Veteran GOP Sen. Specter switches parties

'Political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans,' he says


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30456741/

WASHINGTON - Veteran Republican Sen. Arlen Specter announced Tuesday that he is switching parties, a move would give Democrats a filibuster-proof 60 seats if Al Franken is seated in the Minnesota race.

veeeery interesting.

He is the only republican I have voted for in every senate election he is in.

Well, this is getting repetitive.

He is the only republican I have voted for in every senate election he is in.

same.
I've considered him Democrat since I moved to PA. But he's up for re-election and was going to be in a tough battle in the primary. He switched to try to save his hide.

Curious...

The first priority of any politician is to get re-elected, he did it to save his own seat. I think that alone says more about the man than what he has voted for or against.

I heard on a radio show he was one of the few moderate republicans left, and that he was already having some issues with the more conservative leaning republicans.

No reason for him not to switch.

He would lose the Republican primary... but all polls show him winning a statewide general election against Toomey by 30 points.

Politics is war, the smart general picks the ground he wants to fight on, not his opponent.

No surprise... that man is just saving his job.. It's not about his political and moral integrity at all.

I've never been a big supporter of a politician switching horses once he was voted in. To me this is breaking the trust of those that elected them in the first place.

The cynical side of me wonders from who and how much money did it take to help him change his stripes?

If he can win a general election and Toomey can't..... It seems to me Specter isn't the one who needs saving.

Keep driving out more Republicans. Give Snowe and Collins a few more pushes... Damn Rinos! Who needs them anyway. Keep attacking McCain. PURITY ABOVE ALL!

As far as his payment Fanny...


No serious primary challenge from Dem side. Any potentials (Joe Sestak) will be discouraged, promised full support next time around or be given positions in the administration.
Obama campaigning for him.
Chairmanship of an important committee or two.
Co-Sponsorship of at least 1 major piece of legislation (look toward health care)

In return Specter will in all likelihood vote for all three of Obama's major proposals (healthcare, education, environment) and not run again in 2016. Additionally I would bet that Specter and the Unions have an agreement to get EFCA passed after the midterm (2010) elections.

It's a good point and thanks for explaining that L2. Do you see my point however? He was voted in to fill a seat, he is not the position but a civil servant right?

At some point the politicians need to come to remember they work for those that put them in office and it's not a position up for bid.

They've mutated what these seats actually stand for.

He voted with democrats on that bail out bill, along with Republicans Snowe and Collins of Maine.
Pretty much ever since then, right wing conservatives have been calling for his ouster from the party. Aka the Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity types, which appears every day there the real face and voice of the Republican party.
Specter is smart enough to see where he isnt wanted both politically and personally. Moderates (those with a brain that think for themselves) in that party are nearly extinct now. Its the party line or the highway these days. With the way Specter votes, he was never a reliable straight party vote.
He sees that the general election, is overwhelming moderate in his state and the right wing conservative folks are a smaller faction. He would loose in a Republican primary, mainly based on his voting against his party earlier this year.
Why stay in a party that doesn't like or want you? or a party that's increasingly becoming so far out to the right, that its destroying itself slowly. Theres no room for moderates there anymore. (I wouldnt be surprised if Snowe and Collins follow his lead, or even John Mcain, that would be a disaterous blow to the Republicans, even though the Limbaugh folks would love to see them go as well).
Hes not gonna be a reliable vote for Democrats, any more then he was for Republicans. Hes more Independant, then a party guy. I do think he always fitted better with the Dems.
The Dems are alot more diverse and just don't have the same kind of rigid party discipline that the Repubs instill in there members (except for those couple pesky moderates, which there weeding out in there pursuit of a pure wacko party).

Fandros the same people who voted him in as a moderate conservative will support him in the next election, regardless of party affiliation. He followed his convictions instead of his party, and now is simply realligning more with how he voted.
Its not like all of Pennsylvania doesn't have a chance to vote him out - but they won't.

Allamar beat me. Read what he said instead.

For this debates sake I don't care which party he belongs to. He was elected in a primary to represent his party against the other party in general elections. He won and is supposed to be "serving" those voters will.

By being allowed to get away with this he's illustrating the obvious. Politicians don't work for their constituants, instead we're putting them in a place of power that allows them to do as they will. Usually at the behest of special interest wishes as well as his/her own petty shows of power.

If he wants to leave the party, fine do so ..step down and join the other party during the next elections. At which time you go through the primary of that party and hold to those lines throughout.

I've always had an issue with any of this level of bs.

Fandros, I think you're pretty confused on this issue.
In your mind Republican Party are his constituents but Citizens of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania aren't constituents?

Why should the will of an artificial non-Constitutional entity (the Republican Party) be more important than the will of the people and Constitutional mandate who elected him into office for the duration of 6 years? Politicians should work for their constituents, they shouldn't work for their political party - you are advocating the reverse.

The political party is never mentioned in the Constitution. Mostly, it's an after-the-fact phenomenon...

The first priority of any politician is to get re-elected, he did it to save his own seat. I think that alone says more about the man than what he has voted for or against.


I couldn't have said it better myself.........

He did an interview a few weeks ago where he stated that nearly 200,000 voters in pennsylvania switched from repulican to democrat and that he is following his constituents.

Also, there were some people in the gop that were suggesting mc cain should go to, because he isnt right enough.

It could actually be a pretty exciting time in US Politics. The Senate and House Dems pick up a minor gain in 2010, Sarah Palin gets nominated and fails miserably in 2012, and by 2016 the party falls to the wayside while the Democrat party splits between "Liberals" and "Moderates". It seems inconceivable and yet in the past few hundred years we've already had 5 major party shifts (Bull Moose, Whig, etc.)

None of that seems likely.

None of that seems likely.


What seems likely?

If recent history serves, we'll have Obama for 8 years, but the Democrats will lose their majority before he's out. We just keep swinging between extremes, slightly out of phase.

Palin in 2012 is comical though.

Recent history doesn't mean shit. What is the recent history of a Black president solving an economic crisis in his first term, exactly? Recent history of a president getting elected with more than a 50% popular vote doesn't even exist.

Our country is very young and we've bucked parties 5 times (1792: Federalist vs Democratic-Republican, 1828: Jacksonian Democrats vs Whig, 1854: Democrats vs Republicans, 1912: Bull Moose aka Progressive vs Democrats vs Republicans). The Republican party which my grandfather was a member of (Philadelphia Republican Party Chairman) doesn't exist anymore and the Democratic party isn't a reasonable alternative for many. If the Republican party doesn't begin to correct course, it'll disappear. If nothing changes now, Obama's reputation alone will carry the Democrats through the midterms and in 2012.

I've never been a big supporter of a politician switching horses once he was voted in. To me this is breaking the trust of those that elected them in the first place.

For Kelraz and Fandros:

That quote applies only to those who vote for the wrapper a canidate comes in: IE: I am a Republican. I live in a Red State. I vote for Republicans. I don't pay attention to the issues or their stances, but all I know is that Person A running for Office B is a Republican so I am obligated to vote for them. Even if they are a completely incompetent dope with no backbone or morals.

Fandros, your remark represents everything that is wrong with politics in the United States which is people just toeing the party line with no regard to the issues.

Kelraz, you might just be on to something.

solving an economic crisis

Thank you. That was the funniest thing I've read in days; maybe weeks.

He did an interview a few weeks ago where he stated that nearly 200,000 voters in pennsylvania switched from repulican to democrat and that he is following his constituents.

Also, there were some people in the gop that were suggesting mc cain should go to, because he isnt right enough.

That doesn't wash, he's not showing proof that those 200k were his voters to start with.

For Kelraz and Fandros:

That quote applies only to those who vote for the wrapper a canidate comes in: IE: I am a Republican. I live in a Red State. I vote for Republicans. I don't pay attention to the issues or their stances, but all I know is that Person A running for Office B is a Republican so I am obligated to vote for them. Even if they are a completely incompetent dope with no backbone or morals.

Fandros, your remark represents everything that is wrong with politics in the United States which is people just toeing the party line with no regard to the issues.

Kelraz, you might just be on to something.

Wth are you smoking over there in China? A politician is voted in under a label to vote for standards that party represents , by in large.

If that wasn't the case he'd not buck the party and dare to run in his own party next primary.

For the record, I don't vote party lines myself......but I'm not elected am I to serve the party?

If we could vote on the individual as a standard we wouldn't need either party.

Truth is Specter is bought and paid for by his new puppet masters. It is he that represents what is wrong with politics today. Where there is no integrity and instead it's all about self sustaining greed. To remain in power is their drive and that my friend is what's wrong with America today.

Wth are you smoking over there in China? A politician is voted in under a label to vote for standards that party represents , by in large.

If that wasn't the case he'd not buck the party and dare to run in his own party next primary.

For the record, I don't vote party lines myself......but I'm not elected am I to serve the party?

If we could vote on the individual as a standard we wouldn't need either party.

Truth is Specter is bought and paid for by his new puppet masters. It is he that represents what is wrong with politics today. Where there is no integrity and instead it's all about self sustaining greed. To remain in power is their drive and that my friend is what's wrong with America today.

Honestly man ... normally you know what you're talking about, but you're way off base here. You haven't even bothered to take a look at his voting record or any of the Republican outcry against him over the past few years. Like I said earlier in the thread, my grandfather worked for the guy to help get him elected two decades ago. He was my Senator from birth until I moved to DC and got my very first vote at the age of 18. The party he originally ran for isn't the Republican Party today. So like me, he's moved on. Please, go look at his website and his 20 years of history before you make these uninformed judgments.

Fandros. I won't deny that your are correct on the assumption that people vote for their party's offerings based on some shared idealogy. Its what electing government representatives to serve in your best interests is all about. Now what happens when it seems that the party you trust is not applying their efforts in a productive manner? Or their are offering sub par canidates whose policies are way out of date? Or their lastest track record is the subject of possible federal investigations and war crimes tribunals? What do you do then? People have been Catholic for a long time but you know what? That faith is way behind the times and seems to alude to molestation of young boys as being A-OK.

Oh, and if you really want to dog on the greedy puppet master, which I am assuming is Obama, do we really need to go there? Cheney? Halliburton?

If Speckter was sitting the fence, and was just going the way of his constituents, then what is the big deal? If Republicans never even elected him than who has he done a disservice to? Just the ones that didn't do their homework? There is no law that says a Republican can't vote for a Democrat based on who is offering the better deal. You are voting for the person you feel would best serve you in government based on what they are offering. It seems more sour grapes then anything. He wants to keep his job and not go down with the ship.
Would it be better if he went down with the ship? It seems to be not a worthy cause to be a martyr for.

For Fandros, from wikipedia:

Specter states that he is "personally opposed to abortion", but is "a supporter of a woman's right to choose".[33][34] He received a 20% rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America based on certain votes related to the regulation of abortion. [35]

Specter strongly supports the death penalty and opposes most gun control, voting against the Brady Bill, background checks at gun shows, the ban on assault weapons, and trigger locks for handguns.[3] His work has included numerous articles on the deterring effect the death penalty has on future crimes.

He supports affirmative action and voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1991. He was one of only four Republicans to vote against the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act and in recent years has been less enthusiastic about weakening consumer protection laws than many members of his party. In 1995 he was the only Republican to vote to limit tax cuts to individuals with incomes of less than one million dollars. He voted against CAFTA. Specter also supports an increase in the federal minimum wage. He is a leading supporter of the U.S. Public Service Academy.

On the immigration issue, Specter supports a "pathway to citizenship" and a "guest worker program" which opponents call amnesty. He introduced Senate bill S. 2611 (the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006) on 6 April 2006, which was passed by the Senate on 25 May 2006 before reaching a stalemate in the House.[36]

Specter has received a 61% rating from AFL-CIO.[37] He voted for cloture on the Employee Free Choice Act in 2007. The vote failed to reach the 60-vote threshold that would have ended debate on the bill and allow it to pass. In 2009, Specter announced that he would not be voting for cloture on the Act in the 111th Congress.[38]

Specter supports LGBT rights with mixed positions.[39] He voted to prohibit job discrimination based on sexual orientation[39] but voted against including sexual orientation in the definition of hate crimes.[39]

Specter is opposed to same-sex marriage,[39] but is also opposed to a federal ban[39] and supports civil unions.

Pro-Choice, Pro-Affirmative Action, Pro-Consumer Protection Laws, Pro-Min Wage, Pro-Illegal Amnesty, Pro-Employee Free Choice Act (Ease in forming unions for workers), and Pro-Civil Unions. If you read all that, what party do you think he should be in?

Kelraz, I said I don't care which party he's defecting from. Hell it's not even about him tbh.

It's about anyone who gets elected on a party's platform. He owes it to them to stick under that flag. He's a public servent no?

It's, again, an example of how Washington has been corrupted to an extreme. They, those elected, have become a power unto themselves responsible to noone but their own wallet. They are elected to fill a seat, not rule based soley on thier ego's and wallets.

Lum, as for my comment about a puppet master. Again it's not really about this case alone. It's about any of them that jump ship. I wouldn't be suprised if they were bought and paid for by "someone" whether it be Halliburton, Soros or some other group of folks with monies to dispense in hopes of guiding this country without votes.

For Fandros, from wikipedia:



Pro-Choice, Pro-Affirmative Action, Pro-Consumer Protection Laws, Pro-Min Wage, Pro-Illegal Amnesty, Pro-Employee Free Choice Act (Ease in forming unions for workers), and Pro-Civil Unions. If you read all that, what party do you think he should be in?


Hell I'm "mostly" pro choice, I'm in a union and I think we need to do more for those out of work now due to the recession. ;P

Doesn't mean I'm a democrat, I'm not and hell I don't consider myself fully a part of either party. It has nothing to do with my point. He was elected as a Republican and has stayed that for years. I don't expect him to vote with the party, hell in an ideal world he should take every constituent's wishes into account and vote as they wish. Of course that wouldn't be feasible but still...

When his constituents are mostly Democrat, him switching parties is following his constituent's wishes! You keep saying you wish he'd do this, and condem him for it in the same paragraph.

The cynical side of me wonders from who and how much money did it take to help him change his stripes? Since the agreement that the dems made with this guy is to support him in the next election even over any real Democrat, I suspect that Rush Limbaugh paid him to do this to fuck the Democratic party in the ass with a rusty corncob. But at the very least, this guy is trying to save his spot at the public trough where he has wallowed for the past 44 years. Even if he loses, his pension is more than 95% of Americans make. He's losing badly in the polls, so that if he doesn't switch, then he's not even going to be on the ballot to run for re-election. I don't know about PA, but I do know about election laws in CO and FL, and in both those states, the primary comes later than the date that an independant would need qualify for the ballot. CT was different, which was the only way that sore loserman was able to continue to wallow at the public trough while fucking America over.
The idea that Specter is a "liberal" Republican or even a "moderate" reflects how far to the Right both the GOP and our overall political spectrum has shifted.

...

Specter is also complaining incessently about the fact that Lieberman lost his primary and Specter only won his 2004 primary by 1%. This apparently demonstrates all sorts of bad things about our political process. They really do believe that they are divinely entitled to keep their seats forever, and anything which threatens that is intrinsically illegitimate and wrong.
Source (http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/28/specter/index.html) There is a good reason Arlen Specter has been a Republican for nearly 44 years: he affirms most of the defining beliefs of that party. Republicans today, in self-protective mode, are claiming that he has merely made official what was always true — that he is more of a Democrat than Republican. The Republican Party chairman, Michael Steele, today mocked what he called Mr. Specter’s “left-wing record.” But the claim that Senator Specter is “liberal,” “left-wing” or even “moderate” reflects how far to the right both the G.O.P. and our overall political spectrum has shifted.

Consider Arlen Specter’s most significant votes over the last eight years, ones cast in favor of such definitive right-wing measures as: the war in Iraq, the Military Commissions Act, Patriot Act renewal, confirmation of virtually every controversial Bush appointee, retroactive telecom immunity, warrantless eavesdropping expansions, and Bush tax cuts (several times).

This year alone, he has taken the Republican lead in opposing the pro-union Employee Free Choice Act and investigations into allegations of Bush administration crimes. That he was one of three Republican votes to support President Obama’s stimulus package does not negate the truth that time and again during the Bush era, Mr. Specter stood with Republicans on the most controversial and consequential issues.

Democrats will understandably celebrate today’s announcement, but beyond the questions of raw political power, it is mystifying why they would want to build their majority by embracing politicians who reject most of their ostensible views. Reports today suggest that Democratic officials promised Mr. Specter that the party establishment would support him, rather than a real Democrat, in a primary.

If true, few events more vividly illustrate the complete lack of core beliefs of Democratic leaders, as well as the rapidly diminishing differences between the parties. Why would Democrats want a full-blooded Republican representing them in the blue state of Pennsylvania? Senator Specter is highly likely to reprise the Joe Lieberman role for Democrats: a “Democrat” who leads the way in criticizing and blocking Democratic initiatives, forcing the party still further toward Republican policies.

The G.O.P. now resembles a religion more than a political party, where any deviance from established dogma is considered heresy that warrants excommunication. Its collapse into a Southern regional party has taken one large step forward. It is remarkable to watch an already marginalized party purposely shrink itself further. Nonetheless, given that Arlen Specter will still be Arlen Specter, the Republicans’ loss is not necessarily the Democrats’ gain.
Source (http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/28/what-kind-of-democrat-will-specter-be/)

I've always had an issue with any of this level of bs.

I don't remember you being up in arms when Lieberman left the Democratic Party, but I could be wrong.

I was upset but confused by how it was legal. Perhaps this isn't a real issue but it seems wrong at the core.

Kelraz, perhaps you think his constituents are Democrat. If that's the case , again, he should vacate his position ( step down ) and run under the Democratic platform in the primaries. He sure didn't come up through the Democratic primaries did he?

nm, it'll just be another issue in Washington that bugs me to no end that noone seems to think is a problem ;P

Political parties aren't in the Constitution. You really need to read up on this, you're making an ass of yourself. He was elected as the person, not the party, for 6 years. If he resigns the liberal Democrat Governor Ed Rendell picks a replacement which wouldn't do any justice for the Republican Party or the moderate conservatives Specter represents.

I was upset but confused by how it was legal. Perhaps this isn't a real issue but it seems wrong at the core.

Kelraz, perhaps you think his constituents are Democrat. If that's the case , again, he should vacate his position ( step down ) and run under the Democratic platform in the primaries. He sure didn't come up through the Democratic primaries did he?

nm, it'll just be another issue in Washington that bugs me to no end that noone seems to think is a problem ;P

He did it because it was about political survival, he was very candid about that. The primary voters are those registered republican and in PA that is a minority and is mostly ultra right social conservatives whose agenda is to be big brother and monitor peoples sexual behavior, television habits, what they read etc.. true big government.

Specter won the general elections because a majority of PA voters put him in office and that included a majority of democrats. The last time we voted in a social nut case was Santorum and he was not only a walking disaster but a public embarrassment for a state that is arguably one of the birthplaces of our country and the constitution.

PA election law does not allow a candidate to lose a primary and then run as an independent like Joe Lieberman did. If Specter lost it would be his political end and arguably a huge loss for the state.

What he has done is far from unprecedented it's been happening throughout the history of politics in the US...notably look back to the '90s when there were some defections of democrats to the other side.

Look at what the republican party has become, it is not a party of fiscal conservatives that is indisputable, it is a party that has in its agenda a desire to legislate behavior, sexual orientation, what we see on TV, what we read etc.. It is far from a party of real christian values, far from a party of the people, far from a party that supports the troops, far from a party that respects constitutional rights and the list could go on and on.

I'm not making an ass out of myself for having an opinion jesus christ man.

So you're saying the Republican party, and those registered in the party who donate monies for his election don't have a right to be miffed at him running through the their primaries?

You sir are the one looking like a jackass by pretending you can dictate my own opinion.

Calm down and move on to another thread, apparently this one is beyond you. This isn't merely about Specter, this is about the type of corruption where they become bigger than the seat they represent.

He did it because it was about political survival, he was very candid about that. The primary voters are those registered republican and in PA that is a minority and is mostly ultra right social conservatives whose agenda is to be big brother and monitor peoples sexual behavior, television habits, what they read etc.. true big government.

Specter won the general elections because a majority of PA voters put him in office and that included a majority of democrats. The last time we voted in a social nut case was Santorum and he was not only a walking disaster but a public embarrassment for a state that is arguably one of the birthplaces of our country and the constitution.

PA election law does not allow a candidate to lose a primary and then run as an independent like Joe Lieberman did. If Specter lost it would be his political end and arguably a huge loss for the state.

What he has done is far from unprecedented it's been happening throughout the history of politics in the US...notably look back to the '90s when there were some defections of democrats to the other side.

Look at what the republican party has become, it is not a party of fiscal conservatives that is indisputable, it is a party that has in its agenda a desire to legislate behavior, sexual orientation, what we see on TV, what we read etc.. It is far from a party of real christian values, far from a party of the people, far from a party that supports the troops, far from a party that respects constitutional rights and the list could go on and on.

For the record, and omg the last time, I understand why he'd want to leave the Republican party as it exists today. This isn't about Specter so much as it's about the bs they believe themselves to be allowed to do.

I'm not making an ass out of myself for having an opinion jesus christ man.

So you're saying the Republican party, and those registered in the party who donate monies for his election don't have a right to be miffed at him running through the their primaries?

You sir are the one looking like a jackass by pretending you can dictate my own opinion.

Calm down and move on to another thread, apparently this one is beyond you. This isn't merely about Specter, this is about the type of corruption where they become bigger than the seat they represent.

The money donated is for the re-election of Arlen Specter...it is not for the election of a party...those that are party voters will vote for the nut case Toomey.

The seat that Specter represents will either vote him in or out on election day. The republicans will have their candidate in Toomey. The democrats probably in Specter...and likely Specter will win...we're a state with a moderate majority.

For the record, and omg the last time, I understand why he'd want to leave the Republican party as it exists today. This isn't about Specter so much as it's about the bs they believe themselves to be allowed to do.


He can believe whatever he wants..it's about the voters and the voters of PA will pass that judgment.

There is no legality when it comes to party membership/switching, party policies and so forth (as mentioned previously). So people and play party leap frog if they wanted.

No one is arguing that people can/should be angry. If the donated to him, but one has to ask, if they donated to him, shouldnt they beleive in him and as previously posted the mans views are pretty Democratic.

Oh I happen to believe and support most of Specters opinions/votes. Just seems improper to me for him to switch parties and hold the position. Seems to me he should have to go through the primaries of the party he wants to join.

For that matter, tell me ya'll wouldn't be pissed if Obama suddenly decided he wanted to be a Republican. That he was going to change his party of choice?

For that matter, tell me ya'll wouldn't be pissed if Obama suddenly decided he wanted to be a Republican. That he was going to change his party of choice?

Its just a title. If obama said/did and beleive the same platforms topics as i do...i could give a rat's ass what party he is with.

Again, why should he have to step down? The constitution doesn't lay forth any concessions for political parties. In my perfect world there would be no parties or bullshit primaries and retarded rules. (like florida primaries not counting cause they moved a date WTF is that.)

I don't think the founding documents said anything about him wearing pants to the Senate daily either.

Not everything is covered , there are other guide lines than just that.

I'll ask again, where was this discussion from you when Lieberman left the Democratic party and didn't step down?

'I've never been a big supporter of a politician switching horses once he was voted in. To me this is breaking the trust of those that elected them in the first place.'

- Churchill crossed the floor. If you've lost faith in your party, I don't see it as being so distasteful.

I'll ask again, where was this discussion from you when Lieberman left the Democratic party and didn't step down?

I answered once Tale, do a bit of reading eh ;P

I said I was upset but not sure how in the hell it was allowed. You seem to be under the misconception that I'm some hardcore Republican. Hell I know for a fact I've voted for democrats more than most of ya'll have even been allowed to vote ;P

'I've never been a big supporter of a politician switching horses once he was voted in. To me this is breaking the trust of those that elected them in the first place.'

- Churchill crossed the floor. If you've lost faith in your party, I don't see it as being so distasteful.

You're sure not going to change the party from without. I'd have had more respect for him if he'd have formed up a mini revolution inside the party than I do when he ran away from it.

You're sure not going to change the party from without. I'd have had more respect for him if he'd have formed up a mini revolution inside the party than I do when he ran away from it.


That is for the young turks to do, who have less on their plate and are bringing new energy in to the party. Senator Specter has a pretty full plate in Washington, and from all accounts has done a good job in representing his constituents.

I understand completely the reaction to being told time and again that you have to vote with the party and not your beliefs (or conscience), and watching as that party steadily slides away from the principles it was founded upon.

This has raised the level of discussion of both term limits and the viability (or lack thereof) of the Independent Party. Senator Specter has been around Washington since President Reagan was sworn into office, and many believe he should let someone else have a shot; but, at the same time he has a record of doing right by the country and his state that many want to see continued. He obviously saw no chance of trying to continue as either Republican or Independent.

/Cue Larry the Cable Guy on guitar:

I believe his commitment to the work he does has much to do with his success in battling cancer, and once he no longer has that work available I believe his health will go downhill quickly.

It isn't his job to change the party. Its his job to represent his constituents. Its Michael Steel's job to change the party, yet he's shown he's powerless to Rush so its a moot point. I'm glad everyone else gets it.

I answered once Tale, do a bit of reading eh ;P

I said I was upset but not sure how in the hell it was allowed. You seem to be under the misconception that I'm some hardcore Republican. Hell I know for a fact I've voted for democrats more than most of ya'll have even been allowed to vote ;P

I see you acting like it's the end of the world now, but when someone left the Democratic party, it got nary the ire you show here towards Specter doing basically the same thing. There is one large exception though, Pennsylvania tends now to be a democratic leaning moderate state, and we all know that Connecticut is a predominantly Democratic leaning state. How did Lieberman have his constituents' best interests in mind leaving the party of which the majority of them were the member?

I am not saying one is better than the other or has a more 'valid' reason for leaving his party. I'm just trying to figure out the difference in the attitude 9 months apart aside from the party that each individual left.

why would you even bother changing a party. The whole reason to be in a political party is because you are a group of people of shared beliefs, and if you no longer share those beliefs, find the party that does, or make up your own.

omg, not once did I act like it's the end of the world. Man that's bs and you know it. I'm not even "outraged" I'm just not happy that it's allowed.

NM, apparently ya'll are enjoying your high seats up behind your judges desk.

Enjoy, how dare I have an issue with this ;P

I see you acting like it's the end of the world now, but when someone left the Democratic party, it got nary the ire you show here towards Specter doing basically the same thing. There is one large exception though, Pennsylvania tends now to be a democratic leaning moderate state, and we all know that Connecticut is a predominantly Democratic leaning state. How did Lieberman have his constituents' best interests in mind leaving the party of which the majority of them were the member?

I am not saying one is better than the other or has a more 'valid' reason for leaving his party. I'm just trying to figure out the difference in the attitude 9 months apart aside from the party that each individual left.

Man you are being purposely obtuse to the point of stupidity. I've said time and again this isn't really about Arlen but about all of them changing parties mid stream.

Go ahead Taleren, keep reading into the bullshit ya dern idiot. I was opposed to anyone changing parties , and have said it again and again though you keep trying to pigeon hole this to be solely about the most recent change.

whatever...

why would you even bother changing a party. The whole reason to be in a political party is because you are a group of people of shared beliefs, and if you no longer share those beliefs, find the party that does, or make up your own.

Lieberman was going to be voted out for having moved more to the center and supporting the moderate approach over the hard left line.

Specter was going to be voted out for having moved more to the center and supporting the moderate approach over the hard right line.

Lieberman moved to the Independent Party and won another term.

Specter moved to the Democrat Party where he believes he can maintain his moderate beliefs, but it will remain to be seen if he gets another term.


Why can't these folks that want to take the middle ground find financial backing the way these far right and far left folks are able, and make the Independent Party viable? This is what pisses me off so much about the state of our politics.

Lieberman was going to be voted out for having moved more to the center and supporting the moderate approach over the hard left line.

Specter was going to be voted out for having moved more to the center and supporting the moderate approach over the hard right line.

Lieberman moved to the Independent Party and won another term.

Specter moved to the Democrat Party where he believes he can maintain his moderate beliefs, but it will remain to be seen if he gets another term.


Why can't these folks that want to take the middle ground find financial backing the way these far right and far left folks are able, and make the Independent Party viable? This is what pisses me off so much about the state of our politics.

I agree 100% Byl!!!

You said you don't Fandros, you just said you don't want people to be allowed to change parties.

Like I wrote earlier, a third party (Independant Party probably won't be it) might be created and usurp the Republicans if things continue down this path. The main issue is that globally people like teams. Good vs Bad, Red vs Blue, Red Soz vs Yankees. Any time a third entity enters the mix they are seen as spoiling the chances of one of the bigger two (Ralph Nader in 2000, etc.) Unlike Highlander, in the end there can only be two.

Ugh Kelraz , c'mon now...

Yes I dislike switching parties but I'm all for more than two parties, have been for awhile.

So they can exist, you just don't want people to be allowed to switch to them. Makes a ton of sense.

Wow, are you being dense on purpose? The two subjects have nothing even in common let alone are entertwined...

Third party exists, person runs on said third party....what has that to do with switching parties??

So they can exist, you just don't want people to be allowed to switch to them. Makes a ton of sense.


I think the issue is not one of switching party but of why one is switching party.

Sen. Olympia Snowe right now is discussing this with Andrea Mitchell, and stating that the ideological right is driving moderates from the party and that she wants to retake the party and return it to it's basic principles. Senator Specter was basically driven out of the party by those that want lock-step loyalty regardless of the principles. His move to a party that more closely reflects his positions is far less bothersome than Norm Coleman's move from Democrat to Republican for the financial help more readily available to that party at the time. Coleman claimed it was because of issues that he identified with, but nobody I have spoken with ever believed anything he said.

People's motives are much more important to me than the acts resulting from those motives, at least in politics, where belief in a person is always difficult.

Why can't these folks that want to take the middle ground find financial backing the way these far right and far left folks are able, and make the Independent Party viable? This is what pisses me off so much about the state of our politics.


People beleive you have to be in a party for there to be any success. What needs to happen is some VERY popular candidate/incumbant switch to Independant and win a couple times, or a one actually stand a chance in a Presidential election, or have a non-nut bag, non-wrestler, non-actor run for one of the other parties.

Aye Grey, need to wrest the power away from the people behind the two parties for that to happen.

OMG...Fandros is a communist fascist liberal right wing moderate!

I think I work with Osg's brother. We were having some dumb internal training today on anxiety and as a group we had to come up with a few things that caused us anxiety. One of my co-workers took the opportunity to tout how conservative he was and how worried he was for our country and the past 100 days. We were all /jaw_drop b/c the rest of us were talking about things like project deadlines, late night calls, downtimes, etc. He went on for like 5min until my boss had the sense of mind to tell him to stop that it wasn't relevant to the training.

I giggled.

OMG...Fandros is a communist fascist liberal right wing moderate!

In the spirit of the moment you need to add zombie pig...

or work in Nydia's Porkopolypse ( spelling! )

Aye Grey, need to wrest the power away from the people behind the two parties for that to happen.

dude, im going to make a thread flaming you cause in the last two weeks we have agree'd WAY too much, next thing you know i will be making picket signs for Sancheks text messaging crusade.

lmao okay should have read this one first, was wondering wth in the NAG thread.

I vote on issues/ideals, I don't give a rats arse, what tag they wear over there head. As long as they believe in a majority of the crap i do, they will get my vote.
If Obama switched to Republican overnight, but still followed the same issues and policy's, id still vote for him again.
Its all about the issues or at least it should be. They are what directly effects you, your family and the world around you. Not some political party title. Loyalty should be reflected in there stances on the issues and policy's alone. You change on those, then your fucking over the people who voted for you.

I mean, If Obama changed on the issues and became some right wing nut over night. Then i would be first in line to vote his ass out, come next election. That would be a true betrayal.
I don't care what the wrapper on the outside of the package is, as long as whats inside the package is what i want. If i spent my votes on it, it darn well better be what i voted on.

Ronald Reagan was Democrat before he switched to Republican, and hes the big idol alot of Republicans like to worship.

lmao okay should have read this one first, was wondering wth in the NAG thread.


lol sir.

After watching Arlen Specter on meet the press this morning, i would vote against him in a Democratic Primary. The moment he said he was against Public Health care, he would have lost my vote, if he were in my state.