Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Be thankful for two things: These women fought for your right to vote, and you don't have to dress like this.
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(106)
-
▼
April
(22)
- Prep for the AP GoPo exam with CSPAN
- Whoa!
- Senator Specter's life
- Holy cow!
- Recession lingo
- Remember the engagement ring site from before?
- Heard of the swine flu?
- Notes from Sacto
- Laws and amendments flash cards
- Firefighter promotion case from class
- Limits on warrantless car searches
- Flash cards are go!
- As we're starting the first amendment...
- Engagement rings
- Anniversary of an historic concert
- Still no Senator in Minnesota
- Aaaaand...
- Big news today
- Afghanistan
- Just how wealthy are you?
- DC in Congress
- Remember former Senator Ted Stevens?
-
▼
April
(22)
1 comment:
I remember talking about this in class, and I was really excited that the Democrats might have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate (when Norm Coleman finally admits defeat). After reading this article, I was a little bit disappointed. I was sort of under the impression that Arlen Specter had some sort of a revelation that his beliefs fit in better with the Democratic party than the Republican party. After finding out that this decision was purely political, I was, in a way, disappointed, and I'm not completely sure why. But politically, this was probably a good move. Pennsylvania was a blue state in the 2008 election, showing that it is leaning towards the Democrats right now. Because of this, Specter might not have a good chance of being reelected. In fact, polls showed that there was a good chance he was going to lose. Since the Republicans aren't too happy with him voting for the stimulus package, this was a good opportunity for him to switch parties. So all in all, this was a really good, smart move on Specter's part, and good for him. I wish that his decision was not completely based on his bad prognosis in the 2010 election, though.
Post a Comment