Rendell: Sestak Would "Get Killed" And "Marginalized" If He Runs Against Specter

Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell sent an unusually blunt message to prospective senatorial candidate Joe Sestak on Friday, saying that if the congressman ran against Arlen Specter in the Democratic primary he would lose and fade into political obscurity.

Appearing on the "Ed Show", Rendell didn't apply even the slightest bit of sugar coating to his advice. Specter, he said, would kill Sestak in a primary largely because he has a history of aiding constituents, has the backing of the party machinery, and is supported by the president.

"I'm a great admirer of Joe Sestak and worked hard to get him elected and re-elected," Rendell said. "And I'm going to work hard to get him re-elected when he runs for Congress next year. Not for the Senate. Joe should not run for the Senate in the Democratic primary. He would get killed."

"[Sestak] doesn't want to be marginalized," Rendell reasoned. "He doesn't want to get 15 or 18 percent [of the vote]. Joe should run for Congress again; establish some seniority. His time will come... but it is not this year."

And what if it was this year?

"We will lose a terrific Congressman," Rendell said. "Joe Sestak runs against Arlen Specter, he is out of the Congress after just two short terms. We will lose a terrific Congressman and when he loses to Arlen, he fades into political obscurity."

Rendell's remarks on the 2010 election - the most candid offered to date - come just days after Sestak announced, also on the "Ed Show", that he would likely mount a challenge to Specter in the primary. Should he do so, Rendell said, the chips will undoubtedly be stacked against him. Not, necessarily, because Specter is more ideologically in tune with Pennsylvania Democrats, though Rendell did argue that the state was more conservative than widely believed. But rather because the party - from the local pols to the White House - would all be working on Specter's behalf.

"It's unbelievable how many [local Democrats] know Arlen personally and admired him and supported him even though he was a Republican in the past," said Rendell. "You can't buy that and you can't overcome that in one campaign. It's been 30 years. Number two, Arlen specter, will raise two, three, four times as much money as Joe Sestak. Number three: Arlen Specter has the support of the president and vice president. The president who has got a 90 percent approval rating among registered democrats in Pennsylvania."

"I think Joe should think about what Arlen has done," Rendell concluded, "the alliances that he's made over the years, the constituent service operation that he has that is second to none, and the fact that he does have the support of Democrats, particularly the president."

Comments

[Edmonsky]

Many Democrats and Independents worked hard to elect President Obama. Those hard workers are still waiting for recompense from the President by way of executing some programs dearest to their hearts.
Such big item ticket programs can only be accomplished between the first and second year the President is in office. But to do that, filibuster-proof Congress is required to be on-board with the President. Because in the House, Democrats have overwhelming majority seats, hence where the action is for accomplishing Democratic programs is in the Senate. This is pure commonsense.

Within these two years, Congressman Sestak, unfortunately has nothing to offer in terms of carrying out Democratic programs. During the debate on President’s stimulus package, Senator Specter’s support was indispensable and he delivered. It is only a political neophyte would think that leaning on Specter to switch parties started yesterday. No, it was part and parcel of President’s plan for carrying out of his program. Let us face this home truth.

Sestak has nothing to offer the new President. Sestak is acting very selfish as a spoiler in trying to undermine the behind the scene agreement reached to bring Senator Specter on board in order to carry out President’s programs. It is only children that express themselves in terms of “l like this and l dislike that”. Adults would ask, what is there for me rather than emoting.

[RGKahn]

Arlen Specter was brought on board to help carry out the Obama agenda? Maybe they should have told Specter about that. In his first vote, as a Democrat, he voted with the republicans against the President. He has also stated that he would vote with the republicans on the Union voting question, again voting against the President. It has bee reported that he made commitment to the Democratic leadership in the senate and to the President that he would be a loyal Democrat and support the President. A positions that the denied/denounced as soon as he could get his face on the Sunday talk show. In Senate committee hearings over the years he made a a lot of statements that sounded great until he actually voted, usually by voting the exact opposite of how he said he would vote. He neither walks the walk nor talks the talk. His first priority has always be Arlen Specter and will always be.

[Edmonsky]

Arguing from ideological frame of reference is highly problematical. One of its shortfalls is the foreclosure of alternate viewpoints. Who is a Democrat? This implies a presupposition of homogeneity. It is false because in Democratic Party, there are subsets and conflicting political philosophies. For instance, there are pro-choice and pro-life Democrats. So what do you make of that? Who should be in and who should be out?

The idea of ideological purity is the height of insanity that potentates compressing the party and its power of appropriation into irrelevance. GOP was once hijacked by talk-radio and even though they were not elected and they garnered such power that elected officials outsourced formulation of policies to them. Today, we know the result and consequences when elected party politicians were forced to prostrate to Rush in order to secure re-election privileges and avoid offending Rush followers.

[Altruth]

I don't believe in cutting off my nose to shame my face; people you have to go with the one who can WIN against the GOP!

[PAposter]

I agree, but no one is listening.­..they just keep baiting candidates into a fight they cannot win. Sestak's career will be ruined if he runs in 2010.

[Fugaziaol]

True. Sestak was able to ride anti-GOP sentiment to victory in '06 -- in a historically republican district. There's a real chance that his seat will be re-taken by the GOP if he leaves it to run for senate.

[RGKahn]

I'm sorry, Ed, what we need in Pennsylvania is a real Democratic Senator, not a faux Democratic Senator. Senator Specter became a Democrat because he saw the writing on the wall and knew he would never get the nomination as a republican. Lose the primary and you can't run in the election as an independent. So, being the political opportunist that he is, Arlen Specter turned democrat, Blue Dog Democrat at that. He still has to run in the primary but will now have the backing of the State Democratic Party, or will he." What will happen after this coming election? Will he remain a Democrat or revert back to the gop or will be become an independent? Who knows what the opportunist politician will do or say what the future might bring. One thing I do know is the Pennsylvania needs a real liberal-progressive Democratic Senator in the U.S. Senate in 2010.

[oldvet]

Why the hell do we need to reelect an 81-year old DINO, who only switched parties so that he could get re-elected.

I don't always agree with Joe Sestak, but he is a very intelligent man, with a lifetime of serving his country.

Who would you choose, given the opportunity? No contest as far as I'm concerned!

[Hopeington]

Why do they think Dems will vote for Specter just because Obama backs him? I worked hard to help get President Obama elected, but his word is not the last word. Somehow I think Dems would make an intelligent and informed choice regardless of what President Obama recommends. Do they have us confused with the mass consciousness from the other party that will follow it's leader where ever it tells them to go?

[PAposter]

No, but apparently OUR party has us confused us with those who will vote for anyone with a "D" beside his/her name, and that includes Specter and Sestak.

I'm not impressed by neither the obstructionists, nor the opportunists!

[NotesFromME]

30 years in the Senate--of course he will raise more money than Sestak. Thirty years of selling of selling his soul to the Devil counts for something to the corporate interests. Spector was a turncoat to the Republicans, and he has already proven himself a turncoat to the Democrats. Boot his a$$ out and get a REAL Democrat in the seat.

[research]

The DLC Rahm Dino's are ruling the democratic party.

[PAposter]

No they are not, but the they are trying mightily!

[research]

seems to me the completely rule the party. Obama is also a DLC democrat.

The good democrats like Kucinich are out of the loop.

[StevenevetS]

Ed Rendell and Barack Obama are on the wrong side of this one.
I am proud of both Rendell and Obama, but the people of PA (I am one) need to be given the opportunity to elect OUR choice of a Senator. The national voices in Washington should not appoint a Republican as our choice in the general election short-circuiting our right to have a Democratic primary and choose our Democratic candidate.

It can be argued that Sestak has no chance. The same argument was made against both Bob Casey (who beat the odds on favorite Santorum) and Barak Obama (who beat the odds on favorite Hillary Clinton.

I for one do not want Specter as my (Democratic??? - really???) choice.
I'll back Sestak.

I don't care what the odds are. I care what the choices are.

[PAposter]

...and I don't want Sestak, so where does that leave the Democratic party here in PA?

[blueskybigstar]

Go Joe Sestak. We need you. This statement against you by Rendell will act as an endorsement for you.

[PAposter]

Well, it should be seen as a wake up call, nobody knows the politics of PA like Rendell. He's right on this, and I think if Sestak ignores Rendell and moves forward, he will destroy his career. And all the belly-aching and grandstanding in the media will not resurrect it.

[PAposter]

Please don't waste your money, by sending it to Sestak. He cannot raise the kind of money that Specter can, no matter how much you want it.

It's easy for you guys to insist that Sestak run in 2010, it's not your career on the line. He will be hurt politically if he runs, and we (I) will lose a decent congressman. Timing is everything, and his timing is off on this one.

[blueskybigstar]

I'm sending some money to Sestak. Specter should step down. Obama made Specter a promise and will try to support him, but I hope the people know that there needs to be new blood in the Senate.

[PAposter]

There does need to be new blood, and I think Sestak should plan to run soon, just not against Specter in 2010. I'm inclined to believe he could win a special election, but that's only if the Democrats don't have another candidate they wish to endorse. Sestak can try to go it alone, and hope to rally to type of support Obama did, but I think the safer bet, is to hold his current position for a while. He needs to build a stronger following than the one that already exists for Specter.

I don't really like Sestak, but I don't want to see any Democrat ruin his career unnecessarily. I think he should have made his intentions known before Specter crossed over, and then maybe he wouldn't seem so opportunistic (like Specter).

[NotMcCain]

Keep talking, Governor.

I would love for Sestak to show these old political hacks who have contempt for "the little people" that the days of the political machie are over.

I'll gladly contribute whatever I can to Sestak's campaign. Would love to see him win--and at the very least, his challenge will make Specter step up more as a (supposed) Democrat.

Something Rendell could also do.

[wheresthebeef]

Pree-zactly! All the exposure that Rendell got during the primaries last year just proved him to be a old-style political hack, more interested in protecting his own turf and power than in advancing anything that even vaguely resembles a progressive agenda. Let's hope that Democratic voters in PA tune out Rendell and turn out Arlen.

[Lemeritus]

I'm not really qualified to dispute Gov. Rendell's assessment. We've seen situations aplenty where states are loathe to vote out senators with seniority; antipathy to change allowed Lieberman to beat a good Democratic challenger in Connecticut and almost got a disgraced Stevenson reelected in Alaska. Not that it hasn't been done -- Brownback did it in Kansas, to our lasting regret -- just that given the electorate's allegiance (often knee-jerk) to a familiar name AND with a political machine behind them, it's hard to dislodge someone like Specter.

That said, I like everything about Sestak. Vanquishing Specter would definitely send a message about politics as usual. PA has shown a resistance to being button-holed, so it will be interesting to see what the state decides to do about Specter.

[marka]

Rendell may be right, but I've disliked Specter as a Republican and like him even less as a Democrat. I say leave it to the citizens of Pennsylvania to decide. However, if Sestak runs, I do plan to send him a check for his campaign..

[Jimbo23]

There is a draft Sestak for the Primary fund that just started up over at ActBlue. Of course nothing's official but I gave him a few bucks to nudge him the right way!

http://www.actblue.com/page/draftsestakfund

[Budokan]

Sounds like whistling past the graveyard to me. I want Sestak to run. I believe he can and he will win against false-flag Specter.

[PAposter]

Sestak will not win the majority vote of registered Democrats, and the Independents have always supported Specter, as well as many Democrats. Sestak will not win here in 2010, and if he persists, he will lose support for subsequent races. Rendell is right about this.

[Jimbo23]

Work for Rendell or something? I personally would love to see Sestak run. For far too long Dems have been accepting politically expedient compromises that taint our ideals. I say we remind the insiders that yes we really want change not just window dressing. We need to vote with hope and not fear. Enough is enough. How many people gave Obama a chance against Hillary in the beginning when she was "inevitable"?