Vote for Jessica Wolfe...And a few others

It's no surprise to anyone reading this blog that I will be voting for Hillary Clinton for President today in PA's Democratic primary. I find her to be a brilliant and accomplished woman who will build upon President Obama's progressive successes, as well as staying true to her own passion for helping women and children.

I will also be voting for Joe Sestak for U.S. Senator for his promised ban on fracking, as well as "his ceaseless drive to connect with voters" (Gertrude Stein Political Club of Greater Pittsburgh).

I'll vote for Josh Shapiro for PA Attorney General, because, as the Stein Club puts it, "we believe he’s the most progressive candidate on social issues, by any yardstick. We hope to see ever-increasing fairness and human rights, as far as prosecution, if Mr. Shapiro is elected."

I'm voting for Eugene DePasquale for PA Auditor General, who's an honest, progressive good-guy.

In PA State House District 24, I endorse Ed Gainey. A responsive, reliable progressive.

In PA State House District 19, I endorse Jessica Wolfe. As I have stated before, I know Jessica and knowing the kind of person she is, I know she'd be a real asset to the House and a tireless and caring worker for her constituents.

As for my own PA State House District 36, I will most certainly not be voting for incumbent and DINO Harry Readshaw. As usual, I will write in "A. Prochoice Democrat."

Your mileage may vary.

Hear the PA Democratic Candidates for United States Senate at Forum on Sunday

More at Facebook event page here

Joe Sestak Walks Across Pennsylvania (UPDATED)

In case you missed it, Joe Sestak has been walking more than 400 miles across Pennsylvania for (as his website puts it) "accountable leadership in the US Senate."

Yesterday, he was in Coraopolis:

He started the walk on March 4:

Former Pennsylvania Rep. Joe Sestak formally launched his long-expected challenge to Republican Sen. Patrick J. Toomey Wednesday, setting up a possible rematch in one of Democrats’ best pick-up opportunities.

During an announcement outside Independence Hall in Philadelphia, Sestak said he is running to “restore the trust deficit,” according to the Philadelphia Inquirer. After showing up in a pair of old sneakers, Sestak vowed to walk across the state in a pair of Army boots — to walk symbolically in the shoes of Pennsylvanians.

Apart from anything else, kinda shows a deep level of commitment if a Navy guy can walk start a 400+ mile walk [See update below] wearing a pair of Army boots.  (As I have zero military experience perhaps I am making too much of this military detail.)

The walking trip was punctuated by 2 dozen stops along the way, each with a different topic of discussion.  For example, yesterday his talk in Coraopolis centered around the environment and green energy.  On March 16, he was in Cumberland County discussing education.  On the 9th it was Chester County discussing women's issues.  And so on.

Yesterday's discussion was with a dozen or so potential supporters.  Though I have to add that Sestak, with a sincere grin, also welcomed to the room a guy named Ollie, who he said was the tracker assigned to cover the event by the Toomey campaign.  Nice guy - after the event, he and I joked about how it was snowing outside.  If yesterday's discussion is any indication, Sestak is looking to contrast his record with Senator Toomey's.

And the phrase "Hold me accountable." was repeated a number of times.

For example, Sestak spent a large chunk of his time contrasting Toomey's assertion that "we all want clear air and clean water." with, for example Toomey's cosponsoring of legislation which, according to Sestak's campaign material, "prohibits the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions to address climate change."

This would be Senator Inhofe's Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011.

In order to dispel any ambiguity, here's the first sentence of the bill:

To amend the Clean Air Act to prohibit the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from promulgating any regulation concerning, taking action relating to, or taking into consideration the emission of a greenhouse gas to address climate change, and for other purposes.

And it defines "greenhouse gas" as any of the following:

1. Water vapor. 
2. Carbon dioxide. 
3. Methane. 
4. Nitrous oxide. 
5. Sulfur hexafluoride. 
6. Hydrofluorocarbons. 
7. Perfluorocarbons. 
8. Any other substance subject to, or proposed to be subject to, regulation, action, or consideration under this Act to address climate change. 

Which is pretty much everything.  That's the legislation Senator Toomey cosponsored.

Sestak also pointed out something we've already blogged on - Toomey's contrasting votes on climate science:

• Toomey voted for an amendment that said that Climate Science was not a hoax
• Toomey voted for an amendment that said that "human activity contributes to climate change."
• Toomey voted against an amendment that said that "human activity significantly contributes to climate change."

Note: For whatever political cover Toomey has gotten from these votes, he's still a climate science denier.

Given some recent poll data from Franklin and Marshall:

Senator Toomey currently leads Democrat Joe Sestak by a five point margin, 34% to 29%, although most voters (37%) are still undecided about this race. Joe Sestak’s name recognition is relatively low, with nearly two in three (63%) of the state’s registered voters saying they do not know enough about Sestak to have an opinion of him.

And some recent reporting:

Anxious about a candidate considered to be an unreliable maverick and a political liability, Democratic Party leaders have undertaken a quiet, intensive search in recent months to recruit a serious primary challenger to former Rep. Joe Sestak, the party's Senate nominee in 2010 who is again running for Pennsylvania's Senate seat.

The effort has involved former congressmen, state senators, county leaders and, recently, even a prominent district attorney. Their anxieties are being driven by party officials, who are concerned that Sestak could cost Democrats a must-win state in 2016.

It seems to me that by walking across the state, Sestak is looking to establish two things; solid grassroot support for his campaign (for both the primary and Senatorial) and to show how utterly different Senator Sestak's record would be from Senator Toomey's.

I'll leave you with a question: who walks 400+ miles in a month in Army boots but someone who's really really serious?

UPDATE: After a phone conversation with the campaign, I have a clarification regarding the boots.  Sestak only started the walk with the Army boots.  Along the way he's worn sneakers, hiking boots, snow boots and so on.  I was going by what I read at RollCall.  My apologies but mostly because it kinda kills my joke.  I did get some more info on the walk itself.  Sestak walked the complete 422 miles over the 25 days.  If he had to stop for some reason (for example to travel to a radio station for an interview) a marker would be put down in order for him to return to the same spot on the route that he left.  Army boots or no, that's still impressive.

Bumped Into A Retired Admiral This Afternoon

Coincidences are fun!

Late this afternoon I found this at Early Returns 2.0:

The former Navy admiral and congressman is back in Pittsburgh today after speaking at a Marcellus Shale conference, and continuing his thank-you tour of supporters from his US Senate run.

Not 20 minutes later, I as I am leaving the building I work in who should I see walking towards the coffee shop in the lobby?

The former Navy admiral and congressman, Joe Sestak.

Obviously, he had no idea who I was (and why would he?) but he shook my hand graciously as he thanked me for supporting him in his bid for the Senate.

Classy guy all around.

Politico takes a look at Joe Sestak

Politico takes a look at Joe Sestak's political future in an article today. During their interview, Sestak said, “I don’t know what I’ll do next. I do know that whatever it is, it will be part of public service.”

Read the entire article here.
.

AP calls it for Toomey

.

Sorry, you're just wrong

Sorry, John McIntire, but you're just wrong.

You wrote:

PREMATURE I-TOLD-YOU-SO TO SESTAKERS

What about PA?

Let me be the first to issue a big fat Joe Sestak "I TOLD YOU SO."

This is a weird year. People want candidates who appear to be "independent," whatever that means.

Arlen Specter was DEFINITELY beholden to NO ONE. Many thought he was a weasel as a result. But it's why he would have been a better candidate.

And now, the guy who WAS the Tea Party before there was a party or any caffeinated brown water to sip, Pat Toomey of the Club for Growth (a MAJOR right wing nutbag "think" tank), is going to be a U.S. Senator.
Plus he's a jug-eared varmint to boot.

Way to go progressives. Heckuva job. You got your wish. And now you've put another nutbag in Capitol Hill. Another tax-cuts-for-the-rich nutbag. And this one can actually think and talk, which could make him even more dangerous.
I know, I know. It all depends on Philly turnout. Blah, blah, blah.

Joe Sestak is toast.

Believe me, if Sestak pulls out a miracle tomorrow, I'll happily look like a fool.

If Arlen was the Democratic candidate for Senate, he'd be down by at least 20 points.

This is a "throw the bums out" year. How could Specter -- who's been in public office for 45 years -- possibly have won in 2010?

Where's his base?

Democrats? No way. They already rejected him in the primary and as pretty much every past primary has shown, there simply aren't enough progressives to make a huge dent there -- rank and file Dems tossed him out.

Republicans? You got to be kidding! Those left in that party have moved ever more right. Republicans would have been running the exact same ads against Specter that they are now running against Sestak. Plus there's the whole "turncoat" factor. They certainly would be painting him as a man you could not trust.

So that leaves Independents. You think they'd have seen him as independent and "DEFINITELY beholden to NO ONE"? Nope. They'd see him as the worst kind of hack -- an opportunist who'd do anything to save his political hide (which is why the Sestak primary ad which had the clip of Arlen saying, “my change in party will enable me to be reelected” was so damn effective and which is why the Republicans would have been running that same clip in their ads).

There's simply no way that Specter would be doing better now than Sestak.

That said, despite your huge blind spot soft spot for Arlen, I know the rest of your analysis on the radio today will be spot on and you always bring the funny so everyone who can should listen to you on The Union Edge. Via MacYapper:

I'll be on the radio Tuesday supplying wrist slitting election analysis on 660 AM in Pittsburgh on the Union Edge radio show with Charles Showwalter at 2pm.
Also streamed live at www.WFRNLive.com

Tom Corporate

I know that a lot of my progressive buddies have a Sestak sign up, but refuse to put up one for Onorato (even though they will vote for him).

If you're like them, you might want to consider downloading (right-click) this "Tom Corporate" sign from Penn Action (here) and hanging it in a window.
.

Final Sestak Rally in Pittsburgh

This will be Joe Sestak's last campaign stop in Pittsburgh and he can't win the election without winning Allegheny County.

WHAT: Admiral Sestak's Steel City Get Out The Vote Rally
WHEN: Saturday, October 30, 2010 at 6:30pm
WHERE: Sestak for Senate Campaign Office, 4326 Butler St., Pittsburgh, PA 15201 (Map)

If you have any questions, call the Pittsburgh headquarters at 412-533-1200.

Volunteer Opportunities for Democrats

Time for the final push:

The Coordinated Campaign for Dan Onorato and Joe Sestak (& the entire ticket)
Nancy & Dick Mills' Roselea Farm, 1474 Coraopolis Heights Road, Moon Township

Please RSVP to Chairman Richard Mills: 412-264-6595.

Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday (election day) - volunteer to participate on any or all days: 12:00-3:00-and 6:00. The campaign coordinators will have telephones and street lists. Some will be calling, others will be canvassing.

OFA (Organizing for America, former Obama campaign)
They are doing daily phone banking at all locations:

Lawrenceville: 5170 Butler St

Downtown: 213 Smithfield

E. Liberty: 5929 Broad St.

To volunteer for canvassing from the 30th through election day, you can call Josh at 412-879-0395 or e-mail him at . For phone banking between now and the 30th, you can just show up at any of the HQs (especially if you're bringing your own cell phone). Banking runs from ~10 AM to 8 or 8:30 PM Monday-Saturday, and noon-8 Sunday.

Joe Sestak (for US Senate)
Phonebanks:

Sq. Hill 2200 Murray Ave, Office of James Lange & Assoc, Corner of Phillips and Murray entrance is on Phillips St. Phonebanks on Mon, Tues, Thurs, from 6-8pm

Lawrenceville, 4326 Butler St. Pittsburgh, PA 15201 Phonebanks everyday starting at 9am

Door to Door Literature Drops: Lit drops take place every day. Sestak Campaign office address: 4326 Butler Street. To schedule a time contact Brian Cordova from the Sestak campaign at 412-533-1200

GOTV Weekend and Election Day - Many volunteers needed the last weekend of the campaign. To schedule a shift contact Brian Cordova at 412-533-1200

Dan Onorato (for Governor)
Sign up to volunteer here and a member of their field staff will contact you to sign you up for a shift.

Dan Connolly (PA-18)
Please contact friends@voteconnolly.com or 412-480-1777 for scheduling or more information. Dan Connolly for Congress HQ will be open every day from 9:00am to 9:00pm for anyone to come in to make phone calls or pick up lists of doors to canvass.

Dan DeMarco (PA Senate 40th District)
He's running against Jane Orie. To volunteer contact Christina christina@dan-demarco.com

Disability Voting Coalition of PA
The Disability Voting Coalition of PA, in cooperation with the Election Protection Program, has taken on the challenge of providing volunteers at the 7 UPMC hospitals in Allegheny County. Every Election Day hundreds of our friends and neighbors who expected to be voting at the polls – have an unexpected illness, accident or other medical emergency.

They’re looking for volunteers who can:

· Volunteer for part or all of Election Day from 8:30am to 8:00pm;

· Provide notary services (we’re certain we need a notary for Shadyside Hospital;

· Serve as a driver for our volunteer going to and from the Elections Department downtown (departing from each hospital around 4:00pm and 6:00pm.

If you can volunteer in some capacity, please contact by email pohanlon@drnpa.org or by phone 412-258-2132.

File Under: How do they find us?

Not one but two press releases this AM by "Local Philly Band Swift Technique" letting us know that:

1) They challenged President Bill Clinton to play sax with them at a Joe Sestak campaign rally in Philly today.

2) He will play with them (7:00 PM outside at Temple University's Bell Tower).

Toomey Fact-Checked (But Not By Me)

Tony Rhodin of the Lehigh Valley Express-Times does the honors this time. From what he's correcting, I gotta wonder what the rest of the Express-Times thought of their meeting with Toomey (hint: we'll get to that later)

On Iraq:

To say the Iraq war succeeds because there is less of a chance of weapons of mass destruction being transported across the country is a remarkable justification and simply not true. When Iraq was a minority Sunni-led nation, there was little likelihood Iran would move WMD through Iraq to Lebanon or Palestine, because Iran is a Shiite theocracy. The countries, governmentally, were natural enemies.

Rhodin goes on to say that the Iraq war made the region less safe and made the "stated goals of the Afghanistan war impossible to reach."

On Health Care Reform:

Killing the health care bill and starting over again? You've got to be kidding. Once again, it works in political slogans, but the GOP had complete political control earlier this decade and didn't even consider health care reform, because it's not in the interests of its deep-pocketed patrons. The health care bill, by Congressional Budget Office standards, still cuts the deficit over the next 10 years. And it keeps insurance companies from denying coverage to sick people, putting lifetime caps on coverage and allowing college graduates to go without because they'd been kicked out of their parents' program at 23. Over time it will insure many of the uninsured.

Why would we want to kill it? Fix it? Sure. It does little to cut individual plan costs. You want malpractice reform? Write the legislation and line up the votes. But if you want to set a limit of $250,000 when a doctor cuts off the wrong leg, it's not our job to protect bad doctors.

On Social Security Privatization:

Privatizing Social Security for younger people? OK, how do you replace the money you take out of the system to put into the younger people's accounts? What's the cost? A trillion? At the very time the baby boomers are retiring.

And so on.

Step by step Rhodin deconstructs the Toomey's political positions. I kinda like this guy.

Now about the editorial board - I noticed something odd at the end at the end of their endorsement:

The best example of Toomey’s tenaciousness came in 1998-99, when he got tired of arguing in the House about excessive spending and wrote his own budget.
He then led a filibuster that forced Republican leaders to adopt some of his cuts.

That’s the kind of restraint Congress needs to enshrine — and Toomey is the candidate who won’t brook any dissent in a war on wasteful spending.

Um, guys? His time in the House of Representatives began in January of 1999. And his "filibuster" (which really wasn't as a "filibuster" is a Senate thing) took place in 2002.If you're gonna endorse a candidate for the United States Senate the least you can do is get the basic facts straight.

You'll look less like idiots that way.

Endorsements (was: Jack Kelly Sunday)

In this week's column, Jack Kelly (and I am NOT kidding about this) writes:

In my opinion, the biggest of the many mistakes made by President George W. Bush was his failure to clean out CIA headquarters after 9/11, the most egregious intelligence failure in CIA history.

And then he basically rewrites this column and this column.

You'd think that for whatever amount of money the P-G is paying him, he'd actually deliver something new.

But I digress.

We have a horse race here in Pennsylvania - for Senator. The polls are tightening and the endorsements are rolling in.

Here's a list of the papers in the state, sorted by circulation. Let's start at the top and see if there's an endorsement picture emerging.

Philadelphia Inquirer (circ 356,189): Endorsement SESTAK. First they discuss how bipartisan each candidate would be:

From health care to Social Security to bank bailouts, the candidates for Pennsylvania's open U.S. Senate seat are polar opposites.

The campaigns of Republican Pat Toomey and Democrat Joe Sestak reflect the nationwide purge of moderates from both parties. But Toomey, who served in the House from 1999-2005, has played a more prominent role in this counterproductive trend.

And:

Toomey, having done his part for party purity, now asks independent voters to believe he can be bipartisan in Washington.

The chances for that seem remote, at best.

The endorsement compares records:

Like most of his Democratic colleagues, Sestak would raise income taxes only on families earning more than $250,000 per year and extend tax cuts for all others. Toomey, an ardent tax-cutter during his six years in the House, would make tax cuts permanent even for the super-rich. That would add far more to deficits than the Democratic plan.

Toomey, 48, was once a currency trader on Wall Street and later owned a restaurant in Allentown. He has a grasp of economic issues, and advocates less government across the board. But Toomey would unnecessarily repeal the health-care law in favor of solutions such as deducting the cost of health insurance premiums, something he acknowledges "won't have much of an impact" on people who can't afford health insurance.

And concludes:

Sestak has moderate, reasonable ideas for promoting clean energy and providing small businesses with incentives to create more jobs. In the Senate, Sestak's views would be much more in line with most Pennsylvanians.

Oh, and they point out how that Pat Toomey was more conservative than Rick Santorum. More Conservative.

Now let's see how the big paper on the our side of the state sees things.

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (circ. 192.279) Endorsement SESTAK:

Mr. Toomey wants to reduce the role of government on virtually every front. Mr. Sestak believes government should play a role in improving the lives of Americans. Based on interviews with both candidates, the choice for the Post-Gazette is easy.

In a nation with double-digit unemployment, businesses shipping jobs overseas, a health reform targeted for repeal by special interests, a Congress incapable of forging smart energy policy and a tax-cut extension that could shower billions of dollars on the rich when the deficit can ill afford it -- Joe Sestak is the voice of reason.

The P-G continues it's "reasonable man" portrait:

Joe Sestak supports a smart energy policy that will rely less on fossil fuels, create jobs by growing sustainable technologies and reduce oil imports, thereby enhancing security. While his opponent rails about the federal deficit, Mr. Sestak would help reduce the red ink by extending the Bush-era tax cuts only to households with up to $250,000 in income. Renewing tax cuts to the rich would add $700 billion to the deficit over the next 10 years.

And pointing out Toomey's conservative cred:

In 1998 he won a seat in the U.S. House and served for three terms. Then, as now, he supported privatizing parts of Social Security, a flat income tax of 17 percent and corporate taxes that are as low as possible. He believes the new health insurance law should be repealed and replaced by a modest program of tort reform, competition among insurance companies and health savings accounts in which families would set aside tax-deductible dollars to pay for their insurance.

Mr. Toomey, 48, criticizes the federal banking bailout and economic stimulus as unnecessary spending, although economists widely backed both as necessary to save the nation from a depression. A former president of the Club for Growth, a far-right national political advocacy group, he believes in free trade and corporations unfettered by regulations. Mr. Toomey opposed cap and trade, the market-based concept initiated by Republicans that would give financial incentives to businesses for curbing harmful emissions. He says that while data supports the phenomenon of global warming, the extent to which it can be blamed on human activity is "very much disputed."

The P-G, as the Philadelphia Inquirer, points out how Toomey would very easily replicate Rick Santorum's voting record.

Pittsburgh Tribune-Review (circ. 170,538)Endorsement TOOMEY:

Toomey, who went on to serve as president of the Club for Growth, is a conservative's conservative. Sestak, a retired Navy admiral, is a liberal's liberal. And while we have great personal respect for Sestak, a good and decent man, and stipulate that his military expertise would be an asset in the Senate, the nation no longer can abide his kind of failed liberal public policy prescriptions.

Pat Toomey is another good and decent man. No, there's not much "flash" but Toomey is no shrinking violet. He understands fundamental economics and government's role in facilitating economic growth. His scholarship and demeanor will serve Pennsylvanians well in the U.S. Senate.

So what can we take from these three endorsements?

Sestak: Reasonable, moderate and far more bipartisan.
Toomey: A Conservative's conservative who'd easily recreate Rick Santorum's voting record.

Hmmm...decisions, decisions...

Debate Watch Party and Sestak Rally

WHAT: Debate Watch Party and Sestak Rally
WHEN: Friday, October 22, 2010
Debate Watch: 7:00pm
Rally with the Congressman: 8:30pm - 9:00pm
WHERE: Elks Lodge #339, 400 Cedar Ave., Pittsburgh, PA 15212 (map)

RSVP: Tim Cox at Sestak's Pittsburgh office at 412-533-1200.

Spread the word and show up!
.

Pat Toomey On Abortion

Not sure whether this constitutes a flip-flop but Congressman Toomey has certainly shaded his pro-life position recently.

Shaded it from crazy extreme to merely extreme.

Take a look.

This is from August:


Here's what this self-described "center right" politician said:

I think that Roe v Wade was wrongly defined, wrongly decided and I think states should be free to restrict abortion and I would support legislation in Pennsylvania that would ban abortion and I would suggest that we have penalties for doctors who perform them if we were able to pass that law.

And when Criss Mathews asked whether doctors who performed abortions should be put in jail, Toomey answered:

At some point doctor's performing abortions, I think would be subject to that sort of penalty.

That was August. No qualifiers, no exceptions are mentioned.

And this is from the Sestak Toomey debate from earlier this week. Toomey was asked:

Mr. Toomey, abortion. Is Roe v. Wade...or would you, if elected, work to further undermine it? Or knock it out completely? Two, in terms of-- affirming judicial appointments all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, would you vote to affirm anybody who was not in your camp on that issue?

And he answered (with a lie, by the way):

Abortion’s a tough issue. And it’s one-- there’s good people on both sides of this. My views are consistent with that of a majority of the congressional delegation and the other Senator from Pennsylvania. I’m pro-life. And I would accept a ban on abortions, with the exceptions of rape and incest and the life of the mother.

I think Roe versus Wade was mistakenly-- determined. And I would support its repeal. But I’ve never advocated that we have a litmus test for judges. I think instead that what we ought to do is examine a judge’s qualifications. When Justice-- now Justice Sotomayor was first suggested, nominated by President Obama, many of my colleagues, many Republicans thought we should simply reject her candidacy.

I deemed her to be quite capable and competent and I advocated endorsing her. Joe Sestak is the one who is extreme on this issue. He is in that fringe of-- of members, very liberal, who believe in taxpayer funded abortion on demand. And no restrictions at all.

Did you see the wiggle?

He's willing to allow exceptions for rape and incest and the life of the mother.

And mediamatters has already debunked the myth that Sestak favors "taxpayer funded abortion on demand."

Pat Toomey - All abortions should be banned and doctors performing them should be sent to jail, except maybe not. It depends on which segment of the audience he's pandering to.

Some Poll Numbers

First I saw this, yesterday:

On Tuesday the Democratic-leaning polling firm PPP released findings showing Sestak leading his Republican challenger, former Club for Growth President Pat Toomey, for the first time this cycle: 46 percent to 45 percent. Sestak's campaign did not pay for the poll, which was done with recorded voice interviews and with respondents sampled from actual voter lists. A day prior, the odds-makers at ABC News had moved the race from "lean Republican" to "toss up."

Here's the report from PPP. They give three reasons for the numbers:

• Democratic voters are getting more engaged as election day moves closer.
  
• Sestak has wiped out what was an enormous deficit with independents.
  
• The Democratic base is unifying more around Sestak.
  

Interesting stuff - but still it's a "Democratic-leaning" poll.

But then this morning, I saw this:

A new poll in Pennsylvania's hotly contested race for U.S. Senate shows that Democrat Joe Sestak has apparently wiped out Republican Pat Toomey's lead.

The Muhlenberg (MYOO'-len-berg) College/Allentown Morning Call poll released Wednesday shows Sestak supported by 44 percent of likely voters to Toomey's 41 percent. The numbers include people who are leaning toward voting for a candidate but haven't entirely made up their minds.

Here's the poll itself from MYOO'-len-berg.

I'm not an expert in these things, but it looks like Toomey's support is settling a skosh. For example, his favorable/unfavorable rating from the Sept 28-Oct 4 poll was 44/31 (44% of those surveyed had a favorable impression of Toomey vs 31% who had an unfavorable impression). THIS poll, however, shows a change - Favorable/Unfavorable rating of 34/36. A drop of 10 "favorable" points with a rise of 5 "unfavorable."

Sestak, on the other hand, showed a consistent rating (37/37 in Sep-Oct and a 34/34 now).

The poll has a similar flip in numbers for support of the candidates: Toomey over Sestak 46/39 is Sept 28-Oct 4 poll moved to a Sestak over Toomey 44/41 in the current poll.

Remember, this is only a snapshot. Things could change quickly in any direction but it's my guess is that the more people learn about the Congressman Wall Street, the more they support Joe Sestak.

Cleaning Up Toomey's Crap

Crooks and Liars has the text:

I'm Joe Sestak and this is Belle. My family loves Belle. But she can make a mess. And we have to clean it up.

I think about Belle when I see Congressman Toomey's ads attacking me.

It made me sick to bail out the banks. But I had to clean up the mess left behind by these guys. [Points to picture of George W. Bush and Pat Toomey.] They let Wall Street run wild. Now Pat Toomey is attacking me for cleaning up his mess.

I authorize this message because we deserve leaders who solve problems instead of playing politics.

Plus, it's nice to see SOMEONE having the guts to call the mess Bush and company left behind what it is: a mess of dog crap.

Dick Armey Credits Toomey With Sparking 'Conception' Of Tea Party

Via The Philadelphia Inquirer's Commonwealth Confidential:

Former Rep. Dick Armey (R.,Tex.), whose Freedom Works organization has helped the Tea Party grow, said Tuesday in Philadelphia that the movement was conceived the moment President George W. Bush endorsed Sen. Arlen Specter (then-R, now D) over Pat Toomey in the 2004 Republican primary.

[snip]

Naturally, Democrats would like to hang responsibility for some the more - er, unusual - Tea Party candidates around Toomey's neck. After all, he was head of the Club for Growth, a powerful advocacy group that has spent a decade pushing from the GOP candidates and officeholders deemed insufficiently pure in their conservatism.

Sestak's campaign said in a statement that Toomey and O'Donnell would be a "perfect match" in the Senate...

[snip]

"Congressman Toomey may not be a witch, but his policies are just as scary," said Sestak spokeswoman April Mellody. "Eliminating all corporate taxes, privatizing Social Security and shipping jobs to China are so out of touch with Pennsylvanians that if you didn't have a private plane, you'd need a broomstick to reach them."

Some New Poll Data

An astute reader of the blog brought this to my attention last night.

Jim O'Toole of the P-G wrote at Early Returns yesterday:

We told you about that DSCC poll showing Joe Sestak's bow edging ahead of the U.S.S. Toomey _nautical metaphor are obligatory when writing about the admiral's campaign. Now our pal, the trusty lookout Tom Fitzgerald of the good ship Inky, ahoys us with news of another internal Dem poll depicting a Senate regatta with the candidates in hailing distance of one another _ Sestak, 46 percent, Toomey 45 percent. Those ads charging that Toomey wants to take everyone's Social Security check and mail them to Chinese businessmen to buy risky derivatives might be working.

Here's the piece from Fitzgerald at philly.com:

Democrat Joe Sestak has clawed his way into a statistical tie with Republican Pat Toomey in the Pennsylvania Senate race, according to two new internal Democratic polls.

Toomey was leading Sestak 46 percent to 45 percent among likely voters in a poll conducted for Sestak's campaign by David Petts, of the Washington firm Bennett, Petts and Normington, and obtained by The Philadelphia Inquirer. The survey of 800 likely voters was conducted Oct. 4-6, and results were subject to a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

And adds some details for that DSCC poll:

Also, a poll conducted for the Democratic Senatatorial Campaign Committee by Garin-Hart-Yang over the last week showed Sestak leading Toomey 44 percent to 42 percent. When "leaners" were pushed to make a choice, Sestak went up 47 percent to 44 percent. The poll was based on 606 likely voters.

A few caveats from Chris Bowers at the dailykos:

This is the first poll in a while to show Sestak ahead in Pennsylvania, and it’s an internal poll. However, my research on polling averages suggests that including internal polls in the final averages actually increases the accuracy of the averages. Also, it is the first Pennsylvania poll that will be included in the final Senate Snapshot, since the majority of its interviews were conducted on or after October 8th. [Italics in original]

Before you say that all this is meaingless, I'll give Fitzgerald a pre-emptive retort:

DSCC's Republican counterpart certainly is acting as though numbers are moving in this race.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee launched its first ad on behalf of Toomey Wednesday. Entitled "interview," it shows footage of Sestak, a Democratic congressman, saying he supported a bigger stimulus, a public health-care option and the so-called cap-and-trade energy bill.

And these are supposed to convince me not to support Joe Sestak?

Will you vote for "Joe Seestix"?

I was just polled by a firm called Issues & Answers about US Senate and gubernatorial races in Pennsylvania.

What was completely disturbing was that the interviewer could not pronounce "Sestak."

In fact, the first time she tried to say it I had to ask, "Do you mean Joe Sestak?" because I really wasn't sure who she was asking about. She pronounced it something like "seasicks" or "seestix" -- and continued to do so throughout the interview -- despite my correcting her each time.

How in the hell can the results be valid for the surveys that she's conducted?

They have call centers in IN, MI and VA. I did try their corporate offices in VA, but got voicemail, so for the hell of it, I called the first phone center listed and registered a complaint (I should have asked for her supervisor while I still had her on the phone).

Ironically, she had no problem with "Onorato."
.