I think this was a very politically astute move by Senator Specter that has some not so reliable advantages for Democrats, and some real pluses for the citizens of Pennsylvania.

The only Republicans left in BLUE PA are the ones that LOVED old Frothy-Rick Santorum. Those same characters also adore Toomey; especially since he makes Santorum look like a liberal left-wing democrat by comparison.

By switching parties, Specter has all but nullified the chances Toomey could win (which were more significant when Specter was the GOP incumbent). Specter will retain the seat as a Democrat by gathering to him the considerable BLUE wave of this state; defeat Toomey, and keep us protected from the likes of him for a while longer.

No, his votes will not be reliably democrat leaning, but they were never reliably Republican either. Specter has always been a more moderate character when pushed.

Well they have clearly pushed him too hard.

Can you say 60?!?!?!?!

If Specter thinks this move will clear the Dem primary field for him, Joe Sestak just more-or-less blew a hole in that idea. Sestak was on with Ed Shultz just a few minutes ago and would not rule out a run in the Dem senate 2010 primary. Sestak was obliquely critical of Specter's motives for switching parties and said candidates should run for office to be "for" something, not necessarily to save their own job. It wasn't too hard to read between the lines of Sestak's comments.

So, will Tom Ridge challenge Pat Toomey in the primary now? I doubt that Specter's departure from the Republican Party clears the field for Toomey...

I agree that Sestak might challenge Specter in the primary, but I'd put my money on Specter.

A few quick notes, thoughts, observations, and predictions on this ever-evolving political melodrama:

1) Specter will be just as much a thorn-in-the-side to the Democrats as he was to the GOP. For those on the left rejoicing to heavenly choruses of "60!", be prepared. The prickly weather vane known as "Senator Specter" is your problem now.

2) Specter will not have a clear path to the Dem nomination next April. Despite the best attempts by Obama and Friends to clear the primary decks for him, he will face credible opposition (probably in the form of Joe Sestak, who reportedly is far from prepared to abandon a Senate bid). If Arlen's newly found opposition to card check holds, he'll find himself back where he started, entangled in a nasty primary. It'll just be on the other side of the aisle.

3) On the GOP side, things will probably get interesting as well. Tom Ridge (at the prodding of John Cornyn and the Republican establishment) will jump into this thing against Toomey, and Ridge probably still carries enough goodwill amongst the GOP faithful here to pull off a close primary win. A Ridge/Specter Senate contest next year would certainly be the national headline of the 2010 cycle.

4) The true irony of this entire episode is that, although Specter's motives (in my opinion) were driven by political survival, his party-switching tactic may ultimately prove to be his undoing. If Sestak primaries him, Specter would probably prevail, albeit badly damaged amongst his adopted Dem electorate (he did spend nearly 30 years on the other side of the aisle) and in need of money. Then Specter would proceed to a general against (if my theory holds) Tom Ridge, someone who would run extremely well against Arlen on his home turf (the Philly suburbs in particular). All things equal, if Ridge even draws even with Specter in the collars, he wins the election.

If this happens, Specter ends up exactly where he was headed as of yesterday - "on the train" back to Philadelphia.

Greg,

Smerconish was on Hardball last night and brought up Ridge's name as a possible R candidate. I think Ridge could win in a general election, but he would face the same primary voter problems as Specter. Specter is an opportunist above all else. Ridge, OTOH, is pretty much only slightly center-right. The reason McCain didn't pick Ridge for VP was because the new base of the GOP didn't like his fairly liberal social views. Second, Ridge's voting base is in western Pa, but in our closed primary system, there probably aren't enough R primary voters for him to offset the central and eastern R primary voters.

What could make things interesting is Peg Luksik. IMHO, she would draw the religious conservatives and Toomey would draw the liberatarian/anti-tax/anti-government R primary voters. It might be enough of a split to allow someone like Ridge to slip by with a win.

If Ridge were to run, win the primary and then the general election, he'd face the same pressures that drove Specter away from the GOP. If anything, Ridge's
political leanings are closer to Democrats than Specter's.

It should be interesting to see who else wants to go for this seat. Piccola? Sam Smith? John Perzel? Jim Gerlach? Phil English? Lynn Swann?

Greg,

I wouldn't put my money on Specter winning in the D primary. I'm not sure Sestak is the right guy to knock him out, but I'm not inclined to vote for Specter in the D primary either.

I expect most Dems here will be looking at how much Specter supports Obama's agenda. I expect him too because it's in his self-interest, but he'll have a lot of work to do to convince me I should retain him in office.

Annoying Arlen must think that the "PA middle-roaders" who registered to vote in the 2008 PA Dem primary - will vote for him in 2010.

I think they those voters are too smart for Annoying Arlen - they know not to trust him to vote in their interests - not his.

I don't think anyone in PA trusts Annoying Arlen - especially his relationship to Comcast - one of the always contenders for Worst Company in America.

I look forward to Senator Sestak. If he gets out campaigning in northest and middle PA - he will be the winner. He has got the resume and the SE vote locked up.

I think it's prudent for Sestak to leave the door open to running in the Dem primary to keep pressure on Specter from the left.

But my take is that this switch is all about health care reform. I believe Specter supports major changes in our health care system, but he couldn't support Obama because to keep his seat, he would have to move much farther to the right and oppose Obama. Now that Specter is a Dem, he can support Obama's health care agenda. In fact, Pennsylvania Democrats will be watching very closely how well Specter supports Obama's agenda and if he doesn't, he won't be winning the Dem senate primary.

I also believe Dems won't force Specter to toe the line most of the time as they did not on the budget vote today.

Specter is 110% opportunist, but for the next year, his self-interest is to support President Obama. That will be good for the Democratic agenda.

Wow...indeed...
Has not this Arlen Specter story spiked up and away the level of adrenalin on the Keystone politics page?
For the first time I am at a loss to even find seroius fault with the "Gentleman from..." own comments on this issue.
Amazing what is possible when one allows himself to break loose of a lock-step idealogy and begin to think independently.
At least in my view, the Gentleman's comments were well thought out and fairly on target.
Matt Thomas

I'm touched and humbled by the fact that Matt took the time to compliment my reaction to this story, yet didn't offer his own observations! Has the thoughts and opinions of "The Gentleman from..." taken preponderance over the actual stories themselves?! I'm honored that you think so highly of me, Matt!

Forgive that bit of self-indulgence.

A few quick notes from Day 2 of the Pennsylvania political melodrama:

1) Perhaps it's just me, but doesn't it seem as if the Specter-Dem alliance is an extremely tenuous marriage political convenience? Specter offers the Democrats nothing except a 60th vote, IN NAME ONLY. Just this afternoon, in his first serious vote as a Democrat, Specter said "nay" to the Obama budget. If enough of these voting disappointments for the left begin to pile up, you could see a Ned Lamont-type situation develop here, with Joe Sestak playing the role of Lamont to Specter's Joe Lieberman. As I said previously, despite the wishes of the White House and the DSCC, Specter will not get a free ride next year. If he plays to the center, and Sestak comes at him from the left, Specter's road to the Dem nomination will be anything but easy.

2) Pd mentioned Specter's passion on health care, which isn't in dispute. However, had that been his primary motivation in switching, Specter's efforts in that area would've gone further had he remained in the Republican caucus. Think about it. How many Democrats will seriously have to be persuaded to back even a moderately left-of-center health care reform package? You might need to twist the arm of a southern or western Dem here or there, but in the end, they'd probably vote with Obama. Now, consider the arm twisting that will have to occur for even a few Republican senators (setting aside Collins and Snowe from Maine) to support ANY package that Congress constructs. Assuming Republicans are even permitted to offer proposals/amendments, etc. (which is honestly an open question), what motivation presently exists, from a political standpoint, for the Republican caucus in the Senate to go along with whatever the Democrats devise on health care? This is where Specter could have played a major role, in my opinion. He could have acted as a liaison between the caucuses, hashing out compromises in order for Obama to achieve the huge bipartisan legislative victory on a major issue that he apparently is aiming for. As a Republican, Specter would've been of much more use to him in this area. As a Democrat? Not so much.

3) Someone else mentioned Tom Ridge in an earlier post. I think this situation is currently in flux to the point that hypothesizing about the general in November 2010 is almost useless. However, let's not let that stop us, right?

In my opinion, there are two scenarios in which the Republicans win this. First, Tom Ridge jumps in. That would truly be a game-changer. As much as I personally like Pat Toomey, the GOP's task in this race would become considerably lighter with Ridge headlining the Republican ticket next year. Pennsylvania political observers can rattle off the reasons for Ridge's appeal - i.e., fiscal conservative/social moderate, relatively strong record as governor, personally likeable, compelling biography, etc. Perhaps more importantly, he's run two successful statewide races in a year where the GOP should be recruiting proven vote-geters (Ridge here, Pataki in New York, Castle in Delaware, etc.). Republicans are at 40 seats in the Senate, 178 in the House - they don't have the luxury of ideology at this point. Look at what the Dems did in '06 and '08. They recruited candidates who fit their districts (Casey here, for example), yet they remain a party fairly ideologically in-sync. What is it about winning that Republicans fear?

The second scenario (albeit less likely) sees Specter and Sestak tear each other apart to the point that Toomey's (unscathed on the GOP side) job becomes considerably easier in the fall. Toomey's best chance would be a contentious and nasty Dem primary, and events in general. If Obama and the Dems look vulnerable in the summer/early fall of next year, I think Republicans will have as good a shot here as anywhere across the country, even if Toomey is the GOP nominee. However, their chances would increase exponentially with Ridge as opposed to Toomey.