Posted on 03/04/2005 1:29:10 PM PST by Sub-Driver
Robert Casey Jr. Says He'll Run Against Santorum by KYW's Tony Romeo
Robert Casey Jr., being wooed by national Democrats to challenge incumbent Republican senator Rick Santorum for his US Senate seat from Pennsylvania, has decided to jump into the race.
Earlier this week, Governor Rendell was asked about the prospects for a fight over the Democratic nomination for US Senate:
“I hope, in all cases, if we can avoid a Democratic primary, that would be a good result. But until anybody declares their intentions, it’s impossible. I’m not going to pick up the phone and talk to other candidates until I hear that someone definitely wants to run.”
After the governor made those remarks on Wednesday, former Pennsylvania treasurer (and former Republican) Barbara Hafer told the Associated Press she would run.
Then on Friday, when current treasurer Robert Casey Jr. also said he would run, Rendell did pick up the phone. Hafer has released a statement saying she’ll honor the governor’s wishes and stay out of the race.
(Excerpt) Read more at kyw1060.com ...
PING!
one think is a curiousity to me..here we are on a conservative board yet you back someone who back an obvious lefty over a conservative. I'm curious how you reconcile this.
I keep repeating that Pat Toomey was an unknown with unproven conservative credentials.
He was in the bar and restaurant business before entering politics in 1999.
He was not a shoe in to beat the Democrat.
Specter was and did.
I voted to give the President a chance to appoint the next Supreme Court.
I'm not going to repeat this again unless you can detail what Mr. Toomey's legendary conservative accomplishments were prior to the election?
i listened to his victory speech on kyw..he thanked every left wing organization you could name but not one word for anything to do with conservatism.
Judging from the remarks on this board so far Santorum is going to have a fight within the republican party plus the dems, and Rendell is a slime ball and with the organ stealers' son running, this race is going to be very very close.
i don't see how you think that is a victory for anything conservative
rendell is a real slime ball...someone who thinks he's running philly and who presses for laws accordingly
Rotty, you're getting to be like the libs who keep repeating "Bush lied people died".
Man, you voted for a democrat for goodness sakes!
while i voted for hoffel i also vote for bush in the same ballot, something i didn't do in 2000
I got your back, sf.
just like rick had a chance to support the left or right in the primary and choose specter over toomey?
Yes, but in the last election Bush lost the state by only 2%--less than twice the 5% he won FL (that other oh-so-famous swing state). Given that, in the next election much more emphasis should be place upon PA, but of course the media probably won't.
I didn't state it was a swing state. I stated it had the potential to BE a swing state. Ousting Santorum does nothing to advance the potential.
If Alrlen won he was a sure thing to head the judiciary commitee also and the way the courts have been acting that is more important than who get's to be senator even if it is a senator from the governing party. We all knew what specter would do once he was in that position.
If we are to speak about political calculations, Santorum made a calculation he felt was right. To support Spectre.
He is raked over the coals for it. Yet you suggest another calculation that would result in his loss from the Senate is acceptable. How is that any different? Seems we're right back where we started with my contention there is absolutely no difference. Equally wrong.
BTW, conservatives made a calculation in '92. 8 years of Clinton and his wife still in the background resulted. I refuse to stand aside while the same mistake is repeated.
From three Presidential elections I have followed I have learned three things.
1) You don't toss someone overboard because they failed once or twice to be replaced by a suspect unknown in the misguided assumption it will teach Republicans a lesson.
2) You don't nominate someone to run because they have paid their dues and it's their turn to run.
3) You don't assume your vote doesn't matter.
I've also learned from the Democrats that decades of unquestioned obeisance to a Party results in that party taking you for granted.
I am not in favor of supporting Reps no matter what. But neither will I embrace the mistake of '92. In Santorum's case I see conservatives intending to make the same mistake of '92, and it is not to be congratulated.
"We all knew what specter would do once he was in that position."
Well, what's he done so far?
You're from Philly? Right?
santorum ensured specter would be the head of the judicary which basicly screws conservatives in the confirmation process..the last election in Pa was about much more than who would be senator
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.