Posted on 04/06/2006 5:44:02 AM PDT by moose2004
Pennsylvania Senate:
Will Pro-Life Stance Cost Casey?
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
April 5, 2006--You know an incumbent is in tough shape when it's considered good news that his challenger is just nine points ahead, but that's where Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum (R) finds himself seven months before Election 2006. The latest Rasmussen Reports election poll in the Keystone State shows Democrat Bob Casey leading Santorum 50% to 41%.
That's the first time in all six polls we've conducted on this race that Casey's lead has slipped to single digits. It's also the first time Santorum has moved above the 40% mark since last July.
However, another aspect of the poll might be even more encouraging for Santorum... and troubling for Casey.
After asking survey respondents who they would vote for, we informed them that the National Organization for Women (NOW) is concerned about Casey on the abortion issue and is endorsing another candidate in the primary. We then asked a second time about how each respondent would vote.
Twenty-four percent (24%) of Casey's initial voters changed their mind upon hearing this news. Half switched to Santorum while the others split between "some other candidate" and "not sure."
The change was dramatic enough that, having heard the new information, voters favored Santorum by a five-point margin (46% to 41%). This suggests a lack of voter knowledge about Casey that could make the race more competitive than it seems at this time.
News about NOW's concerns caused Casey's support to fall 12 points among moderate voters and 13 points among liberal voters. It did not gain him any conservative votes.
From a partisan perspective, Casey lost 7 points of support among unaffiliated voters and 13 points among Democrats. Just as important, however, the highlighting of Casey's pro-Life views actually increased Santorum's support among Republicans.
Initially, the GOP voters favored Santorum by a 61% to 27% margin. On the second ask, they favored Santorum 69% to 21%.
Despite all of this, however, it is important to remember the basic fact that Senator Santorum remains in terrible shape for an incumbent. It may be possible for him to mount a comeback, but it will be uphill all the way.
The rolling average of the last three Rasmussen Reports Pennsylvania election polls shows Casey continuing to hold a solid lead, 50% to 38%. In other words, while Casey's support may be declining slightly, it has not yet transformed the nature of this race.
Good news for Rick. Still a lot of work ahead of him, but also a huge warchest to help his cause.
Rick should find a way to remind all the Philadelphia and Pittsburgh libs about Casey's pro-life stance, it appears that as more and more of them do Caey's numbers drop.
Still, alot of time between now and November. I got the feeling that Rick is gonna pull this one out.
its still 9 and with the moe i still wouldnt jump for joy
The socially liberal Phila. suburbs will not be eager to vote for a pro-life Democrat.
Wow. a 15-point swing just based on a single statement by NOW?
And they say the pro-life movement are one-issue voters.....
Your choice is quite clear in this race. I suggest you get over your bitterness. Follow Pat Toomey's example.
I imagine Mr. Casey will soon be issuing some type of "I'm personally against abortion but respect a woman's right..." statement.
LOL! That's exactly what I thought when I read this. He's a Dem. Time to get flippin' and floppin'!
Thanks Coop!
Pat Toomey has started running radio ads locally paid for by a PAC.
It's clearly intended to shore up the base.
If he keeps it up, I can see Rick winning in a squeaker, but it will be VERY tight.
Don't forget that this is a poll in a vacuum, i.e., without any recognition of the overall political situations, like the plunging ratings of the disloyal GOP Congress or the counterbalancing strong run so far by Lynn Swann who is beating the incumbent governor Rendell in the polls.
As do I (and I'm also not a resident). But those conservatives need to decide if they really want to throw out the baby (a dedicated, high-ranking conservative) out with the bath water.
I don't agree with what Rick did, either. I could honestly understand him not taking sides in that race. That made sense to me. But to openly campaign for Spectre, I thought that was a huge mistake. But it's over now. Am I ready to see him replaced by a Dem (even a fairly conservative one) over it? No.
Wow, I am shocked. Wasn't Santorum about 15 points behind? This is a good sign. Sometimes it's not about the actual number but about the trend. This is trending good for our side. Let's hope this keeps up until November.
Back to the topic, it's lookin' good that Santorum is closing the gap, but he's still the underdog. I'm sure the liberal voters will come through for Casey once they realize (if they don't already know it) that he "may" be pro-life but he'll vote the "right" way (wink wink).
I hear you, but I think Rick can pull off an ugly win by exposing Casey's pro-life stance as much and as often as he can. Many Pilly and Pittsburgh dem libs will, more than likely, not support a pro-life candidate, especially since Kate Michelman elevated the issue.
Indeed, Specter did exactly was we wished in getting ALL of the judges through, a position which Toomey would not have had. It's time for the Toomey and McClintock people to realize, like the Dems, they LOST and to work with what we now have.
Why did he support Spector?That alone makes me want to pass on Santorum.Has anyone heard how he stands on illegals?
"The socially liberal Phila. suburbs will not be eager to vote for a pro-life Democrat."
WELL SAID.
Com'n, you good folks didn't really believe all those polls the MSM puts out. Example: the esteemed poller/pundit Stewart Rothenberg predicted that Tom Delay would probably lose his Republican primary. The internal poll numbers indicated that. Fact is: Tom Delay won his primary with 64% of the vote. So much for the esteemed Mr. Rothenberg. Now Tom Delay has withdrawn from the race, and I predict he will become "The Swift Boat Vets" of 2006. The Democrats are going to wish they never heard of him. I said it before and I will say it again, the Pubbies in spite of being whimps of the first order will gain seats in both the Senate and the House this November. End of story!!!
"I imagine Mr. Casey will soon be issuing some type of "I'm personally against abortion but respect a woman's right..." statement."
THAT NUANCED STANCE WILL NOT FLY WITH DEM LIBS GIVEN CASEY'S LONG TERM CONSISTENT PRO-LIFE POSITION. WHEN CASEY AND RICK DEBATE I HOPE RICK SAYS SOMETHING LIKE "I APPRECIATE BOB CASEY'S CONSISTENT PRO-LIFE STANCE DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE NATIONAL AND PENNSYLVANIA STATE DEMOCRATIC PARTY ADAMANTLY SUPPORTS PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTIONS AND ABORTIONS ON DEMAND."
Good point on the judges. And to his credit, Rep. Toomey has not (to my knowledge) held a grudge.
Me thinks you underestimate your foes. :-)
Who are these people -- I guess liberal suburban Republicans?
First, who else is a dem going to vote for? Noone....they will vote against Santorm.
Second, this blurb: "The rolling average of the last three Rasmussen Reports Pennsylvania election polls shows Casey continuing to hold a solid lead, 50% to 38%. In other words, while Casey's support may be declining slightly, it has not yet transformed the nature of this race."
Third, according to the Rasmussen poll from July 2005, the numbers are virtually the same....then 52-41 for Casey...now, 50-41 for Santorum.
Fourth, the sample is 500 likely voters...pretty small sample size, which may explain the weird results (I can't beleive that that many people would change their vote based upon what NOW may have said)....btw, NOW is endorsing Alan Sandals (who?), and included this little blurb in their endorsement: "This race promises to be one of the most closely-watched of the 2006 elections. Feminist voters have the opportunity to send extremist Republican incumbent Senator Rick Santorum packing."
"What a silly story."
WHAT A NAIVE RESPONSE. PENNSYLVANIA ABORTION ON DEMAND DEMS (PREDOMINATELY IN PHILLY AND PITTSBURGH AND THEIR SUBURBS) FOR THE MOST PART WILL NOT VOTE FOR A PRO-LIFE DEM LIKE CASEY. NOT GONNA HAPPEN. CAN YOU HONESTLY SEE KATE MICHELMAN ENDORSING CASEY (AFTER SHE HAS ALREADY ENDORSED HIS LITTLE KNOWN PRO-CHOICE OPPONENT FOR THE DEM NOMINATION, AND AFTER SHE ANNOUNCED ABOUT A MONTH AGO WITH GREAT FANFARE THAT SHE WAS THINKING ABOUT RUNNING FOR THE NOMINATION HERSELF PRECISELY BECAUSE OF CASEY'S POSITION ON ABORTION) AND URGING HER EXTREMIST BASE TO SUPPORT HIM WHEN HE STANDS FOR EVERYTHING THEY DESPISE? REMEMBER WHEN THE NATIONAL DEM PARTY REFUSED TO ALLOW CASEY'S FATHER TO SPEAK AT THEIR NOMINATING CONVENTION SIMPLY BECAUSE OF HIS PRO-LIFE POSITION? THE DEM PARTY UNDER DEAN'S LEADERSHIP HAS BECOME MORE AND MORE LIBERAL (MOVEON.ORG, GEORGE SOROS, ETC...), THE DLC IS DRIFTING RUDERLESS DESPITE BRUCE REED'S ATTEMPTS TO MAKE THEM MORE INFLUENTIAL. I THINK THE DEMS (CHUCK SCHUMER) WERE TOO CLEVER IN PUSHING FOR CASEY THINKING HE COULD SPLIT THE PRO-LIFE AND CATHOLIC VOTE.
GOOD QUESTION.
Some editorializing. Casey hasn't even won the nomination of his party and it is obvioius that his position on various issues remain unknown to the voting public. The run-up to the election has a long way to go. With Lynn Swann on the 2006 statewide ticket, it should help Santorum.
This is NOW's position:
"This race promises to be one of the most closely-watched of the 2006 elections. Feminist voters have the opportunity to send extremist Republican incumbent Senator Rick Santorum packing."
NOW is endorsing someone else for the Dem primary just to hold Casey's feet to the fire...but the ultimate goal for Dems is to vote out Santorum.
Oh come now. Do you really expect any Senator not to support the reelection of an incumbent Senator from his own party and state? FYI: Santorum has been one of the most visible and articulate supporters of SS reform. He also was active in the Schiavo case.
Santorum's ACU rating: 92 in 2005 and and 96 in 2004. Lifetime: 88.
Specter's 63 in 2005, 75 in 2004 and 45 Lifetime.
George Allen: 100 in 2005, 92 in 2004, and 92 Lifetime.
Bennett (Utah): 92 in 2005, 88 in 2004 and Lifetime:88.
Santorum is a real conservative and deserves our support.
Support of Toomey or not, Santorum was going to be the number one target of Liberals throughout the United States in '06.
He lives in a Democrat state, and he has upset a number of the social Liberals with his statements about a certain Supreme Court case. He was right about the consequences, but that set him up as their primary enemy in '06. Rick would have needed his huge chest regardless.
Second, I supported Toomey. But if Toomey couldn't convince enough GOP voters to elect him over Specter I have doubts he'd have won in a Presidential election. Yes, I know, if Bush & Santorum had stayed out of it OR given their support to Toomey he would have won...True. Yet hardly encouraging. Bush increased his totals in '04 with Santorum's support by his side and STILL couldn't win.
To win Penn you need to get Dems on your side. If you can't overcome the "party" support system in the primary, I am NOT going to believe he would have done better in getting Dems to crossover in the General. NOT in a presidential year. Had it been mid-terms, different story entirely.
Given we have Alito & Roberts on the Court, SO FAR, Specter has kept his word and Toomey supporters need to -let-it-go. As TOOMEY has advocated. At LEAST until Specter screws us with a third opening on the Court. Which he may just do, as even Republicans like Hutchinson and the Senator from Alaska may do. I don't trust them with the crucial fifth Justice. Then, by all means, let it rip.
Third, santorum was never 15-20 points behind. Anyone that believed those polls, well, I hope they finally learn not to do so. Though I doubt it. In reality Rick has always been between 3-8 points behind. Penn may be a Dem state, but's not 20 points advan to the Dem either. The race is destined to be close, as his other races were close. The question I have is whether Rick can manage 51-52% with rendell's operation and the entire Dem apparatus behind him. If he does so, this will be a massive achievement for rick. I do think Swann on the ballot will be helpful for Rick. Much as Blackwell may be helpful for DeWine in Ohio, or Steele helpful to Erlich. The first three more popular than the other three, and creating coattails for the incumbents. Though I'm personally rooting for deWine to lose.
Quinnipiac just came out w/a poll for the Phil. Daily News. Casey's up 48-37% (gap has shrunk four pts since last poll in Feb). Interestingly, in that poll 69% of Dems (who account for 565 of the 1,354 RVs) did not know of Casey's pro-life position, and 8% thought he was pro-abortion. Independents favored Casey about 2:1. 77% of Dems were voting for Casey, while 70% of Pubbies were voting for Santorum.
Mum’s the word: Pro-life Casey stays ahead of Santorum by staying quiet on key issues
The problem of being a pro life rat is coming home to bite casey on the ash. Also the fact that Pa. voters had a "problem" with Rick, it now turning out to be the figment of the rat and ratmedia mind that it always was.
With what Steele is proving about Black's willingness to vote GOP and the fact that Pa. Blacks already vote 16% GOP, this will tighten more. By the summer when they campaign together, Rick will pull even. The crazy rat, the baby killers, have already said they won't support casey and they are in Philly. This aint over yet, not by a long shot.
Interesting. It will be a tough race, but anyone who writes Santorum off is a fool. There is many a slip between cup and lip. November is a long way off. The voters know Santorum. They have yet to find out who Casey really is beyond name recognition via his father.
NO NEED TO SHOUT!!!
Given the fact that the only thing Pennsylvanians know about Casey is that they liked his dad, it should not surprise anyone that as soon as people find out a bit about Casey his support drops (and it seems that I was right and Philly-area pro-abortion RINOs return to Santorum when they realize they don't agree with Casey on *any issue*):
"After asking survey respondents who they would vote for, we informed them that the National Organization for Women (NOW) is concerned about Casey on the abortion issue and is endorsing another candidate in the primary. We then asked a second time about how each respondent would vote.
Twenty-four percent (24%) of Casey's initial voters changed their mind upon hearing this news. Half switched to Santorum while the others split between "some other candidate" and "not sure."
The change was dramatic enough that, having heard the new information, voters favored Santorum by a five-point margin (46% to 41%). This suggests a lack of voter knowledge about Casey that could make the race more competitive than it seems at this time.
News about NOW's concerns caused Casey's support to fall 12 points among moderate voters and 13 points among liberal voters. It did not gain him any conservative votes.
From a partisan perspective, Casey lost 7 points of support among unaffiliated voters and 13 points among Democrats. Just as important, however, the highlighting of Casey's pro-Life views actually increased Santorum's support among Republicans.
Initially, the GOP voters favored Santorum by a 61% to 27% margin. On the second ask, they favored Santorum 69% to 21%."
My prediction still stands: Santorum wins 52%-47%. http://auh2orepublican.blogspot.com/2005/08/rick-santorum-vs-bob-casey-jr.html
"Who are these people -- I guess liberal suburban Republicans?"
"This race promises to be one of the most closely-watched of the 2006 elections. Feminist voters have the opportunity to send extremist Republican incumbent Senator Rick Santorum packing."
Who's yelling, I'm only stating facts.
1) NOW has endorsed Casey's pro-choice opponent in the primary.
2) To my knowledge the national and Pennsylvania branch of NOW have never endorsed a pro-life candidate.
3) NOW is targeting Santorum because of his staunch pro-life position, what makes you think they'll warm up to Casey who's position is identical?.
Also, who's to say that an independent pro-choice candidate won't emerge. Can you honestly see NOW/liberal dems being satisfied with having to choose between two pro-life candidates? Will NOW campaign for, make calls for, knock on doors for, and donate money to a dem candidate who's views on abortion are identical to the "extremist" Repub candidate's? Can you honestly see Kim Gandy, Kate Michelman and their minions appearing with Casey on the campaign trail? Do you think they trust Casey to back pro-choice judges/justices/legislation? I can't and don't. Kate Michelman herself elevated the issue when she talked about running? And by the way, did NOW make this statement before or after Kate Michelman announced she might run?
My apologies.
And I'd add to that some indies and even Dems for whom abortion is the sole topic of discussion. Once they find out Casey's position there is the same as Rick's, then they have to decide if they'd rather have a freshman senator in the minority or the #3 guy in Senate leadership.
"Quinnipiac just came out w/a poll for the Phil. Daily News. Casey's up 48-37% (gap has shrunk four pts since last poll in Feb). Interestingly, in that poll 69% of Dems (who account for 565 of the 1,354 RVs) did not know of Casey's pro-life position, and 8% thought he was pro-abortion. Independents favored Casey about 2:1. 77% of Dems were voting for Casey, while 70% of Pubbies were voting for Santorum."
Interesting don't you think?
On the Web all caps generally is accepted as YELLING, even if that wasn't your intent. :-)
It loooks like Casey's campaign may have peaked too soon. He was helped by some gaffes by Santorum, but they've become old news.
The race is in play after all.
While Santorum's made some gaffes, I don't want the guy to lose!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.