By Tom Ferrick

Now that Chris Matthews has decided that the best way he can serve his country is by making millions as a political talk show host, this question arises: What Democratic politicians are now thinking of running for the U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania in 2010.
The short answer is: nearly all of them.
With Matthews, the Big Dog, out of the running, the field is open to a legion of Mini-Me’s who, as you read this, are looking into the mirror and asking: Why not the best?
In the near term, look forward to a spate of stories about people being mentioned as candidates for the seat. (If you ever wondered who is mentioning these people it is usually the people who are being mentioned.)
The chatter about Matthews has obscured one important question when it comes to the race. What makes the incumbent, U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter, think he can win?
To me, the odds of Specter winning are minimal, especially if he gets an opponent with any name recognition. I don’t mean he’s in trouble in the general — Arlen does well in general elections — I mean in the Republican primary.
It’s not because Specter is going to be 80 in 2010. It’s not because of his recent bouts with cancer and other maladies.
It is because of a seismic shift in the Republican vote in Pennsylvania, a shift that works against a moderate with Specter’s profile from winning statewide.
It is important to recall what happened when Specter ran in 2004. He faced opposition in the GOP primary from conservative U.S. Rep. Pat Toomey and nearly lost. The incumbent won by 17,146 votes out of 1,044,532 cast.
He had the spent piles of money to do it, plus rely on an assist from President Bush and then-U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum who vouched for him among conservatives.
The Philadelphia area was and is the home base of Specter’s support. He has been an office holder and political figure here since the 1960’s, when he was Philly’s District Attorney.
In 2004, Specter got 57 percent of the vote in the city and the four suburban counties and defeated Toomey here by a margin of 41,719 votes.
You can do the math. Were it not for his Philly-area margin, he would have lost because he tanked in most other areas of the state.
Now, fast forward six years. The number of Republicans in the five-county area has declined significantly. There are 124,000 fewer today than there were in 2004. Most of them - pushed by the candidates such as Ed Rendell, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama - have defected to the Democratic party.
Pennsylvania has a closed primary system. Only Republicans can vote in the Republican primary, so this pool of defectors will not be able to support Specter in the spring of 2010. He has lost a sizeable bloc of supporters.

The fact that primary voters on the Republican side tend to be conservative voters adds another hurdle. (In 2004, only 3 out of 10 registered Republicans showed up to vote.)
Toomey, 47, has signaled that he is “interested” in running again - that’s political speak for “lusting.”
The combination of these factors might make an ordinary guy consider, maybe, retiring? Not Specter. To quote Churchill, he will never, never, never surrender. He will run again barring the intrusion of forces beyond his control, such as disability or death. And I am not even sure that would stop him.
He has already begun what is a ritual maneuver for Specter: tacking to the right as the election year approaches.
I don’t know why he bothers. Specter is a vanishing breed - a moderate, eastern Republican - and his profile is well known (and disliked) by true-believer conservatives.
One argument Specter does have in his favor is electability.
You would think, what with losing the White House and getting thwacked in the election, that Republicans would embrace a candidate who can attract Democratic votes. But, you would be wrong.
With its defeat last year, the Republicans have crawled back into their shell. The word has gone forth that redemption can only be had by returning to their conservative roots. The instinct will be to purge the party of blasphemers.
It is a delusion, but it is a useful delusion for Toomey - an affable, poised, pro-life conservative who thinks there is nothing wrong with America that can’t be solved by a 30 percent cut in government taxes and spending.
That thinking may be out of step with the times, but it will strong appeal to the Republican primary electorate, even more so after a year where the ruling Democrats spend about $1 trillion of your (and your children’s and grandchildren’s) money to get the economy out of the ditch.