About PA, why do people ignore that Santorum won his 2000 senate race?

[uti2]

The argument is that another GOPer could've won PA or a number of states due to Toomey voters, but why is it forgotten that Santorum won his senate race in 2000 while Bush simultaneously lost?

Another example is FL, Nelson won his senate race in 2000, while Bush won the state.

[Mr. Smith]

Cross-voting was still a bit of thing, and Ron Klink was a near unknown.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Any Republican winning Montco or Delco now is pretty much unthinkable, much less and extremely socially conservative with neoconservative foreign policy views. The opposition to Iraq really hardened this area for the Democrats and caused a lot of Republicans to switch parties, which is in turn what doomed Specter's chances are renomination in 2010.


2000 was a different time.

[uti2]

Cross-voting was still a bit of thing, and Ron Klink was a near unknown.

If any campaign in modern history ever tried to bring back cross-voting at the expensive of damaging the candidate's own party, it was the Hillary campaign. They ignored the DNC's advice on the issue.

https://newrepublic.com/minutes/137093/clinton-campaign-decision-made-may-doom-down-ballot-democrats

Yet this aspect of the race is also ignored.

[Steam Boat Willie]

By people you mean Democrats.  Republicans haven't ignored Santorum's win. 

[Hammy]

Probably because it was 16 years ago.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Cross-voting was still a bit of thing, and Ron Klink was a near unknown.

Ron Klink was not an unknown; he had been a news anchor before he was a Congressman.  Klink was a pro-life Democrat, however, and not liberal on a number of social issues, so his campaign was ignored by the Feminist Left.  Another great call by the Feminist Left losers; if Klink had been elected, the Democrats would have taken the Senate outright in 2000 and would not have needed Jeffords' switch to move it over.