In 2001, Fast Eddie crushed Casey in the primary simply because he was able to bring out the Philly vote in big numbers.
2006 is an off year election and you won't be seeing big turnout in Philly for Casey who is from the NE section of the state. Even though the lefties hate Santorum with a passion, Casey will not appeal to them much more because he is virtually identical with Rick on the one issue that matters most to the left --- the un-holy sacrament of abortion.
I see a growing Republican organization in Western PA along with ethnic Regan Democrats being able to return their hometown boy to the Senate. It matters much in the Western part of the state that 'one of theirs' is in the Senate to ballance the Eastern part of the state.
Just MHO.
The National Review yesterday speculated that Santorum's support of Specter over grassroots hero Pat Toomey may have angered his base, lowering turnout. I can't find it (it's in the Corner's archives), but this was posted today:
"IT'S TOO LATE... [John J. Miller]
But doesn't the case for Pat Toomey look a lot stronger today? It's no secret that Specter in any position of authority is a disaster for conservatives, but Specter's conservative supporters (such as Rick Santorum) kept making a prudential argument: The GOP Senate majority is just too slim to take a chance on Pat Toomey, especially when Specter is a sure thing for re-election. This is not an outrageous argument. But consider it today: Republicans don't need Specter for a majority, not even accounting for the possibility of a guy like Chafee bolting the party. What's more, Specter clearly didn't help put Bush over the top in Pennsylvania. So remind me: As we consider the prospect of Judiciary Committee Chairman Specter, why was this a good bargain? Last April, I was convinced that it was worth taking a chance on Toomey. Today, even more so.
Posted at 11:35 AM"