Specter is unpopular because he has no moral center, no core convictions. That’s why among Democrats who know both Specter and Sestak, Sestak is ahead. Dems were prepared to run against Specter, had he not switched parties, because we also believe he’s out of touch. It doesn’t make any sense to hold Specter up as a generic Democrat to say that Specter’s shitty numbers somehow mean that Democrats are unpopular in the state. Specter’s numbers are dragging well below where generic Democratic initiatives are polling in PA, which is obvious if you actually look at the internals of the poll instead of lazily skimming the toplines like Michael did. It is good that pa2010 readers can always count on Michael for blinkered sloppy analysis to help them misunderstand the political climate in Pennsylvania.

It’s interesting to see what happens when a party starts to lose its touch. Each week, the percentage of comments with adolescent terms like “lazy,” “blinkered,” and “sloppy” become more prevalent, while the analysis becomes more and more far-fetched. Keep hurling the insults and increasing the deficits, fellows, see you in 2010.