You've never asked me, but I've explained it a dozen times at least here.
Right now we are 55 to 45. If the Dem had won (against either Toomey -- had he won -- or Specter, the Senate would be 54-46.
We still are the majority in this case. No downside.
Without Specter (let me say that again. It sounds so good.) WITHOUT SPECTER, Jon Kyl becomes the Judiciary Chairman. Kyl is a reliable pro life conservative.
No downside, only up as far as I can see so far.
Joe Hoeffel becomes that junior senator in the minority party. No special committee assignments, no power to speak of, just one vote out of 100.
Now, if I remember the ACU numbers correctly
Specter 43% Hoeffel 8% ACU deficit 35% in the overall 100 member Senate makeup or an average (theoretical) drop of 1/3rd point per senator. Ouch. That looks bad, doesn't it?
Now lets look at the other part of the equation.
Kyl 97% Specter 43% ACU enhancement 54% within the 18 member committee. An average (theoretical) pickup of 3 points per member.
Overall gain 54% Overall loss 35% = 19% net gain in conservatism and in an extremely important and powerful position.
Yep, there's the upside.
The cushion is the key. If the loss of the marginal RINO changes control of the Senate or the House, that is a new ballgame. That is why we need to pick our battles with some care...
And I agree that Specter is an abomination, and I would rather have had Toomey lose than Specter win. But the people of PA are somewhat RINO-like so electing a RINO is not a surprise...
We're at 55-45 now. Using your strategy, we give the DEMs Chaffee, Collins, McCain, Specter, DeWine, Hagel, Graham, Snowe. Am I forgetting any? That's 8. So, if your strategy worked on every RINO, we'd have a 53-47 DEM majority, and we'd be saying hello to Majority Leader Reid. Good idea LOL.