2004 United States Senate election in Pennsylvania
The 2004 United States Senate election in Pennsylvania was held on November 2, 2004. Incumbent Republican Senator Arlen Specter won re-election to a fifth term. As of 2024, this is the last time a Republican statewide candidate won Montgomery and Delaware Counties and won more than 25% of the vote in Philadelphia. Specter later lost renomination in 2010 as a Democrat, having joined the party in April 2009.
 | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
 County results Specter: 40–50% 50–60% 60–70% 70–80% Hoeffel: 40–50% 70–80% | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
Democratic primary
Campaign
Democrats had difficulty recruiting top tier candidates against the popular Specter. Among the Democrats to decline to run for the nomination were Treasurer (and former Republican) Barbara Hafer, Public Utilities Commissioner John Hanger, real estate mogul Howard Hanna, State Representative (and also former Republican) John Lawless, and State Senator (and future Congresswoman) Allyson Schwartz.[1]
Congressman Hoeffel ended up running unopposed for the Democratic nomination. Software businessman Charlie Crystle was considered a strong possible candidate, but he dropped out before the election.[1][2]
Results
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | Joe Hoeffel | 595,816 | 100.00% | |
Republican primary
Campaign
Specter faced a primary challenge from Representative Pat Toomey. Despite the state Republican Party's strong history of embracing a moderate philosophy, the influence of conservatism among rank-and-file members had been steadily growing for decades; because of his liberal social views, Specter was often considered to be a "Republican in Name Only" by the right.[3] Although Specter had a huge fundraising advantage, Toomey was aided by $2 million of advertising from the Club for Growth, a conservative political action committee that focuses on fiscal issues and targets moderate Republican incumbents. Toomey criticized Specter as a spendthrift on economic policy and as out of touch with his own party on social issues. Although Toomey had difficulty with name recognition early in the campaign, he built huge momentum over the final weeks preceding the primary, and Specter appeared to have transitioned from having a comfortable lead to being behind his challenger.[4]
Specter received a huge boost from the vocal support of President George W. Bush; most of the state's Republican establishment also closed ranks behind Specter. This included Pennsylvania's other U.S. Senator, Rick Santorum, who was noted for his social conservative views. Many Republicans at the state and national level feared that if Toomey beat Specter, he wouldn't be able to defend the seat against his Democratic opponent.[5]
Polling
| Poll source | Date(s) administered | Sample size[6] | Margin of error | Arlen Specter | Pat Toomey | Undecided |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SurveyUSA | April 23–25, 2004 | 478 (LV) | ± 4.6% | 48% | 48% | 4% |
| Quinnipiac University | April 20–24, 2004 | 617 (LV) | ± 4% | 48% | 42% | 10% |
| the polling company, inc. (R) | April 22–23, 2004 | 500 (LV) | ± 4.5% | 46% | 39% | 15% |
| Franklin & Marshall College | April 13–20, 2004 | 401 (RV) | ± 4.8% | 50% | 26% | 24% |
| 126 (LV) | ± 8.7% | 46% | 40% | 14% | ||
| SurveyUSA | April 17–19, 2004 | 479 (LV) | ± 4.6% | 50% | 44% | 6% |
| Quinnipiac University | April 12–18, 2004 | 431 (LV) | ± 4.7% | 49% | 44% | 7% |
| SurveyUSA | April 3–5, 2004 | 490 (LV) | ± 4.5% | 46% | 40% | 14% |
| Quinnipiac University | Mar 30–Apr 5, 2004 | 615 (LV) | ± 4% | 52% | 37% | 11% |
| Franklin & Marshall College | March 25–29, 2004 | 258 (RV) | ± 6% | 50% | 28% | 22% |
| 193 (LV) | ± 7% | 46% | 33% | 21% | ||
| SurveyUSA | March 13–15, 2004 | 399 (LV) | ± 5% | 47% | 38% | 15% |
| the polling company, inc. (R) | March 9–10, 2004 | 500 (LV) | ± 4.5% | 47% | 37% | 16% |
| Franklin & Marshall College | February 19–22, 2004 | 176 (RV) | ± 7.3% | 55% | 17% | 28% |
| the polling company, inc. (R) | January 2004 | 500 (LV) | ± 4.5% | 51% | 28% | 21% |
| Muhlenberg College (p. 2) | Nov 23–Dec 8, 2003 | 193 (V) | ± 7% | 52% | 25% | 23% |
| Franklin & Marshall College | Oct 27–Nov 16, 2003 | 257 (RV) | ± 6% | 49% | 18% | 33% |
Results
- 50–60%
- 60–70%
- 50–60%
- 60–70%
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | Arlen Specter (incumbent) | 530,839 | 50.82% | |
| Republican | Pat Toomey | 513,693 | 49.18% | |
| Total votes | 1,044,532 | 100.00% | ||
General election
Candidates
- Major
- Joe Hoeffel (D), U.S. Representative
- Arlen Specter (R), incumbent U.S. Senator
- Minor
- Jim Clymer (C)
- Betsy Summers (L)
Campaign
For Democrats, hope of winning the election centered on Toomey's defeat of Specter. However, after the challenge from the right failed, enthusiasm from the party establishment waned and Hoeffel had difficulty matching the name recognition and fundraising power of his opponent [7] Despite contempt from conservatives, Specter enjoyed high levels of support from independent voters and, as in previous elections, a surprisingly large crossover from Democratic voters. Even in the areas in which Toomey performed best in the Republican primary (mainly the state's conservative, rural center), Specter performed well. Except for his large margin of victory in almost uniformly Democratic Philadelphia, Hoeffel was crushed at the polls; his only other wins came by close margins in three metro Pittsburgh counties; although President Bush proved to be unpopular in the state, voters were not willing to abandon Specter over party affiliation.[8] Incidentally, Toomey was elected to the seat in 2010, after Specter switched to the Democratic Party in 2009 and subsequently lost renomination to U.S. Congressman and former Navy Admiral Joe Sestak.[citation needed]
Predictions
| Source | Ranking | As of |
|---|---|---|
| Sabato's Crystal Ball[9] | Safe R | November 1, 2004 |
Polling
| Poll source | Date(s) administered | Sample size[6] | Margin of error | Arlen Specter (R) | Joel Hoeffel (D) | Jim Clymer (C) | Betsy Summers (L) | Undecided |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SurveyUSA | Oct 31–Nov 1, 2004 | 650 (LV) | ± 3.9% | 53% | 35% | 8% | 4% | |
| Strategic Vision (R) | October 29–31, 2004 | 801 (LV) | ± 3% | 55% | 33% | 4% | 8% | |
| Quinnipiac University | October 27–31, 2004 | 1,022 (LV) | ± 3.1% | 53% | 33% | 7% | 7% | |
| Zogby International | October 27–30, 2004 | 601 (LV) | ± 4.1% | 54% | 31% | 15% | ||
| Zogby International | October 26–29, 2004 | 602 (LV) | ± 4.1% | 57% | 28% | 15% | ||
| Zogby International | October 25–28, 2004 | 603 (LV) | ± 4.1% | 53% | 30% | 17% | ||
| Strategic Vision (R) | October 25–27, 2004 | 801 (LV) | ± 3% | 55% | 35% | 4% | 6% | |
| Zogby International | October 24–27, 2004 | 602 (LV) | ± 4.1% | 55% | 29% | 16% | ||
| Temple University | October 22–27, 2004 | 1,488 (RV) | ± 2.6% | 51% | 29% | 5% | 3% | 12% |
| Zogby International | October 23–26, 2004 | 602 (LV) | ± 4.1% | 54% | 33% | 13% | ||
| Quinnipiac University | October 22–26, 2004 | 1,340 (RV) | ± 2.7% | 52% | 29% | 6% | 13% | |
| 54% | 30% | 16% | ||||||
| 909 (LV) | ± 3.3% | 55% | 33% | 7% | 5% | |||
| 60% | 34% | 6% | ||||||
| SurveyUSA | October 23–25, 2004 | 797 (LV) | ± 3.5% | 51% | 38% | 6% | 5% | |
| Zogby International | October 22–25, 2004 | 602 (LV) | ± 4.1% | 53% | 35% | 12% | ||
| Zogby International | October 21–24, 2004 | 603 (LV) | ± 4.1% | 48% | 38% | 14% | ||
| Franklin & Marshall College | October 19–23, 2003 | 622 (RV) | ± 3.9% | 52% | 29% | 4% | 2% | 13% |
| 376 (LV) | ± 5.1% | 52% | 31% | 17% | ||||
| Mason-Dixon | October 19–21, 2004 | 800 (LV) | ± 3.5% | 50% | 32% | 7% | 11% | |
| Quinnipiac University | October 16–20, 2004 | 1,185 (RV) | ± 2.9% | 49% | 33% | 5% | 13% | |
| 52% | 34% | 14% | ||||||
| 841 (LV) | ± 3.4% | 51% | 36% | 6% | 7% | |||
| 55% | 37% | 8% | ||||||
| Strategic Vision (R) | October 17–19, 2004 | 801 (LV) | ± 3% | 54% | 35% | 4% | 7% | |
| SurveyUSA | October 15–17, 2004 | 608 (LV) | ± 4.1% | 48% | 41% | 6% | 5% | |
| Quinnipiac University | October 9–11, 2004 | 1,980 (RV) | ± 2.2% | 51% | 33% | 16% | ||
| 1,343 (LV) | ± 2.7% | 55% | 36% | 9% | ||||
| Strategic Vision (R) | October 9–11, 2004 | 801 (LV) | ± 3% | 52% | 33% | 3% | 12% | |
| SurveyUSA | October 3–5, 2004 | 767 (LV) | ± 3.6% | 54% | 35% | 11% | ||
| Franklin & Marshall College | Sep 30–Oct 4, 2003 | 594 (RV) | ± 4% | 46% | 32% | 6% | 16% | |
| Strategic Vision (R) | September 27–29, 2004 | 801 (LV) | ± 3% | 53% | 33% | 3% | 11% | |
| Mason-Dixon | September 27–28, 2004 | 625 (RV) | ± 4% | 53% | 31% | 16% | ||
| Quinnipiac University | September 22–26, 2004 | 1,125 (RV) | ± 2.9% | 52% | 33% | 15% | ||
| 726 (LV) | ± 3.6% | 56% | 37% | 7% | ||||
| Strategic Vision (R) | September 13–15, 2004 | 801 (LV) | ± 3% | 52% | 33% | 4% | 11% | |
| Franklin & Marshall College | September 8–15, 2003 | 491 (RV) | ± 4.4% | 51% | 25% | 5% | 19% | |
| Quinnipiac University | September 11–14, 2004 | 1,205 (RV) | ± 2.8% | 51% | 33% | 16% | ||
| 792 (LV) | ± 3.5% | 52% | 37% | 11% | ||||
| SurveyUSA | September 7–9, 2004 | 684 (LV) | ± 3.8% | 51% | 33% | 16% | ||
| Strategic Vision (R) | August 26–28, 2004 | 801 (LV) | ± 3% | 51% | 31% | 4% | 14% | |
| Pew Research | August 13–21, 2004 | 1,006 (RV) | ± 3% | 54% | 36% | 10% | ||
| 861 (LV) | ± 4% | 56% | 36% | 8% | ||||
| Strategic Vision (R) | August 16–18, 2004 | 801 (LV) | ± 3% | 49% | 32% | 3% | 16% | |
| Quinnipiac University | August 11–16, 2004 | 1,430 (RV) | ± 2.6% | 48% | 33% | 19% | ||
| Franklin & Marshall College | August 2–15, 2003 | 660 (RV) | ± 3.8% | 53% | 26% | 2% | 19% | |
| SurveyUSA | Jul 31–Aug 2, 2004 | 740 (LV) | ± 3.7% | 49% | 34% | 17% | ||
| Quinnipiac University | July 6–11, 2004 | 1,577 (RV) | ± 2.5% | 51% | 36% | 13% | ||
| Quinnipiac University | June 21–22, 2004 | 839 (RV) | ± 3.4% | 50% | 35% | 15% | ||
| Neighborhood Research (C) | June 7–16, 2004 | 631 (LV) | ± 3.9% | 52% | 23% | 2% | 23% | |
| SurveyUSA | June 7–9, 2004 | 679 (LV) | ± 3.8% | 58% | 33% | 9% | ||
| Quinnipiac University | May 24–25, 2004 | 701 (RV) | ± 3.7% | 49% | 37% | 14% | ||
| Quinnipiac University | March 9–15, 2004 | 1,022 (RV) | ± 3.1% | 45% | 29% | 26% | ||
| Quinnipiac University | February 10–16, 2004 | 1,356 (RV) | ± 2.7% | 50% | 31% | 19% | ||
| Quinnipiac University | December 11–14, 2003 | 1,092 (RV) | ± 3% | 50% | 32% | 18% | ||
| Franklin & Marshall College | Oct 27–Nov 16, 2003 | 593 (RV) | ± 4% | 47% | 25% | 28% | ||
| Quinnipiac University | October 9–13, 2003 | 1,116 (RV) | ± 2.9% | 50% | 33% | 17% | ||
| Quinnipiac University | Jul 30–Aug 4, 2003 | 1,037 (RV) | ± 3% | 53% | 29% | 18% | ||
| DSCC (D) | June 10–12, 2003 | 500 (LV) | ± 4.4% | 53% | 26% | 21% |
Results
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | Arlen Specter (incumbent) | 2,925,080 | 52.62% | |
| Democratic | Joe Hoeffel | 2,334,126 | 41.99% | |
| Constitution | Jim Clymer | 220,056 | 3.96% | |
| Libertarian | Betsy Summers | 79,263 | 1.43% | |
| Total votes | 5,769,590 | 100.00% | ||
| Republican hold | ||||
Counties that flipped from Republican to Democratic
- Alleghany (largest city: Pittsburgh)
- Beaver (largest city: Beaver)
- Fayette (largest borough: Uniontown)
Counties that flipped from Democratic to Republican
See also
Notes
References
External links
- Debates
- Pennsylvania Senate Republican Primary Election Debate on C-SPAN, April 3, 2004
- Pennsylvania Senate General Election Debate on C-SPAN, October 2, 2004
- Pennsylvania Senate General Election Debate on C-SPAN, October 9, 2004
- Official campaign websites (archived)
Democrats
Republicans