Changing Horses

United States Senator Arlen Specter The Republican Senator from Pennsylvania has served since 1980 and has always been a bit of a counter voice among his party changed parties yesterday.

To show you where my flu addled brain wasn't yesterday when I first got the NY Times e-mail alert I wondered why this was important enough to waste ether space. But a friend called and reminded of just who Arlen Specter is. He has left his mark:

Arlen Specter’s five terms have made him the longest-serving U.S. Senator in Pennsylvania’s history. A voice of reason, his independence and balance have won endorsements from the AFL-CIO and high marks from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (100% in 2006), the National Association of Manufacturers (86% in 2006), and the Americans for Tax Reform (90% in 2006).

Time Magazine listed him among the ten best Senators in 2006. Knowlegis rated him the second most powerful Senator in 2006 behind only Majority Leader Bill Frist. A November 11, 2007 Philadelphia Inquirer editorial stated: “Senator Arlen Specter has more clout than some sovereign nations.”

The Republicans want us to believe he has left their party because polls showed he would lose in the primary in his state and this is all about staying in the senate at any costs. Senator Specter says it is the Republican party that has left him. During the last Bush presidency he counseled compromise and conciliation in a Congress which established new records for partisan discord. In foreign affairs, he advocated dialogue and accommodation as an antidote to belligerency and saber rattling. There definitely seemed to be a parting of ways. And his decision to change party affiliation is just the official divorce as it were.

It also highlights an interesting turn in politics these days. The Obama win showed a breakdown in the Red State/Blue State political Mason-Dixon line and now there seems to be less division between Republicans and Democrats - at last real division. The extreme ends of both parties are no longer the leaders as to direction, especially in the Republican party which is in shambles scrambling for a new leader.

Every year more and more voters define themselves as independents or class themselves as centralist on issues. And in these trying global times we want leadership and not party rhetoric. And a lot of us are very, very angry at the belligerency and saber rattling and witch hunting of GW's terms in office. We would like to heal this nation and work together. If that means a few party leaders crossing the lines then I am all for it. Way to go Senator Specter.

Three Party System

This image may be taking the low road but with Halloween just around the corner I could not resist it. Incidentally, it is a real photo. No playing with the digital image. McCain said he made the face because he once again tried to walk off the wrong side of the stage. Message there?

I will leave that argument for commentators. I was more interested in a statistic I read today about the numbers of Republicans and Democrats in the United States. For European readers we are not evenly split. Nor is everyone in the United States Republican or Democrat.

In 2004 these two parties were evenly split with 37% of registered voters each. Which left 26% of registered voters "Independent". Read "Independent" as none of the above which is sometimes the only choice you get besides Republican and Democrat. There are Libertarians, Green Party, American Communist Party and yes, the American Nazi Party in some states. But few of those "also rans" manage to rally to the primaries. So some people, especially here in the Mountain West, will list themselves on the rolls as Republican or Democrat in order to vote in the primary and have a voice that early on. But I digress. That may be an entirely different blog.

Today the Democrats are 37% of the registered voters (less the newly registered which have not been effectively counted yet) and the Republicans are only 29%. That less than a third of the voters in the US is now radically split between the "educated conservatives" (their term) and Joe Six Pack or the "religious right."

So both parties have been playing the the independents to put their brand over the top in this election. This is just a guess but I think the 9% drop in registered Republicans defected to the Independents because of their unwillingness to be connected with that extreme religious right the Republicans have been courting the last few elections.

Do we have a three party system? No, because independents are just that - independent thinkers. And that is especially true here in the Mountain West. Many of us moved here because we did not like the rank and file of corporate America or big city living. We are very right on some issues - we want state control of our water and other resources. And very left on others - for me that is a woman's right to control her own life, but we are very independent on our liberal issues. Getting independents to agree on issues of importance to them is rather like herding cats.

Can any two parties pull us into their fold? I doubt it. Can McCain find the right direction to exit the stage? I doubt it.

Republicans Split?

Found the following interesting article this morning while browsing the web for political news:

The New York Post's Page Six reports that at a recent gathering of Republicans in mid-town Manhattan the other night, opinions were running almost universally against Sarah Palin:

NEW York Republicans are not too thrilled at the idea of Sarah Palin as their vice presidential candidate. The other night, private equity firm New Mountain Capital held a debate between James Carville and Karl Rove at Stone Rose in the Time Warner Center. When the moderator asked the 200 Republicans in the room how many were comfortable with Palin becoming president if something were to happen to John McCain, "only one man raised his hand," an attendee reports.

But here's the thing: If you convened a similar meeting of Republicans in Manhattan, Kansas, chances are they'd be in favor of Palin by a similar margin.

I believe Mike Murphy was the first to point out that Sarah Palin would be a "polarizing" choice, though he was talking about her impact on the general electorate.

But Palin has obviously ignited a split within a portion of the GOP as well. There are some Republicans - generally speaking, the upper class elites who live in the DC-NYC corridor - who are simply aghast at Palin and see her as a "fatal cancer" on the party.

But it's clear that the rank and file of the Republican party - generally speaking, the middle class folks who live in red states and don't have a problem shopping at Wal Mart - are smitten with Palin (judging by how they've been flocking to the rallies) in part because they see her as one of their own.

It has me wondering with McCain's age and iffy health issues and now Colin Powell's endorsement of Obama if there will not be other Republican defections in the voting booth.

There has been a lot of talk about the Bradley effect and whether people that publicly say they are voting for Obama will will let their secret racism carry the day inside the privacy of the voting booth. But now we have the possible Palin effect. Will a lot of Republicans in the west and east be unable to face putting Palin a heartbeat away from the Presidency? Let's hope so.