Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Ridge Out, Democratic Prospects Brighten



Former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge will not run for the Senate. AP Photo/Luis M. Alvarez

Former Gov. Tom Ridge has removed himself from consideration as a challenger to Sen. Arlen Specter (D) next fall, a decision that significantly brightens Democratic prospects of holding the seat.

In a statement released around 1 p.m. eastern time today Ridge said that "after careful consideration and many conversations with friends and family and the leadership of my party, I have decided not to seek the Republican nomination for Senate."

As recently as last night, Ridge advisers said privately that they expected him to get into the race, believing that he wanted to run and was looking for a way to make it happen.

Polling also suggested Ridge would be an even-money (or better) bet to beat Specter next fall, and national Republicans had put on the full court press to recruit him -- even having his old friend John McCain (Ariz.) place a call to Ridge urging him to run.

The Ridge decision is a blow to national Republicans who had seen their recruiting prospects brighten in recent weeks. If Gov. Charlie Crist (Fla.), Rep. Mark Kirk (Ill.) and Rep. Mike Castle (Del.) ultimately all get into their respective Senate races, Republicans will still have one of their strongest recruiting classes in recent memory. But, getting Ridge -- a national star if he had run -- would have been a huge momentum boost for a dispirited party.

Without Ridge in the race, Republicans are almost certain to wind up with former Rep. Pat Toomey (R) as their nominee -- a candidate who National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn (Texas) has previously insisted can't be elected in Pennsylvania.

The problem for Republican strategists is that Toomey is a popular figure among the conservative activists who now dominate the GOP base in the state and without a "star" candidate like Ridge as an alternative, it's hard to imagine Toomey losing a primary to the likes of Rep. Jim Gerlach (R).

While Specter, who has had among the worst weeks in recent political memory, is right to breathe a sigh of relief that Ridge is out of the race, the news isn't all good for him.

With Toomey as the odds-on GOP nominee, any Democratic candidate would likely start a general election as the favorite. Given that, Rep. Joe Sestak may well be more likely to challenge Specter in the Democratic primary -- believing that if he can topple the party switcher he has strong odds of being the next Senator from Pennsylvania.

Sestak's candidacy relies largely on where labor decides to go in the primary. If the Employee Free Choice Act, which Specter opposes, is rewritten and the newest Democrat votes for it, labor may well get behind the White House and back Specter.

If labor decides to go off the reservation and support a Sestak primary challenge, then Pennsylvania could well be among the best primary races in the country.

The Ridge decision robs Republicans of a marquee name and by far their best chance of knocking off Specter in November 2008. But, Specter still faces significant peril within his own, new party that could imperil his chances of returning to the Senate in 2011.

By Chris Cillizza  |  May 7, 2009; 1:45 PM ET
Categories:  Senate  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: McConnell's Stealth Gitmo Campaign
Next: Ridge: "We Have To Be Less Judgmental"

Comments

Go Joe!!! Sestak that is.

Let's be real. Specter will be into his eighties by primary time. He has had two major bouts with CA. There is a real possiblity that he might not finish his 6 year term and a future Republican governor could appoint a Republican senator to replace him. PA Democrats need to consider this when they vote in the primary.

Specter needs to go to home to PA and write his memoirs.

Posted by: mcafla | May 9, 2009 6:53 AM | Report abuse

How'bout that. A logical, well reasoned piece. People forget, the GOP is supposed to be a conservative oriented party as opposed to the Dems, a liberal oriented party. To get a party nomination the candidates usually have to win a primary composed of party activists. I'd say Ridge found his biggest fight would be in the primary and decided to pass. Maybe he'll go after Specter in 2016.

Posted by: lorddunsmore | May 8, 2009 1:56 PM | Report abuse

http://www.cnn.com Quick Vote

Is Dick Cheney right that it would be a mistake for the GOP to "moderate"?

Yes 33% 38421
(I, for one, will not vote for a pro-choice Republican)

No 67% 77542
(How many of those are Democrats afraid of losing power?)

Total Votes: 115963

Posted by: JakeD | May 8, 2009 11:24 AM | Report abuse

Kman3:

I am not going anywhere until the Good Lord takes me home -- politicians CAN pass the Human Life Amendment and U.S. Senators, in particular, vote for confirmation of federal judiciary nominees -- but, you knew that already, right?

Posted by: JakeD | May 8, 2009 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Lynn Swann would be a more viable candidate for Senator than he was for governor. Why isn't his name being brought up? He would undoubtedly cut into the black vote of the Democratic nominee and now has the experience of running statewide.

Whatever you think of his political stances, everyone has to admit he would be a viable candidate. Amazing how the so-called political experts can totally forget the most recent high profile and respected Republican candidate for governor.

Posted by: CaptainQ | May 8, 2009 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Nate Silver looked at a Sestak primary. Amazingly, Sestak is more conservative than Specter. I want Rep. Murphy PA-08 to run. He's a real base guy.

Posted by: Kman23 | May 8, 2009 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Go away JakeD. No one likes you! Politicians cannot overturn abortion, its a court issue. And Roe v. Wade is not the current law of the land. Casey v. Planned Parenthood overrode it. If your so obsessed on abortion you should at lease know that!

Posted by: Kman23 | May 8, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

The Republicans actually had a chance to pickup this seat with Ridge. That chance just went down the toilet. I just hope the base cuts down all the RINOs listed in the blog.

Posted by: bradcpa | May 8, 2009 8:15 AM | Report abuse

Nosy_Parker:

Which is why Specter will need to make that final decision BEFORE the Dem primary. He won't be able to pull a Lieberman.

Posted by: JakeD | May 8, 2009 1:15 AM | Report abuse

If you don't know anything else about jaked, just remember that's he endorsing Cheney's ideas about how to grow the Republican Party.

I'd like to think he's a clever Democratic operative, but I'm afraid he's just a nimrod.

Posted by: nodebris | May 8, 2009 12:10 AM | Report abuse

what stops Specter from going to Independent?

Pennsylvania has signature requirements to get on the ballot that are so onerous that most would-be independent candidates could never meet them. The Commonwealth also has a "sore loser" law to prevent a candidate who loses in a party primary from doing a Lieberman (i.e., switching to Independent status).

Posted by: Nosy_Parker | May 8, 2009 12:04 AM | Report abuse

JakeD,
Why don't you ask your leaders, The Dick Cheney and Boss Limbaugh, about that?

Posted by: DrainYou | May 8, 2009 12:02 AM | Report abuse

We already know that Specter is a bald-faced opportunist. If the Dem primary opponent polls as high as Toomey did, what stops Specter from going to Independent?

Posted by: JakeD | May 7, 2009 11:29 PM | Report abuse

Joe Sestak needs to run....period. Did you see him this evening on Rachel Maddow? He is the perfect guy for PA, strong on defense, socially moderate/liberal, honest to the point of being blunt. He has such a broad appeal and (with backing of the "establishment" in Washington) could beat Toomey 65/35.

Posted by: robbygtx | May 7, 2009 9:29 PM | Report abuse

(I am more interested in what actual Republicans says about what direction their party should go in)

Former Vice President Dick Cheney is weighing into the heated internal debate over the future of the Republican Party, declaring it would be a mistake for the GOP to "moderate."

"This is about fundamental beliefs and values and ideas … what the role of government should be in our society, and our commitment to the Constitution and constitutional principles," Cheney said in an interview with North Dakota radio host Scott Hennen Thursday, according to a transcript.

"You know, when you add all those things up, the idea that we ought to moderate basically means we ought to fundamentally change our philosophy," Cheney also said. "I for one am not prepared to do that, and I think most of us aren’t. Most Republicans have a pretty good idea of values, and aren’t eager to have someone come along and say, 'Well, the only way you can win is if you start to act more like a Democrat.'"

Posted by: JakeD | May 7, 2009 9:05 PM | Report abuse

Ridge is a guy who served in Viet Nam. He has no place in this GOP, they'll savage him for not following Limbaugh's playbook.

Trig Palin '48

Posted by: chrisfox8 | May 7, 2009 8:46 PM | Report abuse

Move over, gay pride parades, the GOP is the new champion of self-marginalization.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | May 7, 2009 8:43 PM | Report abuse

Chris, I can't quite buy Tom Ridge as "a star." He was a good governor, a quiet leader of DHS. But, as I said earlier this week, Ridge did not like working in Washington as a cabinet member -- and being a senator is like that X 10. It isn't nearly as nice as being a governor: all that fund raising, all that glad handing, all that compromising. Much nicer to kick back, enjoy your life in PA and make easy money as "Of Counsel."

And WHY would a nice guy like Ridge want to spend 6 years under the nasty thumb of the National GOP? If he got elected they would immediately be dissatisfied with him. They'd all be scowling at him every time he made a that wasn't cleared by Limbaugh or the Club for Growth. Today he was speaking truth to power, and they won't listen.

Look at it: yesterday he was the savior of the party, the guy who was going to take Specter out, hooray! And this afternoon he has people like JakeD p*ssing on him. Ick.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | May 7, 2009 8:09 PM | Report abuse

Look's like Sarah Palin's numbers just went down the toilet :(

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0509/Palin_falls_to_earth.html

From an 86% approval rating last year, to 54% today. No wonder the Neocons love her so much, she's just like George W Bush (i.e., she can blow a wad of public goodwill with the best of em).

Yee Ha!!

Sarah Palin/Tonya Harding 2012

The American Taliban's great white hope for getting revenge.

Posted by: htruman | May 7, 2009 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Good. Otherwise we'd get color charts in the Senate indicating the heat-of-debate level. Ridge is good at color charts, that we know. Other than that, he's just a common republican, i.e. a Chamber-of-Commerce shill and a wingnut: an idiot.

Posted by: RichardKefalos | May 7, 2009 5:52 PM | Report abuse

LOOK I WISH WE COULD GET RID OF

BURRIS AND SPECTOR

PUT THESE TWO OLD COWS OUT THERE MISERY

THERE'S NOTHIN MORE EMBARASSING THAN...

TWO OLD FOOLS WORRYING ABOUT LEGACY


Posted by: danson1 | May 7, 2009 3:37 PM | Report abuse

-----------------------------------------

I second the legacy proposal, but while we're at it can we also inact a muzzle on Cheney and Rove since they're in the same boat?

I want my Fux Noose!

Posted by: htruman | May 7, 2009 5:49 PM | Report abuse

Democrats better start up a preemptive hate campaign against Ridge, just in case.

Posted by: greg3 | May 7, 2009 5:28 PM | Report abuse

There will be a lot of back and force on this race.. but, in the end, Arlen will most likely prevail.. he has a well organized machine behind him and the switch was a convenience measure.. when the money gets spent.. the voters will acquiesce (this is just my uneducated and uniformed opinion, so don't parse it)..

Posted by: newbeeboy | May 7, 2009 5:26 PM | Report abuse

gbooksdc:

FWIW, I never resort to ad hominem personal attacks, against anyone here at least ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 7, 2009 5:20 PM | Report abuse

gbooksdc:

My man! Rocky Wirtz loosened the purse strings and now the 'Hawks have a great young nucleus and a playoff tested goalie. It has been a long time since their last run.

Went to high school with one of Stan Mikita's sons.

Posted by: mnteng | May 7, 2009 5:15 PM | Report abuse

One other thing: Bill Wirtz dies, Hawks in 2d round of playoffs. Coincidence? I think not.

Posted by: gbooksdc | May 7, 2009 5:06 PM | Report abuse

gbooksdc writes:
"Ah well, I also yearn for the days of The Original Six."

Dude, the NHL expanded in 1967. If you remember those days ... well, you're significantly older than 42.

Go 'Hawks.


Posted by: mnteng | May 7, 2009 4:45 PM | Report abuse
_____________________________________

Yes. Yes, I am. Not only do I remember TOS, I remember when hockey players had faces and goalies played without masks and Gary Bettman was not the commissioner.

Good times.

Posted by: gbooksdc | May 7, 2009 5:03 PM | Report abuse

"off the reservation"???? I was not aware that either organized or disorganized labor was supposed to follow situational Democrats who vote against their interests in the same lemming way that Republicans in misleadership positions and lower down are obligated to follow Bah Humbug.

Posted by: ProbablyNot | May 7, 2009 5:01 PM | Report abuse

gbooksdc writes:
"Ah well, I also yearn for the days of The Original Six."

Dude, the NHL expanded in 1967. If you remember those days ... well, you're significantly older than 42.

Go 'Hawks.

Posted by: mnteng | May 7, 2009 4:45 PM | Report abuse

"... I'm sorry but it seems pretty obvious that if the GOP was serious about overturning Roe vs Wade, it would have been done then. But they bring out that old chestnut just to keep the base riled up. The fact is it is settled law ..."

Posted by: katem1 | May 7, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse
______________________________________

Is ANYTHING settled law nowadays? Because that implies an intellectual structure to decision-making I'm not seeing. What I am seeing is partisan muscleflexing with some post hoc rationlization to justify doing basically whatever you wanted to do, whether it was consistent with precedent or not. You get nine Scalias, Roe v Wade goes, and there'll be an elegant rationale for it. Judgment first, opinion later.

Posted by: gbooksdc | May 7, 2009 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who wants to debate abortion and/or disable rights, I will be over here: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/cheat-sheet/050709white-house-cheat-sheet.html

Posted by: JakeD | May 7, 2009 1:59 PM | Report abuse
_______________________________________

JakeD, no offense, but what's the point? Is anyone going to change their mind, no matter how compelling the case presented? I yearn for the days of Firing Line, or The Advocates, when reasoned debate prevailed. Now, it's just ad hominem and innuendo and scoreboard, baby. Your side is possessed of the light and the other side is pure evil, and irredeemable, besides. (For that matter, I yearn for the time when our political opponents were still our fellow citizens, not "the other side".) Nwadays, it's considered a weakness to admit you're in the wrong, even when any reasonable person can see the facts don't support. Instead, we filibuster, cling to technicalities, and act as if intelligent people will miss the fact that we were, on this one, in th wrong. (A little thread about Obama's inauguration comes chief to mind.) Ah well, I also yearn for the days of The Original Six.

Ad for Lidge, he represents the GOP's dilemma: moderates who can win a general election can't attract enough support in the primaries to get a nomination. Gerlach's a good guy, I hope he runs for governor when Rendell steps down.

Posted by: gbooksdc | May 7, 2009 4:21 PM | Report abuse

C'mon, preppy, do it for Erie.

Posted by: ccs4756 | May 7, 2009 4:08 PM | Report abuse

WHERE'S THE "NOR WILL I ACCEPT"?


Not to be too much of a skeptic, but "I have decided not to seek" is not the same as saying "I will not run if drafted."

Ridge would lose big to Sestak.

He would lose by a narrower margin to Specter.

So if he has really decided not to run under any circumstances, that tells me he thinks Sestak will get the nomination.

But I really don't think today's statement from Ridge rules out a Senate run if the party engineers a "Draft Ridge" campaign.


***


EXTRAJUDICIAL PUNISHMENT NETWORK.


Google it.

You, a close relative -- or the Obama administration -- could become its victim.


http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america

http://nowpublic.com/world/bush-torture-memos-oked-radiation-weapon-use-americans-too

OR (if links are corrupted / disabled):

http://NowPublic.com/scrivener


Posted by: scrivener50 | May 7, 2009 4:05 PM | Report abuse

TYPO: "The Ridge decision robs Republicans of a marquee name and by far their best chance of knocking off Specter in November 2008."

Post-election trauma continues.

Posted by: sfcpoll | May 7, 2009 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Breaking!

Republican sees poll, decides to play golf instead!

Republicans have: No answers.

Their budget had: No numbers.

They were going to listen to the people, until Rush told them not to.

They rebranded their party but then they didn't.

They were going to have a Black man as the leader of their party, but then they cut his budget.

You know when an opportunist attention prostitute like "Joe the fake Plumber" gives up on them within a few months of being recruited - it's all over except for taking out the trash and picking up the left over beer cans behind the couch.

Posted by: DrainYou | May 7, 2009 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Well, I don't think a reactionary can win in PA they are moderate and the purging of the Republicans of all moderates and liberals have pretty much destroyed any chances of them gaining any groud in a purple moderate state (the swing states). So I would say if the Republicans continue to go further right wing until they are as far as you can go they will become a regional party in a few years.

Right now many swing voters are thinking it is okay if they leave the scene for good.

Posted by: antonio3 | May 7, 2009 3:41 PM | Report abuse

LOOK I WISH WE COULD GET RID OF

BURRIS AND SPECTOR

PUT THESE TWO OLD COWS OUT THERE MISERY

THERE'S NOTHIN MORE EMBARASSING THAN...

TWO OLD FOOLS WORRYING ABOUT LEGACY

Posted by: danson1 | May 7, 2009 3:37 PM | Report abuse

LOOK I WISH WE COULD GET RID OF

BURRIS AND SPECTOR

PUT THESE TWO OLD COWS OUT THERE MISERY

THERE'S NOTHIN MORE EMBARASSING THAN...

TWO OLD FOOLS WORRYING ABOUT LEGACY

Posted by: danson1 | May 7, 2009 3:35 PM | Report abuse

Sestak should run. If nothing else, it will keep Arlen in line during upcoming critical votes.

Obama does not have to say anything. He just need to stay silent until Arlen agree s to vote for his programs

Posted by: SeedofChange | May 7, 2009 3:27 PM | Report abuse

>>>"The Ridge decision is a blow to national Republicans who had seen their recruiting prospects brighten in recent weeks. ... Republicans will still have one of their strongest recruiting classes in recent memory."

You continue to press this fictional point, and I continue to press back.

Ridge dropped out before he even opting in because it was clear he wouldn't win the Republican primary.

The trend here is in no way positive for Republicans, yet you continue, in the face of such facts as Ridge's clear rejection by primary voters, that it is a 'strong' class.

I would think Ridge's example would make you re-think all your assumptions. If Tom Ridge is unacceptable to Republican primary voters in a moderate state like Pennsylvania, there are real problems.

And chances for a turnaround by the GOP, this shows, are getting worse, not getting better.

Please stop spreading the fiction that this is a strong recruiting class. Ridge proved you wrong.

Posted by: 1EgoNemo | May 7, 2009 3:22 PM | Report abuse

If it's Sestak vs. Toomey, Sestak wins easily. Rightwingnuts are just not in vogue these days.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | May 7, 2009 3:20 PM | Report abuse

It,s nice to see the Washington Post pre arrange the outcome of the senate race in Pennsylvania this fall. Are you folks affiliated with A.C.O.R.N? Thats what they do for a living. Why is your paper so biased. Do you think that might be one of the reasons why you cannot sell your paper? Or is it Bush's fault.

Posted by: SouthernCross2 | May 7, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

--------------------

It's posts like this (above) that always irritate me.

Look, I know you gotta cling to your conservative Republican talking points or you'll feel insecure. And part of those talking points is the ACORN / liburl media meme.

But how exactly is the Washington Post responsible for trying to arrange the outcome of the PA race by merely *REPORTING* that Tom Ridge isn't running?

Jeebus H. Christmas

Posted by: Hawaiiexpat | May 7, 2009 3:10 PM | Report abuse

P.S. The Research2000 poll showed Ridge losing to Toomey 41-33.

Posted by: Hawaiiexpat | May 7, 2009 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Jake...LOL (grin).

I don't know if he relied on the polling or not. But I should mention that the polling isn't done by DailyKos but by Research2000 (a local political polling firm).

That being said, one should always know who's paying for the poll so they can judge for themselves.

Posted by: Hawaiiexpat | May 7, 2009 3:04 PM | Report abuse

don't let the door hit ya on the way out Ridge.
///
"While Specter, who has had among the worst weeks in recent political memory...."

don't know about that
spitzer and blago are still high up there.

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | May 7, 2009 3:00 PM | Report abuse

Ridge might have made a challenge, but barring some lurid Specter scandal, he couldn't have won. I think he knows it too, and that's why he's not running.

Because, ya see, he worked for this guy named Bush. And this Bush guy isn't too popular in Pennsylvania anymore. Wouldn't take much to make Ridge look as unpalatable as Karl Rove to most people.

And who says that the Republicans would nominate Ridge anyway? Aren't they busy purifying their party so that they can present a unified face of bigotry and fanaticism? Wasn't Specter's departure a "victory" for them?

Ridge is in the worst possible spot. Bush connections hurt him among regular folks. Not being a drooling Neanderthal hurts him with the fundies who control the GOP. He made the right choice to stay out.

Posted by: bigbrother1 | May 7, 2009 2:58 PM | Report abuse

It,s nice to see the Washington Post pre arrange the outcome of the senate race in Pennsylvania this fall. Are you folks affiliated with A.C.O.R.N? Thats what they do for a living. Why is your paper so biased. Do you think that might be one of the reasons why you cannot sell your paper? Or is it Bush's fault.

Posted by: SouthernCross2 | May 7, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

fugitivenyc:

I would much rather see Sestak in the Senate than Specter.

Posted by: JakeD | May 7, 2009 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Go Sestak! Arlen should retire.

Posted by: fugitivenyc | May 7, 2009 2:44 PM | Report abuse

Hawaiiexpat:

I sure hope that Ridge did NOT rely on DailyKos polling!

Posted by: JakeD | May 7, 2009 2:42 PM | Report abuse

katem1:

I answered all of those question on the other thread.

Posted by: JakeD | May 7, 2009 2:37 PM | Report abuse

JakeD:Why get rid of them? It doesn't make a difference. When Bush was in the WH, Republicans controlled both Houses, put two ultra conservatives on the Supremes, and yet Roe vs Wade wasn't overturned. Why not? Or is this another example of playing to the base? I'm sorry but it seems pretty obvious that if the GOP was serious about overturning Roe vs Wade, it would have been done then. But they bring out that old chestnut just to keep the base riled up. The fact is it is settled law, and it sure is nice to see those that are anti-abortion are being called that, instead of the ridiculous exclusive pro-life label which was hypocritical when death penalty advocates are included, like the former President. By the way, Barbara Bush did state on Larry King that she was pro-choice. And didn't Gov. Palin make the CHOICE that was right for her?

Posted by: katem1 | May 7, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Chris

Your analysis gives only part of the story. Ridge may have had a great chance to win Pennsylvania, but so did Specter. After all, he had won by 11% in 2004 when Pennsylvania went for Kerry over Bush. The problem is the Republican primary. My guess is that Ridge bowed out because he was worried Toomey would beat him - just like he would beat Specter. Penssylvanian Republicans don't want a moderate, which explains why Pennsylvanians no longer want Republicans.

Posted by: archaeoman | May 7, 2009 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Apparently, Research 2000 polling (for DailyKos - so make your own judgments) had Ridge losing to Toomey in a GOP primary by a significant margin.

I wonder if Ridge got wind of those results (or had similar polling data from another firm provided to him).

Posted by: Hawaiiexpat | May 7, 2009 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Chris, surprising news abour Ridge. What is the rational, the behind the scene story?

Posted by: twshen5 | May 7, 2009 2:25 PM | Report abuse

The GOP really has nothing...they can't even convince Ridge (didn't know he was still alive) to run for them. I think they are well on their way to complete obscurity. Their moderate wing (however small) was always their saving grace.

RIP GOP

LOL

Posted by: free-donny | May 7, 2009 2:24 PM | Report abuse

This opens the door for Jeff Christie.

Posted by: whocares666 | May 7, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Israeli Mossad or Shin Bet must have leaned on him not to run.

Posted by: washpost35 | May 7, 2009 2:15 PM | Report abuse

There are drawbacks to exiling moderates. For one, it makes it pretty hard to convince a moderate to run for you when you need it.

Clearly, ideological purity is more important to them than having any practical effect on government. Which suits a lot of us just fine.

Posted by: nodebris | May 7, 2009 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who wants to debate abortion and/or disable rights, I will be over here: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/cheat-sheet/050709white-house-cheat-sheet.html

Posted by: JakeD | May 7, 2009 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Specter has caused the Dems lots of problems with little or no reward. But without Ridge in the race, the Dems are favored. Although, I don't know how the Republcans could have ejected Specter and then have pro-choice Ridge nominated unless defeating Specter was the chief concern. Abortion was the reason that Bush and McCain didn't pick Ridge in 2000 and 2008 as there runnng mates.

Personally, the only shoo-in would be Crist for the Repubs and its a Republican seat. Castle would make a great Senator, however he is old and I don't know about his health (two strokes). Is Castle pro-life? He seems like a Snow/Collins Moderate which DC needs more of in the Senate but how does that fair in a conservative Republican Caucus. Kirk same thing blue state/moderate republican.

Posted by: jmr1601 | May 7, 2009 1:57 PM | Report abuse

That's fine. We need to get rid of all pro-choice politicians (regardless of whether they are Republican or Democrat ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 7, 2009 1:54 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company