Specter's Switch is a BIG DEAL
The news today that Arlen Specter is switching parties and becoming a Democrat is a really big deal. Republicans are trying to laugh it off by accusing Specter of always having been a Democrat at heart, but that's not even remotely true. Plus, even if it was, having him officially caucus with the Democrats is still a big deal. Al Franken now represents the 60th Democratic vote in the Senate (which is why I now expect the GOP to encourage Norm Coleman to appeal his case all the way to the Intergalactic Court if necessary).
But Specter's switch is a big deal for other reasons too. First, from a political perspective, instead of facing serious pressure from the Right (because of Toomey's primary challenge), he will now face serious pressure to move to the left on various issues. That's because he's now going to have to run in a Democratic primary, and though the party will do what it can to clear the field for him, he'll still likely face some competition. And whoever he faces in the primary will play up his or her own Democratic bona fides while attacking Specter's lack thereof. So Specter will have to do things to prove that he is a legitimate Democrat. And if he proves to be a major obstacle to Obama's agenda, he'll suffer for it; the honeymoon will be over very quickly.
Moreover, as Jonathan Cohn points out, the optics of this switch are very good for Obama and the Democrats. Specter is a very recognizable face and his decision to switch parties this late in his career will underscore for a lot of people just how far the Republican party has drifted from what they once imagined it was. This will hurt Republicans among independents. It's yet another major blow to their brand.
But Specter's switch is a big deal for other reasons too. First, from a political perspective, instead of facing serious pressure from the Right (because of Toomey's primary challenge), he will now face serious pressure to move to the left on various issues. That's because he's now going to have to run in a Democratic primary, and though the party will do what it can to clear the field for him, he'll still likely face some competition. And whoever he faces in the primary will play up his or her own Democratic bona fides while attacking Specter's lack thereof. So Specter will have to do things to prove that he is a legitimate Democrat. And if he proves to be a major obstacle to Obama's agenda, he'll suffer for it; the honeymoon will be over very quickly.
Moreover, as Jonathan Cohn points out, the optics of this switch are very good for Obama and the Democrats. Specter is a very recognizable face and his decision to switch parties this late in his career will underscore for a lot of people just how far the Republican party has drifted from what they once imagined it was. This will hurt Republicans among independents. It's yet another major blow to their brand.
posted by A.L. at 12:09 PM
20 Comments:
A month ago, Specter said this:
[Democrats] are trying very hard for the 60th vote. Got to give them credit for trying. But the answer is no.
I am staying a Republican because I think I have an important role, a more important role, to play there. The United States very desperately needs a two-party system. That's the basis of politics in America. I'm afraid we are becoming a one-party system, with Republicans becoming just a regional party with so little representation of the northeast or in the middle atlantic. I think as a governmental matter, it is very important to have a check and balance. That's a very important principle in the operation of our government. In the constitution on Separation of powers.Then he found out his challenger, true conservative Pat Toomey, was polling 21 points higher for the primary. So, Specter switched. That means what he said a month ago was a lie.
He'll fit in perfectly with the Democrats.
Specter is a very recognizable face and his decision to switch parties this late in his career...Old and stupid also fits in perfectly with the Democrats.
Good riddance.
Steve, I'm not saying this is some sort of principled move. I've never been a big fan of Snarlin' Arlen, but this is still a very big deal. You can say good riddance, but with Specter gone, the GOP's ability to block Obama's agenda is significantly diminished.
As noted, the optics are excellent. I'm going to be especially interested in what the Republican party leadership does going forward. Will they make an explicit appeal to moderates (voters and politicians)?
Steve -
Are you suggesting that lying and stupidity are Democratic and not Republican characteristics? If so, you just arrived here from some alternate reality.
Specter has always been a weasel. But even a spineless, amoral, political pragmatist can have a tipping point. I'll never respect him, but it's nice to see that he might be human.
The Republicans no longer represent anything even vaguely related to the U.S. Constitution, American ideals, or even a valid political ideology of any stripe. To borrow a famous quote, the party left him. Too damned back it took him about 15 years to realize it.
A co-worker of mine just said "Specter switching is bad because America is better off with split government which leads to more bi-partisanship."
As ironic as it seems, I think this might be completely wrong at this point in time. We may end up with more bipartisanship because the Dems have 60 votes. Look at what happened with the agreement to do reconciliation for health care. Now, the GOP and assorted lobbies are forced to come to the table and craft a bill, rather than remaining secure in the knowledge that they can kill the whole thing with a filibuster. Now, the GOPs choices are stay home and have absolutely no influence, or come to the table and deal. With the president that we have, and what I believe is his sincere belief in working with the GOP, we may end up with more bipartisan legislation with more GOP votes, because Obama will want to get at least the more moderate wing of the GOP on board with his policies so that a national consensus is formed.
I believe that Specter's decision may further split the GOP into two factions: one that wants to deal and affect legislation, and one that wants to remain ideologically pure yet utterly irrelevant.
Its a beautiful day!
"Then he found out his challenger, true conservative Pat Toomey, was polling 21 points higher for the primary. So, Specter switched. That means what he said a month ago was a lie."
That's one way of looking at it. Another is that Specter saw the polls, realized a Democrat was going to win the election anyway, and figured WTF, it might as well be Arlen Specter (D) winning that race.
And thus the Republican's march to regional party status continues...
I'm glad to have Specter on board. He has always been a moderate voice. It looks like the bipartisanship of Barack Obama has just paid off big time!
Great site by the way. I've been following it for a couple of months. More on Specter here:
http://governingagainstthetide.blogspot.com/
I am surprised no one I've seen has yet quoted Jerry Della Femina on Specter -- from THOSE WONDERFUL FOLKS THAT BROUGHT YOU PEARL HARBOR. Della Femina was brought in to handle ads on an early Specter campaign -- I think for Pbhilly Mayor, and his portrait of Specter -- except for his assumption that his defeat wopuld end his political career -- was spot on.
I lost my copy two libraries ago, but if anyone has the book, please put it up. It's too good to quasi-quote.
A.L.:
You can say good riddance, but with Specter gone, the GOP's ability to block Obama's agenda is significantly diminished.When was Specter gonna block Obama's agenda? He voted for Porkulus, he voted for the Omnibus bill, he's voted for pretty much every one of Obama's picks (including the tax cheats and terrorist pardoners); he's acted more like a Democrat than a Republican the last two sessions of Congress anyway.
What the Dems are getting is someone more interested in keeping his power than someone who is principled. Which, is par for the course for the Dems. Remember, Obama helped get the corrupt Blago re-elected. This is today's Democratic Party.
SteveAR,
If you think any politician doesn't think first and foremost about preserving his position, you are just demonstrating further evidence that you're delusional.
If you think any politician doesn't think first and foremost about preserving his position, you are just demonstrating further evidence that you're delusional.Oh, I do get it. Remember, another one of your Dems, the gov of my former state (Blago), refused to step down. Why? Because he is a corrupt swine more interested in stealing from the taxpayers and in his power than in anything else. If anything, it just proves again that the left will support politicians who have no principles. Specter fits in perfectly. As do Collins and Snowe.
SteveAR,
As does McConnel, Boozman, Boehner, Perry, Coleman, ...
I expect Specter to be exactly as good a senator as a Democrat as his constituents force him to be. If he is elected comfortably, don't expect much change. If it's close, expect significant changes.
C2H50H:
As does McConnel, Boozman, Boehner, Perry, Coleman, ...What does the left know about principles? They supported Blago during his re-election. Pelosi lies through her botoxed face about not knowing about enhanced interrogations when everyone knows she not only knew about them, but said nothing to stop it; she did the same regarding warrantless wiretaps. Obama votes to continue warrantless wiretapping after whining for years about being against it. "Benedict Arnold" Murtha gets re-elected by racists and rednecks. Harry Reid was "in bed" with Jack Abramoff's group as any Republican. Shall I go on?
Like I said, Specter will fit right in.
"What does the left know about principles?"
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/
SteveAR is being quite honest here. The problem is that when the modern right wing says "principles" they mean "dogma". If you do the translation, you can understand what they mean and see their point.
Oh, and SteveAR, I'll see your Blago and raise you a Stevens, Cunningham, Foley, Craig, and Dey. Are your hermetically-sealed perceptions capable of the level of denial required to continue this?
He's not a traitor if his party stabbed him in the back. Lieberman wasn't a traitor when his party stabbed him in the back.
Oh, and SteveAR, I'll see your Blago and raise you a Stevens, Cunningham, Foley, Craig, and Dey. And I'll raise you Murtha, Kilpatrick, Edwards, Mollohan, Reid, Pelosi, Frank, Richard M. Daley and his five incarcerated appointments, Rezko, Viclosky, Moran, McDermott, Jackson (Jr.), Hastings, etc.
Ah yes. denial capability verified. Methinks it's time to stop feeding the troll.
I think all the 'good riddance' and 'no big loss' talk from the GOP is ass-covering as they realize what a stupid move they made in handing the Dems the filibuster-proof majority. It's inevitable that Franken will eventually be seated, he won the election and after a certain point the courts are not want to look they are handicapping their state by refusing to seat the junior senator.
The thing to watch for now, however, is whether or not Ben Nelson will flip to the GOP or at least declare himself and independent and start caucusing with them.
It's a big deal, but I do not like it. It would have been far better to let a an extreme right winger defeat Specter then run a real Democrat against him who could be relied upon to vote as a liberal. Specter is unrelaiable, cantankerous, and opportunisitic. I like the implicit message that moderates (i.e. Independents) are not welcome in the Republican Party, but I am not convinved Specter will help them reach cloture on important issues to break filibusters.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home