Bloodless Coup

Problem is, Mathews is an instantly credible candidate, polling presently at 46-43 without even formally announcing. Specter is a formidable candidate, and I'm sure none of the others mentioned would poll within 3 points of him out of the gate. I'm not saying I wouldn't prefer to see someone other than Mathews or Specter in office -- it should be self-evident that I would -- but it would be nice to pick up a seat. And it's also worth acknowledging that we can't pretend to know, based on a pundit's on-air persona, how he might govern were he entrusted with that responsibility.

I guess it depends on what you mean by credible. I think he could well suffer from Al Franken-itis. He might well have positive traits that aren't apparent from his tv appearances - but it would be hard to adjust his media persona given that it's firmly set. And I don't know that that style would go over terribly well statewide - though of course some will like, and people already know him, as the polling indicates. And sure, he walks in needing a lot fewer ads and dollars, and that'd no doubt please the DSCC. But I think he might well have a lower cieling than some others too.

I mention Schwartz because she's great at raising mountains of money and Murphy has the kind of profile I think would go over well statewide. I might prefer McGinty or maybe even Stephen Zappala (not that he'd do it) - but obviously they'd need millions more for a race that Matthews does need.

So sure, his candidacy would come with major upsides - but with problems too. And it's key as I'll actually be a little surprised if Specter's the Republican nominee.