send to a friend | print | comment

What to look forward to (and my radio gig)

What a week it’s been. Arlen Specter, the seemingly unbeatable political marathoner, was finally vanquished at the polls on Tuesday, as insurgent Democrat Joe Sestak won the primary in a political thriller that has left Washington abuzz.  Much ink has already been spilled analyzing this race, as well as the other major primary races around the country. Here’s my take on what happened on Tuesday, and what it means not just for Pennsylvania, but for politics around the country.

But first, check out The Rick Smith show on WHAL-AM 960 on Sunday. I’ll be talking about all this and more, and might even be shortly before or after Sestak himself. You can listen here.

And now, the takeaways.

1. The establishment is in trouble

Many people believe that the takeaway from Tuesday’s election is that incumbents are in trouble. I think that is true, but a narrow understanding of an even larger and more powerful trend: the weakening of the political establishment. In a way, the election of Barack Obama was the beginning of a new political era in which unconventional candidates are taking down those favored by political elites. Hillary Clinton was the Beltway favorite, but by appealing to the people instead of the party, Obama was able to vault past her and win the Democratic primary.

Many of the elections this Tuesday were a continuation of this trend.  Not even President Obama, with his formidable email list, army of volunteers, and strong endorsement of Arlen Specter, could persuade the Democratic base in Pennsylvania to follow his lead.  The backing of the entire party establishment and the major labor unions was not enough to sway voters to Specter’s side. In the end, rank-and-file Democrats refused to hold their noses and vote for a lifelong Republican who assured the confirmation of Justices Thomas, Roberts and Alito, voted for the Bush tax cuts and the Iraq War, and has flip-flopped on issue after issue. Instead, they supported the anti-Establishment candidate:  a former Admiral and progressive congressman who has promised to be a Democratic champion in the United States Senate. They bucked the Establishment, and in my estimation, made the right choice.

Joe Sestak was not the only insurgent who delivered a blow to the Establishment on Tuesday. In Arkansas, Senator Blanche Lincoln could not get over 50 percent of the vote against her Democratic rivals, and will face netroots-endorsed Bill Halter in a runoff in a couple weeks. Again, support by the Democratic establishment, including ads by Obama and Bill Clinton, did not make the difference for Lincoln. Her wishy-washy middle-of-the-road campaign does not have enough appeal, and there is good reason to believe that Halter’s more energized voters will oust her.

On the Republican side, anti-establishment Tea Party candidate Rand Paul defeated GOP-backed Trey Grayson by a huge 59-35 margin. In his victory speech, Paul declared himself a proud member and product of the extreme right-wing movement, and vowed to take the cause to Washington. The GOP has an uneasy relationship with this movement. While it is energized and vocal, it still represents only a small minority of American voters. Yet it was that energized activist base that made the difference in Kentucky, defeating the candidate favored by the Republican political elites in the State and across the country.

Some, like Nate Silver of fivethirtyeight.com fame, are arguing that this is not as big a repudiation of the establishment as some are making it out to be. He argues that the winning candidates in these cases ran relatively usual Democratic or Republican campaigns and were able to capitalize on their opponent’s weaknesses to win. It is true that anti-incumbent fever is a force that is influencing these races, and neither Grayson, nor Lincoln, nor Specter were particularly inspiring candidates. Nevertheless, the fact that these candidates all lost despite the strong backing of their respective party Establishments does underscore the fact that in the age of Obama, you need not be the favored candidate of the party to win a partisan nomination. That is a major trend all politicos must take note of.

2. The Republicans still have their work cut out for them

The conventional wisdom is that voter disaffection with Washington will translate into huge Republican gains in November. Some have even argued that the GOP will take back the House. Democrat Mark Critz’s decisive win in the special election in Pennsylvania’s 12 District special election should give the Republicans pause. This race to fill John Murtha’s seat was a juicy target for the Republican Party, out in purple country. Yet Critz delivered a crushing blow on Tuesday, winning by ten points, when even the most favorable polls only had him up six at the most. On the issues, Democrats still are more in line with the views of most Americans. They still retain large majorities in both Houses. While the [resident’s party historically loses seats in the midterm election following his win, Critz’s victory inspires hope the Democratic losses won’t be nearly as bad as some conservatives have hoped.

3. Pennsylvania is still the state to watch

Pat Toomey was never the Republican establishment’s favored candidate. When Specter bolted the GOP, Senator Orrin Hatch, vice chairman of the party’s Senate campaign committee, said that “I don’t think there is anybody in the world who believes he can get elected senator” in Pennsylvania. Hatch was making a frank assessment of Toomey’s far-right record as a Wall Street banker and President of the Club for Growth. All moves to the middle aside (and Toomey has made more than a few, including endorsing Justice Sotomayor and a few Obama policies), Toomey’s record speaks for itself.  A recent analysis by pollster.com concluded, “Toomey ranked more conservative than 97.9 percent of all United States legislators since 1995. He had a more conservative voting record than J.D Hayworth, Jim DeMint, and was about as conservative as Jesse Helms. Only Tom Coburn and Tom Tancredo scored further to the right.”

On the other hand, Joe Sestak has billed himself as coming from the progressive wing of the Democratic party. He was endorsed by Democracy for America, MoveOn.org, and other liberal organizations. He has voted with the Democrats in Congress every step of the way and gave full-throated support for the health care bill.  He is not an extreme leftist, but he is certainly liberal.

Thus, with Toomey facing Sestak, the entire country’s gaze will be focused on Pennsylvania, that perennial swing state, for indication of larger political trends nationwide. Is the more ideologically pure, rightward Toomey the new face of the Republican brand? Is going “hardcore conservative” the way for Republicans to regain their footing and begin winning elections and governing again? Or will a Sestak victory show that, in purple states, this is a center-left country entering a long period of Democratic ascendancy?

Stay tuned. It is sure to be a fascinating ride.

May 21, 2010 at 2:52 pm

--Adam Schwartzbaum

comments

comments [4] | post a comment