Talk Elections

Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion => Congressional Elections => Topic started by: Keystone Phil on November 23, 2010, 08:28:06 PM



Title: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 23, 2010, 08:28:06 PM
Too early? Never! We had the first challenger announce today and you guys will love his background (he used to be a Santorum staffer) - http://blogs.mcall.com/penn_ave/2010/11/former-santorum-aide-to-challenge-casey-in-2012.html (http://blogs.mcall.com/penn_ave/2010/11/former-santorum-aide-to-challenge-casey-in-2012.html)


Declared candidates:

Attorney and former Santorum staffer Marc Scaringi


Other rumored candidates:

Congressman Jim Gerlach
Congressman Charlie Dent*
State Senator Jake Corman
Radio host and businessman Glen Meakem


* With Toomey's win, I doubt that Dent runs. I don't think the state will go for two Senators from the same backyard (the Lehigh Valley).


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on November 23, 2010, 08:56:11 PM
They need someone from out west or from the Philly burbs.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: J. J. on November 23, 2010, 09:33:58 PM
Too early? Never! We had the first challenger announce today and you guys will love his background (he used to be a Santorum staffer) - http://blogs.mcall.com/penn_ave/2010/11/former-santorum-aide-to-challenge-casey-in-2012.html (http://blogs.mcall.com/penn_ave/2010/11/former-santorum-aide-to-challenge-casey-in-2012.html)


Declared candidates:

Attorney and former Santorum staffer Marc Scaringi

Unless he's appointed interim AG, I'd doubt it.


Quote
Other rumored candidates:

Congressman Jim Gerlach
Congressman Charlie Dent*
State Senator Jake Corman
Radio host and businessman Glen Meakem

Both Corman and Gerlach would be excellent.  The Cormans are a dynasty in Central PA.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Rowan on November 23, 2010, 09:42:58 PM
Casey wins easily.

Next.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: J. J. on November 23, 2010, 09:56:27 PM

Maybe not.  He hasn't exactly set the house of fire in the Senate and could be seen as part of the Ancien Régime in 2012.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Kevin on November 23, 2010, 10:44:50 PM

Maybe not.  He hasn't exactly set the house of fire in the Senate and could be seen as part of the Ancien Régime in 2012.

Not to mention I read a PPP poll recently which said that a higher number of voters disapprove of his performance then approve. And even though I can't remember the exact numbers they were moderately higher then the approves, so Casey could be vulnerable with the right candidate.

Plus Casey campaigned and ran as a moderate and his votes in the Senate have been anything but which in a state like Pennsylvania also counts as a mark against him.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on November 23, 2010, 10:49:22 PM
His name is Bob Casey. Unless 2012 is worse than 2010 for Democrats, he's not losing.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 23, 2010, 11:04:08 PM

The Casey situation is somewhat complex.

Now that he's in the Senate, he can't hide behind the moderate label; he has an established liberal voting record. He makes no efforts to hide his friendship with the President and speaks out in favor of controversial legislation pushed by the President. This would explain why his poll numbers aren't great. He doesn't have the approval ratings people would expect for someone with that last name. Again, this isn't Auditor General or State Treasurer Casey anymore.

That being said, beating him will still be difficult for a number of reasons.

1) He's still a Casey. You'd be amazed how many people still believe he is his father. It's a golden name here.

2) It's a Presidential election year. It might not be a good Presidential election year but it will still bring out more voters. More voters know and "like" (not sure if they really like him...) Casey. That includes Independents and, yes, even some Republicans still fall for him.

3) The GOP has a great bench. Wait, what? How does that make it difficult for the Republicans to win? Well, we have a great new bench. Newcomers won't be challenging Casey. Some of the names I listed could give Casey headaches but it's far from definite that they will run.

I think Gerlach is the person Casey would want to face the least. He's a popular elected official from a major swing area in the Southeast that has survived very tough battles when people thought he was a goner.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 23, 2010, 11:07:45 PM
There are problems for Casey though. If the President is still sitting at a 40% approval rating, unemployment is still high, etc. then Obama is done in Pennsylvania and could take Casey down with him. Again, their friendship isn't hidden and Casey's voting record is solidly liberal. The Republicans are already hitting him on it.

There's also the fact that Casey has lost the only real race he has ever had to run (the 2002 Gubernatorial primary to Rendell). If 2012 is another 2012 and he's facing someone like Gerlach, he might not be ready to fight back. A recent article discussing the 2012 race highlighted Casey's mild manner. That's not going to work in a serious fight for a Senate seat. He was able to be mellow Bob Casey in 2006 because...well...we know why. 2012 could be a very different story.

We want this seat and while Casey obviously starts out as a favorite, he's not safe.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 23, 2010, 11:45:52 PM
If Casey wins a second term, it would perfectly set up a run for Governor in 2018. It's the job he has really wanted ever since he got into politics. If the pattern continues, 2018 will mean it's the Dem's turn to win the Governor's mansion here. Casey would be completing his second term and would certainly choose running for Governor over running for a third term. He'll be 58 years old in eight years. Again, assuming the pattern continues, he'd serve two terms and end his time in public life at the age of 66. If it all works out - and that's still a big if - I doubt Casey could have asked for a better resume.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on November 24, 2010, 02:10:12 AM
There are problems for Casey though. If the President is still sitting at a 40% approval rating, unemployment is still high, etc. then Obama is done in Pennsylvania and could take Casey down with him. Again, their friendship isn't hidden and Casey's voting record is solidly liberal. The Republicans are already hitting him on it.

There's also the fact that Casey has lost the only real race he has ever had to run (the 2002 Gubernatorial primary to Rendell). If 2012 is another 2012 and he's facing someone like Gerlach, he might not be ready to fight back. A recent article discussing the 2012 race highlighted Casey's mild manner. That's not going to work in a serious fight for a Senate seat. He was able to be mellow Bob Casey in 2006 because...well...we know why. 2012 could be a very different story.

We want this seat and while Casey obviously starts out as a favorite, he's not safe.

Thats certainly comforting, I feared you guys wouldn't even try. :P At the very least his record can be tied to the President and thus his fortunes will be tied to that of Obama in PA. We should try to send this daddy wannabe resume padder to a Florida retirement home.



Title: Philly paper warns that Casey could be another wave victim.
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 30, 2010, 06:53:55 PM
Obviously making good points - http://blogs.philadelphiaweekly.com/phillynow/2010/11/10/guess-who’s-the-poster-child-for-a-potential-2012-republigeddon/ (http://blogs.philadelphiaweekly.com/phillynow/2010/11/10/guess-who’s-the-poster-child-for-a-potential-2012-republigeddon/)

This is one of the very liberal "hip" papers in Philly so they want him to run to the left.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: J. J. on November 30, 2010, 07:08:22 PM
The Year of the Pennsylvania Republican could be 2012.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Mr.Phips on November 30, 2010, 07:10:28 PM
The Year of the Pennsylvania Republican could be 2012.

That year was 2010.  Obama would have to lose Pennsylvania for Casey to come anywhere close to losing and that just isnt possible in a Presidential year with the Philly Dem machine turning out 600,000 votes for Democrats.  


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 30, 2010, 07:20:25 PM
The Year of the Pennsylvania Republican could be 2012.

That year was 2010.  Obama would have to lose Pennsylvania for Casey to come anywhere close to losing and that just isnt possible in a Presidential year with the Philly Dem machine turning out 600,000 votes for Democrats.  

Yeah, Obama couldn't possibly get more unpopular to offset Democratic turnout and the Dems will always have insane turnout.  ::)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: nkpatel1279 on November 30, 2010, 07:24:53 PM
Obama's performance in PA during the November 2012 General Election will similar to John Kerry's performance in PA or Gore's performance in PA.
Regardless of how Obama performs in PA in 2012. Casey-D is favored to win a second term in the US Senate- but it will be by a high single digit or low double digit margin.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Mr.Phips on November 30, 2010, 07:41:28 PM
The Year of the Pennsylvania Republican could be 2012.

That year was 2010.  Obama would have to lose Pennsylvania for Casey to come anywhere close to losing and that just isnt possible in a Presidential year with the Philly Dem machine turning out 600,000 votes for Democrats.  

Yeah, Obama couldn't possibly get more unpopular to offset Democratic turnout and the Dems will always have insane turnout.  ::)

Obama wont get unpopular enough to lose Pennsylvania.  Not happening. 


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: J. J. on November 30, 2010, 08:21:42 PM
The Year of the Pennsylvania Republican could be 2012.

That year was 2010.  Obama would have to lose Pennsylvania for Casey to come anywhere close to losing and that just isnt possible in a Presidential year with the Philly Dem machine turning out 600,000 votes for Democrats.  

I'd say right now, there is a 50% chance for 2012 to be a worse year for the democrats than 2010 was.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Mr.Phips on November 30, 2010, 08:23:54 PM
The Year of the Pennsylvania Republican could be 2012.

That year was 2010.  Obama would have to lose Pennsylvania for Casey to come anywhere close to losing and that just isnt possible in a Presidential year with the Philly Dem machine turning out 600,000 votes for Democrats.  

I'd say right now, there is a 50% chance for 2012 to be a worse year for the democrats than 2010 was.

Why would you say that?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 01, 2010, 01:33:59 AM
The Year of the Pennsylvania Republican could be 2012.

That year was 2010.  Obama would have to lose Pennsylvania for Casey to come anywhere close to losing and that just isnt possible in a Presidential year with the Philly Dem machine turning out 600,000 votes for Democrats.  

Yeah, Obama couldn't possibly get more unpopular to offset Democratic turnout and the Dems will always have insane turnout.  ::)

Obama wont get unpopular enough to lose Pennsylvania.  Not happening. 

He's sitting at a 40% approval rating in Pennsylvania and you really want to be cocky about this? I remember some other cocky, Dem favored predictions from you about two years ago, too...


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Mr.Phips on December 01, 2010, 01:36:44 AM
The Year of the Pennsylvania Republican could be 2012.

That year was 2010.  Obama would have to lose Pennsylvania for Casey to come anywhere close to losing and that just isnt possible in a Presidential year with the Philly Dem machine turning out 600,000 votes for Democrats.  

Yeah, Obama couldn't possibly get more unpopular to offset Democratic turnout and the Dems will always have insane turnout.  ::)

Obama wont get unpopular enough to lose Pennsylvania.  Not happening. 

He's sitting at a 40% approval rating in Pennsylvania and you really want to be cocky about this? I remember some other cocky, Dem favored predictions from you about two years ago, too...

I made had no illusions about how bad this year would be for Democrats after Obama won. 


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: J. J. on December 01, 2010, 02:11:08 AM
The Year of the Pennsylvania Republican could be 2012.

That year was 2010.  Obama would have to lose Pennsylvania for Casey to come anywhere close to losing and that just isnt possible in a Presidential year with the Philly Dem machine turning out 600,000 votes for Democrats.  

Yeah, Obama couldn't possibly get more unpopular to offset Democratic turnout and the Dems will always have insane turnout.  ::)

Obama wont get unpopular enough to lose Pennsylvania.  Not happening. 

He's sitting at a 40% approval rating in Pennsylvania and you really want to be cocky about this? I remember some other cocky, Dem favored predictions from you about two years ago, too...

I made had no illusions about how bad this year would be for Democrats after Obama won. 

And I recall saying to whomever won, "After you, the deluge."


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Iosif on December 01, 2010, 02:05:26 PM
The Year of the Pennsylvania Republican could be 2012.

That year was 2010.  Obama would have to lose Pennsylvania for Casey to come anywhere close to losing and that just isnt possible in a Presidential year with the Philly Dem machine turning out 600,000 votes for Democrats. 

Yeah, Obama couldn't possibly get more unpopular to offset Democratic turnout and the Dems will always have insane turnout.  ::)

11 points. Obama won by 11 points. Pennsylvania is not a purple state.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 01, 2010, 02:11:59 PM
The Year of the Pennsylvania Republican could be 2012.

That year was 2010.  Obama would have to lose Pennsylvania for Casey to come anywhere close to losing and that just isnt possible in a Presidential year with the Philly Dem machine turning out 600,000 votes for Democrats.  

Yeah, Obama couldn't possibly get more unpopular to offset Democratic turnout and the Dems will always have insane turnout.  ::)

11 points. Obama won by 11 points. Pennsylvania is not a purple state.

Still living in 2008, eh? Beautiful. Only helps my side. Just a quick reminder...

Victories for the PA GOP in 2010: U.S. Senator, Governor/Lt. Governor, Five Congressional seats to take a 12-7 lead in the delegation, kept the 30-20 margin in the State Senate, net pick up of thirteen seats in the State House to take a 112-91 majority (largest ever for any party in decades).

We also hold the Attorney General spot.

Dems now hold a U.S. Senate seat, the Auditor General and State Treasurer spots.

Yeah, definitely a solid Dem state.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Holmes on December 01, 2010, 02:15:37 PM
Will you still be living in 2010 in two years time?

Even Californian Republicans won a lot of races in 1994, winning the assembly and almost winning the senate, and most statewide offices... and that worked out well. :)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Iosif on December 01, 2010, 02:45:34 PM
The Year of the Pennsylvania Republican could be 2012.

That year was 2010.  Obama would have to lose Pennsylvania for Casey to come anywhere close to losing and that just isnt possible in a Presidential year with the Philly Dem machine turning out 600,000 votes for Democrats. 

Yeah, Obama couldn't possibly get more unpopular to offset Democratic turnout and the Dems will always have insane turnout.  ::)

11 points. Obama won by 11 points. Pennsylvania is not a purple state.

Still living in 2008, eh? Beautiful. Only helps my side. Just a quick reminder...

Victories for the PA GOP in 2010: U.S. Senator, Governor/Lt. Governor, Five Congressional seats to take a 12-7 lead in the delegation, kept the 30-20 margin in the State Senate, net pick up of thirteen seats in the State House to take a 112-91 majority (largest ever for any party in decades).

We also hold the Attorney General spot.

Dems now hold a U.S. Senate seat, the Auditor General and State Treasurer spots.

Yeah, definitely a solid Dem state.

CT has gone 20 years without a Democratic governor. Another purple state I presume?

In the best Republican year for decades, with the Republicans united behind a candidate, on the tails of a bruising democratic primary, with a disillusioned liberal base and with a pathetic turnout in Philly - the Republican won by 3 points. A similar margin in IL, another notorious purple state presumably.

John Kerry won PA while losing the election. Al Gore won PA while 'losing' the election. Obama stormed home in PA despite the protestations of a teenage self-proclaimed PA intheknow political expert that catholics and poor whites and union members wouldn't vote black. He won it by 11 points.

I realise there's no point arguing with you as you're stubborn. I also realise there's no point highlighting the hypocrisy of you ridiculing the comparison of 2008 (a presidential election) to 2012 (a presidential election) while simultaneously bringing up 2010 (not a presidential election) because you're also rather thick. So I'll leave you to it and instead I'll look up this thread in 2 years time to bump to chuckle in how yet again you've embarrassed yourself in a thread about Pennsylvania elections.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 01, 2010, 02:57:15 PM


CT has gone 20 years without a Democratic governor. Another purple state I presume?

Good job ignoring the other offices I listed. Obviously a totally different situation.

Quote
In the best Republican year for decades, with the Republicans united behind a candidate, on the tails of a bruising democratic primary, with a disillusioned liberal base and with a pathetic turnout in Philly - the Republican won by 3 points. A similar margin in IL, another notorious purple state presumably.

Pathetic turnout? You are pathetically uninformed. Over 40% isn't pathetic for a midterm.

By the way, 2008 was one of the best Dem years in decades. That would explain an eleven point win for Obama. I take it you're willing to retract your argument now, right?

Quote
Obama stormed home in PA despite the protestations of a teenage self-proclaimed PA intheknow political expert that catholics and poor whites and union members wouldn't vote black. He won it by 11 points.

Self proclaimed expert? Uh huh.

Yes, Obama won Pennsylvania in a Democratic landslide year. Too bad it isn't 2008 anymore, right?

By the way, the know-it-all from across the pond told us Pat Toomey was unelectable. How did that work out?

Quote
I realise there's no point arguing with you as you're stubborn.

Classic coming from you.

 
Quote
I also realise there's no point highlighting the hypocrisy of you ridiculing the comparison of 2008 (a presidential election) to 2012 (a presidential election) while simultaneously bringing up 2010 (not a presidential election) because you're also rather thick.

How is that hypocritical? Don't have much of a grasp on the language, do you now?

Quote
So I'll leave you to it and instead I'll look up this thread in 2 years time to bump to chuckle in how yet again you've embarrassed yourself in a thread about Pennsylvania elections.

Oh, the arrogance. You are absolutely going to be right about 2012! Just like how you would be right about 2010 when you were still gloating about 2008.

Speaking of bumping threads about Pennsylvania elections, do you really want me to bump all the threads about Pat Toomey over the past six years? I know you had some real gems!

That's the difference between people like yourself and people like me: I took the victory with class. I didn't bump tons of threads like you and BRTD. But if you want to get into that, be my guest because I have plenty to throw your way.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: albaleman on December 01, 2010, 03:01:12 PM
The Year of the Pennsylvania Republican could be 2012.

That year was 2010.  Obama would have to lose Pennsylvania for Casey to come anywhere close to losing and that just isnt possible in a Presidential year with the Philly Dem machine turning out 600,000 votes for Democrats. 

I'd say right now, there is a 50% chance for 2012 to be a worse year for the democrats than 2010 was.

Seriously? At a minimum it will be significantly better because more Dems will turnout because it will be a presidential year. If PA Republicans could barely win an open senate seat in the most Republican year in at least a decade and a half, how could you possibly think you could beat Casey?

Of course, this is coming from the same person who claimed that an incumbent Democratic senator could have been defeated in 2006.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 01, 2010, 03:05:36 PM

Seriously? At a minimum it will be significantly better because more Dems will turnout because it will be a presidential year. If PA Republicans could barely win an open senate seat in the most Republican year in at least a decade and a half, how could you possibly think you could beat Casey?

It would help if you read his argument: he said 2012 could be a worse year for the Dems. If it is, you can't keep that that turnout will be better for your side.

The comparison of the Presidential race and the Senate race isn't that great. Sestak was able to portray himself as an outsider and pick up plenty of votes in areas where Obama will get destroyed if he's still sitting at a 40% approval rating here.

Quote
Of course, this is coming from the same person who claimed an incumbent Democratic senator could be defeated in 2006.

That would be me. It would also help if you got your people straight because getting so cocky.  ::)

And yes, polling showed he could have been beaten.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: albaleman on December 01, 2010, 03:13:52 PM

Seriously? At a minimum it will be significantly better because more Dems will turnout because it will be a presidential year. If PA Republicans could barely win an open senate seat in the most Republican year in at least a decade and a half, how could you possibly think you could beat Casey?

It would help if you read his argument: he said 2012 could be a worse year for the Dems. If it is, you can't keep that that turnout will be better for your side.

What I said is that 2012 WILL be a better year for Dems, simply because it will be a presidential year and thus more people will turn out, which almost always helps the Dems. The biggest reason we got swamped this year is because turnout was 42%, which won't happen in a Presidential year.

And yes, polling showed he could have been beaten.

That polling was taken back when people thought 2006 would be a Lean Rep/Neutral year.

And yes, I did mix you and J.J up.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 01, 2010, 03:46:17 PM

Seriously? At a minimum it will be significantly better because more Dems will turnout because it will be a presidential year. If PA Republicans could barely win an open senate seat in the most Republican year in at least a decade and a half, how could you possibly think you could beat Casey?

It would help if you read his argument: he said 2012 could be a worse year for the Dems. If it is, you can't keep that that turnout will be better for your side.

What I said is that 2012 WILL be a better year for Dems, simply because it will be a presidential year and thus more people will turn out, which almost always helps the Dems. The biggest reason we got swamped this year is because turnout was 42%, which won't happen in a Presidential year.

So forget any policy issues or other events over the next two years; 2012 will just be better because turnout is higher in Presidential election years. Excellent analysis!

Quote

That polling was taken back when people thought 2006 would be a Lean Rep/Neutral year.

Nelson had a 44% approval rating in July of 2006. Who thought it would be a lean Republican or neutral year then?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: albaleman on December 01, 2010, 07:07:59 PM

Seriously? At a minimum it will be significantly better because more Dems will turnout because it will be a presidential year. If PA Republicans could barely win an open senate seat in the most Republican year in at least a decade and a half, how could you possibly think you could beat Casey?

It would help if you read his argument: he said 2012 could be a worse year for the Dems. If it is, you can't keep that that turnout will be better for your side.

What I said is that 2012 WILL be a better year for Dems, simply because it will be a presidential year and thus more people will turn out, which almost always helps the Dems. The biggest reason we got swamped this year is because turnout was 42%, which won't happen in a Presidential year.

So forget any policy issues or other events over the next two years; 2012 will just be better because turnout is higher in Presidential election years. Excellent analysis!

Basically, yes, but that isn't saying much considering that 2010 was one of the greatest midterm landslides in, well, ever. The turnout was so bad for Dems this election that it may very well never be duplicated.

Furthermore, anybody who thinks there's even a sliver of a chance that 2012 will be better that 2010 for the Republicans is badly misreading the meaning of 2010. 2010 was not a mandate for Republicans, nor was it a rejection of Democrats. Rather it was just a rejection of the incumbent party. Had the Republicans been in office, they would have been hammered just as badly. Republicans who fail to recognize this do so at their own peril.

Nelson had a 44% approval rating in July of 2006. Who thought it would be a lean Republican or neutral year then?

The Democratic wave of that year was going to carry him to victory regardless. In 2006, for the first and only time in history, no incumbent Democratic governor, senator, or U.S. representative was defeated.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 01, 2010, 07:13:50 PM
Had the Republicans been in office, they would have been hammered just as badly. Republicans who fail to recognize this do so at their own peril.

Ok, that's like any election, dude. If the Dems had the White House going into 2008, it would have been a disaster for them. If they had Congress going into 2006, it would have been a disaster for them.  ::)

Guess what. You're still the incumbent party in the Senate and the White House so it could be another anti incumbent year.

Quote

The Democratic wave of that year was going to carry him to victory regardless.

And I disagree so let's end it at that.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on December 01, 2010, 10:41:22 PM
I don't think they'd be favorites or anything, but it's hard to believe that Gerlach or Dent wouldn't be competitive, credible GOP candidates. Casey ain't perfect.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 01, 2010, 10:44:09 PM
I don't think they'd be favorites or anything, but it's hard to believe that Gerlach or Dent wouldn't be competitive, credible GOP candidates. Casey ain't perfect.

They both are considered that.  :P  Dent likely won't run because Toomey is from the same area and the party leadership won't go for two Senators from the Lehigh Valley.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 09, 2010, 04:38:57 PM
State Senator Kim Ward considering a challenge - http://www.politicspa.com/breaking-state-senator-kim-ward-exploring-challenge-to-bob-casey-in-2012/19227/ (http://www.politicspa.com/breaking-state-senator-kim-ward-exploring-challenge-to-bob-casey-in-2012/19227/)


She represents a sizably Democratic district just outside of Pittsburgh.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 11, 2010, 04:50:39 AM
Dent won't rule out a run against Casey - http://www.mcall.com/news/local/mc-dent-casey-121010,0,3717021.story (http://www.mcall.com/news/local/mc-dent-casey-121010,0,3717021.story)

I was at the weekend long event - Pennsylvania Society - mentioned in the article. It's our annual Pennsylvania political tradition...in New York City. We consider it sort of a retreat. Anyway, I saw Dent and another possible challenger - State Senator Jake Corman. I didn't see Gerlach or Ward there but I have no doubt that they were in attendance. I didn't see Casey either but I did see his predecessor working the individual events. I hear he has his eyes on something a little bigger than this instead of looking for a rematch. ;) The weird thing is that I didn't hear any talk about this race; all I saw were two people wearing "Casey for Senate" lapel pins. Pennsylvania Society is usually buzzing with rumors.

Aside from the obvious problem for Dent (which I've noted), here's another thing standing in the way of a Senate run: he has been given a spot on the Appropriations committee. Probably not as big of a deal with the earmark ban but it's still obviously prestigious.

Gerlach got a spot on Ways and Means so that throws a wrench into things, too.



Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: redcommander on December 11, 2010, 10:24:01 PM
State Senator Kim Ward considering a challenge - http://www.politicspa.com/breaking-state-senator-kim-ward-exploring-challenge-to-bob-casey-in-2012/19227/ (http://www.politicspa.com/breaking-state-senator-kim-ward-exploring-challenge-to-bob-casey-in-2012/19227/)


She represents a sizably Democratic district just outside of Pittsburgh.

She would probably be one of the strongest based on her geography. Casey needs to do badly in the suburbs to lose.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: J. J. on December 11, 2010, 10:45:24 PM
Dent won't rule out a run against Casey - http://www.mcall.com/news/local/mc-dent-casey-121010,0,3717021.story (http://www.mcall.com/news/local/mc-dent-casey-121010,0,3717021.story)

I was at the weekend long event - Pennsylvania Society - mentioned in the article. It's our annual Pennsylvania political tradition...in New York City. We consider it sort of a retreat. Anyway, I saw Dent and another possible challenger - State Senator Jake Corman. I didn't see Gerlach or Ward there but I have no doubt that they were in attendance. I didn't see Casey either but I did see his predecessor working the individual events. I hear he has his eyes on something a little bigger than this instead of looking for a rematch. ;) The weird thing is that I didn't hear any talk about this race; all I saw were two people wearing "Casey for Senate" lapel pins. Pennsylvania Society is usually buzzing with rumors.

Aside from the obvious problem for Dent (which I've noted), here's another thing standing in the way of a Senate run: he has been given a spot on the Appropriations committee. Probably not as big of a deal with the earmark ban but it's still obviously prestigious.

Gerlach got a spot on Ways and Means so that throws a wrench into things, too.



Corman might be a good choice.  He is fairly well known in the T.  Ward is in Westmoreland, which helps a great deal as well.  I think either could take down Casey.

I hope you enjoyed the Pennsylvania Society dinner (and yes, it is a bit upper class).


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 12, 2010, 01:11:08 AM
Casey apparently mentioned that he'd vote for the tax compromise in a speech at Pennsylvania Society.

Sestak vs. Casey primary in 2012, anyone?  ;)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on December 12, 2010, 02:43:29 AM
Casey apparently mentioned that he'd vote for the tax compromise in a speech at Pennsylvania Society.

Sestak vs. Casey primary in 2012, anyone?  ;)

I wouldn't be surprised to see some SE liberal take him on in the primary in the hopes of repeating 2002. Whether its someone as big as Sestak or a nobody would determine how it develops. It would be a hell of a thing to see though.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 12, 2010, 03:38:49 AM
Casey apparently mentioned that he'd vote for the tax compromise in a speech at Pennsylvania Society.

Sestak vs. Casey primary in 2012, anyone?  ;)

I wouldn't be surprised to see some SE liberal take him on in the primary in the hopes of repeating 2002. Whether its someone as big as Sestak or a nobody would determine how it develops. It would be a hell of a thing to see though.

Casey would be especially weak in a primary. It can't automatically be compared to 2002 because he was facing Rendell then. The man is a master campaigner. That being said, Casey fails when he faces real challenges.

I think things have to get a bit worse for Casey to receive a serious challenge. Though the situation was different, this year proved that the liberal grassroots organization here isn't afraid to take on the establishment and with the Dems at historic lows here, the establishment doesn't even have the prestige it boasted this year.

If grassroots could convince Sestak to make another run, it would be an instant must see fight. The thing is that Sestak might be looking to take back his House seat.


Title: Mark Schweiker's return?
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 14, 2010, 03:10:08 PM
Former Governor Schweiker to be "drafted" to run against Casey? - http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/harrisburg_politics/PA_Society_De-Briefing.html (http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/harrisburg_politics/PA_Society_De-Briefing.html)


He might be our best candidate.  :)


Title: Re: Mark Schweiker's return?
Post by: Grumpier Than Uncle Joe on December 14, 2010, 03:20:06 PM
Former Governor Schweiker to be "drafted" to run against Casey? - http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/harrisburg_politics/PA_Society_De-Briefing.html (http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/harrisburg_politics/PA_Society_De-Briefing.html)


He might be our best candidate.  :)

I don't think any politician left office with more goodwill toward him/her than Schweiker.  In my view he'd crush Casey.......he's well liked by both sides of the aisle.

Run Mark, Run!!!


Title: Re: Mark Schweiker's return?
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 14, 2010, 03:23:40 PM
Former Governor Schweiker to be "drafted" to run against Casey? - http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/harrisburg_politics/PA_Society_De-Briefing.html (http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/harrisburg_politics/PA_Society_De-Briefing.html)


He might be our best candidate.  :)

I don't think any politician left office with more goodwill toward him/her than Schweiker.  In my view he'd crush Casey.......he's well liked by both sides of the aisle.

Run Mark, Run!!!

Consider the circumstances though. He was very popular and very well respected by Dem leaders but he had several unique incidents to explain that.

He wouldn't crush Casey. Unfortunately, no one will unless it's a total disaster of a year for the Dems/Obama. Plus, Schweiker hasn't had to run for office in his own right for a long time and has been out of the spotlight for awhile. He won't be nearly as popular as he was in 2002. If he went back on his word and ran for a full term as Governor, he would have crushed Rendell. No doubt about it. But that won't be the case against Bobby especially in a Presidential election year and after being away for so long.


Title: Re: Mark Schweiker's return?
Post by: J. J. on December 14, 2010, 03:26:56 PM
Former Governor Schweiker to be "drafted" to run against Casey? - http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/harrisburg_politics/PA_Society_De-Briefing.html (http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/harrisburg_politics/PA_Society_De-Briefing.html)


He might be our best candidate.  :)

I don't think any politician left office with more goodwill toward him/her than Schweiker.  In my view he'd crush Casey.......he's well liked by both sides of the aisle.

Run Mark, Run!!!

Consider the circumstances though. He was very popular and very well liked but he had several unique incidents to explain that.

He wouldn't crush Casey. Unfortunately, no one will unless it's a total disaster of a year for the Dems/Obama. Plus, Schweiker hasn't had to run for office in his own right for a long time and has been out of the spotlight for awhile. He won't be nearly as popular as he was in 2002. If he went back on his word and ran for a full term as Governor, he would have crushed Rendell. No doubt about it. But that won't be the case against Bobby especially in a Presidential election year and after being away for so long.

I'd make the sames points as Phil.  He had a lot good will 8 years ago, but it will be 10 years prior to the 2012 election.  His tenure was brief.

That said, Casey is much weaker than he was 4 years ago.


Title: More blasts from (the not so distant) past as potential Casey challengers.
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 14, 2010, 05:08:14 PM
Conservative columnist Chris Freind is down on our chances against Casey - http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2010/12/14/gop’s-chances-to-unseat-bob-casey-good-luck/ (http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2010/12/14/gop’s-chances-to-unseat-bob-casey-good-luck/)

He suggests Hart and English which is interesting. I've never heard English mentioned for the Senate before. Hart makes sense since she is known and well liked by the base. She was seen as a successor to Santorum or Specter anyway. However, she and English have the problem of losing their most recent elections though (and, in Hart's case, losing once in an embarrassing upset and again in a rematch by a comfortable margin).

I wonder if Hart even cares to run for office again. English might be a different story. He did host an event for incoming and outgoing members of the Congressional delegation at Pennsylvania Society...


Title: Maybe Sestak really is going to challenge Casey...
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 15, 2010, 03:52:11 AM
:)

A defeated statewide candidate now out of work usually doesn't visit every county to thank supporters without another statewide run in mind - http://citizensvoice.com/news/sestak-tours-state-thanking-supporters-1.1076387 (http://citizensvoice.com/news/sestak-tours-state-thanking-supporters-1.1076387)


In other news, State Senator Kim Ward is apparently dismissing the idea of a Senate run while another Pittsburgh area elected official - Congressman Tim Murphy - is starting to talk about it.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Grumpier Than Uncle Joe on December 15, 2010, 09:15:15 AM
Hart is second in the line of most hated PA pubs.  No chance.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Torie on December 15, 2010, 10:23:02 AM
Hart is second in the line of most hated PA pubs.  No chance.

How did she get on your sh*t list, and apparently that of a lot of other folks, Grumps?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Grumpier Than Uncle Joe on December 15, 2010, 10:34:46 AM
Hart is second in the line of most hated PA pubs.  No chance.

How did she get on your sh*t list, and apparently that of a lot of other folks, Grumps?

She's the female version of the most hated PA pub...she's Santorum with tits........It's funny, Torie, I voted for her more than once.....and she did the closing on my house 25 years ago......but I can't stand her now and I'm glad Altmire unseated her.

That said, Torie, I wouldn't underestimate her.  The pubs love her and she'd do very well in a pub primary.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on December 15, 2010, 11:23:51 AM
Hart is one of those rabid social conservative types. I think she supports criminalizing all abortions with absolutely no exceptions.


Title: Re: Mark Schweiker's return?
Post by: Badger on December 15, 2010, 12:11:58 PM
Former Governor Schweiker to be "drafted" to run against Casey? - http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/harrisburg_politics/PA_Society_De-Briefing.html (http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/harrisburg_politics/PA_Society_De-Briefing.html)


He might be our best candidate.  :)

I don't think any politician left office with more goodwill toward him/her than Schweiker.  In my view he'd crush Casey.......he's well liked by both sides of the aisle.

Run Mark, Run!!!

Can't argue with his credentials or poise, but I can't imagine him doing well in a primary race.


Title: Re: Mark Schweiker's return?
Post by: Grumpier Than Uncle Joe on December 15, 2010, 12:34:03 PM
Former Governor Schweiker to be "drafted" to run against Casey? - http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/harrisburg_politics/PA_Society_De-Briefing.html (http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/harrisburg_politics/PA_Society_De-Briefing.html)


He might be our best candidate.  :)

I don't think any politician left office with more goodwill toward him/her than Schweiker.  In my view he'd crush Casey.......he's well liked by both sides of the aisle.

Run Mark, Run!!!

Can't argue with his credentials or poise, but I can't imagine him doing well in a primary race.

Tough call.....he's a hard guy to attack.......so Hart couldn't go all  pit bull on him....but he's not a hardliner to my knowledge.  I'm not sure what the pub voter is going to be looking for in 2012 to be honest.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Psychic Octopus on December 15, 2010, 01:04:49 PM
Whoa, Mark Schweiker may run? That'd be awesome! Then we might actually have a race on our hands. I remember reading that Schweiker, had he ran against Rendell in 2002, would have crushed him.

I'd be disappointed if he threw this out there only to decide not to run. :(


Title: Quinnipiac to rate Casey tomorrow.
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 15, 2010, 01:19:47 PM
Hart is second in the line of most hated PA pubs.  No chance.

How did she get on your sh*t list, and apparently that of a lot of other folks, Grumps?

She's the female version of the most hated PA pub...she's Santorum with tits........It's funny, Torie, I voted for her more than once.....and she did the closing on my house 25 years ago......but I can't stand her now and I'm glad Altmire unseated her.

That said, Torie, I wouldn't underestimate her.  The pubs love her and she'd do very well in a pub primary.

It's hard to call her the most hated Republican in Pennsylvania when she has never run statewide. She's not known to the general electorate outside of western PA.



Can't argue with his credentials or poise, but I can't imagine him doing well in a primary race.

Tough call.....he's a hard guy to attack.......so Hart couldn't go all  pit bull on him....but he's not a hardliner to my knowledge.  I'm not sure what the pub voter is going to be looking for in 2012 to be honest.

Schweiker might be more moderate but probably conservative overall. That being said, if someone like Hart gets in, he might have an uphill battle.

Whoa, Mark Schweiker may run? That'd be awesome! Then we might actually have a race on our hands. I remember reading that Schweiker, had he ran against Rendell in 2002, would have crushed him.

I'd be disappointed if he threw this out there only to decide not to run. :(


That was 2002 though. It's not the same now even though he still has great connections.

Schweiker didn't throw this out there either. The article states that our former Lancaster GOP Chairman/ former nominee for Auditor General/2010 Lt. Gubernatorial candidate Chet Beiler wanted to start a draft movement (which is odd because I thought Beiler might look at the race himself) and Schweiker neither encouraged nor dismissed the idea.


Anyway, Quinnipiac is supposedly releasing a poll tomorrow with Casey ratings. Should be fun to see.


Title: Sestak is primarying Casey. No joke.
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 17, 2010, 10:57:28 PM
I've been trying to spread this rumor for awhile now even though I simply thought it up on my own after Casey's tax vote. Apparently, it's real - http://nepartisan.com/?p=2641 (http://nepartisan.com/?p=2641)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on December 17, 2010, 11:19:08 PM
Yehawwww!!!!!!!!!!!!! PA most important state in the nation, once again. ;)


Title: Re: Sestak is primarying Casey. No joke.
Post by: Brittain33 on December 17, 2010, 11:28:01 PM
I've been trying to spread this rumor for awhile now even though I simply thought it up on my own after Casey's tax vote. Apparently, it's real - http://nepartisan.com/?p=2641 (http://nepartisan.com/?p=2641)

That is ludicrous. (No, Phil, this is nothing personal against you.) There is virtually no chance that Sestak would challenge Casey in a primary, there are no issues on which he can draw a distinction nor was Casey a Republican for 40 years until last week. Who would give him money, either?


Title: Re: Sestak is primarying Casey. No joke.
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 17, 2010, 11:31:51 PM
I've been trying to spread this rumor for awhile now even though I simply thought it up on my own after Casey's tax vote. Apparently, it's real - http://nepartisan.com/?p=2641 (http://nepartisan.com/?p=2641)

That is ludicrous. (No, Phil, this is nothing personal against you.) There is virtually no chance that Sestak would challenge Casey in a primary, there are no issues on which he can draw a distinction nor was Casey a Republican for 40 years until last week.

Virtually no chance? The guy is going on a 67 county thank you tour...after losing.

It doesn't matter if they are basically in total agreement on the issues (that will go to show you that Casey isn't a moderate and certainly not conservative). This is all about perception and the liberal base has never been fired up for Casey. It doesn't matter that he hasn't been a Republican for forty years.

Sestak probably sees this as yet another opportunity to take down the establishment. He certainly thinks he can win the General after his performance this year and Casey is proven to be weak in primaries so why not do it? What else does he have to lose?

I don't mind if you think he'll ultimately decide against it but virtually no chance? Not acknowledging Casey's weakness with the base? Come on.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Lunar on December 17, 2010, 11:33:26 PM
Some politicians who lose primaries remain active in politics in order to remain political players without necessarily running for office again.  Bob Vander Plaats is still running around in Iowa, and I have no idea what office he'd run for before 2014.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Brittain33 on December 17, 2010, 11:39:10 PM
Sestak wants to keep his options open for the future and maintain the goodwill he built up from nearly winning a race where he was a double underdog. He needs to maintain connections because otherwise he's facing a long retirement with no next promotion.

As a Democrat, I just don't see how Casey is a reasonable target. Yes, he lost to Rendell big in the 2002 primary when Rendell swept the voters off their feet. But to me, he looks nothing like the kind of senator who draws a primary for being ideologically impure or for having flipped off the base. He's just completed one term, so he's not gone native. He won with an enormous margin in his first election. Most importantly, he has not done anything to antagonize liberals--he's been as invisible in Washington as he was on the campaign trail, has NOT insulted Obama, not held out for special deals in the Senate like a prima donna, did not raise a stink about health care or about cap and trade. There is no way for him to be viably primaried. He's not Joe Lieberman, not at all.

That leaves open the possibility he could be unviably primaried--there are often people who will take runs at sound incumbents because they believe that strongly in their cause or because they think they're setting themself up for a future run. I don't think Sestak is that stupid or has such incredibly poor judgment. I think he's probably a jerk to work for, but he hasn't shown that he takes stupid risks with no reward.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on December 17, 2010, 11:39:56 PM
I doubt this will happen, but as I privately noted if it did and Sestak won, he would've deposed Phil's two least favorite in PA politics. Phil probably would like him quite a bit.


Title: Sestak is primarying Casey. No joke.
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 17, 2010, 11:48:48 PM
Some politicians who lose primaries remain active in politics in order to remain political players without necessarily running for office again.  Bob Vander Plaats is still running around in Iowa, and I have no idea what office he'd run for before 2014.

Sestak is going on a 67 county thank you tour. It's a bit different and, again, this isn't just some rumor anymore. It has been confirmed by national and state Democratic sources.

Sestak wants to keep his options open for the future and maintain the goodwill he built up from nearly winning a race where he was a double underdog. He needs to maintain connections because otherwise he's facing a long retirement with no next promotion.

And you probably would have said the same thing when he was considering a run against Specter. Again, this is different but you shouldn't speak with such certainty.

Quote
As a Democrat, I just don't see how Casey is a reasonable target. Yes, he lost to Rendell big in the 2002 primary when Rendell swept the voters off their feet. But to me, he looks nothing like the kind of senator who draws a primary for being ideologically impure or for having flipped off the base. He's just completed one term, so he's not gone native. He won with an enormous margin in his first election. Most importantly, he has not done anything to antagonize liberals--he's been as invisible in Washington as he was on the campaign trail, has NOT insulted Obama, not held out for special deals in the Senate like a prima donna, did not raise a stink about health care or about cap and trade. There is no way for him to be viably primaried. He's not Joe Lieberman, not at all.

Those are your reasons why he shouldn't get a challenge. That's fine but that's not necessarily what most liberals think.

Quote
I don't think Sestak is that stupid or has such incredibly poor judgment. I think he's probably a jerk to work for, but he hasn't shown that he takes stupid risks with no reward.

And we were all rolling our eyes at him for taking on Specter as we saw the polls showing him down by twenty to thirty points. Did we think it would get closer? Yeah but so many asked themselves, "Why is he throwing away a seat?"

The guy might think he has nothing to lose. 2014 is out the window if you believe the Gubernatorial election pattern here and since Sestak is more motivated by federal issues and 2016 is an awful long way away for someone that isn't all that young.

This is certainly possible and let's not forget that we're not debating my rumor here. This is something that higher ups are acknowledging.

I doubt this will happen, but as I privately noted if it did and Sestak won, he would've deposed Phil's two least favorite in PA politics. Phil probably would like him quite a bit.

I've always said that I truly respect the guy.


Title: Sestak is primarying Casey. No joke.
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 18, 2010, 12:10:43 AM
Let's see how long the smiles last...


()





;)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on December 18, 2010, 12:18:47 AM
Wow Casey is actually a tall dude.


Title: Sestak is primarying Casey. No joke.
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 18, 2010, 12:30:50 AM

Very tall. I went to the Senate a few weeks ago and watching from the gallery, I could see him towering over almost everyone else there. Thune was by far the tallest but his height is known (still was taller than I expected though).


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Landslide Lyndon on December 18, 2010, 04:09:55 AM
Even if Sestak challenges Casey, which is highly doubtful, I don't see how he could gain any traction. With Specter he had the active and vocal support of liberals and an unpopular incumbent to run against.

Against Casey he will have none of those advantages. As was mentioned, during his term he never aggravated or insulted the base the way people like Lieberman and Lincoln did. And without any electability issues I don't see why Democrats would decide to oust an incumbent.


Title: Sestak is primarying Casey. No joke.
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 18, 2010, 04:29:05 AM
Even if Sestak challenges Casey, which is highly doubtful, I don't see how he could gain any traction. With Specter he had the active and vocal support of liberals and an unpopular incumbent to run against.

Against Casey he will have none of those advantages. As was mentioned, during his term he never aggravated or insulted the base the way people like Lieberman and Lincoln did. And without any electability issues I don't see why Democrats would decide to oust an incumbent.

Liberals would be vocally for him against Casey, too. Sestak is their star now and they have never had a love for Casey. Do they have real gripes with Casey now? No, which many of us will gladly highlight in 2012. Bob Casey isn't a moderate and certainly not a conservative Democrat. That being said, he still doesn't fit in with the base. He doesn't want to be their guy. He'll take their votes but, at the end of the day, he still plays up this "centrist" persona. The base thinks it can do better. They want a champion for their causes. Yeah, Casey votes with them but is his heart in it? Aside from now proudly proclaiming to be a liberal champion, everyone knows where Casey would rather be and it's not in Washington.

I'm not saying this doesn't come with a risk. In ways, yes, this will be more difficult than facing Specter but Sestak probably sees a far greater reward this time. He has to be thinking to himself, "If I could get 49% in 2010, with better turn out in 2012, how the hell do I lose?" That's for the General. For the primary, he and everyone else will be thinking, "Well, we do know how Casey folds under the pressure of a real campaign." If Sestak thinks he can follow the Rendell playbook - or his own playbook from 2010 - to victory, he'll do this and he's apparently telling people he wants to pursue this.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Landslide Lyndon on December 18, 2010, 05:13:45 AM
Liberals aren't Tea Partiers. They know that Pennsylvania isn't Vermont to have someone like Bernie Sanders elected and they are perfectly content with Casey. He is nowhere near a "villain" like Lieberman or Baucus to arouse the passions of the grassroots, and without that passion there can't be a successful primary challenge. He is a reliable liberal vote and you'll never see him on cable whining like Bayh about how liberals destroy the party.
 
If Sestak decided to go against him, I'd expect him to be treated like Kucinich.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 18, 2010, 05:28:03 AM
Liberals aren't Tea Partiers. They know that Pennsylvania isn't Vermont to have someone like Bernie Sanders elected and they are perfectly content with Casey. He is nowhere near a "villain" like Lieberman or Baucus to arouse the passions of the grassroots, and without that passion there can't be a successful primary challenge. He is a reliable liberal vote and you'll never see him on cable whining like Bayh about how liberals destroy the party.
 
If Sestak decided to go against him, I'd expect him to be treated like Kucinich.

::) Yeah, liberal Democrats don't try to "purge the moderates." That's just the Republicans. I beg you to try to be impartial for once. Just once.

With all due respect, px, you're not in a position to gauge Casey or Sestak's level of passion among the grassroots. And to use such definite language is even more ridiculous.

You must be kidding if you think he'd be Kucinich-like in a primary against Casey though I hope they do treat him that way. They'll end up looking foolish again.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Landslide Lyndon on December 18, 2010, 05:57:15 AM
I don't have to live in Pennsylvania to see that there is zero animus against Casey among liberals. As I mentioned he is a reliable liberal vote and he has never bashed the base the way people like Lieberman and Bayh do regularly. There was enthusiasm this year because Specter was mistrusted due to his history as a Republican and because he was a slimeball. The base wanted to elect a "True Democrat".

And who exactly are the moderates liberals tried to purge? Lincoln was primaried mainly because she was electoral roadkill.
And the Kucinich comparison was meant to mean that the blogosphere and the rest of the Democratic base aren't going to exactly line up behind him just because he will claim to be a more liberal alternative to Casey, exactly like Kucinich was ignored during his presidential runs.


Title: Sestak is primarying Casey. No joke.
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 18, 2010, 06:06:25 AM
I don't have to live in Pennsylvania to see that there is zero animus against Casey among liberals. As I mentioned he is a reliable liberal vote and he has never bashed the base the way people like Lieberman and Bayh do regularly. There was enthusiasm this year because Specter was mistrusted due to his history as a Republican and because he was a slimeball. The base wanted to elect a "True Democrat".

And just because he isn't a Lieberman or Bayh doesn't mean there still isn't a distaste for the man. Casey doesn't bash the base but he isn't seen as one of them. Sestak is.

Quote
And who exactly are the moderates liberals tried to purge? Lincoln was primaried mainly because she was electoral roadkill.

No, she was challenged on ideological grounds. The electoral liability argument was a convenient excuse thrown around by the left after the fact. Lieberman is another example but you'll claim that that's justified...sort of like how we will justify challenging people like Lincoln Chafee.

Quote
And the Kucinich comparison was meant to mean that the blogosphere and the rest of the Democratic base aren't going to exactly line up behind him just because he will claim to be a more liberal alternative to Casey, exactly like Kucinich was ignored during his presidential runs.

And I'm sorry but you're a fool if you think Sestak will be ignored. The man has built up an incredible following. They might see Casey as a liberal vote but he's not truly one of them in their eyes.

Let's see if this definitely happens. If so, just watch at how ineffective Casey will be at trumpeting his liberal record. It's not something he's used to doing or wants to do. Sestak could run laps around the guy as a campaigner, too.


Title: Sestak is primarying Casey. No joke.
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 18, 2010, 06:12:21 AM
Since it seems like people here don't want Sestak to run, tell me: would you honestly support Casey over Sestak in a Democratic primary?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: minionofmidas on December 18, 2010, 07:05:52 AM
No. I don't want him to run because I assume he would lose. :P


Title: Re: Sestak is primarying Casey. No joke.
Post by: Brittain33 on December 18, 2010, 09:34:09 AM
And you probably would have said the same thing when he was considering a run against Specter. Again, this is different but you shouldn't speak with such certainty.

That's not what I was saying at the time.

I am confident speaking with certainty on this issue. There is a universe of possible options, but Sestak primarying Casey isn't one of them unless Sestak has extraordinarily poor judgment. In that vein, it's kind of like Palin getting picked as VP. It was impossible because it was an irrational thing to do. Then it happened. Sestak primarying Casey would be a personal disaster for him and he doesn't have the resources to do it. (See below.)

Quote
Those are your reasons why he shouldn't get a challenge. That's fine but that's not necessarily what most liberals think.

You don't think a liberal has a good sense of what most liberals think? Liberman's challenge was telegraphed by the minions at Daily Kos years before. There was mass revulsion at Specter's comments immediately after switching parties where he sounded like a Republican. There has been nothing comparable critical of Casey.

Quote
And we were all rolling our eyes at him for taking on Specter as we saw the polls showing him down by twenty to thirty points. Did we think it would get closer? Yeah but so many asked themselves, "Why is he throwing away a seat?"

I never rolled my eyes at Sestak's challenge because it made sense for him to do. More to the point, there was always potential there on paper. Specter was an incredibly flawed candidate as a democrat. Casey, not so much.

Anyway, we'll find out the answer soon enough. If Sestak intends to challenge Casey in a primary, there are two things he needs to do: 1) start raising money, because he's broke while Casey is flush, and 2) start making a case for why he should run again, while also making a case why Casey is failing Democrartic primary voters. Until he shows evidence of doing either of those things, which is above and beyond a "thank you" tour of the people who helped him in this past race, I do not see him primarying Casey. I will keep my eyes open for one of these two steps forward.


Title: Re: Sestak is primarying Casey. No joke.
Post by: TeePee4Prez on December 18, 2010, 11:36:48 AM
Since it seems like people here don't want Sestak to run, tell me: would you honestly support Casey over Sestak in a Democratic primary?

Allow me to weigh in.  Probably would stick with Casey.  While I'm ticked over Casey's stem cell and choice votes, I've had no issues with him elsewhere.  And I sure as hell don't want to see another Santorum or Santoomey-like candidate as our 2nd Senator.  Unfortunately I realize the Bob Casey name is a brand name even in Pennsyltucky and it would be impossible for Casey to lose.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: RI on December 18, 2010, 12:19:18 PM
Since it seems like people here don't want Sestak to run, tell me: would you honestly support Casey over Sestak in a Democratic primary?

I, for probably the only one, completely support Casey. He is my favorite Senator, and I wish more Democrats were like him ideologically. If I lived in Pennsylvania, I would actively volunteer for his campaign in a heartbeat. I definitely don't speak for most liberals though. :P

That said, if Sestak runs, it is hard for me to see Casey losing anything whatsoever outside of Philadelphia, Montgomery, and maybe a few other collar counties.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Brittain33 on December 18, 2010, 12:58:42 PM
I'd vote for Casey because I think he's a stronger general election candidate by virtue of his incumbency and popularity and I see no reason to replace him.


Title: Update: Sestak vs. Casey - Sestak fails to deny interest in running.
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 18, 2010, 01:59:50 PM
While I'm ticked over Casey's stem cell and choice votes

Casey has voted Pro Choice.

Quote
it would be impossible for Casey to lose.

Some people still haven't learned their lesson...

39% approval rating and only 40% say he deserves re-election. A sign of the times? Sure but also a sign that outside of safe districts, no one is invincible (and even then they aren't always safe).


That said, if Sestak runs, it is hard for me to see Casey losing anything whatsoever outside of Philadelphia, Montgomery, and maybe a few other collar counties.

Casey would win almost all of the other counties in the state but Sestak would obviously win Delaware county, too. Please note that Rendell only won ten counties in 2002 and beat Casey 56% to 44%.

I'd vote for Casey because I think he's a stronger general election candidate by virtue of his incumbency and popularity and I see no reason to replace him.

Well, he isn't that popular. 39% approval rating might be common for these times but it proves that he isn't popular.



That's not what I was saying at the time.

I am confident speaking with certainty on this issue. There is a universe of possible options, but Sestak primarying Casey isn't one of them unless Sestak has extraordinarily poor judgment. In that vein, it's kind of like Palin getting picked as VP. It was impossible because it was an irrational thing to do. Then it happened. Sestak primarying Casey would be a personal disaster for him and he doesn't have the resources to do it. (See below.)

That's totally subjective.

"I am confident speaking on this issue because Sestak going against my advice is clearly a bad idea." That doesn't provide enough background to back up your points.

Quote
You don't think a liberal has a good sense of what most liberals think?

It doesn't mean you know how they feel elsewhere.

Just because Casey hasn't made comments to piss off liberals doesn't mean they care for him.

And too many of you are simply arguing with me on this subject instead of looking at what's actually being said. Take issue with the source, not me. There's an update today - http://nepartisan.com/?p=2658 (http://nepartisan.com/?p=2658)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Landslide Lyndon on December 18, 2010, 02:11:18 PM
Phil believes, despite all evidence to the contrary, that there is a secret liberal Tea Party-like society awaiting to unleash primary challenges against Democrats they don't deem good enough. From what I see when the Democratic grassroots and netroots put someone in their cross-hair they are hardly silent about it. In fact they are quite vocal in order to push them to the left (just like Specter did).

Lincoln's challenge was mainly due to her horrible numbers. Acting like an asshole during the HCR debate was just an added incentive. Ben Nelson and Evan Bayh are probably even more despised but nobody challenged them or plans to do so. I guarantee you that if polls showed her comfortably then nobody would have bothered.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: You kip if you want to... on December 18, 2010, 02:15:08 PM
Not that he'd win, but i'm all for a Sestak run. Sestak losing (along with Giannoulias) was one of the biggest disappointments of the night, for me.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 18, 2010, 02:20:54 PM
Phil believes, despite all evidence to the contrary, that there is a secret liberal Tea Party-like society awaiting to unleash primary challenges against Democrats they don't deem good enough. From what I see when the Democratic grassroots and netroots put someone in their cross-hair they are hardly silent about it. In fact they are quite vocal in order to push them to the left (just like Specter did).

Px, I know you don't like to debate with anything more than ridiculous rhetoric. You love using boogey man arguments. Not sure what your point is in saying the Democratic base isn't silent about putting someone in their cross-hair. The Tea Party is? They aren't vocal in order to push their officials further right? Your point makes zero sense here but that's common. You don't want to argue about the story so you change the subject.

Quote
Lincoln's challenge was mainly due to her horrible numbers.

Again, that's just the left's excuse after the fact.

Quote
Ben Nelson and Evan Bayh are probably even more despised but nobody challenged them or plans to do so.

They didn't get to. They forced Bayh out. You better believe he would have had a challenge if he ran again. Maybe nothing serious though since it's Indiana. Same with Nelson.

Quote
I guarantee you that if polls showed her comfortably then nobody would have bothered.

Totally disagree but that's beyond the point. Again, you fail to argue about the story. You ignore the issue and want to make this a discussion about me alleging something I'm not alleging at all.

I'll provide you another opportunity; argue against the story itself - http://nepartisan.com/?p=2658 (http://nepartisan.com/?p=2658)

Stop saying, "Sestak isn't doing this. This movement doesn't exist. There's no leftist Tea Party." Argue the facts of the story.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Brittain33 on December 18, 2010, 02:27:37 PM
Phil, would you agree with me that Sestak needs to start serious fundraising and making statements about his own candidacy or Casey's deficiencies in order to run in the primary next year? I can accept if you don't accept my arguments, but can we establish a basis for testing your hypothesis that he is running, moving forward?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 18, 2010, 02:34:03 PM
Phil, would you agree with me that Sestak needs to start serious fundraising and making statements about his own candidacy or Casey's deficiencies in order to run in the primary next year? I can accept if you don't accept my arguments, but can we establish a basis for testing your hypothesis that he is running, moving forward?

Of course. Would you agree that Casey should start prepping for what's probably only his second serious challenge ever if Sestak is talking about running?  :P


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Landslide Lyndon on December 18, 2010, 02:46:57 PM
Phil believes, despite all evidence to the contrary, that there is a secret liberal Tea Party-like society awaiting to unleash primary challenges against Democrats they don't deem good enough. From what I see when the Democratic grassroots and netroots put someone in their cross-hair they are hardly silent about it. In fact they are quite vocal in order to push them to the left (just like Specter did).

Px, I know you don't like to debate with anything more than ridiculous rhetoric. You love using boogey man arguments. Not sure what your point is in saying the Democratic base isn't silent about putting someone in their cross-hair. The Tea Party is? They aren't vocal in order to push their officials further right? Your point makes zero sense here but that's common. You don't want to argue about the story so you change the subject.

Quote
Lincoln's challenge was mainly due to her horrible numbers.

Again, that's just the left's excuse after the fact.

Quote
Ben Nelson and Evan Bayh are probably even more despised but nobody challenged them or plans to do so.

They didn't get to. They forced Bayh out. You better believe he would have had a challenge if he ran again. Maybe nothing serious though since it's Indiana. Same with Nelson.

Quote
I guarantee you that if polls showed her comfortably then nobody would have bothered.

Totally disagree but that's beyond the point. Again, you fail to argue about the story. You ignore the issue and want to make this a discussion about me alleging something I'm not alleging at all.

I'll provide you another opportunity; argue against the story itself - http://nepartisan.com/?p=2658 (http://nepartisan.com/?p=2658)

Stop saying, "Sestak isn't doing this. This movement doesn't exist. There's no leftist Tea Party." Argue the facts of the story.

1)What's there that you don't understand? If liberals wanted to take on Casey then we'd already been reading on the blogs what a horrible senator he is and how he is a traitor to liberal causes.
Kos took potshots against Tester today for voting against the DREAM act. Do you have anything similar about Casey?

2)I didn't expect you to be so ill informed about Bayh. He bowed out voluntarily one day before filing for the primaries was over, so there was no challenge against him, nor the liberals had any time to mount one.

And who are "they" that forced him into retirement? The mob? Soros?



Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 18, 2010, 03:10:53 PM

1)What's there that you don't understand? If liberals wanted to take on Casey then we'd already been reading on the blogs what a horrible senator he is and how he is a traitor to liberal causes.
Kos took potshots against Tester today for voting against the DREAM act. Do you have anything similar about Casey?

Believe it or not, politics doesn't always revolve around what happens from day to day on one blog!

By the way, I take that as admitting Kos is the left wing's version of a Tea Party.

Quote
2)I didn't expect you to be so ill informed about Bayh. He bowed out voluntarily one day before filing for the primaries was over, so there was no challenge against him, nor the liberals had any time to mount one.

I made a second point about why he didn't get a challenge. Didn't expect you to have trouble reading.

Plus, that was before he really went off against the left. If he ran for Governor, you don't think the left would be clamoring for a primary opponent (again, not that he'd get a serious one because it's Indiana)?

Quote
And who are "they" that forced him into retirement? The mob? Soros?

::)

Yeah, the Tea Party isn't behind primary challenges to Republicans. It's always the mob or Murdoch.

You take rhetoric to a whole new level.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Brittain33 on December 18, 2010, 03:16:39 PM
Phil,

What is your evidence that there was going to be a liberal primary challenge to Bayh?

Don't tell me why you think it was going to happen, based on what you think liberals want to do. Cite evidence that there was a challenger or challengers and this drove Bayh out of his seat.

Because if you can't, the absence of a challenge coupled with the facts of how Bayh left office disprove the theory you put forth.

That's where we stand.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 18, 2010, 03:45:54 PM
Phil,

What is your evidence that there was going to be a liberal primary challenge to Bayh?

Don't tell me why you think it was going to happen, based on what you think liberals want to do. Cite evidence that there was a challenger or challengers and this drove Bayh out of his seat.

I didn't say there was an imminent primary challenge; I said it drove him to retirement and he essentially said the same.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Landslide Lyndon on December 18, 2010, 03:49:34 PM
Phil,

What is your evidence that there was going to be a liberal primary challenge to Bayh?

Don't tell me why you think it was going to happen, based on what you think liberals want to do. Cite evidence that there was a challenger or challengers and this drove Bayh out of his seat.

I didn't say there was an imminent primary challenge; I said it drove him to retirement and he essentially said the same.

In other words, you made it all up.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: tmthforu94 on December 18, 2010, 03:51:01 PM
Phil,

What is your evidence that there was going to be a liberal primary challenge to Bayh?

Don't tell me why you think it was going to happen, based on what you think liberals want to do. Cite evidence that there was a challenger or challengers and this drove Bayh out of his seat.

I didn't say there was an imminent primary challenge; I said it drove him to retirement and he essentially said the same.
Agreed. Many in the Indiana Democratic Party were very happy that Bayh dropped out, because his record isn't pleasing to the establishment. However, the person who ended up running is probably even more conservative than Bayh is. :P


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 18, 2010, 03:57:45 PM
Phil,

What is your evidence that there was going to be a liberal primary challenge to Bayh?

Don't tell me why you think it was going to happen, based on what you think liberals want to do. Cite evidence that there was a challenger or challengers and this drove Bayh out of his seat.

I didn't say there was an imminent primary challenge; I said it drove him to retirement and he essentially said the same.

In other words, you made it all up.

I can deal with all of your other nonsense but saying I lied? No.

What did I make up? I said his issues with the left led to his retirement. He has essentially said the same. I said if he ran for Governor, after all of his recent comments, you better believe he would have received a primary challenge. I also said that if he ran in 2010, he would have received a challenge. Now it obviously wasn't going to be anything serious but if he went against the left as often as he did after his announcement, they would have been screaming for a real challenge.

We're only discussing this because you're not making a point when it comes to Sestak. You don't want to argue the facts of the story. You're only interested in straw man arguments.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 18, 2010, 04:00:30 PM
In your next post, px, please address at least one of the two article I posted concerning a possible Sestak run. None of your usual laughable rhetoric about Tea Parties or Chris Christie or Evan Bayh. Try your hardest!


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Brittain33 on December 18, 2010, 04:01:51 PM
I didn't say there was an imminent primary challenge; I said it drove him to retirement and he essentially said the same.

What did Bayh say? Can you find a link to that speech or interview?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Sam Spade on December 18, 2010, 04:03:54 PM
I really don't see how Casey is beaten by anyone in a primary.  He is really dumb, though, on the intelligence scale.

As for the rest of this spat, all I have to say is "calm down, folks."  :)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on December 18, 2010, 04:07:58 PM
So, anyone want to lay odds on whether this thread will be bigger than PA-13 by election day?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Landslide Lyndon on December 18, 2010, 04:08:44 PM
I didn't say there was an imminent primary challenge; I said it drove him to retirement and he essentially said the same.

What did Bayh say? Can you find a link to that speech or interview?

There is none. Bayh always whines about the liberals but I think that he just chickened out when he saw that he might have to fight for his reelection.
The rest are conspiracy theories.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 18, 2010, 04:13:10 PM
I didn't say there was an imminent primary challenge; I said it drove him to retirement and he essentially said the same.

What did Bayh say? Can you find a link to that speech or interview?

There is none. Bayh always whines about the liberals but I think that he just chickened out when he saw that he might have to fight for his reelection.
The rest are conspiracy theories.

...and it is pretty well known that he didn't like what they were doing to the party. That's part of his "whining" - http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-6214377-503544.html (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-6214377-503544.html)

Still waiting on you to address the Sestak stories, px.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Landslide Lyndon on December 18, 2010, 04:16:05 PM
...and it is pretty well known that he didn't like what they were doing to the party. That's part of his "whining" - http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-6214377-503544.html (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-6214377-503544.html)

Still waiting on you to address the Sestak stories, px.

Bayh says the same thing for years now. It's part of the scthick that makes him so popular with the Broder/Milbank crowd. He said the same things back in 2002, '04 and '06 about the Iraq War and Lieberman's defeat.

As for the stories, I'll believe it when I see it.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: J. J. on December 18, 2010, 04:33:10 PM
So, anyone want to lay odds on whether this thread will be bigger than PA-13 by election day?

Exactly what I was thinking.


Title: Sestak: "Casey is a good Senator"...but doesn't totally rule out a run.
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 20, 2010, 04:29:03 PM
http://www.politicspa.com/sestak-throws-water-on-senate-2012-rumors/19404/ (http://www.politicspa.com/sestak-throws-water-on-senate-2012-rumors/19404/)


Not a total dismissal yet.  ;)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Snowstalker Mk. II on December 20, 2010, 04:54:11 PM
Bob Casey 2016, anyone?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 20, 2010, 05:05:06 PM

You mean Sestak? It might be too long for him but who knows? If Casey is re-elected in 2012, he's going for Governor in 2018 to round out his political career with the only job he has truly wanted.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Snowstalker Mk. II on December 20, 2010, 07:02:07 PM

You mean Sestak? It might be too long for him but who knows? If Casey is re-elected in 2012, he's going for Governor in 2018 to round out his political career with the only job he has truly wanted.

I meant for President. :D


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 20, 2010, 10:01:35 PM

You mean Sestak? It might be too long for him but who knows? If Casey is re-elected in 2012, he's going for Governor in 2018 to round out his political career with the only job he has truly wanted.

I meant for President. :D

...

The GOP would never get that lucky.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on December 20, 2010, 10:52:40 PM
Hmm, I just realized something. Three of the 12 Democrats left in McCain districts are in PA: Holden, Critz, and Altmire. Meanwhile, four Republicans in PA are in districts Obama carried by double-digits: Gerlach, Meehan, Barletta, and Dent. That's kind of funny, in a way.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on December 20, 2010, 10:59:03 PM
Hmm, I just realized something. Three of the 12 Democrats left in McCain districts are in PA: Holden, Critz, and Altmire. Meanwhile, four Republicans in PA are in districts Obama carried by double-digits: Gerlach, Meehan, Barletta, and Dent. That's kind of funny, in a way.

What are the other 9 Dems in McCain districts?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Torie on December 21, 2010, 01:16:36 AM
Hmm, I just realized something. Three of the 12 Democrats left in McCain districts are in PA: Holden, Critz, and Altmire. Meanwhile, four Republicans in PA are in districts Obama carried by double-digits: Gerlach, Meehan, Barletta, and Dent. That's kind of funny, in a way.

What are the other 9 Dems in McCain districts?

Off the top, Matheson, Boren, Marshall (?), somebody left in Texas?, Ross in Arkansas, Critz (?), Rahall, well, I am getting tired. You know the zones to look at. How about KY-6?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on December 21, 2010, 08:06:58 AM
Dan Boren, Jim Matheson, Mike Ross, Nick Rahall, Gabrielle Giffords, Collin Peterson, Ben Chandler, Mike McIntyre, and Heath Shuler.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on December 21, 2010, 10:49:21 PM
So Giffords is now the most liberal Dem surviving in a McCain district. Not really surprising actually (her district would be an Obama one in any other state though granted.)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Napoleon on December 25, 2010, 10:30:10 PM
What about Jim Matthews?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 26, 2010, 12:03:08 AM

...

Without going into detail (you really have to be involved or follow local politics here to understand), I can say it is one of the safest bets out there that Jim Matthews won't ever stand a chance in statewide Republican politics ever again. It's very unlikely that he'll even survive his challenge next year. He is very unpopular with both parties but especially with the GOP after some of the stuff he pulled after he was re-elected in 2007.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 06, 2011, 12:44:10 AM
Casey's approval rating remains in the low 40s - http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/regional/s_716843.html (http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/regional/s_716843.html)

"(Casey) went into Washington with all kinds of ideas, but once he got elected, I feel like we never heard from him again," said Joyce Keith, 57, a Democrat from McKeesport.

I actually was cornered into meeting and shaking hands with Casey today outside of Toomey's reception. I'm sure you can just imagine how weird that was for me.  :P  He was actually literally two feet from Santorum and they awkwardly bumped into each other. Surprisingly, they are apparently very friendly to each other.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2011, 08:44:43 AM
Casey's approval rating remains in the low 40s - http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/regional/s_716843.html (http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/regional/s_716843.html)

"(Casey) went into Washington with all kinds of ideas, but once he got elected, I feel like we never heard from him again," said Joyce Keith, 57, a Democrat from McKeesport.

I actually was cornered into meeting and shaking hands with Casey today outside of Toomey's reception. I'm sure you can just imagine how weird that was for me.  :P  He was actually literally two feet from Santorum and they awkwardly bumped into each other. Surprisingly, they are apparently very friendly to each other.

Two senators from the same state, they almost need to be to bring home buck$. That isn't always the case, of course, but it helps.

Oh, and his disapproval rating is only 27%. I'd like to know how much of the 30% undecided is actually "mixed opinion" vs. "no opinion". If I had to hazard a guess I'd say largely the latter.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Brittain33 on January 06, 2011, 09:45:13 AM
Oh, and his disapproval rating is only 27%.

LOL, that's a significant fact to include. Boehner and Pelosi have comparable approval ratings--I think he has 36% to her 34%--and I was all set to post a sarcastic "Dump Boehner now! Save the Republican majority!" post until I saw that his disapprovals were in the 20s while hers were close to 50.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 06, 2011, 02:04:51 PM
Boehner and Pelosi have comparable approval ratings--I think he has 36% to her 34%

Totally irrelevant since the country doesn't vote for either of those individuals.

Two senators from the same state, they almost need to be to bring home buck$. That isn't always the case, of course, but it helps.

I wasn't saying it was odd that Casey was there. I expected it.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: freepcrusher on January 06, 2011, 05:28:11 PM
Keystone, I find the need to call you out. You do realize that Casey unseated an incumbent by 17 points? Add that Pennsylvania hasn't voted for a republican nationally since 1988 and that 2012 won't be anywhere as bad as 2010 and he's pretty much safe. Did I not mention he is family royalty.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 06, 2011, 05:38:39 PM
Keystone, I find the need to call you out. You do realize that Casey unseated an incumbent by 17 points? Add that Pennsylvania hasn't voted for a republican nationally since 1988 and that 2012 won't be anywhere as bad as 2010 and he's pretty much safe. Did I not mention he is family royalty.

No, I haven't realized that.  ::)

Yes, he beat a very controversial Senator in a Democratic wave year. Yes, thank you for reminding me that he's family royalty. Now time for me to call you out: Casey winning by seventeen points in 2006 doesn't affect 2012. I'm not saying 2012 will be as bad as 2010 but you shouldn't be saying it definitely won't be. We don't know what it will be.

If Obama is unpopular, he can lose Pennsylvania and take Casey with him since Casey has been so close to the President. Casey also is finally in a position where he has to perform. Read the article. More people are saying they haven't heard much from the guy. This isn't like being State Treasurer where he got away with doing nothing. During these are times when people are paying more attention to what their members are doing in Congress and Casey isn't performing. He's irritating moderate to conservative Independents and even Republicans that supported him in the past. Also, to be rather blunt about this, the people that still think he is Casey, Sr. are dying off.

All of that having been said, I'm simply pointing out his weaknesses and the fact that he'll be targeted. Everywhere I have posted, I have said it is an uphill battle for a challenger. Casey definitely has advantages but you're out of it if you think he's "pretty much safe" with the voting record he has built and the fact that this is Pennsylvania.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Napoleon on January 06, 2011, 06:44:51 PM
The other wildcard is if the GOP nominee is someone pro-choice like Gerlach. With Casey being pro-life, things could get interesting.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 06, 2011, 06:52:19 PM
The other wildcard is if the GOP nominee is someone pro-choice like Gerlach. With Casey being pro-life, things could get interesting.

Gerlach is Pro Life.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Napoleon on January 06, 2011, 06:56:51 PM
The other wildcard is if the GOP nominee is someone pro-choice like Gerlach. With Casey being pro-life, things could get interesting.

Gerlach is Pro Life.

I guess I made assumptions based on his membership in the Republican Main Street Partnership but I somehow doubt he is pro-life in the sense that Toomey and Santorum are, or else he would lose in the 6th.

What about Tom Ridge? He seems like he actually would be favored over Casey.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 06, 2011, 07:09:23 PM
The other wildcard is if the GOP nominee is someone pro-choice like Gerlach. With Casey being pro-life, things could get interesting.

Gerlach is Pro Life.

I guess I made assumptions based on his membership in the Republican Main Street Partnership but I somehow doubt he is pro-life in the sense that Toomey and Santorum are, or else he would lose in the 6th.

Being vocally Pro Life really wouldn't cost him that seat. The people voting on that weren't voting for him anyway.

Quote
What about Tom Ridge? He seems like he actually would be favored over Casey.

He won't run. He'll be too old and he has no desire to be there. It would easily be the most boring major Senate race we would see in 2012.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Grumpier Than Uncle Joe on January 07, 2011, 09:43:39 AM
Regardless of Casey's ties to Obama (assuming in 2012 that will hurt him with another push to unseat incumbents) it will still take a formidible GOP challenger to unseat him, IMO.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on January 07, 2011, 01:05:58 PM
The other wildcard is if the GOP nominee is someone pro-choice like Gerlach. With Casey being pro-life, things could get interesting.

Gerlach is Pro Life.

I guess I made assumptions based on his membership in the Republican Main Street Partnership but I somehow doubt he is pro-life in the sense that Toomey and Santorum are, or else he would lose in the 6th.

What about Tom Ridge? He seems like he actually would be favored over Casey.

I wouldn't do that on a regular basis. There are some members of the Main Street Partnership that are also in the Republican Study Committee.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: feeblepizza on January 10, 2011, 09:45:40 AM
Tom Ridge or the female House candidate in 2004, the doctor - what was her name again (KP was an avid supporter, he should know her)?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 10, 2011, 12:18:36 PM
Tom Ridge or the female House candidate in 2004, the doctor - what was her name again (KP was an avid supporter, he should know her)?

...

Ridge isn't doing it. I won't even bother to put together a serious response for the second "possible candidate."


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: feeblepizza on January 10, 2011, 12:57:11 PM
Tom Ridge or the female House candidate in 2004, the doctor - what was her name again (KP was an avid supporter, he should know her)?

...

Ridge isn't doing it. I won't even bother to put together a serious response for the second "possible candidate."

Can you at least tell me her name, anyway?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 10, 2011, 01:11:09 PM
Tom Ridge or the female House candidate in 2004, the doctor - what was her name again (KP was an avid supporter, he should know her)?

...

Ridge isn't doing it. I won't even bother to put together a serious response for the second "possible candidate."

Can you at least tell me her name, anyway?

Stop it.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Landslide Lyndon on January 10, 2011, 01:22:15 PM
Tom Ridge or the female House candidate in 2004, the doctor - what was her name again (KP was an avid supporter, he should know her)?

...

Ridge isn't doing it. I won't even bother to put together a serious response for the second "possible candidate."

Can you at least tell me her name, anyway?

Stop it.

Hey, what's going on here? My curiosity has been piqued.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on January 10, 2011, 02:41:48 PM
Melissa Brown, I'm guessing (lost to Allyson Schwartz). She'd be another candidate for OPHTHPAC to support, at least.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 10, 2011, 04:39:11 PM
Tom Ridge or the female House candidate in 2004, the doctor - what was her name again (KP was an avid supporter, he should know her)?

...

Ridge isn't doing it. I won't even bother to put together a serious response for the second "possible candidate."

Can you at least tell me her name, anyway?

Stop it.

Hey, what's going on here? My curiosity has been piqued.

Feeblepizza is being silly.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Landslide Lyndon on January 10, 2011, 04:46:29 PM

Did you have a crush on the lady or what?
And how does he know such ancient history? I thought he was a relatively new member.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 10, 2011, 04:49:09 PM

Enough with the trolling, dude. Seriously.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Landslide Lyndon on January 10, 2011, 04:51:49 PM

Enough with the trolling, dude. Seriously.

How am I trolling? I just asked a question because I was amused by your coy response to feeblepizza's insinuations.
If you don't want to answer, fine by me. 


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: feeblepizza on January 10, 2011, 05:01:24 PM
I am not being silly, I just want to know what the woman's name is because I think that she would be a good contender against Casey in '12. After all, she made a pretty good performance in '04 against Schwartz, did she not? Is it Melissa Brown? Or is it Mary or Marie or something?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 10, 2011, 05:09:53 PM
...

Yeah, her name is Melissa Brown and no, she didn't have a good showing in 2004. She had a good showing in 2002.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: feeblepizza on January 10, 2011, 05:20:29 PM
...

Yeah, her name is Melissa Brown and no, she didn't have a good showing in 2004. She had a good showing in 2002.

Alright. Thanks for the info, Phil. Didn't have to go through all that drama, though ;).


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Badger on January 13, 2011, 06:31:49 PM
...

Yeah, her name is Melissa Brown and no, she didn't have a good showing in 2004. She had a good showing in 2002.

Alright. Thanks for the info, Phil. Didn't have to go through all that drama, though ;).

You know, Phil, when a 12 year old properly schools you about too much drama, maybe its time to turm it down a notch. ;D


Title: Schweiker likely out of the running for Casey's seat.
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 14, 2011, 04:57:12 PM
He took a major lobbying job - http://www.politicspa.com/did-gop-just-lose-senate-prospect-mark-schweiker/20125/ (http://www.politicspa.com/did-gop-just-lose-senate-prospect-mark-schweiker/20125/)

Oh well.  :(


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 15, 2011, 10:50:17 PM
Rumor is that former State Representative and 2010 Gubernatorial candidate Sam Rohrer is considering a run for the Senate (or Auditor General).

I like Rohrer. He's a good guy, a man of unquestionable integrity. I voted for him in the Gubernatorial primary. That being said, Casey would love to face someone like Rohrer. I think I said Ridge vs. Casey would be one of the most boring statewide elections here in modern times. Casey vs. Rohrer would be even more of a snoozer.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on July 02, 2011, 10:28:07 AM
State Senator Jake Corman won't run - http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/corman-not-running-for-us-senate-in-2012-he-says-797097/ (http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/corman-not-running-for-us-senate-in-2012-he-says-797097/)

Not the best of news for Republicans. Unless a deal was made to clear the field for one of the businessmen, this probably means others will pass on an "un-winable" race.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Tender Branson on July 06, 2011, 09:37:24 AM
Bob Casey Raises $1.3 Million in 2nd Quarter

Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey (D) raised $1.3 million in the second quarter and had $3.1 million in cash on hand at the end of June, according to the Pennsylvania Democratic Party.

"Sen. Casey set another fundraising record by posting his strongest quarter yet," Pennsylvania Democratic Party Chairman Jim Burn said in a press release.

Casey has yet to attract a well-known opponent. The two declared GOP candidates are attorney Marc Scaringi, who raised just $22,000 in the first quarter, and tea party organizer Lauren Cummings.

Casey raised $1.1 million in the first quarter and had $2.1 million in cash on hand at the end of March.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/Bob-Casey-2nd-quarter-fundraising-pennsylvania-207025-1.html?pos=adp


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on July 11, 2011, 03:05:10 PM
Another unknown gets in the race - http://christian2012.org/ (http://christian2012.org/)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Snowstalker Mk. II on July 11, 2011, 08:10:03 PM
Sorry Phil, but I'm not following this race; all the high-profile Republicans were elected in 2010, and Casey is a near-perfect fit for PA based on his political positions. A 2006 rematch would be fun but result in the same curbstomp.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on July 11, 2011, 08:14:07 PM
Sorry Phil, but I'm not following this race; all the high-profile Republicans were elected in 2010, and Casey is a near-perfect fit for PA based on his political positions. A 2006 rematch would be fun but result in the same curbstomp.

Funny enough, I was at an event today and some friends of mine that are usually critical of Santorum thought he could win if he ran against Casey. I highly doubt it. It wouldn't be the "same curbstomp" but Casey wouldn't have a problem unless things really got bad nationally.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Snowstalker Mk. II on July 11, 2011, 08:27:09 PM
Sorry Phil, but I'm not following this race; all the high-profile Republicans were elected in 2010, and Casey is a near-perfect fit for PA based on his political positions. A 2006 rematch would be fun but result in the same curbstomp.

Funny enough, I was at an event today and some friends of mine that are usually critical of Santorum thought he could win if he ran against Casey. I highly doubt it. It wouldn't be the "same curbstomp" but Casey wouldn't have a problem unless things really got bad nationally.

I guess; it wouldn't be close, but Santorum wasn't far from the PA GOP's floor.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: TeePee4Prez on July 17, 2011, 11:05:51 PM
Another unknown gets in the race - http://christian2012.org/ (http://christian2012.org/)

NEXT.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on August 02, 2011, 09:43:36 PM
The latest Quinnipiac poll: Casey's approval rating is at 48% and disapproval is at 29%. 47% say that he deserves to be re-elected while 33% say he doesn't. 47% would vote for Casey compared to 35% that would vote for a generic Republican.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1327.xml?ReleaseID=1630 (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1327.xml?ReleaseID=1630)


This just confirms that we'll need a very weak Obama to have a chance at winning here and even then it's probably unlikely (especially since numbers like these will continue to keep major candidates out of the race).  :(


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: TeePee4Prez on August 02, 2011, 10:38:06 PM
The latest Quinnipiac poll: Casey's approval rating is at 48% and disapproval is at 29%. 47% say that he deserves to be re-elected while 33% say he doesn't. 47% would vote for Casey compared to 35% that would vote for a generic Republican.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1327.xml?ReleaseID=1630 (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1327.xml?ReleaseID=1630)


This just confirms that we'll need a very weak Obama to have a chance at winning here and even then it's probably unlikely (especially since numbers like these will continue to keep major candidates out of the race).  :(

I would say unless you guys can get Tom Ridge, there's virtually no shot.  Rohrer has no shot at the Philadelphia suburbs.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on August 02, 2011, 10:40:31 PM
The latest Quinnipiac poll: Casey's approval rating is at 48% and disapproval is at 29%. 47% say that he deserves to be re-elected while 33% say he doesn't. 47% would vote for Casey compared to 35% that would vote for a generic Republican.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1327.xml?ReleaseID=1630 (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1327.xml?ReleaseID=1630)


This just confirms that we'll need a very weak Obama to have a chance at winning here and even then it's probably unlikely (especially since numbers like these will continue to keep major candidates out of the race).  :(

I would say unless you guys can get Tom Ridge, there's virtually no shot.  Rohrer has no shot at the Philadelphia suburbs.

Rohrer isn't even necessarily running.

Saying there is virtually no shot isn't wise at all. Nobodies have been able to taken down the supposedly mighty "unbeatable" before when the environment is right. I just don't think it's likely.


Title: Casey getting a more serious opponent?
Post by: Keystone Phil on August 04, 2011, 05:14:05 PM
Well, this could be serious - former Congressional candidate and businessman Steve Welch might run against Casey - http://www.politico.com/blogs/davidcatanese/0811/Is_Casey_closer_to_a_serious_challenger.html (http://www.politico.com/blogs/davidcatanese/0811/Is_Casey_closer_to_a_serious_challenger.html)

I've been critical of the guy in the past. This was the guy that was initially running for Congress in the 7th Congressional district then got out when Pat Meehan got in. He decided to run in the 6th (which was, at the time, an open seat because Gerlach was running for Governor) but dropped out again when Gerlach returned. Stuff like that didn't help him with politicos around here but he does have a great resume and would certainly be the strongest possible challenger out of the current group.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Phony Moderate on August 04, 2011, 05:15:32 PM
What about Tom Ridge?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on August 04, 2011, 05:17:50 PM

He won't do it. He apparently doesn't have the desire to serve in the Senate. I think Welch or Loiselle (known for starting a medical technology business) are very likely to be the most credible candidates we will find for 2012.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Brittain33 on August 05, 2011, 08:09:49 AM
How about Dino Rossi?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: TheDeadFlagBlues on August 05, 2011, 01:59:22 PM
Does anyone see this race becoming competitive besides Phil?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: J. J. on August 05, 2011, 06:11:11 PM
It is probably the least likely of the competitive races.  Casey is one of those races where, it there is a widespread collapse in the Democrats, it becomes competitive.  2010 was not strong enough.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on August 06, 2011, 01:01:36 AM
Does anyone see this race becoming competitive besides Phil?

Ok, I never said anything about the race becoming competitive. Take the trolling elsewhere. Thanks.


It is probably the least likely of the competitive races.  Casey is one of those races where, it there is a widespread collapse in the Democrats, it becomes competitive.  2010 was not strong enough.

Yeah, exactly. Pretty much what I've been saying throughout the thread yet I apparently see it becoming competitive according to some joke posters.  ::)


Title: Tim Burns to take on Casey?
Post by: Keystone Phil on August 13, 2011, 12:17:42 AM
Another more serious challenger could be emerging and it's another former (2010) Congressional candidate and businessman: Tim Burns from PA 12 - http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2011/08/tim-burns-met-w.php (http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2011/08/tim-burns-met-w.php)

Strangely enough, I did think of him as a candidate not too long ago but after two tough loses to Critz (the General being closer than expected. Only a 51% to 59% loss), I figured he was done with politics and wouldn't even consider it. I'm glad he sat down with the NRSC.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: CultureKing on August 13, 2011, 02:34:37 AM
So Burns wants to become the new Dino Rossi?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on August 13, 2011, 10:07:32 AM
So Burns wants to become the new Dino Rossi?

No, no. Burns lost fair and square in his first race.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on September 06, 2011, 10:45:50 PM
Congressman Tim Murphy won't run - http://www.observer-reporter.com/or/story11/08-31-2011-tim-murphy-visit (http://www.observer-reporter.com/or/story11/08-31-2011-tim-murphy-visit)


In other news, I've heard from a close source that former State Representative and 2010 Gubernatorial candidate Sam Rohrer will be announcing his candidacy within a few weeks. He's far more well known across the state when compared to the rest of the field so he'll be the frontrunner. I'm also hearing that Tim Burns (the guy I want to run) is preparing for a run as well.

With so many candidates appealing to conservative voters, the thought is that a decent path to the nomination is emerging for former Congressional candidate Steve Welch (who is more moderate when compared to the rest of the field). The rest of the field consists of a former Santorum staffer, a Tea Party leader, a retired coal mining company owner, a well known former State Representative (Rohrer), a business consultant/former Congressional candidate from the 1980s and a distinguished Army veteran. Burns, who isn't yet in the race, would further split the vote. That definitely could be enough for Welch.

Fun fact about Welch and Burns: both were Congressional candidates in 2010 and both are biotech executives.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Snowstalker Mk. II on September 07, 2011, 03:17:23 PM
If Santorum drops out early enough (after Iowa), a rematch would be interesting.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on September 07, 2011, 04:02:49 PM
If Santorum drops out early enough (after Iowa), a rematch would be interesting.

Iowa is late this year and since our primary is earlier in Presidential election years, the filing deadline is earlier. I don't know if he'd make it.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on September 13, 2011, 10:10:02 PM
Welch has confirmed that he's running and has already assembled an all star team: former Santorum strategist and political consultant John Brabender and former Corbett Campaign Manager Brian Nutt. Toomey's 2010 Field Director and Pawlenty for President staffer (a friend of mine) is also joining them. He's going to have more difficulty winning over the base but with all of the others running, it might not be too much of an issue.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: J. J. on September 14, 2011, 02:51:57 PM
I basically list Casey as the 14th seat.  There would be about 13 others to go before he loses.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on September 15, 2011, 09:12:25 AM
By the way, Brabender being on board with Welch is the sign that Santorum doesn't intend to leave the Presidential race to set up a rematch with Casey.


Title: This could be big: Pat Meehan for Senate?
Post by: Keystone Phil on September 16, 2011, 01:16:02 PM
()


He'd be giving up a seat that he'd likely win re-election to for a tougher challenge but the risk might pay off - http://www.delcotimes.com/articles/2011/09/16/news/doc4e72bc962d92c253852817.txt?viewmode=fullstory (http://www.delcotimes.com/articles/2011/09/16/news/doc4e72bc962d92c253852817.txt?viewmode=fullstory)


I'd certainly be on board.


Title: Re: This could be big: Pat Meehan for Senate?
Post by: Landslide Lyndon on September 16, 2011, 01:32:28 PM
()


He'd be giving up a seat that he'd likely win re-election to for a tougher challenge but the risk might pay off - http://www.delcotimes.com/articles/2011/09/16/news/doc4e72bc962d92c253852817.txt?viewmode=fullstory (http://www.delcotimes.com/articles/2011/09/16/news/doc4e72bc962d92c253852817.txt?viewmode=fullstory)


Maybe, but he'll make the life far easier for the map-drawers and his colleagues.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on September 17, 2011, 09:43:09 PM
At this weekend's PA GOP State Committee meeting, Burns said that he's serious about a Senate run and that a decision should be reached by the end of this month - http://www.politicspa.com/exclusive-burns-likely-to-run-for-u-s-senate/27874/ (http://www.politicspa.com/exclusive-burns-likely-to-run-for-u-s-senate/27874/)

Unless Meehan runs, Burns is my choice.


In other news, Scranton Tea Party leader Laureen Cummings announced her candidacy today.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: tmthforu94 on September 17, 2011, 10:37:51 PM
At this weekend's PA GOP State Committee meeting, Burns said that he's serious about a Senate run and that a decision should be reached by the end of this month - http://www.politicspa.com/exclusive-burns-likely-to-run-for-u-s-senate/27874/ (http://www.politicspa.com/exclusive-burns-likely-to-run-for-u-s-senate/27874/)

Unless Meehan runs, Burns is my choice.


In other news, Scranton Tea Party leader Laureen Cummings announced her candidacy today.
http://yrnetwork.com/websites/default.aspx?id=3145

Endorsed. It'll be tough, but she can certainly pull this off.

;)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on September 18, 2011, 09:55:07 AM
At this weekend's PA GOP State Committee meeting, Burns said that he's serious about a Senate run and that a decision should be reached by the end of this month - http://www.politicspa.com/exclusive-burns-likely-to-run-for-u-s-senate/27874/ (http://www.politicspa.com/exclusive-burns-likely-to-run-for-u-s-senate/27874/)

Unless Meehan runs, Burns is my choice.


In other news, Scranton Tea Party leader Laureen Cummings announced her candidacy today.
http://yrnetwork.com/websites/default.aspx?id=3145

Endorsed. It'll be tough, but she can certainly pull this off.

;)

Uh, you certainly wouldn't be endorsing her. Believe me. Though I'm guessing you know that with your wink. There's a reason why I don't have much to say about her here.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: tmthforu94 on September 19, 2011, 09:32:03 AM
At this weekend's PA GOP State Committee meeting, Burns said that he's serious about a Senate run and that a decision should be reached by the end of this month - http://www.politicspa.com/exclusive-burns-likely-to-run-for-u-s-senate/27874/ (http://www.politicspa.com/exclusive-burns-likely-to-run-for-u-s-senate/27874/)

Unless Meehan runs, Burns is my choice.


In other news, Scranton Tea Party leader Laureen Cummings announced her candidacy today.
http://yrnetwork.com/websites/default.aspx?id=3145

Endorsed. It'll be tough, but she can certainly pull this off.

;)

Uh, you certainly wouldn't be endorsing her. Believe me. Though I'm guessing you know that with your wink. There's a reason why I don't have much to say about her here.
Look on my Facebook profile for a good laugh, Phil. I almost died when I saw it.

Let's just say, I got contacted be a Senatorial candidate. ;)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on September 19, 2011, 11:32:49 PM
Look on my Facebook profile for a good laugh, Phil. I almost died when I saw it.

Let's just say, I got contacted be a Senatorial candidate. ;)

Uh, wow. Wow. I have a friend that is fairly good friends with her, too.

Anyway, here's a good article from Politico talking about how crowded the field is and how it might lead to a nasty battle between the Tea Party and establishment factions - http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=BB71EF86-078F-4970-9185-E4F796DDEB95 (http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=BB71EF86-078F-4970-9185-E4F796DDEB95)


In a weird way, I'm a mix of both (certainly not "establishment" in the sense that I'm an old school, smoke filled room type or a RINO). I think Burns is the closest thing to that, too. Everyone else seems solidly in one of the other two camps.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 12, 2011, 09:36:08 AM
Steve Welch teases that he has an important announcement on Facebook within the next 24 hours. He'll almost certainly be entering the race.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 12, 2011, 09:43:17 AM
And this is probably why Welch is announcing soon: his likely top rival announced today - http://www.politicspa.com/tim-burns-announces-for-senate/28619/ (http://www.politicspa.com/tim-burns-announces-for-senate/28619/)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: smoltchanov on October 12, 2011, 09:58:49 AM
Well, if Burns is considered a top-class recruit - Casey can sleep good and without any serious nerve problems...


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 13, 2011, 10:45:40 AM
Welch joins the race, addressing his recent party switch right off the bat - http://www.politico.com/blogs/davidcatanese/1011/Casey_rival_heads_off_Democrat_problem.html?showall# (http://www.politico.com/blogs/davidcatanese/1011/Casey_rival_heads_off_Democrat_problem.html?showall#)


Interesting tidbit from the article: Sam Rohrer is apparently expected to announce that he's running very soon even though I've heard from people close to Rohrer that he probably wasn't going to run.


Announced candidates so far:

Tim Burns
Steve Welch
Tom Smith
John Vernon
Marc Scaringi
David Christian
John Kesinger
Laureen Cummings

Burns and Welch start out as frontrunners in the primary with Smith as the dark horse. If Rohrer does get in, he'll be a favorite (possibly the favorite) thanks to his last statewide run and very dedicated following. Other than Rohrer, I don't see anyone else possibly getting in at this point.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 04, 2011, 09:50:53 PM
Sam Rohrer strongly hinted today that he is running. A well placed source that I know said he's doing it.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 16, 2011, 03:45:08 PM
Rohrer is officially getting in on Monday. His website is already up. He becomes the frontrunner but the real winner here is Welch as people like Burns, Smith, Scaringi and Vernon (not to mention a few others) split up Rohrer's vote.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 22, 2011, 10:19:04 AM
A day after Rohrer's official announcement and he's already leading in a poll. PPP has him at 25% and Tim Burns is at 15% (surprisingly high). The rest of the field:

Tom Smith - 3%
Laureen Cummings - 2%
Steve Welch - 1%
John Vernon - 1%
Scraningi - 0%


51% are undecided or supporting "someone else."


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: scoopa on November 22, 2011, 11:51:38 AM
Name recognition poll.

I think this race is probably Welch's to lose. He should go up on air asap.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 22, 2011, 02:35:10 PM

Of course but Rohrer really does have a very dedicated, sizable following. Despite being the candidate in the PA 12 Special and the General, Burns should not have name recognition that high so I think he ought to be the happiest with this.

This race becomes Welch's to lose if lesser candidates like Vernon, Smith, Scaringi and Christian (who was either not mentioned in the poll or registered worse than Scaringi) really pick up steam. That will split the true believer conservative vote. It won't be that easy for Welch though since I believe quite a few of these candidates will be out of the running by early next year.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 28, 2011, 10:59:12 AM
This is the stuff that will make Welch a player in the primary - parody video of Obama and Casey - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoF3-UemPWQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoF3-UemPWQ)

I'm sure this will have gone viral within PA GOP political circles by the end of the day.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: HST1948 on November 28, 2011, 11:07:01 AM
I gotta admit, this is a really funny and great commercial.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Tender Branson on November 28, 2011, 11:16:06 AM
I gotta admit, this is a really funny and great commercial.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Snowstalker Mk. II on November 28, 2011, 01:54:26 PM
It'll probably be Rohrer.

Fun fact: I saw a ton of signs supporting him in a write-in campaign for Governor last year. Mostly Amish people.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 28, 2011, 02:00:39 PM
Fun fact: I saw a ton of signs supporting him in a write-in campaign for Governor last year. Mostly Amish people.

Many of his fans are very dedicated. If Burns and Smith don't emerge as strong candidates, he'll get the nomination. Otherwise, the three risk splitting up the same vote and Welch has a real shot at this.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 28, 2011, 06:10:22 PM
These are actually some good numbers for us - http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/11/casey-continues-to-lead.html (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/11/casey-continues-to-lead.html)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Snowstalker Mk. II on November 28, 2011, 06:16:44 PM
The article put out an interesting possibility: Is there any chance of Santorum running for Senate after he drops out of the presidential race?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 29, 2011, 12:23:20 AM
The article put out an interesting possibility: Is there any chance of Santorum running for Senate after he drops out of the presidential race?

It has been mentioned before but Santorum is now registered to vote in Virginia, I believe.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 29, 2011, 10:47:18 AM
Looks like we don't have enough candidates in the GOP primary and a big name might be getting in: State Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi is considering a bid - http://www.politicspa.com/exclusive-pileggi-considering-u-s-senate-bid/29755/ (http://www.politicspa.com/exclusive-pileggi-considering-u-s-senate-bid/29755/)


Definitely surprising. He'd have all kinds of establishment support and would be a fundraising powerhouse. This could also seriously hurt Welch.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 29, 2011, 02:22:07 PM
This is the stuff that will make Welch a player in the primary - parody video of Obama and Casey - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoF3-UemPWQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoF3-UemPWQ)

I'm sure this will have gone viral within PA GOP political circles by the end of the day.


...and now Casey is "unlikely" to appear with Obama at an event in his hometown - http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/1111/keeping_a_distance_18419369-48a3-42e3-be18-08819a646320.html (http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/1111/keeping_a_distance_18419369-48a3-42e3-be18-08819a646320.html)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 30, 2011, 01:48:25 PM
I guess it can be mentioned here: PPP also polled ratings for Toomey. He's at 35% approval with 33% disapproving. 32% are undecided. Corbett's ratings at upside down: 37% approving and 43% disapproving.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: You kip if you want to... on November 30, 2011, 02:13:21 PM
This is the stuff that will make Welch a player in the primary - parody video of Obama and Casey - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoF3-UemPWQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoF3-UemPWQ)

I'm sure this will have gone viral within PA GOP political circles by the end of the day.

That's so 2010.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 02, 2011, 12:29:06 PM
Insiders are calling Pileggi's possible entrance a "game changer" in the primary and I agree. This would seriously hurt Welch but he's vowing to stay in the race - http://www.politicspa.com/?p=29847 (http://www.politicspa.com/?p=29847)

Reading the article, the amount of praise being showered on Pileggi by the state GOP's big players makes it seem like he's definitely doing this.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 05, 2011, 10:08:45 AM
Pileggi is announcing today that he will not run. Strange timing. I figured he'd allow his potential candidacy to be part of the buzz at this weekend's Pennsylvania Society.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Holmes on December 05, 2011, 09:36:57 PM
Maybe it's possible he does not have an overinflated ego.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 13, 2011, 09:14:31 AM
John Vernon, one of the middle tier candidates, has dropped out. He will be endorsing a candidate in the coming weeks.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Tender Branson on December 27, 2011, 11:29:53 AM
Phil might find this interesting (or not, since it is an internal):

http://www.politicspa.com/smith-internal-poll-smith-leads-senate-primary/30352/


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on December 27, 2011, 12:36:19 PM
Phil might find this interesting (or not, since it is an internal):

http://www.politicspa.com/smith-internal-poll-smith-leads-senate-primary/30352/

I saw.  ;)  It's all over Facebook when you have political friends that are working for Smith's campaign.


I believe the numbers but they're probably a bit inflated for Smith. He's already running ads so that has helped build his name recognition. It looks like good news for everyone else especially Welch. This is a wide open race. Good to see my top three candidates polling within the top four spots.



Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 04, 2012, 11:24:04 AM
Smith has a whopping $4.4 million on hand.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 08, 2012, 11:49:22 AM
Tim Burns won the Central PA State Committee straw poll yesterday.


Burns - 32
Rohrer - 22
Welch - 22
Smith - 20
Christian - 2
Scaringi - 1


The "others" should be dropping out shortly with petition circulation season beginning in two weeks. This is clearly a four man race: Rohrer, Smith, Burns and Welch.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 13, 2012, 11:16:19 PM
Cummings has dropped out and endorsed Burns. Not that it matters. She wasn't a factor anyway.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 14, 2012, 03:20:13 PM
Welch won the Northeast PA State Committee Caucus straw poll with 44% of the vote. Not sure on the exact breakdown but Welch getting that much support in a crowded field is impressive. Kind of surprising that Rohrer didn't win there.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 18, 2012, 09:01:48 PM
Continuing with the "Phil talks to himself" thread... :P

In a blow to Welch, the Southeast caucus voted tonight to not endorse in the Senate race. This is probably because of fellow SE PA candidate David Christian who, somewhat surprisingly, had a Super PAC swoop in to help him out by attacking Welch and Smith in a series of mailers to State Committee members.


Title: Corbett backs Welch.
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 19, 2012, 10:55:02 AM
The Governor apparently started calling party leaders yesterday, asking them to support Welch. It wasn't enough to sway the SE caucus but this is a big boost for Welch overall. This likely means an endorsement from State Committee.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 28, 2012, 12:15:14 PM
State Committee is holding its endorsement vote right now. Welch is expected to get it thanks to some serious arm twisting by the Governor (I saw some of it first hand when I was up there last night). Not sure why Corbett is pushing so hard for it but he is. This will be a big boost to Welch but Smith will be staying in regardless. Same with Rohrer (but that's understood). Burns might be out.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 28, 2012, 12:25:05 PM
Despite the best efforts of almost every candidate other than Welch, the motion to endorse has passed. Welch should have this locked up.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on January 28, 2012, 02:45:36 PM
Which one is Welch? The one who made the aborted run for PA-06 in 2010?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on January 28, 2012, 04:34:24 PM
Welch officially endorsed. No word on whether or not Burns is out.

Which one is Welch? The one who made the aborted run for PA-06 in 2010?

He ran and dropped out in PA 6 and PA 7 in 2010.


Title: Burns bails.
Post by: Keystone Phil on February 02, 2012, 01:47:33 PM
Tim Burns has dropped out.

I only have to choose between Welch and Smith now but I'm even more undecided than ever before.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on March 14, 2012, 09:56:49 AM
Quinnipiac - Casey has a 46% to 27% approval rating. He has a surprising high 31% approval rating amongst Republicans (there's that Casey name!) but only 8% would vote for him. He leads a hypothetical Republican by twelve - 46% to 34%. 48% say he deserves re-election. In other news, Toomey has a 42% to 28% approval rating.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on March 14, 2012, 08:14:17 PM
PPP showing the typical Casey lukewarm ratings (especially with Dems) as well. Rohrer leading in the primary with about half undecided. I'll post the poll in the poll board...until noticing that Inks did it. ;)


Title: Santorum makes his way into first 2012 PA Senate TV ad.
Post by: Keystone Phil on March 27, 2012, 09:56:26 AM
Welch incorporates Santorum in his first TV ad - http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Di34-wlq4TB0&v=i34-wlq4TB0&gl=US (http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Di34-wlq4TB0&v=i34-wlq4TB0&gl=US)


Very wise strategic move for a candidate with problems with most of the base. I guess it also helps that Welch's media consultant is also Santorum's but I believe Welch's people also have ties to the Romney campaign.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: redcommander on March 28, 2012, 08:06:02 PM
Do you know why Welch became a Republican? I read that he was formerly a Democrat.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on March 28, 2012, 09:52:01 PM
Do you know why Welch became a Republican? I read that he was formerly a Democrat.

He was a Republican then switched to Dem in 2008 to vote for Obama in the primary (says he became disillusioned with the GOP on spending matters). He switched back to Republican and voted for McCain but the Obama vote is obviously pissing a lot of people off. Also, while still a Republican, he helped Sestak in 2006.

Welch ran into even more trouble when the Governor claimed that Welch switched as part of Operation Chaos. The problem? Operation Chaos was for people to vote for Hillary, not Obama. This gaffe has hurt Welch even more.

I'm thrilled to be going to the Senate debate next week here in Philly. It's the first time I'll be hearing from the candidates in a debate. Here's hoping I'll decide on a candidate by this time next week.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Snowstalker Mk. II on March 31, 2012, 03:39:37 PM
()


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 04, 2012, 07:49:38 AM
Debate tonight at the Union League. I serve on the board of one of the groups that is hosting so I'll be there and hope to finally get a good idea as to whom I'll be supporting. If you're a Pennsylvanian and watch to watch, tune into PCN at 6:30. :)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 04, 2012, 06:47:18 PM
Rohrer has a Perry-esque moment. Freezes for awhile when asked to name a time when Casey was socially liberal, then mentions Obamacare, then freezes again and admits he was caught off guard. Ouch.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 04, 2012, 07:54:10 PM
Smith: "...Specter ran in 2010?"

Wow. Rohrer didn't have the biggest gaffe tonight. This is horrible. He doesn't remember candidates he voted for and then asked what Welch had for breakfast three weeks ago. Terrible attempt at a save. Your votes are a little more important, Tom.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: redcommander on April 05, 2012, 01:10:45 AM
Smith: "...Specter ran in 2010?"

Wow. Rohrer didn't have the biggest gaffe tonight. This is horrible. He doesn't remember candidates he voted for and then asked what Welch had for breakfast three weeks ago. Terrible attempt at a save. Your votes are a little more important, Tom.

I don't trust Welch or his reasons for changing his voter registration. And Rohrer seems to much in the mold of the Buck and Angle, and we all know how their races went. Is there anyone remotely electable even running? What about that former Santorum aide?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: smoltchanov on April 05, 2012, 02:54:20 AM

I don't trust Welch or his reasons for changing his voter registration. And Rohrer seems to much in the mold of the Buck and Angle, and we all know how their races went. Is there anyone remotely electable even running? What about that former Santorum aide?


You consider him electable? Even remotely???


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 05, 2012, 02:59:16 AM
Smith: "...Specter ran in 2010?"

Wow. Rohrer didn't have the biggest gaffe tonight. This is horrible. He doesn't remember candidates he voted for and then asked what Welch had for breakfast three weeks ago. Terrible attempt at a save. Your votes are a little more important, Tom.

I don't trust Welch or his reasons for changing his voter registration. And Rohrer seems to much in the mold of the Buck and Angle, and we all know how their races went. Is there anyone remotely electable even running? What about that former Santorum aide?


Rohrer is a very intelligent and articulate man. That said, I fear a very easy Casey win if he was the nominee. Scaringi - the former Santorum aide - isn't going to come close to winning the primary.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: redcommander on April 05, 2012, 03:03:41 AM
Smith: "...Specter ran in 2010?"

Wow. Rohrer didn't have the biggest gaffe tonight. This is horrible. He doesn't remember candidates he voted for and then asked what Welch had for breakfast three weeks ago. Terrible attempt at a save. Your votes are a little more important, Tom.

I don't trust Welch or his reasons for changing his voter registration. And Rohrer seems to much in the mold of the Buck and Angle, and we all know how their races went. Is there anyone remotely electable even running? What about that former Santorum aide?


Rohrer is a very intelligent and articulate man. That said, I fear a very easy Casey win if he was the nominee. Scaringi - the former Santorum aide - isn't going to come close to winning the primary.

What makes him unelectable?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 05, 2012, 03:06:54 AM
Smith: "...Specter ran in 2010?"

Wow. Rohrer didn't have the biggest gaffe tonight. This is horrible. He doesn't remember candidates he voted for and then asked what Welch had for breakfast three weeks ago. Terrible attempt at a save. Your votes are a little more important, Tom.

I don't trust Welch or his reasons for changing his voter registration. And Rohrer seems to much in the mold of the Buck and Angle, and we all know how their races went. Is there anyone remotely electable even running? What about that former Santorum aide?


Rohrer is a very intelligent and articulate man. That said, I fear a very easy Casey win if he was the nominee. Scaringi - the former Santorum aide - isn't going to come close to winning the primary.

What makes him unelectable?

Scaringi? Doesn't have the funding, big resume or big backers, quite frankly.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: redcommander on April 06, 2012, 02:50:35 AM
Smith: "...Specter ran in 2010?"

Wow. Rohrer didn't have the biggest gaffe tonight. This is horrible. He doesn't remember candidates he voted for and then asked what Welch had for breakfast three weeks ago. Terrible attempt at a save. Your votes are a little more important, Tom.

I don't trust Welch or his reasons for changing his voter registration. And Rohrer seems to much in the mold of the Buck and Angle, and we all know how their races went. Is there anyone remotely electable even running? What about that former Santorum aide?


Rohrer is a very intelligent and articulate man. That said, I fear a very easy Casey win if he was the nominee. Scaringi - the former Santorum aide - isn't going to come close to winning the primary.

What makes him unelectable?

Scaringi? Doesn't have the funding, big resume or big backers, quite frankly.

I mean Rohrer.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 06, 2012, 08:11:25 AM
Smith: "...Specter ran in 2010?"

Wow. Rohrer didn't have the biggest gaffe tonight. This is horrible. He doesn't remember candidates he voted for and then asked what Welch had for breakfast three weeks ago. Terrible attempt at a save. Your votes are a little more important, Tom.

I don't trust Welch or his reasons for changing his voter registration. And Rohrer seems to much in the mold of the Buck and Angle, and we all know how their races went. Is there anyone remotely electable even running? What about that former Santorum aide?


Rohrer is a very intelligent and articulate man. That said, I fear a very easy Casey win if he was the nominee. Scaringi - the former Santorum aide - isn't going to come close to winning the primary.

What makes him unelectable?

Scaringi? Doesn't have the funding, big resume or big backers, quite frankly.

I mean Rohrer.

Comes across as too stiff and far right. His style would kill him in the suburbs. As for his electability in the primary, he has a chance because he probably has the most motivated group of supporters, is more known and is closer to the base but he and Smith are taking from the same group.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: All Along The Watchtower on April 12, 2012, 12:40:35 AM
Between Rohrer, Smith, and Welch, who do you like the most, Phil?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 12, 2012, 06:35:00 AM
Between Rohrer, Smith, and Welch, who do you like the most, Phil?

Well, I've said for months that I'm undecided between Welch and Smith... :P

Rohrer is a very nice and sincere guy. I like him for other reasons, too, but I fear that he isn't electable. As for Smith and Welch, I think the debate the other night allowed me to finally make up my mind on this one. Barring a major screw up, I'm going with Welch. I have concerns with all of them but I think Welch is extremely intelligent, acceptable ideologically and stands the best chance at giving Casey a real challenge. His aggressiveness against Smith the other night proves to me that he's ready for primetime.


Title: Smith internal has him up 15 over Rohrer.
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 12, 2012, 10:04:56 AM
Keep in mind that it's an internal - http://www.politicspa.com/smith-poll-smith-leads-senate-race/33955/ (http://www.politicspa.com/smith-poll-smith-leads-senate-race/33955/)

Smith - 29%
Rohrer - 14%
Welch - 9%
Christian - 7%
Scaringi - 2%
Undecided - 39%

Not surprised at all at the undecided number even though we are just twelve days away from the Primary. I believe Smith is ahead because of his ads and mail (he is the only Senate candidate I've gotten mail from so far) but I imagine Welch is doing better than 9%.


Title: Re: Smith internal has him up 15 over Rohrer.
Post by: redcommander on April 13, 2012, 12:18:33 AM
Keep in mind that it's an internal - http://www.politicspa.com/smith-poll-smith-leads-senate-race/33955/ (http://www.politicspa.com/smith-poll-smith-leads-senate-race/33955/)

Smith - 29%
Rohrer - 14%
Welch - 9%
Christian - 7%
Scaringi - 2%
Undecided - 39%

Not surprised at all at the undecided number even though we are just twelve days away from the Primary. I believe Smith is ahead because of his ads and mail (he is the only Senate candidate I've gotten mail from so far) but I imagine Welch is doing better than 9%.


Hopefully Welch wins this. Despite my past reservations about him, he seems like the most electable against Casey.


Title: Re: Smith internal has him up 15 over Rohrer.
Post by: smoltchanov on April 13, 2012, 01:53:02 AM

Hopefully Welch wins this. Despite my past reservations about him, he seems like the most electable against Casey.

Well, i don't know.. I don't like flip-flopping on issues. Welch was pro-choice until relatively recent times, now he is pro-life (i know that Casey - too). Not a good behavoir, IMHO


Title: Re: Smith internal has him up 15 over Rohrer.
Post by: redcommander on April 13, 2012, 02:33:43 AM

Hopefully Welch wins this. Despite my past reservations about him, he seems like the most electable against Casey.

Well, i don't know.. I don't like flip-flopping on issues. Welch was pro-choice until relatively recent times, now he is pro-life (i know that Casey - too). Not a good behavoir, IMHO

He can't really be labeled as a right wing extremist though, and seems quite disciplined as a candidate. You can't necessarily say the same about Smith and Rohrer.


Title: Re: Smith internal has him up 15 over Rohrer.
Post by: smoltchanov on April 13, 2012, 05:44:48 AM

He can't really be labeled as a right wing extremist though, and seems quite disciplined as a candidate. You can't necessarily say the same about Smith and Rohrer.

Here i fully agree. They are substantially more right wing..


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 13, 2012, 07:31:14 AM
I've heard many things about Welch. I've never heard that he was Pro Choice. Are you sure you aren't just saying that because he seems to fit the bill (SE PA Republican supported by the establishment, not the most conservative candidate in the race, left the party at one point, etc.).


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: smoltchanov on April 13, 2012, 08:23:47 AM
I've heard many things about Welch. I've never heard that he was Pro Choice. Are you sure you aren't just saying that because he seems to fit the bill (SE PA Republican supported by the establishment, not the most conservative candidate in the race, left the party at one point, etc.).

Yes, i am sure. Not ready to present a link right now, but sure that i read it (being located in Moscow i am, naturally, "Internet-based"). Most likely - on SSP when he (Welch) intended to run for Gerlach seat, when Gerlach himself intended to run for governor

P.S. One off-topic question to you as an expert on Pennsylvania politics. With my strong love for "mavericks" and "really big tent" - most interesting politicians for me in Republican party tend to be as moderate (or even, gosh, a liberal) as possible. In Democratic - vice versa. Can you "recommend" somebody from Pennsylvania for me to follow their career?))))). I don't expect anyone like Jacob Javits or Larry McDonald, but still - ....


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 13, 2012, 08:59:24 AM
Well, it might not have been from a reputable source because he has yet to be hit on his views on abortion and, believe me, they aren't holding back their attacks on Welch.

As for a maverick from PA, I'm sure Specter or Casey, Sr. are the most interesting. Or are you looking for someone currently in office?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: smoltchanov on April 13, 2012, 09:19:17 AM
Well, it might not have been from a reputable source because he has yet to be hit on his views on abortion and, believe me, they aren't holding back their attacks on Welch.

As for a maverick from PA, I'm sure Specter or Casey, Sr. are the most interesting. Or are you looking for someone currently in office?

May be. But he doesn't seems too stringently pro-life either..

Well i know Specter's career since his days as DA in Philadelphia. And i remember Casey Sr. since his governor days. Somebody from, say, state Legislature, would suffice me))). But - as maverick (liberal for Republican, conservative for Democrat) as possible please))


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 13, 2012, 09:59:48 AM
Richard Schweiker was a moderate to liberal Republican U.S. Senator during the 1970s. You may recognize the name because Reagan tapped him as his running mate ahead of the 1976 convention for ideological and geographical balance and as an attempt to win over PA's delegates.

If you want someone from the state legislature, look into former State Representative John Lawless from Montgomery county. He switched his party several times and ran for Lt. Governor as a Dem in 2002. Also, former Auditor General and State Treasurer Barbara Hafer would be up your alley. She was a Dem then became a Republican elected official (but was always more moderate to liberal) then switched back to the Dems in 2003. She was the frontrunner to take on Santorum in 2006 before Casey was recruited. She was the GOP nominee for Governor against Casey, Sr. in 1990 and lost in one of the biggest landslides in PA history (she only won Montgomery county and her margin of victory was miniscule. This was at the time when the Montco GOP won everything. Reagan refered to it as the best county GOP organization in the country). That was a great race because you had two individuals that didn't fit their respective parties that well. Hafer wanted to run for Governor again in 2002 but claims she was forced out by party leaders for then Attorney General (and now federal judge) Mike Fisher. That helped push her out of the party.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: smoltchanov on April 13, 2012, 10:09:49 AM
Richard Schweiker was a moderate to liberal Republican U.S. Senator during the 1970s. You may recognize the name because Reagan tapped him as his running mate ahead of the 1976 convention for ideological and geographical balance and as an attempt to win over PA's delegates.

If you want someone from the state legislature, look into former State Representative John Lawless from Montgomery county. He switched his party several times and ran for Lt. Governor as a Dem in 2002. Also, former Auditor General and State Treasurer Barbara Hafer would be up your alley. She was a Dem then became a Republican elected official (but was always more moderate to liberal) then switched back to the Dems in 2003. She was the frontrunner to take on Santorum in 2006 before Casey was recruited. She was the GOP nominee for Governor against Casey, Sr. in 1990 and lost in one of the biggest landslides in PA history (she only won Montgomery county and her margin of victory was miniscule. This was at the time when the Montco GOP won everything. Reagan refered to it as the best county GOP organization in the country). That was a great race because you had two individuals that didn't fit their respective parties that well. Hafer wanted to run for Governor again in 2002 but claims she was forced out by party leaders for then Attorney General (and now federal judge) Mike Fisher. That helped push her out of the party.

Thanks. Of course - i remember Schweiker. He, BTW, became more conservative after being selected for VP by Reagan...

Thanks for your suggestions. And from present-day Legislature? Milne? McIlhinney? Conklin? Greenleaf? Somebody else?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 13, 2012, 10:24:39 AM
Wow. You seem to know a decent amount already if you can spout their names like that. I don't think Milne is liberal (though I read yesterday about his connections to the teachers union) but McIlhinney and Greenleaf (who actually ran for President this year in New Hampshire to "prove a point" but had many of his fans scratching their heads) are worth a look.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: All Along The Watchtower on April 13, 2012, 11:52:44 AM
Quote
PHILADELPHIA (CBS) – The suspension of Rick Santorum’s campaign poses a real problem for the Republican establishment in Pennsylvania — one with serious consequences.

With Mitt Romney facing token opposition now, voter turnout on the Republican side might be much lighter. That means the hard fought five-candidate struggle for the US Senate nomination to oppose Bob Casey may be affected.

more: http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2012/04/13/analysis-with-santorum-out-corbetts-credibility-on-the-line-in-pa-senate-election/ (http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2012/04/13/analysis-with-santorum-out-corbetts-credibility-on-the-line-in-pa-senate-election/)

Phil, your thoughts on this?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 13, 2012, 12:28:45 PM
I'm involved in one race in particular (not the Senate race) and have said from day one that Santorum's candidacy was a big help to us for turnout. That big advantage isn't there anymore. I don't think it's that horrible because Republicans still have more reason to turn out than Dems (they only have a sort of competitive AG primary) but we obviously won't see the numbers we would have seen if the Presidential primary carried on.

The specific effect it has on the Senate primary is a little complex. PoliticsPA did a "Winners and Losers of Santorum's Withdraw" and listed Smith and Welch as winners while Rohrer was a loser. I mostly agree. The lower turnout typically favors the establishment pick (Welch) while Rohrer and his side clearly had ties to Santorum. With fewer Santorum fans turning out, it could be fatal for Rohrer. However, Welch's supporters are more likely to be Romney supporters and with Mitt not having to compete here/taking a much needed break, turn out among Welch sympathizes could be down, too.

Smith could be the big winner with this because, as PoliticsPA points out, he gets to continue dominate the air with his ads. Smith could really capitalize on Rohrer-Santorum voters not being as motivated in the T. He may also benefit from his hard hitting ads against Rohrer but he has a target on his back, too: Welch and Rohrer are really stepping up the attacks on Smith's history as a Democrat.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 14, 2012, 08:29:59 PM
Smith sent out a misleading mailer, saying "liberal" Steve Welch voted for Obama "even after Obama said we cling to our guns and religion and even after government took over healthcare." It has a black and white photo of Welch and Obama above the giant caption "It's true."

Welch didn't vote for Obama in the General and to say he voted for him even after the government took over healthcare is even more of a blatant lie. Disgusting.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: J. J. on April 14, 2012, 08:52:31 PM
What is the difference between Rohrer and Smith?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 15, 2012, 08:41:28 AM
What is the difference between Rohrer and Smith?

Rohrer at least has a record of being conservative and I think he's far more articulate. A lot of questions remain about Smith.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 15, 2012, 10:21:02 AM
And Smith was the only candidate to skip today's Inside Story (a Sunday round table debate program on Philly's ABC affiliate for those that aren't familiar) debate.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: smoltchanov on April 16, 2012, 01:25:53 AM
Wow. You seem to know a decent amount already if you can spout their names like that. I don't think Milne is liberal (though I read yesterday about his connections to the teachers union) but McIlhinney and Greenleaf (who actually ran for President this year in New Hampshire to "prove a point" but had many of his fans scratching their heads) are worth a look.

Thanks, Phil!


Title: Smith expands lead in internal.
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 18, 2012, 10:48:09 AM
Smith's latest internal: Smith 35%  Rohrer 16%  Welch 10%

31% of likely voters are undecided.


Title: Re: Smith expands lead in internal.
Post by: redcommander on April 18, 2012, 04:13:40 PM
Smith's latest internal: Smith 35%  Rohrer 16%  Welch 10%

31% of likely voters are undecided.

:(


Title: Re: Smith expands lead in internal.
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 18, 2012, 06:48:45 PM
Smith's latest internal: Smith 35%  Rohrer 16%  Welch 10%

31% of likely voters are undecided.

:(

Yeah, word is spreading in GOP circles that state leaders think Smith will win.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: redcommander on April 19, 2012, 01:10:57 AM
Smith can't win against Casey though. And why isn't Welch on the air anymore in Philly?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: smoltchanov on April 19, 2012, 01:59:42 AM
Smith can't win against Casey though. And why isn't Welch on the air anymore in Philly?

It's not likely that Welch would win either, but, at least, it would be better attempt..


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: redcommander on April 19, 2012, 02:11:14 AM
Smith can't win against Casey though. And why isn't Welch on the air anymore in Philly?

It's not likely that Welch would win either, but, at least, it would be better attempt..

Even if he can't win, I still want him to take funds away from others states the Dems have to defend. Smith doesn't seem like he can do that.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 19, 2012, 09:24:33 AM
Smith can't win against Casey though. And why isn't Welch on the air anymore in Philly?

Not sure if he'll go back up starting to today but he doesn't have the kind of money many thought and doesn't even come close to what Smith is willing to spend.


Title: PA GOP leaders all but resigned to a Smith win.
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 21, 2012, 04:59:20 PM
Word from higher ups is that Welch is done/Smith has this.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on April 21, 2012, 05:48:27 PM
Before he dropped out, Santorum was giving an interview in which he stated how he was the first Conservative to "break through the glass ceiling" in what had been a moderate to liberal state GOP. He then said that "some people want to see us go back to that kind of party in PA".

Was he referring to Welch's candidacy, by any chance?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 21, 2012, 05:59:34 PM
No, I think that was a swipe at the establishment in the state that was opposed to him during his candidacy for President.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 21, 2012, 06:00:31 PM
And Santorum wouldn't bash Welch. Brabender is consulting for Welch. 


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on April 21, 2012, 06:08:29 PM
Does Smith have any redeeming qualities other then his willingness to spend money? Does he have a lot more where that came from?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 21, 2012, 08:44:07 PM
Does Smith have any redeeming qualities other then his willingness to spend money? Does he have a lot more where that came from?

He has a lot more money.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: redcommander on April 22, 2012, 03:27:24 PM
I guess we have six more years of Bob Casey Jr. What a disgusting decision for Republicans to back Smith.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 22, 2012, 06:40:45 PM
I guess we have six more years of Bob Casey Jr. What a disgusting decision for Republicans to back Smith.

Dude, in all honesty, did you think we were favored to beat Casey with anyone else? I mean, I guess your point is that this guarantees it but it was always a steep uphill battle.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: smoltchanov on April 22, 2012, 10:12:59 PM
Dude, in all honesty, did you think we were favored to beat Casey with anyone else? I mean, I guess your point is that this guarantees it but it was always a steep uphill battle.

You probably needed Tom Ridge for that)) And even in that case - 50/50..


Title: "When did Steve Welch get God's endorsement?"
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 23, 2012, 10:04:27 AM
The freak snow storm could give life to Welch's chances - http://www.politicspa.com/campaigns-brace-for-snow-storm/34634/ (http://www.politicspa.com/campaigns-brace-for-snow-storm/34634/)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 24, 2012, 10:37:02 PM
Smith wins easily and Casey's nobody opponent gets 19%. The former? Expected. The latter? What the hell?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on April 24, 2012, 10:39:34 PM
Smith wins easily and Casey's nobody opponent gets 19%. The former? Expected. The latter? What the hell?

Well, Casey is a lame Democrat (and it's not just abortion).


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: krazen1211 on April 25, 2012, 08:50:58 AM
The Democrat bench in Pennsylvania looks cooked now, with Altmire, Holden, Sestak, and Murphy all now proven losers.

I wonder who they have left to run against Corbett and Toomey.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: redcommander on April 25, 2012, 04:02:08 PM
The Democrat bench in Pennsylvania looks cooked now, with Altmire, Holden, Sestak, and Murphy all now proven losers.

I wonder who they have left to run against Corbett and Toomey.

What about their Philadelphia Reps?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: minionofmidas on April 25, 2012, 04:09:28 PM
No.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: bullmoose88 on April 25, 2012, 10:35:00 PM
The Democrat bench in Pennsylvania looks cooked now, with Altmire, Holden, Sestak, and Murphy all now proven losers.

I wonder who they have left to run against Corbett and Toomey.

What about their Philadelphia Reps?

Chaka and Brady?  Ha.  I doubt the Schwartz would be with them either. 

At this point...this is going to sound real silly, but could Ed Rendell be the best potential challenger against Toomey in 4 years (a long time I know)?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: smoltchanov on April 26, 2012, 02:48:15 AM
A small commentary to your signature, bullmoose88:

You really do. 30-40 years ago there was a plenty of moderate and even liberal Republicans, just as their opposites - really conservative Democrats. Now American politics became hyperpolarized, bland and dull (with some rare exceptions): in 98% of all cases you may almost perfectly describe candidate's political positions simply by looking at letter after his name.. Boring...


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on April 26, 2012, 08:03:06 AM
The Democrat bench in Pennsylvania looks cooked now, with Altmire, Holden, Sestak, and Murphy all now proven losers.

I wonder who they have left to run against Corbett and Toomey.

What about their Philadelphia Reps?

LOL! We could never get that lucky. I think Schwartz will be too old in 2016.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Napoleon on April 26, 2012, 08:04:59 AM
A small commentary to your signature, bullmoose88:

You really do. 30-40 years ago there was a plenty of moderate and even liberal Republicans, just as their opposites - really conservative Democrats. Now American politics became hyperpolarized, bland and dull (with some rare exceptions): in 98% of all cases you may almost perfectly describe candidate's political positions simply by looking at letter after his name.. Boring...

Good post....<3 bullmoose88.


Title: Casey cruising but under 50%.
Post by: Keystone Phil on June 06, 2012, 10:24:27 AM
Casey leads Smith in the latest F&M poll - 42% to 21%

http://triblive.com/state/1921435-74/percent-casey-obama-smith-poll-voters-senate-campaign-race-republican (http://triblive.com/state/1921435-74/percent-casey-obama-smith-poll-voters-senate-campaign-race-republican)


Title: Re: Casey cruising but under 50%.
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on June 06, 2012, 10:35:48 AM
Casey leads Smith in the latest F&M poll - 42% to 21%

http://triblive.com/state/1921435-74/percent-casey-obama-smith-poll-voters-senate-campaign-race-republican (http://triblive.com/state/1921435-74/percent-casey-obama-smith-poll-voters-senate-campaign-race-republican)

What the Hell? Is Smith just really not well-known or something, or is F&M not a good pollster?


Title: Re: Casey cruising but under 50%.
Post by: Brittain33 on June 06, 2012, 10:39:56 AM
Casey leads Smith in the latest F&M poll - 42% to 21%

http://triblive.com/state/1921435-74/percent-casey-obama-smith-poll-voters-senate-campaign-race-republican (http://triblive.com/state/1921435-74/percent-casey-obama-smith-poll-voters-senate-campaign-race-republican)

What the Hell? Is Smith just really not well-known or something, or is F&M not a good pollster?

The Pres poll has high undecideds, too.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on June 06, 2012, 10:46:29 AM
It's not that F&M isn't a good pollster (though Santorum feels differently ;)). It's just that they don't push leaners so they always have very high undecideds. Always. Other polling has Smith with surprisingly high name recognition but I don't buy that. He had a lot of TV ads and a few mailers before the primary but the race didn't get much coverage at all. I think he's only really known among the base.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on July 23, 2012, 11:12:57 AM
Latest Rasmussen shows Casey up 49% to 38%. Seems dead on.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on July 24, 2012, 01:44:28 AM
Phil, do you expect those undecideds will break any particular way, or are many of them low-information types who might not vote?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on July 24, 2012, 06:44:45 AM
Phil, do you expect those undecideds will break any particular way, or are many of them low-information types who might not vote?

Probably a fairly even split with Casey getting a slight edge. If I had to put money on it, as of now, I see it ending 56-57% to 44-43%.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: krazen1211 on July 24, 2012, 08:33:40 AM
Casey is making a whisper campaign about 2014 governor. It is after all the job he wanted before Rendell stomped him in the 2002 primary.




Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on July 24, 2012, 08:35:14 AM
Casey is making news by refusing to say he won't run for Governor in 2014. When he was pressed for an answer, he said he'd serve out his full term if he wins but he has said that before. ::)

I think 2018 is far more likely but with word that Corbett might not run again, Casey would have a great opportunity (with nothing to lose assuming he wins re-election to the Senate) by running in two years.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on July 24, 2012, 08:38:37 AM
Casey is making a whisper campaign about 2014 governor. It is after all the job he wanted before Rendell stomped him in the 2002 primary.




Beat me by two minutes. :P

Everyone knows that's what he has always wanted. I don't doubt that he will run again but while 2014 really isn't a huge risk, 2018 is even less of a risk.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: krazen1211 on July 24, 2012, 08:43:43 AM
Casey is making a whisper campaign about 2014 governor. It is after all the job he wanted before Rendell stomped him in the 2002 primary.




Beat me by two minutes. :P

Everyone knows that's what he has always wanted. I don't doubt that he will run again but while 2014 really isn't a huge risk, 2018 is even less of a risk.


True, but he would have to vacate the Senate seat and leave it open in the 2018 general, as opposed to merely resigning and appointing a Wofford like successor to run in a 2015 special as an incumbent.

The latter path might help the Democrats hold the seat. Of course Gerlach and Meehan will take a good long look at that seat in a 2015 special.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on July 24, 2012, 08:51:23 AM
I don't think he wants to go for a third term in the Senate anyway so that negates the idea of a 2018 risk. It's also less of a risk because of the PA pattern: eight years in the Governor's Mansion for one party and then a flip. A lot of people take that pattern very seriously so Casey might fear going for it in 2014 and losing (again).


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: MD on July 30, 2012, 07:06:13 PM
Today, Corbett looks like he is vulnerable.   It might be the right time for him to strike in 14.  However, Meehan makes for a strong candidate for that seat especially if Obama is re-elected.  If an off-year, he could win it quite easily.   2014 already looks like a tough cycle for the D's in the Senate.  As many as a dozen could have competitive races while the R seats all look safe.  Some of that is a function of how well the D's did in 08.  So Casey leaving could put them in peril.    We'll see.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on July 30, 2012, 09:30:20 PM
The Gubernatorial race is in 2014. The Senate race isn't until 2018 so Casey wouldn't be giving up his seat to run for Governor. That doesn't mean it isn't a risk though even with Corbett looking vulnerable.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: MD on July 31, 2012, 10:27:03 AM
Phil - I was assuming a Casey win against Corbett in 14.   Then you would have either Meehan or Gerlach run in the 15 special against who knows?   Maybe Sestak again.  I think Meehan makes a better candidate than Gerlach.  I should have made my point a bit more clear.  Sorry.   14 could be an ugly cycle for D Senators.  A dozen races on that side will be competitive to one degree or another.   Pretty much zero on the R side (that will change in 16).   Anyway, Casey winning the gov race could prove disasterous to the D's in the Senate. 


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on July 31, 2012, 01:09:35 PM
Oh, I understand. I agree, Meehan or Gerlach could be very strong candidates.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on August 14, 2012, 01:17:24 PM
The Tale of Two Smith's - Libertarian Rayburn Smith vs. Republican Tom Smith - http://www.politico.com/blogs/charlie-mahtesian/2012/08/the-third-party-challenge-from-hell-132066.html (http://www.politico.com/blogs/charlie-mahtesian/2012/08/the-third-party-challenge-from-hell-132066.html)

Rayburn's signatures are being challenged.

As the article states, Casey, Sr. lost to a teacher and ice cream salesman with the same name (first and last) in his 1978 Dem primary for Lt. Governor. Casey, Sr. ran for Governor in 1986 as the "Real Bob Casey."


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Mr.Phips on August 14, 2012, 01:35:20 PM
If I were Democrats and Casey, I would be waiting until 2018 to run for governor, when I would be highly likely to win given the eight year cycle.  This would allow Democrats to break apart the GOP gerrymander in the state.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 14, 2012, 08:50:02 PM
If you are Bob Casey then you want the Governorship whenever you can get it for your own reasons and not because it is convenient for the Democratic party.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 03, 2012, 08:39:01 AM
So we have some closer polls here now. As others have touched on, the narrowing is because of Smith’s aggressive ad campaign. He’s even hammering away in the SE. And it isn’t just because Smith is being seen and heard from more: the ads are actually pretty effective. Casey just started hitting the airwaves yesterday (and with two negative ads about “Tea Party Tom”) so he got the wake up call. Definitely spending earlier (and a lot more since Smith will dump a ton into this) than he imagined. It’s important to note though that Smith is still trailing.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Niemeyerite on October 03, 2012, 01:02:56 PM
Welcome back, Phil!!

Hilariously enough, with a good candidate (Gerlach comes to mind) this race could have been a tie.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 03, 2012, 01:42:35 PM
Gerlach wouldn't have had tons upon tons of money to pour into this race. I think he's angling for something statewide down the road though.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: knyphausen on October 03, 2012, 03:30:46 PM
I think this race will reverse to the status-quo before Smith's ad barrage once Casey's ads have been playing for a few weeks. Casey is a good fit for the state and his being pro-life probably helps him in areas of the state where Obama is unpopular.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 10, 2012, 09:12:20 AM
Smith plays the empty chair card against Casey - http://www.politicspa.com/new-more-negative-smith-ad-hits-casey-watch-video/42270/ (http://www.politicspa.com/new-more-negative-smith-ad-hits-casey-watch-video/42270/)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 10, 2012, 03:31:49 PM
Still no debate set (notice the wording: the League of Women voters is trying to arrange something, not the candidates) - http://m.abc27.com/default.aspx?pid=2705&wnfeedurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.abc27.com%2fstory%2f19784442%2fstill-no-debate-set-in-pas-race-for-us-senate%3fclienttype%3drssstory (http://m.abc27.com/default.aspx?pid=2705&wnfeedurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.abc27.com%2fstory%2f19784442%2fstill-no-debate-set-in-pas-race-for-us-senate%3fclienttype%3drssstory)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 12, 2012, 10:18:39 AM
Smith internal from McLaughlin & Associates has Casey only up two.


Title: Shocker! Casey and Smith will debate.
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 12, 2012, 07:50:21 PM
I honestly didn't expect this - http://www.politicspa.com/casey-smith-schedule-a-debate-finally/42543/ (http://www.politicspa.com/casey-smith-schedule-a-debate-finally/42543/)

Turns out Smith's campaign pushed for it more. It will be October 26th in Philly at our ABC affiliate.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Snowstalker Mk. II on October 12, 2012, 08:09:42 PM
F**k 'im up, Bobby!


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: tmthforu94 on October 12, 2012, 08:38:45 PM
Phil, a while back, you expressed to me that Smith doesn't have much of a shot, that once Casey starts airing ads, it'll be over.

Do you think that's still the case, or does Smith have a legitimate shot at winning this race?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 12, 2012, 08:55:47 PM
Phil, a while back, you expressed to me that Smith doesn't have much of a shot, that once Casey starts airing ads, it'll be over.

Do you think that's still the case, or does Smith have a legitimate shot at winning this race?

I think Casey is going to hit him a lot harder soon and it's going to be hard to keep this as close as it is now.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 15, 2012, 11:31:17 AM
So with a non-GOP pollster finally saying this a close race (two point margin according to Muhlenberg), we should see some real fireworks very soon. Camp Casey must be going crazy. 


Title: Big breaking news: Smith outraises Casey; leads in CoH.
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 15, 2012, 04:59:11 PM
Wow. Smith beats Casey this quarter and it doesn't even count his $10 million loan - http://www.politicspa.com/smith-outraises-casey-not-including-10m-loan/42637/ (http://www.politicspa.com/smith-outraises-casey-not-including-10m-loan/42637/)

That's big.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on October 16, 2012, 12:51:53 PM
Smith should prepare like crazy for that one debate. Casey is a notorious bore, and Smith might be able to dominate the event if properly prepared. I hope that since he push for it more, that such is what is going on behind the scenes.

If Smith can keep it close with that cash, the viewership of the debate by undecideds will be high. A strong performance by Smith, and then Casey's people really will have reason to panic.

He probably still wins, but just seeing him squirm makes me feel good. At least he won't walk into the seat again because of his name, his opponent's controversial history and Bush's low approval ratings/Dem wave. This time he shall have to work for it.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 16, 2012, 01:34:41 PM
The question is how many stations pick up the debate (one of the Pittsburgh stations will have to show it, I'm sure). It airs here on a Sunday morning, two weeks before the election. Other stations will be able to air it any time after it airs here.

I'm sorry but I don't think anyone expects it to be a barn burner.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 16, 2012, 04:51:48 PM
Another negative spot from Casey - http://www.politicspa.com/casey-ad-doubles-down-on-tea-party-medicare-attacks-watch-video/42703/ (http://www.politicspa.com/casey-ad-doubles-down-on-tea-party-medicare-attacks-watch-video/42703/)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 17, 2012, 02:37:28 PM
Smith's mom comes to his defense in a Medicare ad - http://www.politicspa.com/smiths-mom-endorses-medicare-plan-in-new-ad-watch-video/42742/ (http://www.politicspa.com/smiths-mom-endorses-medicare-plan-in-new-ad-watch-video/42742/)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 17, 2012, 08:23:29 PM
Just watched Casey's latest Medi-scare ad. It just seems so desperate. The guy has run one - one! - positive ad so far. That should tell you all you need to know. And like Smith/his message or not, his ads (including the latest one) are unquestionably effective. I think Casey is playing with fire if he thinks he can just keep running attack ads.


Title: Casey gearing up. Yes, gearing up. In Mid-October.
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 18, 2012, 12:14:19 PM
No, this isn't a satire piece - http://www.politicspa.com/casey-gears-up/42802/ (http://www.politicspa.com/casey-gears-up/42802/)

This comes right after Rendell made a statement that Casey hasn't even run a campaign. LOL!

By the way, Smith could definitely use Rendell's comments in an ad since Rendell called Casey's Tea Party ad "stupid."


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on October 18, 2012, 12:50:41 PM
How organized is Smith's campaign? Especially in your neck of the woods? Can Smith outpoll Romney out West?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 18, 2012, 01:01:58 PM
Smith is pretty damn organized in the SE. In fact, he makes frequent stops in this area of the state especially in Northeast Philly (since he has major allies here going back to the primary). Before the surge started, I saw him at an event down here and thought to myself, "It seems like this guy is here every other week!"

They aren't playing around in the SE. Trust me. The west would naturally be great for Smith because it's his home and he's hammering Casey/Obama on coal but it will still be tough because the SW is packed with original Casey Democrats.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Antonio the Sixth on October 18, 2012, 03:47:21 PM
Oh God he could really blow this...


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Svensson on October 18, 2012, 04:48:32 PM
If Casey loses this, I will legitimately eat someone's hat with barbecue sauce. And this is the mountain west, so we have plenty of cowboy hats and plenty of sauce.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Speed of Sound on October 18, 2012, 11:59:39 PM
Casey isn't fit for public office. He's lazy, self-serving, and largely a dolt.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 19, 2012, 08:54:24 AM
Casey internal shows him up 52%-39% - http://www.politicspa.com/casey-poll-casey-52-smith-39/42834/ (http://www.politicspa.com/casey-poll-casey-52-smith-39/42834/)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Svensson on October 19, 2012, 07:49:10 PM
Casey internal shows him up 52%-39% - http://www.politicspa.com/casey-poll-casey-52-smith-39/42834/ (https://server14.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/sjzdovhxbfh/sqrs/p1/casey-poll-casey-52-smith-39/42834/)

When one thinks about it, that is pathetic. Casey had no place letting this campaign become even remotely close enough to warrant releasing internals. And besides that, an internal where he's only up by 13 when he should be up by 30+?

Dear God, Bob, you make Martha Coakley look like candidate of the year!


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 19, 2012, 10:12:40 PM
Casey internal shows him up 52%-39% - http://www.politicspa.com/casey-poll-casey-52-smith-39/42834/ (https://server14.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/sjzdovhxbfh/sqrs/p1/casey-poll-casey-52-smith-39/42834/)

When one thinks about it, that is pathetic. Casey had no place letting this campaign become even remotely close enough to warrant releasing internals. And besides that, an internal where he's only up by 13 when he should be up by 30+?

Dear God, Bob, you make Martha Coakley look like candidate of the year!

Casey shouldn't be leading by over thirty points. You can make the case that he should be up about 60%-40% but not more. Smith could always count on enough straight ticket voters to at least break 40%.


Title: Casey campaign fires back...at Rendell.
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 19, 2012, 10:31:14 PM
Guys, I'm beginning to think I'm living in a dream. Casey's campaign is firing back at Rendell over his criticism. This is too good!

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/174997051.html (http://www.philly.com/philly/news/174997051.html)


Title: Re: Casey campaign fires back...at Rendell.
Post by: Gass3268 on October 19, 2012, 10:47:26 PM
Guys, I'm beginning to think I'm living in a dream. Casey's campaign is firing back at Rendell over his criticism. This is too good!

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/174997051.html (http://www.philly.com/philly/news/174997051.html)

Casey has a campaign? :p


Title: Re: Casey campaign fires back...at Rendell.
Post by: Speed of Sound on October 19, 2012, 10:48:36 PM
Guys, I'm beginning to think I'm living in a dream. Casey's campaign is firing back at Rendell over his criticism. This is too good!

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/174997051.html (http://www.philly.com/philly/news/174997051.html)
The PA Dems needed Rendell fully in charge of the organization. Now they're just scramblin' all over the place while he babbles about Andy Reid or whateverthesh**t.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Svensson on October 19, 2012, 10:57:53 PM
Casey internal shows him up 52%-39% - http://www.politicspa.com/casey-poll-casey-52-smith-39/42834/ (https://server14.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/shhzdcy/s41jxpmap/p2/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/shhzdcy/s41jxpmap/p2/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/sjzdovhxbfh/sqrs/p1/casey-poll-casey-52-smith-39/42834/)

When one thinks about it, that is pathetic. Casey had no place letting this campaign become even remotely close enough to warrant releasing internals. And besides that, an internal where he's only up by 13 when he should be up by 30+?

Dear God, Bob, you make Martha Coakley look like candidate of the year!

Casey shouldn't be leading by over thirty points. You can make the case that he should be up about 60%-40% but not more. Smith could always count on enough straight ticket voters to at least break 40%.

I meant in his internal. Thus why it's laughable. :P

Either way, Casey can keep this horrid campaign up all the way 'til election day, for all I care. I welcome any hilarity to help numb the fact that we're screwed no matter who wins the race for Pres. :D


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: CountryRoads on October 19, 2012, 11:02:28 PM
Go Tom Smith! :)

Both candidates are supporters of the unborn, but on other issues Smith is just a better candidate. Hope he pulls the upset.

Bob ain't his father. Bob Casey Senior was one of the greatest politicians in Pennsylvania history, while Junior is not even half of that.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 19, 2012, 11:10:15 PM
Casey internal shows him up 52%-39% - http://www.politicspa.com/casey-poll-casey-52-smith-39/42834/ (https://server14.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/shhzdcy/s41jxpmap/p2/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/shhzdcy/s41jxpmap/p2/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/sjzdovhxbfh/sqrs/p1/casey-poll-casey-52-smith-39/42834/)

When one thinks about it, that is pathetic. Casey had no place letting this campaign become even remotely close enough to warrant releasing internals. And besides that, an internal where he's only up by 13 when he should be up by 30+?

Dear God, Bob, you make Martha Coakley look like candidate of the year!

Casey shouldn't be leading by over thirty points. You can make the case that he should be up about 60%-40% but not more. Smith could always count on enough straight ticket voters to at least break 40%.

I meant in his internal. Thus why it's laughable. :P

Either way, Casey can keep this horrid campaign up all the way 'til election day, for all I care. I welcome any hilarity to help numb the fact that we're screwed no matter who wins the race for Pres. :D

I figured you might have meant in his internals but that's still a stretch. :P

By the way, even the press is poking fun at Casey's non-campaign. The Allentown Morning Call ran a story with the headline, "Casey holds rare campaign event." The content of the write up was even more pathetic than what we've been reading the past few days: Casey was confronted about not running a campaign to which he responded that he's been busy fundraising to compete with Smith's self financing. That's why he can't have a ton of events. Uh...might want to think twice before using that excuse, Bobby, when you're failing in the cash haul, too.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 22, 2012, 03:10:48 PM
Republicans find new hope in Pennsylvania - http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82667.html (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82667.html)

"Step it up," was one message Democratic officials delivered to Casey recently...


Title: Harry Reid's Super PAC in PA now.
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 23, 2012, 04:42:44 PM
Harry Reid's Super PAC placed an ad buy in Pittsburgh. They're worried.


Title: Re: Harry Reid's Super PAC in PA now.
Post by: Brittain33 on October 24, 2012, 12:50:08 PM
Harry Reid's Super PAC placed an ad buy in Pittsburgh. They're worried.

How much of a campaign account is Casey sitting on? It must be several million.


Title: Re: Harry Reid's Super PAC in PA now.
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 24, 2012, 01:27:25 PM
Harry Reid's Super PAC placed an ad buy in Pittsburgh. They're worried.

How much of a campaign account is Casey sitting on? It must be several million.

Yep.

Casey released a new ad in response to the "Most Ineffective Senator" label - http://earlyreturns.post-gazette.com/home/early-returns-posts/4940-new-casey-biker-ad-defends-record (http://earlyreturns.post-gazette.com/home/early-returns-posts/4940-new-casey-biker-ad-defends-record)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 26, 2012, 09:08:44 AM
Debate day. Won't air until Sunday though. I'm sure we'll hear of any news that comes out of it before Sunday but don't expect anything.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 26, 2012, 03:21:05 PM
Smith reportedly forgot one of the questioners name twice and Casey interrupted Smith at one point, followed by an "awkward silence." Yep. Pretty expected "highlights."  :P


Title: Breaking: NRSC investing in PA.
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 26, 2012, 03:46:55 PM
PoliticsPA reports that the NRSC is dropping $500k here.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Lief 🗽 on October 26, 2012, 03:52:01 PM
Well Indiana is now gone, so I guess they have to spend money somewhere.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 27, 2012, 05:03:33 PM
The Pro Life Federation Voter's Guide greeted us in our car door this evening. Probably for the first time ever, Casey isn't classified as Pro Life. While he isn't labeled as Pro Choice (while the rest of the Dem ticket is on the cover), there is a note under his voting history that he only voted Pro Life 42% of the time. Smith, of course, got the big bolded Pro Life label.


Title: Casey-Smith snoozefest airing during Eagles game on ABC.
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 27, 2012, 10:31:05 PM
Further proof that the debate had no highlights, Philly's ABC affiliate is airing it just as the Eagles game begins. Another local channel will be airing it tomorrow evening.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Mehmentum on October 28, 2012, 11:38:38 AM
Uhg, did this guy learn nothing from Scott Brown's election?  Casey deserves to lose at this point.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 29, 2012, 08:54:37 AM
Bobby is awfully scared. New ad has him attacking Smith for running "unsafe coal mines." The voice over lists the fire hazards and accident reports/violations at the mines. Of course, it's mentioned that Smith is a millionaire and he's still being called "Tea Party Tom Smith."


Title: Smith daughter stars in campaign closing ad.
Post by: Keystone Phil on October 31, 2012, 09:54:56 AM
First it was "Mum," now it's his daughter. As PoliticsPA points out, it looks like Smith is looking to narrow the gender gap - http://www.politicspa.com/smiths-daughter-stars-in-closing-ad-watch-video/43549/ (http://www.politicspa.com/smiths-daughter-stars-in-closing-ad-watch-video/43549/)


Title: Smith internal - tied at 46% each.
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 02, 2012, 03:55:04 PM
Just breaking - Smith internal has him tied with Casey at 46%.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Lief 🗽 on November 02, 2012, 03:58:09 PM
Couldn't even gin up a one point lead?


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 02, 2012, 05:01:59 PM
Super PAC mailer hitting Casey arrived today along with a Santorum robo call for the entire Republican slate. :)


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 03, 2012, 06:42:41 PM
Two more pieces of mail hitting Casey from Freedom Works today in addition to the flood of lawn signs for Smith that they put up today across NE Philly.

Haven't seen or heard of Casey signs or mail around here. Purely anecdotal but I wanted to mention it.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Incipimus iterum on November 03, 2012, 10:13:15 PM
i just dont get Bob Casey sometimeshe was leading but now -_- hes acting like Martha Coakley


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 04, 2012, 12:22:18 PM
Getting my predictions out of the way...

I'm saying Casey takes 54% to Smith's 46%. Third party candidates (one of whom is a write in and the other is a Libertarian whose last name is also Smith) won't do well enough to round up to a percentage point.


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 05, 2012, 07:09:49 PM
Jesus Christ, FreedomWorks is still going hard against Casey. We got a magazine - yes, a magazine - attacking him today!


Title: Re: Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge
Post by: Keystone Phil on November 10, 2012, 12:15:10 PM
Well, it was more fun than I ever imagined. Hats off to Tom Smith for running a very good campaign. Final tally:

Casey - 54%
Smith - 45%