A Twinge Of Regret, And Of Relief (Specter defeats Toomey)

[phillybri]

From a local Philly blog:

http://downstown.blogspot.com/2004_04_25_downstown_archive.html#108312...

Arlen (Magic Bullet) Specter eked past Pat Toomey in the Republican U.S. Senate primary tonight. While it's early to assess, the pro-choice incumbent ran predictably well around Philly. He also ran above expectations in central Pennsylvania. Because the Club for Growth poured money into the campaign for the far-right Toomey, and because Specter's favorables are so low (people seem to be tired of his act, across the political spectrum) a lot of people thought Toomey might win. His race prompted some big-name magazines to cover the race, including the New Yorker's long piece on the potential for Republican purges of moderates.

Now, a lot of Democrats are going to be disappointed this morning, because most of them thought that Toomey would be easy to beat in a general. For me, much as I'd enjoy the idea of seeing a race for an open seat in a state that Gore won in 2000 and that has a Democratic governor, I'm glad that Specter won.

My reasoning is:

1) Toomey would be bad for America. And he could have won a general election. After all, Santorum is our other senator. I have to feel better knowing that Toomey is finished. He was a Grover Norquist-style radical right-winger.

2) Specter is himself beatable. If Joe Hoeffel is much of a candidate--and it's honestly too early to tell--then he'll have a shot to beat Specter. Arlen polls horribly and he's been beaten up by conservatives consistently over the past few months. The Constitution Party is talking about sabotaging him by running a pro-life candidate in the general election, in part to keep pro-lifers from sitting the race out altogether and spoiling Bush's chances here. Specter will cut hard into Hoeffel's fundraising--he's popular among the same types of Philly bigwigs--but the race will still be there to win, if Hoeffel can run it.

3) I believe that we're better off with broad-based parties. My problem with Zell Miller wasn't that he was too conservative to be a Democrat; it was that he stopped in 2002 being a Democrat at all. Democrats benefit by dealing with moderates in their party, and Republicans benefit by dealing with moderates (or oddballs like McCain) in their party. These moderates can be a brake on stupid partisan bills, and can, in good times, help to frame a sense of what is acceptably partisan and what's unacceptable. Ideological purity is interesting in grad school seminars but it doesn't really make for good politics or good policy. The first rule of politics is plunder. If either party were to gain an unassailable hold on Congress, the first order of business would be insider contracts that would dwarf the Halliburton deals. The best brake we have on this corruption is not virtue--a commodity that is selected against in the Darwinian world of politics--but traitors, people like Specter who will threaten to cross over against the party line. He's no angel, but he's a lot more useful to the country than Toomey.

[Dogmudgeon]

1. Arlen: Down and Dirty

The man is spent.

He's blown through a lot of his war chest, he's 74 and has had his first real political fight in years, and he's facing Joe Hoeffel, who can match him for brains and still has his whole war chest left untouched by an uncontested primary.

Specter is weak, vulnerable, and hated by the mad-dog Right that dominates central Pennsylvanian politics. Unless the political establishment (Democratic as well as Republican) rallies 'round Specter, the senatorial election is Hoeffel's to lose.

--bkl

[spinbaby]

2. Specter has name recognition

And that may trump everything else. Still, I can live with him. Can't say the same for Toomey.

[RossMcLochNess]

3. Personally, I wish Toomey would have won

I disagree that Specter would be easier to beat than Toomey. The reason Specter has had the seat for the last 24 years is that he appeals to Democrats too. He's never been a guy to strictly toe the party line. I've seen posts here suggesting that he does toe the line but its just not true. If Toomey had won, he would have received virtually no help from Dems thus making his chances of winning very slim. Especially when you consider that statewide, Dems outnumber Repubs by almost 400,000. I think that it would have been next to impossible for Toomey to win and its very likely that Specter will win again. He hasn't really done much lately to turn away a Dem voter that has been supporting him for the last 24 years. Specter gets a ton of Dem votes every time and I think that will continue. Sure, there are some in the Repub party who think that he's too far left but think about it, if someone thinks Specter is too far left are they going to vote for someone who is left? Of course not. Specter will get the Repub votes. Toomey endorsed Specter last night and his votes will go to Specter. I completely and totally agree that I'd rather have Specter there than Toomey if I had to choose but I just feel that had Specter lost, then the seat was a near guarantee to become Dem. Just my .02 for what its worth.

[phillybri]

5. I say it's better that Toomey lost...

If there was even a slim chance that Santorum and Toomey could've been the 2 PA Senators....Well...:puke:

[Demoiselle]

7. Agreed, Phillybri!

"Be careful what you wish for" was never more appropriate than here, I think. Hoeffel will have to run a smart campaign, because Arlen always somehow manages to convince moderates and even liberals that he's of some use (I don't agree..he folds on principle all the time for his Republican masters) but I think Joe might manage it. Hoeffel has a kind of well-scrubbed,eager, er, SQUARE manner, actually, that might play well among central Pennsylvanians not entirely wedded to the rampaging right. Let's cross our fingers and SEND MONEY!!!

[lovedems]

4. I watched this race closely from Illinois and I tell ya, I have mixed

feelings about these results. On the one hand I really did want Toomey to win because he would have given the dems a better shot at the seat. That being said, I was disappointed to see one of the last moderate republicans being hijacked by the conservative nutcases such as Club For Growth. We all remember their ads about Dean.

It will sure be interesting to see how things play out in PA. this November.

[IronLionZion]

6. The Constitution party is considering entering a pro-life conservative

to bring out the conservatives and wingnuts. Because both Specter and Hoeffel are pro-choice, a lot of Toomey's supporters may sit out the election meaning a Kerry and Hoeffel sweep.

The pro-life candidate scenario would help Bush and Hoeffel.

[Freddie Stubbs]

8. The Constitution party usually runs state-wide candidates here in PA

They usually get less than 1% of the vote. It would have to be a very close race for them to have an effect, especially with the fact that the Green Party usually outpolls the Constitutional party.

[JPZenger]

9. Specter saved us from Bork

If Specter had not shown bravery and independence, right wing-nut Robert Bork would have been on the Supreme Court for the last decade. Instead, we have Justice Kennedy, who is a reasonable moderate swing vote. If Specter had quietly followed the party line, many important Supreme Court decisions that went 5-4 would have gone 4-5.

[Joy Anne]

10. Arlen again

I agree that it's better that Arlen won. In a way I relished the opportunity to go up against Looney Toomey--you should have seen the commercials our TVs were stuffed with in the T--but that's too dangerous. After all, we did elect Santorum, as odd as he is, and we can't have two such bizarros from here in Washington.

Joy, Cumberland County Dean fan