Mudd, or Quicksand?

RepublicanSenate’s only endorsed Democrat now leads Senator Mudd by 11 points according to a Rasmussen poll out today. Bob Casey, Jr. Is amazingly running a Senate campaign based solely on his father’s name. He has stated his positions on a number of important issues, but remains very low-key. On the other hand, the incumbent has been all over the news, most recently to promote the nomination of Judge Roberts. Mudd is outraising Casey by about $4 million, but Casey’s fundraising has picked up and it now appears that he will have enough to compete.

At a convenient time for Casey, DNC Chair Howard Dean is now pitching a willingness to accept pro-life Democrats. If Democrats are willing to overlook Casey’s pro-life position, it now appears that he will have a smooth road to the Senate. Even so, appearances can be deceiving. Mudd is a strong campaigner. It is still over 17 months out, and Mudd’s money advantage will come into play eventually. He will need to rely heavily on the President getting a boost in the polls.

The wild card in the mix is what becomes of President Bush’s judicial nominees. If all of his nominees prove themselves willing to pay more attention to the Constitution than to bad precedent, especially on the matter of Roe, conservatives may be willing to forgive Mudd for his transgressions and turn out to keep the Republican majority. If, on the other hand, any of President Bush’s nominees act more like Souter than Scalia, conservatives will at the very least not vote for Mudd, but quite possibly actually turn out to back Casey, a candidate who is tailor-made for Reagan Democrats.

While I am hesitant to bet against an incumbent of either party in any race, Casey clearly has an advantage here. Put this race in the “Lean Democrat” category.

4 Responses to “Mudd, or Quicksand?”

  1. joe Says:

    casey is no better than any other democrat. besides abortion, hes as liberal as you get. you honestly think that the democrats are ready to take in pro-life candidates for any other purpose than using them? go check the number speakers at the democratic convention in ‘04. there were 55 of them. guess how many were pro-life? 1 - just 1 and that 1 person spoke about stem cell research. democrats know they cant keep winning unless they fool people into thinking they are something theyre not. your very link in your post had dean speaking like he was pro-choice. im sick and tired of hearing democrat politicans saying they are pro-life personally but pro-choice politically. thats the biggest load of bs ive ever heard. you are either for it or against it - theres no in between. the democrats are not pro-life and i doubt casey will stand up for himself. i live in pa and im voting for senator “mudd”. better a rino than a fake dino.

  2. SI Conservative Says:

    Joe,
    Thanks for your thoughts on this, but I have to disagree. I don’t believe Dean, but I do believe Casey. He has stated his position on life in such a way that it would be nearly impossible for him to go back on his word once in office.

    The Casey endorsement has more to do with Mudd than with Casey. Somebody has to pay for the Specter fiasco lest Republicans take more liberties in straying from the conservative cause. This week alone, Senator Lott said that Judge Roberts would be bound by Roe while Senator Frist is set to endorse embryonic stem-cell research. The GOP’s move left must stop now, but the only way to make that happen is to send a message at the ballot box. The way to do that is to defeat Sen. Mudd, who more blatantly than anyone else betrayed conservatives by backing Specter not only for reelection but for Chair of the Judiciary Committee. I hope that at the very least you’ll send your message by staying home.

  3. Serge Says:

    The only difference is that a Santorum defeat will be publicized as a defeat for conservatism. “Moderate” Specter got elected easily but “Conservative” Santorum lost. If you want to see a further leftward drift of the GOP then hope Casey wins. Otherwise you need to vote for Santorum.

  4. Anonymous Says:

    What does Rick Santorum have to do with how Bush’s Supreme Court nominees decide cases? I don’t get it. Punishing Santorum over how a Supreme Court Justice votes is just silly.

Leave a Reply