Hall of Famer Lynn Swann might soon be a Congressman
Congress is up for grabs
By Mark Kilmer Posted in 2008 — Comments (36) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Lynn Swann might challenge Representative Altimire (D-PA) next year.
Newly elected Representative Jason Altimire, a Democrat from Pennsylvania's 4th CD, knocked off incumbent Republican Melissa Hart, 52%-48%, last November to become part of the new Democratic majority in Congress. He should never have won in the 4th, which includes the Pittsburgh suburb of Sewickley, and he should be an easy knockoff for the Republicans if they field a good candidate. (Dems have a slight registration edge, but the district is averse to nutcases.)
NFL Hall of Famer Lynn Swann and his wife Charena make their family home in Sewickley Heights, dab in Pennsylvania's 4th CD. Jason Altmire, unfortunately, represents Mr. Swann in the U.S. Congress.
Swann, if you'll recall, ran a decent campaign against Pennsylvania Governor Fast Eddie Rendell last year, and he lost by the same margin as that by which Senator Bobby Casey upended former Senator Rick Santorum: 59% to 41%. The reasons for this are manifold, and include some immaturity and infighting amongst Commonwealth Republicans, but the main reason for Ed Rendell's victory was Ed Rendell, especially the $$$ which comes with it. He's a tremendous fundraiser, and in a blue State like Pennsylvania, Ed could hold the Dems and expand.
Ed is not a Congressman.
Which brings us to our hopeful story:
Read More…
"I'm still collecting information," Swann, of Sewickley Heights, told The Associated Press in a phone interview. "People are still talking to me about it."
Swann would not say who has talked to him or when he plans to make up his mind.
"It's a process. It's not a matter at this point about whether it's something I thought about doing in the past or would think about doing in the future," Swann said. "It's a matter of getting information and keeping an open mind."
As some of you remember, I blogged Lynn Swann's campaign for RedState last year. Although I missed the opportunity to meet the man, I "followed" him on what seemed to be an hourly basis, 24/7. He started out early last year as someone who seemed unsure of what he would have to do to win the race and he involved into a great candidate. Some Commonwealth commentators wondered aloud what might have happened if the October version of Lynn Swann the candidate had been running in, say, April.
This is exciting stuff. There are few people in Congress Lynn Swann's quality, and we could be looking at the probability of a Republican pickup in '08. I do not know who is talking to Swann about it, be it local Republican functionaries and fundraisers, the PA GOP, or the NRCC, but there has to be one page and Swann must be on it.
It's almost morning in Sewickley.
(See ya', Nancy. Wouldn't want to be ya'.)
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Fanfare For The Common Man — Comments (7) »
Hall of Famer Lynn Swann might soon be a Congressman 36 Comments (0 topical, 36 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
I don't know if she has said, and I don't know that anyone has asked her. I've heard her discussed as a possible gubernatorial candidate in 2010. I've also heard her mentioned as the GOP candidate for Senate in that year or as the conservative challenger to Arlen Specter should he go through with his threat to seek reelection.
As a former PA-04 resident, I remember talking with those back home about the Hart-Altmire race. Hart's loss was a shock to those I spoke with, but then again, they were Republicans. The vibe I got was that Hart did not run an aggressive enough campaign against Altmire. She failed to point out his many negatives.
Losing Hart was a huge blow to the already weak PA GOP. As was mentioned elsewhere in this thread, she had been touted as a possible gubernatorial or senatorial candidate. Hart was also mentioned as possible leadership material for House Republicans.
If you look at the numbers of the Hart-Altmire race posted below in this thread, you see a huge 16 point drop for Hart in Allegheny County. I think we can pretty safely assume this is Hart being a victim of the Rendell/Casey tidal wave that washed over the state in 2006.
I'm not sure about the other counties in PA-04, but I know that in Allegheny County the mechanical voting machines allow you to easily vote a straight, party-line ticket. You just pull a lever for your party then press a big red button to record your vote. This is what I did when I voted a straight GOP ticket in 2000. What most likely happened here is a lot of people showed up mostly to vote for Rendell and Casey. Since they are both Dems, I bet a lot of people just pulled the Democrat lever, recorded their votes, and left.
I think this would account for at least a good portion for the drop in Hart's support. How else can you explain it? Before winning this seat in 2000, Hart represented the same area in the state senate. She won reelection handily in 2002 and 2004. She was not embroiled in any sort of scandal.
If the GOP name brand can rebound in 2008, Hart stands a good chance of recapturing this seat. Whether she wants to or not is the question. I do think she would be a better candidate than Swann. For some reason I just can't see a legislative position being a good fit for Swann.
The GOP should promise Swann anything he wants to get him to enter the race. Republicans should take every opportunity to get black conservative Republicans elected.
If the Republican Party can peel off 20-30% of the black vote, it's lights out for the Democrats.
Lynn should have pursued public office with a congressional seat, rather than starting out tring to be governor with no prior experience.
"Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich. "
William F. Buckley, Jr.
started running for Congress then eventually sought the governorship or a Senate seat once he's had some experience. It makes sense, but Swann was not planning a career in politics when he was approached to run for governor.
If he does seek this seat, the experience of last year's race will be invaluable to him (Just like the experience of blogging his campaign for RedState would prove invaluable to me should Al Haig need a campaign blogger.)
I honestly didn't think of Lynn Swann as a black Republican when I wrote that post, but, yeah, I guess he is. Kewl. Politically, such inroads are important to the party, but that won't be on his mind probably or those of voters in November of '08.
If he were to run for Congress before running for governor, he was either going to have to move, hope a Democrat beat Melissa Hart so he could run the next cycle, or primary an incumbent. All three of those options suck, so it's kind of hard to fault his decision, IMO.
Republicans never get the black vote is because people keep saying if we can peel 20-30% then we will win. African Americans vote Democrat because they trust Democrats to listen to them and help them. Republicans need to establish the same trust and they won't with that kind of talk
No, very different things were said about the governor's race. It was hoped that Swann's popularity in the west would be enough to split Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. Swann's candidacy was considered the best (it was a given that he was a long shot) attempt the PA GOP could manage in order to defeat a sitting governor (they are almost always reelected in PA). The hope was that his popularity in the west might split the cities, which of course did not happen.
I suspect that he would do very well in any competitive western congressional race. He carried the democrat leaning 4th district in a losing campaign for governor during an exceptionally bad year for the PA GOP (see Payjacking scandal). I think that says a lot about his ability to win votes in the 4th CD.
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
Winning 20-30% of the black vote would be great for the GOP, and would likely prove decisive in many states now, and for years to come. But if 'comprehensive' (i.e. amnesty plus massive increases in legal immigration) immigration reform passes, then the Democrats will eventually have no trouble making up for lost ground.
Those outside of Pennsylvania who were not witness to the unmitigated disaster that was the 2006 Lynn Swann campaign should be careful before encouraging or supporting him for another run for office.
His campaign was run awfully, from beginning to end, constantly seeking the approval of GOP bigwigs on issues such as the PA legislative pay raise (including endorsing several pay-raise supporters who lost their primaries).
Swann, from beginning to end, was the candidate of the liberal GOP establishment. I remember being shocked when I found out that conservatives in PA were largely backing Bill Scranton in the primary for Governor, despite Scranton being pro-choice and Swann at least ostensibly pro-life. But conservatives opposed Swann because he was not one of the agents of reform. Scranton, unfortunately, was muscled out of the race by the state party, which promised that Swann's celebrity would assure victory in the general election.
This obviously didn't happen. Swann failed so miserably at running a campaign that Ed Rendell was able to pour millions from his campaign account in the final weeks into state legislative races all around Pennsylvania, which resulted in the Democrats winning a 1 seat majority in the state house.
Ask anyone who was in Pennsylvania last year for this, and they will tell you the same thing. Lynn Swann is a paper tiger.
and this is a prime example of why I added that the immaturity of some Republicans in Pennsylvania might have contributed to his defeat. That, and the failure of many to realize that Pennsylvania is a blue State.
Bill Scranton's partisans wanted their pro-abortion candidate to win the Republican nomination. When he failed to do that, quitting the race after he judged his overall support to be week, some of his partisans campaigned against the party's pro-life nominee, Mr. Swann.
I had mentioned Swann's improvement as a candidate as the race progressed. And I might also mention that this campaign will be run by a different team.
I was and am in Pennsylvania. Yours is a disgruntled, minority opinion, and I'm going to ask you very nicely to take it somewhere else.
I grew up in PA and I disagree with your assessment of the state. PA is not a "blue" state. Pennsylvania's democrat strongholds Pittsburgh and Philadelphia (and the counties in their immediate orbits) have been hemorrhaging population through out-migration to other states for decades. The statewide democrat voter registration edge had slimmed to only a couple of points prior to 2002. The generations in which the democrats enjoy major voter registration advantages are those whose members can recall the Depression (there will be a lot less of them around in 2008 than there were in 2006). Economic conservatism motivates many PA voters (see the payjacking scandal and Santorum's tuition scandal). PA also has a long history of electing Republicans.
P.S. The change in the state legislature's composition is a direct result of the Payjacking scandal. In many ways the Payjacking scandal shows that PA is not a "blue" state. In a "blue" state the whole payjacking incident would not have had any impact on the elections.
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
I argue that we are a blue State because a Republican cannot win a State-wide election. And there were strong Republican counties near Philly (say, Montco) and near Pittsburgh (West Moreland).
The midnight pay increase fomented a mass rebellion amongst Republicans which managed only to replace the State Republican leadership, re-elect the pay increase's architect (Rendell), and for some reason toss a State supreme court justice. Many of the leaders of that movement were Democrats, who played the thing perfectly.
We are a blue State, Herodotus, because the Dems own this Commonwealth and the GOP needs coherence and cohesion. There are conservatives, mainly in the middle and the upper tier, but there are fewer of them and they seem now to have only anger. That's not the party of Reagan, and that's what it needs.
I am from western PA, and it is Westmoreland County. The blue areas in Alleghany County and other surrounding counties are starting to run out of population. While red areas have been stable or growing populations. The long term trends for the state look light red, the state GOP establishment just needs to get a clue, and cleanout its internal corruption. One election cycle does not make a state blue or red it takes several.
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
Perform in the 4th district when he ran for governor? I would expect a much better performance in the 4th if I could see him as being a good person to run first.
Granted I don't know how much of the 4th District follows the county lines, but in the loss, Hart ran well behind her 2004 numbers. It is definitely a spot where the Republicans can win back a seat, and I don't think Swann's numbers were that much behind Hart's given that she was an incumbent.
| County | Hart 04 | Hart 06 | Swann 06 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Allegheny | 67 | 51(-16) | 40(-11) |
| Beaver | 53 | 39(-14) | 45(+6) |
| Butler | 78 | 64(-14) | 61(-3) |
| Lawrence | 60 | 42(-18) | 45(+3) |
| Mercer | 35 | 26(-9) | 48(+22) |
| Westmoreland | 74 | 60(-14) | 54(-6) |
First (+/-) are difference of Hart 06 and Hart 04
Second (+/-) are difference of Hart 06 and Swann 06
___________________________________
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson
A random walk through my head at Indiscriminate Tastes
He is well known, which is very good but I still am not sure because to be honest he didn't preform considerably better in 2006 than Hart. I think he is a person that can generate a good matchup, but I wouldn't want to give him the torch just yet and wait and see if any Republican State Congressmen/Senators wish to jump in.
The reason why I think the Republican Party should promote black Republican candidates is to fight the perception the media and the Democrats have established that we're a WASP only party.
Nothing will destroy that perception quicker than the black community seeing black Republican leaders in office.
There is nothing racist about wanting to change the Republican Party's inaccurate perception among minorities.
The point I am trying to make is if Republicans can get their foot in the door and have minorities take a second look at conservative ideas instead of voting lockstep against Republicans because they're "racist", the Democrats will be in trouble.
This won't happen overnight no matter what Republicans do, it will probably take several generations for African-Americans to have voting patterns similar to caucasians, but to set a realistic goal, capturing just 20-30% of the black vote would completely change the electoral map.
"Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich. "
William F. Buckley, Jr.
The reason Republicans should vote for black candidates is because they are the best person available for the job. Perception will follow (eventually). Condi Rice was not an "affirmative action" choice. Neither was Justice Thomas or Michael Steele or J.C. Watts, etc.
WE don't pick people or favor people because of their skin color. That's the other party. WE pick people for their abilities and the content of their character, not the color of their skin.
Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper, but it's been tried and it's failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
Clarence Thomas wasn't an affirmative action choice? It's just a coincidence that the second black justice in the history of the court took the seat vacated by the first?
He's brilliant. No he's not an affirmative action choice.
Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper, but it's been tried and it's failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
If you ask me if I think that Clarence Thomas got the nod to replace Thurgood Marshall because he was black, I'd answer yes. Or, put another way, if "Clarence Thomas" was a white guy with the very same qualifications that the real Clarence Thomas had, I sincerely doubt he'd have been tapped.
That's not to say that his qualifications weren't up to par. But I think it's hard to say with a straight face that race didn't play a part in the selection.
I certainly agree that Thomas is a brilliant justice and was eminently qualified for the job. And I'm not sure I've ever read any of his opinions that I disagreed with -- which I like from a personal standpoint. He knows, exactly, what a judge should be -- and comports himself accordingly.
One of the obvious evils of affirmative action is the stigma attached to minorities who get ahead. Even if they aren't "an affirmative action case", they get labeled as one by some people.
That you would assume that my insinuating he was an affirmative action choice was meant to imply anything about his qualifications for the job.
Great to see that Lynn Swann might run for congress. Trying to capture the governorship of a major state like Pennsylvania with zero political experience was a bridge too far.
The problem with rousting up qualified Republican candidates is that it's usually a step down financially and status-wise from real life.
For Democrats, it's usually worth it just for the pay raise.
The whole billionaire Republicans vs. working class Democrats myth is just that. First, Democrat voters are statistically as wealthy as Republicans. (google it if you want) Second, the candidates on BOTH sides are usually from wealthy families. There are certainly candidates who pull themselves up by their bootstraps, but many of them are also Republicans.
If there is any wealth differential, it seems that influential Democrats are old money, while Republicans draw on new money, but I don't have any data for that and it may be the Northeast, not the rest of the country.
Along the same line, maybe losing NJ Gov Candidate Doug Forrester should run for House in his district in central New Jersey. Incumbent is Democrat Rush Holt and I think that is where Forrester is from--near Princeton. Area is probably slightly Democratic, but not overwhelmingy so. Holt recently voted "no" on the amendment in House to immunize citizens who report suspicious behavior from civil lawsuits--so-called John Doe act.
As a big advocate of the black voter outreach efforts, it is important to have black Republican candidates in the media. However, unlike Blackwell or Cain, Mr. Swann's biggest advantage is being cool.
Like Schwarzenegger, Guiliani, and Obama, many non-politicos will listen to Swann a bit more than a normal politician. He can reach out in a way that most old men in suits can't. I know having J.C. Watts and Steve Largent in OK as Rs helped make the party's image a little younger and cooler.
I think Swann could help do that in the Pittsburgh area in a swing state.
I hope he is serious. Keep us up to date Mark.
______________________________________
Bobby Jindal Saves Louisiana
While I live outside the district but I still vote there and have friends and family, both Republicans and Democrats, who are actively involved in politics there. Those same people worked both sides of the gubernatorial campaign.
Based on what I've heard, and it was pretty much the same story from everyone, Swann ran a dreadful campaign. The difference in the cause was dependent on who I talked to. Democrats tended to blame it on Swann being a novice, having no record and not articulating a clear message. Republicans tended to blame Swann's loss on bad staff, having far less money, media bias, President Bush disapproval, and Rendell's power of incumbency.
Now much can change in two years, but I don't see it changing if Swann runs. The key to this election will be the Iraq war. The war overrides everything. If its going well, Swann has a chance. If its going poorly, he has no chance.
If the war is going well, Swann will still have a difficult time beating Altmire. Altmire beat a skilled potitician in Melissa Hart. She's been in elected office nearly her entire adult life. She knew how to run a campaign. Swann is none of those things.
Swann may be able to surround himself with a better staff but he still suffers from having no record and no experience. I just don't see him beating Altmire after one term. But again, if the war in Iraq turns around, he has a chance.
Swann should not run for anything. There are good reasons many republicans didn't support him. The campain was a mess, his interviews were worse, and I don't know one black liberal or conservative who likes him.
a February '06 talk with ABC News' George Stephanopoulos, and he wasn't prepped for that one. His later interviews were splendid, and he won both debates.
His campaign was, to be blunt, broke. Ed sucked the air out of that election.
How many African Americans, liberal or conservative, do you know in PA-4?
And it weakens the points you are trying to make.
As others have pointed out, there are better Republicans to support.
His district which was once Republican is solidly Democratic.
I live in PA 4. Yes, Swann ran a horrible campaign for governor, but for an experienced politician, Hart ran a terrible campaign here in PA 4. Not to mention that the few adds the RNC ran for her here were terrible.
If Swann assembles a more capable campaign team, and if the RNC invests in the race and runs more effective advertisements, Swann can win. However, those are big ifs.
I did see him speak and spoke with him one on one briefly, and I must say, I was impressed. He just has a likeability about him that few politicians do. Certainly not Altmire, with whom I have also spoke briefly.
Certainly we at the local level will work to get him elected. If Hart doesn't want to try again, he should go for it. I can't think of anybody else who has a better shot.
but not with the candidate.
With few exceptions(Sherwood and Weldon), every congressional candidate who had a close loss last year should in all account be given another shot, like Fitzgerald and Hart. Hart should be the first to be asked, and then if she does not want to run, then by all means if Mr.Swann wants a shot, let him have it. But if Hart says she is running, Mr.Swann should focus his energies elsewhere.
Melissa Hart doesn't want to try to get that seat back?