Pennsylvania 2012: Casey's Challenge

[Keystone Phil]

Too early? Never! We had the first challenger announce today and you guys will love his background (he used to be a Santorum staffer) - http://blogs.mcall.com/penn_ave/2010/11/former-santorum-aide-to-challenge-casey-in-2012.html


Declared candidates:

Attorney and former Santorum staffer Marc Scaringi


Other rumored candidates:

Congressman Jim Gerlach
Congressman Charlie Dent*
State Senator Jake Corman
Radio host and businessman Glen Meakem


* With Toomey's win, I doubt that Dent runs. I don't think the state will go for two Senators from the same backyard (the Lehigh Valley).

[Keystone Phil]

Casey wins easily.

Next.

The Casey situation is somewhat complex.

Now that he's in the Senate, he can't hide behind the moderate label; he has an established liberal voting record. He makes no efforts to hide his friendship with the President and speaks out in favor of controversial legislation pushed by the President. This would explain why his poll numbers aren't great. He doesn't have the approval ratings people would expect for someone with that last name. Again, this isn't Auditor General or State Treasurer Casey anymore.

That being said, beating him will still be difficult for a number of reasons.

1) He's still a Casey. You'd be amazed how many people still believe he is his father. It's a golden name here.

2) It's a Presidential election year. It might not be a good Presidential election year but it will still bring out more voters. More voters know and "like" (not sure if they really like him...) Casey. That includes Independents and, yes, even some Republicans still fall for him.

3) The GOP has a great bench. Wait, what? How does that make it difficult for the Republicans to win? Well, we have a great new bench. Newcomers won't be challenging Casey. Some of the names I listed could give Casey headaches but it's far from definite that they will run.

I think Gerlach is the person Casey would want to face the least. He's a popular elected official from a major swing area in the Southeast that has survived very tough battles when people thought he was a goner.

[Keystone Phil]

There are problems for Casey though. If the President is still sitting at a 40% approval rating, unemployment is still high, etc. then Obama is done in Pennsylvania and could take Casey down with him. Again, their friendship isn't hidden and Casey's voting record is solidly liberal. The Republicans are already hitting him on it.

There's also the fact that Casey has lost the only real race he has ever had to run (the 2002 Gubernatorial primary to Rendell). If 2012 is another 2012 and he's facing someone like Gerlach, he might not be ready to fight back. A recent article discussing the 2012 race highlighted Casey's mild manner. That's not going to work in a serious fight for a Senate seat. He was able to be mellow Bob Casey in 2006 because...well...we know why. 2012 could be a very different story.

We want this seat and while Casey obviously starts out as a favorite, he's not safe.

[Keystone Phil]

If Casey wins a second term, it would perfectly set up a run for Governor in 2018. It's the job he has really wanted ever since he got into politics. If the pattern continues, 2018 will mean it's the Dem's turn to win the Governor's mansion here. Casey would be completing his second term and would certainly choose running for Governor over running for a third term. He'll be 58 years old in eight years. Again, assuming the pattern continues, he'd serve two terms and end his time in public life at the age of 66. If it all works out - and that's still a big if - I doubt Casey could have asked for a better resume.

[Keystone Phil]

Obviously making good points - http://blogs.philadelphiaweekly.com/phillynow/2010/11/10/guess-who’s-the-poster-child-for-a-potential-2012-republigeddon/

This is one of the very liberal "hip" papers in Philly so they want him to run to the left.

[Keystone Phil]

The Year of the Pennsylvania Republican could be 2012.

That year was 2010.  Obama would have to lose Pennsylvania for Casey to come anywhere close to losing and that just isnt possible in a Presidential year with the Philly Dem machine turning out 600,000 votes for Democrats.  

Yeah, Obama couldn't possibly get more unpopular to offset Democratic turnout and the Dems will always have insane turnout. 

[Keystone Phil]

The Year of the Pennsylvania Republican could be 2012.

That year was 2010.  Obama would have to lose Pennsylvania for Casey to come anywhere close to losing and that just isnt possible in a Presidential year with the Philly Dem machine turning out 600,000 votes for Democrats.  

Yeah, Obama couldn't possibly get more unpopular to offset Democratic turnout and the Dems will always have insane turnout. 

Obama wont get unpopular enough to lose Pennsylvania.  Not happening. 

He's sitting at a 40% approval rating in Pennsylvania and you really want to be cocky about this? I remember some other cocky, Dem favored predictions from you about two years ago, too...

[Keystone Phil]

The Year of the Pennsylvania Republican could be 2012.

That year was 2010.  Obama would have to lose Pennsylvania for Casey to come anywhere close to losing and that just isnt possible in a Presidential year with the Philly Dem machine turning out 600,000 votes for Democrats.  

Yeah, Obama couldn't possibly get more unpopular to offset Democratic turnout and the Dems will always have insane turnout.  

11 points. Obama won by 11 points. Pennsylvania is not a purple state.

Still living in 2008, eh? Beautiful. Only helps my side. Just a quick reminder...

Victories for the PA GOP in 2010: U.S. Senator, Governor/Lt. Governor, Five Congressional seats to take a 12-7 lead in the delegation, kept the 30-20 margin in the State Senate, net pick up of thirteen seats in the State House to take a 112-91 majority (largest ever for any party in decades).

We also hold the Attorney General spot.

Dems now hold a U.S. Senate seat, the Auditor General and State Treasurer spots.

Yeah, definitely a solid Dem state.

[Keystone Phil]

CT has gone 20 years without a Democratic governor. Another purple state I presume?

Good job ignoring the other offices I listed. Obviously a totally different situation.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Pathetic turnout? You are pathetically uninformed. Over 40% isn't pathetic for a midterm.

By the way, 2008 was one of the best Dem years in decades. That would explain an eleven point win for Obama. I take it you're willing to retract your argument now, right?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Self proclaimed expert? Uh huh.

Yes, Obama won Pennsylvania in a Democratic landslide year. Too bad it isn't 2008 anymore, right?

By the way, the know-it-all from across the pond told us Pat Toomey was unelectable. How did that work out?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Classic coming from you.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How is that hypocritical? Don't have much of a grasp on the language, do you now?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh, the arrogance. You are absolutely going to be right about 2012! Just like how you would be right about 2010 when you were still gloating about 2008.

Speaking of bumping threads about Pennsylvania elections, do you really want me to bump all the threads about Pat Toomey over the past six years? I know you had some real gems!

That's the difference between people like yourself and people like me: I took the victory with class. I didn't bump tons of threads like you and BRTD. But if you want to get into that, be my guest because I have plenty to throw your way.

[Keystone Phil]

Seriously? At a minimum it will be significantly better because more Dems will turnout because it will be a presidential year. If PA Republicans could barely win an open senate seat in the most Republican year in at least a decade and a half, how could you possibly think you could beat Casey?

It would help if you read his argument: he said 2012 could be a worse year for the Dems. If it is, you can't keep that that turnout will be better for your side.

The comparison of the Presidential race and the Senate race isn't that great. Sestak was able to portray himself as an outsider and pick up plenty of votes in areas where Obama will get destroyed if he's still sitting at a 40% approval rating here.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That would be me. It would also help if you got your people straight because getting so cocky. 

And yes, polling showed he could have been beaten.

[Keystone Phil]

Seriously? At a minimum it will be significantly better because more Dems will turnout because it will be a presidential year. If PA Republicans could barely win an open senate seat in the most Republican year in at least a decade and a half, how could you possibly think you could beat Casey?

It would help if you read his argument: he said 2012 could be a worse year for the Dems. If it is, you can't keep that that turnout will be better for your side.

What I said is that 2012 WILL be a better year for Dems, simply because it will be a presidential year and thus more people will turn out, which almost always helps the Dems. The biggest reason we got swamped this year is because turnout was 42%, which won't happen in a Presidential year.

So forget any policy issues or other events over the next two years; 2012 will just be better because turnout is higher in Presidential election years. Excellent analysis!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nelson had a 44% approval rating in July of 2006. Who thought it would be a lean Republican or neutral year then?

[Keystone Phil]

Had the Republicans been in office, they would have been hammered just as badly. Republicans who fail to recognize this do so at their own peril.

Ok, that's like any election, dude. If the Dems had the White House going into 2008, it would have been a disaster for them. If they had Congress going into 2006, it would have been a disaster for them. 

Guess what. You're still the incumbent party in the Senate and the White House so it could be another anti incumbent year.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And I disagree so let's end it at that.

[Keystone Phil]

I don't think they'd be favorites or anything, but it's hard to believe that Gerlach or Dent wouldn't be competitive, credible GOP candidates. Casey ain't perfect.

They both are considered that.    Dent likely won't run because Toomey is from the same area and the party leadership won't go for two Senators from the Lehigh Valley.

[Keystone Phil]

State Senator Kim Ward considering a challenge - http://www.politicspa.com/breaking-state-senator-kim-ward-exploring-challenge-to-bob-casey-in-2012/19227/


She represents a sizably Democratic district just outside of Pittsburgh.

[Keystone Phil]

Dent won't rule out a run against Casey - http://www.mcall.com/news/local/mc-dent-casey-121010,0,3717021.story

I was at the weekend long event - Pennsylvania Society - mentioned in the article. It's our annual Pennsylvania political tradition...in New York City. We consider it sort of a retreat. Anyway, I saw Dent and another possible challenger - State Senator Jake Corman. I didn't see Gerlach or Ward there but I have no doubt that they were in attendance. I didn't see Casey either but I did see his predecessor working the individual events. I hear he has his eyes on something a little bigger than this instead of looking for a rematch. The weird thing is that I didn't hear any talk about this race; all I saw were two people wearing "Casey for Senate" lapel pins. Pennsylvania Society is usually buzzing with rumors.

Aside from the obvious problem for Dent (which I've noted), here's another thing standing in the way of a Senate run: he has been given a spot on the Appropriations committee. Probably not as big of a deal with the earmark ban but it's still obviously prestigious.

Gerlach got a spot on Ways and Means so that throws a wrench into things, too.

[Keystone Phil]

Casey apparently mentioned that he'd vote for the tax compromise in a speech at Pennsylvania Society.

Sestak vs. Casey primary in 2012, anyone? 

[Keystone Phil]

Casey apparently mentioned that he'd vote for the tax compromise in a speech at Pennsylvania Society.

Sestak vs. Casey primary in 2012, anyone? 

I wouldn't be surprised to see some SE liberal take him on in the primary in the hopes of repeating 2002. Whether its someone as big as Sestak or a nobody would determine how it develops. It would be a hell of a thing to see though.

Casey would be especially weak in a primary. It can't automatically be compared to 2002 because he was facing Rendell then. The man is a master campaigner. That being said, Casey fails when he faces real challenges.

I think things have to get a bit worse for Casey to receive a serious challenge. Though the situation was different, this year proved that the liberal grassroots organization here isn't afraid to take on the establishment and with the Dems at historic lows here, the establishment doesn't even have the prestige it boasted this year.

If grassroots could convince Sestak to make another run, it would be an instant must see fight. The thing is that Sestak might be looking to take back his House seat.

[Keystone Phil]

Former Governor Schweiker to be "drafted" to run against Casey? - http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/harrisburg_politics/PA_Society_De-Briefing.html


He might be our best candidate. 

[Keystone Phil]

Former Governor Schweiker to be "drafted" to run against Casey? - http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/harrisburg_politics/PA_Society_De-Briefing.html


He might be our best candidate.  

I don't think any politician left office with more goodwill toward him/her than Schweiker.  In my view he'd crush Casey.......he's well liked by both sides of the aisle.

Run Mark, Run!!!

Consider the circumstances though. He was very popular and very well respected by Dem leaders but he had several unique incidents to explain that.

He wouldn't crush Casey. Unfortunately, no one will unless it's a total disaster of a year for the Dems/Obama. Plus, Schweiker hasn't had to run for office in his own right for a long time and has been out of the spotlight for awhile. He won't be nearly as popular as he was in 2002. If he went back on his word and ran for a full term as Governor, he would have crushed Rendell. No doubt about it. But that won't be the case against Bobby especially in a Presidential election year and after being away for so long.

[Keystone Phil]

Conservative columnist Chris Freind is down on our chances against Casey - http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2010/12/14/gop’s-chances-to-unseat-bob-casey-good-luck/

He suggests Hart and English which is interesting. I've never heard English mentioned for the Senate before. Hart makes sense since she is known and well liked by the base. She was seen as a successor to Santorum or Specter anyway. However, she and English have the problem of losing their most recent elections though (and, in Hart's case, losing once in an embarrassing upset and again in a rematch by a comfortable margin).

I wonder if Hart even cares to run for office again. English might be a different story. He did host an event for incoming and outgoing members of the Congressional delegation at Pennsylvania Society...

[Keystone Phil]

A defeated statewide candidate now out of work usually doesn't visit every county to thank supporters without another statewide run in mind - http://citizensvoice.com/news/sestak-tours-state-thanking-supporters-1.1076387


In other news, State Senator Kim Ward is apparently dismissing the idea of a Senate run while another Pittsburgh area elected official - Congressman Tim Murphy - is starting to talk about it.

[Keystone Phil]

Hart is second in the line of most hated PA pubs.  No chance.

How did she get on your sh*t list, and apparently that of a lot of other folks, Grumps?

She's the female version of the most hated PA pub...she's Santorum with tits........It's funny, Torie, I voted for her more than once.....and she did the closing on my house 25 years ago......but I can't stand her now and I'm glad Altmire unseated her.

That said, Torie, I wouldn't underestimate her.  The pubs love her and she'd do very well in a pub primary.

It's hard to call her the most hated Republican in Pennsylvania when she has never run statewide. She's not known to the general electorate outside of western PA.

Can't argue with his credentials or poise, but I can't imagine him doing well in a primary race.

Tough call.....he's a hard guy to attack.......so Hart couldn't go all  pit bull on him....but he's not a hardliner to my knowledge.  I'm not sure what the pub voter is going to be looking for in 2012 to be honest.

Schweiker might be more moderate but probably conservative overall. That being said, if someone like Hart gets in, he might have an uphill battle.

Whoa, Mark Schweiker may run? That'd be awesome! Then we might actually have a race on our hands. I remember reading that Schweiker, had he ran against Rendell in 2002, would have crushed him.

I'd be disappointed if he threw this out there only to decide not to run.

That was 2002 though. It's not the same now even though he still has great connections.

Schweiker didn't throw this out there either. The article states that our former Lancaster GOP Chairman/ former nominee for Auditor General/2010 Lt. Gubernatorial candidate Chet Beiler wanted to start a draft movement (which is odd because I thought Beiler might look at the race himself) and Schweiker neither encouraged nor dismissed the idea.


Anyway, Quinnipiac is supposedly releasing a poll tomorrow with Casey ratings. Should be fun to see.

[Keystone Phil]

I've been trying to spread this rumor for awhile now even though I simply thought it up on my own after Casey's tax vote. Apparently, it's real - http://nepartisan.com/?p=2641

[Keystone Phil]

I've been trying to spread this rumor for awhile now even though I simply thought it up on my own after Casey's tax vote. Apparently, it's real - http://nepartisan.com/?p=2641

That is ludicrous. (No, Phil, this is nothing personal against you.) There is virtually no chance that Sestak would challenge Casey in a primary, there are no issues on which he can draw a distinction nor was Casey a Republican for 40 years until last week.

Virtually no chance? The guy is going on a 67 county thank you tour...after losing.

It doesn't matter if they are basically in total agreement on the issues (that will go to show you that Casey isn't a moderate and certainly not conservative). This is all about perception and the liberal base has never been fired up for Casey. It doesn't matter that he hasn't been a Republican for forty years.

Sestak probably sees this as yet another opportunity to take down the establishment. He certainly thinks he can win the General after his performance this year and Casey is proven to be weak in primaries so why not do it? What else does he have to lose?

I don't mind if you think he'll ultimately decide against it but virtually no chance? Not acknowledging Casey's weakness with the base? Come on.

[Keystone Phil]

Some politicians who lose primaries remain active in politics in order to remain political players without necessarily running for office again.  Bob Vander Plaats is still running around in Iowa, and I have no idea what office he'd run for before 2014.

Sestak is going on a 67 county thank you tour. It's a bit different and, again, this isn't just some rumor anymore. It has been confirmed by national and state Democratic sources.

Sestak wants to keep his options open for the future and maintain the goodwill he built up from nearly winning a race where he was a double underdog. He needs to maintain connections because otherwise he's facing a long retirement with no next promotion.

And you probably would have said the same thing when he was considering a run against Specter. Again, this is different but you shouldn't speak with such certainty.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Those are your reasons why he shouldn't get a challenge. That's fine but that's not necessarily what most liberals think.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And we were all rolling our eyes at him for taking on Specter as we saw the polls showing him down by twenty to thirty points. Did we think it would get closer? Yeah but so many asked themselves, "Why is he throwing away a seat?"

The guy might think he has nothing to lose. 2014 is out the window if you believe the Gubernatorial election pattern here and since Sestak is more motivated by federal issues and 2016 is an awful long way away for someone that isn't all that young.

This is certainly possible and let's not forget that we're not debating my rumor here. This is something that higher ups are acknowledging.

I doubt this will happen, but as I privately noted if it did and Sestak won, he would've deposed Phil's two least favorite in PA politics. Phil probably would like him quite a bit.

I've always said that I truly respect the guy.