Category: 2010 Election

A key message from yesterday’s post on the challenging climate we’re facing here in Pennsylvania is that we need Democratic gun owners to show up in a big, big way. If you’re a Pennsylvania gun owner who is registered as a Democrat, you don’t have the option of staying home for the primary election.

Consider that the most “moderate” of the Democratic gubernatorial candidates on record only wants to ban your rifles. (Whether you decide to cast your lot with the one seeking the least amount of gun control or the far-left progressive who can’t win statewide is up to your own voting strategy.)

But as of tomorrow, one of the more extreme gun control advocates is dropping his gubernatorial bid to instead challenge a pro-gun Democratic House member for an open Senate seat.

The Senate seat in question has been primarily Democratic since 1963, so it is likely that the Democratic primary will serve to determine the final office holder, regardless of the election in November. The Democrats who have held it before have been very pro-gun, and hopefully we can keep that tradition. Right now, State Rep. Jim Wansacz currently holds an A rating and is hoping to continue the trend. But tomorrow he will be challenged by Chris Doherty who wants to limit the number of guns you can buy, end statewide preemption, make your license to carry obsolete, and possibly create a formal gun owner registry to track how many guns you try to purchase. It doesn’t matter if you’re a carry advocate, recreational shooter, hunter, or all three, your status as a lawful gun owner under Chris Doherty will be impacted in a very negative way.

That’s one nice thing about Pennsylvania, we still have some pro-gun Democrats. It means that Democratic voters who actually respect the Second Amendment will often have a choice of candidates. In this case, it’s pretty clear that Rep. Wansacz needs your vote, your political donations, and your time.

All across the board, as I hear more and more about what’s been going on with the Pennsylvania GOP, the message seems to be from the party apparatchiks that they are in charge, and you wormy little tea-baggers can go get bent. In our district, it appears they are all going to all but anoint Mike Fitzpatrick, who already lost to Pat Murphy once with the advantage of incumbency. I seriously question that he can win. Rumors abound that the GOP is doing much the same on the state level.

The GOP in Pennsylvania is scared to death of this grassroots movement that’s formed up to oppose the Obama/Pelosi agenda. While other state parties are happy to work with it, the PA GOP is essentially telling the grass roots to go to hell. This is a recipe for disaster. And it would not seem that, rounding out the desert menu, Reasoned Discourse^TM is breaking out all over the State GOP Facebook Page in regards to the party hacks’ chosen candidates.

Pennsylvania will remain a true blue state as long as the GOP hacks insist on fighting their own grass roots rather than the Democrats. This is a new world, and a new political climate, and they had best start getting used to it. Democracy is ugly. But the alternative is far worse. I have to wonder whether the PA GOP really agrees with that.

So far, things are looking really good for Republicans in 2010. Political watchers even think things look rosy here in our Congressional district where they have moved Patrick Murphy’s seat from Solid Dem to Likely Dem to only Lean Dem. I assume that’s because they believe a former Congressman who Murphy narrowly beat will put up a good campaign. At this point, one could only wish.

I’ve had my concerns about Mike Fitzpatrick ever since I heard he was entering the race. Bucks Right hits the nail on the head with what’s bothering me at the moment:

Mike Fitzpatrick, presumptive Republican nominee in his own mind for the US House Seat representing Pennsylvania’s 8th district, appears to be employing the little seen “gimmick a day” political strategy in his run to regain the seat he lost nearly 4 years ago to Patlosi Murphy.
…
Sweet Jesus. To anyone remotely associated with the campaign who may read this: While you weren’t paying attention, Patlosi turned himself into kind of a big deal to the far-left wing of his party. If you think running a rinky-dink, misspelled, incoherent, gimmicky campaign against the well-oiled Rahm Emanuel digital age machine is going to take Murphy out, you’re wrong. You’re killing me here. Do you need a consultant? How about a proofreader?

Amen.

The fact is that Fitzpatrick already lost when Murphy was a no-name upstart. While I’m open to the idea he may be the best candidate to take on Murphy, that doesn’t mean he’s a good one. The weird gimmicks he’s been touting only go to confirm that.

As Bucks Right points out, Fitzpatrick asked for a spending freeze of $1 million in the campaign.

1. Murphy is a talented fundraiser. Why would he do that since he can far out-raise Fitzpatrick?
2. Murphy has the media adoration that will land him endorsements and free coverage. A spending freeze would only hurt Fitzpatrick who can’t counter the coverage.
3. There are higher priority races for the GOP this year, so Fitzpatrick can’t rely upon outside groups to come in and save him. If Murphy did agree to freeze spending, there are a number of groups that will come in and save him with additional funds because of his leadership on some issues like “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the fact that he picked up the tab for the street money for Obama in Philly in 2008.

Fitzpatrick’s “spending freeze” gimmick will only hurt Fitzpatrick. Did no one think that one through? Or are they just hoping that Murphy doesn’t take them up on the offer?

The latest gimmick was the announcement that he’ll honor term limits by not serving more than three additional terms. Great. That means even if Fitzpatrick does win, we will have to go back and fight another uphill battle in six years. If he’s not even going to stick around even if we can manage to elect him, then why should I invest my votes, dollars, and time with Fitzpatrick? At that point, I suspect that my resources are better spent on a candidate like Jeff McGeary or Ira Hoffman. I don’t quite think they are to the point of being able to take on Murphy, but if this gets them started on a path toward name recognition that could serve them well in another run for another office, my investment would still pay off.

Fitzpatrick made the case to PA2010.com that he would be the best candidate because of a serious lead on a campaign infrastructure and experience. If this is the kind of goofy & sloppy campaign we can expect with all of that experience on board, then Fitzpatrick has moved this race closer to the Solid Dem category.