Phil, Moose, Ice, Soulty, et al...help...

[JSojourner]

You guys know Penna. politics better than any of us.  I have read the Specter thread and your comments with interest.  And I have no agenda here except to get your opinions and analysis.

1.    Was Specter certain to lose to Toomey in a primary?
2.    If so, why would Penna. voters ditch the old fellow?  Is it because of his health?  His socially moderate positions? Support for the stimulus?  Or something else?
3.    If Specter was trying to insure re-election by switching parties, how will that make a difference?  Instead of Toomey beating him in the primary, he beats him in November, right?  So how is this opportunism?

LOL -- I am not saying Specter isn't being an opportunist.  In another thread, I noted that he probably IS...as are many party switchers.  But I still don't have answers to the above questions and would be grateful for your help as I think this through.  Thanks!

[Keystone Phil]

1.    Was Specter certain to lose to Toomey in a primary?

Yes

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Conservatives/Republicans haven't been fans...ever. We haven't liked him on social issues and we haven't really liked him on economic/fiscal issues either. His certain primary defeat would have been a long time coming. The Stimulus vote was just what made people actually go crazy. He would have still received a primary challenge even if he voted against it but that vote was what ensured that he got a top tier opponent (Toomey).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This doesn't guarantee him re-election. Even if it did, how does that mean he's not an opportunist? He's jumping around to whatever gives him a chance. One minute, he's bragging about how he's reached out to conservatives and how he's a Republican/will remain so/will run as a Republican and how we need a two party system in this country...and then he's gone when the polls show that he was going to get demolished. That's the definition of opportunism. The man has no spine.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Specter basically admitted he's being opportunistic. This was based on his showing in primary polls. He said that he realized there was no way he could win and switching was his only chance.

By the way, please see the article Lunar posted in the other thread (I re-posted it in the "Opinion of Arlen Specter" thread in the Individual Politics section). Specter opposed Jeffords switch, spoke out against it and switching in general. He also fought to outlaw switching in the middle of his term.

[Smash255]

You guys know Penna. politics better than any of us.  I have read the Specter thread and your comments with interest.  And I have no agenda here except to get your opinions and analysis.

1.    Was Specter certain to lose to Toomey in a primary?
2.    If so, why would Penna. voters ditch the old fellow?  Is it because of his health?  His socially moderate positions? Support for the stimulus?  Or something else?
3.    If Specter was trying to insure re-election by switching parties, how will that make a difference?  Instead of Toomey beating him in the primary, he beats him in November, right?  So how is this opportunism?

LOL -- I am not saying Specter isn't being an opportunist.  In another thread, I noted that he probably IS...as are many party switchers.  But I still don't have answers to the above questions and would be grateful for your help as I think this through.  Thanks!

1.  Pretty much, his chances in a Primary was quite slim

2.  As Phil stated, he has never been all that popular with the GOP base.  He barely defeated Toomey in 2004.  Also, the GOP electorate in PA has shifted well to the right since then.  As the national GOP has gone further and further right, the old school moderate to liberal Rockefeller type Republicans have been jumping ship in droves (think moose).  More than 200,000 voters in PA have shifted from the GOP to the Democrats.  A large portion of this shift has been in Specter's base of suburban Philly.

[bullmoose88]

1.  If the economy stayed as is, Toomey (and I'm being conservative here) had an 80% chance of beating Specter in the primary.

2.  The reason is that the nature of the Republican primary electorate (as has been mentioned) has changed considerably since 2004.   Phil's right in that the conservative part of the party has always disliked Specter.  The problem for arlen was that side of the party has grown in relation to the total number of Republicans in the state.  (Perhaps some additions out in the West--not Specter types)  The other factor is that the Southeastern Moderate/Liberal Republicans are pretty much gone from the party...they had started to leave as early as the late 80s/early 90s and left in large numbers to vote in the Obama/Hillary contest.  This was particularly noticeable in Specter's traditional power base of Philadelphia, Bucks, Montco, Delaware and Chester counties. (SE PA)

3.  Specter was pretty certain to lose, this time, against Toomey against the GOP primary electorate (PA primaries are closed). Specter was down 12 or so points in most, though, polls. (Still he was pulling about 20-30% of polled republicans in those polls, so I can see a good deal of them voting for him in November as a democrat.  I'll be voting for him.)

Specter is the favorite (I'm assuming the Dems have or will sufficiently clear the field for him) against Toomey in a General election.  How big of a favorite is certainly debatable.  Toomey could theoretically win (though I wouldn't count on it) if the stimulus doesn't work.  But I can't see arlen losing even if the economy stays as is, I think Toomey would need more of a drop but thats just me.

[TeePee4Prez]

You guys know Penna. politics better than any of us.  I have read the Specter thread and your comments with interest.  And I have no agenda here except to get your opinions and analysis.

1.    Was Specter certain to lose to Toomey in a primary?
2.    If so, why would Penna. voters ditch the old fellow?  Is it because of his health?  His socially moderate positions? Support for the stimulus?  Or something else?
3.    If Specter was trying to insure re-election by switching parties, how will that make a difference?  Instead of Toomey beating him in the primary, he beats him in November, right?  So how is this opportunism?

LOL -- I am not saying Specter isn't being an opportunist.  In another thread, I noted that he probably IS...as are many party switchers.  But I still don't have answers to the above questions and would be grateful for your help as I think this through.  Thanks!

1. Yes

2.  PA GOPers wanted to "ditch the old fellow", not the state at large.  It seems the GOP has a greater distaste for its moderates than the Dems.  Case and point the 2006 Senate election.  Myself and many other pro-choicers weren't happy with Bob Casey, but most of us felt well.. what's worse?  Casey and his liberal economics/moderate social or Santorum being almost far right on everything (wow, with the DeMints and Coburns it's hard to believe I'm saying "almost" far right with Santorum). 

3.  Specter's always been an opportunist.  March to the beat- LEFT. RIGHT.LEFT.LEFT.RIGHT.LEFT RIGHT LEFT.  What will his position be tomorrow?  He simply wants to stay in politics and figued moving to the Democratic party was the only way it could happen.