PA-Sen: EMILY’s List Endorses McGinty

Katie_McGintyIt’s been quite a good week for Katie McGinty.

After announcing her Senate bid on Tuesday, and winning the United Steelworkers’ endorsement Wednesday, McGinty woke up Thursday with the support of EMILY’s List.

EMILY’s List – a political organization that has raised over $400 million for pro-choice, Democratic women candidates – put Sen. Pat Toomey “On Notice” last Monday for his “anti-woman, anti-family record,” including his vote to defund Planned Parenthood.

“The Senate could use a woman like Katie, who has proven her commitment to creating middle-class jobs and preserving the environment,” President of EMILY’s List Stephanie Schriock said. “The EMILY’s List community of over three million members is excited to support Katie as she campaigns to bring bold new ideas to the United States Senate.”

While EMILY’s List focuses mostly on women’s health issues, the group is impressed with the former DEP Secretary’s experience in alternative energies.

“Because of Katie’s pragmatism and creativity, Pennsylvania can become number one in the country in wind energy jobs, number two in solar and a pioneer in energy efficiency technology,” Schriock said.

EMILY’s List – who lobbied McGinty to get into the race – will be hoping to help McGinty overcome former Congressman Joe Sestak in the Democratic primary next year, before replacing Toomey as the junior Senator from PA.

43 Responses

  1. McGinty or Sestak? My vote is NEITHER! I’ll vote to keep Pat Toomey in our Senate seat and will do everything I can to make sure he wins it! We need another Democrat/Progressive Liberal in the Senate about as much as we need Hillary Clinton as our next President!

  2. Jerry

    Yes. I know you were responding to FYI, hence the condition: “until you identify yourself”

    AND “Jerry to FYI” that I used to preface my comment.

    But, you broke that promise to FYI after only 23 minutes.

  3. Jerry to FYI @ 9:23 pm

    “I will not respond to any more of your posts until you have the courage to identify yourself.”

    @9:46 pm

    “On second thought I decided to read your post, and I do need to comment on it.”

    Well, that didn’t last long enough at all. 🙁

  4. On second thought I decided to read your post, and I do need to comment on it. I never declared a “conspiracy,” but rather some irresponsible troglodytes who do not understand that there are limits to what they can post without doing some basic fact checking. I don’t agree with much that you post, but I don’t launch personal attacks on you with made-up “facts.”

    You write: “Quite frankly, I found it amusing that the leaders in your county apparently had so much faith in your candidacy that they required you to pledge to withdraw if they found a better candidate.” Where on Earth did you get that from? I was not asked to make such a pledge and would not have made it if they had asked for it. Quite the contrary, when they kept coming after me I asked them if they had any other prospects. They responded that more than ten people wanted to run, but they thought I would be an excellent candidate (they had good reason for believing that based on other organizing I had done in the County). In fact, during the interview one member of the committee asked me why they should select me, and I reminded her that they were coming after me rather than the otherway around, and that I had not even agreed to run. Again, you are just making this up as you go, FYI.
    I disaree with you on endorsements and am proud that the LCDC bucked the Democratic Establishment and endorsed Sestak for Senate, though I think endorsements prior to the Primary are inappropriate. Unlike you I think we need to weaken the state and national organization because they have lost sight of what our Party is supposed to stand for. “Going forward try not to be so sensitive and don’t take things personally???” When you cross the line and lie and slander it is not sensitivity to object. I have a thick skin, but I draw the line at the kind of bullshit you and your buddies have demonstrated.
    We can continue this discussion if you have the guts to identify yourself.

  5. Jerry
    I’m sure I speak not only for myself but also FYI in thanking you for promising not to respond. Your foolishness is painful to watch.

    Some parting advice from the great Sgt Hulka: “Lighten up, Francis”

  6. Jerry – No one ever attacked you personally, slandered your name or wrote anything even remotely worthy of being considered libel. After reading your posts and engaging in a discussion with you I’ve determined that you are a walking, talking contradiction. It is 100% clear that trying to impart any sense of reason to you is a genuine waste of time. I’m quite certain I’m not alone in arriving at that conclusion, in fact it’s likely your campaign managers arrived at that exact conclusion in 2010. At this point, I think you may legitimately struggle with reality and I’ve begun to question your sanity. Good luck to you sir. Take care. Signing off.

  7. I only skimmed your post FYI because your posts are not worth my time. I do not have a thin skin, but to suggest that political blogs should permit personal attacks that are devoid of facts is way over the top, and such posts are way over the line. Facer it.
    And again you read things into posts that are not there. The LCDC extracts promises from potential candidates that they will not run if they are not endorese. It had nothing to do with me. This is a promise they ask of everyone, and I remind you, they came after me to run, not the other way around. I told them quite explicitly that I would be a pain in the ass if elected because I would be at least as tough on Democrats as Republicans if I was elected since Democrats should have a higher standard.
    I will not respond to any more of your posts until you have the courage to identify yourself.

  8. Jerry – please take a deep breath and take step back. This is a political blog which is a vehicle for intense discussion. Just because people disagree with you doesn’t mean there is a conspiracy against you or a specific candidate or anyone else. Passionate disagreements will occur on political blogs. You may want to reconsider joining in on the discussion if you take it personally. Ultimately, good people can disagree. For many reasons that even this own website and many others have pointed out I personally don’t believe that Joe Sestak is capable of defeating Pat Toomey. I also believe that Katie McGinty is our best choice to take Toomey on in the general election. I know she is the most progressive, least divisive and the only unifying candidate in this race. Now more than ever I believe Democrats need to come together and rally around a strong leader. With Kathleen Kane’s tenure probably coming to an end sooner than later Pennsylvania will have no women serving in statewide office and no women serving in Congress. I think that is a disgrace. While I know you disagree with me regarding who our candidate should be, the fact that I disagree with you shouldn’t cause you to declare a conspiracy.

    Also, allow me to clarify one point. You accused me of calling you a liar when I posted a excerpt of your letter to the editor. I was not. Quite frankly, I found it amusing that the leaders in your county apparently had so much faith in your candidacy that they required you to pledge to withdraw if they found a better candidate. People weren’t beating down the door to run for that seat, especially since no one ran for that seat the election prior in 2008. Interesting, I actually agree with the point you were trying to make in that letter. County committee endorsements, especially in smaller counties with fewer Democrats like yours often don’t benefit from a endorsement process. In addition, I believe County Committees should not be allowed to hold separate endorsement conventions for statewide candidates and should be punished if they endorse candidates that were not endorsed by State Committee. County Committee conventions should always be held prior to State Committee endorsement conventions and the County Committee should not take up statewide candidates during their convention. We need to strength the organization not divide it. I know you’ll disagree with that last point.

    Going forward try not to be so sensitive and don’t take things personally. Try to enjoy the passionate political discussions that are had here. Ultimately this is just a place for a bunch of talking heads and political junkies, but in due time the voters will have their say and nothing we say on this blog will make a difference.

  9. Perhaps someone would like to point out to Mr. Dialo that my 2 (not 3) references to him were in response to FYI, not him. I have also requested that people who engage in these kind of personal attacks that include falsehoods should be subjected to moderating, or at the very least not be permitted to engage in this kind of behavior anonymously. And yes, I did name names and provide specifics and point out that a simple e-mail or phone call could have established the truth or falsity of this slander, but none of them bothered because their goal was to personally attack someone simply because they refuse to buy into their anti-Sestak Kool-Aid.
    I also pointed out that their posting of such lies while hiding their identities was cowardly and reflected poorly on PoliticsPa for allowing it.

  10. Jerry-

    You wrote: “I will waste no more time with you”

    But, then you responded to me and referred to me in at least two other posts (also misspelled my name).

    So, I guess you did waste more time on me, therefore, giving direct libel/slander-free evidence to anyone who wants to call you “a liar who can’t keep his promises” (there’s no need).

  11. Just one last brief response to FYI’s second post. First of all he missed Jo Ann Lentz who ran for State Senate in 2010 in Lancaster County and got a little more than 2,000 votes. This is not important, but it is one more example of FYI’s poor scholarship and research “skills.”
    I did not mention it, but the Democratic percentage of district registrations has been steadily rising. My recollection is that it is now about 38% versus 33% when I ran, so naturally Democrats are getting a higher percentage of the votes with more registered Democrats in the district and a higher Democratic turnout. That is not to diminish what Marcy Dubroff and Alice Yoder accomplished. Both ran strong campaigns and both were excellent candidates. Marcy Dubroff, especially, is to be commended because the LCDC did not even recruit a candidate in PA-41 in 2012, and Marcy got on the primary ballot via a write-in campaign — no small accomplishment.
    FYI claims that “-It’s clear this state house district benefitted from having Tom Wolf at the top of the ticket in 2014. Alice Yoder was a great candidate who had the backing of Katie McGinty as Chairwoman of Tom Wolf’s Campaign for a Fresh Start… It’s clear this district DID NOT benefit from having Joe Sestak at the top of the ticket in 2010.

    How is that clear? FYI cites no election tallies for Sestak or Wolf at all, and, again, fails to mention the radically different circumstances that prevailed in 2010 and 2014. I think I have established that I did quite well, given the circumstances, in PA-41 in 2010. I believe Sestak got about 1,000 more votes in PA-41 than I did, so he clearly did quite well too. This is just another example of how FYI makes statements that are completely without foundation and masks that fact by posting unrelated statistics that are completely irrelevent.
    The word “sloppy” hardly does justice to the supposed research regularly posted here by “Gotcha,” “FYI,” and David Dialo.
    I renew my request that Gotcha and FYI take responsibility for their posts by using their real names rather than posting anontmously.

  12. First of all, there is nothing inappropriate about your post. Personally maligning people who disagree with you with invented “facts” is what is offensive and inappropriate, and people who do that should be moderated. I would never stoop to such maliscious attacks, and to do so without even knowing if the allegation is true or not does cross a line. David or “Gotcha” could easily have ascertained if it was true by simply calling or e-mailing Sally Lyall who is still Chair of the LCDC, but they obviously did not care if it were true. They were just interested in maligning someone they disagree with. I have not contacted Sally about these allegations because I know what the facts are, and I have no doubt she will confirm them without prompting from me.

    For the record, Even though I had a team of two campaign managers after Sally, one of them urged me to cleanse my web site of my positions, most of which were quite Left of Center for Lancaster (pro-choice; drilling moratorium in Marcellus Shale; prison reform; tax reform aimed primarily at forcing corporations to pay their fair share of state taxes; elimination of the Delaware corporate tax loophole; taxing tobacco products; a gas severance tax; single-payer healthcare; down-sizing the Pa. Legislature and eliminating many Legislature perks; etc.) and simply ask voters to vote for me and the rest of the slate. I refused to do that and told him, quite literally, that if the Democrats ever grew a set of balls they would start winning elections. My managers team remained in place, but I assembled my own team and after that I largely ran my own campaign with their help. My manager continued to chair the weekly meetings, but I made the major decisions.

    Yes, the district was re-alligned in 2002 (before I lived here). So??? It was re-alligned again in 2012 because it had been progreeesively becoming more Democratic.

    Your numbers are correct, but lack context. Have you forgotten that 2010 was the year of the Republican tsunami where Democratic turnout was horrible? I will afford you the benefit of the doubt that you did not deliberately leave this out, but the only valid analysis of 2010 voting results is comparing them to other 2010 results. Sestak-bashers love to point out that Toomey beat Sestak in 2010, but they never seem to mention that it was by only 2 percentage points when most Democrats went down to catastrophic defeat that year. Context does matter.

    I am reciting these numbers by memory because I have no intention of spending hours on the internet responding to FYI. I have better things to do, not to mention that this is all quite irrelevant when discussing the 2016 Senate election. People like FYI, David Dialo, and “Gotcha” (2 of 3 hiding behind a wall of anonymity which I regard as cowardly — an opinion, not an established fact, just for the record) seem obsessed with trying to discredit people who defend Sestak. In doing so they play the role of trolls whether that is what they really are or not.

    In 2010 Democratic turnout was 31% in Lancaster County compared to close to 60% for the GOP. In PA-41 it was 39% which I largely attribute to the effort my team and I made to get out the vote. We knocked on thousands of doors, made thousands of phone calls, took out newspaper ads, and even managed a 5-day extensive TV campaign during the final week that included both cable stations and the local CBS powerhouse,WGAL-TV. If I recall GOP turnout was something like 58%. So, yes, I only received 7,994 votes and 34% of the total vote. Democratic registration was 33%, so I must have gotten the vast majority of Democratic votes and lots of Republican votes given that GOP turnout in PA-41 was almost 50% higher than Democratic turnout. Now, about those 7,994 votes, that was more than any of other Democratic candidates runnning for the Pa. House or Senate in Lancaster County that year. Mike Sturla, who represents Lancaster City, got the second highest total, and he trailed me by 1,008 votes in a district that had some 12,000 more registered Democrats than PA-41. I also received some 800 more votes in PA-41 than Dan Onerato, our Gubernatorial candidate, who got considerably more exposure in the media than I did. In fairness, Both Joe Sestak and Lois Herr got more votes than I did in PA-41. We were all thrilled with our performance given what kind of a year it was for Democrats.

    Marcy Dubroff (who had been part of my 2010 team, and I a member of hers in 2012) continued the positive Democratic trend in 2012, and so did Ms. Yoder in 2014, though both benefited from a much stronger turnout of Democrats than I had to deal with.

    FYI implies that I lied when I wrote to the newspaper: “Four years ago, the Lancaster Democratic Committee asked me to run for the 41st Legislative District… They also asked me to pledge that I would not run if they opted to endorse someone else…”
    He “supports” his inference by following with “according to the Pennsylvania Department of State website no other candidates filed to run in the 2010 Democratic primary for PA House 41st.”
    Again I will give FYI the benefit of the doubt and assumes he is misrepresenting out of ignorance rather than malice. The LCDC has a vetting process for prospective candidates. In 2009 they asked me to run in PA-41 and I declined. They kept asking me to run, and I finally agreed to be interviewed without making a commitment. I was told I was one of more than ten prosepective candidates they were considering. At the interview I did agree to run, and I also agreed to their request that I promise not to run in the Primary if they selected someone else. My letter to the newspaper reflected the fact that in hindsight I wish I had not agreed to that because I believe the voters should choose their candidates, not the LCDC. So while it is true that no one but me “filed to run in the 2010 Democratic primary for PA House 41st” that only reflects the LCDC candidate vetting process. I was unanimously endorsed and was the only candidate who filed because one of the conditions of being endorsed was that one did not file if they were not selected by the LCDC. I am sure Sally Lyall can also verify the truth of what I am saying, though she was not yet LCDC Chair at the time. This candidate selection policy by the LCDC still exists, and I have been a vocal critic of it despite having been a beneficiary of it in 2010.

    I apologize for the length of this response, but I feel FYI left me no choice. Again, I must emphasize that context matters, and numbers devoid of context can lie.

  13. In addition, in the 2010 general election there were 8 seats in the PA House of Representatives that included parts of Lancaster County. Out of those 8 seats Democrats fielded only 3 candidates in 2010:

    (In order of percentage of the vote)
    Source: PA Dept. of State website
    -96th District
    Mike Sturla – 6,962 – 61.9%
    -41st District:
    Jerry Policoff – 7,994 – 33.8%
    -97th District:
    Patrick O’Keefe – 6,919 – 27.7%

    (Note: There was one contested state senate seat (Sen. Mike Folmer’s 48th) however the district was comprised almost entirely from parts of Lebanon County and only included a very small part of Lancaster County.)

    Going back and taking a look at the historic election results from Democratic nominees in the 41st:

    PA House 41st – Democratic nominees by percentage of the vote:
    1) 2014 – A. YODER – 9,020 – 40.6%
    2) 2012 – M. DUBROFF – 13,562 – 40.1%
    3) 2004 – C. DESMOND – 11,683 – 35.2%
    4) 2010 – JERRY POLICOFF – 7,994 – 33.8%
    5) 2002 – B. ACHTERMANN – 6,532 – 32.8%

    -It’s clear this state house district benefitted from having Tom Wolf at the top of the ticket in 2014. Alice Yoder was a great candidate who had the backing of Katie McGinty as Chairwoman of Tom Wolf’s Campaign for a Fresh Start.

    -It’s clear this district DID NOT benefit from having Joe Sestak at the top of the ticket in 2010.


  14. Not posting any libel or slander, just a few facts and a couple of newspaper excerpts which are cited with references.

    The 41st District of the PA House of Representatives was redistricted to Lancaster County in 2002.

    Electoral History of PA House 41st District:
    (per PA Dept. of State website)

    2002 General Election – PA House 41st
    KATIE TRUE (R) – 13,371 – 67%
    B. ACHTERMANN (D) – 6,532 – 32%

    2004 General Election – PA House 41st
    KATIE TRUE (R) – 21,481 – 64%
    C. DESMOND (D) – 11,683 – 35%

    2006 General Election – PA House 41st
    KATIE TRUE (R) – 17,039 – 81%
    K. BRENNEMAN (IND) – 3,762 – 18%

    2008 General Election – PA House 41st
    KATIE TRUE (R) – 25,937 – 100%

    2010 General Election – PA House 41st
    RYAN AUMENT (R) – 15,616 – 66%
    JERRY POLICOFF (D) – 7,994 – 33%

    2012 General Election – PA House 41st
    RYAN AUMENT (R) – 20,183 – 59%
    M. DUBROFF (D) – 13,562 – 40%

    2014 General Election – PA House 41st
    BRETT MILLER (R) – 13,196 – 59%
    A. YODER (D) – 9,020 – 40%

    Democratic nominees by percentage of the vote:
    1) 2014 – A. YODER – 9,020 – 40.6%
    2) 2012 – M. DUBROFF – 13,562 – 40.1%
    3) 2004 – C. DESMOND – 11,683 – 35.2%
    4) 2010 – JERRY POLICOFF – 7,994 – 33.8%
    5) 2002 – B. ACHTERMANN – 6,532 – 32.8%

    The following excerpt is from a Lancaster Newspapers article titled:
    “Aument easily defeats Policoff in 41st” dated November 3, 2010

    “In Lancaster County’s 41st District, voters overwhelmingly selected Republican Ryan Aument… (Aument) soundly beat Democrat Gerald Policoff by a more than 2-to-1 margin in Tuesday’s election.”


    The following excerpt is from a Lancaster Newspapers Letter to the Editor titled:
    “End Dem endorsements” authored by Jerry Policoff dated May 16, 2014

    “Four years ago, the Lancaster Democratic Committee asked me to run for the 41st Legislative District… They also asked me to pledge that I would not run if they opted to endorse someone else…”

    According to the Pennsylvania Department of State website no other candidates filed to run in the 2010 Democratic primary for PA House 41st.

  15. David,
    It is impossible to engage in civil discourse with you. Have a nice life.

  16. Jerry-

    I won’t sue you for libel or slander for calling me a schmuck, since your posts have provided you a solid defense for “diminished mental capacity”.

    As for your claim: “running a campaign and running a county Democratic Committee are both full time jobs. No one could do both..”

    I don’t know where to begin to explain how wrong that is.

    Brady is Philly chairman and a congressman. Marcel is Montco chairman, a lawyer, involved in electing a slate of row offices, and aiming to be the state party chairman (which isn’t a full time job either). Chairman Landau of Delco is a full time lawyer. A few years ago, Chairman Daugherty of Lehigh ran for congress.

    Don’t claim Lancaster committee is a full time job, let alone your state house campaign.

    Empirical evidence suggests Gotcha knows something as your explanation doesn’t pass the laugh test.

    Even funnier is the suggestion (let alone threat) to complain to the site monitors. Crossed the line? LOL. We are nowhere near the line. Some posters have suggested that other posters are pedophiles, and they’re still around.

    While I do applaud and encourage posters to post under their real names, you can’t even handle simple remarks about being abandoned by your campaign manager. You should post under an anonymous handle to avoid embarrassing yourself even further.

    If you can’t accept criticism without threatening a lawsuit, you really aren’t mature (or mentally stable) enough to handle the hardball politics and banter here. (And, frankly, I’m getting tired of your whining like a child.)

  17. David,
    You really are a colossal shmuck, and I will waste no more time with you. But I would advise caution. “Gotcha” is indeed posting lies (lies I have never even heard until today, and lies that are demonstrably untrue), and you are coming dangerously close to repeating them. Of course Sally resigned as my campaign manager when she was elected chair of the Lancaster County Democratic Committee. running a campaign and running a county Democratic Committee are both full time jobs. No one could do both, and I was frankly relieved that she decided that someone else needed to run my campaign. To state that she “resigned and refused to lead my campaign” is irresponsible and preposterous. You should be ashamed of yourself, and you should apologize, but you are instead pushing the envelope. I intend to bring this to the attention of the people who run this site and suggest that they subject both of you to monitoring because you have both crossed a line, and I do believe that your posts are libelous and slanderous.

  18. Jerry-

    It’s not defamatory. Yes, one could read the implication that you are a giant @sshole and a complete fool. Or it could just mean the manager had no faith in your candidacy.

    That you would claim it was slanderous or libelous leads credence to the “foolish” theory and might explain lack of faith in your ability as well.

    You certainly haven’t covered yourself in glory here.

  19. David, You are the one who should be embarrassed because you obviously do not know how to read. “Gotcha” did not ask some amorphous question. He made a statement, and the statement was demonstrably false. He then compounded the lie by asking why it happened when, in fact, it never happened:

    “JERRY POLICOFF LOL!! Why did your campaign manager resign and refuse to lead your state house campaign?!?! Hahahahahahahaha”

    Definition of slander: a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report

    Definition of libel: anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents.

  20. Thank you Terry. I am deeply touched to get such a complement from you.
    I am proud to say that I have a long history of working to elect women and people of color. I was a strong supporter of Lois Herr every time she ran for Congress and was honored to receive her endorsement when I ran for the House (and Terry’s as well).
    Despite the claims of the Sestak bashers, Sestak has a lot of support from many Democrats, including many Democrats who are women and progressives.

  21. Pennsylvania currently has ZERO women serving in the United States Congress!!!!! Pennsylvanians are going to change that and make history by electing Katie McGinty for US Senate. She will be our nominee and she will defeat Pat Toomey and the Republican money machine.

    Learn more and donate here:

  22. Jerry-

    Gotcha asking why someone wasn’t on your campaign isn’t libel or slander. Please stop embarrassing yourself.


    Talk to his ex-staffers. Arrogant doesn’t begin to cover it. Misogynistic might come up a few times in conversations about how he’s treated some female staffers. The bottom line is Sestak feels entitled to these these jobs. This seems centered around his belief that he’s superior because he works harder, even though he’s immoral, irrational, inconsiderate, insincere, incapable, and insane.

  23. Well said, Lois. And Jerry Policoff it is always good to read your insightful and knowledgeable comments. I would dearly love to have a woman senator from PA, but I also know that Adm. Sestak has been working hard to dispel the Toomey lies and half truths for more than a year. He knows what the issues are and who responds to what. Who would ever call him arrogant needs to understand subtlety rather than glad handing.

  24. By the way Gotcha, would you consider posting under your real name, because what you posted is not only demonstrably false, but very likely meets the legal definition of slander and libel. Are you afraid to post such things without hiding behind a mask of anonymity?

  25. My, aren’t you full of disinformation. My campaign manager was Sally Lyall who decided to run for the newly open position of LCDC Chair. She won that election and decided that she could not do that job properly and still give my campaign the support it needed, so she resigned, but helped me recruit two co-chairmen, both prominent members and officers of the LCDC. There were five Democrats running for the State House and Senate from Lancaster County in 2010. I was by far and away the top vote-getter, including getting 1,008 more votes than Mike Sturla whose Lancaster City district had 12,000 more registered Democrats than my own. I was also endorsed by more progressive organizations than any other candidate, raised the most money any Democrat in PA-41 had ever raised, and was the only Democrat in the County who was endorsed by the Lancaster Intelligencer. The County Democrats recruited me to run that year, and it took a while before I reluctantly agreed. They endorsed my candidacy unanimously. My short acceptance speech acknowledged that PA-41 and Lancaster County are known for being strongly conservative, but “I am a proud progressive, and I intend to run as one.” That speech was greeted by a long and loud ovation.
    Any more false tidbits you’d care to share???

  26. JERRY POLICOFF LOL!! Why did your campaign manager resign and refuse to lead your state house campaign?!?! Hahahahahahahaha

  27. I absolutely opposed Bob Casey in the 2006 primary, and I was proud to support Chuck Pennacchio who I ended up writing in both in 2006 and 2012. I will never vote for Bob Casey because he is on the wrong side of so many issues. He only agreed to run in 2006 after Schumer and Rendell cleared the field for him (Hoeffel and Hafer succumbed to the pressure and pulled out of the race). A Pastrami sandwich would have beaten Santorum in 2006. A pastrami sandwich also probably would have beaten Smith in 2012. Casey and his “rose garden” campaign strategy would be in for a shock if he ever faces a strong GOP candidate.
    And no, “electability and fundraising” do not determine who I support and vote for. Where they stand on the issues does. I won’t vote for right-wingers like Casey simply because they put a “D” in front of their name. In my opinion that is what makes me a good progressive Democrat. I refuse to blindly support my Party’s nominees regardless of what they stand for. I am a progressive, not a Lemming.
    And yes I supported Hoeffel in 2010, but I also voted for Onerato in the general election. Apparently FYI simply disdains progressives like Hoeffel and Pennacchio, but thinks we should all vote for people like Casey even if we deplore what they stand for. It seems like a huge double standard to me, FYI.
    Just to set the record straight, The only Democrats I have refused to vote for in the general election since moving to Pennsylvania in 2004 were Bob Casey (twice), and Obama in 2012. Those decisions were based on conscience. I will not vote for Hillary Clinton for similar reasons in 2016 if she is the nominee. I did vote for Sestak in both the primary and general in 2010. I voted for Wolf in both the primary and the general in 2014. I also voted for Rendell in 2006 and for Gore in 2000 and for Kerry in 2004 and Obama in 2008. I voted a straight Democratic ticket in 2014. I have never voted Republican in my life. I did vote for Jill Stein (Green Party) for President in 2012. I reject FYI’s contention that I am “am on the fringes.” Voting one’s conscience is nothing to be ashamed of, and it does not make one a “fringe” Democrat. Voting a straight Democratic ticket all of the time regardless of what the candidate stands for just makes you a hack in my opinion. Thank goodness not all Democrats vote that way.
    I also reject the totally unsubstantiated claim that is often bantered about around here that Sestak cannot win. In 2006 He unseated an admittedly flawed Republican incumbent in a strongly Republican district that had elected only one Democrat since the Civil War. He won re-election in 2008 by something like 20 points. When he stepped down to run for the Senate the district reverted to Republican where it remains to this day. He was a huge underdog when he decided to take on the Democratic Establishment by challenging Specter in 2010. At one point he was behind by some 50 points if memory serves, but he overtook Specter and won the Primary comfortably. That Fall he lost to Toomey by 2 points in a GOP tsunasmi that saw most Democrats go down to crushing defeats. By what standard do these naysayers claim that Sestak is unelectable, and that McGinty is electable when she too was crushed in the 2012 Gubernatorial primary? Saying it does not make it so, and in this case the evidence supports the opposite of what you suggest. Too many claims go unchallenged around here.

  28. Eight more months of this. Some fun, eh? The sooner we can get them side by side in a debate or public forum, the sooner the vast difference between them will be clear. And yes, despite what others here are saying, McGinty is the obvious pragmatic progressive choice. I agree that the state committee and national Dems are not usually who I want to follow, but in this case it doesn’t matter. If PA Dems really want to beat Toomey, McGinty is the only choice.

  29. Shelly-

    The “establishment” doesn’t want to see Sestak blow another race.

    BTW, once Sestak loses the primary, his house in Delco will be up for sale before you can blink. Then he can drop all pretense about PA when he’s really living in Virginia.

  30. Unfortunately, Jerry Policoff is once again promoting candidates who simply cannot win and as a result elect Republicans. This is nothing new. Jerry has often supported fringe candidates. If I recall Mr. Policoff opposed Senator Bob Casey in the 2006 primary, voted for Jill Stein over President Obama in 2012 and supported Joe Hoeffel in 2010. While Mr. Policoff has the right to his opinion and vote, which I respect, he doesn’t have the right to call himself a progressive within the Democratic party, especially if he is advocating for a conservative, military hawk like Joe Sestak. Both Mr. Policoff and Ms. Herr hail from Lancaster County where the local Democratic party has struggled for years and continues to do so. Due to being in such a conservative base, Lancaster Democrats have traditionally been outside the mainstream. Their leadership supported Rob McCord, I believe their county committee endorsed Joe Hoeffel in 2010. So, it is no surprise that Mr. Policoff is on the fringes. However, Sue Stoltzfus who is a Democratic State Committeewoman from Lancaster County has endorsed Katie McGinty for US Senate. No political party is perfect and the current political environment we live in requires serious people who can tackle serious challenges. Katie McGinty is a qualified, smart progressive who has the ability to unite our party especially while the party has endured so much negative press lately due to the actions of a handful of people like Mr. McCord. If you watched the Republican debate last night we should be terrifed at the prospect of Republicans serving in any leadership role. Now more than ever before Democrats must rally around a unifying candidate who can actually win and lead! Katie McGinty is that leader! Regarding EMILY’s List: The organization has always struggled to elect gubernatorial candidates as their main focus has always been congressional candidates. Keep in mind, Allyson ran in a unique four-way race. I’m confident that Katie will receive support accross Pennsylvania from unions, organizations, electeds, but most importantly she’ll receive support from hard working, middle class families who realize the serious challenges facing our nation require a non-divisive, serious leader who can lead.

  31. Only reason Katie McGinty is running because establishment wants somebody against Joe Sestak. Very sad! Katie McGinty most likely will lose and then what will be next for her?

  32. Only reason Katie McGinty is running because establishment wants somebody against Joe Sestak. Very sad! Katie McGinty most likely will lose and then what will be next for her!

  33. Lois-

    “Sestak has evolved from the totally arrogant Admiral…” LOL. That isn’t even close to true. If anything, he’s gotten worse. Talk to his former staffers.

    Lois and Jerry
    The “establishment” wants to support candidates they think will win (or have the best shot). Sestak isn’t that candidate (and neither is Bernie).

    We’ve got Bob Casey because he was the most progressive Senator that’s been electable in PA so far. Electability and fundraising are key criteria for party support.

  34. If you want to learn more about Emily’s List and its often un-progressive agenda, read this (They also endorsed Hillary Clinton even though she is arguably the least progressive Democratic candidate):

    Progressive Left’s Latest Target: EMILY’s List

    In case you don’t know who Lois Herr is (see her post below), she is a progressive Democrat who ran against Joe Pitts in PA-16. Pitts has one of the worst records in Congress when it comes to gender equality, abortion rights, women’s health issues, etc., etc., but PA-16 is a strongly Republican district. Emily’s List could help progressive women like Lois have a fighting chance to win in such districts, but they rarely get involved in races like this one where they are probably needed the most.

    As far as the Emily’s List McGinty endorsement posted by “FYI,” its claims that she is a strong environmentalist are simply nonsense. She has been employed by and has shilled for the fracking industry for many years, and most people I know would consider that as the record of someone who cares little about the environment.

  35. Pennsylvanians are beginning to rally around our unifying candidate and our champion for progressive ideals and the middle class. That candidate is Katie McGinty!

    United Steelworkers, EMILY’s List, State Rep. Brian Sims, Allegheny County Democratic Chair Nancy Patton Mills among others are determined to take back the US Senate from the Republican machine and they know PA is a must win senate seat and they know THE ONLY DEMOCRAT WHO CAN BEAT PAT TOOMEY AND THE REPUBLICAN MONEY MACHINE IS KATIE MCGINTY!

    Simply put, Joe Sestak is a flawed candidate who is unelectable and who doesn’t appeal to the voters we need in order to take back this seat.

    Learn more about Katie McGinty’s proven record fighting for progressive values for Pennsylvania:

    Katie McGinty grew up in northeast Philadelphia, the ninth of 10 children. She is the daughter of a police officer and a restaurant hostess and has said that watching her mother work nightshifts at a local restaurant inspired her commitment to raising the minimum wage for all workers. Katie is pro-choice, and supports Roe v. Wade. She understands that voting rights are under attack nationwide, and will fight back against Republican attempts to stifle and silence voters. With roots in the middle-class, Katie has been a consistent champion for hardworking families, for job creation, and for the environment her entire career. Her election will be a game-changer for the state of Pennsylvania, which no woman has ever represented in the Senate.

    A progressive leader, with a history of getting things done:

    Katie McGinty is a smart, pragmatic leader, who’s spent her more than 25 years in public service “finding positive ways to get things done” for everyday families. Katie McGinty was the first person in her family to complete four years of college, which she attended on a full scholarship to study chemistry. After graduating from law school at Columbia University, her interest in environmental issues brought her to Washington, where she worked as a congressional fellow in Al Gore’s senate office. When she was just 29 years old, Katie was appointed by President Clinton to serve as his special assistant for environmental and energy affairs, later chairing the White House Council on Environmental Quality, which no woman had ever led. In 2003, Katie was appointed to lead the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, a role in which she championed clean water initiatives and created jobs by growing the state’s clean energy economy. Serving until recently as Governor Tom Wolf’s chief of staff, she worked to expand the state’s Medicaid program and create a budget that invests in public education.

    A champion for Pennsylvanians, who’ll help win back the Senate for Democrats:

    The race for the Senate in Pennsylvania will be among the most closely-watched of the cycle. Katie will need our help to raise money early on, so she can build momentum and keep it going through the general election—and her campaign will be key to Democrats’ chances of winning back the Senate from the Republicans. Katie is known for her focus and her strong work ethic. Her 2014 campaign for governor was strong, exceeding fundraising expectations, and she’s prepared for an even bigger fight this time. The Republican incumbent, Pat Toomey, has already seen early success fundraising — and with one of the most extreme, anti-family agendas in the Senate, the same deep-pocketed, extremist donors who’ve lined up to support him in the past are guaranteed to pour donations into the race this cycle. Let’s show her opponent’s deep-pocketed, Tea Party supporters she has the full strength of the EMILY’s List community on her side — and the resources she needs to win back the Senate for Democrats and give Pennsylvania families a champion in the Senate.

  36. Emily’s list doesn’t have a particularly successful record in PA, does it? Looks like the establishment links Rendell and Emily’s List. What a scary alliance. I like McGinty but she is being used by Rendell and will not be helped within PA by the Emily’s List endorsement though folks across the country will contribute, not knowing our situation and eager to support a woman. I want more women candidates and I want Democratic women to win in PA. However, I agree with Policoff, the establishment wants to rule the territory in every nook and cranny of this commonwealth and beyond. Sestak has evolved from the totally arrogant Admiral to one who walks the walk and talks the talk of everyday folks. You won’t find a senate candidate more aware of the issues and what we need to do about them.

  37. Emily’s List is a part of the Democratic Establishment. They only endorse women who have the backing of the machine and are already getting money from the DSCC and DNCC. I have been told by at least three women, all progressives, and all strong on women’s health and gender equality, that if you are not financially backed by the machine, forget it. They won’t even return phone calls. One of the women who told me this actually got an endorsement from Emily’s List.
    As for Allison Schwartz, she has never been a progressive, and progressives who knew her record strongly opposed her. After the election she showed her true allegiance to the corporate sub-culture by becoming the President of AHIP, the lobbying arm of the health insurance industry, whose interests she represented during her entire career in Congress.
    In McGinty’s case Emily’s List lobbied her to enter the race, so they are just part of the Establishment effort to undermine Sestak.
    What we are really seeing here is a strong message from the Democratic Establishment that there are consequences for not being what they consider a “team player.” It is only partly about Sestak. Obviously McGinty is a “team player.” Her extensive ties to the natural gas industry, by the way, are full of conflicts-of-interest, and they will come back to haunt her. It is difficult to reconcile her record on the environment with her claims to be a strong progressive, by the way.

  38. 1) the endorsement will have an impact on fundraising

    2) Emily’s list is making bigger push this cycle with planned parenthood under attack and 3-4 supreme court seats to be replaced in next few years

    3) with Hillary on ticket, and no PA women in congress, PA is going to get a lot of attention

    4) Allyson ran a terrible campaign and wasted her early front runner status. But, Wolf’s greater money put him beyond her reach. Likewise, McGinty will outraise Sestak and blow past him.

  39. I wonder if endorsement has any impact on actual voting. Emily’s list endorsed Alison Schwartz for Pa governor. Alison did not get the nomination.

  40. What will be the final endorsement count for McGinty vs Sestak?

    There’s going to be a lot more for McGinty.

  • Who are you voting for in the PA Supreme Court race?

    • Dan McCaffery (61%)
    • Carolyn Carluccio (37%)
    • Still undecided (2%)

    Total Voters: 344

    Loading ... Loading ...
Continue to Browser


To install tap and choose
Add to Home Screen