Series II: The Specter Toomey Race: Why So Close?
April 30, 2004
|
THE SPECTER / TOOMEY RACE: WHY SO CLOSE?
|
|
The dust is still settling after Tuesday' Pat Toomey's insurgent campaign succeeded in pushing four-term incumbent Arlen Specter closer to defeat than had any of his previous opponents. Though the election is over, the debate continues about how Senator Specter managed to sneak past Toomey, the three term congressman from the Lehigh Valley . Toomey's near miss raises many questions about what his candidacy means for the state and for the party. Several questions immediately come to mind. Does Toomey'Pennsylvania voters are turning from their traditionally moderate sentiments? The answer to this question is an unequivocal " Toomey's success is rooted in a very vocal, very passionate, but also very small group of Republican voters. Toomey�s vote total represented only about one in six Republican voters in the state. What Toomey'importance of voter turnout. In some campaigns, the attitudes and preferences of non-voters are very similar to those of voters. This was not the case in the recent campaign. The polls conducted during the race revealed a very clear pattern: the lower the turnout the better Toomey's chances of victory, because a majority of registered Republicans in these polls preferred Arlen Specter to Pat Toomey. Toomey was able to mount a credible challenge because voter turnout was low, which gave his supporters a disproportionate voice in the outcome. Interestingly, voter turnout was highest in the parts of Pennsylvania where Toomey performed best, primarily western Pennsylvania . The Republican voter turnout in western Pennsylvania was several points higher than for the state as a whole (33%). Conversely, turnout in Specter's geographic stronghold (the southeast and Philadelphia) Had turnout there been higher, Specter's narrow advantage would have been increased. Finally, Toomey' He campaigned with a clear message and ran a disciplined and well-funded campaign�qualities that Specter's previous primary challengers lacked. Toomey was different from Specter�s previous conservative challengers because he offered an experienced and credible alternative to Specter. Did endorsements matter in this race? Three endorsements likely made the difference for Specter. The endorsement of President Bush was crucial. The President is very popular among the state's Republican voters, with more than three in four (76%) having a favorable opinion of him (84% of conservative Republicans have a favorable opinion of the President). Only two in five (41%) Republicans view Specter favorably (39% of conservative Republicans). Yet, in our final Keystone Poll, Specter was holding his own among self-described conservatives, 51 percent to 49 percent. Without the President's endorsement, it is conceivable that Toomey would have gained support from six in ten conservative voters. Then, too, the endorsement of the state' His high profile endorsement and activity on behalf of Specter sent a clear signal to conservatives that it was okay to cast a vote for Specter. Santorum�s work on behalf of his colleague helped to inoculate Specter against the charge that he was too liberal and not a true partisan. The final endorsement that counted came from Republican State Committee. The Republican Party in Pennsylvania almost always nominates its endorsed candidates. The Party's county organizations exhibit considerable discipline, which gives it the ability to turn out its core voters. Voter turnout in 2004 was high enough to produce a narrow Specter victory. The turnout in 2004 exceeded the turnout in the 1998 (16%), 2000 (20%) and 2002 (25%); turnout at those levels would have doomed Specter. The party was in part responsible for stimulating turnout, increasing it to one-third of Republicans, which helped offset the small but passionate Toomey vote. The National Rifle Association' The final Keystone Poll showed that 55- percent of those who opposed more gun laws planned to vote for Toomey, while 66-percent of likely voters who favored more gun laws planned to vote for Specter. Why did Toomey' Toomey'ized fiscal conservatism and social conservatism. The Club for Growth, which helped Toomey�s effort tremendously, wants people to believe that Toomey's success hinged on the popularity of fiscal conservatism; however, it is likely the social conservative message most galvanized his supporters. The Keystone Poll showed that 57-percent of pro-life voters were likely to choose Toomey, while only one-third (36%) of those with a moderate position on abortion were planning to vote for him. Not coincidently, the regions of the state with the highest turnout are also the regions of the state where the most pro-life voters live, southwestern, northwestern and central Pennsylvania ; there, about one in four Republicans identify as pro-life according to past Keystone Polls. Moreover, the final Keystone Poll asked voters why they were supporting a specific candidate, and twice as many Toomey supporters said abortion and conservative/family values were their reasons for supporting Toomey as said taxes or economic policy. Will Specter be a stronger or weaker candidate in the fall because of the campaign? It is remarkable how quickly conventional wisdom can be turned on its head. Before the 2002 governor's race, pundits generally suspected that a primary challenge was a bad thing - draining resources and defining candidates in negative terms. That was until Ed Rendell was able to overcome a serious primary challenge and still comfortably win the general election. Now, the new conventional wisdom holds that a primary challenge may not be a bad thing at all. In this instance, the primary challenge likely weakened Arlen Specter for the fall campaign. Specter's strength has always been his crossover appeal. In fact, past Keystone Polls have shown Specter is as popular among Democrats as among Republicans in Pennsylvania . Toomey's primary challenge caused Specter to tack to the right, probably far more than he would have liked. The big question is whether Specter can tack back toward the center, which is a major source of his crossover appeal. Another obstacle for Specter could be his close ties to the President. The President is not very popular with Democrats (the March Keystone Poll showed that 68-percent of Democrats view him unfavorably). Toomey's challenge forced Specter to align himself very closely with a President who is not very popular with the state's non-Republican voters. Can voters who express great animus toward the President pull the lever for a candidate who is closely aligned with him? The Republican primary was marked by a bitterness that will test the party' The confluence of factors that helped Specter win the primary, and the resultant bitterness that remains for some of Toomey's supporters, will likely make his general election campaign against Congressman Joe Hoeffel much more difficult than it otherwise would have been.
__________________________________________ G. Terry Madonna is Chair and Professor of Government at Millersville University and Berwood Yost is Director of the Floyd Institute's Center for Opinion Research at Franklin and Marshall College. |
