Can a career politician seamlessly make the switch from McCain/Palin voter to mainstream left-liberalism in a matter of weeks without anybody noticing? Looks like the answer is “no.”
When Joe Sestak began calling out Republican-turned-Democrat Arlen Specter last year, it was clear the makings were there for a tough primary challenge. Specter had the name recognition, and the support of the establishment, but Sestak had a long military record, a firm Democratic pedigree…and the fact that Specter had made one of the most abrupt about-faces in the history of American politics. But for almost a year after Specter switched parties, the polls were static, and Specter enjoyed a huge lead over his challenger.
Until now.
In just the past couple weeks, Sestak has really opened his coffers. In particular, he dropped a lot of cash on spots introducing himself to voters, and on damning ads tying Specter to former President George W. Bush and former Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin.
Which seems to have done the trick. Sestak cut into Specter’s lead like a hot knife through butter, and, just like that, Specter’s double-digit advantage has been erased.
“This race was always going to be close–this is a TV state.” says Dan Hirschorn, editor of the political sight PA2010.com, and a close watcher of the campaign.
Now, obviously Sestak didn’t just sit on his thumbs for nine months only to unleash hell on Specter at the last minute. By all accounts he’s been a tireless campaigner, and he did the best he could to get his name out there last summer and through the winter. But Sestak’s message was never going to take hold until he broadcast it widely. And once he did, the anti-incumbent mood in the state, combined with Specter’s switch–a brazen act of self-preservation–pushed Sestak into a dead heat with Specter, and, according to several polls, into the lead.
“[Sestak] hadn’t done anything to up his name ID. He had done plenty of retail politicking throughout the state. But if you’re the best campaigner on the planet, that’ll maybe get you two, three points,” Hirschorn adds.
This all despite the fact that Sestak a). was at a cash disadvantage, b). lacked the support of the Obama administration and the state and national party, and c). didn’t run the smoothest of campaigns himself. Sestak caused quite a stir several weeks ago when he claimed that the White House offered him a high-ranking administration job in exchange for dropping out of the race, only to clam up when reporters pursued the story. And though he’s managed to blunt Specter’s calls for him to release his Navy personnel records, his refusal to do so has kept alive in the press the question of why he was reassigned from a top Pentagon job in 2005.
But that’s nothing compared to what Specter’s had to answer for. In his metamorphosis from moderate Republican to one of the Senate’s most liberal Democrats, he’s had to atone for previous positions on Obama nominees, health care, labor law, taxes, and on and on. In the end, that has proven too tall an order for even a bare-knuckled pol like him.
Chris Bowers–a Sestak supporter and former adviser–says understanding the dynamic in the race requires recognizing two key facts. First, likely Democratic primary voters who knew both candidates generally preferred Sestak, even from the early months of the campaign. That meant upping recognition was crucial.
Second, and more importantly, Specter enjoyed tremendous support from Pennsylvanians who believed he switched parties for policy reasons–but deep antipathy from those who believed he became a Democrat opportunistically.
“That was always going to be the central issue of the campaign,” Bowers said.
