You forgot a few strikes (4.00 / 2)

Specter voted against Obama's budget, and is fillibustering the nomination of Dawn Johnsen to the Office of Legal council. He needs to be primaried, he's batting 0-8, and needs to be put on the bench permanently.  

---

by: FloridaLefty @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 18:38:52 PM UTC

Sen. Specter = FAIL (0.00 / 0)

He was FAIL as a "moderate Republican" who almost never stood up to the radical right... And he's still FAIL as a "Democrat" who hardly ever supports the Democratic position on anything. Let's primary him already and see if we can get a Sen. Joe Sestak (Real D-PA) who will actually vote with us. And even if Sestak doesn't win, I'll still feel OK if we can at least push Specter leftward.

Yes, Virginia, there are progressives in Nevada.

---

by: Andrew Davey @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 18:57:14 PM UTC

Good case against Specter (4.00 / 1)

You've made a very good case against Specter, but made very little effort to make a case for Sestak. I'm convinced that Specter should be primaried, but I'm not convinced that progressives should expend much effort supporting Sestak. Your poll does not make any provision for my perspective.

---

by: RandomNonviolence @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 19:04:34 PM UTC

The links provided, at the voting site, have many arguemnts, including why (4.00 / 1)

and why not Sestak. It is more than comprehensive. What do you have to share about Sestak.  

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

---

by: HousesofProgress @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 19:18:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

yup (0.00 / 0)

Thanks, HousesofProgress. RandomNonViolence, see arguments for and against on the polling site.

---

by: AdamGreen @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 20:24:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

OK, no (0.00 / 0)

I see from your comment below that No is the response I should make since I'm not convinced we should support Sestak.

As best I can tell from reading the poll site and this diary, Sestak is a well-funded Blue Dog, hawkish on military issues, who is young enough to be a senator for many terms if he is elected. He is better than Specter, but I don't see any reason for progressives to use our limited resources to fight for him. To me, it probably makes more sense to find real progressives to support either in PA or somewhere else.

In Ohio, we're likely to be supporting either Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner or Lieutenant Governor Lee Fisher. Neither has much of a track record on national issues, but I expect either would be fairly liberal and certainly better than Rob Portman, the likely Republican candidate (and former health insurance lobbyist). I don't know, but I suspect that our money and effort would be better spent on one of these candidates in Ohio than on Sestak in Pennsylvania. And there may be even better races in other states.  

---

by: RandomNonviolence @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 23:15:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Except ... (0.00 / 0)

... at least Sestak wants it.  None of the more progressive options seem interested in the race, or have expressly declined.

---

by: Adam B. @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 03:06:59 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sestak = not Blue Dog (0.00 / 0)

Sestak is not a Blue Dog and is not particularly aligned with them. He does occasionally vote poorly from the progressive viewpoint.

Karl in Drexel Hill, PA

---

by: KB @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 15:40:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Does this help? (0.00 / 0)

http://progressivepunch.org/me...

http://www.sestak.house.gov/is...

While I know he's not perfect, I do think Sestak's among the best in the field in PA. He has a 93% Progressive Punch lifetime score, which is a hell of a lot better than Arlen Specter's 37%. Sestak supports EFCA while Specter does not. Sestak supports real action on climate change while Specter waffles. Sestak supports ending DADT while Specter's been silent on the issue.

Again, Sestak's so much better... And unlike other PA Dems who have been scared away by the official Obama-Biden-Rendell-Casey blessing on Specter, Sestak has not.

Yes, Virginia, there are progressives in Nevada.

---

by: Andrew Davey @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 19:18:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Doesn't help too much, no (0.00 / 0)

I'm afraid the following featured "no" voice on the straw poll page has the ring of truth to me. It agrees with everything else I hear about Sestak. DADT is obviously opportunism. Sestak "supports EFCA" but sponsored a "compromise" that would remove card-check from it.

Joe Caucci - Pennsylvania Activist, Health Care Worker

Joe Sestak is an awful congressman.

I'm sure there are people more knowledgeable than me about Joe Sestak's record. But based on personal experience, I think he's awful. I have called his office about 6-7 times since he became my congressman on various issues that greatly concerned me. Almost every time I have called his office and asked where he stood on a bill, or a particular issue, I have been told that he has not come to a decision yet.

I'm not talking about weeks before the vote. I called his office the day before the House was going to vote on telecom immunity, and they told me he hadn't decided yet. It's infuriating because this (intentionally?) forces constituents to remember to take the time to go check the rollcall the following day. How many Americans even know how to do that? It's ridiculous that the public can't just get a straight answer from our own congressman.

And when I've checked the rollcall, on almost every issue I care about, including telecom immunity, he has voted the wrong way. Sestak simply isn't with progressive interests when it counts.

I believe his recent stance against Don't Ask Don't Tell was pure political theater to draw attention and support from progressives for a run at Arlen's Senate seat -- not a show of real progressive convictions.

Specter isn't with progressive interests either. But at least PA benefits from his seniority and influence in the Senate. Specter has my vote if Sestak is his opponent.

Personally, if I lived in Pa. I'd have a hard time going this far (voting for Specter over Sestak in a primary).  But I'd sure as hell resent not being given a better primary challenger.

---

by: tdub @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 20:12:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So who else do we have? (0.00 / 0)

That's the problem. Most everyone else has been scared out by Biden & Rendell. Kucinich is in Ohio, so he can't run here. And even if we could convince former candidates like Patrick Murphy and Allyson Schwartz to run, it's not like we'd be "trading up"...

http://www.progressivepunch.or...

http://www.progressivepunch.or...

And finally, that's just one person's opinion of Sestak. And again, contrary to what that one anti-Sestak Dem says, he's voted with us 93% of the time... That includes support for EFCA (yes, the full bill as well as the possible compromise), climate & energy solutions, LGBT civil rights, and progressive economics. That's not only far better than Arlen Specter, but even better than Bob Casey, Patrick Murphy, and even Allyson Schwartz.

What more can we ask for and actually get?

Yes, Virginia, there are progressives in Nevada.

---

by: Andrew Davey @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 22:30:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

DW-NOMINATE scores contradict the claim that Sestak is "better" than Casey (0.00 / 0)

Casey -.401
Sestak -.287
DW-NOMINATE: -1 = very liberal, 0 = moderate

I get it, Sestak will likely be the only choice.  I have said I'd vote for him over Specter.  But what I don't get is why Sestak is being sold so hard on progressive sites like this one as more liberal than he is (e.g. Andrew Davey's "even better than Bob Casey").

I live in the northeast and I'm all too familiar with this kind of candidate, suddenly making liberal-sounding speeches when there's a new opportunity for his own advancement.

Find me some proof that Sestak, a high-ranking naval officer who's had plenty of time to figure out what he thinks about running the military, spoke out against DADT before this episode, and I'll take that as evidence worth reconsideration.

---

by: tdub @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 02:02:15 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sestak is very accomplished in his own right (4.00 / 1)

Here's his bio. He's a 3-Star Admiral, served as Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Warfare Requirements and Programs helping oversee a $70b budget, has an MPA and PhD, and was the first Director of the Navy's Anti-Terrorism unit.

Damn.

Joe is a former 3-Star Admiral, who successfully ran for Congress in 2006, after completing his 31-year military service to our country.   Joe is the senior military veteran serving in Congress and the highest ranking former military officer ever elected to Congress.

Joe led a series of operational commands, culminating in command of the USS George Washington carrier battle group (30 U.S./allied ships, 100 aircraft, and over 15,000 Sailors/Marines/Aviators/SEALs) that conducted combat operations in Afghanistan and precursor combat operation to the war in Iraq.  Joe served as President Clinton's Director of Defense Policy at the White House on the National Security Council.  After 9/11, the Navy selected Joe to became the first Director of "Deep Blue", the Navy's anti-terrorism unit.  Joe also served as Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Warfare Requirements and Programs, responsible for the Navy's $70 Billion warfare program. As Captain of the USS Samuel B. Roberts, his ship was awarded the Battenberg Cup for best ship in the Atlantic Fleet.

Joe was born and raised in Delaware County, where he always maintained his residency.  He attended Cardinal O'Hara High School with his brother and six sisters (and where his mother taught math).  The son of a Navy Captain who fought in World War II, Joe followed in the footsteps of his father and attended the U.S. Naval Academy where he graduated 2nd in his Class.  Joe also earned a Masters in Public Administration and a Ph.D. in Political Economy and Government from Harvard University.  After his 31-year distinguished military career, Joe returned home to Delaware County with his family, where his parents and siblings also live.

On the issue of qualifications alone, Sestak is one of  the few who will be able to give Specter a run for his money both on the merits and politically.  

---

by: afertig @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 19:40:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And that's why... (0.00 / 0)

I want him to run. Take a looky at the new DKos poll...

http://www.dailykos.com/storyo...

Specter's numbers look high at first, but beneath the surface "there's no there there".

If the 2010 Democratic Primary for U.S. Senate were held today would you definitely vote for Arlen Specter would you consider someone else or would you definitely vote for someone else?

Definite Specter        37
Consider someone else   23
Definitely someone else 16
Not sure                24

Head to heads:

Specter (D)  56
Sestak (D)   11
Undecided    33

Specter (D)  60
Torsella (D)  5
Undecided    35

If this is what Specter can do with 90% of the Dem establishment behind him and so much free publicity with no announced candidate running against him, then Sestak can totally beat Specter.

Yes, Virginia, there are progressives in Nevada.

---

by: Andrew Davey @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 22:39:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

We need a real liberal, not just someone who's better than Specter (4.00 / 1)

Let's face it, just about any Democrat is better than Specter.  But as I explained in an earlier post (http://www.openleft.com/diary/13247/#166519), if Sestak is going to be just marginally better than Specter but still a pain in the ass Blue Dog, it's better over the long-run to have Specter for just another term at most than Sestak for potentially the next couple of decades.  What we should be working on is drafting a real liberal champion like Joe Hoeffel.

---

by: liberalmaverick @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 19:49:48 PM UTC

But Sestak isn't "marginally better"... (0.00 / 0)

He's far better than Specter! Now don't get me wrong, I want a more progressive Dem in that seat. However, I don't want to enforce a "purity test" so much that it disqualifies good Dems that can win.

So is Hoeffel interested in running? As I mentioned above, both Murphy & Schwartz pulled out when Biden & Rendell pulled all stops to "clear the field" for Specter. But as I also just pointed out above, Sestak's record is actually better than either Murphy's or Schwartz's. So IMHO, it looks like we're already "trading up" in candidates from Murphy & Schwartz to Sestak.

Yes, Virginia, there are progressives in Nevada.

---

by: Andrew Davey @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 22:34:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I guess it's up to each of us to decide how much liberalism is good enough (0.00 / 0)

I've heard good and bad things about Sestak.  I have mixed feelings about him: on the one hand, everything he's saying right now is spot-on, but on the other, I get the feeling that he's just feinting leftward to position himself for the primary, which isn't much less politically opportunistic than what Specter is doing.

My point in all this is to say that if we in the liberal community are going to back Sestak, let's do it because we REALLY support Sestak in his own right, not just because he's better than Specter.  Anyone is better than Specter, and right now anyone looks good compared to Specter.  But whoever beats Specter in the primary could be in there for a long time, so we need to make sure that person is someone we'd be happy with for a long time.

---

by: liberalmaverick @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 02:43:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oh, and AFAIK Hoeffel has been silent on this race (0.00 / 0)

Which means it's likely that he's not thinking of running.  Which means, we need to focus a draft movement on him.

---

by: liberalmaverick @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 02:46:43 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Where is the none of the above (4.00 / 1)

option on this poll? s

---

by: Eureka Springs AR @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 20:09:08 PM UTC

It's the "no" option. (0.00 / 0)

The goal is to see if people want to pro-actively draft the person most talked-about as a potential challenger to Specter.

If you don't want to draft him, than just vote no.

---

by: AdamGreen @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 20:25:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Question for Adam (0.00 / 0)

What about Torsella? Do we know anything about his views?

I wouldn't mind keeping our options open.

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates

---

by: Emocrat @ Sun May 10, 2009 at 20:43:58 PM UTC

From what I've read on liberal blogs (4.00 / 1)

Some say that he's a progressive; others say he's a "hack" or a Rendell/DLC stalking horse.  He's a blank slate as far as I can tell; he just launched his website a week ago, and it doesn't list his positions on the issues yet.

I think all the potential challengers to Specter will have to at some point get together and decide on who will stay in the race, cuz a challenge probably won't work if there's more than one challenger.

---

by: liberalmaverick @ Mon May 11, 2009 at 03:22:22 AM UTC

[ Parent ]