Specter-Toomey turnout low! Good Toomey News!

National Review / The Corner ^ | 4/27/04 | KJL

[Josh in PA]

STUFF FROM PA. [KJL] Most of this is cribbed from an email from a good, insidery source, with permission:

***Various sources in and around the Philadelphia suburbs report unusually low turnout. This is good news for Toomey, because the white-bread upper-middle class suburbs are the hot bed of squishy Republicanism.

***Broadly, polling sites have shown low turnout to this point. Poll officials outside of Harrisburg and north of Troy report low turnout. At one polling place outside of Troy, about 10 percent of registered Republicans had voted before 2 p.m. Low turnout statewide helps Toomey, because conservative Toomey backers are bound to show up, while Specter's backers will be more likely to decide something else is more worth their while.

***Weather so far has been good. Weather Channel, however, forecasts ugly weather, maybe rain or sleet in Philadelphia tonight. Doppler shows rain just hitting Philly. Rain may be spotty, rather than a big storm. Sleet hit Pittsburgh earlier today according to source in Allegheny Co.

***An exit poll in Lancaster Co. shows a slim lead for Toomey, 52-48. But this is very unscientific. It was of 113 voters at 23 polling places in the Co.

***A statewide conservative call-in show welcomed listeners to debate the race. Right away, they had Toomey callers. It took them 19 minutes to get a Specter backer on the air.

***Unscientific interviews show all late breakers going Toomey's way. This is promising for the 4-10 percent undecideds in most recent polls. Many pro-lifers are backing Specter because of Santorum's and Bush's endorsements, we also found.

***Specter had recorded phone calls going into central Pa. last night, with the voice of President Bush (likely from last Monday's rally in Pittsburgh) expressing his full support for Specter. Specter has spent his last $5 on get-out-the-vote efforts. The Philadelphia Inquirer carried the headline about the race above the fold on page A-1.

***A good source has spoken to folks at seven polling places. None of them had Specter workers present.

[Marylander]

5 pm: poll worker in NE Philly said very few showed up.

[GoMonster]

Does anyone know when the polls in PA close?

[Recon by Fire]

It;'s better to have a Republican voting with the Dems than a Dem voting with the Dems.

Please splain the difference!

It is better to have a Republican voting with the Republicans.

[eureka!]

8:00 p.m. Eastern.

[Steve Eisenberg]

Does anyone know when the polls in PA close?

Just did at 8. I voted a half hour ago, in the rain, and I only saw Democrats.

I live in the kind of Main Line neighborhood, just outside Philadelphia, that would seem made for Specter, but most of the lawn signs for the race around here are for Toomey.

Persoanlly, I'm a moderate by FR standards and the kind of voter Specter, I would think, needed, but I couldn't go there. Let an International Criminal Court judge my nephew fighting in Baghdad? Don't think so.

[Patriot62]

It is of course better to have a Republican voting with the Republicans. In the case of Specter, he was hardly a loyal Republican and often voted against the party. But he was a Republican and thus counted towards the Republican majority in Congress no matter how he voted. Thus the Republicans control the committees and many other procedural aspects of the Senate that are just as important as winning any vote.

If Toomey is unable to defeat the Democrat challenger in November, than the Republican majority in the Senate is in Jeapardy, with all that entails.

[jwalsh07]

Specter is a fiscal moderate, a social liberal and constitutionally challenged. And that's being rather kind to Arlen.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

I'm not from PA but strongly support Toomey and have twice sent him donations. Still . . .

The various reports on turnout are interesting, but in all the years I've been following them here at FR, they are invariably the same: "heavy turnout here in our conservative area," "really light in the [insert name of conservative opponent] area."

So I've come to put absolutely no stock in these reports. We'll know soon enough.

[Steve Eisenberg]

we STILL need to get rid of RINOs. We are losing the Republican Party, folks

I can't remember all the names (Pell, Packwood, Cohen), but there used to be a lot more unambiguously liberal Republican senators than there are now. Specter's survival to this point does not show we are losing, it is just a holdover from the past.

[Spaulding]

Josh, while your enthusiasm reflects what representation is all about, you, nor anyone else in the US has any assurance that their votes are counted or applied to published totals. The US has not had an auditable voting mechansim for several decades - longer in major metropolitan areas such as Cook, Dade, and San Francisco counties.

I'm not suggesting conspiracies, simply stating a fact. I design auditable systems, systems which the FDA demands pharmaceutical and chemical assay firms use to validate analyis, and lack of which would cause them to be shut down by the government or trail lawyers. Recounts are impossible without having everyone vote again. The courts and US Justice Department have protected the secrecy, yes, secrecy of the process - the counting software, the chain of possession (just try asking your precinct supervisor what happens to your vote).

So, while I'd probably go with Toomey, if I were a Pennsylvanian, I am always aware that whomever wins, the decision was not necessarily made by a presumptive electorate.

We are presumed such fools as be satisfied with arguing for and contributing to our favorites, and always assuming that some benevolent authority is listening to us, counting the little man's vote alongside a that of Soros (does he vote in the US?) or Fonda. We in California see bond measures we didn't vote for pass again and again, figuring the other guys just don't understand graft and corruption. But inniatives gather countable signatures on paper, and guess what? A different method of counting shows a different California. What would our country be if votes could be verified?

Paper ballots are the simplest way to return us to representative republicanism. I've read of other mechanisms, but question the need for such elaborate hardware and software, much as I appreciate the benefit the money might bring to my industry.

[Sun]

Thanks for the info; however, I'm thinking when I went to school, anything under 65% would be considered as failing. IMHO, AT THE VERY LEAST 65 would be considered a moderate (and that's a maybe).

I'm surprised Kennedy did that well (3). :)

[Sun]

What makes me think that we are losing the Republican Party, is that we have a Republican president, with a Republican-controlled Congress, and liberalism still seems to be in control. For instance, President Bush wants school choice, wanted the taxes to be even lower & can't even get all his pro-life, conservative judicial nominees approved.

[Steve Eisenberg]

Paper ballots are the simplest way to return us to representative republicanism.

The most auditable system combines paper ballots with public voting. We should be willing to publicly own up to our opinions. Then, if a close election, we could look up how our vote was recorded and complain as need be.

There is nothing particularly American about our Australian ballots.

[Alberta's Child]

I don't necessarily feel like I have a horse in this race, but regardless of his politics, Specter's 24 years in the Senate is about 12 too many.

[Sir Valentino]

Specter is a moderate, not a liberal.

Specter is a *RINO* and he is *REAL* liberal. If you think he belongs in the Senate, maybe you should go *BACK* to DU...