Michael Smerconish, a Philadelphia area talk radio guy, made the same prediction this morning on Scarborough's MSNBC show. He doesn't think Toomey can beat Ridge in the primary and also thinks Ridge could beat Specter.

Nothing would please me more than having the Democratic primary voters in Pennsylvania defeat this RINO, now DINO, Arlen Specter, so that he experiences the rejection by the voters that he so richly deserves.

Please rid us of this vile and odious man.

A friend of mine who used to work on the Hill posed an interesting question this morning -- what committee chairmanship was Specter promised in return for defecting?

Specter will not get a chairmanship in this Congress. Who knows what will happen if he gets reelected?

Also, at the risk of being uncouth, I have to say that Specter looks and sounds terrible. How is his health? He hailed his own "vigor, vim and vitality" yesterday, which only made me worry more.

The Dems do seem to have a bit of an actuarial problem. Byrd is not well. Ted Kennedy's brain cancer is a tragedy. Lautenberg, Inouye and Akaka are all very old.

Spector's move is most indicative of the need for open and honest debate within the halls of our government - exactly the lesson lost on the remaining Republicans! -Kevo

Specter's switch was purely self-serving and has nothing to do with supporting the Democratic platform. The Dems Powers-That-Be had better have received some assurances from him that he will support the program in exchange for their support in 2010. More likely they promised him a chairmanship as stated above.

I will gladly send my money to a real Dem who opposes Specter in the PA primary even though I don't live in PA.

I won't send one Ohio penny to Specter before he shows me how he's going to walk the Dem walk. But likewise, a Specter in the Dem camp for the general election, when compared to any GOPer, could qualify as the lesser of two evils.

The big question now should be: How will Specter stand on the issues, now that he's out from under the GOPer sledgehammer? If it's positive for Dems, and he starts talking about how much easier it is to function politically, might we not see a few more of them come on over to our side of the aisle?

Also---how might the shift affect voter registration? Mightn't we not see a sizable chunk of GOP voters shift registration status?

If Specter can't win a GOP primary then neither can Ridge.

And there are better uses for money than trying to defeat Specter in the primary.

Sestak was a three star admiral (Vice Admiral). They can't even get basic facts right. I think he found the two star reference on a right-wing web site and believed it.

what committee chairmanship was Specter promised in return for defecting?

He's number two behind Leahy on the Judiciary, and number 4 on Appropriations behind Inouye, Byrd and Leahy. Inouye and Byrd won't be around much longer, so Leahy may get to choose, and would probably take Appropriations. However, it's possible Dems would rather convince Leahy to keep Judiciary, since Specter has a more conservative history on judges.

Yes, Admiral Sestak, emulate another Admiral and "Damn the torpedoes; full speed ahead"

Now I see that the two star thing is sort of true. He got three stars and then got fucked by that asshole Mullen.

Not Toomey? I can't imagine it -- he still has drawing power (and money raising ability) for a race among the Alabama section of Pa. (e.g. anywhere between Phila & Pitt.)

But isn't Tom Ridge pro-choice and therefore Not Ideologically Pure?

It's obviously still very early, but I wouldn't be shocked if neither Specter nor Toomey were on the general election ballot in November 2010.

I think Specter's capable of pulling a Lieberman and running as an independent if he loses the Democratic primary. As with Lieberman, it's all about Arlen for Arlen.

But isn't Tom Ridge pro-choice and therefore Not Ideologically Pure?

Yes, but he's also dumber than dirt, always a highly attractive feature to the NRSC.

Sorry shortstop, Pennsylvania laws don't allow that. That's why Specter switched in the first place.

Matt made a nice diving catch on that foul tip. No, Pennsylvania does not have the same rules as Connecticut. Their "poison pill" rule does not allow the switch.

Sorry shortstop, Pennsylvania laws don't allow that.

Ah. No need to apologize, Matt. I wasn't rooting for old Arlen, honest -- just aimlessly specterulating.

One of the only good points about Ridge, and that includes Duncan Hunter, is both of them are among the very few RepuGs who have served their country in the military during a time of war. No, ChickenHawks, they. But, their negatives vastly help tip the scale against them.

One problem with "specterlating" is to not spit as Arlen does while speaking. Don't ever stand in front of him as he speaks. He really, really needs to have his false teeth repaired.

Now that the short term thrill of watching the GOP contract even further has worn off, this Pa. Democrat isn't particularly thrilled at having a recent former Republican forced on me in the Dem primary by the powers that be.
I suppose Specter's voting record isn't much different than a blue dog, but I'd like a real choice, and I don't like hearing about Rendell trying to clear the path for a guy who's likely to be just as much a pain in ass for us as he was for the GOP. He's already said that he won't vote for cloture on EFCA, so I have to think that there are other Dems in the state who are feeling the same way.
Sestak asked the right question--what does Specter stand for, and why should long-time Dems support him just because the party says so? As far as I can tell, Specter doesn't stand for anything except Specter and Specter's precious legacy--such as supporting Bush's war efforts and all the spending that went with it.

Don't ever stand in front of [Arlen] as he speaks. He really, really needs to have his false teeth repaired.

Don't ever stand in front of Specter til he gets his false tongue repaired, either.

Can someone explain to me how someone can go from being a RINO to being a DINO?

I'm trying to puzzle together how someone can be both simultaneously. I mean, he must stand for SOMETHING other than betraying his party's ideals.

Or maybe it just means there is a big hole right of center (center by US standards) where the republicans used to be. Like a slug slinking away from salt, the party's now cramped up on the right.

This has been today's edition of something obvious.

If Specter can bring himself to support the Dems at least on the big issues, then challengers like Sestak and Torsella are likely to have problems raising enough money to mount a credible challenge. Arlen was/is very unpopular with the GOP base, but his rating among all PA voters is a lot higher.

Specter doesn't stand for anything other than Specter's legacy? Huh? He voted for the stimulus, which was the right decision, but had virtually no support among the far right Republican teabaggers that make up the GOP. I think he will be forced to come around on EFCA if he wants the union votes that are necessary to win the Democratic primary in PA, and ultimately the general.

Based on what we heard yesterday from party leaders -- the White House, DSCC, DNC, et al -- Specter will enjoy the support of the Democratic establishment. I suppose it's a courtesy (and a luxury) extended to all Democratic incumbents seeking re-election, even if the incumbent hasn't been a Democrat for very long.

But the party obviously can't force other Democrats to skip the race, and Specter's decades of service as a Republican -- and former George W. Bush ally -- may give pause to more than a few Pennsylvania Democrats. (Yesterday, Specter said, "I don't expect everybody to agree with all my votes. I don't agree with them all myself at this point." Expect to hear a lot of this.)

Well, perhaps these Democrats had best get out and talk to the voters before they make their decision. I was doing some calling yesterday for the DNC, to good Democrats who donate to the DNC, and in Pennsylvania I asked them what they thought of Specter's move, and the overshelming majority were happy he did it because they'd been voting for him all along and now they can vote for him as a Democrat. If Specter finds a way (and I'm sure an opportunist like he will) to vote for health care and EFCA, he'll likely be re-elected in 2010. He has a lot of Democratic support to begin with. If he goes for EFCA, the AFL-CIO will support him strongly.

As to the Establishment support, I can see them doing this as a way of proving to other Republican office-holders that switching parties is not a death sentence, which will promote more party-switching.

I guess folks here (including me) will have to ask ourselves if we want to be a "big tent" party, or the leftwing version of what's going on in the GOP?

From a purely strategic point of view, I would think that Specter will have to be President Obama's biggest fan from now on and vote like one as well. He may huff and puff a bit but he surely must know that if he tries to be too cute about it he'll just open the door for Admiral Sestak to swoop in and take the prize.

Which wouldn't be all that bad, all things considered.

TCinLA --
I guess folks here (including me) will have to ask ourselves if we want to be a "big tent" party, or the leftwing version of what's going on in the GOP?

You have got to be kidding me.

It's either accept the likes of Specter or we're all Communists in an all-Communist, all-the-time Communist Party?

I don't think so.

Look Arlen Specter's got a bad habit of mumbling concern about core Constitutional issues and then turning around voting to betray those principles within 24 to 48 hours. Those near-instantaneous turnarounds aren't just blatant hypocrisy, they're a shiv in the ribs, right out there in public. His continual pattern of paying lip service to principle but following up with an instantaneous El-Foldo Routine is notorious.

Specter's faux outrage at spying by New England on rival NFL teams --- while making no effort to reign in warrantless wirtapping is case in point, and it really took the cake. The outright hypocrisy would be staggering if it weren't such an old, old pattern with the guy.

It's like he actually thinks we don't know.

Specter may win reelection, but he jumped the shark long ago. Personally, I think he's unaware the electoral ground shifted on the Democratic side of the aisle too, so we'll have to see if he can win a primary.

We're all better off if he loses --- and I'll be contributing significant $$$ chunks to any primary challenger -- a first for me.

To quote Montgomery Burns: "I like the cut of Sestak's jib." This guy is smart, approachable and has a serious resume. I would gladly send some money his way should he officially announce his candadicy.

I just hope too many people don't get in the race so that the grassroots vote gets diluted.

I think he will be forced to come around on EFCA if he wants the union votes that are necessary to win the Democratic primary in PA, and ultimately the general.

If he does that, then I'll probably vote for him, considering that he's unlikely to finish another term anyway. But if a real Democrat like Sestak runs, I'm voting for the real Democrat.
As much as I like Ed Rendell, the way he's trying to limit my choices and treating Dem voters like his personal pawns really rubs me the wrong way.

I suggest everyone check out Specter's voting record related to Bush's wars, among many other issues. He was also more concerned about retaining his judiciary committee chairmanship than he was about a woman's right to choose.
I can't think of any position that he hasn't been willing to change in order to maintain his power, even more so than your average politician.

From a purely strategic point of view, I would think that Specter will have to be President Obama's biggest fan from now on and vote like one as well. He may huff and puff a bit but he surely must know that if he tries to be too cute about it he'll just open the door for Admiral Sestak to swoop in and take the prize.

Yep. Specter will start tacking to the left in the next few weeks because he knows he has to be seen as a moderate -- an actual moderate, not a Republican "moderate" -- to win his election.

Honestly, I respect Specter more for switching now, a year out from the election, than I do the people who get themselves elected under one party and then promptly switch. (I remember there was a Southern Democrat-turned-Republican who did it that way, and it was sleazy.) He is at least setting it up for a fair fight. Remember, Lieberman lost to Lamont in the primary -- the only way he pulled out a victory was by forming his own party and getting Republicans to swarm to him.

I remember there was a Southern Democrat-turned-Republican who did it that way, and it was sleazy.

Yeah, it was Shelby in Alabama, and I've never respected him since then.
The problem with Specter is he's assuming that Dems will just blindly vote for him now, and I don't think they will if he refuses to budge on EFCA or other big Dem issues.
If he doesn't budge until after a real Dem like Sestak gets in, he could very well lose the primary.

With his seniority, if he should win reelection, Specter would outrank Tom Harkin on the Appropriations subcommittee that funds the Departments of Labor, HHS and Education. Harkin could claim the subcommittee that funds USDA as compensation.

Ridge still loses to Toomey in the primary because too many moderate Republicans left and registered as Democrats. Whoever is the furthest right wins that primary, so whoever wins the Democratic primary will win the election.

I don't much like the DSCC and the White House pledging support for an unproven, budding octogenarian who quite plainly says his switch was a matter of practicality, not ideology.

I guess folks here (including me) will have to ask ourselves if we want to be a "big tent" party, or the leftwing version of what's going on in the GOP? -TC in LA

I think there is an obvious distinction between being a big tent party and anointing recent converts and prospects as saviors and bowing to their every demand. I welcome Specter as a fellow Democrat; I don't think he should be given unwarranted support from the party, especially at the expense of other candidates. I also don't think he should be given any chairmanships. Committee assignments are one thing, but let's give the chairs to people who have been working for the Democratic agenda for more than 24 hours.

The big tent is more than well stocked with people to the right of what the country wants; I think it's high time we stopped welcoming all center right DINOs in Reid's fawning, flaccid style, and perhaps let some actual progressives into the tent.

We have a duly elected Senator who Reid won't seat protemp because he's afraid of a influential, progressive voice in the Senate, but he's practically ready to fellate Specter on the Senate floor for his dubious, self-serving conversion.

Just ask the Connecticut Democrats how they feel about the big tent and I think you'll have your answer.

Specter is no spring chicken. Were he to prevail in 2010 and die within six years, any real democrat who gave him a run for his money during the primary would surely have the inside track to replace him. (Or so I'd guess, not knowing a thing about PA politics). If so, that will likely factor in the thinking of those dems who as of yesterday are now second tier candidates..

Joe Sestak was actually a three star admiral (Vice Admiral) it matters a lot because that is the major line between the two.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vice_admiral_(United_States)

Vice Admirals are in charge of major commands and are hand selected for their roles in ways that two stars (Rear Admiral) are not.

I believe Joe is the highest ranking officer ever to serve in Congress and would be a great choice for Pennsylvania. He is not anywhere as left as I am, but then neither I think is Pennsylvania.

Bobs I see you got to this before me. Per the Wiki article Vice-Admiral is job specific and goes away when the job does returning the guy to Rear Admiral.

But the point is that only a relatively small number of Rear Admirals get selected to serve as Vice Admiral and we really should give people the senior title they earned. That is we generally reference Presidents John Quincy Adams and William Howard Taft and not Congressman Adams and Justice Taft (except when specifically talking about the Supreme Court).

So Joe is Vice Admiral Sestak to me.

And there are better uses for money than trying to defeat Specter in the primary.

I'm willing to let PA Dems make that decision, just as I hope the rest of you will allow us IL Dems decide whether or not we want to support someone against Burris in the 2010 primary.

Let's not allow our national aspirations for a lock on the Senate get in the way of people selecting proper representation.

Can someone explain to me how someone can go from being a RINO to being a DINO?

There are two basic possibilties:
1) Someone could be self-serving, not dedicated to any particular values, and thus at one minute be a Republican-of-convenience and at the next a Democrat-of-convenience, simply because first one and then the other party was useful to their own self-serving ambitions.
2) Someone could have honest, deeply held values that don't neatly fit into either "Democratic" or "Republican" pigeon-holes, and thus at one minute be a Republican because it seems to be the best, albeit still poor, fit for his views, but, as a partisan realignment shifts the center of gravity of the major parties, find himself switching to a Democrat, as the best, but still poor, fit for his views, being seen by the base of each party as a member "in name only".