Senate Dems try to coax Olympia Snowe to switch parties

Olympia Snowe is one of the most liberal Republicans in the U.S. Senate. But if Harry Reid is lucky, she might just cross the aisle and become a Democrat.

National Journal passes along the scuttlebutt:

“We hear that Dems are making new overtures to Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine to switch teams. They’ve tried before, but Snowe’s 2012 primary prospects make taking another run at her now seem worth it.”

After watching Tea Party activists go after Utah’s Bob Bennett, Snowe might just pull an Arlen Specter and switch parties instead of facing a challenger in the Republican primary. (A cautionary note for Snowe: It proved no help to Specter who lost in the Democratic primary to a Democrat that used Specter’s Republican votes against him.)

“There is going to be a primary, and she is going to have at least one ‘tea party’ candidate against her. If it is done correctly, she can be beaten,” Andrew Ian Dodge, the coordinator of the Tea Party Patriots, told the Washington Times. “She is definitely the next target.”

Republicans won big in Maine, electing Paul LePage as Governor, and flipping control of Legislature to the GOP. It has Tea Party activists convinced that a more conservative Republican than Snowe could not only win a primary, but also a general election, too.

Maine’s Governor-elect Paul LePage is pro-life, while Snowe is very pro-abortion. But given that Snowe campaigned hard for LePage, he is expected to support her re-election bid.

But she might just switch parties before it comes down to that.

804 views

Categories:Uncategorized

5 thoughts on “Senate Dems try to coax Olympia Snowe to switch parties

  1. Pam says:

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/supreme-court-justice-alito-fundraising-conservatives-not-important/
    Let’s talk about why it’s ok for Justice to fundraise for conservative causes. Why is it ok to have A Supreme Court activist judge? I can remember just a short while ago, posts from this very site, deploring judges that legislate from the bench. Yet now we have laws that allow corporations to contribute to campaigns and can do so anonymously. So what are your thoughts on that? Can we do a fair post about something like this? According to the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, a justice should not “solicit funds for, pay an assessment to, or make a contribution to a political organization or candidate, or attend or purchase a ticket for a dinner or other event sponsored by a political organization or candidate.” Yet Alito did just that. Thoughts? Or ban? I’ll go with you wont put it through.

  2. TellyB says:

    This is sort of a sad state of affairs when we are really concerned if Manchin decides to go Republican or Snowe decides to go Democrat. This two party stranglehold – who does it really serve? Why is it that we can’t have the Manchins and the Snowe’s in either party and it’s ok? Why can’t we have a moderate voice on either side? It’s like if we don’t have one side so far right or so far left, we are not happy. Yet, isnt our country overall deep down more moderate in the first place? Come January I sure hope to see something done on abortion. Now that the Republicans have the house, I am ready for that house to start doing something about abortions. What do you see first on their list? I want to know what meaningful reforms can and will be done.

    1. Howard says:

      I could not disagree more. The problem with our 2-party system is not that the Democrats and Republicans are too different, it’s that they are too much alike, leaving the American voter with no meaningful choice. One party plays “good cop”, the other plays “bad cop” — which party plays which role is a matter of personal taste, but it doesn’t really matter, because the “good cop” and the “bad cop” are really on the same side, and it isn’t your side.

      As an example, think about our foreign relations with Cuba, China, Israel, and Iran. Would any of these be meaningfully different if McCain had won the election? Not really. He’d have praised Israel and threatened Iran more, but the aid to Israel and the threat to Iran would be essentially the same. Or suppose you think NAFTA is a bad idea. Which party is responsible for NAFTA. Both! NAFTA was pushed by both Bush administrations (though I think it wasn’t signed until the Clinton administration) as well as by both Clinton and Obama.

      What you really get to choose at the polls is the kind of speeches that will be delivered over the next 2 to 6 years. The voters get to determine the words — but others have already determined the ACTIONS.

      Of course, Republicans are “pro-life” — but usually only when they need voters at the polls or $$$ in their campaign chests. What you DON’T see is Republicans expending political capital on the issues that are really important to cultural conservatives.

      1. Samuel says:

        What you DON’T see is Republicans expending political capital on the issues that are really important to cultural conservatives.

        So why is it so important to vote Republican then? If they don’t really listen or do anything. If they only use cultural issues to serve the agenda of getting elected, why do we fight so hard for them?

  3. John V says:

    It worked so well for Arlen Specter.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

STAY CONNECTED


DON'T MISS A THING

Receive our updates via email.