Toomey's record on abortion

3/21/2004 | SpyktRose

[presidentbowen]

Toomey is a prolife advocate! I am very happy he is running against RINO Specter. However, I have been hearing conflicting reports as to whether even if Toomey wins this election, can he win the general against Hoeffel. Although, even though Hoeffel isn't really considered that top tier of a candidate for the dems, and seeing as how Bush is beating Kerry in PA so far, does bring some optimism. I would like to hear other FREEPER comments on this race...

[JohnnyZ]

Toomey first ran in the congressional primary in '98 as a pro-choice candidate. Since that race, he has voted 100% pro-life, I believe, and he is regarded as a sincere pro-lifer by all but those who he's currently running against.

[CPT Clay]

go Toomey!!!

[AZGOPer]

I cannot bet on Toomey to win. Santorum won in 2000 against a TV reporter, pro-life Eastern Pennsylvania Democrat Ron Klink. He won narrowly, 50-47 against poorly funded Klink, but speculation is that Klink had trouble raising money from Philly area Democrats because of his pro life stance and as a result was underfunded enormously. Can't bet on that with Hoeful though. He's hardcore pro-abortion and that issue itself along with gun control could hold down Toomey's percentages in the Philly suburbs and Harrisburg which would otherwise go to Specter. Basically, i like Toomey a lot and idealogically agree with him, dislike Specter and hold strong supsicions on how he will chair the Judiciary. But a lot is at stake here, there are several GOP seats open in Alaska, Colorado, Illinois, Oklahoma. Do we really need a Linoln Chafee moment again guys? (50+50, Chafee switches to (I). So i pretty much see it as a big risk. We need to increase our margins as much as we can and Toomey is too big a risk for that unfortunately. Specter is recognized statewide for 20 years and won't be as bad as would a narrow Democratic controlled Senate or a thin Republican one. That would basically kill Bush's second term if he got one. So i think Rove and the guys are right on this one politically speaking, and that is my case for Specter !

[AuH2ORepublican]

"Toomey first ran in the congressional primary in '98 as a pro-choice candidate. Since that race, he has voted 100% pro-life"

---

Johnny is correct, although that he forgot to mention that Toomey had a genuine religious conversion on the issue of abortion. Regardless of what Pat Toomey may have said 6 years ago, I can think of no more reliable vote for the protection of the unborn than Pat Toomey's. He provides clear evidence of the converted making the truest believers. Arlen Specter, on the other hand, never met an abortion that he didn't like, and even tried to derail the partial-birth abortion ban by voting for a sham substitute amendment (which wouldn't have banned a single partial-birth abortion) sponsored by liberal Democrat Dick Durbin.

[AuH2ORepublican]

I think Hoeffel has a better chance of beating Specter than he would of beating Toomey. Specter is incapable of getting votes from blue-collar Democrats from outside the Philly metro area, since they are generally pro-life, pro-gun and pro-defense and Specter is none of those things. Toomey, on the other hand, has been getting those votes for year in his Lehigh Valley congressional district. And against Hoeffel, who represents Montco and NE Philly, Specter cannot count on getting his usual large margins in the Philly metro area to overcome getting blown out in the rest of the state. My predictions would be Hoeffel beating Specter 50%-48% if Specter wins the GOP primary, but Toomey beating Hoeffel 52%-46% (with Hoeffel's support for abortion and gun control costing him hundreds of thousands of traditionally Democrat votes) if Toomey defeats Specter in the primary.

Another important point is that if Specter is the GOP nominee, turnout will not be as strong among conservatives as if Toomey is the nominee, which could swing the state to Kerry in the presidential race (the RINOs that will turn out en masse to vote for Specter could give Kerry his margin of victory over President Bush). That's yet another reason to support Toomey in the primary.

And, oh yeah, Toomey is a real Republican, while Specter merely plays one on TV every six years.

I think this one is a no-brainer. GO, PAT, GO!

[zbigreddogz]

I agree. I'm the most pragmatic conservative I know, I'm more then willing to take a half loaf, but Specter isn't even a half loaf, and I think Toomey can win this. If Toomey does lose, it will be because Santorum refused to stay out of this. I usually like Santorum, and I understand wanting to be pragmatic, but he should have just stayed out of this contest.

And in this case, I agree, Toomey has at least as good of a shot at holding the seat as Specter. I wouldn't count on conservatives to vote for Specter again, not this time, and what we REALLY don't need in PA is conservatives sitting on their hands. Even more important then the Senate is Bush winning reelection.

[presidentbowen]

I agree with you all. I have never met more optimistic conservatives than you all. What you all need to do is post more on politics1.com. The liberals have taken over there! I mean, the have some people posting that the Dems have a really good chance to win back the Senate. Come on now!

[GeneralHavoc]

You are correct, Bowen.

Specter is the pro-abortion extremist.

He is simply trying to trick people into thinking Pat isn't pro-life...

[Badray]

"We need to increase our margins as much as we can and Toomey is too big a risk for that unfortunately."

Sorry, but I must disagree.

This is the thinking that has brought us 24 years of Arlen Specter. What we need are principled conservatives and Toomey is the real deal. It's time for the GOP to stand for the values that they proclaim and not accept any more Specters.

I've been following Pat since a year before he announced. I have watched as people respond to his call to give Republican values a chance. I've seen him rise in the polls as Specter spends millions to trash him. I've been to 3 Toomey events in the past week and worked a booth for him at a gun show. I hear people thrill to the fact that they have someone that they can proudly vote for (and against Arlen.) Other than some politically intimidated party operatives, I haven't found anyone who even says that they will vote for Arlen.

This is a once in a lifetime chance for Republicans to govern. We've squandered a large portion of this opportunity by having Specter, Snowe, Jeffords and Chaffee block our every effort. It's been 70 years since we've had the reins of elected government. If we don't use them now and properly, we'll never again in our lifetimes, have that opportunity.

Go Pat, Go.

[AuH2ORepublican]

"What you all need to do is post more on politics1.com. The liberals have taken over there!"

---

Tell me about it! I posted how Toomey would defeat Hoeffel in the general election, and they all went crazy over there. On a previous Toomey thread on FR, I invited FReepers to post on politics1.com to give it a little more balance, but I guess there weren't too many takers.

[AZGOPer]

I would really like to agree with that line of thinking, that pure conservatives can win, and i really like Toomey. But i've been looking at the Pennsylvania's political scene lately tracing back thru 1988 and done the math. Some important developments have taken place since then. 1) Eastern Pennyslvania has gotten more liberal. George Bush won PA in 1988 50-48, the son lost it 47-50. The strong margins that typically went towards the Republicans in the 80's has shrunk significantly. Many of the Eastern PA suburbs cast strong margins for the GOP 16 years ago has now either been trending towards the Dems or reliably Democratic. It's very much like what has happened in NJ, strongly Republican in '88, now strongly Democrat in 2000's. Republicans cannot win without those margins. George W. Bush lost precisely because he couldnt match his fathers margins in the crucial Eastern areas in 1988. Now to be fair, W. did better than his dad in Western PA, but his margins there were just not high enough to offset his losses in Eastern PA. This is exactly the reason why Casey lost to Rendell, and Fisher lost to Rendell. Rendell picked up these votes of moderate Republicans. Specter will do the same thing.

I wish PA was more conservative, but it isnt and is getting less so. Santorum won largely because he was better known, better financed, and his oppenent had the same view on human life that he did. Between the two candidates, Moderate Republicans are more inclined to vote for a Socially conservative Republican than a Socially conservative/fiscally liberal Democrat.

So, i really cannot envision a scenario where Toomey would pull this off. You may say that he will do well in Western PA, but Western PA is complicated. Yes, a voter there will tell you that they are very pro-life, but they will ALSO tell you that they are very Democratic. I'm talking New Deal FDR. This has been a puzzle for political consultants of both parties. Toomey has done quite well as a conservative in his district, but he would need to do exceptionally well in the rest of Western PA to offset his losses in the East. Can Toomey do it ? Can he pick up the votes of socially conservative but fiscally liberal New Deal
Dems being a staunch government shrinking Republican ? That is the dillema !

I really think that this race should be reserved for a time when Republicans control the Senate with 54-55 seats, i would be all for Toomey then. But this isn't the time unfortunately.

[Badray]

"...i've been looking at the Pennsylvania's political scene lately tracing back thru 1988 and done the math."

No disrespect intended, but while you were in Arizona looking at numbers, I've been working with the campaigns and the candidates. Bush I won because people thought that his first term would be Reagan III. For term II, Bush I screwed the pooch by breaking his no new tax vow. Conservatives stayed home. Bob Dole sucked as a candidate. He got the nomination because he paid his dues and wanted to tell his great grand children that he ran for president. Again, conservatives stayed home.

Before you (or any one else) goes off on conservatives for this practice, all I can say is deal with it. Conservatives with principles won't compromise their values and the GOP better learn the lesson or expect to lose.

Mike Fisher was Bob Dole II. His candidacy was a payoff for years of faithful service to the GOP. He must have thought that Rendell signed off on the deal too, because he forgot to campaign. Fisher was the weakest candidate that I've ever seen. I worked on the campaign purely because I didn't want Rendell to win. I won't put that kind of effort into another candidate if he doesn't show the promise of a Pat Toomey. Casey lost the primary to Rendell because he didn't have the feet on the ground to make it happen. It was a dismal campaign effort.

Interestingly, Rick Santorum - one of the most conservative GOP Senators - WON the same election that "W" lost. Toomey won his race that year too by preaching the conservative message. It was his biggest margin to date.

Another race that you don't mention is for the Allegheny County Chief Executive. The incumbent Republican was pro choice. The Democrat challenger was pro life. The pro life groups swarmed to him and he handily defeated the incumbent.

I think what you are missing is the people themselves, the candidates and their personalities. Where a strong and principled candidate runs a strong campaign, he wins. When he tries to blur the differences thinking that he can pick up the middle, he loses. The reason is that the few (relatively speaking) 'undecideds' that he picks up are more than offset by the loss of the base that is alienated by the pandering. He also loses the activism and vote generating capacity of the base. (W, are you listening?)

"So, i really cannot envision a scenario where Toomey would pull this off."

Have you seen the poll numbers? In the last 90 days, Toomey has gone from a 23% point deficit to a 9% deficit. It is now a horse race. The closer those numbers get, the more outside support Toomey will get. There are a lot of people around the country that want Specter gone and they are putting their money where their mouth is to do it.

In this race, like the others I mentioned above, it is the candidate and how he presents his philosophy that makes the difference. They both boast of their conservatism but only Toomey has the record to back it up. Specter's disingenuousness is costing him. He'd do better if he proudly proclaimed his liberalism than lying about it.

" I really think that this race should be reserved for a time when Republicans control the Senate with 54-55 seats, i would be all for Toomey then. But this isn't the time unfortunately."

Toomey is the man and this is the time. We've waited almost 70 years for an opportunity to rule based on GOP principles. The Specters, Snowes, Chaffees, and Jeffords have obstructed that chance as much as the Democrats. Specter and the rest of the lot have to go.

And rest easy. We will pick up other seats as well as converting the PA seat into not only a Republican (from RINO) but also to conservative.

[SamInTheBurgh]

AZ, I am really tired of this argument coming from Conservatives that we can't run Pat because of the risk of losing the majority. What difference does it make if we have Joe Hoeffel in the Senate or if we have Arlen Specter who votes like Joe Hoeffel in the Senate? The Republican Party has let too many people like Arlen who have abandoned the principles of our party stay in office because they have the "tenure" or we need to keep the seat. What kind of message is this sending to our elected officials? It tells them that they can run on a platform of catering to our values and ideals, but once in office can do whatever they want and we won't hold them accountable. Sorry, but don't whizz down my back and tell me it's raining.

I'm the one going out door to door on the weekends hearing the overwhelming responses from the voters, not you. From what I have seen over the past month, I can't see how we will lose this. Nobody likes Arlen. His time is past due and on April 27th we'll be handing him his pink slip.

Throw your numbers out the door and stand for principle. I would rather lose and have dignity knowing I stood up for principle instead of being a "Yes Man".

[Badray]

Sam, You da' man.

[AZGOPer]

"....What difference does it make if we have Joe Hoeffel in the Senate or if we have Arlen Specter who votes like Joe Hoeffel in the Senate?...."


The difference is Tom Daschle or Hillary Clinton as majority leader vs. Bill Frist. It is hard to argue that conservatives wouldn't be better off without the latter or that it doesn't make a difference. If Tom Daschle was the leader for the last year, NO tax cut in 2003, NO ban on infanticide, NO new judges confirmed, but MORE spending. It DOES make a difference. That is what my argument comes down to. I would love a Toomey vs. Specter race.....but in 1998 when the GOP controlled 55 seats.

"....The Specters, Snowes, Chaffees, and Jeffords have obstructed that chance as much as the Democrats. Specter and the rest of the lot have to go...."

I don't agree with them on much either but you simply have to consider the states they represent are hardly conservative territory, especially Rhode Island. Picking up Republican seats in these very liberal areas are huge advantage while we are loosing in conservative areas such as SD,ND,NE. The few benefits that these Senators give the GOP are crucial ones; controlling who chairs the committees, providing crucial votes on some measures, and supporting all of Bush's jucidial nominees to date. America is a much less conservative country now and the political reality is that the GOP must have room for these Senators until we expand to a healthy enough majority.

"...Throw your numbers out the door and stand for principle..."

I do think something is better than nothing at all. Not having accomplished anything for the sake of principle doesnt have much to do with principle at all. Instead, it can end up setting your agenda back decades.

"...Where a strong and principled candidate runs a strong campaign, he wins. When he tries to blur the differences thinking that he can pick up the middle, he loses...."

Well, it looks like my opinion is the minority in the message boards and Toomey has a very good chance of ousting Specter. I can only say i hope you are right because Toomey is going to need all the conservative support he can get plus a large share of the votes of fiscally liberal Western PA. And the people you have been out campaigning with who are enthusiastic, i certainly hope that this enthusiasm is felt all thru the state since it will be crucial in determinging the next Senator from PA. It will also determine who exactly knows what they are talking about on these Message Boards as well.

[Badray]

I think that it is very telling that in order to win this primary, Specter's major appeal has been to Democrats to switch to the GOP to vote for him.

The AP just ran a story on this (it's posted on our PA page) and he made a similar personal appeal at 2 Jewish community meetings. What he failed to realize (or forgot in his desparation) was that the second meeting was all GOP.

[Dr. Scarpetta]

To AZGOPer:

As a Pennsylvanian, I promised Specter's office I wouldn't vote for him again after the Scottish vote, and I won't. I voted for him in the past, but I've had it with him.

[Sun]

Rep. Toomey was a guest on one of the Christian radio shows. That in itself proves he is pro-life. And more importantly, his voting record proves it.

When are the primaries? Forgive my ignorance, but I am from NYS, but have been following this important race.