May 3, 2004
Toomey's defeat shouldn't get conservatives down

By Andy Matthews

Just a few thoughts on the Arlen Specter-Pat Toomey race for the GOP nomination in Pennsylvania's Senate election:

A lot of conservatives are no doubt disappointed (myself included) by the fact that ideological ally Toomey couldn't get quite enough support from Pennsylvania Republicans to knock off the incumbent Specter. And a few are either confused or enraged over the decision of the party establishment (President Bush, Sen. Rick Santorum) to throw their support behind Specter, a left-leaning Republican who seems to vote with Democrats more often than with his own party.

There's little question Toomey would have made a better senator than Specter. Whereas Specter has racked up a string of votes over the years that have earned him infamy among conservatives, Toomey is a right-winger's dream, cut from the same cloth as Santorum, the state's other GOP senator.

But as frustrated as conservatives are with the outcome, there are plenty of positives to take out of this race:

  • Specter is a shoo-in for re-election. That's not to say Toomey couldn't have beaten Democratic nominee Joe Hoeffel. After all, part of the anger over Santorum's support for Specter stems from the fact that the conservative Santorum would seem, ideologically at least, like a Toomey kind of guy. So Santorum is proof that Pennsylvanians have no problem with sending an unapologetic conservative to Washington. Still, the race would have been more competitive had Toomey been the GOP candidate; now, the party can count this as a safe seat.

  • Pennsylvania could be crucial to Bush's own re-election hopes. Bush narrowly lost this state to Al Gore in 2000 and has a very good chance to carry it this time around. Campaigning with Specter by his side will make it easier for Bush to reach out to swing voters.

  • Specter may tend to vote with Democrats, but he also knows he was saved this time around by Bush and Santorum. He owes Bush big time, and here's hoping the President reminds him of this when it comes time to confirm judges, among other things.

    But the most encouraging thing about the race is the fact that Toomey, thanks to grassroots support and without any help from the establishment, came so close (he lost 51-49) to defeating a four-term incumbent in a primary. Considered a long shot from the outset, Toomey made this a race. He went from an unknown to a rising star within the conservative ranks in a few short months. And the scare Specter received should put other liberal Republicans (Olympia Snowe, Lincoln Chafee) on notice that they may want to think twice before ignoring the party's right flank. What Toomey did this year should be seen as a victory, though a modest one, for conservatism.

    Specter will be 80 at the end of his next term, so this is it for him. And thanks to the name recognition Toomey earned in his unsuccessful yet impressive challenge to Specter this time, he should be well positioned to grab the nomination for Specter's seat should he want it in 2010, or to run for some other office before then. Either way, Pat Toomey now has an extremely bright future in American politics, and that alone means his challenge to Specter was well worth it.

    Andy Matthews is the editor of rightturnonly.com.