Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Could Bush have won Pennsylvania if he would have endorsed Toomey instead of Spector?
Don'tmoveon.org ^ | 11/4/04

Posted on 11/04/2004 8:30:06 AM PST by truthandlife

Could President Bush have won Pennsylvania if he would have endorsed Toomey instead of Spector? Toomey lost in the Republican primary (49½ to 50½ %). Things were looking pretty good for Toomey until Bush weighed in. He could have left it at a pro-forma statement of support, but instead he came to Pittsburgh to stand beside Specter and say: "I appreciate my friendship with Arlen Specter. He's been a friend for quite a while. I'm proud to campaign for him. I think he's earned another term in the United States Senate. He's a bit independent-minded sometimes, but there's nothing wrong with that."

Concerning this independence of mind, Ann Coulter writes: "More than any other person in America, Arlen Specter is responsible for a runaway Supreme Court that has turned every political issue into a 'constitutional' matter, giving radical liberals an uninterrupted string of victories in the culture wars."

When Toomey seemed to be closing the gap despite kind words from on high for his opponent, Specter put out campaign ads with the theme "Pat Toomey vs. George W. Bush" and touted Bush’s support in a last minute blitz of telephone calls.

Now Arlen Spector at a news conference less than 12 hours after winning a record fifth Senate term, Specter wasted no time in asserting himself.

"If you have a race that is won by a percent or two, you have a narrowly divided country, and that's not a traditional mandate," he said. "President Bush will have that very much in mind."

Could Bush have won Pennsylvania if the Republicans would have had a more conservative candidate to vote for in the Senate? Would more conservatives have voted in Pennsylvania?

What does Bush and the Senate need to do to punish Arlen Specter?


TOPICS: Politics/Elections; US: Pennsylvania; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: battleground; gwb2004; specter; toomey
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last

1 posted on 11/04/2004 8:30:07 AM PST by truthandlife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

I dunno...I think Toomey would have lost in PA.


2 posted on 11/04/2004 8:32:12 AM PST by RockinRight (Bush's rallies look like World Series games. Kerry's rallies look like Little League games.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Yes - that and "supressing" the massive voter fraud in Philly...


3 posted on 11/04/2004 8:33:04 AM PST by 2banana (They want to die for Islam and we want to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight

We'll never know if Toomey would have won. But we'd still be better off with 54 senators and no Chairman Specter.


4 posted on 11/04/2004 8:33:26 AM PST by The Old Hoosier (Right makes might.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight

Specter got more votes than John Kerry in PA. There were over 150,000 people who voted for Kerry and Specter. None of those people would have voted for Pat Toomey. Arlen Specter is arguably the most popluar politician in Pennsylavnia. It sucks, but that's the truth.


5 posted on 11/04/2004 8:33:55 AM PST by Dems_R_Losers (Proud Reagan Alumna!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
I think Bush could have won Pennsylvania if we could exclude Philadelphia, he could have won Michigan if we could exclude Detroit, he could have won Winconsin if we could exclude Milwaukee, and I think he may had a chance in Illinois if we could exclude Chicago.
6 posted on 11/04/2004 8:34:04 AM PST by longhorn too
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: truthandlife
No, Philadelphia is to much dead weight dragging the whole state down. I supported Toomey in the primaries and did not vote for Sphincter. The conservative turnout here in Berks county was incredible and I don't think it could have been much better.
8 posted on 11/04/2004 8:34:53 AM PST by ol painless (ol' painless is out of the bag)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2banana

I don't quite understand why the Republicans didn't do more about vote fraud this time around in Pennsylvania. Bush was suppose to win in 2000 with Ridge in office and he lost because of vote fraud. Same thing in 2004 because of governor Ed Rendall's Democrat Vote Fraud Machine.

I


9 posted on 11/04/2004 8:35:05 AM PST by truthandlife (http://www.neverforgetneveragain.com -- If you want Bush re-elected pass on this video link!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Not likely, sorry.


10 posted on 11/04/2004 8:35:47 AM PST by HitmanLV (I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight

>>>>I dunno...I think Toomey would have lost in PA.

I don't think you just ask if Toomey would have won or lost. You also have to ask what his place on the ticket would have meant for Bush. I'm guessing that some PA conservatives, disgusted with Bush's endorsement, stayed home. The results in PA just don't seem to match the results elsewhere in my mind.

I think they would have come and voted if Toomey had been on the ballet, and its hard to say how much that could have helped the president there.

patent


11 posted on 11/04/2004 8:36:18 AM PST by patent (A baby is God's opinion that life should go on. Carl Sandburg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

No way to win PA until you get Pilly votes from 80% Demon to 65% Demon


12 posted on 11/04/2004 8:37:09 AM PST by Rippin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
I despise Specter as much as anyone around here, but there's no way that Bush couldn't back him. Bush is the leader of the party, and the party's incumbents NEED to know that the party won't sandbag them. Bush's backing of Specter didn't earn him any loyalty from Specter himself, but it certainly earned him the loyalty of many other officeholders. They know they can count on the Big Man, no question at all.

Toomey will be back. There's talk of putting him up against Rendell.

13 posted on 11/04/2004 8:37:18 AM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

See:

Phillly Fraud by the numbers (a logical look at Philadelphia)


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1268546/posts


14 posted on 11/04/2004 8:37:19 AM PST by 2banana (They want to die for Islam and we want to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dems_R_Losers
There were over 150,000 people who voted for Kerry and Specter.

These votes were from the Union-bots. The AFL-CIO endorsed Specter over Hoeffel.

15 posted on 11/04/2004 8:38:18 AM PST by Mannaggia l'America
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Toomey would have definitely lost. However, it would have made no difference to Bush's showing in PA. I can understand how many think think the senate Republicans would be better off without Specter, but I disagree. This is likely Specter's last term, and I don't see him actively blocking the President's judicial selections.


16 posted on 11/04/2004 8:39:24 AM PST by Yancey Ward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
No. The fix was in by Rendell. Philadelphia county delivered the additional 300K votes required to carry PA. Oddly no one was suspicious that the largest county in the state was the first to post their returns while the smaller ones arrived much later.
17 posted on 11/04/2004 8:45:00 AM PST by PA Engineer (Liberalism is a Hate Crime-Liberate America from the occupation media!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
The short answer to this question is no.

It's based on a fundamentally incorrect assumption that conservatives didn't turn out, or if we did, we didn't vote for the President. The GOTV effort in PA was huge, and successful. And conservative Republicans went for Bush. We were angry over the endorsement, and we're still angry because Specter is such a hyperinflated windbag who's done so much to harm the conservative cause, and because unlike GWB and Rick Santorum, we know he isn't finished with that yet.

The "Republicans" who went for Kerry are Country Clubbers living in the Philly suburbs. Last time, they went for Gore. This time, they went for Kerry. If anything, Specter could have helped us with this group: they're his kind of "Republican." He did not. To my knowledge he didn't even make a single positive statement about the President during the campaign, anywhere, anytime.

To win Pennsylvania, Bush needed to flip two areas. He needed to get the votes of ethnic Catholics in Coal Country who went for Reagen twice. He made some progress, but he didn't get as much as he needed. He also needed to flip the Philly suburbs back into the Republican column. He didn't.

Theories about rampant fraud or derailment by angry conservatives don't wash. Fraud happens, but you don't come up 125,000 votes short. No significant number of conservatives was so determined to punish Bush that they stayed home. The stakes were too high.

Those of us who know Specter knew we wouldn't have to do anything to punish the President for his foolish lapse: Specter is going to punish Bush plenty in the next four years, without any help from deranged right wingers.

18 posted on 11/04/2004 8:47:59 AM PST by FredZarguna (Ready now thy pajamas. For the Dark Queen begins to gather all evil things unto herself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
I think Bush had a slight chance of winning PA if Specter wasn't on the ballot. Pennsylvania is a strong pro-life state (they elected a pro-life Democrat to two terms as governor) - and having Specter on the ticket meant the GOP had to tip-toe around that issue instead of pulling out all the stops.

And, in the ultimate irony of this election, the GOP removed the main obstructionists for conservative judges in the Senate - only to have that role replaced by one of their own, that they could have gotten rid of as well.

19 posted on 11/04/2004 8:48:38 AM PST by dirtboy (Tagline temporarily out of commission due to excessive intake of gin-soaked raisins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Weigh this carefully. In the politics of yesteryear, as expressed by another President from Texas, LBJ, this would have been "Keeping his p****r in my pocket", but I am sure that George W. Bush is nowhere nearly that pragmatic or cynical. As it is, Arlen Specter is beholden to Bush now, and as chair of the Judiciary Committee, is in a position to steer the nominations for the Federal bench, all the way up to the Supreme Court. All Bush should have to do is pick up the phone, and the wheels are already greased.

If Bill Frist can show some cojones, and hold the Democrats' feet to the fire when they threaten a filibuster, by keeping any filibuster going non-stop until they sit down, he may just be able to break that tactic for good. At best, the Democrats will abandon the tactic for good, and at the minimum, it would put them on notice, there is just not much tolerance for disruptive activities.


20 posted on 11/04/2004 8:53:07 AM PST by alloysteel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson