009 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's kind of silly.
Yes, on issues where it's barely possible to get a majority, every vote counts. But it's better to get that majority with one's own party than by making concessions to the other party, as those are typically much more demanding.
I don't particularly like Leiberman or Specter, but I'd rather deal with them and have them in the party to reach a super majority, than deal with your typical Republican.
And let's not kid ourselves states like PA are about to elect very left leaning Dems.
April 28, 2009 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why do we want Specter? Will he continue to align with the GOP caucus on votes, only using the Democratic party to avoid a GOP primary loss to Pat Toomey?
If Pat Toomey defeated Specter in the GOP primary, then we would surely have a new DEMOCRATIC senator from Pennsylvania after Toomey loses the election. If Dems. took their chances with a real Democrat for the general, and Specter defeats Toomey in the primary, then we would still have Republican Arlen Specter for another 6 years, but no more or less friendly because Democrats did not want him.
I'm only seeing upside for Arlen Specter, not for the Democrats.
April 28, 2009 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not difficult to see why we want Specter - just read Michael Steele's statement
Forget 60 ..that's just gravy. Specter's switch makes present, makes real, concrete the radicalization and marginalization of the GOP...
Teabags have consequences
Besides a Senator in the hand is worth two in the bush
April 28, 2009 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
A-f'n-men
(crap, going to Hell now....)
April 28, 2009 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that the Spector-loses-Primary-Dems-win-General would have been the best scenario.
However, I think the big advantage is for getting him inside the party is that--generally speaking--he'll probably now support cloture votes in most cases, even where he may vote against the bill once the actual vote comes (like Nelson's stance on Dawn Johnsen). While of course in theory he can still just tie his vote on cloture to his actual opinion on the issue, I think in practice this is seen as pretty inappropriate behavior when it thwarts your own party (especially since Cloture in principle is about protecting the right to debate, not about the substantive merits of the law being questioned).
So I suspect we'll see his votes against cloture drop significantly, even if policy-wise he maintains his usual positions (of course, now that he's liberated as a Dem, his policy positions may shift significantly, and not just on things like the EFCA).
Final thought: assessing cloture vote position vs. final vote position would be a great Nate Silver kind of project for someone...
April 28, 2009 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who is this mystery dem who would have surely defeated Toomey?
I'm a PA voter and I've not the slightest clue who you're talking about.
April 28, 2009 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know off hand, but if the Democratic party can't come up with a candidate who could defeat ultra conservative Pat Toomey in the current political climate, the party is much weaker than it presently appears. Since you are from PA, can you think of no one?
April 28, 2009 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think so, though it will probably depend on the polls in Pennsylvania. I'm no great fan of Arlen Specter, but it does seem to me that his first instincts have been to support moderate-to-conservative Democratic positions, and any retreat rightward from that has been simply from fear of losing GOP primary voters. With that fear gone, I don't think he's going to find it hard to vote with the Democrats on most things.
I could, of course, always be surprised. Arlen has a great talent for douche bag-ism, though I think he is no match for "Joementum" Lieberman on that score.
April 28, 2009 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
To all that responded this is a good move for the Dems. - let's hope so.
April 28, 2009 2:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
The upside is the GOP just lost one of their most recognizable, longest serving Senators, and that theirs is quickly becoming a rump party.
April 28, 2009 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have a substantive question. Does he get to count his total seniority? In which case, will he get to be chairman of a major committee? If, for example, he becomes chair of Senate judiciary, would he support or block an inquiry into Bush-era atrocities?
April 28, 2009 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not part of the deal..Seniority unchanged
April 28, 2009 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate."
Shorter Specter, "those wackos aren't taking away MY job."
April 28, 2009 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unbelievable! He will lose re-election anyway. But, Pugs are dead in the water!
April 28, 2009 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look at it from the bigger picture and how the parties are represented..
Democrats: Yes, we know you don't agree with us on everything, but here we are, willing to listen.
Republicans: You can't march party line with us? Good riddance....
Even if it doesn't change a single vote, it certainly enhances the inclusive image of the Democrat party...
April 28, 2009 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ultimately it does change votes, because it's not possible for pols to march in lock step the majority of the time.
The only reason it worked for Republicans recently is becasue they had something of a political confidence bubble. i.e. They had been ascendant for so long (since Reagan) that they believed they'd just keep winning. It's analogous to the gambler's fallacy or tulip manias.
In that environment it made sense to march in lock step, so long as your team was assured victory and you'd eventually be rewarded. But now, the GOP is going to pieces. The hardliners are retrenching and preparing for a long winter.
April 28, 2009 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Specter was pushed out of the GOP as much as anything, what with the Republican leadership encouraging a primary challenge from the right. Listening to Hannity afterwards, it's apparent also that the neocons wouldn't mind seeing Snowe and Collins also take flight.
Of course, the GOP's quest for ideological purity is self-defeating -- that is not how Reagan made his "revolution" successful -- but with the dearth of leadership within the party it is to be expected.
April 28, 2009 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
George Snuffleupagus has an interesting take, that Specter's change was strictly self interest (at least, that was my read of it):
http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/04/specter-switche.html
April 28, 2009 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I mean, George Stephanopoulos. I always say Snuffleupagus in my head, though.....
April 28, 2009 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Me too!
April 28, 2009 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
One of the commenters (Steve from NH) pointed out something that made me laugh out loud. Responding to an earlier comment about the reason Specter was facing such a tough primary battle being that so many registered Republicans had switched their party affiliation to Democrat so that they could weigh in on the Clinton vs Obama battle last fall, he said, "So, Rush Limbaugh's "Operation Chaos" ends up giving the Democrats a 60 seat majority. Now THAT'S beautiful...."
April 28, 2009 4:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
heh, Rush may not believe in Karma, but Karma believes in him...
April 28, 2009 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is just CLASSIC slb!!!
The DNS should throw up ads taunting Limbaugh about the 'law of unintended consequences' or in Limbo's case, karma.
April 28, 2009 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wish it had been my line, but the credit belongs to "Stever from NH" on that abc blog!
And, of course, the Clinton vs Obama battle in Pennsylvania was last spring, not last fall.
April 28, 2009 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
This will be a great victory for the Dems (or at least for me) if he loses the Dem primary to a liberal and that liberal carries some Demomentum to victory in the Senate election.
April 28, 2009 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
This may not be game changing news for the Democrats per se.
But, anyway you look at it, it is a catastrophe for the Republicans.
How many different ways can this be spun up by the Democrats? Too many for the Republicans good I'm afraid.
Specter just confirmed for all America, what we all thought we already knew. That the Republicans have become exclusive and extreme and are completely off the reservation. And no moderate (or independent?) in their right minds would have anything to do with them.
Who's next? McCain? HE has a primary challenge coming up as well.
Snowe? Collins?
Man oh Man. Reminds me of the old saying "How Low Can You GO??". Pretty low its beginning to look like.
April 28, 2009 2:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
McLame? It might be the only chance he has of staying even remotely relevant until 2010. After all those overtures Obama made toward McCain to give him a chance to make amends for all the respect he lost running a George Wallace redux in the GE, and McCain kills the goodwill with his over the top attempt to draft a competing stimulus bill comprised solely of tax cuts and banning earmarks. And now all you can hear is him crying about how Obama's not being bipartisan.
Well, McCain overplayed his hand with his outsized ego thinking Obama depended upon him as a moderate voice to get bipartisan bills past. I'm looking forward to Specter's move driving a stake into the GOP being given any legitimate air time by the MSM. From now on it should be the bluedogs and Liebercrats.
April 28, 2009 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm a long time PA Democrat and I have always voted for Arlen Specter, no matter who his opponent might be. Simple reason - he is smart, and is usually smarter than his opponents.
bye by Toomey. You people all ought to be glad we ddged that redneck bullet.
April 28, 2009 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Does that mean that Hatch becomes ranking member on the Judiciary Committee?
April 28, 2009 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Arlen Specter? The man is pure poison! Swallow his jive at your own risk. From torture (he's against, he's for it) to illegal wiretapping (he's for it; he's against it)-- from there move on to his work in getting Roberts and Alioto on the Court. ...to his saying no to Unions and you have a thoroughly contemptible Senator--
Perhaps no worse than many other senators, but no big plus for the so-called big tent democrats who list rightward more with each day. Is there is left-wing in the big-tent Democratic Party? Someone to say no to Wall Street, no to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, yes to unions, no to the trillions of dollars in our budget for military world hegemony--let this person stand up!
April 28, 2009 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. I for one would be extremely cautious, at best, extending a welcoming hand to the original author of the magic bullet theory.
April 28, 2009 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Arlen the flip flopping Bush butt boy should have joined Lieberman's party. Then they would have doubled their membership.
April 28, 2009 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yo yo yo! For something completely different, check this out: The Economist Blog is linking to Eric's piece here at TPM: http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2009/04/arlen_specter_switches_to_the.cfm
Good for the editors at The Economist for reading smart blogs like this one! And nice piece, Eric.
April 28, 2009 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Retired Rear Admiral Representative Joe Sestak of Pennsylvania is poised to seek the Democratic nomination for U. S. Senate. If Toomey is the Republican nominee, Sestak would beat him handily. It may be that Sestak can beat Specter for the Democratic nomination next Spring, given Labor's unhappiness with Arlen and his opposition to EFCA.
"Desperate times call for desperate measures," eh, Arlen? (I don't trust him or any other Republican.)
April 28, 2009 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder if Steele is regretting now when he said he would withhold funding support from the RNC to Specters campaign.
I saw this great quote from Steele today which is a reminder to everyone who isn't in the GOP why Steele is great for the Democratic party.
"If Sen. Specter survives in the fall — get ready to go to the mat, baby, because we're coming after you and taking you out," added Steele."
April 28, 2009 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
"If Sen. Specter survives in the fall — get ready to go to the mat, baby, because we're coming after you and taking you out,"
--Michael Steele, Chairman,
Republican National Committee
Who wants to be if Steele will still be around for the 2010 elections? Personally, I hope he is because he will pretty much assure massive Democratic gains across the board. But I'm sure the GOP will wise up and (sadly) give him the boot.
SG
April 28, 2009 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
And just to vindicate Spector, the "mean girls" in the GOP (Rush, Steele) come otu with bitchy trash talk. That kind of behavior is actually why people are leaving the GOP -- you're all a bunch of intolerant assholes!
Some party!
Let's hope they "get tough" on McCain, Snowe and Collins next!
And then there were none.....
April 28, 2009 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sestak vs Specter in the Dem primary. A poll needs to be made of that IMMEDIATELY.
April 28, 2009 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another great Bush legacy. George W. drove the country into the ditch, and he helped drive the Republican party there as well.
April 28, 2009 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
They are going to clear the Dem field for Specter. He has Rendell and the entire Dem establishment in PA behind him AND I hear Obama is both going to campaign AND fundraise for him. THere is a reason he switched to Dem and not Independant. He's got it made.
April 28, 2009 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Primary his a$$. I don't want a DINO in my state!
April 28, 2009 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Honestly, I am really happy about Sen. Spector's decision, especially since Al Franken will be the fillibuster proof Senator. Maybe he can come in and whoop it up. We are ready to lead once more. What?! I'm saying be a lefty with two arms. Go on merits now. Make it a good decision to be a little more reasonable, besides he wants a fair fight in the primary. Keep it posi.
April 28, 2009 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
In other words, I completely agree with this comment. Sorry if I'm passive aggressively antagonizing with the above, but I think Dems now have a mandate to push Obama's progressive agenda. Great news, and some props to Arlen Spector for keeping it real.
April 28, 2009 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
We are ready to lead once more! (celebratory, funny political VIDEO.)
April 28, 2009 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I find it interesting that some think this is a bad thing for the Dems. This is great. It will immediately show that there is more diversity in the party and that the right is closer and closer to an authoritarian litmus test based organization. This will turn many off and leave them either no other choice to vote D or force a new organization to be created (a very low chance of occurrence). I doubt many will turn libertarian. As the party was essentially the "Party of no", Spector had no choice but to cross the isle because as one who takes the senate and legislation serious, the last thing he wanted was for his constituents to deal with the likes of Toomey and the wing nuts at the Club for Greed..uh I mean Growth.
April 28, 2009 9:33 PM | Reply | Permalink