Pat Toomey’s reward: Bloomberg’s gun-control group drops attack ad, runs favorable ad in PA instead

posted at 8:01 pm on April 10, 2013 by Allahpundit

As John Ekdahl says, it’s awfully hard not to see a cynical motive in a conservative senator from a blue state suddenly “evolving” on gun control. I can’t believe I’m saying this after spending years rooting for Toomey primary challenges to Arlen Specter, but … is someone going to end up primarying Pat Toomey? Or will Pennsylvania conservatives follow the Scott Brown rule and stay out of his way in the belief/knowledge that no one they nominate will have a better chance of winning their state than the current somewhat unsatisfactory Republican incumbent?

Matt Lewis identifies Toomey and immigration point man Marco Rubio as part of a new “Teastablishment” vanguard:

This gives me two immediate thoughts: First, if Pat Toomey were going to be a standard Republican who works across the aisle to forge compromises with Democrats anyway, then why did conservatives expend so much energy trying to elect him (and oust another Republican senator with more experience)?

Granted, you may say that Toomey has to move to the center in order to win re-election in 2016. But one could also have used that excuse to forgive Specter’s penchant for bipartisan compromise.

The second thing this highlights is that all the worry about those “crazy” and extreme conservative tea party candidates elected to the U.S. senate in 2010 was overwrought.

Yay, I guess?

Two clips for you, first the ad that the Bloomberg gun-control group started running in PA a week ago and, via the Daily Caller, the one they’re running today. I hope Toomey knows what he’s doing: The way Tom Coburn’s talking, it sounds like the new bill’s in for a chilly reception among Republicans because of its provisions about record-keeping. But Toomey can live with that. If the point here is to lighten the load of being a red senator in a blue state, what better way than to be crossways with the rest of the party on a high-profile issue? If it passes, it’s a bipartisan feather in his cap. If it fails, he’s a “different kind of Republican.” Smart politics either way. Unless, er, he gets primaried.

Update: Conservative opposition to starting debate on a bill is relenting:



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Primary Rubio!
Primary Toomey!

What short memories people have. They’ve been in office 2 years. Out of their elected 6.

I’m curious – can someone give me an example of a Republican Senator who ran and was ever replaced by another Republican from the same state?

Marcus on April 11, 2013 at 9:27 AM

I’m curious – can someone give me an example of a Republican Senator who ran and was ever replaced by another Republican from the same state?

Marcus on April 11, 2013 at 9:27 AM

Senator Bob Bennett lost to now Senator Mike Lee (not that I’m advocating a primary challenge to Toomey…yet).

crrr6 on April 11, 2013 at 9:53 AM

crrr6 on April 11, 2013 at 9:53 AM

Good example. And a very red state. Which neither Pennsylvania or Florida are.

Marcus on April 11, 2013 at 10:07 AM

I guess now that McConnell’s #1 priority failed and is moot, the Repubs now have some time to put towards other objectives.

verbaluce on April 11, 2013 at 10:09 AM

Are you implying that if Toomey really had some principles, he sold them out for favorable publicity from Bloomberg. If true, how shallow our elected officials are.

savage24 on April 11, 2013 at 10:18 AM

Senator Bob Bennett lost to now Senator Mike Lee (not that I’m advocating a primary challenge to Toomey…yet).

crrr6 on April 11, 2013 at 9:53 AM

I’m not sure as I see the point in more primary challenges. Nearly everyone we pinned our hopes on in 2010 has gone off the rails. Realistically, how much more likely are we to find someone better than Toomey that won’t rush to join McConnell in working for higher taxes, more debt, gun control, amnesty, etc? I’ve basically abandoned hopes for internal reform of the Republican Party at this point and am just waiting for it to collapse.

Are you implying that if Toomey really had some principles, he sold them out for favorable publicity from Bloomberg. If true, how shallow our elected officials are.

savage24 on April 11, 2013 at 10:18 AM

The advertising from Bloomberg seems like a weak tea excuse to me, given that he won’t be facing election for years yet. I think it’s much more likely his cooperation on this issue was arranged at the dinner with Obama during the time of the Paul filibuster, or shortly thereafter.

Doomberg on April 11, 2013 at 10:30 AM

BTW, more than 80% of gun owners support background checks…that might not be 80% of the TruCon bloggers…but they in turn do not represent as many people as they think they do.

Terrye on April 11, 2013 at 6:25 AM

And since when did you become a fascist troll?

Go piss up a rope.

Dunedainn on April 11, 2013 at 10:33 AM

I live in PA and I can tell you based on the last Senate election – we do not have a deep bench of GOP candidates to primary Toomey. And absolutely no one with his credentials and following. No one, no one will be able to primary him. If anyone is getting primaried it will be Tom Corbett for Governor – and that WILL NOT HAPPEN either. PA is a light blue state – Ron Paul-type candidates do not get elected here. I am surprised Toomey cut a deal – but we are in a war of attrition right now – things happen.

PhillyUnion on April 11, 2013 at 11:12 AM

PhillyUnion on April 11, 2013 at 11:12 AM

You make good points. I’m just surprised Toomey staked out this issue (a big voting issue that always favors us) vs wedge issues that seem to favor the bad guys. His election turned out to be a nailbiter in 2010 (of all years), so I think he will have a hard time holding that seat in 2016. And, I don’t see how this really helps him.

Oh well. Here’s hoping his incumbency and the reduction in fraud with voter ID laws will help hold the seat.

crrr6 on April 11, 2013 at 11:50 AM

The reason so many people support the concept of a background check is that no one has explained exactly what would constitute a “background check”.

So, I put it to Terrye and KingGold:

“Do you favor a requirement that private citizens notify the Federal Government when and to whom they sell a firearm, including the serial number of the firearm sold?”

Because that is what a background check will be.

One more Sandy Hook and they’ll start collecting ‘em.

chigger76 on April 11, 2013 at 12:05 PM

Politically dead man walking!

Mr. Grump on April 12, 2013 at 8:10 PM

Comment pages: 1 2