Who Runs Gov

The Plum LineGreg Sargent's blog

Gibbs: Obama Will Back Specter No Matter What He Does

So what can Obama and the Dem establishment do to pressure Arlen Specter to get behind their agenda?

Today’s White House press briefing dramatized the problem well. The key moment came when ABC News’ Jake Tapper asked White House press sec Robert Gibbs a good question: Is there any point at which Specter’s refusal to back key aspects of Obama’s agenda might get him to, you know, rethink his automatic support for Specter through the 2010 Dem primary?

As Tapper put it, is there “anything that Specter could do” that would persuade Obama not to back him against a Democrat “more in line with the president’s priorities”?

Gibbs’ answer: Not really. “Senator Specter has his full support and he’ll do what — what’s necessary to see him reelected,” Gibbs replied.

Here’s the problem. Obama and Dems can quietly pressure Specter by encouraging Dem Rep Joe Sestak behind the scenes to proceed as if he’s going to run a primary against Specter. But they may not do this, out of a sense that a primary would be too much of a headache.

The rub, though, is that if they decide they don’t want a primary, and project full backing for him in hopes of scaring away any and all challengers, this ends up minimizing the pressure on Specter to get behind their agenda.

Yes, it’s really, really great for Dems that Specter switched. But this aspect of it could prove a real problem for them. Period.

The homepage of this blog is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.

Posted by Greg Sargent | 05/05/2009, 04:49 PM EST | Categories: President Obama, Senate Dems, White House

16 Responses

  1. AllButCertain | May 5th, 2009 at 04:59 pm

    I get your point, I get your point, but any post that requires spending mental energy on Arlen Specter is probably one post too many, and today there’ve been four. I’d say it’s high time for happy hour.

  2. sbj | May 5th, 2009 at 05:00 pm

    Hot off the presses: Specter Wants Coleman to Win

    http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/05/05/specter_wants_coleman_to_win.html

  3. Greg Sargent | May 5th, 2009 at 05:09 pm

    ABC, I couldn’t agree more re Happy Hour. but check out that link above there. I think it proves the point rather well.

  4. sgwhiteinfla | May 5th, 2009 at 05:15 pm

    Just a question but….how else could Robert Gibbs have answered that question?

  5. sgwhiteinfla | May 5th, 2009 at 05:17 pm

    Off topic but Chris Matthews is kicking Mike Pence in the junk on my Tee Vee right now over evolution. All I can say is WOW.

  6. junebug | May 5th, 2009 at 05:27 pm

    “… they may not do this, out of a sense that a primary would be too much of a headache.”

    And six more years of this **** isn’t? Seriously, unless I’m missing some finely tuned snark, your comment could use some elaboration. When did in-season elections — particularly those with actual stakes to be had — become so onerous for the Democratic Party?

  7. AllButCertain | May 5th, 2009 at 05:53 pm

    Greg, David Kurtz checks the context on the Specter quote:
    “With your departure from the Republican Party, there are no more Jewish Republicans in the Senate. Do you care about that?”

    “I sure do. There’s still time for the Minnesota courts to do justice and declare Norm Coleman the winner.”
    .
    Looks like a joke . . .

  8. tropicgirl | May 5th, 2009 at 05:55 pm

    It is extremely unseemly to see Obama appearing, like a political hack, in the middle of this controversy. Spector is a political toilet bowl ready to blow up. It would serve Obama right to get the poop-splash.

    Now, Mr. President, please get back to YOUR job, which is not going so well so far. Your political triangulation is embarrassing. Stop being such a moral coward and start your big fat mouth to stand up for the American people, which you haven’t done a thing for, so far.

    It amazes me to see the tripe you use your political capital for. Amazing. Do you EVER think of the American family? Or just bankers? I’m done.

  9. jwhitaker | May 5th, 2009 at 07:25 pm

    Spector switched parties because he knew he get trounced by Toomey in the republican Primary. Sestak is an up & coming figure, retired Rear Admiral, the guy has credentials – what the hell are Reid & Obama thinking in backing Spector?

    Dem primary – Joe beats Arlan.

    Go Joe.

  10. msmolly | May 5th, 2009 at 08:17 pm

    Sestak would probably be a Blue Dog. We can do better!

  11. LeAnn | May 5th, 2009 at 08:54 pm

    Obama is way to smart to do something this dumb… giving Spector unwaivering support is just crazy.

  12. Chris | May 5th, 2009 at 11:50 pm

    I’m telling ya Greg, there has to be a vote in there somewhere. Obama has to get one vote out of Specter’s switch. Whether it’s health care or Supreme Court, whatever, there has to be a vote in it for the president to come out so in favor of Arlen.

  13. Heidi in Chicago | May 6th, 2009 at 01:44 am

    Here’s a theory about Obama’s support for Specter: PA is VERY expensive. If we can push it aside by supporting Specter, Dem money can go to other senatorial contest that really need the money and are winnable. More money in states other than PA may mean more Senatorial wins. Obama is far too smart to do anything that appears ridiculous without having a very good reason. I am most curious to hear what folks think about this idea.

  14. Carolyn Kay | May 6th, 2009 at 08:30 am

    No, it’s not really, really great that Specter switched. We need fewer, not more, Blue Dogs in the Congress.

    But at least it will force the Democrats to come up with new excuses about why they can’t implement a progressive agenda.

    Carolyn Kay
    MakeThemAccountable.com

  15. deva | May 6th, 2009 at 11:24 am

    I honestly don’t think it’s going to be that big of a deal. I think Specter will fall in line because its in his best political interest to do so. He has no reputation for consistency that he needs to protect — if anything, this party switch has freed him to be as mercurial as he wants to be. I was interested to read the polling that points to the problems that Specter might have as a general election candidate even with the primary field cleared, but I think that’s ultimately a mobilization/ get out the vote issue — all the more reason for Specter to fall in line. The mobilizing acumen of labor and Organizing for America are nothing to sneeze at and they’ll be tough to secure without a thumbs up on EFCA and some very promising telegraphing on Health Care.

  16. Minnesota Jobs | June 29th, 2009 at 02:27 pm

    I like this theme you are using… what is it?

Leave a Reply


Please email us at profiles@whorunsgov.com to bring to our attention any content or conduct that you believe violates our Discussion and Submission Policy.