Rasmussen Says Specter May Have Made a Mistake

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

. On taxes,guns, school choice, foreign policy, etc.

So would any Democrat that's electable in PA

Ohio is arguably more conservative than PA, and we elected a very progressive candidate to the Senate.

Yes, Brown has the 2nd best rating of liberal relative to how the state is here. And actually he's the only non-new Senator in the top 6, the other 5 have a statistically small number of votes.
http://www.progressivepunch.org/members.jsp?chamber=Senate&sort=benchmark-percent

[Lunar]

. On taxes,guns, school choice, foreign policy, etc.

So would any Democrat that's electable in PA

Ohio is arguably more conservative than PA, and we elected a very progressive candidate to the Senate.

He's a good fit for Ohio (anti-trade and stuff) and he's not vulnerable.  I wouldn't try and stretch it further than that.

[Keystone Phil]

Specter isn't fairly liberal outside of less than a handful of social issues (abortion, affirmative action, and amnesty pretty much). On taxes, privatization, guns, school choice, foreign policy, etc. he's consistently toed the party line. Considering where he's from, he's probably the best 'conservatives' can really hope for unless they want to focus solely on goober social issues... And in many cases that's a clear losing proposition in the long term.

Specter hasn't been completely in touch with the party on taxes or spending. As 2004 proved, Specter really doesn't have a problem basically admitting that he doesn't care about wasteful spending.

I think Specter just likes power.  

No! You're kidding me!

I don't want to jinx it just yet because Specter has a habit of surviving but...

Adios, Arlen!

Who's coming to beat him?

Why Pat Toomey of course!

Oh, the arrogance.

Yep, every election in PA will be just like 2006 and 2008. For the rest of time.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Can Democrats vote in the GOP primary?  I can't remember in PA.

No, we have a normal system. Independents rightfully can't vote in our primaries either.

WARNING! Potential thread hijack in progress!
It may be normal, but it ain't right.  Not that I disagree with the idea of party-only primaries, I just disagree with the idea of party-only primaries paid for and run the state government.  We need to get the government out of the business of supporting the party duopoly by having the government pay for party activities such as primaries.
WARNING! Potential thread hijack in progress!

[Keystone Phil]

Can Democrats vote in the GOP primary?  I can't remember in PA.

No, we have a normal system. Independents rightfully can't vote in our primaries either.

WARNING! Potential thread hijack in progress!
It may be normal, but it ain't right.  Not that I disagree with the idea of party-only primaries, I just disagree with the idea of party-only primaries paid for and run the state government.  We need to get the government out of the business of supporting the party duopoly by having the government pay for party activities such as primaries.
WARNING! Potential thread hijack in progress!

Fair enough but I support the government paying for third party primaries as well as funding the GOP and Dem primaries.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Fair enough but I support the government paying for third party primaries as well as funding the GOP and Dem primaries.

Problem is, third parties generally have a hard enough time attracting one candidate for most offices, so even so-called parity in primary financing is still an advantage for the duopoly as they would still get a disproportionate benefit in government sponsored publicity.

[Keystone Phil]

Fair enough but I support the government paying for third party primaries as well as funding the GOP and Dem primaries.

Problem is, third parties generally have a hard enough time attracting one candidate for most offices, so even so-called parity in primary financing is still an advantage for the duopoly as they would still get a disproportionate benefit in government sponsored publicity.

...then that's their problem. Sorry.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Fair enough but I support the government paying for third party primaries as well as funding the GOP and Dem primaries.

Problem is, third parties generally have a hard enough time attracting one candidate for most offices, so even so-called parity in primary financing is still an advantage for the duopoly as they would still get a disproportionate benefit in government sponsored publicity.

...then that's their problem. Sorry.

And what about the taxpayers who don't belong to any political party?  Why should they have to pay for what should be party expenses?

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

I agree with Ernest - either everybody gets to participate, or everybody (i.e. the taxpayer)  doesn't have to pay for the primary.  Since our system is so deeply partisan, and power is concentrated in only two parties, it is only fair that independents should be able to participate in how they are governed.

As for Specter, I have all but given up on him.  I am deeply troubled by his vote on the "stimulus" plan.  I'd still vote for him because he's our only shot at keeping the Dems out of the mid-60's... but our Party needs to develop a clearly anti-debt platform and he drove a knife through that ideal.

[Keystone Phil]

Fair enough but I support the government paying for third party primaries as well as funding the GOP and Dem primaries.

Problem is, third parties generally have a hard enough time attracting one candidate for most offices, so even so-called parity in primary financing is still an advantage for the duopoly as they would still get a disproportionate benefit in government sponsored publicity.

...then that's their problem. Sorry.

And what about the taxpayers who don't belong to any political party?  Why should they have to pay for what should be party expenses?

I'm sorry if this sounds nasty and simplistic but that's the breaks.

I understand that parties are private organizations but having to choose between not funding them (which would be a disaster for many state parties) and having people that aren't even members help decide the nominee is awfully unfair.

it is only fair that independents should be able to participate in how they are governed.

I guess we have to apply that to Dems and Republicans as well.

Great time to discuss this..

Here in Philly, we're going to have a very interesting DA primary. Five Dems are running and no Republican (so far...but we're probably not running anyone for strategic purposes). Even with a Republican running, the chances of a Dem victory are insanely in their favor. I attended a forum last night in which four of the five candidates exchanged ideas. I sat there thinking to myself how this has an impact on my life as a Philadelphian but I don't even get a say besides possibly volunteering for one of them. At the same time that I thought about that, I realized that I wasn't all that upset. I'm a Republican and I ought to have a say in the voting booth in my party's process. Using your argument, we'd basically have to let anyone vote in any primary and I think that's probably worse than letting Independents pick and choose what primary to vote in.

If you care that much about a race, change your party a couple times a year. It's happened enough times here. If I cared that much about my vote in the DA's primary, I would be able to leave the party. As you all know, that's not happening.

[TeePee4Prez]

Fair enough but I support the government paying for third party primaries as well as funding the GOP and Dem primaries.

Problem is, third parties generally have a hard enough time attracting one candidate for most offices, so even so-called parity in primary financing is still an advantage for the duopoly as they would still get a disproportionate benefit in government sponsored publicity.

...then that's their problem. Sorry.

And what about the taxpayers who don't belong to any political party?  Why should they have to pay for what should be party expenses?

I'm sorry if this sounds nasty and simplistic but that's the breaks.

I understand that parties are private organizations but having to choose between not funding them (which would be a disaster for many state parties) and having people that aren't even members help decide the nominee is awfully unfair.

it is only fair that independents should be able to participate in how they are governed.

I guess we have to apply that to Dems and Republicans as well.

Great time to discuss this..

Here in Philly, we're going to have a very interesting DA primary. Five Dems are running and no Republican (so far...but we're probably not running anyone for strategic purposes). Even with a Republican running, the chances of a Dem victory are insanely in their favor. I attended a forum last night in which four of the five candidates exchanged ideas. I sat there thinking to myself how this has an impact on my life as a Philadelphian but I don't even get a say besides possibly volunteering for one of them. At the same time that I thought about that, I realized that I wasn't all that upset. I'm a Republican and I ought to have a say in the voting booth in my party's process. Using your argument, we'd basically have to let anyone vote in any primary and I think that's probably worse than letting Independents pick and choose what primary to vote in.

If you care that much about a race, change your party a couple times a year. It's happened enough times here. If I cared that much about my vote in the DA's primary, I would be able to leave the party. As you all know, that's not happening.

If you were a Dem, would you vote for Abraham?  Just curious.  Wouldn't it be funny if a very liberal Dem won the nomination and Lynne Abraham was written in as the Rep nominee.  I could feasibly see that happen in this case.

[Keystone Phil]

If you were a Dem, would you vote for Abraham?  Just curious.  Wouldn't it be funny if a very liberal Dem won the nomination and Lynne Abraham was written in as the Rep nominee.  I could feasibly see that happen in this case.

Oh, boy. Now you're going to get me going. I'm starting to follow this race a bit and I attended a forum at Temple where four of the five candidates participated.

Yes, I would. I like Abraham. I'm leaning towards Grady and McElhattan in this one. I felt that way before the forum anyway. I have to admit that my problem with McCaffery is that he's a McCaffery. His brother, Seamus, is seen as a very conservative Democrat but my problem isn't with policy positions of the family; it's that they're trying to become another Philly dynasty. So many white Dems will be voting for McCaffery just because he's a McCaffery. I'm sure my Dad will want McCaffery mainly because he's a McCaffery (Seamus was my one of my Dad's superiors in the Air Force and my Dad, like many others, can't tell you enough how "tough on crime" Seamus is) but he doesn't get to vote since he's a Republican as well. McCaffery is going to be the candidate for the leadership here in the NE. The NE and white areas of South Philly will be McCaffery's strongholds and only shot at winning this.

McElhattan arrived at the forum with probably ten minutes left due to a prior committment but his answer to the last question and his closing statement were powerful. Grady was pretty awesome. He's definitely competing with McCaffery to be the "no nonsense, straight talking" candidate in this race. He comes across as your average guy but you can tell that he's very smart. I think I'm going to end up wanting Grady but the problem is that he's one of three - that's one of three white candidates in a five candidate race. Grady won't last because he's coming in fourth in the money race and that probably won't change. McCaffery and McElhattan have all the white, machine support. It won't really matter for them anyway. Unless Turner becomes a serious challenger for Williams among black voters, no white candidate is winning this primary (especially when there is more than one white in the race). Sorry but that's just the way it works.

By the way, McElhattan is a former City Councilman. He beat Jack Kelly in a close race in 1991 which is a plus in my book but lost to the infamous Rick Mariano in the 1995 primary. That is one insane Council district with some very unique former Councilmen.

The two black candidates - Seth Williams and Mike Turner - are both too liberal for me though I'll give credit to Turner (who is probably more liberal) for coming across as possibly the most educated candidate. I think he'll be the guy who appeals to the fringe left in the primary. I don't see him doing well with blacks in general since he's not as well known as Williams and he doesn't have the money to compete with these guys.

Basically, unless something big happens (two of the white candidates drop out), Seth Williams is our next DA. I'm not thrilled.

Interesting fact: At least four of the five candidates for DA are Roman Catholic. I don't know Turner's religious affiliation. Yes, that includes Williams. In fact, Williams makes it a point to stress his Catholic background/activities on his literature! He states how he's a Eucharistic Minister and a member of the Board at Catholic Social Services. Grady also puts a lot of emphasis on his Catholic background on his website biography and on his issues page. He's a big believer in faith based initiatives to work with those who committ misdemeanors.

I might post a seperate topic on this if the race really heats up. I know Williams received a lot of attention in 2005 among the national progressive "netroots." If it gets interesting and the thread will be more than just me and you going back and forth, I'll start it up. Otherwise, well, we don't need another PA 13 thread. 

[Keystone Phil]

By the way, I failed to mention that Grady is from Roxborough. I always found that to be an interesting political question mark area. I'm sure Grady will run up some good numbers there if he stays in the race. Other than that, he'll need some miracle like McCaffery and McElhattan dropping out (don't bet any amount of money on the former ending his bid).

[TeePee4Prez]

Wow, you know a lot about this race.  All I'll say is I'm surprised none of the more conservative ones run as Republicans.  Philadelphia Democratic primaries are absolute bloodbaths, but the General is always.. Meh, Dem wins..  It's amazing someone could theoretically only pull a 20ish percent of the vote in the primary and could eventually be elected.  If anything, that would give conservatives hope in the city, but could make elections like Europe with coalition-type primaries.         

[Keystone Phil]

Wow, you know a lot about this race.  All I'll say is I'm surprised none of the more conservative ones run as Republicans.  Philadelphia Democratic primaries are absolute bloodbaths, but the General is always.. Meh, Dem wins..  It's amazing someone could theoretically only pull a 20ish percent of the vote in the primary and could eventually be elected.  If anything, that would give conservatives hope in the city, but could make elections like Europe with coalition-type primaries.         

We have strategic reasons with other races for not running anyone.

[Keystone Phil]

Wow, you know a lot about this race.  All I'll say is I'm surprised none of the more conservative ones run as Republicans.  Philadelphia Democratic primaries are absolute bloodbaths, but the General is always.. Meh, Dem wins..  It's amazing someone could theoretically only pull a 20ish percent of the vote in the primary and could eventually be elected.  If anything, that would give conservatives hope in the city, but could make elections like Europe with coalition-type primaries.         

We have strategic reasons with other races for not running anyone.

...or not.

I just got word that we're running Michael Untermeyer for DA. Never heard of him? Well, he's a former Democrat. He ran against Sheriff John Green in the 2007 primary. Untermeyer received about 33% of the vote. This is beyond stupid. Sure, Untermeyer has a background as a prosecutor but I remember this guy at a civic group's candidates' forum. He seemed a little...goofy. Once again, I'm not pleased with the decision by our party to endorse this guy. Oh well.