Specter's Strength

Quinnipiac was out with a poll earlier this week on Arlen Specter which I wanted to briefly reflect on. While the poll provides some initial numbers which appear quite poor for the incumbent Republican, closer reflections shows that Specter has considerable strengths as he seeks a sixth term next year.

Does Specter deserve to be re-elected?

Overall: 40% yes/43% no (-3)

Among Republicans: 42/42 (+0)
Among Democrats: 41/42 (-1)
Among Independents: 36/45 (-9)

Among Men: 41/48 (-7)
Among Women: 38/38 (+0)

These are not good numbers for any incumbent, especially a five-term one who has been involved in his state's politics for decades. Interestingly, Specter's re-elect number is basically identical with voters of both major parties (and it tanks with indies). Both Republican and Democratic voters are equally ambivalent about sending Specter back to Washington in 2011. Additionally, Specter seems strongest with women, which is good for him because he has stoked mixed feelings with many women over the years (traced back to the early 90s, when in 1992 he was almost toppled by a female Democratic candidate over his harsh questioning of Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings).

Yet, as bad as these numbers may look at first glance, let's check out the senator's approval ratings.

Specter approvals

Overall: 56% approve/30% disapprove (+26)

Among Republicans: 55/33 (+22)
Among Democrats: 62/26 (+36)
Among Independents: 49/35 (+14)

Among Men: 56/34 (+22)
Among Women: 55/27 (+28)

These are pretty good numbers, but what sticks out at me is the breakdown by party ID. Specter is at a mediocre +22 with his own party. This is not terribly surprising since Specter has always tried to carve out a centrist path in his career, often earning the ire of conservative Republicans. Dissatisfaction among Pennsylvania Republicans came to a head in 2004 when Specter faced a strong primary challenge from then-Rep. Pat Toomey, and Specter barely won by just 51-to-49.

What is striking is how well Specter does with Democrats. That a Republican senator enjoys a +36 rating from Democratic voters in this day and age of extreme partisanship is pretty impressive. Republicans may not universally love one of their own, but many state Dems clearly have an affinity for the old codger.

What does this mean? In my opinion, it shows that Specter is in strong shape to win another term so long as he is not ousted in a primary. If Specter is at +36 right now, and he makes it to the general election, he should beat any Pennsylvania Democrat short of Ed Rendell, who is almost certainly not going to run against his friend and former boss Specter.

And unlike in 2004, a strong Republican primary challenge has not yet fully materialized. It may well still happen and we need to stay tuned, but until it occurs, Arlen Specter should feel pretty good for himself if he makes it to November 2010. Fogetting all of the DSCC's bluster and financial largesse, as we have already noted, the state Democratic bench is pretty weak, and it might be hard to win this seat unless Specter is beaten by another Toomey-type challenger.

As for Specter's weak re-elect numbers, while I think they are absolutely something the incumbent should worry about, they are not that terrible a concern. These days, voters are simply angry at politicians and Congress as an institution, so that kind of general, loaded question is going to get a lot of people calling for their unnamed rep or senator to be tossed out of office. Besides, I remember all last year, a strong majority of voters said Frank Lautenberg was too old to continue running and didn't deserve another term, but then he ended up winning by over a dozen points. Granted, New Jersey is quirky and the DSCC may aid whoever ends up facing Specter more than the NRSC ponied up to Dick Zimmer, but I think the comparison is valuable and certain valid.

There is a reason I put Pennsylvania at #7 in our rankings: I am not convinced in Specter's dire vulnerability or Dems' ability to recruit a winner. These poll results only strengthen this opinion.