It is inevitable that both the Santorum and Casey camps will be putting together media ads designed to draw votes away from their opponent. Perhaps, we can all help them. My bet for the first anti-Casey radio and television ad is: THE PERPETUAL CANDIDATE - painting Treasurer Casey as the man who's addicted to running for any office that's available.
Anyone out there have any good ideas for either the Casey or Santorum camps for other ads? *no positive ideas here people, only negative ads will do*
I'm sure the first anti-Santorum ad will focus on Social Security. Since Casey and Santorum see mostly eye to eye on things like abortion and gun control, Casey will have to make the case that privatization is a bad idea. Pennsylvanians are already with him on that.
With Bush's high disapproval in PA (53%), Santorum sticking by GWB the whole time won't help him either.
As long as Santorum sticks with the Social Security plan, his numbers will stay low.
Also, I don't think the "Perpetual Candidate" thing will work. He's more well known as the "Perpetual Winner" here in PA. People know him and like him, and when they see his name on the ballot they know to vote for him.
The GOP is already in a tough position. They know that Ricky's negatives are high and that Casey, other than being a lackluster campaigner, really has nothing they can sink their teeth into.
That's why I wouldn't be surprised to see Republican money start to flow into the little-known campaign of Democratic challenger Chuck Pennacchio. Creating a higher-profile primary battle might be the only way that Santorum supporters can slow down Casey's momentum.
The perpetual campaigner will work...combined with a very real lack of accomplishment on Casey's part...what has the guy done...aside from leaving a job un-done in the wake of hopping to the next job/office. Leadership means you finish the job...Casey views his job as being done when he gets elected...you've got to ask yourself what has he done other then ride on Dad's coattails to deserve election? He's had an easy time getting elected to non-issue row office jobs that most voters could care less about...hey his Dad was a good guy...what can he hurt in a job like auditor or paper pusher...The Senate is a whole different ball of wax...he got pounded in the Governor's race...
That and a glaring need for a personality/ability to communicate trandplant might help.
quote: Originally posted by: DauphinRepublican "It is inevitable that both the Santorum and Casey camps will be putting together media ads designed to draw votes away from their opponent. Perhaps, we can all help them. My bet for the first anti-Casey radio and television ad is: THE PERPETUAL CANDIDATE - painting Treasurer Casey as the man who's addicted to running for any office that's available. Anyone out there have any good ideas for either the Casey or Santorum camps for other ads? *no positive ideas here people, only negative ads will do*"
One strategy may be to connect him with liberal Democrats in the Senate. Electing Bob Casey, Jr. may cause liberals like Hillary Clinton and Teddy Kennedy to become powerful committee chairman in the Senate. That could take some of the wind out of Casey's sails in in rural PA.
quote: Originally posted by: FormerLVGOPer "One strategy may be to connect him with liberal Democrats in the Senate. Electing Bob Casey, Jr. may cause liberals like Hillary Clinton and Teddy Kennedy to become powerful committee chairman in the Senate. That could take some of the wind out of Casey's sails in in rural PA."
that's only if you can get people to truly believe that the Democrats have a chance at all of getting the senate back in 06 or 08
even harry reid said that it would take a miracle to get it back in 06
You and I both know it would take a miracle, but people buy lottery tickets.
1) Job hopper - Paint him as an ambitious career politician who has ridden his father's coattails from office to office and who in 2010 will leave his new senate seat behind to run for governor. I think it might be possible to dig up a quote somewhere in some local paper where he indicated he wants to be governor and nothing else.
2) Who's afraid of the big, bad Kennedy? Make people fear the Dem majority in the senate. Sell people the lottery ticket.
quote: Originally posted by: Doctor Octopus " that's only if you can get people to truly believe that the Democrats have a chance at all of getting the senate back in 06 or 08 even harry reid said that it would take a miracle to get it back in 06"
Most voters don't follow politics closely enough to know how much of an uphill battle it is for Democrats to take back the Senate. But they do know who Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy are.
I want each and every GOP poster to be on Santorum's constultant staff! You're ideas will only further complicate the election, which never helps for somebody like Santorum who needs to be able to sell gut reactions.
When has Casey ever left one office to pursue another office? Never! He ran for governor while sitting as the incumbent Auditor General. He then returned to his job and executed it with due fidelity. He completed his term as Auditor General and ran for Treasurer b/c he was term limited as Auditor General. Notice now that Casey isn't running at this time. He is laying low and doing his work as Treasurer (in the public at least) and allowing Santorum to say things that get himself into trouble. The Democrat party then pounces on Santorum and then Casey will ride in like the white clad night and carry the victims of Santorums antics to victory. That's the strategy for the Dems. Let Santorum shoot himself, beat him up, and then run a near prestine candidate out to clean up the mess. Besides, what average voter is going to actually listen to the line of the perpetual candidate when the candidate is not a loser? Remember also that Santorum left his state senate seat to run for Congress and then his Congressional seat to run for senate. Don't throw stones when you live in glass houses! Again, voters don't care! As far as accomplishments, he will site over and over again his low profile changes to Megans Law (keeping our children safe from sexual preditors), improving nursing care facilities (while Santorum is trying to change Social Security for the worst), and streamlining state education purchasing (improving efficiency in our schools and tax dollars). Are the sexy? No, but neither is the job of Auditor General.
The liberal connection is probably your best bet. But do you really think you'll be able to connect Casey (pro-life/pro-gun) to Clinton/Kennedy. That's a suspect thought at best. The man is a commodity in PA. You can't redefine him when he publically ran against Rendell as the conservative alternative.
The GOP's best bet it to find a way to strengthen the incumbent, which is of course how senatorial elections are determined. Has my senator been good in his job? Yes, I'll vote for him (see Specter, Heinz, Santorum in 2000). No, I'll vote the bum out and send his challenger (See Wofford). The other option is to change how this election will be defined. If the prime issues are economy and social security, Santorum, as the incumbent (would be the same if he was a Democrat) is in trouble. If the the issues are values, Santorum is again in trouble b/c Casey neutralizes the base. Santorum needs to redefine the battle into taxes, but I think history shows that taxes in PA are only an issue if it includes "property" beforehand.
retract the statement about Santorum being a former state senator. I believe I'm mistaken. But that doesn't negate my argument about his propensity to jump to the highest power position, especially in light of his decision to purchase website domains for 2008. Talk about not fulfilling a term of office.
quote: Originally posted by: LV Dem "I want each and every GOP poster to be on Santorum's constultant staff! You're ideas will only further complicate the election, which never helps for somebody like Santorum who needs to be able to sell gut reactions. When has Casey ever left one office to pursue another office? Never! He ran for governor while sitting as the incumbent Auditor General. He then returned to his job and executed it with due fidelity. He completed his term as Auditor General and ran for Treasurer b/c he was term limited as Auditor General. Notice now that Casey isn't running at this time. He is laying low and doing his work as Treasurer (in the public at least) and allowing Santorum to say things that get himself into trouble. The Democrat party then pounces on Santorum and then Casey will ride in like the white clad night and carry the victims of Santorums antics to victory. That's the strategy for the Dems. Let Santorum shoot himself, beat him up, and then run a near prestine candidate out to clean up the mess. Besides, what average voter is going to actually listen to the line of the perpetual candidate when the candidate is not a loser? Remember also that Santorum left his state senate seat to run for Congress and then his Congressional seat to run for senate. Don't throw stones when you live in glass houses! Again, voters don't care! As far as accomplishments, he will site over and over again his low profile changes to Megans Law (keeping our children safe from sexual preditors), improving nursing care facilities (while Santorum is trying to change Social Security for the worst), and streamlining state education purchasing (improving efficiency in our schools and tax dollars). Are the sexy? No, but neither is the job of Auditor General. The liberal connection is probably your best bet. But do you really think you'll be able to connect Casey (pro-life/pro-gun) to Clinton/Kennedy. That's a suspect thought at best. The man is a commodity in PA. You can't redefine him when he publically ran against Rendell as the conservative alternative. The GOP's best bet it to find a way to strengthen the incumbent, which is of course how senatorial elections are determined. Has my senator been good in his job? Yes, I'll vote for him (see Specter, Heinz, Santorum in 2000). No, I'll vote the bum out and send his challenger (See Wofford). The other option is to change how this election will be defined. If the prime issues are economy and social security, Santorum, as the incumbent (would be the same if he was a Democrat) is in trouble. If the the issues are values, Santorum is again in trouble b/c Casey neutralizes the base. Santorum needs to redefine the battle into taxes, but I think history shows that taxes in PA are only an issue if it includes "property" beforehand. "
Santorum has never run for an office which if he had been elected to, he would not have been able to complete hsi current term. Has Casey been elected Governor in 2002, he would not have been able to complete his term as Auditor General. If he is elected to the Senate next year, he will not be able to finish his term as Treasurer.
There is a legitamate concern that Casey will try to run for another office (Governor) before that Senate term would end. He has stated several times in the past that he has no interest in being a legislator, and that his career goal is to follow his father's footsteps into the Governor's mansion.
I only buy into the argument that Casey is potentially vulnerable under one condition: if Santorum unequivically states that he will not run for President in 2008. As you say, he would not be able to fulfill his term as senator in that event. Until that happens, I outright question the heartfeltedness of the claims toward Casey. In order for Santorum to credibly make these arguments in a public forum, he would have to come off as completely innocent in the matter when it has become quite clear that he has presidential aspiritions. Besides, the response would be something to the effect of, "there is a serious lack of leadership and I am going to fill that void, even if it means that I must regrettably forego the remainder of my term as treasurer. The people of Pennsylvania must be well served in Washington." That dilutes the claim and refocuses the question on whether or not Santorum has served Pennsylvania well while pushing for the Social Security changes he has advocated (not arguing whether he is right or wrong, just trying to show the language since less than 40% of Pennsylvians think this is a good idea).
Believe me, there are people working for Casey far smarter than I am and if I can credibily refute the claims made by the state GOP, then the Casey campaign will be just fine.
All of this being said, this is going to be an absolutely amazing midterm election in Pennsylvania with the governors race sharing the top focus with the senatorial race.
I was also thinking of this and please comment: if Santorum loses in 2006, he might still decide to run for President on the theme that there is a liberal plot to undermine conservative values. I could see him blaming the liberal media and the elites who are out to destroy the Christian Conservative movement. I'm not saying he would be successful, but I think if anybody in PA has the stones to pull that kind of campaign, it would be Rick Santorum. Since I think there are some pretty reasonable Republicans and Democrats posting here, I'm interested in responses.
quote: Originally posted by: LV Dem "I only buy into the argument that Casey is potentially vulnerable under one condition: if Santorum unequivically states that he will not run for President in 2008. As you say, he would not be able to fulfill his term as senator in that event. Until that happens, I outright question the heartfeltedness of the claims toward Casey. In order for Santorum to credibly make these arguments in a public forum, he would have to come off as completely innocent in the matter when it has become quite clear that he has presidential aspiritions. Besides, the response would be something to the effect of, "there is a serious lack of leadership and I am going to fill that void, even if it means that I must regrettably forego the remainder of my term as treasurer. The people of Pennsylvania must be well served in Washington." That dilutes the claim and refocuses the question on whether or not Santorum has served Pennsylvania well while pushing for the Social Security changes he has advocated (not arguing whether he is right or wrong, just trying to show the language since less than 40% of Pennsylvians think this is a good idea). Believe me, there are people working for Casey far smarter than I am and if I can credibily refute the claims made by the state GOP, then the Casey campaign will be just fine. All of this being said, this is going to be an absolutely amazing midterm election in Pennsylvania with the governors race sharing the top focus with the senatorial race. I was also thinking of this and please comment: if Santorum loses in 2006, he might still decide to run for President on the theme that there is a liberal plot to undermine conservative values. I could see him blaming the liberal media and the elites who are out to destroy the Christian Conservative movement. I'm not saying he would be successful, but I think if anybody in PA has the stones to pull that kind of campaign, it would be Rick Santorum. Since I think there are some pretty reasonable Republicans and Democrats posting here, I'm interested in responses."
I seriously doubt that Santorum (or any smart politician) would run for President after being rejected by the voters of thier home state. It kind of like getting demoted and asking for a raise. The only moron I can recall doing something like this is Carol Mosely Braun, the one-term-wonder from Illinois.
Casey will immediately be painted as "too liberal for Pennsylvania" and will be tied (as others have noted) to Hillary, Ted Kennedy (and new this year!) Howard Dean. The Santorum people will pull out these liberal bogeymen (and bogeywoman) and repeatedly hammer Casey with them.
Taxes will be the other fist. All they need to do is find one way in which Casey was involved, even tangentially, in raising taxes, and they'll be off and running with a negative ad with that as the central point. And it won't matter if the allegation is true, twisted or just lame; they'll run the spot into the ground.
Quite honestly, this will be the first real election contest Santorum has faced in years. Klink was a slam dunk from the start. It will be interesting to watch if he and his enablers can win when they've got solid competition.
The tax thing I can buy, but I have to ask if you really think efforts to paint Casey as too liberal will actually happen. Any opinion polling will suggest he's just right for most, and too conservative for others. The only people that think of him as liberal will be way outside the target of a TV ad war. Those people are the direct mail target of the GOP. I really think trying to paint a pro-life candidate as too liberal won't work. But, trying to paint him as too connected to Hilary Clinton/ Ted Kennedy and Howard Dean might work. The counter, however is that Santorum will be connected with Bush's social security efforts and the war in Iraq which has seen a marked decline in support in PA. I just don't see anything but the "tax and spend" line working on Casey. Casey is just going to fire back by saying record deficit under Santorum.
Ok, …so the Dems are playing Republican lite again by running to a Santorum clone in Bob Casey. Chuck Pennachio, the only candidate fit to serve may go unnoticed
Pennachio is not Ron Klink (the last conservative Dem loser who could not divide the Republican conservative vote)… nor is he Joe Hoeffel (the organization-less candidate)… so neither argument will suffice.
Know why we haven’t heard a peep from Casey all these months? Casey can’t speak. Remember the interview of Casey…”I’m appalled at the Republicans for the last few months” blunder. How will Casey look standing beside Santorum in a debate?
Some of us in Pa want our senator to have a degree in international relations AND history like Chuck Pennachio…not an auditor who as yet can’t speak on national issues and certainly not an incumbent senator who takes his marching orders from a group of zealot religionists like Pat Robertson, who are hell bent on PERVERTING Christianity.
Santorum (the extremist) is not Arlen Spector (the moderate…who has divided progressive voters for twenty years with union endorsements no less).
So the Cons won’t split their vote but many Progressives will split their vote, unless presented with a clearer choice. Pennachio is that choice.
Did not Gore win the state? Did not Kerry….and by the same margin as the last poll that gave Casey the lead… or is that just coincidence?
Bush’s negatives were high in Pa during the general election. Santorum’s negatives are so high right now that almost anyone could run against him and win.
Madonna’s Pa poll… (31 percent see economy as #1 issue…moral issues at about 8 percent). So Pa is ripe for an “economic populist” message.. And 48% say that they would vote for a pro-choice candidate…UNSEEN. Almost no one in Pa knows the real Bob Casey … will the Dems keep it a secret that Casey is so anti-choice and wants to leave that decision to middle-aged men in Congress?
Santorum is similar to 20 year Republican incumbent Larry Pressler who was defeated in South Dakota (a 65% conservative to 35% liberal state) in 1996 with a “Who’s on your side?” strategy (tie the candidate’s voting record with special interests…show Santorum’s backing of Republican irresponsibility in Washington…greatest deficit in history, stealing money from school district etc…) Many conservatives may stay home.
Pennachio has experience working on… not one… but several WINNING senatorial campaigns.
Will the Democrats decision to advance Rendell’s political career at the expense of their ideals just to stop Casey from running for governor end up as successful as the last TEN Pa Democratic senatorial campaigns?
Hey there Jimbo. We have waaaay too many errors and misfacts in your posting. Let's start from the top!
Casey is not Republican lite. He and santorum agree on two issues, three if you want to argue. Abortion, the death penalty and stem cell research. On social security, health care, economics, taxes, proper role of government... all different. And given the several years of experience by both Santorum and Casey, I find it hard to say they are unfit to serve. Fitness to serve is limited to age, citizenship and residence (well, maybe Santorum isn't as fit, but that's an argument that can be settled through the legal process)
No crap Pennachio is not Ron Klink. Ron Klink was a several term congressman from the Western Part of the state with no name rec and little money. The only thing Klink and Pennachio have in common is the no name rec. And take note: Klink pulled in 46% of the vote while being outspent by at least 6:1. Give him the money to run in the SE and he might have pulled it out. He did divide the conservative vote: he took the conservative Democratic vote from Western Pa. With his lack of name rec he did not perform the way democrats perform in the SE. And yeah, he's not Joe Hoeffel either. Joe Hoeffel is a former congressman, state representative and county commissioner. He has policy making experience. Pennachio was a staffer, a political hack if you will. Hoeffel has made laws and represented real people.
We haven't heard a peep from casey b/c it is still more than 18 months until the election. Oh yeah, he has a job. He's the state treasurer. It's nice to see that he is working for the people that elected him with over 3 million votes. When it comes time to debate, I think Casey only needs to show up. Santorum is doing quite a good job in tying himself up. Besides, with a gubernatorial race in 2006, do you think a senate debate is going to get a lot of air time. Moreover, who stays up until midnight on a thursday night to watch them.
Degree in international relations? Name 5 senators who have a degree in international relations. Our TREASURER will speak to national issues b/c he is an intelligent man. Being a statewide official does not preclude a candidate from speaking on national issues. Besides, I don't need a know it all PhD telling me what is good for my country.
Union endorsements. Every union in the state endorsed Casey in 2002 when he ran for governor. You want union popular, you've got union popular.
Progressives will split there vote. Who will they vote for? Santorum? Conservatives will split their votes, just like they did in 2000 when they voted for Klink. Seperate conservatives from republican reactionary for a moment. PA has a ton of conservative Democrats and I think that having a candidate that appeals to them will get their votes.
The last poll gave Casey an 11% lead. Kerry won the state with about 1% of the vote. You're making no sense at this point.
Santorum's negs were high in 2000. Running anybody against him clearly doesn't work. There needs to be an organizational operation in place. Casey has what Klink did not have: money and stature. Besides, Santorum specializes in ripping up liberals. See Wofford 1994.
Madonna's poll: Santorum and Casey are miles apart on the economy. Neutralizing 8% of the electorate is a substantial % of the population. Take away half of Bush's "values" voters in PA and you have a very different race. Take away half of Santorum's values voter in 1994 and you have a different senator. 48% of the electorate would vote for a pro-choice candidate... unseen. That means 52% wouldn't. 52% is bigger than 48%. That number ignores whether or not 48% would vote for a pro life candidate. I'm willing to bet that some would.
Don't compare S. Dakota politics to pa. the Dakotas are hotbeds of populist movements. PA is the most mainstream political state every (not to mention bland). Many conservatives already are planning to stay home incidentally. They are outraged that Santorum endorsed Specter over Toomey. They realize that he is a politician and doesn't really stand on their side.
Working on winning campaigns v having served as an elected official? I take the official any day b/c I can also say that I have worked on winning campaigns. That doesn't make me qualified to run or give me an advantage over somebody who has actually run for office. Besides, how many of those winning campaigns were in PA. big ole zero.
What's the nonsense about Rendell's career and Casey running for governor. Rendell will be done in 2010 whether he wins now or not. Casey's plan was to run then. Do you think he was going to run in 2006? Also, the last 10 senatorial campaigns included Specter and Heinze, pro-choice republicans who were insanely popular. The Pope could have run against them and lost. The reason they were elected and re-elected is b/c they were good candidates and then good incumbents. Oh, Casey won in 2004 with a margin of victory larger than what former senator... none other than John Heinze. I think that is a testiment to the popularity of Casey and to Heinze. Yes, Santorum won in there twice, but against an old timer liberal that was appointed to office and against Klink (see above).
So go ahead, complain and whine. Pennachio frankly being arrogant to suggest that as a professor he is smarter than I am and therefore I should bow to him. With no elected experience he is running for senate in a state that has continuosly shown it favors experience (play it safe). If he was serious about serving this state, he would run for state representative or state senate, or even congress. With about 20k raised this quarter I am sure that Mr. Chuck is demonstrating his extremely broad base of support. Go claim to be the voice of the Democratic Party. This is one life long Democrat who knows that the voice of the party will be well represented in Washington by our future Junior Senator Bob Casey. Come 2010, he'll also be our Senior Senator.
So there, you made me waste my lunch break on a professor who used to be a political hack and who has no experience in government. Now I'm going to finish my week grumpy and have a terrible weekend. Thanks a bunch!
I don't care what the first ad will be. It can't start soon enough for me. I don't like either of them. Let the blood bath begin. I think the best thing for the republicans to do would be to make Casey look as far right as they can so the democrats won't vote for him. That wouldn't be hard to do either because Casey is just a republican registered as a democrat.
Where is all this hostility towards your fellow Dems coming from?
Pennachio never claimed that because he is a professor he's smarter than you and that you should bow to him. I don't know where you are getting that from. I would argue that his academic knowledge about international relations makes up for his lack of experience as a politician. What can Bob Casey take from his time as an auditor and treasurer to the US Senate? They are completely different offices, requiring many unique skills. Yeah, Chuck only has about 25k raised so far, but considering that the average contribution he receives is probably somewhere around 10 or 20 bucks, that is a decent number of people so far.
Then you go and complain that someone "made you" waste your time replying to this post. I can only hope you were joking about that one.
If you don't like Chuck, don't vote for him. Vote for Casey. I wouldn't expect any different from a conservative Democrat. Casey isn't a DINO, he is proggressive on economic issues, but he is a social conservative. We just want an actual primary rather than letting Rendell decide who our candidate should be. Before Casey decided to run, he wanted to make sure no prominent Democrats would oppose him in the primary. What does that tell you about his political skills? He seems afraid to debate and take a stand on the controversial issues.
Many progressive Democrats may be convinced they need to support Casey because of his name recognition or perceived electability. If Chuck wins the primary, he will get national media attention. Everyone will be talking about it. The next Paul Wellstone. Chuck is a charismatic, articulate speaker and I think he could give Santorum a run for his money in a debate.
Where does my sentiment on liberal elites come from? It's a very prominent feeling among many conservative Democrats tired of hearing from our SE party friends that unless you are pro-abortion and pro-gun controll that you aren't a progressive. I've heard it too many times and from many of Chucks most ardent supporters. Don't tell me what it's like to be a Democrat, I already know and until the academics and the elites start to get the hint, many deserving progressives in the world won't stand a chance b/c of that reputation. I'm ticked b/c I'm tired of being called a Republican just b/c we disagree on two issues that frankly shouldn't be dividing our party.
And don't insult Paul Wellstone. Yeah the odds were similar but Paul Wellstone knew how to touch lives through inspiration and as a person who met Paul Wellstone and Chuck, I can tell you that Chuck is still in the minor leagues. What is Chuck's message? I'm prochoice and Casey isn't a real Democrat! Great message. Paul Wellstone is a giant and comparing anybody to him does a great disservice to any arguments that you will put forward. And yes, I would have voted for Paul Wellstone over Casey b/c Paul Wellstone would have taken the time to drive his bus into my town and shake my hand. Going to the LV DFA meetings doesn't mean that Chuck has visited my town. Casey can get away with it b/c he's a political commodity. And his political skills are just fine. Rendell is a machine. He won that election. Casey didn't blow it. It's impossible to side step a tsunami and that's what happened to Casey.
LV, I think you're right about the Democrats regarding abortion and gun control; that is, the Democratic party should be more accepting of our members that don't agree with liberals on the issue. I personally don't believe its fair to call someone a DINO or a Republicon because of those two issues if they are progressive on most other issues. But you have to understand that they are important issues to a lot of people, so they are going to want candidates that see eye to eye with them; everyone has their hot issues. And I don't think it helps any when you make false dichotomies of rich liberal elites and working class Democrats. Lots of poor Dems care about abortion, lots don't. I recommend you read "What's the matter with Kansas?" For the most part, it's a great book and it touches on a lot of the red state / blue state myths the media LOVES to perpetuate.
As for Paul Wellstone, I can't say too much about him because I never met the guy, but his political positions are very similar to Chuck and both Minnesota and PA are moderate blue states, so that's why I make the comparison.
When Chuck first launched his campaign, I agree he emphasized the abortion issue WAY too much. Since then, he has realized the importance of other issues which he disagrees with Casey on, especially the war in Iraq. Unfortunately, the newspapers that mention Chuck tend to refer to him simply as the "pro-choice" candidate and don't go into any of their other differences. We're trying to shake that and get them to mention some of the other issues. If you go to Chuck's website and look under the issues section, you will see that by and large most of his criticisms are directed towards Santorum and the right-wing Republicans; he rarely mentions Casey. I guarantee that if Casey does win the primary, Chuck will urge his supporters to vote for Casey.
