Nate Silver proves scientifically that the only thing Arlen Specter stands for is re-election. Bonus: he appears to have made Pat Toomey actually competitive in the general race, which certainly wouldn't be true normally.
This may give pause to those who are advocating that the Democrats "discipline" the Blue Dogs. Many of them are in districts that lean Republican much more firmly than Pennsylvania has swayed left. A primary challenge from the left would be a sad joke.
Copyright © 2010 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
"A primary challenge from the left would be a sad joke."
A sad joke that might secure us a cap and trade program, national healthcare reform with near 100% coverage, lower medical costs, ...
Assuming, arguendo, that these are all terrific ideas, and that hte results will be as described, it's hard to see someone mounting a primary challenge from the left in the first idaho. Even if they did, they'd just lose the general.
Cecil Andrus is tanned, rested & ready.
But Megan - you're running on fumes. Taunt. Gloat. Repeat.
Maybe you should just take a couple weeks now as an early honeymoon.
"national healthcare reform with near 100% coverage, lower medical costs"
Which of those two would you prefer?
We can have both. The only sticking point is the definition of "coverage".
I should have said lower costs *for the average payer.* I don't think that they are mutually exclusive -- while ensuring a larger portion will necessarily cost more, I don't think it has to be done in a way that costs the average purchaser more (e.g., capital gains tax reform). The major point -- I don't care if blue dogs get re-elected. I care that they worry enough about a challenger from the left to bite the bullet on healthcare reform (and in the senate, cap and trade).
Devo, if you think the only thing standing between you and cap & trade and HC reform is Spector, I'd say your analysis is a bit off.
And I didn't say "only thing" -- but certainly, when combined with other dems from conservative districts, a major factor.
A primary challenge from the left would be a sad joke.
Just like Virginia electing a Democratic Senator or voting for a liberal Democrat in a Presidential election?
A primary challenge from the left would be a sad joke.
You are joking, right? Why do you hate Democracy? And where was your stink when Toomey announced his challenge to Specter(before Snarlin' Arlen became a 2-time carpet bagger)? Why isn't a primary challenge from the right(against a fellow Republican) in a place like PA not a joke?
Calvin, I'm pretty sure that when Megan says "he appears to have made Pat Toomey actually competitive in the general race, which certainly wouldn't be true normally," she's arguing that a primary challenge from the right by Toomey was also a joke, since Toomey "certainly" wouldn't win the general election.
The primary challenge from the right was a sad joke: it pushed Arlen Specter into the arms of the Democrats, and (unless Arlen keeps moving left) lost them the PA seat.
And one other thing. The people I know that are advocating primaries are advocating them against people like Jim Cooper. Districts where Obama won handily!!
Let's not be too hard on the fierce moral urgency of keeping your day job. I'm pleasantly surprised what that in part has kept us from in Congress this year.
Agreed. It does prevent us from addressing long term problems such as Social Security before we reach a crisis, but I would view gridlock in the legislative branch as usually a good thing. It's essentially what I would vote for if that were an option.
Young fool! Your primary challenge is a sad joke. Now witness the power of this fully armed and operational battle station!
Megan,
You are wasting your writing time. Some people are, and always will be, completely immune to political reality. They think it a simple matter of backing the correct candidates, rather than those backstabbing Blue Dogs for example, to get someone as far left as necessary to enact their agenda. The really ironic thing is that Specter faced a challenge from the right that displayed the exact same mentality- rather than being happy with holding the seat, the extreme Right encouraged Toomey to challenge Specter. If Toomey had beaten Specter, Toomey would have lost the general election for certain. In my opinion, the Democrats made a tactical mistake welcoming Specter into the party, but, politically, they probably didn't have a real choice but to do so.
Parties must select their candidates to fit the electorate those candidates are looking to represent. To do otherwise simply concedes those districts to the opposition.
The "Blue Dogs" don't bring much to the table. They made up 15 of the 19 Democrats who voted against ENDA, for example. The Democrats probably made a mistake bringing them into the party.
And thus Yancey Ward's point is made for him. Given there are 52 members of the Blue Dog Coalition, what they bring to the table is Democratic control of the House.
But, hey, if you think a Republican Speaker of the House is a small price to pay for ideological purity, please continue to attack the inclusion of the Blue Dogs in the Democratic Party as a mistake.
"A primary challenge from the left would be a sad joke."
Leiberman might agree but so is a primary challenge from the right. In most states, with some southern exceptions, the majority are in the middle and the winners are those who get 'em. Ask Obama.
Middle of what exactly. Can you define for me what constitutes that all elusive "middle"?