pennsylvania was close!!!

[J. J.]

It was an over sampling of Philadelphia, is what it was.

No so much an "oversampling" per se, but there was massive turnout in Phily, almost counteracted by massive turnout elsewhere on the GOP side.

Kerry won Phily HUGE in 2004, he had a margin of about 400,000 votes versus about 348,000 in 2000 for Gore.

When turnout in Phily became clear, there was a natural assumption to call the state.

Kerry won Allegheny by about 95,000 (94,000 in 2000 for Gore), Montgomerty by about 45,000 (33,000 in 2000), and Deleware by about 41,000 (28,000 in 2000)

The Bush folks actually did a pretty good job GOTV too, but he was down 600K just in the 4 counties.

I remember J. J. talking about how blacks were so unethusiastic and there would be such low turnout. lol.

Yes, and I reported that there was a high turnout in African American areas, which was surpassed by a higher Caucasian turnout.  The precentage of turnout in Phila, as part of the overall PA turnout was slightly lower (about 0.1%) from 2000 in 2004.

[J. J.]

It's funny that while much of the country trended towards Bush, Southeast PA continues to trend Democratic. The next county in Southeast PA to go Dem: Chester. Compared to the national or even state average, they are moving left and quick.

Well, it's not a new trend.  In 1986, Bill Scranton carried SE PA against Bob Casey; I'd have to check on Bush in 1988, but in general the large Dem turnout in Phila was neutralize in most election from about 1960 until 1992.

In 1992, Clinton won the region.  In 1994, Ridge, while winning statewide, lost the region to Singel, even though both candidates were from the western part of the state.  Excepting Ridge's fairly big win in 1998, this has been the pattern in all Presidential and gubernatorial elections.

During this time, the percentage of the PA vote from Phila has dropped, including this election.

[J. J.]

In the state of Pennsylvania the GOP moved down by 0.8% compare to 2000.
In 2000 Bush was there by 1.54% below his national number.
In 2004 this gap went up to 2.34% which is by 0.8% greater than 1.54%.
Again, the absolute number went up by 1.8%, but each such number should be compared to the 2.6% Bush’s national grow.

Shira, none of what you've said here is relevent to the areas of the state where there is overall party strength. 

In 1984, Mondale ran about 2.5% better in PA using your standard.  That indicated nothing about 1988. 

[J. J.]

Pennsylvania was close in 88, if Dukakis had done a little bit better he would've taken it.

You could basically make this statement about lany losing candidate, possibly excepting Bush in 1992.  PA is, and has been, a swing state.

[J. J.]

In the state of Pennsylvania the GOP moved down by 0.8% compare to 2000.
In 2000 Bush was there by 1.54% below his national number.
In 2004 this gap went up to 2.34% which is by 0.8% greater than 1.54%.
Again, the absolute number went up by 1.8%, but each such number should be compared to the 2.6% Bush’s national grow.

Shira, none of what you've said here is relevent to the areas of the state where there is overall party strength. 

In 1984, Mondale ran about 2.5% better in PA using your standard.  That indicated nothing about 1988. 

In 1984 Mondale in Pennsylvania was by 5.44% better than his national number.
Dukakis in 1988 was better in Pennsylvania by 2.74% compare to his national number.
In 2004 Kerry in PA was 2.12% above his national number and Bush was 2.34% below his national number.

Shira, what shows, using you theory is that PA is becomming a Republican state.