I guess Arlen is enjoying that he doesn’t need to look over his right shoulder any more.

Also, Sestak has been ‘making clear’ his intent to run since long before May 28th. I think he’s been fairly direct since the beginning of May.

Dan-
I saw this on Nate’s website a few days ago.

What’s missing is an analysis Sestak’s voting record. I feel that Sestak was drifting to the Right in order to appeal to conservative voters statewide, then had to tack back to the Left to outflank Specter. I think Specter has moved Sestak to the Left.

Also, Nate’s analysis failed to take into account Specter’s change relative to losing his seniority, and I’m not sure how many “critical” votes actually occurred during each the time periods Nate used in his slices.

Finally, it’s hard to tell how much of this is Specter unshackled and in a party that treats him better. Maybe Sestak should quit the race (that he’s not even really in) for a few months, and then we can see if Arlen swings back.

Arlen’s hearing Sestak’s footsteps …. LOL!!!

yes.. fading into the distance of Specter’s 55% to 23% lead. Double LOL!!

Learn to read a poll. Two-thirds of voters have never even heard of Sestak. These numbers will tighten over the full year that Sestak will be campaigning all over the state. He’ll have plenty of money to get his name and his message out. Specter’s name recognition is nearly total, yet he remains well below the magic 50% reelect number that is the best signal of a vulnerable incumbent. Democrats will flock to Sestak once election season heats up and they realize there’s a better option. I think the big takeaway from Nate’s analysis is that nobody knows how Specter will vote when there’s no longer any pressure holding him accountable. Surely no reelection pressure would bear on the then-86 year old incumbent in 2016.

Jon-
The numbers might tighten, or Specter might pull farther away as his approval increases (which it will as he votes with Dems). The Sestak cult acts like all those 2/3 will flock to Joe. The reality is that Sestak is still an “unknown” even once they know his name. He’s made enough pro-Bush/Cheney votes to counter any charges he makes against Specter. In Montco, they couldn’t give a rat’s ass about Joe, even among the people that know him.

Let’s have Nate do an analysis on Joe “goes-the-way-the-wind-blows” Sestak before you get too worried about trusting Specter.

Specter has pretty much voted the way he campaigned. Sestak has voted the OPPOSITE of his campaigning on the very issues that got him elected. Sestak’s already proved he can’t be trusted on his campaign promises. There are a lot of progressives unhappy with him.

Anyone who has watched Specter over the years could tell that he seemed more like a prisoner trapped in the GOP than a happy camper. The Democratic party is a better fit for him that the GOP.

The electorate rewards good votes. That is why most Dems have voted for Specter at least once.

I’d love you to teach me read a poll Jon.

Cause when I read the recent Q-Pac poll, I read that Specter had an approval rating among Democrats of 75%. Not bad vis-a-vis your magic 50% threshold.

And regarding your point that Sestak’s awful name recognition is a virtue, let me point out that 58% of people don’t know Sestak IN HIS OWN BACK YARD! In the Philly area which is so crucial for Dems in the general.

And no offense, but Democrats shouldn’t risk a Senate seat on a guy who’ll need to spend several million bucks just to win the counties next door to his district. If we want PA to stay a blue state, we can’t nominate someone who’ll have to play defense against Pat Toomey in Montgomery and Bucks Counties.

And on top of that, your assumption is that increased Sestak recognition will equate to increased support for Sestak. I think there are quite a few folks around the state who would disagree with that premise. (Heck, there are even some folks in DelCo who would disagree with you).

For example:
(“Allegheny County party chairman Jim Burn said (of Sestak) “you are attempting to create an inference that perhaps I have endorsed Congressman Sestak when I have not,” and southeastern Democratic caucus chairwoman Penny Gerber said the e-mail “grossly mischaracterizes my quote from another independent publication.””)

We need someone like Specter who help the statewide Democratic ticket. Someone who can bring millions of dollars, thousands of supporters and high-profile celebrities to Pennsylvania to help out our candidate for governor. No one is going to pay for a fancy fundraiser to listen to Joe Sestak bloviate about the Navy for 3 hours.

So, like I said Jon, I’d love you to teach me to read a poll, but I think to fully get it, I’ll need to borrow your rosy Sestak glasses.

John-
That was some smack down!

The Sestak drones aren’t too good with logic. When asked to jump off a cliff, they say “How high?”.

Jon

You read the poll correctly. John is comparing apples and oranges. What you wrote about Sestak having great room to grow in the name recognition category isn’t even arguable.

As for the reason Specter is moving to the left, the explanaton that Sestak’s candidacy is the primary cause is certainly the most plausible. Actually, if that is the explanation, it is a compliment to Specter’s political skills. It also is an early dividend from Sestak’s candidacy.

Sestak-Specter is going to be a fascinating election. You can tell that Specter supporters are worried, despite their denials, because they are trying to shape the peception of Sestak beofre he can define himself to the electorate.
Frankly, I think that it is going to be a close primary election.

Lee-
Sestak has room to grow, sure, but that doesn’t mean he will be preferred. Specter has “room to grow” himself in being accepted as a Dem. That’s the only thing that Sestak really attacks him on and gives the voters pause. Once Specter convinces enough in the electorate that he is a reliable Dem vote, he will be preferable to a whining, inexperienced blowhard like Sestak.
Everybody in the party whose political future depends upon Specter winning this year, and filling the gap when Specter retires, has no interest in Sestak filling that slot.

Actually, shaping the perception of Sestak is EXACTLY the right strategy and one of the key reasons Weldon lost. In June/July of 2006, Sestak still had very little name recognition. Joe lucked out because the Weldon team incompetently missed their opportunity to define Joe. Had they done that, Joe would have wasted money trying to correct misconceptions. Instead, Weldon let Joe define himself, and it was Weldon who didn’t have the resources to alter the peoples’ view of Joe.

Lee, the loss of his seniority (and opportunity to regain it) is a far more likely explanation for Specter’s shift (beyond his natural tendency to be with us on most of the current issues). Specter is smart enough to know when the country is in crisis and that Obama has the answers and the party-of-NO doesn’t.

Joe’s got little support and even fewer friends in PA politics. At this point, I’m just waiting for him to give up his congressional seat so we can replace him with a real Democrat.

So, Arlen is like Romney.. Just float where ever the political winds blow.. I hated Mitt Romney for that. I really believed he was better than that, then he just flopped so far right, a ten foot poll would have been a contagion…proving me a fool for wishing anything more..
Sestak has a voting record, why hasn’t anyone written about that ?

mike

Its all about Arlens self preservation. This guys going to do what he has to to keep his spot in the Senate. Neither you or I matter its all about Arlen and Arlen only.

Time for a change I say

With the primary just under nine months from now, a lot of things can happen. I’m sure we’ll see plenty of ads with Arlen and W and Arlen and Cheney and Arlen and McCain on the air. Will Arlen’s ads with him and Biden and Obama help?

Also I don’t recall Specter getting a lot more than 20% of the D vote in general elections in his past two tries. That “might” go up, but he will surely lose a lot of his R votes. I think his party switch will leave him “un-elected” come next year.