REPUBLICAN Senator Arlen Specter now a DEMOCRAT

[~tangerine~]

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=7450974&page=1

Specter: 'Prospects for Winning a Republican Primary Are Bleak'

Long-time Republican Says He Finds Himself More Aligned with Democrats' Philosophy

By Z. BYRON WOLF and JONATHAN KARL

WASHINGTON, April 28, 2009

Sen. Arlen Specter stunned both parties on Capitol Hill today when he announced he would switch his party allegiance to Democrat after 42 years as a Republican, including 28 as a senator from Pennsylvania.

Arlen Specter abandons the GOP to become a Democrat, impacting balance of power.Beyond the personal drama and implications for the Republican Party, which has endured major setbacks in the last two general elections, Specter's decision could potentially give Democrats the ability to break Republican filibusters in the Senate.

Specter called his decision to switch from Republican to Democrat "painful," and said he made the decision based on public and private polling in Pennsylvania that showed "the prospects for winning a Republican primary [in Pennsylvania] are bleak."

"As the Republican party has moved farther and farther to the right, I have found myself increasingly at odds with the Republican philosophy and more in line with the philosophy of the Democratic Party," Specter said at a news conference Tuesday afternoon.

Former Congressman Pat Toomey, a conservative Republican, officially entered the primary race against Specter just two weeks ago and was way ahead in polls.

"I'm not prepared to have my 29-year record in the United States Senate decided by the Pennsylvania Republican primary. This is a decision that has been reached gradually as I have traveled the state in the last several months. Specifically, I got my own poll results back last Friday and consulted with my campaign manager..." he added.

[Electrophile]

He aligns more with the Dems ideologically so in that respect it makes sense. The issue is though, he did this because he was going to get his ass handed to him by Pat Toomey in the GOP primary in 2010. Now he's in a much stronger position to keep his Senate seat.

There's talk that Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe up in Maine could be poised to do the same, since the Republicans are all but pushing them out for being too moderate. Frankly, I hope they do. I hope the GOP goes so far-right, they destroy themselves and a new Republican Party forms. They need to stop leaning on the Fundies and become more fiscally conservative. The GOP right now is more big government than the Dems, IMO. Lose the culture war issues and get back to what makes the Republicans Republican.

If they choose to stay on the course they're on, they are in deep, deep trouble.

[Dzldoc]

Referrals are available

http://www.alz.org/nca/index.asp

I know it's a career move

[~tangerine~]

He aligns more with the Dems ideologically so in that respect it makes sense. The issue is though, he did this because he was going to get his ass handed to him by Pat Toomey in the GOP primary in 2010. Now he's in a much stronger position to keep his Senate seat.

There's talk that Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe up in Maine could be poised to do the same, since the Republicans are all but pushing them out for being too moderate. Frankly, I hope they do. I hope the GOP goes so far-right, they destroy themselves and a new Republican Party forms. They need to stop leaning on the Fundies and become more fiscally conservative. The GOP right now is more big government than the Dems, IMO. Lose the culture war issues and get back to what makes the Republicans Republican.

If they choose to stay on the course they're on, they are in deep, deep trouble.

I agree, Senator Specter has never seemed all that Conservative to me. Specter was a Democrat until i believe 1966, so i say good to have him back! I love the power it gives the Democratic party (of course)... as for his motives, probably using good judgement to keep his seat, but at least his record shows his tendency towards the Democratic party (it really wasn't shocking to me that he did this)... Specter was one of three Repubs to vote for Obama's stimulus package. Govenor Ed Rendell is supporting Specter in 2010!

What about Al Franken? Does he still have a chance to get a seat in Washington?

[~tangerine~]

Referrals are available

http://www.alz.org/nca/index.asp

I know it's a career move

Well Dzldoc, i say your humor is fresh as ever! Thanks for the laugh

[JimmyPage1977]

"As the Republican party has moved farther and farther to the right, I have found myself increasingly at odds with the Republican philosophy and more in line with the philosophy of the Democratic Party," Specter said at a news conference Tuesday afternoon.

The fact is that the Republican Party has moved Left. Bigger government, increased spending and Conservatives would NEVER bail out a private business (see General Motors). Specter is just another old fool....it won't get him re-elected.

[marolyn]

hallelujah!!!...he has seen the light!

[Electrophile]

What about Al Franken? Does he still have a chance to get a seat in Washington?

Al Franken won that election, Norm Coleman just needs to grow up and accept defeat. The longer he drags this on, the worse he looks.

Once the Senate seats him, they'll have 60.

[The Rover]

Areln Spectre !

[cryingbluerain]

Congrats Dems. You'll also be glad to know your esteemed Senator Specter is the very same shithead who defended the murderer Ira Einhorn ("The Unicorn Killer") and got him his 40k bail so he could jump the country and stay on the run in France.

[PennyLane]

The change from Republican to Democrat: "It’s due to Sen. Specter’s increasing isolation in the Republican Party and to save his own political career".

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-sto...king-defection/

[Reggie1971]

He's doing this to stay in the Senate, pure and simple. All his remarks about the party moving right, blah blah blah are nonsense. I realize that the popularly accepted narrative is the party was a big tent ideologically thirty years ago, and now banishes moderates, but that simply isn't backed up by facts. The party had a platform thirty years ago that was every bit as conservative as it is today. In fact, looking at the eight years of the Bush Administration with Medicare drug benefits and out of control spending, it seems the GOP has steadily moved left since the time of Ronald Reagan.

[Bong-Man]

The only thing I can offer about the whole "we're not conservative enough anymore" argument is a dumb-founded go for it.....Please ?

.

[Electrophile]

He's doing this to stay in the Senate, pure and simple. All his remarks about the party moving right, blah blah blah are nonsense. I realize that the popularly accepted narrative is the party was a big tent ideologically thirty years ago, and now banishes moderates, but that simply isn't backed up by facts. The party had a platform thirty years ago that was every bit as conservative as it is today. In fact, looking at the eight years of the Bush Administration with Medicare drug benefits and out of control spending, it seems the GOP has steadily moved left since the time of Ronald Reagan.

If Eisenhower was alive today, and active in politics.....he'd be called a RINO. He would be considered too moderate for what the Republican Party has become. If that's not a sign it has moved further to the right in recent years, I don't know what is. Same goes for Theodore Roosevelt. Neither one of them would be considered "Republicans" by the party's current standards. And I consider them 2 of the 3 greatest Republican Presidents this country ever had.

It's not a "popularly accepted narrative", it's fact. Members of the GOP that are not far right are finding themselves increasingly marginalized. Arlen Specter is just one of several Republican senators that have found themselves at odds with the party brass because they don't veer further to the right than a broken shopping cart. Rather than focusing on the root word of "conservative", they choose to continue harping on stupid culture war issues like abortion and gay marriage. If they ever decided to go back to being the fiscally conservative party, you know.....like in the 1950s.....maybe they could get somewhere.

Specter is 100% correct when he said the party has moved further to the right in recent years, and he found himself increasingly at odds with them over his opinions and voting record. I was reading an article on FiveThirtyEight not too long ago about how a lot of states are showing increased registration switches; meaning people who were registered Republicans becoming either Democrats or aligning with a third party. Care to think about why that is? The more exclusive you become, the more you exclude people. Big tent, my ass.

[TypeO]

I would offer that it isn't that the Republican party is moving farther right, but rather is attempting to stand firm as the country becomes more liberal.

Conservatives aren't so much being MORE conservative as they are resisting becoming LESS conservative.

There's a difference.

I, nor anyone I know, is suddenly doing MORE things, or acting MORE conservative than before.

It's simply standing by whatever your principles are even as we are told "everyone's doing it!" and "that's how things are."

Liberals certainly didn't consider it a bad thing when they held to their values as the country went through what they felt was a shift to the right after 9/11.

Why is it different - and a bad thing - when conservatives do the same?

[eternal light]

Senator Arlen Specter regularly attends sessions of the United States Congress. Maybe he has noticed a change there where he sits. It may be different in other environments. Or maybe he is positioning himself to run for office as a Democrat.

Since he was elected to a fifth term in 2004, 239,000 Republicans and independents in Pennsylvania have switched to the Democratic Party. Facts are facts. It was clear that Specter could not win the Republican primary in Pennsylvania next year against the man he defeated in 2004, former Congressman Pat Toomey.

theroot.com/views/why-dems-can-t-count-specter

[Reggie1971]

If Eisenhower was alive today, and active in politics.....he'd be called a RINO. He would be considered too moderate for what the Republican Party has become. If that's not a sign it has moved further to the right in recent years, I don't know what is. Same goes for Theodore Roosevelt. Neither one of them would be considered "Republicans" by the party's current standards. And I consider them 2 of the 3 greatest Republican Presidents this country ever had.

It's not a "popularly accepted narrative", it's fact. Members of the GOP that are not far right are finding themselves increasingly marginalized. Arlen Specter is just one of several Republican senators that have found themselves at odds with the party brass because they don't veer further to the right than a broken shopping cart. Rather than focusing on the root word of "conservative", they choose to continue harping on stupid culture war issues like abortion and gay marriage. If they ever decided to go back to being the fiscally conservative party, you know.....like in the 1950s.....maybe they could get somewhere.

Specter is 100% correct when he said the party has moved further to the right in recent years, and he found himself increasingly at odds with them over his opinions and voting record. I was reading an article on FiveThirtyEight not too long ago about how a lot of states are showing increased registration switches; meaning people who were registered Republicans becoming either Democrats or aligning with a third party. Care to think about why that is? The more exclusive you become, the more you exclude people. Big tent, my ass.

In your response I found mention of only two specific issues. Gay marriage and abortion. With respect to gay marriage, the majority of Americans oppose it. I'm fairly confident that Ike would have opposed it. So to consider that a right wing position is to put the majority of the country and an esteemed "RINO" President on the fringe.

Abortion is a bit more divided, though. Before 1973 it was an issue left up to the states, which is probably what a majority of Republicans would concur with considering that the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution is basically ignored in the Roe Vs. Wade decision. In any case, the pro-life position has been prevelant among Republicans for decades.

Beyond that, I'm really curious to know the extreme right wing positions adopted into the GOP platform that were not considered mainstream in years gone by. Without 'em I'll restate it: The narrative that the GOP has drifted right is bulls--t.

[~tangerine~]

Al Franken won that election, Norm Coleman just needs to grow up and accept defeat. The longer he drags this on, the worse he looks.

Once the Senate seats him, they'll have 60.

I'm hopeful, too, that Al Franken will get his spot soon (wasn't the lawsuit over something like 200 votes?).... and when Specter takes his seat (because as a Pennsylvanian, i believe he will get re-elected) 61!!!

[redrum]

Congrats Dems. You'll also be glad to know your esteemed Senator Specter is the very same shithead who defended the murderer Ira Einhorn ("The Unicorn Killer") and got him his 40k bail so he could jump the country and stay on the run in France.

He needs to be put out to pasture along with Jimmy Carter and Robert Byrd.

'The Magic Bullet Man'

[~tangerine~]

Senator Arlen Specter regularly attends sessions of the United States Congress. Maybe he has noticed a change there where he sits. It may be different in other environments. Or maybe he is positioning himself to run for office as a Democrat.

Makes sense, maybe his experience "has" influenced his decision. If he did it in hopes of keeping his job (which i suspect is part of the reason), he is still welcome in the Democratic Party! I just pray Sarah Palin won't do the same!

[bigstickbonzo]

Written by John Feehery.

The departure of Arlen Specter from the Republican Party puts an exclamation point on a rough first hundred days for the national GOP in the Obama era. While many conservatives will say good riddance to the Pennsylvania senator, other leaders understand that without the Arlen Specters of the world staying in the Republican fold, the chances of regaining a majority coalition are severely diminished. Specter would have lost in a Republican primary to Pat Toomey, a firebrand conservative who used to run the anti-tax group Club for Growth. That is why he decided to become a Democrat. The Club for Growth is best known as the organization that fields ideologically pure nominees who tend to lose general elections. Rather than have a moderate Republican stay in the Senate, Toomey chose to force him out, and now hopes the winds of political fortune blow his way in two years.

It hasn't been a particularly fun time to be a Republican since last November. The party chairman, Michael Steele, has had a rocky start, to say the least. It was Steele who suggested that perhaps Specter should face a primary test. Now Specter is a Democrat, so that tactic didn't seem to work so well. Republicans have been marginalized in the Congress, ignored by Democratic leaders to such a point that every one of them voted against the president's stimulus package in the House, with only three defectors in the Senate. They also voted en masse against the president's budget, only to see it pass largely unchanged. Worse, they have seen their party rating sink to anemic levels. It is hard for the GOP to make the case that they are national party when only 21 percent of the American people choose to identify themselves as Republican, according to the latest polls.

The GOP leaders in Congress, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell, have both been effective tactically, trying to counter the Democrats on issues like cap and trade, health care reform, spending and taxes. And there are some signs that the American people would like to see a more effective check on the Obama agenda. For example, new polls show that a slim majority of Americans believe that because Democrats control Congress, it would be good to have more checks and balances by electing more Republicans. That being said, Republicans need to go in a new direction strategically should they ever want to have control of the agenda again. A fundamental debate that is rolling the party hinges on one key question. Should they come up with a different strategic game plan or should they try to revive a strategy that has worked for 40 years but is now showing its age?

Since 1966, in the aftermath of LBJ's Great Society program being enacted into law, and after the Watts riots, the Republican Party has employed a winning, if controversial, election strategy. Bring together southern whites, Midwest conservatives, western libertarians, blue-collar Catholics and New England capitalists in a coalition. Focus on anti-communism for the conservatives, the abortion issue for the Catholics, the civil rights backlash for the southerners, and concern about taxes and spending on welfare programs--and a strong national defense--for all the groups. The coalition served the Republicans fairly well. They controlled the White House for 28 out of the 40 years, and while they didn't dominate the Congress to the same extent, they did have some success in both the House and the Senate. But like coalitions, this conservative coalition has started to fray. Communism has been vanquished, the sexual revolution is over, a fairly high percentage of Americans don't pay federal income taxes, and the old divisions between white and black are starting to disappear.

New England has largely been lost to the GOP, the Democrats have made remarkable strides in the west, and many Catholic voters have swung back to their old party, partly a reaction to evangelical takeover of the GOP. Some luminaries on the right are hoping to bring back the old coalition. They see Obama as the sum of their worst fears. Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity like to call the president and Nancy Pelosi and their policies "socialist." They beat the drum on gay marriage, hoping that this will give the right a needed shot in the arm (and not recognizing that getting gays to marry is actually a victory against promiscuity and a victory for family values in a strange way.)

An unspoken part of this strategy has always been to play on the resentments of the largely white and conservative base toward other people, be they communists, liberals, blacks, immigrants, gays or athiests. While it may have worked in the past, there is no evidence that this strategy is working or is going to work tomorrow. Changing demographics and changing attitudes make it necessary for the GOP to change the target of its ire. The country is getting less white every day, so that means the Republicans need to attract more African-Americans, more Asians and more Hispanics. It also needs to do better with the female vote, especially female small business owners, the fastest growing part of the new economy. I believe that instead of targeting people, the new Republican strategy should be to target government, and more specifically, bloated, unaccountable, imperious, out-of-touch, ineffective and corrupt government. Anger against incompetent government spans all classes, all races and all genders.

The much-maligned tea parties should give the Republicans an inspiration to rework both its philosophy and its coaltion. The resentment that inspired the thousands of people to come out and protest was not tax related. It was not only the bailouts either. It was years of frustration that comes from incompetent and unresponsive government, which has failed to deliver basic services, like a sound public education. The frustration finally boiled over in a series of mostly spontaneous protests aimed at the government and its new leader, Obama. Republicans should seize on that populist outrage and drive a new reform agenda, based on the principles of transparency, accountability, competence and thrift. They should hold Obama's feet to the fire when it comes to spending. They should demand greater accountability from the federal government and the unions that represent the bureaucrats. They should push hard for greater transparency for TARP funding, earmarks, Medicare and host of spending programs.

They should also go out to the American people to get their input. Find out what most Americans really expect from the government, and find out what they willing to pay. Take suggestions from the people in series of national town hall meetings, turn them into policies and then present them to the president.

It's easy for pundits to write the old story of the great divide between moderates and conservatives in the GOP. But it is more compelling to see this fight as the end of one era and the beginning of a new one. For Republicans, the road back to the majority will mean finding a new strategy, one based on reforming a bloated and wasteful government into a smaller, smarter government that meets the needs of the people.