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:
Honestly, from this article I was under the impression that it was not really Specter's primary reasoning to switch parties because his ideas better coincided with the Democratic party as opposed to his previous Republican ideas. It seems as though he really changed because he had a better chance of winning in 2010 if he were a Democratic candidate. Switching would just give him a boost in votes and a more guaranteed spot in the Senate. This was a good political tactic for him to take on; it was a smart move to get reelected as according to how it would've played out had he remained a Republican. Either way, at least it'll be a filibuster proof Senate. Good job Specter.
Post a Comment