PA Dems Size Up Chris Matthews For 2010 Senate Run

[ClarkUSA]

Marc Ambinder over at The Atlantic:

The universal view within NBC Universal about Chris Matthews's flirtation with a Pennsylvania Senate bid is that a larger contract is the object of his true affection.

But Pennsylvania Dems are taking the talk seriously. Many senior Pennsylvania Democrats view Matthews as the most viable candidate against a (fairly) vulnerable Sen. Arlen Specter, even more viable that Adm. Joe Sestak (Ret)., a new congressman and Clinton supporter. Specter, approaching 80, will primarily have to live down his party affiliation, although he always outperforms other Republicans in those archetpyal Philly suburbs like Bucks, Delware and Montgomery Counties. The case for Matthews is simple: he has the right accept, he knows politics, he'll be a fantastic campaigner, and as a "force of personality" candidate, he'll roll through primary opponents.

For many, the issue now lies squarely within the candidate himself: the infrastructure is there, but is there a fire in the belly?

The rumors continue... :)

[grantcart]

1. Didn't Matthews already announce that he signed a new big contract and

would be concentrating on his show?

[rvablue]

6. Rumored to be $5 million a year

Nice deal for some spittle-accented bloviating and interrupting.

Word is, the Senate run rumors were all to get a better contract.

[AlinPA]

10. I like your description of the slobbering loudmouth fool.

[stillcool]

17. He should go to FOX..

O'Reilly gets between 10-12 mill a year..
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/2008/10/21/2008-10-21_bill_oreilly_signs_contract_for_four_mor.html

[ClarkUSA]

13. When did he announce that? I haven't heard or read about it.

I have read rumors but that's all.

[Captain Hilts]

2. And he's old and unhealthy enough to not be considered a long-haul senator. nt

[H2O Man]

7. Respectfully disagree.

n/t

[Captain Hilts]

8. He has SERIOUS complications from diabetes. He lives in my 'hood. nt

[H2O Man]

9. Diabetes is

a serious illness, but can be treated. His health is okay.

Living in your neighborhood may hold other risks, but that has nothing to do with his qualifications.

[Captain Hilts]

12. He's had some significant absences from his show and his weight...

varies pretty significantly. Not a good sign, and at his age, it might not get worse, but it won't get better.

They should go younger and/or healthier to hold onto the seat a long time.

His book on RFK, by the way, was terrific. Being on television so much has done him no good.

[AndrewP]

20. I've had Type 1 Diabetes for 12 years

and it is a factor. I'm not saying you can't do things like run for office, as long as he maintains his health. But it's trickier with Diabetes.

[Captain Hilts]

21. The absence from his show and the varying weight set off alarm bells. nt

[rvablue]

23. How do you know he is OK....do you know him personally....seems so. n/t

[goclark]

55. Agree ~

It is not our calendar that makes decisions about how long others walk on earth.

RFK was in excellent health as far as I remember ~ we can use statistics but then Robert Byrd would laugh us off the face of the earth.

[SoCalDem]

14. and he caught a bad case of Malaria when he was in Africa with his son

Malaria returns again and again..(My father had it) and a compromised health-situation created by the diabetes can create problems.. all that said, Specter has had serious health issues too...MOST people have some health concern by the time they hit 50:(

[Captain Hilts]

16. Yes, that one's a beast. nt

[ShortnFiery]

3. Matthews is horrible. He's a pompous blowhard that changes positions like a wind vane.

OMG, Tweety functioning as a US Senator from PA?!? FUCK THAT! :puke:

[Pab Sungenis]

4. No.

No. No. No.
Please. No.
No no no no no no no no no no no no wait, let me think. NO!
NO!

[MadBadger]

11. YES, YES, YES!

[ClarkUSA]

15. lol

:rofl:

[IntravenousDemilo]

5. He has the right "accept"? WTF?

Don't be alarmed -- it said the same thing in the linked text, so I'm not blaming you for it. I guess they meant "accent", but even then, I don't know what kind of difference that should make.

[harun]

18. I think I can take Matthews in the Primaries.

[rvablue]

24. Me, too. Let me know where to send the contribution Harun...and if you

don't spit on everyone and interrupt them every time they open their mouths I think you have an excellent chance.

[PM Martin]

19. Pundits are not the kind of people I would like to see in public office.

[ShadowLiberal]

22. As a PAer I can understand why they'd skip over Sestak, but not picking Mathews

I've seen Sestak get interviewed on the local news stations maybe 5 or 6 times in the last few years. He's always talked about the exact same thing every single time, air plane noise that causes families to suffer who happen to live close to an airport. He's made clear he heavily opposes letting airlines expand and fly more flights because of how it would make those families suffer more from airplane noise.

Airplane noise is a lame issue that most voters probably won't care about, unless they live near an airport, which even in Sestak's district is very few people. I am very doubtful that the guy could connect with PA voters across the whole state if keeps up that kind of attitude, focusing on trival issues most won't care about. The only reason that Joe Sestak is in congress right now is because in 2006 his opponent, Curt Weldon, had his house, and his daughter's house, raided by the FBI a few weeks before the election. That corruption investigation absolutely murdered Curt Weldon's campaign, before then Joe Sestak was considered somewhat of a long shot to pick up his seat.

As a PAer however, I am also quite puzzled by why top democrats think Matthews is a good candidate to run. Matthews is just too controversial, and throughout his career in the media has said controversial things in the past that will come back to haunt him in a campaign.

Besides that, after Al Franken, who polls always showed was a weak candidate to run against Norm Coleman, might cost us a senate seat that we should have won last month, you'd think that democrats would have learned their lesson, stay away from controversial people on TV. Worst yet for Matthews, PA has a history of celebrity's doing very poorly in the state when they run for public office. In 2006 for example the republicans ran a former NFL player, who was black, and he lost in nearly a 2 to 1 margin to Ed Rendell in the governor's race, and even lost the black vote by the same margin that most republicans do.

The problem for us democrats in PA is that the governor's race is where all of the top tier challengers towards Specter are looking to run right now.

At this point I think our best hope is for Tooney to announce that he's running against Specter in the primary, so that a stronger democrat decides to run for the senate, thinking they won't have to run against Specter.

[rvablue]

25. BTW Matthews brother was Lynn Swann's running mate in that primary....little trivia. n/t

[ClarkUSA]

26. It's true: Sestak has the charisma of a carp and his speaking style resembles paint drying.

Politicians do not underestimate the power of a celebrity candidate with high name recognition. Unlike most celebrities,
Matthews has a stronger background and longer history in politics than most Democratic candidates mentioned as
possible candidates. He also has no problem either self-funding or having fundraisers and will probably not rely as
much on the DSCC as other possible candidates. Senior PA pols know this and that's probably why they see him as
the top prospect.

[tigereye]

27. exactly! Good Assessment.

Many folks in PA love Arlen and I can't see them replacing him with a pundit, no matter what he used to do. It doesn't look like any of the younger Heinz's are particularly interested in running, although i seem to remember one of them unsuccessfully running for Congress... I can't think of another big name who might- many of them, as you said, are caught up in their desire to succeed the Governor.

[ClarkUSA]

28. They don't love Arlen that much: he had trouble winning the primary the last time around.

And the last PA poll had Spector under 50% (a sign of a vulnerable incumbent) with Matthews only 2 points behind him.
That's bad newsfor Spector/good news for Matthews and no doubt those senior PA Democrats mentioned in the OP
know it. DUers have their prejudices against pundits (by the way, how many pundits have Matthews' political background?)
but unfortunately few of them look at the facts which do indeed indicate Matthews is the strongest challenger against
Spector thus far.

[tigereye]

29. I just don't see it...

but you never know.

[ClarkUSA]

30. I do...

But you're right, you never know. I hope Matthews decides to run, though because the last two public polls and senior
PA Democrats concur that Matthews is the strongest challenger against Spector in a state that has a huge edge in
Democrats now, thanks to Team O.

[tigereye]

31. good point...

where in PA are you if you don't mind my asking... feel free to pm if you want. :)

[LynneSin]

45. He had that trouble in a republican primary because an anti-choice candidate was running

You eliminate half the people who can vote for him and suddenly the guy has a dog race because the Pennsyltucky region of Pennsylvania has themselves a Rick Santorum mini-me.

YOu have the ENTIRE state voting for Specter is is a different race. Specter does well in Philadelphia which is why he wins general elections. But Philadelhpia is overwhelming Democratic so he loses that edge in the primaries and has to compete in regions that aren't keen on having a pro-choice candidate as their senator.

[ClarkUSA]

49. So what? Doesn't matter why he nearly lost. He's not loved among the base, like McCain.

Given the huge 1M+ edge in Democratic voters (thanks to Team O) I am not worried about Spector going up against a strong
Democratic candidate, one that has charisma and good preliminary poll numbers instead of a candidate with a voice and demeanor
that reminds people of paint drying on a rainy day and bad preliminary poll numbers. I like to look at the facts, like the top PA
Democrats mentioned in the OP. But that's just me, obviously. Others might ignore great poll numbers and the opinions of top
politicians in a state in favor of their personal opinions.

:)

[LynneSin]

50. Why don't you understand the concept that Specter wins because Dems vote for him.

I don't know where you live but I live in the Philadelphia region for 14 years. Every time Specter ran people would support him. He can afford to lose those conservative nutjobs because he'll do well in the general election with moderate democrats.

We have the same thing here in Delaware. This state is thoroughly blue. Obama won by like 61% and Biden for Senate won with 65%. Even the governor race saw the dems get 65%. You'd think a state that solidly blue and liberal (hell Al Sharpton's one electoral vote in 2004 came from DE) that we should easily win our one US representative (we only have one). But Mike Castle easily pulls in the democratic vote (and no I haven't voted for him but he's one of the nicest guys you'll meet. I see him all the time since he lives in my neighborhood just a few blocks away).

So look at the facts all you want but please please please, do some research about the guy and how Pennsylvania works. I'm not sure how many times I have to explain the Philadelphia factor but I've seen it every single election. Rendell put together a strategy that has been turning Pennsylvania blue since he won the primaries in 2002. But Specter still pulls in stronger numbers in Philadelphia county than any other republican out there because Philadelphians see Arlen as one of them. He might not win the county but he'll keep it close enough that the rest of the state can give him that victory. It's kinda like how I explained with Mike Castle - he's local (lives in Philly) and everyone alway has an Arlen story about seeing him a the store, or the game or some local venue. And even local personalities who have openly supported democrats, like morning sports talk-show host Angelo Cataldi, have a great repertoire with Arlen Specter. Philadelphia has little factor in the republican primaries but big impact with the general election - but Arlen Specter defies that with the general elections. And the big factor are the Philly suburbs which notoriously split the vote and tend to lean republican in many area - Arlen does very well in those regions even though the 4 counties (Bucks, Chester, Delaware (the county) and Montgomeryville) tend to go blue for the presidential votes.

And finally it is great that we registered all those voters in Pennsylvania, many which I helped to registered in Philadelphia. But are you betting that all these voters are going to be turning out faithfully each election? I would like to think so but without someone like Barack Obama drawing out the voters I wouldn't place my bet on it.

We have been making his race more competitive. Joe Hoeffel was a good run in 2004 because he was also a Philly area candidate and helped pull some of the vote his way. But Arlen is always a tough run and defies what some people think shouldn't be the case. Pennsylvania is a state where the republicans end up being pro-choice and the democrats (like Bob Casey Jr. and John Murtha) tend to be pro-life. And one other thing about Arlen - the guy is pro-union, always gets some of the big endorsements, like 6 years ago it was the Steelworkers.

If Arlen gets the nomination he will probably win again which is why I think our best shot at unseating him is at the primaries. The democrats will be doing their own vote which will leave it solely on the republicans to decide who they want running for office.

[ClarkUSA]

51. There's been a sea change in PA politics since he was last re-elected.

You can't keep reaching back to irrelevant ancient history and ignore very recent public polling that has him under 50% and
Matthews within low single digits of him, but I'm sure you'll keep trying. And as of Oct. 2008, there are almost 1 million more
registered Democrats than Republicans than existed when Spector was last re-lected.

Pssst! Up-to-date facts do count. Opinions are like assholes (no insult intended of course!). That's why top PA Democrats agree with me and not you. :)

[LynneSin]

52. Well you reach back to Matthews career from 20+ years ago

I'm reaching back to 4 years ago. You're living a dream to think that all those registered voters from 2008 are going to be turning out and voting for whatever dem is running against Arlen Specter. That turnout was due to Barack Obama, who won't be running in 2010. Perhaps if this senate race was in 2012 we would have a shot of getting those votes.

I've been working Philadelphia politics for way too long to see the appeal that Arlen still has with that city. It's foolish to think that we put a 'celebrity' against Specter that somehow people will change their votes. In Philadelphia they treat Specter as a celebrity.

[ClarkUSA]

53. When did I do that? Oh, you mean to counter the meme that he's not fit to run?

I told the truth about the man's impressive Democratic Party bonafides: he was Tip O' Neill's chief of staff and Jimmy Carter's
speechwriter, the one that got Carter to the White House. What's wrong with that? You're not making much sense, are you?

:crazy:

[LynneSin]

57. Clark, I think everyone has given up on the sense you're making

You keep assuming that Matthew's career from 20 years ago somehow makes him a good democrat. Using your standards would make even Dick Morris a good democrat since well, Dick did work for Bill Clinton in the 90s.

And you use a poll that is being done 2 years BEFORE the election during a time when Bush is getting some of the lowest ratings for a President and Obama's rating is going strong. But on the turn of a dime this could all change - it did in 1994 and the republicans made major sweeps in the mid-term elections because of Clinton's sagging ratings.

I'm guessing either you work for Chris Matthews or have a serious crush on him. Can't figure it out. But it seems everyone else here at DU is NOT keen on seeing him as a democratic senator. I don't care what Chris Matthews did 20 years ago, wait we're actually getting closer to 30 years. I care what he's done the past 5 years which includes years of bashing democrats and praising republicans including Bush. He was a part of the problem that we have with the media but I guess since the last 6 months he jumped on the Obama bandwagon you deem he's 'suitable' now.

Well there are plenty of suitable democrat that can make that run. Hell I'd rather see Ed Rendell run for the ticket and even Ed has disappointed me these past few months with some of this 'hot-mic' comments.

And when we provide you proof, like 385 items listed at Media Matters, you totally ignore us. I don't want a democrat that had 385 instances where he was bashing on democrats or distorting the truth about what our government was doing. If Matthews gets elected we'd end up with another Joe Lieberman in the senate except this guy has a "D" next to his name.

http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/tags/chris_matthews?f=h_hot

[ClarkUSA]

60. Matthews' Democratic bonafides are indisputable and public polls cast him as very electable

Top PA Democrats agree with me and your ranting goes unnoticed by them and me because your views are irrelevant and/or biased,
possibly by your past vote for Spector... and Tom Ridge.

[LynneSin]

61. That's ok - most people are ignoring your rants too here at DU

And your stupidity is amazing since clearly you're more concerned about what people did 15-30 years ago then what they have been doing the last 8 years. I've listed 385 times that Matthews had bashed democrats and sucked up to George Bush and yet I haven't voted republican ONCE since Bush was in the White House (to be fair not since 1994). Matthews qualifications of working for Carter and O'Neill mean NOTHING to most of us - hell you have posters here who probably weren't even born or just mere infants when those 2 were in office. The world has changed mightily since 1980.

And anyone who places money on a poll doing today should have their head examined. Of course he's a strong candidate. Hell right now my mother could be considered a strong democratic candidate because right now Republicans are on the downswing. Show me the poll 6 months before the 2010 election and then perhaps I might buy into it.

I'm tired of people thinking we need celebrities to win these elections. No we need people who have the democratic party in their best interest running. Matthews has not shown the best interest for democrats in the last 8 years ONLY the last few months when jumping on the Obama bandwagon looked like a safe bet and even then he wasn't a Keith Olberman or Rachel Maddow.

[ClarkUSA]

63. Link? Proof? Or is this ANOTHER ad hominem attack by you disrupting my OP thread?

:eyes:

[LynneSin]

65. Wow putting yourself to sleep

You're the president of the Chris Matthews fan club. And we've posted the link but you're too lazy to check them out. Do you even live in Pennsylvania?

[ClarkUSA]

66. You're obsessed with me, aren't you? LOL! Can't stop kicking this thread, eh?

Keep it up, dear. I really appreciate it. Really. :)

[ailsagirl]

32. I wouldn't mind at all

[rvablue]

34. Does any of this change your mind

Chris Matthews admitted on his show that he voted for Bush....and he did so to prove that he wasn't too "left."

Chris Matthews has invited Ann Coulter on his show multiple times where she lies about and smears Democrats, including letting her unchecked insinuate that Bill Clinton is a homosexual and Al Gore is "a fag."

And he's been one of Rudy "9/11" Guiliani's biggest cheerleaders -- including in the last week touting him as a great candidate to be NY Governor Paterson.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. I suggest you go to mediamatters.org and click on his archive. It will be an eye-opening experience for you.

Or maybe you think this is an excellent criteria for being a Democratic Senatorial candidate.

Me, not so much.

[LynneSin]

35. I have to agree! I'd rather just keep Specter in the seat than have Matthews

And I say this as someone who has once voted for Arlen Specter for Senate ages ago (I'm originally from Pennsylvania). But I'll tell you this much, if I was in Pennsylvania today I'd have a tough time supporting Matthews. If it was Arlen vs. Matthews then I think the best thing I could do is just shut my mouth and let Pennsylvanians make their decision. If it was Arlen vs. someone like Joe Sestek, I'd drive up from Delaware every weekend to help get Sestek elected.

I just ultimately cannot see Matthews running for senate. Arlen, believe it or not, is still pretty popular in Pennsylvania and ESPECIALLY in the Philadelphia area. Pennsylvania's reason for success with the democrats is due to getting high voter turnout for our candidates in Philadelphia. You get a high voter turnout (Philly had like the 2nd greatest margin of victory for Obama for all the major Urban areas) then the rest of the state can't compete. Trust me, they ran Lynn Swann, former Hall-of-Famer for the Pittsburgh Steelers, as a republican against Ed Rendell (governor) and Swann lost by 19pts. Arlen wins because somehow he can pull out a close race in Philadelphia.

But for me, at least we know how Specter butters his bread (and personally I don't think he'll survive his next term so hopefully he would be replaced by a respectable democrat).

[Name removed]

37. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rvablue]

40. Sorry, but I wouldn't rather see Specter who is now trying to play games with the AG nomination

how about Pennsylvania Democrats find a REAL Democrat to run...I'm sure there are many decent choices....I have to read more about this Sestek individual......

But Matthews, please. And all I can hope is that if he does run -- which is doubtful b/c rumor has it this was all a play at MSNBC to jack up his contract to $5 mill a year -- other Dems will step up as use the vast library of Matthews Republican-ass kissing video clips.

[LynneSin]

41. Seriously! And btw Joe Sestak is an amazing guy

but I honestly can't see anyone beating Specter.

Here's a great way to describe it:

Angelo Cataldi is the morning host of the WIP Sports Radio station on 610am. Cataldi has been in that post for decades and is very well known in the Philadelphia area. Cataldi is also a democrat and has helped campaign not only for Ed Rendell, but hosted the free concert that Bruce Springsteen did in Philadelphia for Barack Obama. Was a big supporter of Obama too.

But he's also a big fan of Specter. Regularly has Specter on the radio show because Arlen is a big Eagles fan.

It's something that doesn't make sense because personally I'd like to see Specter retire. But Specter does well in Philadelphia and that's how he wins.

[LynneSin]

44. You know - the solution to all of this is Pat Toomey

Specter can win Pennsylvania because he gets a large chunk of democratic votes in the Philly region every election. If you can't get strong numbers in Philly you can't make up the rest of the state. This is why I believe that Specter is unbeatable against any democrat - whether it's Matthews or another candidate.

HOWEVER, what if Specter wasn't the nominee? Of course if Specter bows out of the race then the seat would easily be a democratic pickup and I think there are several strong democratic candidates out there that would be better choices than Matthews including Sestak, Hoeffel (although he might run for governor) and Allyson Schwartz (no clue what's out there in Pittsburgh). I think even Tim Holden might be a good candidate - I know he does really well in a republican district because of his appeal to the Union votes (when Bethelhem Steel unloaded their pensions Holden was right there fighting to get coverage for those out in the cold).

However if Specter does run he MIGHT have a dogfight in the primaries if Pat Toomey were to run again against Specter. Toomey is a Rick Santorum clone and ran a tight race against Specter in 2004. If Toomey could pull out a win (provided that dems don't crossover in the primaries and support Specter) then any democratic senate candidate would easily win that election.

We just need to find a viable candidate. And another poster mentioned the issues with Franken, I could see the same thing happening with Matthews.

[ClarkUSA]

47. Why would you rather have a Republican keep a seat rather than have a Democrat win it?

Perhaps you're at the wrong forum? :shrug:

[ClarkUSA]

69. PA Gov. Rendell disagrees with you. He believes Matthews is the 'strongest Democratic candidate'

Fast Eddie should know. Guess you think he's a fool with knows nothing about Pennsylvania politics, too? :rofl:

Politico reports:

Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell gave Chris Matthews a glowing endorsement for his potential Senate candidacy
today, calling the MSNBC host the “strongest Democratic candidate without any doubt” in an interview on
Bloomberg TV.

Rendell added that he doesn’t “really know” if Matthews has made a decision to run yet. And he cautioned that Sen.
Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) would be a formidable opponent because of his strong ties to independents and moderate
Democrats.


Rendell's longtime political consultant, Neil Oxman, has been talking with Matthews about running for Specter's seat
and is encouraging him to jump in the race.

His comments come in light of a new poll, conducted by Research 2000, that shows Matthews leading in a Democratic
primary field, and would be just one point behind Specter if an election was held today.

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ailsagirl]

42. WOW-- say what you really think!!

I knew I shouldn't have posted. Invariably someone takes me to task... :eyes:


Whatever happened to Voltaire's: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend
to the death your right to say it"???


:hi:

[ClarkUSA]

48. You forgot to add: Chris Matthews was Tip O'Neill's chief of staff and Jimmy Carter's speechwriter.

His Democratic bonafides are impeccable, as was his strong support for Barack Obama during this election season.
Many Democrats and indies voted for Bush in 2000. So what? Many of them, including Matthews, voted for Obama
this time around. MediaMatters.org is a Clintonian agency which means they despise all things Matthews. They are
about as impartial about Matthews as Hillary and Bill.

Better to see how the RNC decried Matthews' bias towards Democrats this year, so much so he was demoted from
anchoring the Presidential debates along with Keith Olbermann? Why did they do that if he's such a GOP sympathizer,
as you seem to be implying from your selective list of Matthews' transgressions?

:eyes:

[LynneSin]

33. Sestek is not a "NEW" congressman, he just one his first re-election

in a district that leans republican. And btw, when he won in 2006 he unseated Curt Weldon, who was a very popular (but asshole) republican representative. I didn't think it could be done but he did it easily (and then won by 60% in 2008)

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ClarkUSA]

46. Um, Sestak only got elected in 2006, so he's "new" -- and he's a terrible campaigner to boot.

In 2006, Sestak won in a surprisingly close race against the most famously corrupt Republican in the state, which is not a freebie he's
going to get a chance to do again. Weldon had terrible approval ratings at the time, so your implication that he was very popular at
the time of the election is false. Sestak has zero charisma and even less personality, so no doubt he'd go down in flames against
Spector. Oh, and there's also those two recent public polls, which show Matthews being the best challenger against Spector, despite
Sestak being a known elected official already. Maybe that's because he's so "new" while Matthews is a well-known political entity.

:)

[LynneSin]

54. Yeah, such a terrible campaigner that unseated a long-term republican incumbant...

and then INCREASED his margin of victory in 2008 in a district that leans slightly republican.

[ClarkUSA]

56. You mean the incredibly corrupt incumbent who had basement-level approval ratings at the time?

That's how Sarah Palin beat Frank Murkowski, ya know. So Sestak is at least as good a campaigner as Miss Piggy and had about
as hard a road to hoe. I'll give him that. :rofl:

[LynneSin]

58. Well if he was that bad then why did he do even better next time?

The district isn't a solid blue one, it has major sections of suburb Pennsylvania and stretches into Rural Pa.

If the guy was such a bad campaigner then he should have tanked when a Iraq War Veteran ran against him. I mean geez, this guy served in Iraq - why aren't we supporting our troops and sending this republican off to DC. Check out the map of that congressional district - that was handdrawn by republicans to keep that seat safe for them. Republicans did a really great job with redistricting so they could keep more of their own in office

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania%27s_7th_congressional_district

What gives, this guy is such a bad campaigner - why did he win again. I'm just not clear about what happened?

:grr:

[ClarkUSA]

59. Because incumbents have a 95% re-election rate unless you're Mark Foley, Curt Weldon, or Larry Craig

He'd be a lousy pick to run against Spector which is why top PA Democrats aren't even considering him. :)

[ShortnFiery]

62. My Gawd! Have you heard Tweety's spittle the last couple of days?!?

He's manic, spastic, and two fries short of A Happy Meal. :crazy:

I do hope and pray that the good people of Pennsylvania say "no" to Tweety's bleating, self-contradictory persona for the Senate. :thumbsdown:

[ClarkUSA]

64. No, I've been busy. Transcript link?

As for PA voters and top PA Democrats, I'm afraid that many of them are giving Matthews a fair chance of beating Spector,
who seems a vulnerable incumbent getting less than 50% in two recent public polls. I could care less about personality
politics. All I want is another Democrat in the Senate and unlike many DUers, I will support whoever has the best chance
of beating BushCo enabler Spector. We need as many Democrats in the Senate as possible and I don't give a damn how.
I don't even know if Matthews will run but if he does, I think he stands a better chance of beating Matthews than any other
candidate out there. Polling and top PA Democrats' sentiments seem to bear this out, but who knows? All I'm saying is
I am being pragmatic and intend to support the candidate with the best chances.

[ShortnFiery]

67. We know your MO, Listen in? He's presently on a "witch hunt" to paint Illinois as the worst state

for politicians. Pull any transcript and read it. Most objective people think that Chris Matthews is, at the least, unpredictable. Or have you forgotten his good buddy, Tom Delay who he has on far too often. Remember when he salivated over George W. Bush's "package" when he had his photo-op on the Air Craft Carrier.

& Oh, remember when many people were complaining how he was cheer-leading us into this immoral invasion of Iraq, he referred to the netroots as "The Pajama Hudeen?"



No, query any 100 people on this board and the vast majority would say that Chris Matthews is all about "Chris Matthews." There's many rumors around The Beltway about how he ADORES the power elite of both parties and is never left out of any of their fancy soirees.

[ClarkUSA]

68. My MO is wanting facts. No link, eh? And you're spouting false info re: Matthews. Facts --->

Last night's show had him specifically cite a report that named ND as the most corrupt state, followed by Louisiana and Alaska.
He pointedly said Illinois came in 18th.