Santorum and Obama - Who's Next 2005

[J. J.]

What has Obama actually done to make him so admired by Democrats (besides beat Alan Keyes by 60-points )?

I think it's amazing. The guy is a State Senator and gains nationwide attention and a great amount of admiration. I could never imagine my joke of a State Senator in Obama's position.

Let's be fair to Obama.

1.  He is exceptionally articulate, overshadowing Clinton at the DNC.

2.  He has an exceptionally powerful "rags-to-riches" personal story.

3.  You might disagree with it, but he had a productive record as a State Senator.

4.  He packaged himself as a moderate in his speech.

It's a good start, but let's see how well he does in the Senate.

[J. J.]

I agree. Obama is a great speaker. He does have a great personal story. He's an impressive individual.

 However, the way I see it, he will become one of the Senators I dislike the most. He will end up having a voting record that I highly disagree with. In my opinion, Illinois will have the worst Senatorial delegation.

I'll reserve judgment.  He's better than Mosely-Braun, clearly. 

I can remember a line from his DNC, "It doesn't take a village to raise a child; it takes a family to raise a child."  Now, he said that with Hilary Clinton sitting there.

If he developes a more moderate voting record and distances himself from the Loony Left, he could be an exceptionally compelling national figure (and possibly a presidential contender).

[J. J.]

Obama will not have a moderate record. Sorry. He might not be a vocal liberal like Ted Kennedy or Barbara Boxer because, as you stated, he might want to run for President. However, I still think he'll have a liberal voting record.

He won't be successful then. 

The Senate is not a good place to launch a presiential campaign, as Senators Muskie, Humphrey, McGovern (1972), Bayh (1976), Kennedy, Baker (1980), Hart, Glenn (1984), Gore, Simon, Dole(1988), Harkin, Kerrey(1992), Gramm, Dole, Specter (1996), McCain (2000), Lieberman, Graham, and Kerry (2004) can all attest.

[J. J.]

One of Obama's most interesting statements during the campaign had to do with his extremely left-leaning voting record. His response was that he was representing his district, and it's true that Hyde Park is one of the most liberal areas in Chicago. His lack of competition left unasked the question as to whether a US Sen. Obama would then have a voting record that reflects the broader views of the whole state.  I hope that he does.

There is this pattern.

LBJ's voting record became substantially more liberal in the late 1950's, when he was preparing for his run in 1960.

George Wallace actively, and successfully, courted the African American vote in his last election.

Let's not forget the candidate for governor of a southern state who publically refered to himself as "an ignorant and bigoted redneck," in 1970.  His name Jimmy Carter.  :-)

[J. J.]

Why won't Hoeffel have the turnout Kerry did? Kerry did not run a good campaign, as you often say, but with Rendell at the top of the ticket, turnout will be good.

Hoeffel is a liberal, Santorum is a conservative, PA is basically split. It's neither liberal nor conservative. That means close election.

In a word, geography.  Western PA likes having its own resident senator; the "T" doesn't want any one of the other regions to dominate the state.  This gives an advantage to candidate from the western part when running against someone from the southeastern part.

Also, do not expect Rendell to get a large turnout from the SE in the next election.

[J. J.]

Scranton likes having it's own resident Governer ;-)

Ah, there can only by one Governor at a time.

[J. J.]

Why won't Hoeffel have the turnout Kerry did? Kerry did not run a good campaign, as you often say, but with Rendell at the top of the ticket, turnout will be good.

Hoeffel is a liberal, Santorum is a conservative, PA is basically split. It's neither liberal nor conservative. That means close election.

In a word, geography.  Western PA likes having its own resident senator; the "T" doesn't want any one of the other regions to dominate the state.  This gives an advantage to candidate from the western part when running against someone from the southeastern part.

Also, do not expect Rendell to get a large turnout from the SE in the next election.

I see your point, but my main question is, if the candidates are politically the same as Kerry and Bush, why would Santorum win, and by a comfortable margin at that.

Well, because there is a difference between between a legislative post and a president.  It is not entirely do to ideology.

[J. J.]

There are going to be a lot of factors, such as geography and how devisive the primary will be.

[J. J.]

Increasingly, the conservative Union members are conservatives first and union members second.