State of the Senate right now

[Rococo4]

ok, but if Kerry wins MA Gov Romney appoints someone to take Kerrys seat, which will be a Republican.  Then, I believe that person would be up in a special election in 2006, along with Ted Kennedy who is also up in 2006.  I could be wrong about that, but intially Romney will appoint a Republican.  Moot point anyways because Bush is going to win.

[Rococo4]

ok, but if Kerry wins MA Gov Romney appoints someone to take Kerrys seat, which will be a Republican.  Then, I believe that person would be up in a special election in 2006, along with Ted Kennedy who is also up in 2006.  I could be wrong about that, but intially Romney will appoint a Republican.  Moot point anyways because Bush is going to win.

The MA State Legislature is currently working on a bill that will allow for a special election within a couple months of the presidential election.  It is likely to pass with a veto-proof majority,

i heard that, but i dont think it will happen.  I am sure you dont care, its simply a power grab.  So desperate for power are the Dems that they have to change the rules on appointing senators.  

[Rococo4]

ok, but if Kerry wins MA Gov Romney appoints someone to take Kerrys seat, which will be a Republican.  Then, I believe that person would be up in a special election in 2006, along with Ted Kennedy who is also up in 2006.  I could be wrong about that, but intially Romney will appoint a Republican.  Moot point anyways because Bush is going to win.

The MA State Legislature is currently working on a bill that will allow for a special election within a couple months of the presidential election.  It is likely to pass with a veto-proof majority,

And before the Republicans start complaining....remember, you guys did almost the exact same thing two years ago to keep Murkowski's seat in GOP hands.

\

yeah but there were no rules changed, it was just shady.  I admit that.  we deserve to lose that seat for what Murkowski did.

[Rococo4]

well i am not 100% sure......whatever though.  Good discussion.

[Rococo4]

Specter has been the Senator from PA for a long time and has won with comfy margins and is by all accounts - even by most Toomey supporters - a stronger candidate against Hoffel.  The problem is that if Toomey was the nominee, half his potential voters (moderates in suburban Philly) will be alienated from him and the Dems will win.  How many times does a freakishly conservative candidate (Simon, Shallenberger, etc.) have to lose a race that we could have easily won with a more moderate candidate for you folks to realize that Republicans win when we match the hopes, dreams, and aspirations of the voters - not just nominate candidates who are hardcore ideologues.  Thank heavens there was no primary for the California recall race otherwise you guys probably would have screwed that up too.

I disagree on PA's Senate race.  No conservative will vote Specter.  If he is the nominee, half his potential voters will be alienated from the GOP Senate candidate and the Dems will win.

This is just a special case....we are not out there backing other challengers, nor would we be.  Specter has to go. He can not be in charge of Judicary.  Thats all this is about.  I agree Specter would win the General, and Toomey would be 50/50 to win, but I also think we will hold the Senate.  A lesson needs to be shown that you cant act like a Dem then change in your election yr.  The real moderates like Snowe, Collins and Chafee at least have principles, even though I disagree with them.

[Rococo4]

AMEN.

We know what happens when the Republican Party decides to say, "Screw Reality, Lets Nominate an Ideologue and be a Movement"...

Its called Goldwater...and 6 states.

Go ahead and try, but don't expect us moderates to clean up your mess.

you guys are just plain wrong.  It is one senator and it is only a big deal because of the position he is in line to get if he wins reelection.  We have too many moderates in the party now - but no one is trying to get rid of them.  I dont see how any Republican could support Specter.  There is just a laundry list of reasons not to.  

[Rococo4]

Kansas went pretty heavily for Bush in 2000.  Now they've got a Democrat Governor cause we nominated someone that was too conservative for KANSAS   But I guess that was still a victory for you, eh?

At least you are supporting Mel in Florida, though I wish Mark Foley would have stayed in the race.

I agree we have a shot in IL if we play our cards right, but NV is hopeless after all our first, second, third, fourth, and fifth tier candidates dropped out.

I've already said, I think Toomey will win and is a better candidate than Specter.

I also think the Republicans are the favorites in Colorado, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Florida if they nominate Mel Martinez.  All these states went to bush in 2000.

We also have a shot in Illinois and Nevada.

I have no expectations of losing the Seante, with or without the Pennsylvania seat.

Foley might have been the GOP's best candidate in the general, but he could not have won a GOP primary with so many Christian conservatives against him.

And JohnFord...I don't think the Republicans even have a legitimate candidate in Nevada.

seems to me the FLA Senate race will be almost strictly determined by the Presidential race.....i am willing to bet there will be almost 0 people who vote Bush, but for the Dem nominee or vice versa.  This isnt all that common, but sometimes you see it, like in 2000 (Bush won in NE by alot, but Ben Nelson won a close race for Senate, there are many examples).  FLA will not be one of them.

[Rococo4]

Someone catch me... I'm about to faint.  Speechless really.

"Too many moderates"... well.. just you wait.. we're only going to get bigger and bigger and bigger...

I don't see how any Republican could support a Democrat having a better chance at winning the seat.

AMEN.

We know what happens when the Republican Party decides to say, "Screw Reality, Lets Nominate an Ideologue and be a Movement"...

Its called Goldwater...and 6 states.

Go ahead and try, but don't expect us moderates to clean up your mess.

you guys are just plain wrong.  It is one senator and it is only a big deal because of the position he is in line to get if he wins reelection.  We have too many moderates in the party now - but no one is trying to get rid of them.  I dont see how any Republican could support Specter.  There is just a laundry list of reasons not to.  

and i dont see how any Republican could vote for Specter over Toomey, because Toomey is actually a Republican, not just a politican with a "R" next to his name

[Rococo4]

Rococo... moderates are often better members of their respective parties than fire eaters in nice safe seats.

yes they are sometimes, actully most of the time, yes your right.  not this time.  Specter is not your average moderate.  I will just have to disagree with you all on this one.

[Rococo4]

I am sure you will love Specter if he becomes Judicary Cmte. chairman and rejects a Bush SCOTUS nomiantion because they are too conservative for him.  (assuming GWB wins again).  or appeals court judges for that matter

IF you see Specter as Judicary chairman i think you guys will realize what this is about......if it wasnt for the fact of what he is going to become in the Senate, frankly i wouldnt care if beat Toomey or not.

[Rococo4]

President Bush seems to be comfortable with him.  Vice-President Cheney seems to be comfortable with him.  Senator Santorum seems to be comfortable with him.  If they are comfortable, I'm comfortable with him.

I am sure you will love Specter if he becomes Judicary Cmte. chairman and rejects a Bush SCOTUS nomiantion because they are too conservative for him.  (assuming GWB wins again).  or appeals court judges for that matter

IF you see Specter as Judicary chairman i think you guys will realize what this is about......if it wasnt for the fact of what he is going to become in the Senate, frankly i wouldnt care if beat Toomey or not.

I dont think Bush would come out against any Republican senator for reelection - you dont do that.  The most he would do is stay neutral, like he did against Bob Smith in 02 in NH.  Bush wants to win PA and he doesnt want to look too extreme, which he feels supporting Toomey would make him do

[Rococo4]

I dont think you are getting my point.  Specter is one case by itself.  We are not trying to push out any other moderates.  

[Rococo4]

Rococo is right.

We are not tryingn to purge moderates.  There is no desire from me to oust Schwarzenegger form me out here in CA.  Mitt Romeny in MA, Pataki in NY, all fine with me, because that is the best we can hope for.  However, this is a special case.  Specter will cause more harm than a freshmen Democrat because of the power he will have.  Also, this is a state that just re-elected Rick Santorum.  They will, of course, elect Toomey if we send him up.

And by the way guys, the last time we tried to be a movement we won 49 states.

Thanks for the backup......good points about Romney, Arnold, etc.  Specter absoluetly would do more damage as Judicary Cmte. Chairman than a freshman PA Dem Senator

[Rococo4]

They just keep ignoring that we are just anti-Specter...whatever.  No obvioulsy we are not for Democrats over Republicans.  We think  (know) Toomey would be a better Senator and can win, so thats why we want him to defeat Specter

[Rococo4]

And Ill have to say again - I would rather see Specter defeated than in either the primary or the general because I dont want him chairing Judicary.

Toomey would be 50/50 at best, I understand that, but it is worth the risk.  I am sure Specter will win, he always fools enough people and this yr, gets Dems to register and vote for him.

Win or lose Toomey should be congratulated by all so these Senators (of both parties) cant ignore their constiuents for 5 years then pander to them in election years and expect to be unopposed by a serious candidate.

[Rococo4]

So you are more supportive of Democrats than Republicans.  I see exactly where you stand.

Rococo is right.

We are not tryingn to purge moderates.  There is no desire from me to oust Schwarzenegger form me out here in CA.  Mitt Romeny in MA, Pataki in NY, all fine with me, because that is the best we can hope for.  However, this is a special case.  Specter will cause more harm than a freshmen Democrat because of the power he will have.  Also, this is a state that just re-elected Rick Santorum.  They will, of course, elect Toomey if we send him up.

And by the way guys, the last time we tried to be a movement we won 49 states.

Thanks for the backup......good points about Romney, Arnold, etc.  Specter absoluetly would do more damage as Judicary Cmte. Chairman than a freshman PA Dem Senator

I just figured it out.....you moderates want Specter to chair the Judicary Cmte. It was so simple all along, and I missed it.  You want him to make sure only pro-abortion, pro affirmative action and pro democratic ideals get on the bench.  It is a great way to stop Bush appointments.  Specter is the key to this.  We need more judges like Souter and Kennedy, right?  Specter thinks so.  I think we all know where he stands on real conservative judges, and dont give me anything about Clarence Thomas - his support of him was nothing put an election ploy and to save his job after he brought down Bork.  Sicne this will be his last term, he can support his pro  abortion opinion all he wants, he wont have answer to anyone anymore.

[Rococo4]

Of course we Dems would like Specter to be the chair. We would much prefer Leahy though.

Kick out Specter and there is a decent chance that the senate goes Democratic.  Leave him be and its hard to imagine that the dems do better than hold even.

Pick your poison. Who would you prefer as judiciary chair? Specter? or Leahy?

This is a race we Dems can't lose.  Specter, who we like. Or we get a liberal Dem senator.

Well you are making a big assumption that if Specter loses we will lose the Senate (legiatemtly this time, not on back room deals to get a defector like Jeffords).  I think we will hold the Senate anyways.  Maybe Leahy will get kicked off Judicary, like he was kicked off the intelligence cmte.  a while back for leaking classified information.  Yeah, obvioulsy dems like Specter.  Just like Republicans like Zell Miller.

[Rococo4]

You think we'd want more judges like Kennedy or Souter?

You're absolutely right.

In case you haven't figured it out, there's a reason why we're called moderates, its because we're not far right wing conservatives. I'll take a Kennedy over a Scalia anyday, and I'll take Souter over Ginsberg anytime.

The Republican Party is not a single thinking being (ala the Borg), if you wish to turn it into such, then go ahead...I'm sure there are plenty other parties who wouldn't mind the millions of moderate republicans joining them.

I am willing to take my chances that enough people wouldnt leave the party because of a Supreme Court appointee. No, the Republican party isnt a single thinking being, but when it comes down to it, there are far more people like me than Republicans who are pro-Specter / pro-Souter.

Most of the party does NOT stand ideogiacally with Specter.  We should not have to support every moderate.  We support all but one - Specter.  I dont like McCain, but I would back him in an AZ Senate Primary.

[Rococo4]

We're better off with 50 or 51 reliable conservatives in the Senate than a 55 majority with 5 or 6 RINOs.  Keeps things consistent - especially things like committee chairmanships.  

I even think we're better off purging turncoats like Specter and ending up with 49 because then we can blame Leahy and the Dems for nixing more Scalia/Thomas-type judges - turns out the base for Senatorial contests in 2006.

Yeah I agree except I hope we dont lose the Senate - just Specter loses and Jon Kyl takes over for Orrin Hatch on Judicary.

We have a majority now, but it is not a "working majority."

[Rococo4]

I don't know why all of you are so up in arms about Specter. He voted with Bush 89% of the time, and Toomey voted about 93% of the time as a US Rep.

And Rococo, even though it's impossible to truly tell, I highly doubt that there are more ultra right-wing Republicans then there are moderate Republicans. Same goes for the opposite end in regards to Democrats.

Yes it would be hard to tell, but I bet that more Republicans overall would prefer Toomeys voting record over Specter.  I dont really care how Specter has voted, as I have said before, I just dont want him to be in charge of the Judicary Cmte.  If he wasnt in line for that I would probably back him just to keep the seat safe.