Are You Really Surprised Arlen Specter Lost ?

Are you really surprised that Arlen Specter lost in the Pennsylvania Democratic primary and subsequently won't be back for another six year term in the Senate? In the afterglow of established fact it becomes rather simple to see how it could be that Specter lost his bid to stand for re-election to one Joe Sestak. Who? That's right the well known and tough campaigner Specter lost to the relatively unknown and somewhat novice politician Sestak. But surprise? No.

Honestly you can be completely disinterested in Pennsylvania or national politics and yet guess from the beginning who was likely to come out the winner. Take a photo look or an on camera look at Arlen Specter and compare it to the same vision of Joe Sestak and the contrast is considerable and in a sense sad. Specter is a man who, thought known to be active, looks most of his eighty years. Sestak image by comparison is on of a man who could be Specter's son. Among other motivations voters might bring with them to the polls, the desire avoid electing someone who before the end of the term would be their 86 year old Senator must have pushed more than a few votes away from Specter and over to Sestak.

Of course comparative age was only part of what fed the anti-Specter sentiment. There was real concern in Pennsylvania over party loyalty. Arlen Specter was asking party regulars to accept his decision to come over to the Democratic Party and work with that party for the last year and to simultaneously forget that he had served as the Republican Senator from Pennsylvania for almost 30 years. For many this was a leap of faith that was too much to ask. Sestak's campaign ads took advantage of images of Specter playing nice with President Bush and Sarah Palin and put it on screen for all to see and judge. More than a few voters were moved to see Specter as the kind of politician who was willing to trade his political soul for a chance to hold on to power, not an endearing trait.

In many other years, and in many other occupations Arlen Specter's 30 years of political service might have qualified him for another term. As in the case of the late Ted Kennedy, long years in the Senate might have guaranteed Specter the right to as many additional terms as he could manage. But 2010 is not any other year. It appears to be a year when incumbents for better or worse are becoming the victims of the times. Men and women of solid credentials are also , those who have been around while the country's economy almost went bust, those who have been on watch during the nightmarish wars in Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan, those who seem somehow at least indirectly responsible for the fallout after Katrina and the BP explosion, those who seem powerless to halt the flow of immigrants, terrorists or drugs into our country.

At least once a day on television, radio or other media we are reminded, if reminder are necessary, that 2010 is not the year for incumbents and that the mid-term election in November 2010 could reflect a major alteration of the Washington D. C. landscape as many old faces retire gracefully or are bumped unceremoniously from their positions in the U. S. House or Senate.

Arlen Specter was spared the indignity of a general election disaster by losing in the primary of his new found party. This loss came at the hands of Joe Sestak but it is hard to imagine that it really mattered too much who the opponent was. Arlen Specter wasn't just an incumbent, he was an 80 year old, party switcher who had been on the job for 30 years. What would have been surprising would have been if given all his negatives Specter somehow survived the primary. Now that's would have been a surprise!

Source:

www.abcnews.go.org