Comments on: Specter to switch parties?

By: IJB

IJB — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:04:23 +0000

By: Moe Lane

Moe Lane — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:46:36 +0000

Which is apparently scheduled for June,

By: IJB

IJB — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:37:25 +0000

By: erp

erp — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:08:52 +0000

I hope this means Franken’s chance to be seated in the senate is diminishing.

By: scarlos

scarlos — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:52:08 +0000

I mean, that would be a perfectly fitting way to win the seat–by beating out a person who switched parties in order to try to hold it.

I would probably do more to keep the rest of our squishies in line anyway

By: Aaron Gardner

Aaron Gardner — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:28:54 +0000

He should be happy that RNC money won’t be used in a divisive primary to support a duplicitous weasel such as Specter. Enough with the nice guy act Steele.

By: Husker

Husker — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:23:19 +0000

WASHINGTON – Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Michael Steele released the following statement today:
“Some in the Republican Party are happy about this. I am not.
Let’s be honest-Senator Specter didn’t leave the GOP based on principles of any kind. He left to further his personal political interests because he knew that he was going to lose a Republican primary due to his left-wing voting record.
Republicans look forward to beating Sen. Specter in 2010, assuming the Democrats don’t do it first.”

(Link)

By: ATLconservative

ATLconservative — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:14:52 +0000

Toomey has a sure-fire way to discredit him as a man who changes his vote for political survival. It’s obvious, and I hope PA voters know it.

By: paulincolo

paulincolo — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:05:43 +0000

since he was previously voting with them on the big votes anyway, however,
1. prior to that his waffling on card check (due to an upcoming election) at least had them delaying any action
2. this emboldens the dems to get as much through as fast as possible before the next election.
3.It cuts off debate so that our side can’t get the opposing view out and before the public is engaged.

I am with you on why they didn’t oppose these things with Bush’s spending, but the dems are for spending and they controlled congress. But republican opposition could have stopped it, I believe.

By: Common_Cents

Common_Cents — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:03:35 +0000

Just last month, on March 18, 2009, Specter said he would remain a Republican:

“I am staying a Republican because I think I have an important role, more important role to play there. I think the United States desparately needs a two party system. It is the basis of politics in America. I think each of the 41 Republican Senators, in a sense, and I don’t want to overstate this, is a national asset, because if one was gone you would only have 40. The Democrats would have 60 and they would control all of the mechanisms of government.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRgsnj_rvPU