Reid Spokesman: Obama And Reid Will Campaign For Specter Against Sestak

I wonder if this will still apply should Specter vote in a way they're not happy with? I think it stinks all the way around.


http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/campaigns/reid-spokesman-obama-and-reid-will-campaign-for-specter-against-sestak/

Reid Spokesman: Obama And Reid Will Campaign For Specter Against Sestak


Now that Joe Sestak has said he intends to challenge Arlen Specter in the 2010 Pennsylvania Democratic primary, how will the White House and the Democratic establishment handle this?

Well, according to a spokesperson for Harry Reid, Obama, Joe Biden and Reid all intend to work for Specter against Sestak. I asked Reid spokesperson Jim Manley how Reid intended to proceed, and he emailed:



White House officials had previously pledged to back Specter for reelection, but that was before the threat of a primary looked real.

This means Sestak, if he runs, would have to battle the full weight of the Dem establishment. One outstanding question is whether the White House and top Dems will work to pressure Sestak to stay out of the race before it even starts, which could make it even tougher for him to mount this challenge.

n/t

I guess if your values really lean to the center right and you're not all too interested in seeing a progressive majority or getting progressive policies in place.

Slowly, but surely I'm beginning to question whether he'll get my vote and support again.

They stick together way too much.

If they were saying "If Arlen supports our plans and votes with us we will support him" fair enough I guess. But declaring it when he has done nothing makes me want to send the challenger money.

even pretending to hide their actions.

I don't even live in the state and I will donate to Sestak if he runs. Reid and Specter are bad news. Obama is a bigger person than I am; I would not waste time helping these two out, they've pretty much done nothing for him.

and won.

doesn't seem so....

But the party centrists worked with Lieberman so he could win as an independent.

None the less, Lamont was the winner.

which is what Sestak and Specter will be fighting for.

which is why he bolted to the Democrats- to save the job he feels "entitled" -because otherwise the soon to be octegenarian would have been "retired."

with the power they think they have.

Yet, they refuse to use it for any progressive action. They only use it to quash liberals and "compromise" with the repukes.

Boy - I am so glad they won.

does NOT mean protecting the good old boys network.

and then helps the conservadems defeat Oabama's proposals, I don't really feel that his spokespeople have a right to SPEAK for the Obama administration.

I'd rather hear it from the horse's mouth. Reid has no credibility, precisely because he has no political courage.

he can have the same exact position as Obama, but will get no slack for it, while people will bend over backwards to find excuses for Obama saying the same thing.

Imagine if Reid said he was supporting Specter, and didn't mention Obama. This thread would be very different.

Of course Reid isn't thinking specifically of DU, but it's the same everywhere, it's to some extent a popularity contest.

So he should be trashed for that.

He would not get trashed at all if he was anything resembling a good Democratic leader, but instead, he is a self-serving, mewling kitten of a leader. This is only example #43030 of his political cowardice. He should stand on his own two feet and not hide behind Obama's coat-tails.

I say this as a well-known Obama critic (after all, I hold my leader's feet to the fire, especially the ones I like). I just cannot stand political cowardice, and it is a plague that infects our side of the aisle extensively.

Obama does it, it's 12-dimensional chess.

You will never see a post like that come from me. I call individual events as I see them, and I am not beholden to cult of personality, identity politics, brand-name loyalty, or ascribe "trust" to any politician.

Now if you were offering this as a jab to some nebulous group of DUers who engage in this behavior, I would appreciate it if you would not do it in response to my post. I do not care for such jabs, and I do not endorse them.

If you see me launch the 12-dimensional chess argument, then fire away. Otherwise you are shadow-boxing.

I'd like to see a primary challenger to Reid as well.

especially over a Specter.

This is just sad.

It's quite plain he is chafing to get out of the House and into the Senate--but I don't think he'll get there that way. I think it could make things problematic for him down the road. Specter isn't going to be in the mix forever.

Then again, perhaps this is a "placeholder" game Sestak is playing--"I'll back down, but you guys had better give me first dibs AND serious backing when Specter retires or shuffles off this mortal coil."

Now, if Specter starts acting like an asshole, all bets are off. But this just doesn't seem like a smooth move to me.

But egos can sometime get in the way. That being said I do think that someone will concede and it wont be Specter.


-nnnm

The same way the timing is never right for verified voting, a single payer medical system, or a fair trade system.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss - because we're just not ready for anything else.

of rank and file Ds in the state shows your opponent has a 2 to 1 lead on you, it is a good time to re-think filing for office.

And it's just the beginning of the primary - plenty of time for the real Dem to clobber the fake Dem.

Rahm, is that you?

And ya gotta go and get all personal with the guy. Why the snark? All it does is stifle discussion.

FWIW, I see "Rahm's" point--this isn't news, it's how the game is played. The ones with the money actually DO get to have a say--it's why they went to all the trouble to raise the money, it's why people donated their money to the relevant PACs (they trust the PAC holders to make these "inside baseball" decisions) and it's all part of the Money Equals Speech argument that the Supremes upheld awhile back.

The "real Dem" with a lot of his own cash (who didn't have to rely on the PAC princes and princesses) not too long ago was Ned Lamont. He suffered the same fate that is projected here. Part of the reason was because he was less known, and the incumbent very well known (and understood, warts and all), and part of the reason had to do with his one-dimensional campaign, and commercials that should have gotten less flaky, not more, as the campaign progressed. Last but not least, he had a load of rather smug supporters, who just thought they had it in the bag, and weren't willing to really go the distance for him....kinda like Howard Dean's supporters in his Presidential run.

Rahm always has good points - good for him, not so good for us.

rank and file. If there weren't, we'd be living in Utopia and "party officials" would be simply receptionists and janitors--taking messages and cleaning up little messes.

FWIW, I'm not really "advocating" here. I'm simply observing. I happen to like Sestak--he's very smart. A bit "straightforward" for the tastes of some, but I happen to like a no-nonsense approach, myself. He doesn't deliver a great deal of fluff and hand-holding. Because I like him, I don't want him to blow a shot at the Senate with a bit of intemperate gamesmanship. He's got the right kind of mind for that more deliberative body. And it's overpopulated with lawyers (nothing against them, but still...).

I don't have an inside track on this issue. I just hope he's thought, and looked downstream at how this might shake out and play out (he won't starve, in any event--he gets a liveable pension). Some leaders can be vindictive; I don't think Reid is that way, but I do think he can be pretty firm when he wants to be--and I think that could possibly impact Sestak's aspirations if he doesn't play this thing carefully.

He's already acting like an asshole.

from Corporate control.

It will be bloody.

Someone will pee then roll over.

nnnm

Specter, a republican vs. Sestak, a New Democrat.

He comes out of a career in government, as a senior Navy leader working at the HQ level. He understands the intersection between corporate and military interests. He's had to oversee these interactions in the performance of his duties. He's not going to go biting hands that fed him over lo, these many decades.

I'm not suggesting he'd ignore abuses, but if you think he regards corporations or corporate interests as "The Enemy" I think that's probably not quite accurate. Not even close.

I am not interested in being force fed Gilliland. If they insist on running her without a primary, I will leave the line blank.

I think that only time with tell with this Spector v. Sestek deal.

If Spector is a good team player in the coming months on importants issues, why waste the time, money and credibility on a primary?

And if Obama, Reid, and Rendell stay on board with Spector what chance does Sestek really have in raising money?

It's not as if he's appealing to an entire different base of voters -- someone posted on here yesterday that Sestek only votes with the party 63% of the time.

And isn't he from the Philly burbs? Without a large warchest how will he overcome his name ID deficit in eastern Pennsylvania?

Link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8436141&mesg_id=8436251

The entire thread is worth a look, too.

against. And we all know that Specter just tries to kill good bills from the inside by watering them down.

Doesnt matter what the values are or what they stand for. We just need for them to have a "D" after the name.

:sarcasm:


-nnnm

On edit: You and Harry would be kissing Pres. McCain's "ring" to get a bill passed.

They would not have picked him since he was a new comer.

????

Shocked I tell you.

Why would the Pres. put his neck on the line for an admittedly disloyal, senile old man?