Who are you voting for, Dan? I am really struggling to decide this one.

More idiotic tripe from the leader of the state Democratic Party, TJ Rooney in today’s Inquirer:

“[Sestak's] been calling Arlen Specter all sorts of names suggesting he’s a better Democrat, but the one true-blue Democrat is Arlen Specter,” Rooney said in an interview Sunday. “If Joe Sestak can’t be counted on to support his opponent if he loses, what can we count on him for?”

1-Other than calling Specter what he really is –a five-term Republican – what name-calling has Sestak done? None that I know of. But Rooney, they guy who’s ordering Democrats to vote for Specter, seems to have no trouble at all throwing a lie like this.

2-Rooney sets up the twisted lie that journalists ran with, that “Sestak can’t be counted on to support his opponent.” Of course, Joe said nothing like that. What he said was that he wouldn’t consider losing, which is very, very different.

One great side benefit of Sestak winning tomorrow will be the real message of this campaign: the Democratic leadership has completely lost touch with the grassroots voters of this party. It’s not just time for new blood in our Senate nominee, it’s time to clean house in our leadership, too.

Bruce-
I saw the interview. Sestak went out of way to dodge the question. It may look like discipline to act like losing isn’t an option. But, we usually call that living in a state of denial.

What would it have cost Sestak to say, “Of course I’d support Arlen, but I’m not going to have to.”??
Has Sestak previous claimed there was no difference between Specter and Toomey?

Hey Bill M.,

I am not registered with any political party, therefore I cannot vote in party primaries under Pennsylvania law.

And even though I can vote in November, I will not be doing so.

I know objectivity is impossible at a purely human level. But it’s a worthy aspiration, one to which I have decided to devote my life (incredibly corny sounding, I know).

So I’m not picking any horses in any of these races.

As to your vote, I only have one position: You should vote.

Good luck making your decision. Should be a close race.

And thanks for reading.

Dan Hirschhorn

This race is over. Sestak wins.

Very happy tomorrow night to know that the rendell-rooney era is over…maybe we can back ot having real democrats in charge and not oportunists like rendell and rooney.

David, he could have said anything in response.

But this is what he did say. And it wasn’t reported accurately. Instead, it was interpreted (incorrectly, in my opinion) as part of a news story. It was interpreted in the way that most benefits Arlen Specter and TJ Rooney. And that’s just flat wrong.

The party establishment has it right- the party should WELCOME moderates who leave the other side, not push them out because they havent always been a Democrat.

Perhaps for the true betterment of the state we should be especially welcoming to someone with seniority who sits on the appropriations committee and brings billions to PA.

Take a moment and think about the state without Specter and the funding he brings.

Dan-
I respect your neutrality, but I’m surprised you don’t plan to vote in November. You get to interview a lot of these candidates face-to-face and have access to information that you can’t always print. Your vote is probably a lot more informed than most.

Certainly some candidates must represent your views closer than other candidates. If a candidate was running with a record of trying to stifle the press vs more transparency, I would expect you to have an opinion on that.

So, I’ll give some advise I just read recently from a very wise man:
“As to your vote, I only have one position: You should vote.”

I love irony.

Dan:

I totally respect and agree with your stance on objectivity as a journalist. However, I am HORRIFIED that you do not intend to vote in November. That is the most basic and fundamental part of this democratic process we are all so concerned about. Journalists in most cases are best off keeping their opinions to themselves, but to refuse to vote out of some misguided need for editorial purity is a ridiculous and offensive conceit. Vote for Mickey Mouse. Vote for yourself. But the act of not voting, even for a supposedly “principled” reason, cheapens the process, and gives aid and comfort to those who don’t vote because maintaining a democratic society is someone else’s problem, not theirs.

Mario Cimino
D – Morton Borough Council

Dan-

Not attacking; but wondering how your voting in the general and keeping it secret, as we all have the right to do, hinders your objectivity, or even the perception of your objectivity.

p.s. You know that you’ll be accused of favoritism no matter what you do or don’t do.

Hey David, Mario and Lee,

All of you make good points, and alas, I’ve heard them all before from friends of mine who are similarly horrified when they hear that I decline to vote in these situations.

I don’t expect to be able to convince you that this makes sense, but nonetheless, here’s just a brief window into my thinking on the matter.

Yes, voting is the core of our participatory democracy. It is a right we all enjoy. It is the glue that holds this system together. All that patriotic stuff

Now, as corny as it sounds, I see myself as having chosen to exercise a different role in that democracy, one of informing you fantastic people, rather than exercising the right myself. Just as I have the right to vote, I also have the right not to vote. It is my right, to do with it what I please.

Would voting completely ruin my credibility and destroy any semblance of objectivity? Of course not. But that’s not the point. I do ANYTHING and EVERYTHING I possibly can to attain the greatest, most dispassionate level of objectivity possible.

I see consciously avoiding having a horse in the race as part and parcel to that effort.

So there it is, a little look inside my neurosis.

Hope you enjoyed.

And thanks as always for getting involved in the conversation.

Dan Hirschhorn