Tom Ridge

There's a concept people in the suburban Northeast of mild prosperity are very familiar with

"Certified Pre-Owned"  

If one is a fan of pro or college sports around here , one is inundated with ads on YES and ESPN, as well as the network sports recap shows, beseeching one to buy a slightly driven and sterling condition Benz, Beemer or Lexus coming off lease.

I knew a guy who did this and got a Benz convertible quite cheap. Helped him get PI clients for his practice and was fun to drive on moonlit summer nights from Stone Harbor to Wildwood back in the day. He used the dough he saved to buy a house.

You get a value buying certified pre-owned--getting a luxury car for Nissan prices; but you realise that there's only so many miles left in the creampuff. Still, a good deal for the appearance concious. 

But I'm not sure this is a great political strategy. Nonetheless, the NRSC is looking almost exclusively at elder statesmen in their candidate recruitment.

This week Charlie Crist announced for the Florida senate seat he ran and lost for in 1998. Sure he's won a few times since for AG and Governor and he is quite popular, but Marco Rubio is the fresh face in this race.

Likewise, the NRSC first backed the 79 year old Arlen Specter and when he became Harry Reid;' headache, thought the answer was the 64 year old Tom Ridge; first elected to federal office in 1982.

We are running Roy Blunt in Missouri. He was first elected Secretary of State there in 1984. At that point his son Matt was 14. Matt's already been elected Governor and stepped down after a difficult term. Back to the Future?

The NRSC is likewise trying to get a near 70 something to run in DE (Mike Castle) and a 60 something is their favored candidate in CT ( Rob Simmons). OK, the blue state benches are somewhat thin, but there is a 42 year old candidate running in CT as well. (Sam Caligiuri)

It's not just the Senate, I recall seeing that the ageless Tommy Thompson may seek the Governorship again in Wisconsin, having first won it in 1986.

I'm not going to disparage any of these individual candidates. Each may well be the strongest possible candidate available in their state this year. The problem is that at a point when the party needs to introduce "new models"   the Beltway brain trust is trying to give our old reliables a tune-up, a detailing, and then send them off down the road.

We may win a few seats this year doing this, but we will find many of these folks retiring after a single term and have to hope we build a bench in the meantime. And when we are gasping for breath with younger voters, we are wasting a cycle by not promoting candidate who represent Generation X and Generation Y.

Lots of people buy Certified Pre-Owned. The problem is: almost all of them really wanted to buy a new model. What if the competition offers one at a reasonable price? 

The DC insiders are in a mood from bemused angst to irrational frustration over Arlen Specter's decision to switch teams in the middle of the game. Much of the ill will is based on the theory that Specter's hand was forced by the likes of Pat Toomey and various fi-cons who ran him out.

While this makes for a good story, it is fundamentally flawed.  Specter's apotasy on fiscal conservativism did seal his fate; but a close reading of poll results indicate that it wasn't a cabal of conservative power brokers that doomed Arlen Specter, it was an uncontrollable revolt of the Republican peasantry.

I'm a numbers guy and the March Quinnipiac poll  is pretty conclusive in my book.

Specter was polling at only 27% in the ballot test for a Republican primary, and Toomey was at 41%. But Toomey only had 26% statewide name recognition among Republicans.

So 1/3 of Toomey's vote against Specter were folks who didn;t have an opinion about who he was.!

That isn't a vote ginned up for Toomey, or even a vote for his agenda. It's a pure repudiation of Specter.

Specter's favorable/unfavorable ratio deteriorated badly from November 2008.  That's the stimulus vote. Pure and simple. 53% of Republicans in PA decided Specter didn't deserve another term.

So, how exactly is this Pat Toomey's problem again?

Had Pat Toomey not run, some lesser known Republican candidate would have found this dry kindling and lit the same fire under Specter.    Think about Ned Lamont, or Al D'Amato.

The British SAS has a mantra --"Who Dares, Wins".

Had Jim Gerlach or Pat Meehan or Tom Corbett jumped into this race ahead of Toomey, they might well be the GOP nominee-in-waiting. But they deferred to seniority, unwisely in retrospect.  They --or some other less conservative candidate--might oppose Toomey. The DC GOP would be well advised to quit while it's behind and let Keystone State Republicans sort this out.

The Beltway GOP is irrelevant as per Scott Rasmussen.

To be relevant in politics, you need either formal power or a lot of people willing to follow your lead. The governing Republicans in the nation’s capital have lost both on their continuing path to irrelevance.

"Yeah, it's a traversty the actual voters we represent don't appreciate the great talents of Arlen Specter and want to vote for a fiscal conservative, and let "electability" be dammed"

If the Beltway Republicans screw around here any more, they will only make matters worse and embarass themslves.

 Besides, my read on the Q poll is to the extent Specter has support among non-Republicans, it's awful soft---his re-elect and "hard" ballot tests aren;t great. Think "liked, not well liked". He may not hold up well over the next 18 months.

I saw what happened to Joe Lieberman once a Democratic challenger put him on trial for supporting the Iraq war.  Think this won't happen to the pro-war Specter in a primary?  

96 % of PA Democrats viewed George W. Bush unfavorably before the 2008 election.

Who endorsed Specter in 2004?

What primary is Specter running in again?

I dunno. Why can't Toomey or another competent Republican beat Joe Sestak or that Torrella dude? 

 Here's some advice to our party "leadership". How about backing candidates your members actually want to vote for?

In all the turmoil over the alleged interest in having Joe Lieberman as McCain's running mate, a thought occurred to me.

McCain could do worse than Joe Lieberman. Or Tom Ridge, or Mitt Romney.  At least I can identify some pool of potential additional voters they might bring to the table. But McCain could pick someone less helpful. MUCH less helpful. 

a.) He could pick a V.P. who had a history not of appealing to Clinton-style voters; but of taking the Clintons over the coals

b) He could pick a V.P. who had alienated conservatives on such hot button issues as judicial appointments, immigration and oil drilling.

c) He could pick a V.P. who at the same time had no issue agenda to appeal to independents and moderates, having opposed abortion rights and the Medicare prescription drug plan.   

d) He could pick a V.P. who was a white southern protestant male from a state that is never in play. 

e) he could pick a Washington insider in a year when the mantra is "change" 

f) and he could pick a V.P. with the same verbal dexterity as Joe Biden

It has been rumored that South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham is McCain's "BFF". http://www.slate.com/id/2197499/

Being a "BFF" doesn't bother me; the man is not on the ballot. But if there was a better way to produce mutual political disarmament by all elements of the conservative and Republican rank-and-file while netting zero new voters, I've yet to figure out what it would be.

My nickel for a Bizarro world McCain V.P. choice is Lindsey Graham. What's yours?