Originally posted at PA2010.com on May 27, 2010

Retired Navy Admiral and U.S. Congressman Joe Sestak shocked the political world on May 18 by upsetting 30 year incumbent U.S. Senator Arlen Specter in a come-from-behind victory. While many anticipated problems for Specter, who was running his first race as a registered Democrat in over four decades, few expected Sestak to administer a seven point drubbing at the polls.

Looking back at Sestak’s emergence in 2006 as a challenger to longtime Congressman Curt Weldon in Pennsylvania’s Seventh District, a pattern emerges that is visible today. First, Sestak enters a race as an underdog. Second, he is underestimated in his ability to overcome disadvantages in the name recognition and fundraising departments. Third, Sestak makes up for the funding gap by working tirelessly to make himself known. Fourth, Sestak wins and catches the political community sleeping as very few anticipated a dark horse riding to victory.

But that seems to be the Joe Sestak modus operandi. Play the role of the underdog. Amass a campaign arsenal including a strong staff and a good message. Work diligently to make up for the lack of front-runner status. Pounce when the moment is right. And most importantly, catch opponents and the political paparazzi off-guard.

While I disagree with Sestak on many issues, there are a few things that I respect him for and hope that all of those who opposed him in the primary and will oppose him in the fall campaign also value. These items are his unwavering devotion to his family, his military service, and his dogged approach to campaigning.

If you have heard him speak about his parents, his wife, and his daughter, you will know that Sestak is not in the Bill Clinton camp when it comes to family values. His key advisors are his siblings, a fact which says something of his character. His military service speaks for itself. He’s the kind of persistent candidate who if he knew that ten registered voters were meeting at the Burger King at the New Stanton Service Plaza on the Turnpike, he’d be there shaking hands and buying chocolate frosties.

The point isn’t that Joe Sestak walks on water. The point is that Pennsylvania’s Sestak versus Pat Toomey Senate race is going to be the biggest donnybrook in all the land, the top slobberknocker of them all. In Davy Crockett terms, it’ll be a real “sockdolager.” A contest between two deserving, competent, qualified candidates that voters in other states wish they could choose from.

Unfortunately, in the days since the primary’s finale, the major talking point has been the senseless he-said-she-said accusations surrounding an alleged deal in which a White House operative allegedly offered Sestak an appointment to a federal post if he exited the Senate race. Sestak claims an offer was made. The White House denies it. The Toomey camp and the RNC have pounced, declaring that the truth must be known because it somehow indicates that someone is either lying or guilty of playing politics.

In short, the real question worth asking is “who cares?” Voters are disgusted with this type of political wrangling that comes at the expense of real debate.

Was Joe Sestak offered a federal position to drop out of the Senate race? Perhaps he was, but maybe he wasn’t. In the grand scheme of things, this is nothing more than politics playing out in a major race. The voters are smart enough to understand that this purported job offer has no bearing on the race at hand between Sestak and Toomey. As George Will pointed out on ABC’s This Week program on May 23, such an offer, whether accepted or not, is just politics and not worthy of turning into a distraction that could potentially obstruct voters from making a serious, important choice between two well-matched candidates.

The Republican Party is firmly united behind Toomey, a former Congressman from the Lehigh Valley, a small business owner, and former Club for Growth leader. The Democratic Party seems to be unified for Sestak, especially after Specter took him days after the election to meet with the Senate Democratic Caucus. This has the potential to be the closest, most competitive Senate race in Pennsylvania in decades.

Here’s to hoping for a Senate race grounded in substance, the exchange of competing ideas, and a factual discussion of the issues rather than a rhetorical hack fest focused on alleged political deals that have no bearing on the race itself. Pennsylvania voters deserve the opportunity to decide between the candidates on their merits while leaving the rumors of potential deals and job offers for the spin doctors to sort out in the bubble that keeps them segregated from reality.