Casey +7

[Keystone Phil]

This race leans Casey. Most Republicans, even PA Republicans, have admitted this. What is your point?

[Keystone Phil]

Here's teh thing. If it was something like Casey 42 Santorum 35, you could argue Santorum wasn't in too much trouble. But Casey's almost at 50 this early. Santorum has a lot of ground to cover, he's going to need almost all the undecideds (since they break against the incumbent usually not easily) and going to sway a few Casey voters back. Anything can happen in a campaign, but having your opponent at almost 50 this early is not good.

Here's another thing.  Why can't us Democrats field a good pro-choice socially liberal, economically left-center candidate?  Out of Philadelphia and suburbs, we should have someone articulate and intelligent enough as a Democrat who can look very good against Rick Santorum.  The name Lois Murphy keeps popping up in my mind as such a candidate.  She did incredibly well in such a horribly gerrymandered conservative district.  I went to bed thinking she won PA 6!  Jim Gerlach is a horrendous candidate though.  I think we can win PA elections with putting forth an effort solely in eastern PA and trying not to lose too much in SW Penn or Erie County.

Lois Murphy would be laughed at out west. Her economic views might help but socially she'd be a joke.

[Keystone Phil]

By God I hope not.

I suspect it's too late now... *looks worried*

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's interesting, but some of the statewide results from last year are interesting as well.
PA's ticket splitting habits make for interesting maps at times

Yeah.

I voted for Casey.

I actually would have voted for Casey, too. Jean Pepper was the definition of a joke.

[Keystone Phil]

If you guys didn't have your heads up your collective asses...you would have run Casey against Specter, Hoffel against Santorum.


ah well.

Specter would have won it and Hoeffel vs. Santorum would have meant a Santorum win, too.

[Keystone Phil]

All of Philadelphia would have voted Specter.

The city would have went Casey but the burbs would have went crazy for Specter.

[Keystone Phil]

How we trade one of them for Coleman and the other for Santorum? That'd make me, Flyers, and you all very happy.

No thanks. 

[Keystone Phil]

How we trade one of them for Coleman and the other for Santorum? That'd make me, Flyers, and you all very happy.

No thanks. 

alright, compromise, Coleman for Specter.

Fine with me!

[Keystone Phil]

I love the non-PA residents chiming in to tell us all about PA. 

This will be a tough race.  It will be the featured election of 2006.  Both parties are going to spend spend spend.  Both candidates are going to be VERY well known.

But at the end of the day Casey will win for these reasons:

1) He's a moderate Dem against an extreme Repub.  PA is a state of moderates.

2) Santorum has a record which the Dems can attack.

3) Casey is an extremely personable guy whereas Santorum can be a real dick (yes, I have met both).

Yet you fail to acknowledge that Santorum has a good amount of support among Pennsylvanians as a whole and even some Democrats like the guy.

By the way, Klink was more of a moderate Dem, too, in a state "full of moderates." Why couldn't he win? Sure money was an issue but if he was more in line with the people, why didn't he pull it out?

Also, you bring up non-PA residents telling us about PA (I guess you're talking specifically about AuH2O). I hope you realize there are plenty on your side doing it was well.

[Keystone Phil]

I love the non-PA residents chiming in to tell us all about PA. 

This will be a tough race.  It will be the featured election of 2006.  Both parties are going to spend spend spend.  Both candidates are going to be VERY well known.

But at the end of the day Casey will win for these reasons:

1) He's a moderate Dem against an extreme Repub.  PA is a state of moderates.

2) Santorum has a record which the Dems can attack.

3) Casey is an extremely personable guy whereas Santorum can be a real dick (yes, I have met both).

Yet you fail to acknowledge that Santorum has a good amount of support among Pennsylvanians as a whole and even some Democrats like the guy.

By the way, Klink was more of a moderate Dem, too, in a state "full of moderates." Why couldn't he win? Sure money was an issue but if he was more in line with the people, why didn't he pull it out?

Also, you bring up non-PA residents telling us about PA (I guess you're talking specifically about AuH2O). I hope you realize there are plenty on your side doing it was well.

Oh, Santorum definitely has support in PA.  That's one reason why this is going to be such a tough race.  I won't deny that.

Klink was a moderate but he wasn't as defined of a moderate as Casey.  The Republicans painted Klink as a super-liberal.  AND this 5 years ago, when Santorum's rep as an extremist wasn't built yet.  And lastly on this point, money was a definite issue for Klink.

Like many others, you seem to refuse to change your opinion on Santorum's stances. I don't see him as an extremist, you do. If he was that extreme, his approval ratings wouldn't be so good.

[Keystone Phil]

and Casey has not staked out ground on gay marriage so far as I am aware.

He favors Civil unions and is against FMA.

[Keystone Phil]

note: if I was Santorum, I would hit Casey on judges. If Casey goes with Democrats in filibustering judges, pro-life judges won't be confirmed, thus negating Casey's value as a pro-lifer and keeping that vote with Santorum.
 

If I was Santorum I would hit Casey on his lack of interest in the U.S. Senate.  In reality Casey does NOT want the job.   He wants to be governor and everyone knows that.  He has already stated that he will not commit to serve a full term if he is elected to the senate.  That alone should make PA voters second guess voting for him.  I have a feeling alot of Democrats are going to be upset with the result of this race.  Im not holding my breath for a Casey victory, thats for sure.

I would bring that up, too, but you have to be very careful.

[Keystone Phil]

The Democrats shouldn't get too excited about this poll.  Casey was leading the Governor's race in 2001, but once the candidates actually started running ads, Rendell pulled away .  Of course, Casey is certainly a better candidate than Ron Klink, and Santorum has become a more polarizing figure since 2000.

You view Santorum as a polarizing figure but he has some of the best approval ratings in the state and the lowest disapproval ratings. When you will guys understand that?

[Keystone Phil]

The Democrats shouldn't get too excited about this poll.  Casey was leading the Governor's race in 2001, but once the candidates actually started running ads, Rendell pulled away .  Of course, Casey is certainly a better candidate than Ron Klink, and Santorum has become a more polarizing figure since 2000.

You view Santorum as a polarizing figure but he has some of the best approval ratings in the state and the lowest disapproval ratings. When you will guys understand that?

Whatever his approval ratings are, I think it's hard to argue that Santorum isn't now more polarizing than he was five years ago.  When he ran for reelection in 2000, Santorum was just one of six or seven generic Republican Senators who won in 1994 that the Dems were trying to knock-off.  Since then, he has become a national symbol for the anti-gay movement.  What was Santorum's disapproval rating in 2000?  And even if he is just as popular in PA now as he was then, Santorum is polarizing on a national scale, such that his race will attract a lot more money and attention than it did then.

Ok, you can throw all the money you want at the Democratic opponent but Pennsylvanians haven't cared what a few Democrats on the national level have to think about Santorum for awhile now.

[Keystone Phil]

To specify this a little more, if you look through Quinnipiac's polling history in Pennsylvania, you will see that Santorum's disapproval rating hovers around 30%, and has since his anti-gay marriage comments.  Prior to these comments, his disapproval was consistantly 20-22%.   Hence, he is clearly more polarizing now than he was when he last ran. 

Then you believed that Specter was vulnerable and more polarizing and Rendell will be vulnerable and is also polarizing?

[Keystone Phil]

note: if I was Santorum, I would hit Casey on judges. If Casey goes with Democrats in filibustering judges, pro-life judges won't be confirmed, thus negating Casey's value as a pro-lifer and keeping that vote with Santorum.
 

If I was Santorum I would hit Casey on his lack of interest in the U.S. Senate.  In reality Casey does NOT want the job.   He wants to be governor and everyone knows that.  He has already stated that he will not commit to serve a full term if elected.  That alone should make PA voters second guess voting for him.  I have a feeling alot of Democrats are going to be upset with the result of this race.  Im not holding my breath for a Casey victory, thats for sure.

I already mentioned that some time ago.  I think that the way Casey launched into this has hurt his credability.

He didn't run in '04 because, he said, he didn't want the job.  Now he turns around and runs, thus abandoning a job that he was voted and entrusted with by PA voters, including myself, and runs for a possition that he thinks will be a better stepping stone to the governorship, which everyone knows is what he really wants.

So you voted for him for treasurer too.

Don't you feel a little disappointed?

He's one of my favorite Democrats and I would have voted for him, too. However, it's pretty disappointing that he's running for an office he really has no interest in at all and decided to do this after only one month in his new job.

[Keystone Phil]

To specify this a little more, if you look through Quinnipiac's polling history in Pennsylvania, you will see that Santorum's disapproval rating hovers around 30%, and has since his anti-gay marriage comments.  Prior to these comments, his disapproval was consistantly 20-22%.   Hence, he is clearly more polarizing now than he was when he last ran. 

Then you believed that Specter was vulnerable and more polarizing and Rendell will be vulnerable and is also polarizing?

Ok, this is the message I posted that you were responding to:

The Democrats shouldn't get too excited about this poll.  Casey was leading the Governor's race in 2001, but once the candidates actually started running ads, Rendell pulled away .  Of course, Casey is certainly a better candidate than Ron Klink, and Santorum has become a more polarizing figure since 2000.

Note I never said Santorum was "vulnerable".  I don't know where you are getting that from...In fact, the point of my message was that he's less vulnerable than many Dems are currently arguing.    I do think Santorum is  more vulnerable than Rendell, but that's because the Dems currently have a better challenger than the Republicans, not because of approval ratings.

Well why not because of approval ratings? Swann would be a strong candidate (especially out west) and Rendell is not doing as great as many think.

[Keystone Phil]

To specify this a little more, if you look through Quinnipiac's polling history in Pennsylvania, you will see that Santorum's disapproval rating hovers around 30%, and has since his anti-gay marriage comments.  Prior to these comments, his disapproval was consistantly 20-22%.   Hence, he is clearly more polarizing now than he was when he last ran. 

Then you believed that Specter was vulnerable and more polarizing and Rendell will be vulnerable and is also polarizing?

Ok, this is the message I posted that you were responding to:

The Democrats shouldn't get too excited about this poll.  Casey was leading the Governor's race in 2001, but once the candidates actually started running ads, Rendell pulled away .  Of course, Casey is certainly a better candidate than Ron Klink, and Santorum has become a more polarizing figure since 2000.

Note I never said Santorum was "vulnerable".  I don't know where you are getting that from...In fact, the point of my message was that he's less vulnerable than many Dems are currently arguing.    I do think Santorum is  more vulnerable than Rendell, but that's because the Dems currently have a better challenger than the Republicans, not because of approval ratings.

Well why not because of approval ratings? Swann would be a strong candidate (especially out west) and Rendell is not doing as great as many think.

How do you know if Swann would be a good candidate?  Have you ever seen him in a debate or even a prepared policy speech? 

Even his sports background is a mixed blessing....the majority of Pennsylvanians aren't Steeler fans, and about half those Steeler fans aren't even old enough to remember when Swann was playing for them (almost thirty years ago).

More importantly, Swann doesn't do anything target the suburban Philly voters than Republicans need to win back in order to win that race.  Rendell did pretty badly in western Pennsylvania in 2002, but the southeast more than made up for it.

If the Pennsylvania GOP wants to beat Rendell in 2006, they should run Mark Schweiker.  I'm not really sure who else would get it done, although I'm not as up on PA politics as some on this board.

The fact that Swann can wrap up the west is good enough for me. He's a legend out there.

Rendell did not do badly in the west. He didn't win it like he won SE PA but it was still a comfortable win in most areas. Swann eliminates that. The west won't just go along with 2002's Mr. Popular in 2006.

As for Schweiker, I wouldn't mind him as the GOP nominee at all. If he jumped into the race, I'd probably go with him over Swann. He could make it very interesting especially since he is from this area (He's from out in Bucks county and would likely take that heavy Rendell county with him if he ran.)

[Keystone Phil]

Um, every PA Republican on this board understands that Casey is a good candidate. But, Casey is still at the same point he was in the last poll, and will continue to be in this position until the campaign begins for real. 

And maybe he'll win the election by the same 7 points.

and second because Hoeffel got the big out of state abortion dollars that Casey won't get.

I have a feeling they aren't done going after Chris Heinz. The Pro Choice groups made a big fuss about Casey and then it quited down all of the sudden. Maybe something's going on...or atleast that's what I'm hoping for...

[Keystone Phil]

I have a feeling they aren't done going after Chris Heinz. The Pro Choice groups made a big fuss about Casey and then it quited down all of the sudden. Maybe something's going on...or atleast that's what I'm hoping for...

That happens, Casey gets pissed and drops out.  PA Dems are left with Hoeffel Jr. from the west and end up losing badly.

Casey won't drop out. He won't do that to the national leaders. If Heinz runs, though, I can see a Heinz win. The General election would be a good one for Santorum. No 10 point but a pretty comfortable one.

[Keystone Phil]

I have a feeling they aren't done going after Chris Heinz. The Pro Choice groups made a big fuss about Casey and then it quited down all of the sudden. Maybe something's going on...or atleast that's what I'm hoping for...

That happens, Casey gets pissed and drops out.  PA Dems are left with Hoeffel Jr. from the west and end up losing badly.

Casey won't drop out. He won't do that to the national leaders. If Heinz runs, though, I can see a Heinz win. The General election would be a good one for Santorum. No 10 point but a pretty comfortable one.

He would if they try to get Heinz to run.  Casey wants an open primary so he can raise money.  He knows Santorum is going to have from now until November 06 to raise money.  Casey wants the same.  He has nothing to lose by dropping out and waiting until 2010.

I think it would be too risky. The national Dems would be throwing a fit. I'm sure they've spoken with Heinz, telling him not to run but if the Pro Choice groups can offer him a nice deal, he might just take it.

[Keystone Phil]

I have a feeling they aren't done going after Chris Heinz. The Pro Choice groups made a big fuss about Casey and then it quited down all of the sudden. Maybe something's going on...or atleast that's what I'm hoping for...

That happens, Casey gets pissed and drops out.  PA Dems are left with Hoeffel Jr. from the west and end up losing badly.

Casey won't drop out. He won't do that to the national leaders. If Heinz runs, though, I can see a Heinz win. The General election would be a good one for Santorum. No 10 point but a pretty comfortable one.

He would if they try to get Heinz to run.  Casey wants an open primary so he can raise money.  He knows Santorum is going to have from now until November 06 to raise money.  Casey wants the same.  He has nothing to lose by dropping out and waiting until 2010.

I think it would be too risky. The national Dems would be throwing a fit. I'm sure they've spoken with Heinz, telling him not to run but if the Pro Choice groups can offer him a nice deal, he might just take it.

Heinz may actually not do that bad & has a chance to  beat Santorum (Casey has a much better chance obviously)  Heinz will do better in Western PA than another Dem more on the liberal side like hafer would because he is from that area &  he will beat Santorum up pretty bad in SE PA.  Santorum probably would still beat Heinz, but it won't be as easy as some people think

Heinz could win but Santorum would finish him off in the debates. Chris Heinz is overrated.

[Keystone Phil]

Hmmm. Interesting. I could believe it.

[Keystone Phil]

And in the latest Franklin & Marshall poll, Swann is polling at 29%, not 42-46%.

I hope you don't think that's the amount he would get in an actual race. Once he gets more active his numbers will go up.

[Keystone Phil]

Santorum flip flops on death penalty now

He's reconsidering his position and it's not a flip flop because it wouldn't help him in any way in an election.

[Keystone Phil]

Santorum flip flops on death penalty now

He's reconsidering his position and it's not a flip flop because it wouldn't help him in any way in an election.

yes it is a flip flop.

A flip flop is done mainly for political purposes and a changing of his position on the death penalty wouldn't help him with any voters here.