Fluorescent Dreams Wax Cylinders - Arlen Spectre..

I haven't followed Specter's career for a couple of decades; I didn't like him then, but since I can't vote either for or against him and he isn't worth more drastic action, I've been ignoring him since.

Franken getting seated is certainly more important.

best,

Joel

(Reply) (Thread)

Franken may be more important as an individual. Specter is very interesting, though. To have watched his views change as a former resident of PA was interesting. Cancer did play a big role, but he was rather North Eastern so far as Republicans go. It was almost inevitable in that light to see him leave..

So its not the man that makes the biggest difference, though, sadly. The divisions as they are make up a bigger role in terms of importance. The change in numerical balance is granted weight by the way the system works. That's what's important. But without Franken, it wouldn't be as much so. Franken will ultimately be more interesting.

(Reply) (Thread)

Yes.

Franken NOW.

(Reply) (Thread)

Arlen Specter didn't change parties on the basis of any principle, he changed because he knew he was dead in the water for a 2010 reelection, very unpopular with the state Republican party for breaking ranks and voting for the stimulus, and trailing his likely challenger (Toomey) in the GOP primary by 21 points. Only way he can win reelection is as a Democrat. His decision to change was purely an act of self-preservation, and contemptible for it.

(Reply) (Thread)

*shrug*

From what I've read, he was very likely to lose the GOP primary -- mostly because many Republicans in Pennsylvania switched to the Democratic party in the last few years. The ones who remained in the Republican party were more conservative than him.

But the Republican primary doesn't determine the Senator.

Right now, it looks like Toomey will win the Republican primary, and Specter will win the Democratic primary.

It's the general election, not the primary, that determines the Senator. Let all of Pennsylvania, not just the Republicans, determine who should represent them.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

> But the Republican primary doesn't determine the Senator.

Neither does the Democratic primary. He's in essence gaming the state election system to keep himself in office since Pennsylvania doesn't have open primaries. And it wasn't simply a matter of people switching parties; he *did* lose a significant amount of support in the state by supporting the stimulus.

> It's the general election, not the primary, that determines the Senator.
> Let all of Pennsylvania, not just the Republicans, determine who should
> represent them.

That's more an argument for open primaries than an excuse for switching parties. I wouldn't approve of his actions even if the parties were reversed. What he's doing he's doing for personal political gain and to keep himself in office. There's nothing high-minded or honorable about that. His actions are a selfish political calculation, nothing more.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

While I'm glad there's another Dem in the fold, I agree with this analysis. He even said as much, although it was a bit sideways (something about not wanting to have to deal with an unwinnable GOP Primary).

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

(Continued; sorry, wasn't finished)

On the other hand, is it more about him or more about the Republican Party that a multi-term senator can't win a primary? In fairness, the same question could be asked about Lieberman and the Democratic Party.

Now that 2% of the Senate is represented by relative Moderates who felt shunned by increasingly partisan parties, how long before a third, moderate party gains serious traction?

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

On the other hand, is it more about him or more about the Republican Party that a multi-term senator can't win a primary? In fairness, the same question could be asked about Lieberman and the Democratic Party.

There's a difference between his situation and Lieberman's. Liebermann could lose his primary, then turn around and run as an independent. Pennsylvania doesn't allow that--you lose a primary, you're done. So he had to make the switch now, or commmit to being an independent, which makes it a likely three-way race where he's still the loser.

Now that 2% of the Senate is represented by relative Moderates who felt shunned by increasingly partisan parties, how long before a third, moderate party gains serious traction?

Not long, I hope and pray.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Arlen's move makes the remaining Republican party that much more radical and insanity focused. I'd rather have his voice balancing out the lunatics like Michelle Bachman than pulling on the strings of freshmen Democrats.

Also, I don't like the notion of the two party system turning into a choice between the Moderates and the McCrazies.

(Reply) (Thread)

I've been trying to decide what I think about this particular move and I think I'm at Well, that's interesting but, meh. His stated reasons for changing parties is pretty well stated, he's a moderate and the Republican party has gone too far to the right for him to feel comfortable there while the more moderate portion of the Democratic Party has become better organized. By swapping parties he gets back to a position of greater influence in various Senate committees.

Though I have to say, I find the sound bites from Republican leaders about this development kind of astounding, as though somebody in Specter's position deciding that the GOP no longer represented his personal views was a horrible betrayal that should be punished by all other GOP members in the house rather than the, "No, really. You guys suck!" message that it really is.

(Reply) (Thread)

Specter's switch means that the Republicans can no longer use filibuster-by-default politics. This hardly means the Democratic party can run bills through unopposed, they're still the Democratic party after all, but it does mean that the Republicans are going to have to pick and choose battles and actually TALK about things, instead of simply shutting off the Senate on party principles.

So, I think the switch is more of a blow to the Republicans than a gain for the Democrats.

(Reply) (Thread)

The "Club for Growth" crowd seem to view this as a big victory for them, and now seem to have taken the reigns of the party. I expect them to target Snowe next, and with more vitriol and hate than they use against democrats.

I fully expect Olympia Snowe to run as an independent come 2012.

(Reply) (Thread)

Now that Spector doesn't need to do party-line votes, we may see his record become much more liberal. It certainly couldn't get more winger.

We'll see if he has a record the Democratic voters in his state will like. And as he pointed out, his voters turned Democrat... Why shouldn't he? The GOP was tying his hands.

(Reply) (Thread)