Arlen Specter now D-PA

[travelinman67]

How did "the GOP [leave] him"?

The GOP has NEVER been a pro-abortion party. Ever.

Specter aligned 100% with the left on judicial appointments, using abortion as the sole litmus test. That is what disenfranchised him with the GOP.

Bullcrap. There used to be plenty of pro-choice Republicans.

Merely because a small percentage of Republican party members back abortion, doesn't make the party "pro-abortion". (Don't forget, there a pile of Democrats who as Catholic, oppose abortion, yet still vote Democrat. Has the Democrat party "abandoned" them?)
The Republican party platform is pro-life: Always has been. As a ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee he is expected to represent his party's interests on that committee: He has not.

[OL FU]

First, the party for 30+ years has been pro-life and small government (unfortunately, the small govenment part slipped during the Bush years and Specter was a part of that). If the republican party left Specter they left him years ago. he is a pragmatic politician like most politicians and his leaving is more indicative of his fear of losing the nomination than the GOP leaving him.

Second, the republican party is in disarray and rightfully so. They governed horribly over the last 8 years and Specter among others contributed to that government.

As fas as the future, who knows. After 1976, the death of the party was predicted only for Reagons's victory 4 years later. 1964 the death of the part was predicted only for Nixon to win 4 years later (where is the throw up emoticon). In fact there were those that had convinced themselves in 2004 that the republicans had put together a new coalition that would dominate for years

The best thing that can happen to the republicans now is for the democrats to have unbridled control of the legislative agenda. It should be interesting to see how they do.


Sadly, it will not be the best thing for the country. I agree with appaholic. The best government is a divided one.

[dbackjon]

Bullcrap. There used to be plenty of pro-choice Republicans.

Merely because a small percentage of Republican party members back abortion, doesn't make the party "pro-abortion". (Don't forget, there a pile of Democrats who as Catholic, oppose abortion, yet still vote Democrat. Has the Democrat party "abandoned" them?)
The Republican party platform is pro-life: Always has been. As a ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee he is expected to represent his party's interests on that committee: He has not.

Hence, the Republican Party has LEFT Specter...

[travelinman67]

Merely because a small percentage of Republican party members back abortion, doesn't make the party "pro-abortion". (Don't forget, there a pile of Democrats who as Catholic, oppose abortion, yet still vote Democrat. Has the Democrat party "abandoned" them?)
The Republican party platform is pro-life: Always has been. As a ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee he is expected to represent his party's interests on that committee: He has not.

Hence, the Republican Party has LEFT Specter...

Sure thing, Jon.

[Ivytalk]

That's right, spinmeister. Arlen was always a mainstream Republican. Specter was facing another tough GOP primary this year and may not have won it. So long, Arlen. Don't let the door kick you in the azz on the way out.

Specter used to be indicative of an entire WING of the GOP. "Rockefeller Republicans" used to be a huge part of the GOP... they've been pushed out of the party entirely as they've pursued the "southern strategy" and embraced the evangelical right. Look at the GOP's disappearing act in the northeast... that owes itself to the GOP embracing a much more extreme right wing line favored by the evangelicals.

people as moderate as Specter have been told in the past decade that we aren't extreme enough for the modern GOP (yeah... I was in the GOP from 96-00).

I'm sure that's because you were on some Republican's payroll!

[TwinTownBisonFan]

Hence, the Republican Party has LEFT Specter...

Sure thing, Jon.

the GOP used to be the party of big business interests and the market economy with little government interest in social issues... until Nixon realized he could win elections by subtly attack the Dems for supporting civil rights. then all the sudden you started seeing the GOP embrace Falwell and the "moral majority" crowd to win elections and shift their power base to the south and rural areas... now all they have left is the deep south and pockets in the west.

fact is, the GOP did leave moderates like Specter and Jeffords. they now demand far right social views and far right economic views... or face the primary attack. what we're seeing in PA is what we've seen in other places... the base of the GOP is FAR to the right of the majority of voters in a given state.

[TwinTownBisonFan]

Specter used to be indicative of an entire WING of the GOP. "Rockefeller Republicans" used to be a huge part of the GOP... they've been pushed out of the party entirely as they've pursued the "southern strategy" and embraced the evangelical right. Look at the GOP's disappearing act in the northeast... that owes itself to the GOP embracing a much more extreme right wing line favored by the evangelicals.

people as moderate as Specter have been told in the past decade that we aren't extreme enough for the modern GOP (yeah... I was in the GOP from 96-00).

I'm sure that's because you were on some Republican's payroll!

not right off... i started out as a volunteer... found i had an aptitude for it, ended up getting paid by a few campaigns for some "consulting work" (i was a teenager) but i never had a full-time gig when i was with the GOP... that didn't happen until college and with the dems.

[UNI88]

That's right, spinmeister. Arlen was always a mainstream Republican. Specter was facing another tough GOP primary this year and may not have won it. So long, Arlen. Don't let the door kick you in the azz on the way out.

Specter used to be indicative of an entire WING of the GOP. "Rockefeller Republicans" used to be a huge part of the GOP... they've been pushed out of the party entirely as they've pursued the "southern strategy" and embraced the evangelical right. Look at the GOP's disappearing act in the northeast... that owes itself to the GOP embracing a much more extreme right wing line favored by the evangelicals.

people as moderate as Specter have been told in the past decade that we aren't extreme enough for the modern GOP (yeah... I was in the GOP from 96-00).

To tie this in with the gerrymandering thread ...
Wouldn't restrictions on gerrymandering have forced the GOP to take more centrist positions in order to appeal to a broader element of society in order to win elections? Wouldn't it also make it more difficult for extremists to exert so much control over the GOP? Would this be better for John and Jane Public?

[TwinTownBisonFan]

Specter used to be indicative of an entire WING of the GOP. "Rockefeller Republicans" used to be a huge part of the GOP... they've been pushed out of the party entirely as they've pursued the "southern strategy" and embraced the evangelical right. Look at the GOP's disappearing act in the northeast... that owes itself to the GOP embracing a much more extreme right wing line favored by the evangelicals.

people as moderate as Specter have been told in the past decade that we aren't extreme enough for the modern GOP (yeah... I was in the GOP from 96-00).

To tie this in with the gerrymandering thread ...
Wouldn't restrictions on gerrymandering have forced the GOP to take more centrist positions in order to appeal to a broader element of society in order to win elections? Wouldn't it also make it more difficult for extremists to exert so much control over the GOP? Would this be better for John and Jane Public?

not really, no. the base of the party still drives the boat... the base of the GOP even in pretty blue areas is pretty far to the right. that owes to the national "top down" structure of the GOP in part. the Dems are structurally different... state and local affiliates are much more moderate in red areas. the base generally is accepting of moderate dems in swing districts... (this may change now that we're in power... we'll have to see)

but you look at places like Illinois 14... where the GOP base could have nominated a moderate in a swing district, they instead nominated Jim Oberweiss a far right type... and they lost to a moderate in Bill Foster. this happens a lot to the GOP where Dems pick off leaning R districts because the moderates have a place in the party, and the local dems seem to be inclined to support them even if they aren't as liberal as they'd like.

[travelinman67]

Sure thing, Jon.

the GOP used to be the party of big business interests and the market economy with little government interest in social issues... until Nixon realized he could win elections by subtly attack the Dems for supporting civil rights. then all the sudden you started seeing the GOP embrace Falwell and the "moral majority" crowd to win elections and shift their power base to the south and rural areas... now all they have left is the deep south and pockets in the west.

fact is, the GOP did leave moderates like Specter and Jeffords. they now demand far right social views and far right economic views... or face the primary attack. what we're seeing in PA is what we've seen in other places... the base of the GOP is FAR to the right of the majority of voters in a given state.

Ahem...

The counterculture attack against conservatism, along with the sexual revolution (and Roe v Wade circa 1970) took place during Nixon's Administration, hence his "instigation" of social issues as both a moral and elective litmus test.

I'll agree that there are a pack of ultra right quacks that still have a large voice within the Republican Party, but they're not the reason Jeffords and Specter jumped ship.

Jeffords jumped ship because Trent Lott put the screws to him and attempted to muscle Jeffords into toeing the line. It had NOTHING to do with party ideology. When Lott attempted to "punish" Jeffords by stripping him of his committee memberships...Jeffords said Hasta La Vista.

Specter is simply a spineless coward who has sold his vote like a whore to the party which gave him the most in return. With his vote carrying so much wait to estoppel filibusters, he simply upped his price to the Republicans who responded by targeting him in the next election. Realizing he had worn out his welcome with the Republicans, he went to work for another pimp.

Old, senile, amoral, dishonest, unaware of the consequences of his foolish behaviour...he'll fit well into the Democratic Party.

[UNI88]

To tie this in with the gerrymandering thread ...
Wouldn't restrictions on gerrymandering have forced the GOP to take more centrist positions in order to appeal to a broader element of society in order to win elections? Wouldn't it also make it more difficult for extremists to exert so much control over the GOP? Would this be better for John and Jane Public?

not really, no. the base of the party still drives the boat... the base of the GOP even in pretty blue areas is pretty far to the right. that owes to the national "top down" structure of the GOP in part. the Dems are structurally different... state and local affiliates are much more moderate in red areas. the base generally is accepting of moderate dems in swing districts... (this may change now that we're in power... we'll have to see)

but you look at places like Illinois 14... where the GOP base could have nominated a moderate in a swing district, they instead nominated Jim Oberweiss a far right type... and they lost to a moderate in Bill Foster. this happens a lot to the GOP where Dems pick off leaning R districts because the moderates have a place in the party, and the local dems seem to be inclined to support them even if they aren't as liberal as they'd like.

Is the Illinois GOP really representative of other state GOP's? The party has been in disarray since the end of the George Ryan administration. The centrists (like Topinka) and the extremists (like Oberweis) have been fighting for control and the party has not been able to develop an identity or a slate of candidates positioned to run for state-wide office. I'm not sure the party really wanted Oberweis but I don't think they had many alternatives. It is extremely unlikely that the Reps will be able to take advantage of the Blago situation to wrest some control away from the Dems. I have a hard time believing that the GOP is in that bad of shape in that many other states.

[dbackjon]

Reaction from top GOP officials to the defection of Sen. Arlen Specter has been decidedly mixed. The less orthodox are interpreting the news as a validation of their biggest concerns, while the dyed-in-the-wool types wave 'good riddance.'

Acid-tongued conservatives have long viewed Specter as an Independent or even a Democrat in GOP clothing. And so when the Pennsylvania Republican announced that the R after his name would be changed to a D, the response was to celebrate the purge of moderation.

"A lot of people said, well Specter, take McCain with you, and his daughter. Take McCain and his daughter with you," talk show host Rush Limbaugh declared during the early hour of his Tuesday program.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/2 ... 92382.html

[HI54UNI]

That's right, spinmeister. Arlen was always a mainstream Republican. Specter was facing another tough GOP primary this year and may not have won it. So long, Arlen. Don't let the door kick you in the azz on the way out.

Yes, I believe Specter did this more for himself to get re-elected than anything, a-la Lieberman.

Bingo. This is about Arlen Specter and nothing more. The ego these people have is amazing. And we wonder why our country is so screwed up.

Any politician that does this is a piece of crap in my book whether Republican or Democrat. If they want to do this fine, do it like Phil Gramm did. Resign and re-run in the other party.

[Appaholic]

the GOP used to be the party of big business interests and the market economy with little government interest in social issues... until Nixon realized he could win elections by subtly attack the Dems for supporting civil rights. then all the sudden you started seeing the GOP embrace Falwell and the "moral majority" crowd to win elections and shift their power base to the south and rural areas... now all they have left is the deep south and pockets in the west.

fact is, the GOP did leave moderates like Specter and Jeffords. they now demand far right social views and far right economic views... or face the primary attack. what we're seeing in PA is what we've seen in other places... the base of the GOP is FAR to the right of the majority of voters in a given state.

Ahem...

The counterculture attack against conservatism, along with the sexual revolution (and Roe v Wade circa 1970) took place during Nixon's Administration, hence his "instigation" of social issues as both a moral and elective litmus test.

I'll agree that there are a pack of ultra right quacks that still have a large voice within the Republican Party, but they're not the reason Jeffords and Specter jumped ship.

Jeffords jumped ship because Trent Lott put the screws to him and attempted to muscle Jeffords into toeing the line. It had NOTHING to do with party ideology. When Lott attempted to "punish" Jeffords by stripping him of his committee memberships...Jeffords said Hasta La Vista.

Specter is simply a spineless coward who has sold his vote like a whore to the party which gave him the most in return. With his vote carrying so much wait to estoppel filibusters, he simply upped his price to the Republicans who responded by targeting him in the next election. Realizing he had worn out his welcome with the Republicans, he went to work for another pimp.

Old, senile, amoral, dishonest, unaware of the consequences of his foolish behaviour...he'll fit well into the Democratic Party.

WOW!...I agree almost 100% with TMan....however, I'll add that, although the counterculture attacked conservative values during Nixon, Nixon used this (politics 101) to his advantage by attacking what he didn't understand as subversive and fomenting a culture of fear to justify his heavy-handed responses....IMO

[ASUMountaineer]

Reaction from top GOP officials to the defection of Sen. Arlen Specter has been decidedly mixed. The less orthodox are interpreting the news as a validation of their biggest concerns, while the dyed-in-the-wool types wave 'good riddance.'

Acid-tongued conservatives have long viewed Specter as an Independent or even a Democrat in GOP clothing. And so when the Pennsylvania Republican announced that the R after his name would be changed to a D, the response was to celebrate the purge of moderation.

"A lot of people said, well Specter, take McCain with you, and his daughter. Take McCain and his daughter with you," talk show host Rush Limbaugh declared during the early hour of his Tuesday program.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/2 ... 92382.html

Ehh, he can take McCain, but leave McCain's daughter. Hearing her speak more conservatively then her wrinkled douche of a father makes ASUMountaineer feel special inside.

[clenz]

FWIW, I don't give a shit what party someone is in. If I agree with them I will vote for them, regardless of party...with the exception of the communist and socialist party.

[D1B]

Conks

[Wedgebuster]

[TwinTownBisonFan]

Ahem...

The counterculture attack against conservatism, along with the sexual revolution (and Roe v Wade circa 1970) took place during Nixon's Administration, hence his "instigation" of social issues as both a moral and elective litmus test.

I'll agree that there are a pack of ultra right quacks that still have a large voice within the Republican Party, but they're not the reason Jeffords and Specter jumped ship.

Jeffords jumped ship because Trent Lott put the screws to him and attempted to muscle Jeffords into toeing the line. It had NOTHING to do with party ideology. When Lott attempted to "punish" Jeffords by stripping him of his committee memberships...Jeffords said Hasta La Vista.

Specter is simply a spineless coward who has sold his vote like a whore to the party which gave him the most in return. With his vote carrying so much wait to estoppel filibusters, he simply upped his price to the Republicans who responded by targeting him in the next election. Realizing he had worn out his welcome with the Republicans, he went to work for another pimp.

Old, senile, amoral, dishonest, unaware of the consequences of his foolish behaviour...he'll fit well into the Democratic Party.

WOW!...I agree almost 100% with TMan....however, I'll add that, although the counterculture attacked conservative values during Nixon, Nixon used this (politics 101) to his advantage by attacking what he didn't understand as subversive and fomenting a culture of fear to justify his heavy-handed responses....IMO

Except that isn't where Nixon really broadened the GOP base... he expanded it by bringing in Trent Lott and the Dixiecrats by quietly turning against the civil rights movement... the essence of the southern strategy.

Jeffords jumped ship when Lott demanded he hew the company line and go along with their right wing agenda - just like you said T-Man... they decided having a member of their caucus wasn't enough unless he was entirely servile. bit em in the ass for about a year and a half.

it was a symptom of the GOP's emerging problem, increasingly moving to the right and demanding ideological purity from their members. it's something they still are engaged in... they seem to think the reason America walked away from them was either a) Bush or b) they just weren't conservative enough... which is... well it's amazing that anyone could really think that.

[UNI88]

What will the short and long term effects of this change likely be?

Short-term: will Obama still attempt to build (or at least provide the appearance of obtaining) bipartisan support for his initiatives? Or will he drive his agenda by focusing on support within his own party (which will mean more liberal policies while trying not to go so far left that he endangers the Blue Dog Democrats)?

Long-term: what will be the impact on the 2010 and 2012 elections? With this majority, Obama and the Democrats cannot effectively use the Repubicans and their "obstructionism" as a defense/excuse for any failures. If they don't get results, how will it effect the upcoming elections?

Success will likely mean continued domination of the elected branches of government by Democrats; failure (or perceived failure) will likely lead to election losses in 2010 and 2012 (if the Republicans can get their heads out of their various orifices and develop a strategy and identity). As an American, I hope Obama succeeds; as a fiscal conservative, I will be pleasantly suprised if he does.

[Appaholic]

WOW!...I agree almost 100% with TMan....however, I'll add that, although the counterculture attacked conservative values during Nixon, Nixon used this (politics 101) to his advantage by attacking what he didn't understand as subversive and fomenting a culture of fear to justify his heavy-handed responses....IMO

Except that isn't where Nixon really broadened the GOP base... he expanded it by bringing in Trent Lott and the Dixiecrats by quietly turning against the civil rights movement... the essence of the southern strategy.

Jeffords jumped ship when Lott demanded he hew the company line and go along with their right wing agenda - just like you said T-Man... they decided having a member of their caucus wasn't enough unless he was entirely servile. bit em in the ass for about a year and a half.

it was a symptom of the GOP's emerging problem, increasingly moving to the right and demanding ideological purity from their members. it's something they still are engaged in... they seem to think the reason America walked away from them was either a) Bush or b) they just weren't conservative enough... which is... well it's amazing that anyone could really think that.

1st paragraph...point I was trying to make, but you wrte more eloquent...catering to fear of blacks...

2nd paragraph...that may be true, and I also equally certain Jeffords received incentives in some form to make switch..

3rd paragraph....definitely true and the reason people like myself (true conservatives interested in smaller government and minimal intrusion) are running from the GOP currently controlled by the flesh-eating zombies...

[Pwns]

Specter and people in this thread saying the GOP is too far right? So wanting 9 figure budget deficits instead of 10 is now "too far right" I guess. The fact that he would leave the republicans for the abomination that the dem party currently is shows that he was in no way a real conservative. He's not even a good Giuliani or Bloomberg type republican.

Now that he is a dem, will he basically agree to be an Obama yesman? If so, God help us. Appaholic is right about how the gridlock helps all of us. The minority party has a history of standing up for common sense, civil liberties, and sensible foreign policy.

[UNI88]

Specter and people in this thread saying the GOP is too far right? So wanting 9 figure budget deficits instead of 10 is now "too far right" I guess. The fact that he would leave the republicans for the abomination that the dem party currently is shows that he was in no way a real conservative. He's not even a good Giuliani or Bloomberg type republican.

Now that he is a dem, will he basically agree to be an Obama yesman? If so, God help us. Appaholic is right about how the gridlock helps all of us. The minority party has a history of standing up for common sense, civil liberties, and sensible foreign policy.

Couldn't agree more with you and Appa about gridlock but will 2 years of free reign make gridlock more likely following the 2010 elections? If yes, is 2 years of pain worth a quicker return to gridlock?

[AZGrizFan]

That's right, spinmeister. Arlen was always a mainstream Republican. Specter was facing another tough GOP primary this year and may not have won it. So long, Arlen. Don't let the door kick you in the azz on the way out.

Specter used to be indicative of an entire WING of the GOP. "Rockefeller Republicans" used to be a huge part of the GOP... they've been pushed out of the party entirely as they've pursued the "southern strategy" and embraced the evangelical right. Look at the GOP's disappearing act in the northeast... that owes itself to the GOP embracing a much more extreme right wing line favored by the evangelicals.

people as moderate as Specter have been told in the past decade that we aren't extreme enough for the modern GOP (yeah... I was in the GOP from 96-00).

He admittedly switched parties SOLELY to ensure getting reelected, because he himself stated he didn't feel he'd win the Republican primary against a conservative challenger given that he'd voted FOR the president's stimulus package. This has almost NOTHING to do with ideals, and EVERYTHING to do with ensuring he gets reelected.

Truly pathetic at every level. What a POS.

[houndawg]

Yes, I believe Specter did this more for himself to get re-elected than anything, a-la Lieberman.

But, the part about the GOP leaving him is accurate. As a pro-choice Senator, Specter is an anomoly in the GOP.

How did "the GOP [leave] him"?

The GOP has NEVER been a pro-abortion party. Ever.

Specter aligned 100% with the left on judicial appointments, using abortion as the sole litmus test. That is what disenfranchised him with the GOP.

Same way they left Hillary Clinton, the former Goldwater Republican.