Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 14, 2014, 09:01:49 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  2012 Elections
| | |-+  2012 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls (Moderators: Tender Branson, Sheriff Buford TX Justice)
| | | |-+  PA: Muhlenberg College: Obama beats Romney & Gingrich
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: PA: Muhlenberg College: Obama beats Romney & Gingrich  (Read 1226 times)
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 34021
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -6.09

View Profile
« on: December 09, 2011, 10:22:16 am »

New Poll: Pennsylvania President by Muhlenberg College on 2011-12-08

Summary: D: 52%, R: 35%, U: 13%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details

Logged
TXMichael
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 797
United States


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2011, 01:25:46 pm »
Ignore

The difference between Romney and Gingrich is toss-up and rout.  A 17 point lead on Gingrich is massive in PA, Gingrich is clearly poison in some states
Logged

Proposed 2012 GOP election slogans

1.  Defeat the economy!  Defeat Obama!
2.  More government control over Women's bodies!
3.  Vote conservative, vote for failure!
4.  Vote weakness, vote Republican!
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10097
United States


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2011, 08:00:21 pm »
Ignore

Gingrich in the 1990s reminds most Northerners why several states that went for Ford in 1976 never went GOP after 1988.
Logged



Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.49
A.G. Snowstalker
Snowstalker
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 17201
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -8.45, S: -4.26

View Profile
« Reply #3 on: December 09, 2011, 09:34:49 pm »
Ignore

Maybe the GOP war on labor has finally woken up the WWC. Obama can stand to make massive gains in SW PA.
Logged

memphis
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14732


Political Matrix
E: -3.10, S: -3.83


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2011, 09:50:30 pm »
Ignore

Maybe the GOP war on labor has finally woken up the WWC. Obama can stand to make massive gains in SW PA.
Very  much doubt it. Obama is going to gain among Romney supporters with a Gingrich nomination. He'll continue to extend the Dem swing in SE suburbs.
Logged

I cannot do anything good under my own power. 
I will get up and move around every now and then so I reduce the chances to get hit with another Grade 8 headache in the morning.
Skill and Chance
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1947
View Profile
« Reply #5 on: December 09, 2011, 10:13:44 pm »
Ignore

Maybe the GOP war on labor has finally woken up the WWC. Obama can stand to make massive gains in SW PA.

Not going to happen next year.  However, 2014 could be a rural bonanza for the Dems if it's Republicans all the way down in 2013 and they privatize medicare and social security, eliminate farm subsidies, etc.  It's going to take actual new laws passed on a party line vote, though, not just the threat of their passage.
Logged
A.G. Snowstalker
Snowstalker
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 17201
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -8.45, S: -4.26

View Profile
« Reply #6 on: December 10, 2011, 01:04:55 am »
Ignore

If Obama is winning PA by that much, I assume he's doing at least as well as Gore did in SW PA. Even in a close race, he can at least pick up Fayette; based on historical precedent, he'll improve in at least one state (doesn't mean he'll win it) and will certainly pick up some counties he failed to win in 2008.
Logged

CaDan
Full Member
***
Posts: 181
View Profile
« Reply #7 on: December 10, 2011, 11:45:08 am »
Ignore

Quote
If Obama is winning PA by that much, I assume he's doing at least as well as Gore did in SW PA. Even in a close race, he can at least pick up Fayette; based on historical precedent, he'll improve in at least one state (doesn't mean he'll win it) and will certainly pick up some counties he failed to win in 2008.

Its a joke college poll with a horrible track record, but the lefties here want to pretend that it has some validity.

Fayette voted for Toomey over Sestak. The GOP trend that started in Westmoreland has spread to the entire SW. It's not just an anti-obama like the mental midgets out on DA INTERWEBZ! want to pretend. Its actually an anti-democrat thing that has been growing in the SW.

Obama isn't going to win Fayette. The GOP nominee will improve on McCain's numbers there.

I love it how "trends" only work one way on this board, and they are ALWAYS INEVITABLEZ!!! if they favor Democrats. They never work the other way.

I have news for you, SW Pennsylvania is a place where the trend is in favor of the GOP and has been for some time.
Logged

oakvale
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9027
Ireland, Republic of


Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -4.00

View Profile
« Reply #8 on: December 10, 2011, 12:05:44 pm »
Ignore

Maybe the GOP war on labor has finally woken up the WWC. Obama can stand to make massive gains in SW PA.


Eh, I doubt it. It's not the white working class really votes in their own self interest anyway. Maybe in a few years, but not 2012... IMO.

Very  much doubt it. Obama is going to gain among Romney supporters with a Gingrich nomination. He'll continue to extend the Dem swing in SE suburbs.

Yeah, this is more likely, I think. Against Gingrich Obama probably wins most of the legendary 'swing voters' that think Romney seems unthreatening or whatever.

Fayette voted for Toomey over Sestak. The GOP trend that started in Westmoreland has spread to the entire SW. It's not just an anti-obama like the mental midgets out on DA INTERWEBZ! want to pretend. Its actually an anti-democrat thing that has been growing in the SW.

...

I love it how "trends" only work one way on this board, and they are ALWAYS INEVITABLEZ!!! if they favor Democrats. They never work the other way.


Oh fuck off you odious little prick.
Logged

A.G. Snowstalker
Snowstalker
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 17201
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -8.45, S: -4.26

View Profile
« Reply #9 on: December 10, 2011, 12:13:29 pm »
Ignore

Quote
If Obama is winning PA by that much, I assume he's doing at least as well as Gore did in SW PA. Even in a close race, he can at least pick up Fayette; based on historical precedent, he'll improve in at least one state (doesn't mean he'll win it) and will certainly pick up some counties he failed to win in 2008.

Its a joke college poll with a horrible track record, but the lefties here want to pretend that it has some validity.

Fayette voted for Toomey over Sestak. The GOP trend that started in Westmoreland has spread to the entire SW. It's not just an anti-obama like the mental midgets out on DA INTERWEBZ! want to pretend. Its actually an anti-democrat thing that has been growing in the SW.

Obama isn't going to win Fayette. The GOP nominee will improve on McCain's numbers there.

I love it how "trends" only work one way on this board, and they are ALWAYS INEVITABLEZ!!! if they favor Democrats. They never work the other way.

I have news for you, SW Pennsylvania is a place where the trend is in favor of the GOP and has been for some time.


Oh, not all trends favor Democrats. Missouri is no longer a pure tossup, and I'm skeptical of those who claim Texas is becoming competitive. The Dakotas, in addition, have always been Republican but are becoming more consistently partisan at a congressional level. Southwestern Pennsylvania has certainly trended against us--no way Obama will win Westmoreland except against Bachmann.

In addition, Democrats still do well in the region at a local level--look at the statehouse. Two of the three non-Pittsburgh districts still send Democrats to Congress, and Sestak, despite losing Fayette and Greene (along with the state), did better than Obama (who won by 11 points), and in a uniform swing to a Sestak win he would have won both.
Logged

memphis
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14732


Political Matrix
E: -3.10, S: -3.83


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: December 10, 2011, 01:36:21 pm »
Ignore

Quote
If Obama is winning PA by that much, I assume he's doing at least as well as Gore did in SW PA. Even in a close race, he can at least pick up Fayette; based on historical precedent, he'll improve in at least one state (doesn't mean he'll win it) and will certainly pick up some counties he failed to win in 2008.

Its a joke college poll with a horrible track record, but the lefties here want to pretend that it has some validity.

Fayette voted for Toomey over Sestak. The GOP trend that started in Westmoreland has spread to the entire SW. It's not just an anti-obama like the mental midgets out on DA INTERWEBZ! want to pretend. Its actually an anti-democrat thing that has been growing in the SW.

Obama isn't going to win Fayette. The GOP nominee will improve on McCain's numbers there.

I love it how "trends" only work one way on this board, and they are ALWAYS INEVITABLEZ!!! if they favor Democrats. They never work the other way.

I have news for you, SW Pennsylvania is a place where the trend is in favor of the GOP and has been for some time.


Oh, not all trends favor Democrats. Missouri is no longer a pure tossup, and I'm skeptical of those who claim Texas is becoming competitive. The Dakotas, in addition, have always been Republican but are becoming more consistently partisan at a congressional level. Southwestern Pennsylvania has certainly trended against us--no way Obama will win Westmoreland except against Bachmann.

In addition, Democrats still do well in the region at a local level--look at the statehouse. Two of the three non-Pittsburgh districts still send Democrats to Congress, and Sestak, despite losing Fayette and Greene (along with the state), did better than Obama (who won by 11 points), and in a uniform swing to a Sestak win he would have won both.
The places that are trending Dem are doing so because they are becoming less white. This is not the case in SW PA.
Logged

I cannot do anything good under my own power. 
I will get up and move around every now and then so I reduce the chances to get hit with another Grade 8 headache in the morning.
A.G. Snowstalker
Snowstalker
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 17201
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -8.45, S: -4.26

View Profile
« Reply #11 on: December 10, 2011, 01:48:16 pm »
Ignore

Quote
If Obama is winning PA by that much, I assume he's doing at least as well as Gore did in SW PA. Even in a close race, he can at least pick up Fayette; based on historical precedent, he'll improve in at least one state (doesn't mean he'll win it) and will certainly pick up some counties he failed to win in 2008.

Its a joke college poll with a horrible track record, but the lefties here want to pretend that it has some validity.

Fayette voted for Toomey over Sestak. The GOP trend that started in Westmoreland has spread to the entire SW. It's not just an anti-obama like the mental midgets out on DA INTERWEBZ! want to pretend. Its actually an anti-democrat thing that has been growing in the SW.

Obama isn't going to win Fayette. The GOP nominee will improve on McCain's numbers there.

I love it how "trends" only work one way on this board, and they are ALWAYS INEVITABLEZ!!! if they favor Democrats. They never work the other way.

I have news for you, SW Pennsylvania is a place where the trend is in favor of the GOP and has been for some time.


Oh, not all trends favor Democrats. Missouri is no longer a pure tossup, and I'm skeptical of those who claim Texas is becoming competitive. The Dakotas, in addition, have always been Republican but are becoming more consistently partisan at a congressional level. Southwestern Pennsylvania has certainly trended against us--no way Obama will win Westmoreland except against Bachmann.

In addition, Democrats still do well in the region at a local level--look at the statehouse. Two of the three non-Pittsburgh districts still send Democrats to Congress, and Sestak, despite losing Fayette and Greene (along with the state), did better than Obama (who won by 11 points), and in a uniform swing to a Sestak win he would have won both.
The places that are trending Dem are doing so because they are becoming less white. This is not the case in SW PA.

Ah, forgot about the massive Hispanic influx in northern New England.
Logged

pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10097
United States


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: December 10, 2011, 02:05:07 pm »
Ignore

Quote
If Obama is winning PA by that much, I assume he's doing at least as well as Gore did in SW PA. Even in a close race, he can at least pick up Fayette; based on historical precedent, he'll improve in at least one state (doesn't mean he'll win it) and will certainly pick up some counties he failed to win in 2008.

Its a joke college poll with a horrible track record, but the lefties here want to pretend that it has some validity.

Fayette voted for Toomey over Sestak. The GOP trend that started in Westmoreland has spread to the entire SW. It's not just an anti-obama like the mental midgets out on DA INTERWEBZ! want to pretend. Its actually an anti-democrat thing that has been growing in the SW.

Obama isn't going to win Fayette. The GOP nominee will improve on McCain's numbers there.

I love it how "trends" only work one way on this board, and they are ALWAYS INEVITABLEZ!!! if they favor Democrats. They never work the other way.

I have news for you, SW Pennsylvania is a place where the trend is in favor of the GOP and has been for some time.



2010 was a freak year. Republicans won a bunch of Congressional seats that have a Cook PVI of D+5 or so (which means that in a 50-50 Presidential election the district tends to go by a 5% margin for the President and on the average Congressional Representatives) , and those are likely to swing back. Add to that, the Republicans have gotten a bunch of turkeys elected who will be consummately vulnerable in 2012. If I am running for Congress as a Democrat against one of those fellows I am going to go for the jugular -- that is, the nexus between support from out-of-district interests and the new Rep's voting record. "How many Wall Street hedge fund managers and Texas oil executives do you know? I'm here to represent you, and not a bunch of millionaires who only see you as people to be fleeced!"  

Unless statewide GOP pols are able to cull the vote significantly, the electorate of 2012 will look more like that of 2008, a Presidential year.

...The 2010 elections represented a political equivalent of Bill James' "Plexiglass Principle" (James introduced it into his study of baseball, which like politics has many random characteristics) in that some weak Democrats who might have held some seats that they barely won in 2006 and 2008 or who perhaps represented districts with a Cook PVI of R+4 got defeated.  Add to that, the Republican Party (and its front groups) found ways in which to hit where such was unexpected.

The problem is that the Republican Party has done nothing to offer anything new -- just the same old platitudes that served as public policy when Dubya was President. It is the same old anti-intellectualism, the same old plutocracy, the same old militaristic policy, the same deceit,  and the same old corporatist stuff. If it was unpopular in 2006 and 2008 and is seen as much the same it will again be unpopular in 2012.

Your Republican Governor is unpopular. The generic ballot for Congress suggests the likely reversal of the Republican majority of the Pennsylvania delegation to the House of Representatives. (The same applies to three other swing states -- Colorado, Florida, and Ohio so far, and that bodes ill for the GOP nationwide). For the next five years Pennsylvanians are going to be wondering how they could elect Pat Toomey, a stooge of Big Business before they dump him in 2016 much like they (ahem!) dumped Rick Santorum.

Consider the election of 2010 the Pyrrhic victory that it is -- your Republican Party came back with the same old failure because it didn't change. It didn't win new voters because it found no new constituencies. It changed none of its old policies except to assert them more secretively before the election and more stridently after the election.

Conservatism will be back in America -- but when it is back it will be asserting the legitimate achievements of President Barack Obama and not the failures of the likes of Gingrich and Dubya.      
Logged



Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.49
CaDan
Full Member
***
Posts: 181
View Profile
« Reply #13 on: December 10, 2011, 03:01:55 pm »
Ignore

Let's see... 2000 was a freak year, 2002 was a freak year, 2004 was a freak year. 2006 was normal, 2008 was normal. 2010 was a freak year. 2011 was a freak year.

See a pattern there?

U mad bro?

Oh, btw: Obama LOST SW Pennsylvania in the "normal year". So how does your rambling nonsense address that point?
Logged

Scott
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18806
United States
View Profile
« Reply #14 on: December 10, 2011, 03:20:13 pm »
Ignore

Quote
This user is currently ignored.
Logged
memphis
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14732


Political Matrix
E: -3.10, S: -3.83


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: December 10, 2011, 05:08:44 pm »
Ignore

Quote
If Obama is winning PA by that much, I assume he's doing at least as well as Gore did in SW PA. Even in a close race, he can at least pick up Fayette; based on historical precedent, he'll improve in at least one state (doesn't mean he'll win it) and will certainly pick up some counties he failed to win in 2008.

Its a joke college poll with a horrible track record, but the lefties here want to pretend that it has some validity.

Fayette voted for Toomey over Sestak. The GOP trend that started in Westmoreland has spread to the entire SW. It's not just an anti-obama like the mental midgets out on DA INTERWEBZ! want to pretend. Its actually an anti-democrat thing that has been growing in the SW.

Obama isn't going to win Fayette. The GOP nominee will improve on McCain's numbers there.

I love it how "trends" only work one way on this board, and they are ALWAYS INEVITABLEZ!!! if they favor Democrats. They never work the other way.

I have news for you, SW Pennsylvania is a place where the trend is in favor of the GOP and has been for some time.


Oh, not all trends favor Democrats. Missouri is no longer a pure tossup, and I'm skeptical of those who claim Texas is becoming competitive. The Dakotas, in addition, have always been Republican but are becoming more consistently partisan at a congressional level. Southwestern Pennsylvania has certainly trended against us--no way Obama will win Westmoreland except against Bachmann.

In addition, Democrats still do well in the region at a local level--look at the statehouse. Two of the three non-Pittsburgh districts still send Democrats to Congress, and Sestak, despite losing Fayette and Greene (along with the state), did better than Obama (who won by 11 points), and in a uniform swing to a Sestak win he would have won both.
The places that are trending Dem are doing so because they are becoming less white. This is not the case in SW PA.

Ah, forgot about the massive Hispanic influx in northern New England.
Northern New England is obviously a special case and marches to the beat of its own drum.
Logged

I cannot do anything good under my own power. 
I will get up and move around every now and then so I reduce the chances to get hit with another Grade 8 headache in the morning.
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10097
United States


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: December 10, 2011, 07:35:01 pm »
Ignore

Let's see... 2000 was a freak year, 2002 was a freak year, 2004 was a freak year. 2006 was normal, 2008 was normal. 2010 was a freak year. 2011 was a freak year.

See a pattern there?

U mad bro?

Oh, btw: Obama LOST SW Pennsylvania in the "normal year". So how does your rambling nonsense address that point?

President Obama won Allegheny County solidly, which is enough (in view of the smaller electorates of surrounding counties) to allow him to win southwestern Pennsylvania.  He may have lost all but one county in southwestern Pennsylvania, but he won the county that mattered most.

All Presidential elections beginning in 1992 are variations upon the election of 1992. You see a tendency for states in an arc from Louisiana to West Virginia steadily slipping away from the Democrats. Democrats winning Presidential elections used to win those states. Beginning in 2000 they lost those states and even President Obama couldn't make them close.



Logged



Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.49
TXMichael
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 797
United States


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: December 10, 2011, 08:35:25 pm »
Ignore


Oh, not all trends favor Democrats. Missouri is no longer a pure tossup, and I'm skeptical of those who claim Texas is becoming competitive. The Dakotas, in addition, have always been Republican but are becoming more consistently partisan at a congressional level. Southwestern Pennsylvania has certainly trended against us--no way Obama will win Westmoreland except against Bachmann.

In addition, Democrats still do well in the region at a local level--look at the statehouse. Two of the three non-Pittsburgh districts still send Democrats to Congress, and Sestak, despite losing Fayette and Greene (along with the state), did better than Obama (who won by 11 points), and in a uniform swing to a Sestak win he would have won both.

Texas is interesting because there are multiple trends occurring at the same time.  The major counties are shifting towards the Democrats (Harris, Dallas), but east Texas a former Dem strong hold has swung dramatically towards the GOP.  West Texas has probably reached a ceiling for GOP support in the last few cycles with almost nothing to indicate small shift back is likely.  Also Travis County has been shifting to the left.This is also all occurring against the back drop of two very important issues; increased Hispanic voting power (good for Dems) and increasing suburban population in DFW and Houston (good for GOP).  So it is a very complicated picture to look at. 

1996 vs. 2008 Presidential elections show a stark shift in the state.  Clinton won more than two dozen west Texas Counties and did decently in East Texas.  However he only won Travis with 52.6% and lost Dallas and Harris. 

With all this going on it does make it difficult to track the state which is why I think the 2012 results will be very telling, especially if there is any major shift in either direction relative to national totals
Logged

Proposed 2012 GOP election slogans

1.  Defeat the economy!  Defeat Obama!
2.  More government control over Women's bodies!
3.  Vote conservative, vote for failure!
4.  Vote weakness, vote Republican!
memphis
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14732


Political Matrix
E: -3.10, S: -3.83


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: December 10, 2011, 09:07:47 pm »
Ignore

I agree that Texas has too many moving parts to get a good sense of what's gonna happen. In addition to the prior points, you also have a GOP home state effect in several previous cycles. Hispanics are obviously the key demographic. The GOP has no room for improvement left among whites. They're already winning 75% or so of them. And on the other foot, the blacks aren't going anywhere also. Obama has overseen a rough time for Hispanics, but the GOP is not appealing to them either. Still, I think Obama will improve over 2008, but still lose solidly in the Lone Star State. If TX were ever to be in play the GOP may as well retire.
Logged

I cannot do anything good under my own power. 
I will get up and move around every now and then so I reduce the chances to get hit with another Grade 8 headache in the morning.
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10097
United States


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: December 10, 2011, 09:33:00 pm »
Ignore


Oh, not all trends favor Democrats. Missouri is no longer a pure tossup, and I'm skeptical of those who claim Texas is becoming competitive. The Dakotas, in addition, have always been Republican but are becoming more consistently partisan at a congressional level. Southwestern Pennsylvania has certainly trended against us--no way Obama will win Westmoreland except against Bachmann.

In addition, Democrats still do well in the region at a local level--look at the statehouse. Two of the three non-Pittsburgh districts still send Democrats to Congress, and Sestak, despite losing Fayette and Greene (along with the state), did better than Obama (who won by 11 points), and in a uniform swing to a Sestak win he would have won both.

Texas is interesting because there are multiple trends occurring at the same time.  The major counties are shifting towards the Democrats (Harris, Dallas), but east Texas a former Dem strong hold has swung dramatically towards the GOP.  West Texas has probably reached a ceiling for GOP support in the last few cycles with almost nothing to indicate small shift back is likely.  Also Travis County has been shifting to the left.This is also all occurring against the back drop of two very important issues; increased Hispanic voting power (good for Dems) and increasing suburban population in DFW and Houston (good for GOP).  So it is a very complicated picture to look at. 

1996 vs. 2008 Presidential elections show a stark shift in the state.  Clinton won more than two dozen west Texas Counties and did decently in East Texas.  However he only won Travis with 52.6% and lost Dallas and Harris. 

With all this going on it does make it difficult to track the state which is why I think the 2012 results will be very telling, especially if there is any major shift in either direction relative to national totals

President Obama did far better than any recent Democratic nominee in winning suburban votes.  Without the suburban votes he would not have won Florida, Indiana, North Carolina, Ohio, or  Virginia. He did badly, to be sure, in the suburbs of Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, New Orleans, and Phoenix.

Suburbia used to be a Republican lock; as an example, Jimmy Carter lost all of the Illinois suburbs of Chicago, all of the Pennsylvania suburbs of Philadelphia, all suburban counties of San Francisco except Alameda County (whose center of population was still ultra-urban Oakland), and the suburban counties of St. Louis. Tellingly, Carter lost almost the whole of the Dallas and Houston areas.

Suburbia used to be the Republicans' political dream because it was then understood to have the conveniences of urban life with the certainty of rural life... and white-collar workers who trusted their bosses enough to vote with them. Barack Obama showed clearly that such was no longer so.  Maybe "white collar" has gone from being associated with such professionals as accountants to such throwaway workers as checkout clerks. It could also be that Barack Obama learned as Republicans have yet to learn how to win large parts of the suburban vote without pandering to right-wing pressure groups. Suburbia has much the same problems as urban America -- environmental degradation, high-cost infrastructure, traffic jams, and high-cost public services.

So what is the portent of the 2012 election -- Collin County, Texas (62-36 for McCain) or Fairfax County, Virginia (60-39 Obama)? Both are comparatively upscale suburban counties. If Suburbia resorts to Carter-era ways and votes like Collin County (suburban Dallas), then President Obama is cooked politically.  But if Suburbia votes like Fairfax County, then the GOP is in deep trouble.      
Logged



Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.49
A.G. Snowstalker
Snowstalker
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 17201
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -8.45, S: -4.26

View Profile
« Reply #20 on: December 10, 2011, 10:00:41 pm »
Ignore

Let's see... 2000 was a freak year, 2002 was a freak year, 2004 was a freak year. 2006 was normal, 2008 was normal. 2010 was a freak year. 2011 was a freak year.

See a pattern there?

U mad bro?

Oh, btw: Obama LOST SW Pennsylvania in the "normal year". So how does your rambling nonsense address that point?

And Kerry won it. Though the area has been trending Republican since the 80's, it swung hard to McCain as a kneejerk reaction to...I won't go there.
Logged

TXMichael
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 797
United States


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: December 10, 2011, 11:02:06 pm »
Ignore

A good question about Pennsylvania is whether or not SW Pennsylvania is trending to the GOP fast enough to offset the Democratic trend of SE Pennsylvania.  One great advantage for the Democrats is that the counties that are trending Democratic are population heavy.  Montgomery County alone has more people than Westmoreland, Beaver and Fayette Counties combined; toss in Delaware, Bucks and Chester Counties and then it does overwhelm the SW counties, excluding Allegheny, with regards to electoral power
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 11:07:25 pm by TXMichael »Logged

Proposed 2012 GOP election slogans

1.  Defeat the economy!  Defeat Obama!
2.  More government control over Women's bodies!
3.  Vote conservative, vote for failure!
4.  Vote weakness, vote Republican!
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines