Friday, August 20, 2010

Keystone Kaper

Joe Sestak, the Pennsylvania congressman who recently upset incumbent U.S. Senator in the Democratic Senate primary this spring, is the poster boy for the progressive movement's insistence that the best way to get liberal policies enacted is to elect truly progressive Democrats, rather than stand by establishment moderates like Specter or Arkansas's Blanche Lincoln. Sestak beat a White House-back incumbent Democrat based on the passion of liberals to get things done on their agenda, not a corporate Washington agenda.


Well, it might not work out so well. Polls have consistently shown Sestak (above) and economic arch-conservative Republican Pat Toomey in a dead heat, but one poll has shown a Toomey surge. Sestak's own internal polling shows Toomey ahead by two points - ahead within the margin of error, perhaps, but still ahead. As Philadelphia talk radio host Michael Smerconish noted, it's pretty embarrassing to be behind in your own internal polling, but the Sestak campaign has made a point to demonstrate how Toomey lead is marginal enough to keep the race competitive. Senator Specter, who despises Toomey, has pledged to help Sestak keep the seat in a Republican column that Specter himself abandoned.
But here's the problem. Consider these Senate races. Sestak is running strong in Pennsylvania. Meanwhile, progressive Democrat Elaine Marshall is putting up a spirited fight against Senator Richard Burr in North Carolina. In Iowa, Democrat Roxanne Conlin hopes to put Senator Charles Grassley's political career before a death panel of voters. The most recent polls give the Democrats anything resembling a chance only in Pennsylvania and suggest that picking off incumbent Republican senators elsewhere is a pipe dream. And if present trends continue, Pennsylvania may be lost.
So I have just one question. If progressive candidates are what the Democrats need to hold the Senate, how come so many of them aren't progressing with the voters?
Still, you have to give Sestak credit for his efforts, as this New York Times Magazine article shows.

No comments: