Posted: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:30 am
Robert E. Field
LANCASTER ON LINE LETTER: Although I have considerable respect of the political acumen of Terry Madonna, there is one salient point missing from his recent Op-Ed (“Desperately seeking someone to challenge Sestak in primary,” July 20).
He cites a number of reasons Democratic Party officials doubt Joe Sestak would be a good Senate candidate: fundraising, campaign and personal style, etc.
Madonna probably accurately summarizes the view of the Democratic Party big wigs. But what Madonna does not address is who would make the better senator. Isn’t that what the electorate is seeking?
Sestak would be the only representative in all of Congress to have served as a three-star admiral. Moreover, he was a popular two-term congressman and would likely have remained in the House had he not chosen to run for the Senate in 2010, very narrowly losing to Pat Toomey in a Republican landslide year.
What Madonna doesn’t mention is Sestak’s real sin in the eyes of Democrat Party potentates: Against their wish, he ran against and defeated Sen. Arlen Specter in the 2010 Democrat primary.
As for Madonna’s description of Sestak’s chances, very much the same was said of Specter in 1980 by the Republican Party leadership before he defeated their preferred candidate in the primary. Then they did all they could to elect him — as the Democrats would do for Sestak.
I remember well. I was Specter’s finance chair.
Robert E. Field
Lancaster Township
