The decision of Pennsylvania Club for Growth Leader Pat Toomey, a former Republican Congressman from the Lehigh Valley, to forego a second primary race against Arlen Specter after almost beating him in 2004 is great news for Specter and bad news for the Pennsylvania Democratic Party.
While it is possible that someone else may emerge to challenge Specter from the right, it is likely that the combination of Obama's decisive Pennsylvania victory, the current 13-6 Democratic Congressional Delegation in Pennsylvania make-up in districts drawn by Rick Santorum and the Republican National Committee, the landslide defeat of Santorum by current U.S. Senator Bob Casey, and the Democratic takeover of the state house of representatives in the 2006 and 2008 elections all work to reinforce Specter's message to the Republicans: no one significantly to his right can win in Pennsylvania.
Arlen Specter has long deliberately defied ideological categorization. He was first elected District Attorney of Philadelphia running as a registered Democrat on the Republican ticket, with liberal reformers from the Americans for Democratic Action helping run a campaign that appealed to women's fears of rape.
A case can be made that Specter is a liberal; a case can be made that Specter is a moderate; a case can be made that Specter is a conservative. Decade after decade, Specter is the least predictable U.S. Senator.
His 1992 primary opponent, former assistant district attorney and State Representative Stephen Freind, identified what he called the "Specter shuffle," showing that Specter was far more liberal in the first four years of his term and the last six months of his term than he was in the year and a half before the Republican Senatorial primary.
It can be safely said that Specter is more pro-choice than the average Republican, more pro-labor than the average Republican, more concerned with the rights of criminal defendants than the average Republican. Specter is also generally an ally of the National Rifle Association, those who favor lower taxation on the rich, and those in support of an aggressive militaristic American foreign policy.
But how Specter will vote on any given bill is anybody's guess. He likes to hold off announcing a position until the last possible moment. This makes him look important, gives his decisions a certain gravitas, and likely helps him raise campaign contributions. It does not, however, make Specter very many people's idea of a key ally.
To defeat Specter against the odds in 2010, Pennsylvania Democrats have to build on the record 1.2 million or more (new almost certainly higher figures will be announced shortly after a purge of longtime non-voters is completed) Democratic registration lead over the Republicans.
The Democrats need to nominate a candidate who can identify Pennsylvania's interests with the Democratic Party's interests, who can say "Arlen Specter votes for you half the time. I will vote for you all the time" or ""Arlen Specter's a 50% Democrat. I will be a 100% Democrat."
Pennsylvania is the most conservative of the blue states. Its high population of "I am a Democrat, BUT..." voters led the McCain camp to invest enormous resources here that probably could have been spent to greater effect elsewhere. But the ready availability of Democrats who like the Democratic Party while at the same time have serious grievances against us has long entranced Republicans and dispirited Democrats.
No Democrat can possibly out-Specter Specter. If Pennsylvania voters want a Senator who can do anything on any day of the week, who is for things in principle and against things in practice, who carefully calibrates the politics and substance of each bill for maximum effect without worrying about consistency or rationality, they want Specter.
There may or may not be a genuine, reliable Democratic majority in Pennsylvania at this time. The only hope for the Democrats is that such a majority not exists, or can be made to exist in 2010.
If people want a genuine Democratic majority in the U.S. Senate that can overcome Republican filibusters, they will want a Democratic U.S. Senator.
If people want a U.S. Senator with his finger in the wind who sees each vote as a unique event at a unique period in time, they want Specter.