Specter-Sestak debate gets ugly (and new polling shows Specter in BIG trouble).

[Lunar]

Time to shudder and support Toomey, looks like. There seems to be a reason he has a substantial lead against both of them.

I would give three dominant factors as to why this is the case:

1) In the heat of a primary, voters tend to over-inflate their unwillingness to vote for a primary rival.  Remember how Hillary's campaign was arguing that Obama wouldn't be able to win?

2) Toomey's been able to avoid a heated primary, and can campaign towards the center.  Remember how he said he would vote to confirm Sotomayor?  (Rubio said he wouldn't)

3) Toomey's been running a really solid, really great campaign. 

[Lunar]

Time to shudder and support Toomey, looks like. There seems to be a reason he has a substantial lead against both of them.

I would give three dominant factors as to why this is the case:

1) In the heat of a primary, voters tend to over-inflate their unwillingness to vote for a primary rival.  Remember how Hillary's campaign was arguing that Obama wouldn't be able to win?

2) Toomey's been able to avoid a heated primary, and can campaign towards the center.  Remember how he said he would vote to confirm Sotomayor?  (Rubio said he wouldn't)

3) Toomey's been running a really solid, really great campaign.  

Good points. Personally, I'm just dreading the possibility that he might be the second coming of Rick Santorum - a Republican who campaigns as a moderate to get elected, then immediately drives off to the far right afterward.

Well, Toomey won't be a surprise, he headed the Club for Growth and would be a far-right Senator very much in the old of Santorum.

And Senator Toomey is the most likely outcome as of now.

The most interesting comment I read on this forum RE: Santorum was that he was very much reflective of the waves he was in.  He was elected in 1994, the big GOP wave, reelected in 2000 with George Bush with mixed results nationally, and thrown out in the Democratic wave of 2006.

People shouldn't forget that Pennsylvania is like the second oldest state in the country after Florida.  That matters in terms of swinginess.  

[Lunar]

What is it w/ pennsylvania and nasty senate debates? I remember the 2006 campaign...there were some nasty pennsylvania senate debates there too. Pennsylvania and nasty senate debates is kind of like South Carolina and nasty presidential primaries.

Is it Pennsylvania or Specter straddling party divides?  

really, this ad is nothing compared to the one Arlen put out against Sestak, that basically accused him of a dishonorable discharge from the military

One of the reasons why this ad is so hard hitting is that it doesn't really deviate from the facts.  Specter broadcasted himself as quite right-wing in his last two primary challenges as a Republican and now he's trying to reframe himself as a liberal.  It's really not thaaat nasty to point that out in explicit terms. 

[Lunar]

Big question: If Specter loses his primary, how will he vote when there is no more political gain to be had?

[Lunar]

Since Charlie Crist is doing well, Specter may bet he should have went independent.

I don't think an Independent has any chance of winning Pennsylvania.

Actually, looking at the numbers, one shouldn't have a very good chance in Florida either.  Florida has no serious base of Independent voters, nor a base of ideologically moderate Independent voters. 

[Lunar]

Both Florida and PA have very high Jewish base of voters and they are very independent minded like Lieberman.  I was simply matching who fits best with those independent voters.

I think you mean "old," as those two states are the two oldest states in the country I believe.

[Lunar]

Who are the unions backing? I'd love to see a Democratic machine vs. unions battle.

You're not gonna get it.  AFLCIO is behind Specter.

[Lunar]

I mean, how often do they oppose the White House?  The only state where they dare is Arkansas, where the White House's opinion is decidedly unwelcome on everything but black radio. 

[Lunar]

Those posts were made almost 7 minutes apart!  HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO KEEP TRACK OF THAT?

[Lunar]

Obama's commercial for Specter starts running tomorrow, according local Phila news.

So far, he's not really had a good track record of campaigning for candidates in time. Otherwise, Coakley might have had more of a chance back in January...

Well, with Specter, fwiw, Obama needs his vote badly for the rest of the year

[Lunar]

Regarding Brittain33's comment number 2 about Specter about some thinking he is only the candidate that can win, how could one believe that when the polls now show him running far weaker against Toomey than Sestak is at the moment?  Thanks.

I highly doubt that most PA Democrats now each poll and what it says while walking into the booth.

Indeed, as I've said countless times, competitive primaries really screw up general election polling as, in the heat of the primary, staunch supporters of one candidate always claim that they could NEVER back the other candidate, which isn't usually quite the case.

The question, however, is who is more likely to win back the support of the entire Democratic coalition?  Which candidate, Specter or Sestak, will be able to turn out voters that the other one wouldn't?  Which candidate, Specter or Sestak, is best able to appeal to moderate Democrats who supported the other, but are torn between Toomey and them?  Does Specter's biography as a senior, as a moderate Republican, as someone connected to the Democratic machine, matter more, or does Sestak's biography as a consistent progressive, as a military veteran, do more for appeal?

[Lunar]

Regarding Brittain33's comment number 2 about Specter about some thinking he is only the candidate that can win, how could one believe that when the polls now show him running far weaker against Toomey than Sestak is at the moment?  Thanks.

I highly doubt that most PA Democrats now each poll and what it says while walking into the booth.

Indeed, as I've said countless times, competitive primaries really screw up general election polling as, in the heat of the primary, staunch supporters of one candidate always claim that they could NEVER back the other candidate, which isn't usually quite the case.

The question, however, is who is more likely to win back the support of the entire Democratic coalition?  Which candidate, Specter or Sestak, will be able to turn out voters that the other one wouldn't?  Which candidate, Specter or Sestak, is best able to appeal to moderate Democrats who supported the other, but are torn between Toomey and them?  Does Specter's biography as a senior, as a moderate Republican, as someone connected to the Democratic machine, matter more, or does Sestak's biography as a consistent progressive, as a military veteran, do more for appeal?

I pay very little attention to GE polling during competitive primaries - totally agree on that front.

Remember Bill Clinton calling Bill Richardson on the phone in 2008, right before Richardson was to endorse Obama, seriously telling him that Obama "couldn't win!"    ?  Rustbelt Dems, it was claimed, were proven by polling that they could never support Obama.  Obama "couldn't win" states like, well, Pennsylvania.  

[Lunar]

Sestak should've used a different picture. There are lots of other crummy photos of Specter in which he looks evil.

I think they wanted a bald picture because bald people look more Republican