|
Edited on Thu May-20-10 12:23 AM by Drunken Irishman
However, your question is faulty because it suggests Pres. Obama really wanted Specter to win. If he did, he would've gone to Pennsylvania and gone balls out in campaigning for the guy. He didn't.
Obama got Specter to switch parties at a very important moment. That switch not only helped set the perception that the Republicans were pinching out the moderate wing, it helped establish another Democratic vote. Anyone who says otherwise doesn't know a lick of anything and should probably just keep quiet on the matter.
With that said, and this is the point you're forgetting, Sestak is a better DEMOCRAT than Specter. I'm sure even Pres. Obama knew this. So, unless you subscribe to nonsensical logic, you'd guess he probably, ultimately, wanted Sestak to win when it became clear the race was not going to be a runaway win for Specter.
Now granted, Obama probably thought Specter would walk to victory in the primary, beat Toomey in the general and sustain the seat. But he couldn't turn around, just days after getting Specter to switch, and tell him he wasn't going to back him after, most likely, he had promised the WH's backing if he were to switch.
What happened was that because of Pres. Obama and VP Biden getting Specter to switch, the Republicans lost a seat and the Democrats gained one for not just a month or two - but nearly two years. That is very important and can't be downplayed.
Now ultimately, the perfect scenario for Obama worked out. Not only did he get Specter to vote with him on nearly every important issue, he got rid of a potential threat down the line. There was no evidence to suggest that Specter wouldn't ditch the Democratic Party in 2011 after winning in November. Or maybe he stays with the Democrats, but decides to vote more with the Republicans than he did in 2009 and 2010. In that regard, Obama would've lost.
So to sum it up:
Obama got Specter, an important moderate Republican, to switch. That provided the Democrats another vote in the Senate and as we've seen, they nearly needed every vote in the healthcare debate. The fact Specter as a D instead of an R could have been the difference between healthcare passing or failing makes this a win regardless for Obama (and let's not fool ourselves, had Specter never ditched the GOP, he would've ran to the far-right to beat Toomey in the primary).
Specter, who has shown to be a fickle supporter of both parties and is most certainly less reliable than Sestak, loses in the primary. Thus giving the Democrats a legitimate Democrat in the general and a chance to bring to the Senate a Democrat who, on most issues, will probably align more with the party than maybe Specter ever would have.
How is that not a win-win? Because the candidate Obama tepidly backed lost?
Please.
|