ARLEN SPECTER/PAT TOOMEY RACE--Tuesday, April 27, 2004 (Toomey is ardently pro-life)

[Liz]

Pro-abort RINO, US Senator Arlen Specter, is up for re-election for another six year term, his opponent is pro-life Pat Toomey, a Congressman from the Lehigh Valley.

The election is next Tuesday, April 27, 2004, and is very close.

You should be very involved in this race.

If Sen Specter gets re-elected he will be deciding who our Judges will be, and will help to shape the Supreme Court which looks like it'll have 2-3 openings.

If you can help Cong Toomey, those in and around Pennsylvania should go there this weekend, or send this information to your friends in Pennsylvania and urge them to vote for Toomey

Get more info on volunteering for Toomey at his web site:

http://www.pattoomey.org/

Below is a Catholic Voter Guide for Pennsylvania put out by the Catholic Conference of Pennsylvania.

http://www.pacatholic.org/election%20archive/US%20Senate%20flyer.pdf

If you have additional voter info, post it here.

[Liz]

Pat Toomey is running tri-state TV ads affirming his pro-life position. He needs all of our support, and our prayers. It's shaping up to be a close race.....Toomey the pro-lifer running against Specter the pro-abort RINO.

[Liz]

Toomey narrows gap in Pennsylvania GOP primary; Conservative voters desert Specter for challenger


Quinnipiac | 4/19/04


Conservative voters have shifted to U.S. Rep. Pat Toomey who has narrowed the gap in the Pennsylvania Republican primary, trailing incumbent U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter 49 - 44 percent among likely voters, according to a Quinnipiac poll released today.


Sen. Specter held a 52 - 37 percent lead in and April 7 poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN uh-pe-ack) University.


In this latest survey, which includes voters who are leaning toward a candidate, conservative Republicans support Rep. Toomey 56 - 39 percent, while liberal and moderate Republicans back Specter 63 - 28 percent. One week before the primary, their mind is made up, 77 percent of Specter supporters and 82 percent of Toomey supporters say.


In the April 7 poll, conservative Republican voters split with 46 percent for Specter and 43 percent for Toomey.


Specter is "too liberal," 51 percent of likely Republican primary voters say, up from 43 percent April 7; 14 percent of Republicans say Toomey is "too conservative."


"Conservative Republicans are rallying behind Congressman Toomey's charge that Sen. Specter is too liberal for Pennsylvania. The 10-point swing in the last two weeks comes from conservatives who deserted Specter in favor of his challenger from the right," said Clay F. Richards, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.


"A majority of likely primary voters now agree Specter is too liberal, up 8 points from the last poll, and three out of four of those voters are going to Toomey. Toomey has turned his challenge into a real horse race and the outcome depends on whether Specter can halt the conservative desertions and rally his own liberal and moderate Republican base. He is still the incumbent and he is still ahead, but now he can hear Toomey's footsteps coming up behind him," Richards added.


Among Toomey supporters, 32 percent say their vote is pro-Toomey and 59 percent say it is anti-Specter; 75 percent of Specter backers say they're voting for the incumbent, while 15 percent are voting against Toomey.


Specter gets a 40 - 27 favorability rating from Pennsylvania Republican voters, with 29 percent mixed and 1 percent who say they don't know enough to form an opinion. This compares to a 39 - 24 percent favorability April 7.


Toomey gets a 35 - 13 percent favorability rating, with 25 percent mixed and 25 percent who don't know enough to form an opinion. This compares to a 24 - 12 percent favorability rating for Toomey April 7, with 39 percent who haven't heard enough to form an opinion.


"Toomey's advertising campaign clearly is hitting the target," Richards said. "More Republicans know who he is and agree with his message."


From April 12 - 18, Quinnipiac University surveyed 431 Pennsylvania likely Republican primary voters with a margin of error of +/- 4.7 percentage points.


The Quinnipiac University Poll, directed by Douglas Schwartz, Ph.D., conducts public opinion surveys in Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and the nation as a public service and for research.


For additional data -- www.quinnipiac.edu and quicklinks

[Common Tator]

Pat Toomey is running tri-state TV ads affirming his pro-life position. He needs all of our support, and our prayers.

Do you really think Toomey has a shot against Joe Hoefel in the fall election? All you tell us is that Spector is bad and Toomey is good. But no one ever says if there is even a slight chance that Toomey can beat Joe Hoefel in the fall election. If polls showed Toomey could beat the Democrat nominee, that is what his ads would say, and he would be a shoe in for the nomination. If Toomey had a good shot against Hoefel, Toomey would also have the support of Santorum, Bush and Rove.

If Toomey doesn't win in the fall, then Tom Daschle and Hillary Clinton will be picking our judges. And I know you would just love their picks. IF Bush loses control of the senate, then you can kiss the tax cuts and the economy goodbye. Nothing would be better for HIllary's run for the presidency in 2008 than an economy in the dumpster.

If Toomey had as good a chance or even nearly as good a chance as Spector of winning in the fall, Rove and Bush would be doing all they could to elect Toomey and defeat Spector.

The fact that Santorum, Bush, and Rove are backing Spector tells me that the real choices for actually winning the Senate Seat are Spector or Joe Hoefel.

Winning the primray is not worth a dime if you can't win in the general election.

Once we lose the Senate, there is little chance we can keep Hillary from being president in 2008. I know that will make you very happy.

I would think anyone with a brain would listen to Santorum, Bush and Rove before they listen to people who would rather see Spector defeated in the primary even if the cost was Hillary as president and a Surpreme court that kept Abortion legal for another 40 years.

[Liz]

Picking candidates--like picking horses---and betting on them to win is never a sure thing. Even the savviest political experts have been proved wrong. One has to resort to utilizing criteria.

[Born Conservative]

Do you really think Toomey has a shot against Joe Hoefel in the fall election?

Absolutely!

[RobFromGa]

I hear you but is it possible that Santorum, Bush and Rove are supporting Spector because 1) they are loyal to incumbent GOP candidates, 2) they have promised support in the past in order to get Arlen to go along with something they needed, 3) they want to be able to work with Spector in the future in the (likely) event he gets re-elected.

Maybe they are secretly hoping for Toomey and can't say it publicly without screwing everything up.

Pennsylvania can elect Toomey most likely-- after all they elected Santorum 2.5 million to 2.2 million in '02. It will take some strong coattails and campaigning from the Prez though during the general election cycle.

One question I have is whether Spector will support Toomey if defeated in the primary. I'd hope Toomey will support Spector if the reverse happens.

[chainsaw]

Arlen Specter - the U. S. Senator that quotes ancient Scottish law when making decisions about your life in the United States. I may be wrong, but I thought the U.S. Constitution was the foundation of our society and our laws.

[airborne]

I heard a news report (1270WLBR Lebanon, PA) that said, "Toomey is the favorite among conservative REPUBLICANS while Specter is supported by moderate and independent VOTERS."
IMO, it seemed to imply that Specter was the choice of the Democrats. I forget where I heard it, but I recall hearing how Arlen was encouraging Dems to change party registration for the primary so as to vote for him.

[Fresh Wind]

I would expect Democrats to support Spectre. After all, he was a Democrat who changed to the "R" side only so he would have political viability outside of Philly.

[Bob Redman]

See my website "Don't Move On" at www.dontomoveon.org to see a concentrated treatment of the Specter-Toomey race.

[cuz_it_aint_their_money]

For all of you who claim that Snarlin’ Arlen deserves the Republican nomination just because President Bush has endorsed him, I have one simple request.

Name for me one Republican incumbent, up for re-election, that President Bush HAS NOT endorsed.

< Waiting patiently>

< Still waiting patiently>

Here’s a hint, don't waste any more time looking for one cuz there ain’t one!
That’s because it’s Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the President to endorse the incumbent.

I predict that the second that Pat Toomey is declared the winner of next Tuesday’s primary, President Bush will be the first of many Republicans to throw 100% of his support to Pat Toomey, the next Junior Senator from Pennsylvania.

And for all of you who claim that Pat doesn’t have a chance against Hoefel (sp?) in the General….. They said the same thing about Rick Santorum.

I put it to you that Hoefel (sp?) doesn’t have a chance against Toomey (a real Republican) or Snarlin’ Arlen (a donkey trapped in an elephant’s body). Thank you Ann Coulter!

[Fresh Wind]

Don't Move On

[Liz]

Do us a favor, and post your analysis here.

[ken5050]

Enjoyable discussion, you two. I have one thought to toss out...I can't believe that if Bush had asked Pat NOT to run, Toomey wouldn't have. So, the question is, did Bush aquiesce in Toomey's run....Could be.. It would serve to keep Spector in line, and send a message to other RINOs...Also, as I posited here a few moths ago, the idea of Arlen as the next chair of the SJC makes me ill. It would be an unmitigated disaster..So perhaps there was a quid pro quo...in return for Bush's, AND Santorum's endorsement and aid, Spector will NOT take the chair of the SJC.. I know it sounds cynical, but hey, it's politics..."problem" is that Toomey just might win the primary...(g)

[Liz]

Nice take.

[Liz]

What? You never saw MacArlen in his kilt?

If anybody deserves to lose, he does.

[MoralSense]

Ann Coulter today writes about this race on townhall.com.

[NittanyLion]

If Toomey had as good a chance or even nearly as good a chance as Spector of winning in the fall, Rove and Bush would be doing all they could to elect Toomey and defeat Spector. The fact that Santorum, Bush, and Rove are backing Spector tells me that the real choices for actually winning the Senate Seat are Spector or Joe Hoefel.

That's one of the more creative excuses I've seen to defend liberal Arlen Specter. The fact is, supporting the incumbent is SOP for the administration. Your contention that Specter's support is based on electability is false.

And I might add, Toomey is at least as capable of beating Hoeffel as Specter. Specter barely beat a weak opponent the last time he was seriously challenged (12 years ago), while Toomey's home district actually leans Democrat. Toomey is likely to carry similar districts in the Pittsburgh area - and that will be a necessity to offset Hoeffel's advantage in Philadelphia.

[Dr. Scarpetta]

BUMP

[Preacher777]

Great discussion! Everyone needs to read Coulter's column on Specter!

Anyone coming to the HUGE Toomey-Dr. James Dobson rally Friday night in Lancaster?? Specter's ads he has been running in Lancaster County basically infer that Specter is pro-life and say that Toomey is pro-abortion and pro-life! Dobson will help any confused pro-family person to see who is thinking about the family! The rally is at the Host Exposition Center behind the Host Resort on Route 30 in Lancaster. Doors open at 6:00 and the rally starts at 7:00. Free admission. Join us!!

[Boxsford]

One has to resort to utilizing criteria.

Amen to that! I've lived in 5 other states and now in PA. I'm thrilled I get the priviledge to cast my vote to help throw that ungodly, nation destroyer, liberal commie out of office.

[Paul_B]

Donation made.

[jocko12]

GO TOMMEY GO

[Liz]

Nice work.

[Liz]

Specter's ads he has been running in Lancaster County basically infer that Specter is pro-life and say that Toomey is pro-abortion and pro-life!

Specter is a moral relativist, a secularist and a deceiver, divider, and rumor monger.

[votelife]

I wonder whether Specter will support Bush if Toomey wins...

[votelife]

you're right about Bush/Toomey. If Bush had asked Toomey NOT to run, I bet Toomey would have waited. This may have happened in FL with an open Senate seat and K. Harris.

[votelife]

great web page!

[votelife]

I almost wish I lived in PA this week!

Go Toomey!

[BillyBoy]

Specter wing of the GOP in 2000:

<-- then Senator Bill Roth
"Yes, Senator Roth is a DULL, 70 YEAR OLD CENTRIST RUNNING for a FIFTH term. But in a SWING state like Delaware ONLY a guy like Roth can WIN!!! Roth has been around FOREVER, and people can't imagine this state WITHOUT Senator Roth-- if he's renominated, the Democrats won't even TRY to win this one!! "

Spring 2000: Bill Roth renominated because "only he can win"

Fall 2000: DemocRAT Tom Carper beats the tar out of the old geezer and picks up the seat for the RATS.

Jan. 2001: Net RAT gain in the Senate because GOP voters went with the advice of the "moderate establishment"

If Snarlin' Arlen can't get over 50% of his OWN party to support him after 25 years in the Senate, how the heck can he convince the rest of PA to support his RINO butt in November? If they LIKE liberal values, then they have Joe Hoeffel to vote for.

[ex-snook]

Bork Specter. Reagan would vote for Toomey.

Thursday, April 22, 2004

Why Toomey vs. Specter Matters


National Review's Paul Kengor

On Tuesday, Pennsylvania Republicans like myself will cast a ballot for either long-time senator Arlen Specter or three-term congressman Pat Toomey. The winner will secure the Republican nomination for the U.S. Senate and take on the Democratic nominee in November. Specter is probably the Senate's most liberal Republican, representing the old Northeast/Rockefeller-wing of the GOP. Toomey is a conservative, in the mold of the Reagan wing that today dominates the party.

The most crucial difference between the two men concerns their stance on abortion. Toomey is staunchly pro-life. Specter is adamantly pro-choice. And that's why this election really matters, and certainly beyond just Pennsylvanians.

If Specter defeats Toomey, and the GOP holds its Senate majority in November — which it likely will — he will chair the Senate Judiciary Committee. If that happens, pro-life Republicans will face the appalling prospect of a Republican chairman blocking President George W. Bush's pro-life appointments to the bench, including the Supreme Court, or supporting a President John F. Kerry's pro-choice picks.

Equally frustrating, Pennsylvania is a pro-life state, where one need not be pro-choice to succeed politically. Our other senator, Republican Rick Santorum, is one of the Senate's top pro-lifers. We elected a pro-life Democrat as governor, twice: He was Robert Casey, a voice of conscience whom the Democratic Party refused to let articulate the pro-life position at the 1992 convention.

The Toomey-Specter election speaks to the future of the GOP. The Democratic Party has become the pro-choice party. If you want abortion on demand, you pull the Democratic lever. That will be especially true in the coming presidential election, where Democrats will run the most fiercely pro-choice candidate ever to receive a major party nomination for president. (At the 2003 NARAL Pro-Choice America Dinner, Senator Kerry described pro-lifers as "the forces of intolerance.")

The Republican Party is the pro-life party. That was the wish of the architect of the modern GOP: Ronald Reagan, the man whom George W. Bush most resembles politically, including on the abortion issue.

To Reagan, abortion was not merely a political matter; it was a moral matter — actually, it was a Biblical matter. In a January 1984 speech to the National Religious Broadcasters convention, he said: "God's most blessed gift to his family is the gift of life. He sent us the Prince of Peace as a babe in the manger." Like the 19th-century clergy who led the movement to abolish slavery, Reagan as a Christian saw himself as similarly duty-bound to fight abortion, which he equated with slavery in terms of moral outrage — an analogy that in turn outraged the New York Times. He made the analogy to the religious broadcasters, and quoted Jesus Christ in the process:

"This nation fought a terrible war so that black Americans would be guaranteed their God-given rights. Abraham Lincoln recognized that we could not survive as a free land when some could decide whether others should be free or slaves. Well, today another question begs to be asked: How can we survive as a free nation when some decide that others are not fit to live and should be done away with?
"I believe no challenge is more important to the character of America than restoring the right to life to all human beings. Without that right, no other rights have meaning. 'Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for such is the kingdom of God.'"

Together, Reagan assured the religious broadcasters, they could convince their fellow countrymen that America "should, can, and will preserve God's greatest gift": the right to life. In his 1986 State of the Union address, Reagan lamented: "Today there is a wound in our national conscience. America will never be whole as long as the right to life granted by our Creator is denied to the unborn."

Ronald Reagan was politically much more flexible than assumed, but abortion was a moral issue on which he refused to compromise as president. He understood what pro-choice Republicans do not: Abortion is the preeminent moral problem of our time.

On Reagan's side is one of the most influential moral thinkers of our generation, Pope John Paul II, who has framed the subject even more starkly: Pro-choicers are foot soldiers in what he has characterized as the Culture of Death. We need a culture that embraces life and fights to protect the unborn, not one that battles for the "right" to partial-birth abortion or for taxpayer funding of abortion.

And it's that which is at stake for Pennsylvania Republicans on Tuesday, April 27. Should the GOP be the Party of Reagan or be complicit in the Culture of Death?

[Liz]

Excellent piece. Thanks for posting.

[votelife]

great post on #30

[hispanichoosier]

All along, I've been telling my fellow GOP-ers that Toomey can (1) beat Specter in April and (2) beat Hoeffel in Nov. He's charismatic and articulate on the stump. He has TONS of grassroots volunteers (this Hoosier is driving 300 miles this wkend to go door-to-door for him). Toomey has appealed to blue-collar Dems in his congressional district and will do so statewide in the fall because of his conservative stance on social issues, a crack campaign team, and his personal charisma.

[ForOurFuture]

If AuH20 isn't FR's most knowledgable scribe on American electoral politics, he certainly is the most prolific. He has several times posted a convincing argument that Toomey is actually more likely to defeat Hoeffel than Specter. Perhaps he'll paste it for you. But I can address this one:

If Toomey had as good a chance or even nearly as good a chance as Spector of winning in the fall, Rove and Bush would be doing all they could to elect Toomey and defeat Spector.

Bush didn't endorse Specter because he neccessarily thought Specter had a better chance of winning. He endorsed Specter because that's what Presidents do: endose inbuments in party primaries. Bush can't risk the retribution that would surely occur if Bush endorsed Toomey and Specter won. Specter would be even less cooperative in passing Bush's agenda than he already is. He might even defect to the Democrats. Bush almost certainly is privately hoping for a Toomey win. But he has to publicly support the incumbent.

[AuH2ORepublican]

Pennsylvania Republicans who are struggling with whether to support a real conservative or a more electable liberal need not fret. In Pat Toomey, we have the good fortune of having a candidate who is not only a true conservative, but also has a better chance of beating Democrat Joe Hoeffel in the general election than does Arlen Specter. And a Toomey nomination would greatly improve President Bush's chances of carrying PA, which would pretty much kill whatever chances Kerry has of becoming president.

In order for *any* Republican to win statewide in PA against a Montgomery County Democrat like Joe Hoeffel, he must win votes from blue-collar Democrats (who are disproportionately pro-life Catholics like Toomey) not only in the Pittsburgh area, but in the "T" as well. Arlen Specter is incapable of winning those votes, since he is pro-abortion and anti-gun and thus have nothing to offer those voters (and if they wanted to vote for someone who will raise taxes and toe the union line, they'd surely vote for the Democrat). Pat Toomey, on the other hand, has been elected and reelected in the blue-collar Lehigh Valley, centered in Allentown and Bethlehem, with similar demographics to the Pittsburgh-area districts held by Melissa Hart and Tim Murphy and to the one held by Rick Santorum before moving to the Senate (in fact, Toomey's district is less Republican than Hart's or Murphy's, although less Democrat than Santorum's old districts). Pat Toomey knows how to get blue-collar Democrat votes, and will beat Hoeffel just about everywhere outside of Philly and its close-in suburbs (well, Hoeffel will carry a few inner-city areas, but he is so brazenly anti-gun that he will get blown away in most of the "T"). Pat Toomey will win the general election, and given the fact that he's both more conservative and more electable than Specter, the choice is clear.

Some people point to Specter's easy victory in 1998 as evidence that he is more "electable," but Specter did not face a well-financed Democrat challenge that year, so it is silly to even look at those numbers. So let's look at the 1992 election, the last time Specter faced a strong challenge.

Specter won with 49.10% in the state, to Lynn Yeakel's 46.33%. Specter was below 50% overall even though he received 39.34% of the vote in Philadelphia (source: http://www.seventy.org/stats/1992GeneralResults.htm), which is a ridiculously high percentage for a "Republican" in a city in which Clinton beat George H.W. Bush by 68.16% to 20.90% in 1992 and in which Gore beat George W. Bush by 80.04% to 17.99% in 2000. It is risible to presume that Specter would be able to win such a high percentage in Philly this time around, since (i) Philadelphia has trended even more Democrat than it was in 1992, (ii) there is more political polarization today than back then, so there is less ticket-splitting among Philadelphia Democrats, and (iii) Joe Hoeffel is from Abington Township, just across the Montgomery County border, and represents most of Northeast Philadelphia (which is the least heavily RAT part of the city) in Congress. The same holds true in the close-in Philadelphia suburbs of Montgomery, Delaware and Bucks Counties, in which Specter won 54.40%, 53.17% and 50.72%, respectively, in 1992 (source: http://wilkes1.wilkes.edu/~wesp1/sen/PaSen1992.html), but have trended Democrat through the years and in 2000 these counties gave George W. Bush 43.81%, 42.66% and 46.29%, respectively. Outside of Philly and its 3 adjoining suburbs, Arlen Specter got only 49.97% in 1992, a pitiful percentage for a Pennsylvania Republican and much lower than Santorum's totals in his 2 statewide victories or even than Fischer's and Bush's losing statewide races.

Nowadays, because of demographic and political changes in Philadelphia, Montgomery, Delaware and Bucks Counties, Republicans can't carry Pennsylvania without getting at least 55% of the vote in the Pittsburgh area and in the "T." And for that, Republicans need to not only turn out their conservative base, but get votes from blue-collar Democrats, who are generally liberal on economic issues but pro-life, pro-gun and pro-military. Arlen Specter can't do either of those things, but Pat Toomey can, as he has proven in his blue-collar Democrat district in the Lehigh Valley. And if Bush carries PA in 2004 (as I think he will), it will be because he will increase his percentages among blue-collar Democrats, not because he can somehow convince pro-abortion, anti-gun and anti-military suburban RINOs to vote for him. While Bush and Toomey can get their share of suburban Philly votes because of issues such as national security, our road to victory in PA in 2004 goes through places like Allentown and Scranton and Wilkes-Barre and Erie and the Pittsburgh suburbs, not through Philadelphia and its RINO-infested close-in suburbs. President Bush would benefit if Toomey is nominated because it would guarantee overwhelming turnout from conservatives, while a Specter candidacy would just bring out pro-abortion RINO voters who would likely vote for Kerry.

So the choice is clear. If Pennsylvania Republicans want to win the 2004 elections, they need to support Pat Toomey in his primary challenge to Arlen Specter. GO, PAT, GO!

[bmwcyle]

Send and dollar or more if you can afford. It will send a chilling message to the RINOs if Toomey wins.

[maryz]

but I recall hearing how Arlen was encouraging Dems to change party registration for the primary so as to vote for him.

I've seen posts on this subject from posters who live in PA, and they say there are lots of pro-life, "Reagan conservative" blue-collar Dems. Maybe some of them will switch to vote for Toomey in the primary. ;)

[Liz]

Nice analysis.

[AuH2ORepublican]

Thank you.

[Common Tator]

In Pat Toomey, we have the good fortune of having a candidate who is not only a true conservative, but also has a better chance of beating Democrat Joe Hoeffel in the general election than does Arlen Specter. And a Toomey nomination would greatly improve President Bush's chances of carrying PA, which would pretty much kill whatever chances Kerry has of becoming president.

To believe that Toomey would help Bush win, you have to believe Bush is campaigning for Spector in order to defeat himself. You have to believe that Bush wants Kerry to win.

You have to believe that Rick Santorum would support a liberal Republican over a conservative Republican in order to help a liberal Democrat named Joe Hoefel win.

Only a Goldwater Republican is dumb enough to believe that! And many of them do!!

The problem with Goldwater Republicans is they actually think they can win general elections in moderate states. The same is true of McGovern Democrats. The liberals think they can win in moderate states as well.

Both the Goldwater Conservatives and the McGovern Liberals always, always, always lose general elections 61 to 39.. You could like look it up. Goldwater Republicans, and McGovern Democrats never learn from experience. You would think the first hundred times they lose general elections they would get clue. But they never do. They always think the 101st time will be different.

It never is.

First move the voters to the right.. then run consevative candidates. AuH20Repubicans always get that bass ackwards. That is why they always lose

[AuH2ORepublican]

"To believe that Toomey would help Bush win, you have to believe Bush is campaigning for Spector (sic) in order to defeat himself. You have to believe that Bush wants Kerry to win.

You have to believe that Rick Santorum would support a liberal Republican over a conservative Republican in order to help a liberal Democrat named Joe Hoefel (sic) win."

---

No, you have to believe that both Bush and Santorum either (i) believe the canard that Arlen Specter is unbeatable in a general election and thus it isn't worth rocking the boat even if he rarely hangs with conservatives on important votes, or (ii) fear that Specter will win the primary regardless of what they do, and are afraid that if he wins reelection in spite of Bush and Santorum turning their backs on him he will vote even more liberal or even switch to the RATs. Arlen Specter is one mean som'bitch and it is not beneath him to blackmail the Preisdent or the Senate Republican Conference Chairman. Why, Specter's people have told local officials in the Lehigh Valley that if they don't support Specter in the primary, he won't appropriate any federal money for local projects.


"The problem with Goldwater Republicans is they actually think they can win general elections in moderate states."

---

Pennsylvania is in general a socially conservative state, very pro-gun and pro-life. And it is actually *very* socially conservative outside of Philly and its close-in suburbs (actually, Northeast Philly is quite socially conservative as well). In fact, of the 19 U.S. representatives from the state, 15 are pro-life (that's 79%!). 11 of the 12 GOP Representatives are pro-life, with only über-RINO Jim Greenwood being pro-abortion. And among the 7 Democrat Representatives, 4 are pro-life (Murtha, Doyle, Kanjorski and Holden), so even a majority of Democrat congressmen from PA are pro-life! And this is not just because of the GOP redistricting of 2002---after the 2000 election, when there were 11 Republicans and 10 Democrats from PA in the House, 16 of the 21 Representatives (76%) were pro-life. 10 of 11 Republicans (all but Greenwood) and 6 of the 10 Democrats (Mascara, Borski, Murtha, Doyle, Kanjorski and Holden) were pro-life. Specter is completely out of step with the socially conservative majority in Pennsylvania.

I will admit that PA is economically moderate or even liberal outside of suburban areas and some conservative areas in the "T." But Specter won't be able to out-tax and out-spend Democrat Joe Hoeffel, so he won't be able to compete for votes with blue-collar Democrats outside of the Philly metro area (who are disproportionately pro-life Catholic and are almost without exception pro-gun and pro-military). Pat Toomey, on the other hand, can compete for those votes in spite of the fact that he is more economically conservative than Hoeffel, since at least he has something to offer those blue-collar Democrats.


"Both the Goldwater Conservatives and the McGovern Liberals always, always, always lose general elections 61 to 39."

---

Actually, 61 to 39 sounds more like Reagan's *winning* margin in 1984. Other than Reagan, the closest to a Goldwater Republican we've had run for President since Barry's 1964 run was George W. Bush, and---far from losing 61-39---he was able to defeat a sitting vice president at a time of apparent peace and prosperity. So you Rockefeller Republicans should put *that* in your pipe and smoke it.

[airborne]

I was one of those "pro-life Reagan conservatives" (registered Independant).
I changed parties (registered Democrat like my mom) so I could vote in the primaries. (This was in 1993, after voting for Perot. I had hopes that a third Party would develop).
It didn't take long to realize that the dems were not the people they claimed to be. My mom loved JFK (she was raised a Catholic from North Adams, Mass.)
So now I'm a Republican. I try to educate myself on the the candidates and talk to my friends and try to educate them. I learned that if you are armed with information you can win any debate, or at least make your opponent question their position.
I will vote for Toomey, and encourage others to also. But if Specter should win in the primary, I will support him over the Dems candidate.