Hours after the polls closed, the nation still didn’t know who would become Pennsylvania’s junior senator, as Republican Pat Toomey and Democratic Congressman Joe Sestak were locked in a back-and-forth duel, a race too close to call.
Finally victorious, Toomey thanked his supporters, of course, but he should have also thanked those most responsible for his success: Philadelphia Democrats.

It was the relatively light turnout in the city that killed Sestak’s candidacy.  Based on the 77,000 vote statewide margin — out of 3.9 million cast — if just one of ten more Philadelphians voted, Sestak’s election would have been a lay-up.

Ironically, the One-Party town of Philadelphia, with virtually no competitive races, led to the demise of the Democratic senate seat. As a matter of fact, the only race that was close involved  incumbent Republican State Representative John Perzel, saddled with an 82-count indictment.

That said, there’s a lesson to be learned for Pat Toomey and all Republicans running statewide, including Presidential candidates: make major inroads in Philadelphia immediately, or suffer the consequences. The Democratic vote in the city always jumps in Presidential election years, as it will in 2012, and 2016 — when Toomey faces the voters again.

*****

Now that the Election Day white noise has subsided, let’s look at the true picture that has emerged from last week’s historic vote.

The Republicans made huge gains all around, especially in Pennsylvania, arguably the epicenter of electoral activity.

Attorney General Tom Corbett trounced Rendell-protégé Dan Onorato by a ten point margin, the seat held by Arlen Specter was flipped by Toomey’s win, and five congressional seats fell into GOP hands.  And the state senate — up until Election Day the ONLY elected Republican body from the Mid-Atlantic north and east of Ohio — is now joined by a GOP dominated statehouse, with Republicans picking up an almost-unfathomable 15 seats to enjoy a 12 seat majority.

So is the Keystone state “red” again, like in 1994, when Republicans controlled the governorship, both U.S. senate seats, all row offices, and had majorities in the state house, senate and congressional delegations?

Not so fast.

Things didn’t work out back then because too many Republicans chose power for the sake of power, and abandoned the platform on which they were elected. Likewise, if the current GOP winners don’t follow through on their campaign promises, they do so at their own peril.

Republicans have usually been an effective minority opposition Party; it’s the governing part where they have had problems. They must avoid taking the position of Robert Redford in The Candidate, when, after he wins his election, famously asks, “What do we do now?”

*****

The GOP would be wise to understand that the election was NOT a mandate for Republicans, as much as it was a protest…a shot across the bow of both Parties.
Voters have grown increasingly irritated with the Business As Usual approach in Washington and Harrisburg, and are demanding their elected officials focus on what the people want, not what some leaders think they need.

The best example of arrogant leadership was when Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Majority Leader Harry Reid and President Obama ram-rodded national healthcare legislation through to fruition. While the need for reforming healthcare is universally recognized , it was fourth or fifth on most people’s lists.  After Scott Brown’s victory for Ted Kennedy’s seat, the message was clear: jobs, jobs, jobs.

Despite that, universal healthcare was given priority over the economy. Give Pelosi and Reid credit: they got the job done against the odds, but with SEVERE consequences.

The Republicans would do well to heed that lesson.

The message is clear.  The GOP cannot just be Party of No.  Instead, voters are insisting that they work with Obama and the Democrats, creating solutions to float the sinking economy.

The Catholic vote is a prime example, as it abandoned the Democrats in massive numbers. Just two years ago, Obama (despite his avidly pro-abortion stance) won Catholics 54-44, but this time they voted for the GOP in droves. Some observers estimate that the swing was 34 points.

Voters want the focus to be on the economy.  If Republicans don’t make strides in this regard, their gains will be in jeopardy over the next several years. And they can’t make progress unless they are honestly willing to work with their counterparts.

Where do they agree? For starters, offshore drilling, nuclear power, certain tax cuts, and more teacher accountability. The President made these items part of his agenda this year, only to be met with disdain from the current congressional Republicans, who made no attempt to cooperate on these issues.

So here’s the $64,000 question: will the incoming Republicans give serious effort to getting America back on track, knowing that any achievements will help Obama’s reelection, or will they play partisan politics, trying to turn every word the President utters and every action of the Democratic senate into a campaign sound-bite in two years?

The latter choice is more enticing, since it’s far easier to play politics inside the beltway than actually make tough governing decisions, but it is a slippery slope.
Regardless which path the GOP chooses, it will most certainly make more gains in 2012 based on simple math.  The Democrats must defend 22 seats to the Republicans’ nine, with only four needed to control the senate.

But what then?

Obama will most likely be re-elected, made possible, ironically, by the Republicans gains.  It is very difficult to defeat an incumbent President, only accomplished four times over the last 150 years. In fact, an incumbent has to work very hard to have the voters reject him.  Give them credit — Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush did just that.

Therefore, the Parties will once again be forced to work together — done so effectively when Bill Clinton and the GOP got down to the business of governing — or they will deliberately stand opposed to gain miniscule partisan advantage, all while solving nothing.

If a ship changes course only one degree, over many miles its destination will change dramatically, but trying to steer away from an iceberg only 100 feet away is pointless.
The time for America to safely turn away from the iceberg has almost elapsed.
America is at a crossroads, reeling in unprecedented fashion.  The decisions its leaders make over the next several years will largely determine if it will continue its debt-ridden decline into a second-world nation with a first-world military, or whether its beacon will once again glow brightly as the Shining City on a Hill, the civilized leader in an increasingly chaotic world.

If the choice is Business As Usual, if it’s Robert Redford’s line, if it’s divisive politics at its worst, then it won’t matter which Party rules Washington, because the lights will already have gone out.

And what a wholly avoidable tragedy that would be.

********************

Chris Freind is an independent columnist, television commentator, and investigative reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com
Readers of his column, “Freindly Fire,” hail from six continents, thirty countries and all fifty states. His work has been referenced in numerous publications including The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, foreign newspapers, and in Dick Morris’ recent bestseller “Catastrophe.”
Freind, whose column appears nationally in Newsmax, also serves as a guest commentator on Philadelphia-area talk radio shows, and makes numerous other television and radio appearances, most notably on FOX.  He can be reached at CF@FreindlyFireZone.com

Stu Bykofsky wrote in the Daily News on Thursday that Governor Rendell said at a meeting of ward leaders that Democratic Party Chairman (and Congressman) Brady would resign as chairman if Philly voter turnout didn’t top 50%. Rendell and Brady have been the Batman and Robin of Philly politics for so long that I was surprised that Rendell would say such a thing in public. At the recent Obama-Biden rally in Germantown, Rendell did complain about the 17% turnout in the city, but did not mention Brady.

When I ran into Rendell, he was late for an event but said he was stopping because he wanted to refute what Bykofsky wrote. He said, “I never said that. Brady can have the job forever.” When asked
about the low 17% turnout in Philadelphia for the primaries, Rendell answered, “If Brady was responsible for that, I would hold him responsible, but he is not responsible.”

Who said what? If the Democratic Party Chairman is not responsible, who is – the cookie monster? I live in the same city building as my committee person, but have only gotten one form letter from him this important election cycle.

http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20101028_Stu_Bykofsky__Have_happy_Dems_built_a_dike_against_GOP__wave__.html

But five weeks before primary day, Williams is getting more feisty in trying to break out of what he calls “the box”—and that’s not the box he carries down the street in a campaign commercial. In trying to step out of that single-issue framework, Williams is looking to tie his stance on education into the larger fabric of public policy—and he says he’s got more than enough liberal bona fides.

“Lately people have done a lot of work on making sure I look like a limited, one voice, one purpose [candidate] in this race,” Williams said after accepting an endorsement from Congressman Bob Brady on Monday.

When a reporter asked Williams about school vouchers at his first endorsement news conference last month, he calmly said “here comes the box.” Before it even came up on Monday, Williams was more forceful in trying to focus on other issues. He said he had advocated for more state funding for the arts, supported abortion rights and lobbied SEPTA to change its gender-specific transit pass policy on behalf of LGBT constituencies.

“I’m the only person in this race whose words match their deeds and their performance,” Williams said.

Alas, money speaks loudly in politics, and it’s a given that reporters will bring up his big-money donors.

That $5 donor who did it online means as much to me as anybody else,” Williams said Monday.

Brady warned against trying to tie Williams to just the school choice issue.

“Anybody that thinks he’s a one issue candidate,” Brady said, “they better not go down that path, because I will put him against any one of them, one -on-one on any issue they want to pick out.”

Williams has also been increasingly looking to frame the four-way primary as a two-man race.

“There are two of us who have the ability to be on television from now until the end of the election,” he said. “It’s Dan Onorato and Tony Williams. That’s it. With all due respect to the rest of them, they’re nice people. but they don’t have the resources.”

See a video clip below of Williams’ news conference from Monday.

Brady endorsed Anthony Williams for governor on Monday. He’s also endorsed—and been the most adamant supporter of—Jonathan Saidel for Lieutenant Governor. Williams is a state Senator hailing from west Philadelphia. Saidel is a former City Controller from northeast Philadelphia. Conventional wisdom holds that an all-Philly ticket would be disastrous in a general election, making it difficult to court votes from the many regions of the state wary of the big city’s influence on Pennsylvania politics.

Just don’t tell that to Brady, chairman of the city party.

“I’d be elated,” he told pa2010.com in a brief interview outside City Hall here. “I’d love to be in that position.”

Brady also downplayed the idea that his relationship with Dan Onorato, the party’s gubernatorial front-runner, is a bit icy. The perception is that Brady got peeved when chatter built earlier this year that Onorato might form a ticket with Scranton Mayor Chris Doherty—cutting out Saidel, a close friend to Brady. But Brady shrugged that off.

“We’re friends,” he said, “but I’ve got lots of friends.”

Brady, who is chairman of the Philadelphia Democratic City Committee, promised that the entire weight of the local party’s political machine would be behind Williams, going so far as to say that Williams should focus his campaign elsewhere. “We’ll take care of his back here,” Brady told pa2010.com.

The endorsement from Brady came as Williams has picked up considerable momentum five weeks before the four-way Democratic primary, quickly raising money from large donors, racking up support from elected officials and becoming the second candidate in the race to air TV ads. On Sunday night, he was also endorsed by state Senator Michael O’Pake (D-Berks). During an appearance outside City Hall here Monday morning, Brady called Williams the only candidate with the right experience to be the Keystone State’s next governor. He said local ward leaders would deliver a formal endorsement on behalf of the city party as soon as possible.

“Nobody knows how it works better than Senator Anthony Hardy Williams,” Brady said, “and nobody will be a better governor for the state of Pennsylvania and for the city of Philadelphia.”

In some ways, Brady’s support for Williams had been assumed even before the endorsement. Brady helped deliver a large number of votes for Williams during the Democratic State Committee endorsement meeting in February, and backing the local can help Brady maintain his own hold on political power in the city party. While some think that power is on the wane, Brady is undoubtedly still a potent force when it comes to making sure that ward leaders turn out of the vote and toe the line on who they support. Whether that will be enough to overcome what is sure to be a deluge of advertisements and a considerable field operation in the city for Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato remains to be seen.

But Brady sounded a confident tone.

“No one else has an organization like we do,” he said.

In endorsing Williams Sunday, O’Pake said Williams has the “skills and vision” to make life better for Pennsylvanians.

“For Democrats, Tony is our best shot at victory this fall,” O’Pake said in a statement. “He can take on and beat any Republican.”

Click here for audio of the entire news conference. See a video clip of Brady’s endorsement below.

Why would two Democrats, with a huge financial advantage and almost no chance of losing this fall, behave in this manner?

I don’t know, but I suspect it shows how jittery Democrats are in the wake of the supposedly “historic” health care bill. Every candidate who runs unopposed means that much more money and attention for those who have opposition. If people like Schwartz and Brady, who (especially Schwartz) raise piles of money, can share all or most of it with others that is a substantial advantage.

Apparently the Democratic insiders don’t believe their official line that health care marks the high-water mark of GOP reaction and the beginnings of a liberal comeback. And with good reason. The health care bill is wildly unpopular, passed by a dubious procedure and is the subject of a lawsuit by numerous state attorneys general.

While its details are confusing, the bill’s  basic outline—a transfer of money from middle class (especially older) voters to poorer or working class people and, more immediately, to insurance companies—is understandable to everyone. Under these conditions, assuming the bill is “irreversible,” or that people will like it more as it gets pushed down their throats, defies common sense.

Indeed, not even the Democrats themselves appear to believe it—which may be one reason they are taking no chances.

Yes, it was a hectic evening at the Democratic State Committee, and behind the scenes there was serious politicking going on, with operatives counting votes for their candidates and gauging support in the hours before party committee members will gather to vote on endorsements in the three statewide races.

Through it all, pa2010.com managed to get a decent idea of what’s going on. Here’s our take, with the usual rumor-mill-caveat that this stuff isn’t necessarily confirmed. Enjoy.

Making the trip: There were some doubts that the necessary quorum would make the trip considering the snowstorm. But throughout the night, estimates of the number of committee members who had checked in gradually ticked up. First it was 130, then 160, then 180. By midnight, with the bar still full of revelers, there was a consensus circulating that well over 200 voting members or their proxies were on hand, and that an endorsement meeting could go forward.

Specter’s set: Even as Joe Sestak worked the room at various times, there seemed to be little doubt among party insiders that Arlen Specter is set to achieve the difficult two-thirds threshold needed to win the party’s endorsements. His outreach at the local level has, by all accounts, been extraordinary, as he has leveraged his longstanding relationships throughout the state into a level of party support that was hard to imagine last Spring. If he can win the endorsement Saturday, only nine months after switching parties, it will be an amazing political achievement.

The Doherty-Onorato chatter dies down: There was no shortage of speculation that Dan Onorato and Chris Doherty might come here having brokered some kind of a deal to run together on a gubernatorial ticket. But that doesn’t seem to be in the cards. Onorato, some say, was sufficiently spooked by the idea of going up against Bob Brady. And while there’s little doubt that Doherty would entertain a joint ticket with him on the bottom, the Scranton mayor is happy to stay in the race and raise his name recognition for another statewide campaign down the road. Unless there was a deal of monumental proportions being brokered deep into the night, Jonathan Saidel looked free and clear to win an endorsement that had seemed like his for months anyway. And one couldn’t help but notice Brady, who doesn’t always make it to these shin-digs, holding court in a foyer just above the bar for hours, deep into the night—perhaps just to make sure no funny business was going down.

Will Wagner win? The behind-the-scenes drama that is the race for governor was the most captivating of the night. And as morning approached, it was by far the most uncertain. Word swirled that the Onorato camp had thrown its weight behind the idea that the party should forgo an endorsement, in the clearest indication that it has no expectation of winning one. Meanwhile, coming off a string of endorsements from county party leaders, Jack Wagner was looking more and more like a man who might come out of Lancaster on top. Getting two-thirds will be a formidable challenge. But it seemed almost certain that he’d emerge as the top vote-getter. The hypothetical scenarios that would arise if he did win two-thirds, though, were dizzying. Usually the endorsed candidate takes control of the party infrastructure. But would Ed Rendell, who’s hardly buddies with Wagner, let him do so? Clearly hoping to take a major step forward, allies to Wagner could been seen working the room late into the night.

So he called up seemingly every political reporter in the state, with a warning to anyone who might be thinking of trying to cut his candidate out of the mix that they shouldn’t even try it. “There’s really no room at the inn,” he said.

But behind the political theater and chatter, there’s something real going on. Multiple Democrats familiar with the situation confirmed to pa2010.com that Democrats as high as Gov. Ed Rendell have been discussing the possibility of Doherty, who’s running for governor, taking the bottom spot on the ticket instead, complementing Onorato in what many believe would be a potent combination. By most accounts, these discussions have neither been initiated by, nor do they even involve, the candidates themselves. Aides to both Onorato and Doherty say they’re focused on the Governor’s Mansion and nothing else.

Still, the high-level discussions underscore that some party leaders are looking to make the primary as painless as possible, acutely concerned that the political climate doesn’t favor them going into the November election. But if they try and push Saidel out of the way, they’ll have another political headache on their hands. Democrats familiar with the situation say that Congressman Bob Brady (D-1), the chairman of the Philadelphia Democratic Party and a longtime friend to Saidel, is ready to go to war for him if necessary.

In a recent interview, state party chairman T.J. Rooney declined to talk about any specific discussions going on behind the scenes. But he seemed to confirm that they’re happening.

“My job and the job of the governor as leader of our party,” Rooney said, “is to at least explore the possibility of saving our punch for when it counts, and that’s in the general, not the primary. It is no secret that conversations take place every day, in every state, in every party, to try and figure out ways to win. If I didn’t have these conversations, if we didn’t explore the possibility of avoding a divisive primary, I’d be guilty of political malpractice.

“I’ve never advocated for any candidate seeking the nomination for governor to withdraw,” he added. “I have pointed out where the race is, what the lay of the land is, and whether it would be possible to not have blood let in a primary.”

It may be too late to make a move. Saidel, a skilled campaigner by all accounts, has already raised more money than some top-ticket gubernatorial candidates, including Doherty. He’s racked up labor endorsements across the state. And his campaign says it will have the votes to win the party’s endorsement when state committee members meet in Lancaster this weekend, an assertion some party insiders say isn’t far from the truth. Rooney himself acknowledged that “Jonathan has tremendous support among the rank and file members of the party, make no mistake about it. He’s really worked this.”

And then there’s the matter of Brady. Though many see his power on the wane, he undoubtedly holds sway over a vast amount of the political infrastructure in Philadelphia. Local Democrats describe his relationship with Saidel as intensely close, both politically and personally. And after Brady nudged Saidel out of the 2007 mayoral race and ran himself (explanations for why he did so differ), he’s said to loathe the thought of pushing his friend aside again. When rumors that the governor was looking for an alternative candidate picked up steam, Brady quickly put together a meeting of the city’s ward leaders, who endorsed Saidel only hours before he formally declared his candidacy.

“He is going to do whatever he can,” one Democratic insider said of Brady. “He is going to fall on his sword for Saidel. I can’t see him cutting a deal with anyone here. … Brady loves Jonathan Saidel.”

Asked about the situation after Saidel’s recent announcement, Brady, who emceed the event himself, passed on the chance to talk about it.

“We hear all kinds of rumors,” he said.

It can’t be a pleasant turn of events for Saidel. By his telling, it was Rendell who encouraged him to run in the first place—though the governor isn’t known for discouraging anyone against running for anything. The campaign says its assuming Rendell is behind Saidel, and that all the chatter will eventually go nowhere because he’s the best candidate.

“It’s not just not going to come to pass,” Marks said. “No serious Democratic leader in the state is going to try to put a ticket together without Jonathan Saidel.”

But Rendell and Rooney alike are said to have a growing political infatuation with Doherty. As a Casey-style Democrat from Scranton, his value to a Democratic ticket would be formidable. Whether Brady could run up high enough margins for Saidel in Philadelphia against the governor’s wishes would be a test of his remaining clout.

No matter what happens, Saidel says he’s not going anywhere unless he loses in the May primary, which he quickly—and correctly—points out is a separate election.

“It doesn’t matter if they want me or not,” he said, adding that “I think it’d be foolish for anyone to jump in at this point and think things are going to change.”

One factor motivating the governor and others in their deliberations could be a perception that Saidel has, as one Democrat put it, “baggage.” For all his skill as a campaigner, he can be seen as embodying the city’s political establishment, in a decidedly anti-establishment climate. And though he is widely credited with greatly expanding the profile of the City Controller’s office during his long tenure, in late 1998 his girlfriend was charged with stealing money from his campaign. The charges were eventually thrown out and Saidel was never charged. But with a candidate for Lieutenant Governor having the primary campaign job of not being a liability, the prospect of the incident being brought back to life makes some Democrats queasy. Even in today’s charged political climate, a 12-year-old episode that went nowhere might not have much punch, but Democrats have little margin for error this year.

If there’s one thing on which Onorato and Doherty agree, it’s that neither of them wants to shift the focus from their own campaigns.

“It’s flattering,” Doherty spokesman Mark Nevins said of the speculation. “We take it as a compliment when people talk about the benefit of Chris Doherty being on a ticket. I think it means people recognize that he’s got a record of accomplishment. … We are committed to running for governor.”

Onorato spokesman Brian Herman said: “We’re focused on the governor’s race right now, and that’s the only race we’re focused on.”

“I’m going to get it back,” he told pa2010.com with a smile after entering a crowded ballroom here for the Philadelphia Democratic City Committee’s spring dinner.

In between accepting a slew of warm welcomes, including one from Congresman Bob Brady (D-1), who is the head of the city’s Democratic Party, Specter acknowledged that the party switch has been challenging.

“There are a few bumps in the road,” he said. “But I’ve got good shock absorption.”