Specter, Sestak Fight For Left Flank On Afghanistan

Sen. Arlen Specter (D) has staked out Afghanistan as the next issue on which to prove his Dem bona fides after his party switch earlier this year.

Specter has come out against a troop buildup in Afghanistan, a position his campaign cites as farther to the left than that of his opponent, Rep. Joe Sestak (D).

The move, which comes as Pres. Obama is expected to announce the addition of as many as 30K troops in a prime time speech next week at West Point, also puts Specter in the curious position of being to the left of the WH itself, which has thrown its support behind his bid.

But perhaps more troublesome for Specter, it could give Sestak more fodder to use against what his camp sees as Specter's Achilles' heel -- the argument that Specter's issue positions are motivated by political calculation rather than personal conviction.

Specter made his first remarks in opposition to a troop increase early last week, telling a group of PA high school seniors 11/16, "My view is not to stay or increase troops unless Afghanistan is indispensable in a war against al-Qaeda."

He elaborated on an 11/19 conf. call with bloggers: "My view is that we ought not to add troops to Afghanistan," he said. "I even question staying there unless it is indispensable to our fight against al Qaeda. If it is, then we have to do everything necessary to defeat Al Qaeda, because they are out to annihilate us."

Those remarks were circulated to reporters by Specter's camp 11/19 under the header, "Specter opposes troop increases in Afghanistan." Specter reiterated them for a national audience in an appearance on "Fox News Sunday" 11/22.

Sestak's camp fired back in an 11/22 release claiming that Specter was "going along with Joe's position on Afghanistan by saying that we should only increase troop levels if it is indispensable in our war against al Qaeda" -- a claim Specter mngr Chris Nicholas challenged, noting that Sestak "has said multiple times that he supports a 'measured increase' in troops in Afghanistan."

(FELICIA SONMEZ)

The shift -- from supporting a troop surge in Iraq to opposing one in Afghanistan -- may pay political dividends for Specter, according to Franklin & Marshall College prof./pollster Terry Madonna.

"No longer can [Specter] be a centrist," Madonna said. "Now he has to be a 100% Obama Democrat, because he's running against Joe Sestak, who is a 100% Obama Democrat."

While there remains "a lot of ambivalence" on Afghanistan among PA Dems, "it's probably a safer position to oppose the troop buildup" ahead of the May '10 primary, Madonna said.

Madonna added that even though Specter tacked leftward on Afghanistan to avoid getting outflanked by Sestak, he believes Specter will eventually line up with Obama in support of a troop increase because he doesn't want to be seen as opposing the POTUS' agenda.

Dem media consultant Ed Mitchell cautioned that the Afghanistan tit-for-tat isn't likely on the radar screen for many PA voters, who are more worried and angry about the economy and local corruption than about nat'l issues. "Frankly, nobody talks to me about the war," Mitchell said. "The most important thing that's on their mind is, how are we going to get over this unemployment? How are we going to survive this winter?"

Madonna agreed, noting that Afghanistan rates relatively low among issues on voters' minds. "At the elite level, there's a fair awareness of Specter's position shifts," Madonna said. "Do rank and file voters have a clear sense of that? Probably not."

The danger for Specter, then, may be not what position he takes, but the act of switching positions itself, which Madonna said is on track to become "one of the transcendent arguments in the course of the campaign."

"I think the bigger argument is not so much the substance of the issues," Madonna added. "The dilemma [Specter] faces is, how many times can he switch his positions? How fast can he evolve?"

Down the road, a move in favor of a troop increase might put Specter back in line with Obama, but it would leave him vulnerable to criticism from Sestak, who has been hammering Specter on his position changes on issues including DOMA, a health care public option and EFCA.

Recently, Sestak has seized on examples from Specter's nearly three-decade long voting record as a GOPer to release Specter's "10 worst votes," and is trying to tie Specter to ex-AK Gov. Sarah Palin (R) in a vein similar to ex-FL House Speaker Marco Rubio's (R) use of the infamous Charlie Crist-Obama hug against his FL SEN GOP primary opponent.

On the other hand, that dilemma is matched by Specter's reputation for effectively representing PA's interests in DC. "No public official has worked longer and harder than Specter did," Madonna said. "He's beyond diligent."

That -- coupled with the fact that 77% of registered PA voters in F&M's most recent poll didn't know enough about Sestak to have an opinion on him -- means that at this early stage, the Dem primary fight is anything but settled.

"I think it's going to be ugly," Mitchell said. "I think it's going to be close."