I’m sure many of you may disagree with the premise of my diary – after all, several polls still show Casey with double-digit leads over Rick Santorum, such as Quinnipiac’s latest poll. However, Matt Stoller’s analysis of the latest Rasmussen poll may give us some cause for concern.
My reasons, though, for Bob Casey’s defeat in November 2006 have more to do with the impression I got of his campaign when a senior staffer visited the 27th Ward Committee meeting last night. I had decided to attend to get a feel for the local politics of the area, and although I couldn’t stay for the whole time (I missed Valerie McDonald-Roberts, who spoke shortly after I left), I did get to listen to the pitch for Bob Casey. One would expect to be more inspired after learning more about a candidate, but after this one, I was less inspired and less inclined to donate any time to the Casey campaign.
As this senior staffer took the floor to speak at the ward meeting (I don’t recall her name, but apparently, she’s been working with Casey for quite some time), she started expounding upon Casey’s great work as Auditor General and his first couple of years in the Treasurer’s office. It sounds like he’s been doing good work in those positions, for sure – but, to be honest, being a senator goes far beyond those statewide issues. It may help his credentials as someone who will be fiscally responsible, but in no way does it reflect on the job he will do as a senator. What particularly struck me was the emphasis of the staffer on what Bob Casey has done in the past. There was no mention of what he might stand for as a senator. Of course, vague, appealing platitudes were thrown out towards the end – that Casey will fight for education, for lobbying reform, and so forth – but when you’re speaking to a room full of people at a ward committee, this isn’t your average American who may like the sound of those words. These are folks who are politically involved, politically aware, and will be able to detect a bullshit line right away.
Afterwards, there was time for Q&A, and it was clear that there was an ‘elephant in the room’, so to speak. That would obviously be Casey’s anti-choice stance, but while the staffer acknowledged that he was ‘pro-life’ (I can’t bring myself to call anti-abortion folks that anymore, given how the current administration’s policies could not be less ‘pro-life’), she brushed around the issue, stating that there were more important issues to be discussed in the race. I agree with this, but the political reality is that social issues, whether we like to discuss them or not, will be prominently displayed during the campaign. I raised my hand for a question, speaking about how, as a Democrat, I believe in largely broad ideals such as equality, justice, freedom to make one’s own choices, helping out those who need help, etc. How then, I asked, can I support someone who denies these things on social issues – whether it be with abortion, gay adoption, and other important social issues? (by the way, thanks to jpol for having this post on Casey’s stand on issues) The staffer had the audacity to say that Casey stood for gay rights, even though the answers he provided above are clearly hostile to such rights. The staffer made a point about making me visit Casey’s website to see his positions on the issues. I did visit this morning, and, not to my surprise, there is nothing on the website about his positions on social issues. It’s the sign of someone who is clearly scared to showcase their positions on the social issues; after all, it is a no-win situation for Casey: he can lose the support of his base for his extremely conservative social views, and he can lose the support of independents and moderates who are more socially liberal but may be more inclined to vote for Santorum if they see that Casey essentially holds the same views.
There was one more question that was similarly confrontational; one of the committeepersons asked why Casey hasn’t taken a stance on any important issues, such as the war on Iraq. The staffer didn’t really answer his question either, and I got the feeling that there was a sour taste left in a lot of people’s mouths afterwards. We politely applauded after the Q&A was over, but it was disturbing to see what I thought was a great disconnect between the people who are running this campaign and the grassroots. I have never seen in my political experience (granted, it’s not much, but I’ve volunteered for a few campaigns and have interned with Rep. Nita Lowey) a display of such arrogance. This staffer spoke down to us, as though her personal connection to Casey somehow made her qualified to tell us how we should think about him. She was rude to the point of cutting us off several times during questions, and, quite honestly, did not answer any of the relevant questions that she was asked.
Perhaps I’m wrong, and the Democratic base will embrace Casey more energetically as Election Day nears. But people should know that simply not being someone is not cause enough to win an election. It didn’t work for John Kerry in 2004 (although, unlike Casey, Kerry did have a platform he was running on; he let everyone else frame the campaign as anti-Bush), and it certainly won’t work for Casey in 2006. We in the grassroots may not like Rick Santorum – and he is one of the Republican politicians I dislike the most – but there is simply no way to inspire us to help his campaign out when they are hostile towards their own base. For these reasons – not standing for anything, being an extreme conservative on social issues to the point that Santorum would be proud, and for ignoring the base – Bob Casey will lose in November.
Casey will get his ass kicked. Santorum and the Republicans will pull out all of the stops. Every dirty trick will be played. Black voters will be disenfranchised, one way or another. Women will be forced to hold their noses, and frankly I think a lot of them will just stay home.
I’m not a Pennsylvanian, but here’s my advice from WI: DO NOT reward this Republicrat and his buddies in the institutional party with your votes, votes in what will be a losing effort. Vote strike. Vote Green. Write in Pennachio or Barbara Hafer. Yes, it sucks that Santorum will be in there for another 6 years, but he’s going to win anyway. He’s a strong campaigner, while Casey has an oft-reported inability to energize voters. Casey is the PA Democrats version of GW Bush … a pampered child of a powerful parent coasting on his name.
The party won’t change if the base keeps acting like a battered spouse. DO NOT VOTE FOR THIS BETRAYAL.
If Casey does wind up being santorum’s opponent, the Repubs won’t even need to use dirty tricks or smears to shot him down. All they’ll have to do is point out the truth about his positions on the issues.
Undecideds who lean toward the right will dump him in favor of the real wingnut Santorum, and Dems who value the principles of individual rights for all will drop him like a stone, refusing to vote for someone who in the end is an authoritarian-minded Repub in spirit.
she sounds almost like Scotty McClellan…
Penacchio’s still in the primary, correct? so there’s a month to shut down this guy who sounds like another DINO. did the right make a conscious decision to actually run sheeps in wolves clothing the past decade or so, because there are some pieces of work in Congress (and in those trying to get in)?
Yep, Pennacchio is still in the primary and I’m volunteering on it everyday, even now as I’m up in NY visiting the fam!
First of all, thanks for this diary. Keep ’em coming.
Second, I agree–Casey’s going to get his ass kicked in November because he’s Santorum-lite. I am beyond tired of this “My Daddy…” stuff. He’s also a little too Bob Dole ’96 for my taste–the the way is cleared for him because he feels like this is his due.
And on top of that, he seems to be boring as hell.
Third, don’t discount your political experience.
I have never seen in my political experience (granted, it’s not much, but I’ve volunteered for a few campaigns and have interned with Rep. Nita Lowey)
Well guess what? That’s a lot more political experience than about 90% of the country.
Fourth, he is Exhibit A as to why I’ll only give my meager duckets directly to candidates and not the DCSS. Every last appeal from them is put into “File 13.”
Good job!
I live in PA, and I strongly agree with the diarist here. Furthermore, Santorum has not brought out the big guns yet.
A few days ago, I started seeing TV adds already against Casey paid for by some BS front called Americans for Job security. These adds announce that Casey has missed something like 91 days of work out of something like 200 days as State treasurer. The byline is to call Casey and tell him to get to work. Now can you imagine what it means that Santorum feels confident enough to attack Casey now on work ethic issues and is not mentioning social conservative similarities yet? When he brings out that/those big guns announcing that Casey sees social issues the same as Santorum but Santorum was there first and has more power and seniority so why vote for a meaningless change, well then Casey will be in further trouble IMO.
The main source of my anger against this candidate stems from his similarities on theocratic powers with Santorum! It is quite easy to understand anger and who to dislike when talking about the hard core repub conservatives like Santorum. However, when the dems try to replace Santorum-types with only slightly less theocratic-religiously blinded types (as in Bob Casey Jr.) how does that fit into sleeping at nights and how does it prevent a bad future empty feeling on very important issues??? Personally, I believe it will make the problem even worse and harder to deal with when we think we have won in the future. Can you imagine how we will all feel when Roe gets overturned by a Judge that Bob Casey Jr. allowed to get on the SC because that judge helped legislate Casey’s religious beliefs on everyone else. Who will we then blame? Why we will all say why did we do this, and how could we be so blind! Well folks, please try to listen to the few folks that are trying to wake you up!
I hope that there is time to wake up from this nomination disaster and get a real progresive for Pennsylvanian’s to vote for. PA can deliver such a Senator but not if no one properly backed runs!
Americans for Job Security is indeed a bullshit PAC that has more than it’s share of problems. But it’s also a PAC that shares a huge link to Casey. From the Pennacchio campaign’s Casey fact file:
Americans for Job Security is funded in large measure (i.e. more than $1 million by 2004) by the American Insurance Association PAC. The founder of Americans for Job Security is Robert Vagley, who until his retirement last summer was President of the American Insurance Association. (The new president is former RNC chair Marc Racicot). The American Insurance Association PAC also gives to CHRISPAC, which gives to Casey. Let’s face it, the corrupting influence of PAC money has made Casey and Santorum just two sides of the same dirty coin.
This is why public financing of elections is so important. Pennacchio is for it. 2008 Presidential candidate Russ Feingold is for it. Taking PAC money is like fucking someone. You’re fucking everyone that person has fucked. If there’s a nasty STD floating around, you’re gonna get infected. Casey’s whining about all this while accepting the same tainted money.
There’s a great Senate candidate who has an all grassroots-volunteer squad on the ground across the state who could use some more help here in Philly – Chuck Pennacchio. If you’d like to get involved, please feel free to shoot me an email.