Posts tagged ‘Arlen Specter’

Specter’s people asked me to share that the Senator will be in the area on Monday in advance of Tuesday’s tightening primary.  Polls have shown the race is a statistical dead head between Arlen Specter and Joe Sestak.

For those interested:

Monday
1:45pm – Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Press Conference
Airport Holiday Inn Express – adjacent to the Scranton Wilkes-Barre International Airport.
1st Floor Conference Room
30 Concorde Dr.
Pittston, PA

With Specter slipping in the polls, it was only a matter of time before the White House noticed. While I still think this race is a toss-up, and I imagine that the White House looks at it similarly, Obama appears to be backing off slightly. He was supposed to have a rally in Philadelphia (kudos to Gort for directing me to this), but instead will be cutting a commercial. A last minute rally in vote-rich Philadelphia would’ve undoubtedly boosted Specter. Philly is heavily Democratic and would be more likley to vote for Sestak, given his more pure Democratness. The commercial, though, is still a boon, as it’ll air in a far greater region than Philadelphia. But, as Gort pointed out and Sestak is ramming home, Bush cut commercials for Specter, too.

According to the latest Muhlenberg tracking poll, Sestak is now ahead of Specter 46 to 42. This surge recently is semi-surprising, given Sestak has been in the race and vocal for a long, long time. His strategy was to save his money and then blitz at the end and it appears to be paying off. His “Specter Hearts Republicans” commercial has gotten a lot of airplay and seems to be resonating with voters. Not only that, the fallout over Specter attacking Sestak’s record continues.

If Sestak’s upward swing keeps on, then he’ll win on May 18th. I’ve been reading the liberal blogosphere’s take on this, and most seem afraid that Specter, who has been a very reliable vote since his switch, will turn unreliable when he doesn’t have to worry about being primaried from the left.

I’ll be keeping an eye on any other polling that comes out. Muhlenberg has been the only one (that I’ve seen) over the past few days putting Sestak ahead. I’m sure Quinnipiac and R2K will be weighing in sometime this week.

Joe Sestak has just released a devastating attack ad against Arlen Specter. No wonder Specter went negative first, he must’ve known something like this was coming.

The ad shows Specter with Sarah Palin and George Bush. Bush talking about how great Specter is probably won’t go over well with many Democrats. I know it made me cringe.

Specter has turned to the left and been a good, reliable vote for the Democrats, but this is going to hurt him. There is no question about that.

Frankly, this surprised me.  A Quinnipiac Poll put Joe Sestak at 39 points and Arlen Specter at 47.  We are now looking at single digits and with Sestak still introducing himself to voters, he may pick up a few more points.  This is making it a race.

But why is this happening?

I hear from A LOT of people that they did not at all like Specter going after Sestak’s military record.  Sestak’s response, that he was being swiftboated, seems to have paid off a little.  Not only that, but Sestak has conserved his money for some time (something I’ve been critical of) and is now up with commercials everywhere you turn around.  This is only going to up his name-recognition and, if people have even an iota of a reason not to like Specter, they’ll at least consider a second choice.

I still think Specter is the favorite here, but if this trend continues into next week, there may be big trouble… and an upset.

The Specter-Sestak Debate last night was pretty contentious, from all accounts.  Specter demanded an apology from Sestak for calling him a liar.  Sestak called out Specter for hitting his military service.

Specter is pretty well set to win this race, I think.  Sestak has run a poor campaign, waiting until the last minute to even really begin running commercials.  The only publicity he’s getting now revolves around a very public, very negative fight between his opponent.  People tend not to respond well to that.

Sestak, predictably, went after the fact that Specter was a Republican in Washington serving a Republican agenda for years.  This is a legitimate concern and Specter, in the past year, has moved very far to the left.  I hope this continues if/when he gets re-elected.

As for substantive policy differences, honestly, the biggest one comes down to military issues, particularly the surge in Afghanistan.  Specter was against, Sestak for.  I fall into Specter’s column on this one.  Bring our men and women home, stop spending money on war, and start spending money creating jobs here.

A lot of people criticize Democrat Arlen Specter for all his years as Republican Arlen Specter. I got a copy of some remarks he’ll be delivering today on the anniversary of his switch. Enjoy:

As today completes one year since my return to the Democratic Party, I have a few observations on what we should do as Senators, not as Democrats or Republicans, to tend to the Nation’s business in these difficult days.

Partisanship ran high in 2005, with Republican threats to invoke the nuclear or constitutional option, which would, in effect, change the rule to allow 51 votes to cut off filibusters. The so-called “Gang of 14,” a group of centrists from both parties, structured a compromise which confirmed some judicial nominees, rejected others, and established a standard that filibusters should not be employed except for “extraordinary circumstances.” That spirit of compromise should be revisited today.

In the face of a threatened great Depression in February 2009, I refused to join the Republican obstructionism and played a key role in the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. I am fully aware that my vote put my job on the line.

Achieving civility and cooperation for the common good in 2010, as occurred in 2005 with respect to judicial nominations, will require independence and risk-taking by Senators. Senators must be willing to cross the aisle and work with their colleagues even at the peril of the disfavor of their political party. The problems of the country are too severe, too many Americans are out of work, too many Americans are fighting and dying in foreign lands, for members of this body to be unwilling to risk their seats for the public good. The stakes for America require we all do our level best and permit the public to judge us accordingly.

At the moment, there is a pressing need for Republicans to join with us in reforming Wall Street to prevent the kind of financial crisis that cost this country 8 million jobs. Both sides agree that legislation is necessary. On a motion to proceed to the bill, there is no realistic contention that “extraordinary circumstances” justify a filibuster. Once the bill is being debated, there will be opportunity for amendments. Forty-one Republican senators will have the opportunity to filibuster whatever proposed legislation evolves before final passage occurs. “Extraordinary circumstances” now call for Republicans to join Democrats in passing legislation to prevent another economic crisis.

Harrisburg — The state’s two largest newspapers endorsed Sen. Arlen Specter for re-election today.

In their endorsement editorial today The Post-Gazette called Specter the stronger Democratic candidate in the fall and praised him for “his knowledge of the state’s needs, his ability to command respect on Capitol Hill” and said “his voice for the brand of civil discourse that is too rare in America today have few rivals.”

In endorsing Specter The Inquirer said “when you look at the sum of his career and what it has meant to Pennsylvania, you have to conclude he’s a good choice for Democrats.”

The Inquirer called Specter “a highly influential lawmaker and appropriator on behalf of Pennsylvanians. He is also one of those rare congressmen who contribute both on the national and international stages. His expertise on the Middle East, federal law enforcement, the judiciary, and health-care research has provided presidents of both parties with valuable counsel.”

The Inquirer concluded: “But Specter is a senator for the ages. He is still a vital player and a worthy choice for Democrats.”

And the Post-Gazette summed up the Democratic Primary this way: “While Joe Sestak tries to portray himself as the genuine article, Arlen Specter is the real deal — with a demonstrated record of service for Pennsylvania. He’d be the stronger candidate for Democrats in the fall, and he has the Post-Gazette endorsement.”

Controversy has recently arisen over an ad Senator Arlen Specter has released criticizing his opponent, Joe Sestak, and hitting him on his military record.  Sestak has responded by calling this “Swift-Boating” and is working hard to brand the issue.  He scored a point today involving the coming Biden visit to the Scranton-area.

Biden, in the past, said that no swift-boating would be directed his way because, basically, he would punch the perpetrator in the face.  Have I mentioned I love Biden’s rhetoric?  Sestak loves it, too, because, in his response to Specter’s ads and Biden’s visit, he said that Biden should punch Specter in the face.

Hilarity!

Native son, Vice President Joe Biden, will be at the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton Not Quite International Airport on Friday at 2:00 PM. He’s coming to support Arlen Specter’s re-election.

Tickets are available at the Specter office in downtown Scranton on 520 Spruce Street. You can get them from 5-8 pm today or 10-5 pm tomorrow.

A word of caution, followed by a word of advice: Secret Service agents have the right to refuse you entry and probably probe you in uncomfortable ways. Show up early!

Somebody snap a photo or two for me! I can’t make it, which is very depressing.

My favorite politician in this country will be heading to Scranton to stump for Arlen Specter. Who’s my favorite politician you ask? Why, Joe Biden.
It’ll be wonderful to welcome him back to the area and I’m hoping I can get up there to see him.

Speaking of Specter, Rick Santorum has said something about Specter exchanging votes for support. First off, if this happened, it’s just how things work. But secondly, this is Rick Santorum, a snake in human form.

This controversy isn’t a controversy and it’s sad to see how left-wing bloggers (I consider myself one, but disagree with my compatriots in this instance) jump on Specter for every little thing. While I have some legitimate policy disagreements, misspeaking at a Young Democrats meeting (and saying the word “Republican” accidentally) isn’t a big deal. Talk about “card check” or something that matters, not Santorum, who thinks gay people aren’t far off from those who enjoy bestiality.
So, Arlen Specter will have a nice bump from native son Joe Biden. I hope to be there, possibly with bells on to catch his attention. I met him once before, at the Mellow Picnic a few years back. He’s a smooth operator and one of the most personable and friendly politicians I’ve ever met.

Yes, I’m unhealthily enamored. Deal with it.

Arlen Specter got a huge endorsement yesterday: the AFL-CIO is getting behind him. Sometimes I miss some news and Jake Digel, Specter’s guy in the region (who I saw at the NEPA Blogger Extravaganza and deserves a shout-out), clued me in on this.

The AFL-CIO is a huge and influential union, and for union guys like me, this lends a lot of credibility to Specter, particularly since one of the issues I have with him – card check – is an issue dear to the AFL-CIO’s heart. If they can get behind Specter despite this, it’s a big boost!

Yesterday, I had the pleasure to sit down with Senator Arlen Specter and ask him a few questions.

Okay, I wrote that line nonchalantly, but in reality, and I know this is going to come as a surprise, when I finally sat down, I was both nervous and intimidated.  I’m just a blogger, after all!  Stop judging me!

So, normally I’m pretty relaxed, no matter my situation.  I roll through life, take things as they come.  Sure, I get fired up, but rarely nervous.  I thought I had time for just one question, so I rehearsed it a few times in my mind – I wanted to get it right – but when I had my chance to sit next to Specter, I learned I could ask a few questions, and, additionally, it hit me: I am not press.  I’m not with a newspaper, or a news station, or even a radio station.  I’m a guy who had a website to write about politics, and now, boom, I’m with a Senator.

Needless to say, I fumbled my first question – talked too fast, spoke too generally, and all of that.  But I asked.  Then recovered, got some great answers and insights, and had a great experience.

Here’s my report:

One of my concerns, which I’m sure I’ll expound upon in coming posts, is about Obama’s education plan, as it relates to the reauthorization of No Child Left Behind.  Obama never went to public school, and his plan disproportionately blames teachers.  It ignores socio-economic factors, cultural issues, and the role of parents.  It plays up how great charter schools are, but ignores that they can choose which students attend, whereas public schools cannot pick and choose.  With the ridiculous emphasis on standardize testing, and the fact that special ed students are tested and factored in the same way regular ed students are, public schools look like disaster areas when they often are either a) not or be b) are disasters, but for far more complicated reasons than “teachers”.

By now you can see why I fumbled my first question.  Not very succinct of me!

I basically asked two questions: How do you feel about Obama’s education proposal, and how do you feel about the undue blame placed on teachers, as evidenced by the Rhode Island incident?

In Rhode Island, EVERY SINGLE TEACHER in one school was fired – seriously, what the hell?  Obviously, teachers, myself included, are very concerned – besides, we’ve been totally left out of the equation – we want to be part of the solution, we are the front line after all.

Specter said that he finds the modification of NCLB to be essential.  This is something every teacher agrees with, as NCLB is a disaster.  Some of Obama’s modifications are good, sure, but many are ignorant of the facts on the ground.

Specter believes that we need measured progress, not necessarily uniform standardized testing.  The difference is that we can measure how much a special education student has progressed in school instead of testing them the same way as a regular education student.  Doing so is inherently discriminatory, because uniform testing sets up students with disabilities for failure.  Their needs are different, and measuring progress, as Specter suggests, is far fairer.

Specter went on to say that he disagrees with the firing of the RI teachers.  I nearly leapt for joy, as, aside from selfish job security, it’s important to recognize that student achievement is a HUGELY complex issue that has been totally ignored by Obama.

Next up, I asked about Health Care, since it’s the topic of the day.  Most of his thoughts are out there, so I instead asked what he would rather have seen in the bill, as the bill isn’t perfect.  His first response: “a public option.”  Again, an exciting answer.  It’s nice to know there are people representing us who actually want to offer people something that will help people for the sake of helping them.  Insurance companies, ever driven by the pursuit of profit, could care less about helping people.  That’s why a public option is essential.

Specter also pointed out how unfortunate the constant misinformation ended up being, such as “death panels” which, of course, don’t actually exist.

Finally, he said more money needed to be spent on prevention, after all, what better way to save money than to stop a problem before it starts.  He also said he wished the NIH (National Institutes of Health) had gotten more funding in the bill.

For my last question, I asked about something region-specific.  I went with the rail connection to New York.  I said that it seems to locals that there has been no progress.  He corrected me to say that there has been money allocated.  However, my use of “no progress” was intentional, as it’s been more than a decade and we have no service.  Maybe “tangible progress” would’ve been a better phrase.  Still, he said it’s one of his priorities to get rail funding, and we’ve already made many advances on environmental issues related to its construction.

All in all, I was impressed with Senator Specter’s responses.  Very impressed. Some progressives who don’t like him have taken the low road and raised questions about his age.  Let me say this: the man is spot on and very sharp.  Not only that, he looks great and gets around very well.  Hopefully that puts some concerns to bed.  It probably won’t.

My thanks to the Senator for his time, and his thoughtful responses.  It was very eye-opening for me.

Steve Corbett has recently been railing against Senator Arlen Specter and his campaign for free parking at the Airport during a Specter fundraiser.

So, I figured I would ask his campaign.  Here’s what I found:  Actually, the Specter campaign paid Wings (the restaurant at the airport) a fee per person, which included vouchers for each of their guests, much like if you park somewhere and get a ticket validated.  Guests were given a voucher from the campaign that allowed for free parking.

So, it wasn’t a scam.  The airport wasn’t giving Specter special treatment.  The campaign paid, and only attendees got free parking.  I have no reason to believe airport officials, Wings workers, or the Specter campaign lied, and all of this information is easily accessible.

Case closed.

Candidates for Senate Joe Sestak and Pat Toomey will be debating on April 11th at La Salle University. Incumbent Senator Arlen Specter won’t be showing.

Specter hasn’t agreed to this debate simply because it gives more attention to Sestak, who still has low name recognition. If people see Sestak in action, it could boost his support. Now, if this event does get press, and both men (Sestak and Toomey) use the opportunity to prop themselves up and bash Specter, then it might make Specter look bad anyway. Whatever comes out of this, it should be good. Toomey is to the right of Rick “gay people are no different than those who have sex with animals” Santorum.

Don’t worry though, Sestak and Specter will debate once, on May 1st.

Between Research 2000 and Quinnipiac, Specter is doing pretty decently in the polls.  The R2K poll, released yesterday, shows Specter up 6 points against Toomey and Quinnipiac poll showed a 7 point lead last week.

Regardless of polls, this state isn’t going to put in a Republican.  The registration advantage for Dems is too high and Toomey is too crazy.  Not to mention that PA voters recognize that Republicans are the reason that governing in this country has ground to a halt.  They obstruct everything.  A vote for Toomey is a vote for obstruction.  The evidence for this is that Toomey only leads Sestak by 3 points.  Sestak remains relatively unknown and, despite this, remains in striking distance if he wins the primary.

On the Governor’s side of things, Corbett is ahead of Onorato by only 6 points.  This is great news, since Onorato has low name recognition and after the primary, everybody will solidify behind the Democratic winner, which will inevitably provide a bounce.  Corbett’s race isn’t all that competitive, so he won’t be seeing much of a boost.  And if the Veon trials ends up with an acquittal, Corbett will look pretty bad, as that’ll be two corruption cases that he prosecuted wrongly.

Arlen Specter is looking better against crazy Republican Pat Toomey in a recently released Quinnipiac poll. Specter leads Toomey 49-42. Part of it may be that Specter has moved to the left, more in line with the values and beliefs of Pennsylvania. Part of it may be that Democrats are starting to point out that Republicans are the ones holding up any reform in Washington (they should beat the death out of this narrative, by the way).

Specter has been campaigning hard, and if it weren’t for Sestak’s primary challenge, he wouldn’t be in the news nearly as often. Being in the news is the best way to fight Toomey at this point, as Toomey has no primary challenger.

The poll for the Senate race between Specter and Sestak reveals nothing really new. Sestak still has little name recognition, and Specter is still polling higher. Both lose to Toomey in the likely voter category. But there is time to gain ground, so I wouldn’t worry too much about that just yet.

The interesting one, though, is the Governor’s race. Dan Onorato, Jack Wagner, and Joe Hoeffel are all tied at 6%. That means Onorato’s big money advantage and Wagner’s institutional advantage haven’t really translated into increased support. Anthony Williams, the less-than-ideal Philly candidate, came in at 1%. Good.

Hoeffel is a progressive and a liberal and very unapologetic about it. See, I think voters like people who simply state what they think and fight for what they believe without any caveats. For example, Democrats and the President are seeing their poll numbers sink. I think it’s because they aren’t doing a damn thing because they are too afraid to flex muscle and push something through that’ll offend Republicans. Newsflash: When Democrats breathe, it offends Republicans. What Dems should do is just get some work done. That’s why their numbers tank, because they aren’t being true to themselves. They’re too afraid to.
That’s why I think Hoeffel has a good shot against Corbett, if Hoeffel is the nominee.

Senator Arlen Specter, while having moved to the left on many issues, is still holding onto his Republican roots on issues like the Flat Tax (ick), Miranda Rights (sometimes he’s not a fan), EFCA (no card check), and not debating Sestak (fine, it’s not a conservative thing, but still).

Today, I had a chance to be on call with him.  My plan is to ask him to explain why he thinks a progressive tax (our current system) is bad. While I don’t think his flat tax proposal will ever succeed, I find it disturbing and even dangerous that a Senator, especially a Democratic one, supports a policy that so heavily favors the right and so heavily punishes the poor and middle class.  The tax would be on earned income.  Some rich people, especially those who are trust fund babies and exclusively make money by playing the stock market, wouldn’t pay a dime in taxes at all.  This is not healthy for America.

Talking Points Memo, FireDogLake, PoliticsPa.com and Pa2010.com were represented, among others.

Forgive the choppiness.  Just so everybody knows, most of what Specter said, I transcribed.  Some might be slight paraphrase and I’ve omitted what I couldn’t get (the call dropped a few times).  Despite this, it should be relatively close to his exact wording.

Questions are in bold. Answers are in Italics. My thoughts are in normal.

Here’s the report:

Specter began by saying he believes we have a good chance to get a health care bill.  He signed onto the reconciliation letter to Majority Leader Harry Reid.  Reconciliation has been used often, he said, like with SCHIP, Medicare Advantage, COBRA, and Welfare Reform.  Thursday’s forum that Obama is holding will likely be a factor in the process.

The cloture vote on the jobs bill was very significant and he’s happy to see the new Massachusetts Senator, Scott Brown, buck his party and vote for cloture, which is a sign that he’ll be responding to his constituents.

From me:  Many in the progressive community, including myself, have been critical of your flat tax proposal. Rather than explaining why the flat tax is good, would you mind explaining why you think exactly the progressive tax and taxes on capital gains are bad?

The flat tax has appeal because it would vastly simplify the cost of filing returns.  Est. are 250 billion to 3 times that.  Tax simplification has not gone anywhere.  Flat tax can be utilized so that people in lower brackets don’t pay taxes.  If there’s no tax simplification, then you do have to have a progressive income tax.  There are some very significant areas where capital gains are recorded to Wall Street transactions which really are not in aligned with the concept of a capital asset.

This answer was frustrating, because it did exactly what I tried to head off.  I didn’t want to hear why a flat tax was good, I wanted to hear why he thought a progressive tax is bad.  But he did just say that if taxes aren’t simple, there has to be a progressive tax.  Rich people use complex financial transactions to pillage the poor, so, hey, a complex system of taxing them sounds about right.  Also, I hate to say this, but I didn’t understand his final sentence.

Question (not sure who from): What’s your reaction to the Toomey-Sestak debate?  Any concern that he’s giving Toomey undue publicity?

The tradition is to have only one debate and that’s a tradition worth following and we have a debate scheduled that will be televised in every market in the state.  Tradition and institutional practice are safe ground.  I can’t control that (Toomey publicity).  The business of building a professional reputation in politics and government and tough to do.  I think it’ll be a boost in my opponent’s exposure.  That’s why I’m prepared to have a debate, but to maintain the tradition.  He went on to say bloggers are an intellectual group and he’s always up for questions.

Specter is definitely open to questions from us bloggers.  He is, however, ducking the debate not out of tradition, but out of calculated politics.  A debate on Meet the Press, which he turned down, would’ve given Sestak a very broad audience.  Sestak’s name recognition is still low.

PoliticsPa.com:  You were hesitant on reconciliation with health care at first.  Why change your mind?

I did so after researching precedent and saw that it was used very broadly.  I always said it would be a last, last resort.  Well, it’s been a year, and it’s at that point.  Millions aren’t covered.  People who have insurance are paying too much.  It’s time to move ahead and govern.  The public reaction to Washington is understandably abysmal.

Specter has been in Washington for decades.  He shouldn’t need to research whether or not reconciliation has been used.  He should simply know.  But this isn’t a big deal, at least he’s on board.

TPM:  You signed onto the Public Option letter to Sen. Reid.   Press Secretary Gibbs said the votes aren’t there in the House for it.  How hard is the [Congressional] leadership and the White House working for the public option?

It should be done but it’s a long shot.  The town meetings in August, including the notorious one in Lebanon he had, convinced people it’s a government takeover, even though it’s not.  But it’s still in play and should be pushed for.

This doesn’t address the question, so I’m left wondering what his sense of the White House and Senate leadership’s feelings are.

Firedoglake:  Polling shows Public Option is popular around the country.  Are you expressing what colleagues are saying?

The view is that it’s a government takeover.  I’m aware of the polls you described, but I don’t know that they’re accurate.  In the Democratic caucus, the majority favor public option, but quite a few dissented.  It’s over the concern over the inclusiveness of government.  The idea of intrusiveness isn’t discussed by the Democratic Caucus, but people feel that way.

I’m glad the caucus doesn’t discuss intrusiveness.  It means they understand that it isn’t really intrusive.  In fact, it’s far less intrusive than Medicare.  And also, who cares if it’s intrusive?  Why would people rather private industry either be intrusive or drive them into poverty?  I’m also not sure why Specter would call the polls illegitimate.  Maybe he’s so isolated in Congress he doesn’t believe scientifically conducted polls in the face of loud, angry, and ignorant Teabagging Republicans.  That’s probably true of many Democrats in Congress, which is probably why they’re more interested in acting like scared pansies instead of passing meaningful legislation.  To Specter’s credit, he is not a pansy, as he signed the reconciliation letter.  Actually, since he believes that the public is against the public option, even though they aren’t, he could be viewed as brave, since he’s going against what he thinks the public feels.

American Prospect:  Where do you stand on the Consumer Financial Protection Agency?  How can we get it passed?

It’s very important and it’s a matter of getting to it, but we sat around all day doing nothing because of Republican obstruction.  Wall Street makes recommendations to investors, then sells short which isn’t good.

He also said he supports the Volker Rule.  That’s a tad too complex to get in now.  Suffice it to say it’s a good thing, as is the CFPA.  Consumers need more protection from corporate greed.

PoliticsPA:  What do you think the public reaction to reconciliation will be?

A good bit of the public won’t understand the technicalities and nuances.  We wouldn’t want to get it done through intimidation, extortion, or bribery, but people do want results.  Clear cut answers aren’t easy.

PoliticsPA: What do you feel about eliminating the filibuster?

I’m not ready to do that just yet.

PoliticsPA:  What about the proposal to change the number of votes for cloture?

That wouldn’t work.  I don’t think it would safeguard the traditional role of the filibuster.  Somehow we were able to get through, it was tough in 2005, but we’ll get through it again if we’re pragmatic and principled.

Specter closed by saying he wants the gridlock in Congress to end.  The President and presidency are weakened and it’s having a large impact.  People are really questioning the capability of our form of government.  In talking to people outside of the country.

All in all, the call was very informative, even if I didn’t get my question answered the way I would’ve liked.  It’s nice that he took the time to confront a group of people who tend to be hostile to him (it seemed, during both calls I was on, like the FireDogLake people didn’t love him all that much).

Thanks to Senator Specter for taking the time!

Fresh off of Arlen Specter’s refusal to debate Joe Sestak comes the news that Sestak and Republican Pat Toomey will debate each other!

This will raise both candidate’s profiles and so is mutually beneficial to both. Specter should minimize the damage and accept Meet the Press’s offer to host a debate between him and Sestak, but the likelihood of that is little.

This quote from Toomey, courtesy of PA2010.com, sums up the unlikely Sestak-Toomey PR alliance:

“I can certainly understand your frustration with Senator Arlen Specter’s refusal to engage in debates with you,” Toomey wrote. “Like many politicians who have spent decades in Washington, Sen. Specter maintains a sense of entitlement to his office and he is unwilling to put his record and ideas to the test of open and honest debate. Pennsylvanians deserve better than that from their U.S. Senator.”