Specter Loss: Obama’s Word Not So Good?

Flickr/<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/cpurrin1/222896370/">Colin Purrington</a> (<a href="http://www.creativecommons.org">Creative Commons</a>).

He came to us, we didn’t go to him. That’s how Obama White House aides started talking about the soon-to-be former Sen. Arlen Specter (R-to-D-Penn.) hours before he lost the Democratic Senate primary to Rep. Joe Sestak. In politics, this is called running away.

When Specter last year bolted the Republican Party and became a Democrat—when it looked as if he might not be able to win the GOP primary—the White House said that he would have its full support. And the Obama crew did signal it did not want any Democrat, including Sestak, to challenge Specter in the Democratic primary. But Sestak, a retired admiral, wouldn’t retreat.

For months, Specter—a politician with much name recognition in the Keystone State—looked like a good bet for the White House. He maintained a double-digit lead over Sestak. But in the final weeks of the campaign, Sestak drew to a tie in the polls. And though Specter’s prospects looked bad, experienced political handicappers in Washington still were saying that the party-switcher could pull it out, especially if Democratic Gov. Ed Rendell, a Specter supporter, could deploy his political machine on Specter’s behalf.

But with the race close, the White House did nothing special for Specter. President Barack Obama recorded one robo-call. Neither he nor Vice President Joe Biden campaigned with Specter. It appeared that they had cut him loose. It wasn’t pretty. But with 2010 looking ugly for incumbents, especially Democrats, the White House now seems to be hunkering down. Obama and his aides didn’t want to take an early hit on this race and come across as politically impotent. (One bit of good news for the Ds: in a special election to fill the Pennsylvania seat of the late Rep. Jack Murtha, Democratic Mark Critz bested Republican Tim Burns. Of note: former President BIll Clinton campaigned for Critz. Not surprisingly, the Democratic Party called this the “most significant election contest” of the day.)

Obama’s pirouette in Pennsylvania made political sense. But did Obama send a signal: don’t trust me? He had said he would put his muscle behind Specter, but in the end he didn’t. This might have been best for the party, for Sestak could well be the better Democratic candidate in the general election. And if Sestak wins in November, what Obama did with (or to) Specter won’t matter much. For now, though, this one race shows that Obama’s endorsement doesn’t have much juice (ask Martha Coakley and Jon Corzine about that) and that any promise of support from Obama is vulnerable to political calculation.

Also happening Tuesday night: Rand Paul wins the Republican Senate primary in Kentucky and Dems rejoice, while Blanche Lincoln is headed to a runoff in Arkansas, which could be good news for tough Wall Street reform.

One More Thing

And it's a big one. Mother Jones is launching a new Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on the corruption that is both the cause and result of the crisis in our democracy.

The more we thought about how Mother Jones can have the most impact right now, the more we realized that so many stories come down to corruption: People with wealth and power putting their interests first—and often getting away with it.

Our goal is to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We're aiming to create a reporting position dedicated to uncovering corruption, build a team, and let them investigate for a year—publishing our stories in a concerted window: a special issue of our magazine, video and podcast series, and a dedicated online portal so they don't get lost in the daily deluge of headlines and breaking news.

We want to go all in, and we've got seed funding to get started—but we're looking to raise $500,000 in donations this spring so we can go even bigger. You can read about why we think this project is what the moment demands and what we hope to accomplish—and if you like how it sounds, please help us go big with a tax-deductible donation today.

We Recommend


Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.


Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.