Open Left

Well we win either way, at least in the short run (4.00 / 3)

Sestak's primary challenge means that Specter will have to vote more liberally, at least until the primary election (which is what, spring 2010?).  So either way, until next year's primary we win, because of Specter wins we will have gotten his liberal votes from 2009-2010, and if Sestak wins we get Sestak while still getting Specter's liberal votes.

The downside of this dynamic is what happens the day after the primary.  It seems like Specter is not shy about hiding the fact that he only runs towards the base - whichever it happens to be - for the year or so before a primary election.  Right after the primary he goes back to his normal self, which both parties seem to despise.  Specter played the GOP base in 2004 by acting like America's Greatest Conservative and the day after the primary he immediately switched to being Mr. Independent.  Let's hope the Left deals with him more appropriately this time.

The problem with "make them do it" is that if they're not already inclined to do it on their own, they're only gonna be responsive if 1) We give them a ton of money, more than the special interests or 2) It's election time.  Considering that Senators only have to deal with elections every six years, that means we really only control them for one of those six years.  And yeah, running primary challenges - or any campaign from the left, really - is a lot harder than it should be.

As I see it, the best way to solve this problem in the long run is to elect more people who are already committed liberals before they go into office, so they go into Congress with a prepared set of convictions, making it harder for them to be bought off.  Also, support people who are true activists rather than ones that are just career politicians.  We need people who really believe in something rather than people like Arlen Specter who just like being in power for the sake of being in power.

---

by: liberalmaverick @ Thu Jun 25, 2009 at 23:14:35 PM CDT