Republicans for Rendell

[mithrandir2001]

My parents received an interesting letter yesterday from Ed Rendell, who is trying to become the Democratic candidate for Pennsylvania Governor. He is asking Republicans to temporarily switch to the Democratic Party so that they can vote for Rendell in the primary. Mike Fisher, who is the Republican candidate, is running unopposed so there is no Republican primary for Governor. He said that after the primary, he'll send them a form to change their party affliation back to Republican.

Isn't this odd? I don't recall a candidate asking people of another party to switch temporarily.

Rendell generally has more bipartisan support than the usual Democrat, but he faces an uphill battle against Robert Casey Jr. who harkens from the west part of the state. I shudder at the prospect of a Casey governorship. He's a economic liberal AND has social conservative tendencies: too totalitarian for me. While Rendell is still rooted in the "government spending can solve lots of problems" clan, he's rather moderate and has been pitching pro-growth policies as a way to get Pennsylvania up to modern times.

Mike Fisher is a boring wet noodle who inspires no flame or fire. I don't want him becoming governor because PA needs some strong leadership. It's odd that I find myself aligning with Rendell, perhaps the first time I may ever support a Democrat for a major office. Of course, I'm registered Libertarian (which PA doesn't think is major enough of a party so I get a big "O" on my voter card for "Other party") and not about to jump to another party and back for the sake of a primary, but it is an interesting proposition nonetheless.

 

[todpod]

If I were to such, I would vote for Casey, I don't like Rendell at all, campaigning on education reform when the state has to take over the schools in Philly, thats funny. I voted for Casey's daddy twice and may vote Jr in the fall. I just like a democratic candidate that the party hates. I may switch for pres primary because GW isn't going to have much if any oppisition.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Both Rendell and Casey are black listed in my mind because they both support a "living wage", which is a make-or-break issue for me. Although, when I stop to think about it, since I'm only in PA for college and then I'm going back to Ohio I suppose it's no skin off my back if PA kills its job market by creating a $10.12 per hour "living wage". I wouldn't mind some jobs jumping the border into Eastern Ohio.

ZV

 

[todpod]

The living wage comes from the big union presence in the state, I don't think they will get it passed though.

 

[mithrandir2001]

The steel tariffs also come from the strong Union presence in the state. It should be no surprise that Harley-Davidson products are on the EU's tariff list...HD has a large manufacturing facility in York, PA.

Rendell supports a "living wage", but I just can't see that becoming state law. Has any state adopted a living wage law? Some cities have, but I'm not aware of anything larger in geographical area. Rendell also talks about "fixing the property tax problem", which only means one thing: he'll raise the state income tax. It might happen with or without a Democrat but there's been talk of raising the tax from 2.8% to 4.3%...a substantial hike. PA's income tax has generally been one of the state's few attractive policies: 2.8% is relatively low compared to many states (New York??) and it's flat, not progressive, which is why a border township like Upper Makefield is filled with million-dollar homes owned by executives who work in NYC. I don't support a substantial income tax hike unless property taxes are broadly cut...i.e., not just in problem districts.

What turns me off to Casey and Fisher is that they would like to deny women's reproductive health choices. Rendell is a fairly secure social liberal, which I think is very vital in a post-9/11 world. I used to place economics ahead of social policies, but that pendulum has shifted - temporarily, who knows? - and I think Rendell is the only major candidate who espouses tolerance and inclusion. Casey Jr., like his father, might turn out to be a puppet for the pulpit. Yech.

 

[Russ]

What the hell is this? An intelligent political discussion? Are you people in the wrong forum?

mithrandir2001,

Crossover vote strategy is actually more common then you might think, although rarely this overt. It's usually done within the party - as privately as possible - during primaries in an effort to insure that the weakest opposing candidate wins.

Russ, NCNE

 

[mithrandir2001]

<< Crossover vote strategy is actually more common then you might think, although rarely this overt. It's usually done within the party - as privately as possible - during primaries in an effort to insure that the weakest opposing candidate wins. >>


I certainly understand that and always questioned the way primaries worked, but Rendell is taking a fairly big risk here. The Casey campaign is sure to get wind of this and they'll exploit it, showing how desparate Rendell has become (if you want to call it that). Yet OTOH, Rendell wouldn't do this unless he thought there was a payoff and I think it's interesting that he thinks from some Republicans support him more than Mike Fisher. I think Gore had something to do with it. My county has slightly more registered Republicans than Democrats, yet Gore won the county by a fairly decent margin in the 2000 election. It's the oft-talked about suburban shift from Republican to Democrat, particularly among the soccer mom demographic.

 

[todpod]

Actually that is what I like about Casey, a pro-life democrat hard to belive that is possible this day in age. That the only thing I can see about Casey that the Dem. party doesn't like, but they won't back him for anything, Rendall is the chosen canididate. Its good to see people challege the power of the party regardless of where it comes from. Even Pat Bucahann(sp) was good to put a little perpective on things. The people should pick the canididates not the parties.

 

[MrBond]

<< Crossover vote strategy is actually more common then you might think, although rarely this overt. It's usually done within the party - as privately as possible - during primaries in an effort to insure that the weakest opposing candidate wins. >>

This is true. I remember when Kevorkian's lawyer was running for Michigan governor as a democrat, there were Michigan republicans who switched sides in the party so he'd get the bid to to run as a democrat against Engler. They saw that there was no way he'd beat Engler, and thats exactly what happened in the fall.