New PA Rasmussen: Toomey 49% Specter 40%, Toomey 43% Sestak 35%…
New PA Rasmussen: Toomey 49% Specter 40%, Toomey 43% Sestak 35%…
|
Comment Commandments:
1) No Personal Attacks. (Debating is encouraged, but be respectful). 2) No Sexual Discussion (unless it specifically pertains to a cited story). 3) No Profanity (Let’s all behave like adults). |
GOLDEN RULE:
Be civil and statesmanlike. You can disagree without being disagreeable. Annoying trolls who break these rules will be blocked from commenting. ***Please don't disable anonymous commenting for everyone else*** |
NOTE TO COMMENTERS: CREATE AN INTENSE DEBATE ACCOUNT
|
-vote comments up or down
-email notifications when someone replies |
-pick a profile picture
-promote your website or blog |
***TOPIC FORUM: 50 STORIES LAST COMMENTED ON***
***LIST OF TOP 50 COMMENTERS***
***LIST OF 50 MOST COMMENTED ON STORIES***
***LIST OF 50 LAST COMMENTS***
.
49 Comments
U believe that the magic Raz number for Arlen to drop out of a race is minus 21. He is now at minus 9 … a little less than halfway to the drop out point.
As I said on an earlier thread, Specter can keep his seat until the GOP runs a real conservative.
I cannot, in good conscience, vote for Pat "Seat Sotomayor" Toomey.
…Luksik 0%
Peg Who? Honestly Peg should run in the 12th. She is basically the puppet master there anyway. I would be more than happy to support her against the Commissar for Pork, Jack Murtha.
Apparently you hate the Founding Fathers who advise and consent as a rubber stamp formality only designed to weed out the unqualified, enfeebled or criminal.
Anyone whose appointed should be confirmed unless they are mentally incapable of serving, a criminal or an enemy agent.
Toomey looks more like Opie-the grown-up than Ron Howard ( the original Opie Taylor actor) from the Andy Griffith Show
Just an observation.
A real vote: Opie Taylor look-a-like?
See link, then vote yes or no.
http://www.tvland.com/photogallery/andygriffith/i...
Who would you vote for?
Question.
Why does support for Toomey drop when he runs against Sestak even though Sestak's numbers are much lower than Specter's?
Where do those votes go?
Oh, goody. PA's own John McCain is doing well…despite his best efforts to disgust his base.
If you think Toomey's like McCain, you're smoking something. I see the anti-Toomey crowd is still very cranky.
P Whipple… they are not smoking anything. Crack does not even make anyone that nutty.
I would be willing to bet anyone on here that I could go to any town in Pennsylvania and ask 30 random people about Toomey and most would say he is a conservative if I read them his record.
In terms of economics, Toomey is the most conservative person to run in this state in modern times.
Advise and consent is NOT to be a rubber stamp. If the nominee is only to be weeded out for being insane or a criminal, then you don't need the senate.
Enemy agents are not as easily found out — unless they are grilled and their life and their records are reviewed strenuously. The senate failed in it's mandate with Ginsberg and Sotomayor. They do not see America and Americans as sovereign. Their ideology is foreign to ours and they should have never been confirmed.
A political appointee MAY be a spoil of war. Lifetime appointments to the Supreme Court are not to be taken so lightly.
I'm more interested in the "barbarian hordes" that are coming…….are they coming from Barbaria led by Conan?
Do you have a link for that report of only having 100 donors?
Ryan, you are out of your mind. You keep reporting that and similar charge, but you never get specific. Maybe it's because you can't.
How have social conservatives bankrupted the country? Name for me the programs that have cost so much. Opposition to Sotomayor has little or nothing to do with abortion. She is a far left ideologue and way out of the mainstream of American thought and not all that bright or articulate.
Mainly (but with some exceptions) social conservatives want to be left alone and not have the liberal, feminist, and homosexual agenda imposed on them and their children. How expensive is that? It's not. It is the social liberals who desires violate our rights and cost so much of our treasury.
The only point I care to make is that, at present, Toomey is the only Republican candidate with a realistic chance to defeat either Specter or Sestac. My guess is that Sestac will defeat Specter in the primary, but if he doesn't then, like it or not, our choices are Specter or Toomey. Toomey may not be the perfect Republican candidate, but would you rather have Specter? Not me!
SS
So for review, Santorum Bad so we get Casey, now Toomey is Bad so we can keep Arlen? The reason half of you hate Santorum was because he stood with Arlen against Toomey.
Chris call some realtors in Montana or Utah and get some listings on here. The militia needs to find a UTOPIA!
I think Toomey's critics are overstating his mistakes. On the whole, he has a decent track record and has worked hard for conservative candidates when it was not popular to do so. Remember, Toomey was heading up the CFG when they cleared the deck of RINOs in NE states like Rhode Island. And he stood shoulder-to-shoulder with Eich and Mike in 2006.
I do not agree with his position on Sotomotor but if I place that on the scale, his conservative positions far outweigh his blunders.
And, sad to say, what other choice is there? Arlen Specter? Ya gotta be kiddin' me!
http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/can_ind/2009_S0P...
Actually she has 97 according to the available FEC information.
Rich, I'm sorry to say this, but your statement is almost delusional. It defies any reason whatsoever. Using Toomey and McCain in the same statement is farcical. One could write entire books to argue against your statement, but let's just settle for one fact.
The Senate Conservatives Fund, headed by the most conservative (and best) senator in Congress, Jim DeMint, has endorsed four candidates this year. It doesn't endorse just anyone (it thankfully recommended a vote for Scott Brown, but rightly indicated that he didn't meet all of the SCF criteria and thus didn't formally endorse him). The four candidates SCF has endorsed: Marco Rubio (FL), Chuck DeVore (CA), Michael Williams (TX), and Pat Toomey (lifetime ACU rating 97%). I rest my case.
Ray: Ryan is correct. Both Pat and Peg draw donors from all around the country. But in the FEC filings through 9/30 (the last reported quarter), Peg has 12 Pennsylvania donors of 97 total. That means a whopping 12.37% of donors were from Pennsylvania. Donations over $200 are listed in FEC reports, so the statistic is not completely accurate. But it gives you a real sense of Peg's limited appeal to the voters who actually will be electing a senator from Pennsylvania.
http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/can_ind/2009_S0P...
Of course there is no comparison between Toomey, Specter or Sestak. None. Neither Ray nor I have ever suggested any such thing, although the Sotormayor pander put does him firmly in the liberal camp.
That said, I refuse to grant him license to do whatever he pleases. I choose to hold him accountable for his mis-steps. If you will not hold him accountable for his blunders now, what are you teaching the prospective Senator Toomey? How do you suppose St. Rick got the idea that he was invincible and that we would support him regardless of the idiocy he proposed or perpetrated? Why do you think Toomey is above this? He is a fallible mortal, just like every other man on this planet, and we must hold him accountable…now more than ever. We haven't even cast a vote for him and already you apologists are excusing his behavior. You people are like parents who refuse to correct and discipline their toddlers then wonder why they grow up to be horrendous teenagers.
Wake up. If you refuse to hold Toomey accountable for things like the Sotomayor pander, you can expect that Senator Toomey will not give a whit what you think after he's been elected.
Latest news is the Dems are trying to force Sestak out of the race in favor of Specter.
I met Toomey. He used to be a shining star in the conservative movement.
Now he's a shining star in the "moderate my tone to let liberals know I'm not such a bad guy" movement.
No, he's not as bad as McCain…but he's trying! Heck, at least McCain starts talking like a conservative before an election. Toomey is still charging to the left.
No thanks.
Exactly.
Rick was a conservative. He ran as one. Then he started to change.
Toomey was a conservative. He ran as one (last time). Then he started to change.
Yep, liberal RINO hordes led by Rnold the Barbarian.
We can all be happy that Rnold ran as a fiscal conservative and social liberal. He really saved California from that horrible Gray Davis, didn't he?
Really… what policy has he changed since 2004? I am curious.
Toomey is the most conservative candidate to run for statewide office in this state in a very long time.
Correct Morbuis… if we weigh Toomey's policies, he definitely falls on the right of the spectrum.
Dolley, you claim to be such a great originalist, but your take on appointments really flies in the face of original intent. They viewed the Appointments Clause as largely a rubber stamp that was designed to prevent the appointment of completely unqualified (like a taxi driver to the Supreme Court) or a criminal. Appointments are the spoils of political warfare. Barring being a criminal or grossly unqualified, they should be rubber stamped. The Founders viewed them in that light and Toomey actually adheres to that understanding.
Really Ray? Lets look at the results of the most socially conservative President in modern times, George W. Bush: 8 Deficit budgets, trillions of more in debt, ignoring Afghanistan when he should have his ball on Iraq and Afghanistan, an exploding teenage pregancy rate, the creation of the biggest entitlement since Medicaid, the grossly unconstitutional expansion of the Federal role in education.
In hindsight, this looks minor compared to Obama's reign of big government incompetency, but it proves my point. People obsessed with social issues, whether right or left, are not capable of managing the true affairs of national government.
Explain to me how Toomey has changed his policies from before? I am curious.
No, it does not prove your point.
His policies were mostly liberal. He could talk a good game in from of the crowds and that revved them up, but most of what he did enhanced the liberal causes.
Bush was not, is not, and will never be a conservative. He won because his dem opponents were so much worse. That doesn't make him conservative or good, only better by comparison. Bush was obsessed with getting good press and kissing the rear ends of Kennedy and company.
You sound like the nuts who say that the extremely cold weather we've had is because of global warming. It's as insane as you saying that the spending of a non conservative president is proof that conservatives are bad.
You still have not named any policies that bankrupted us due to socially conservative programs. You can't because there are none.
The troubling thing about Peg's donations is that Pennsylvania donors do not even constitute a plurality. She has more donors from Florida.
BTW, the government has a duty to pay for making bullets. The government has no business funding abortion.
Social conservatives would love to end welfare. Liberals live for it because of the power it gives them over other people and because it allows them to feel superior.
Don't blame social conservatives for the costs of liberal programs.
Give me a break. Social cons love programs that force their agenda down our throats. Abstinence-only education and college scholarships for teenage mothers are two great examples of how social conservatives encourage bad behavior in the name of their values.
There is no difference between people obsessed with social issues. Both love programs that force their agenda down our throats. I rather have a pregnant teenager whose family cannot support the child give the kid up for adoption than me have to pay for it programs. In fact, social conservatives should push for the same instead of supporting programs for teenage mothers.
What really makes me sick is how social cons actually think we should support these economic pests. They are irresponsible and I should not have to pay for their mistakes. Those who engage in such reckless behavior should be treated as outcasts and encouraged to give the kid up to a home that actually has some common sense and responsiblity.
In the limited way that you point out, you and Ryan are correct.
She is not the endorsed candidate and the reporting requirements do not include the area where she does well — the small contributions.
Just remember the old adage about statistics, lies, and damn lies. And that a partial truth is a whole lie. (Not you, the way in which the info was presnted. It's not the whole truth. (And yes, Pat probably has lots of small contributors too.)
Hmm. No answers, but some people don't even like questions to be asked.
If Peg were to win the primary, are you suggesting that republicans and conservatives and pro life, pro gun democrats wouldn't vote for her?
This is a primary. If she can win here, she can win the state — especially in these times.
Santorum betrayed conservatives and endorsed a liberal. He has a history of never supporting pro life candidates. What does that tell you? It should tell you that he really wasn't pro life. That was just a campaign sign to win votes.
He only was with gun owners 2 or every 3 votes. That's a failing grade. Specter had a 54% pro gun rating compared to Ricky's 65%. Not much of a difference, was there?
In 12 years, Ricky went from a 98% ACU rating to a lifetime rating of 84% (IIRC). You got to have a lot of bad votes to drop 15 points in 12 years.
The trend was going downhill fast. He needed to be removed. Too bad there was no primary to remove him. I think that primaries are illegal in PA (LOL).
Vote for Peg in the primary if you like her. If she doesn't win, you can still vote for the 'lesser evil' in November.
You can never reach your goals if you settle for less before you even get started.
I'm not saying Toomey should not be held accountable but until he is elected and starts establishing a record to nail him down on, then the matter is mute.
Has he made mistakes? Yeah. Is he the perfect candidate? No (I am). Is Toomey a good candidate, at the right place at the right time? Yes.
So, once he wins the primary (a race Peg should NEVER have entered), I'll be working for him 110% because Specter needs to be retired once and for all.
BRAVO! Well said.
Are you serious?
We have outlined his faults here countless times.
If you recall, Toomey was pondering, wondering, considering, testing the waters, and dreaming about the governor's mansion. Only AFTER Peg declared did Pat make up his mind that he wanted to take another shot at Specter.
How dare you say that she shouldn't have entered the race? What's wrong with a hotly contested contest to get the eventual victor ready for the general election?
Mistakes or missteps in campaigning can be just as revealing as if they were made while in office. No one should get a pass and no one should go uncriticized. D_M and I have disagreed with and criticized Peg too here.
Abstinence education is bankrupting the country? You're kidding right?
Abstinence ed probably has gotten less funding ever than Planned Parenthood gets in a year.
Teen scholarships sounds more like a liberal program to me, if it isn't just a private one. If it's a private program, what do you care? If it's a liberal program, you are just wrong.
You made the claim that social conservatives are bankrupting this country to the point that we can't pay for bullets but you haven't made the case for it yet. You cite liberal programs and blame them on socons.
What EXACT AND SPECIFIC program have social conservatives gotten enacted into law that are bankrupting us. I don't know of any conservatives who think that taxpayers should pay for the programs that you cite. They all believe in private charity and family and church is the proper place for such thing, not the taxpayer.
Welfare is a liberal / socialist construct, not a conservative one.
Thank you.
Please note, this report only covers up to the 3rd quarter so the info is accurate, but not current.
Incorrect, as usual. If you trouble yourself to read Federalist Nos. 62 – 66, you will learn that the Senate was to be a moderating body comprised of learned individuals serving for a realtively lengthy duration. The overarching purpose of the Senate is to moderate the extremes and protect the people from themselves and "factious leaders." They are supposed to be the "NO" people. Advice and consent, i.e. the right and responsibility to say "NO" to an unqualified appointee is part of the overarching purpose of the Senate. Obama is a factious leader and Sotomayor is a hard leftist. She NEVER should have been confirmed and Toomey's got a lot of 'slainin to do.
Ryan,
In 2004 he told us how bad Specter was, then he told us to vote for him. Specter is now endorsed by Obama. Specter and Toomey have both endorsed Sotomayor.
He backed away from a strong pro life stand, saying it shouldn't be a litmus test. Generally speaking, pro abortionists are also for big government and against RKBA (not always, but generally) and that means so called moderates and leftists are okay with him.
He 2nd Amendment position is the weakest I've ever seen. He was strongly pro gun and not afraid to say so. (In fairness, when we spoke the other day, he did say that he would look into that.) That means that it is possibly the weakness of a staff member, but anything as important as this should never go up without the approval of the candidate. Overlooked, lapse in judgment, or his real belief? He told me one thing but his public statement on the web site says otherwise. Let's see if it is changed.
The point is that his public statements are more moderate than those in his 2004 campaign. That's all we can go by right now. Scott Brown, in contrast voted badly in the past, but came out in his campaign as very conservative. That is daring and it's important. That's why he got my support. He headed in the right direction, against the odds. Toomey, otoh, seems to have moderated when boldness is what is called for.
As you all know, I'm the kind of guy who says what he believes and believes what he says and I appreciate the same trait in others. That's why I've questioned Toomey's candidacy.
One Trackback
[...] Courtesy of GrassrootsPa… [...]