which party has the bigger problem?

[danwxman]

The only reason Kerry one here in 2004 was because of his military record, his connection to Heinz and vote fraud in Philadelphia, which a recently released study said is now the vote fraud capital of the US.

Yeah, right.

Which one of these are you denying.  They are all pretty much the truth.  Military service in a lot of places in PA (like many similar places in the South) is golden, even if the Republicans did call it out, it probably still helped him, on the whole.  The Heinz people still carry a lot of weight in the Pittsburgh area.  I would bet that that was probably at least 40,000 votes, at least right there, combine the hometown feel of the campaign in Western, PA, esspecially the Southwest, with the military record, and it gave him about the same boost the Dems would have got in Arkansas and Tennessee if they had run Clark.  Finally... well, I have nothing to say other than that is what the study said.  I provided a link.

Unlike what some Dems seem to think, that 19 point lead that the exit polls gave Kerry here did not hold.  You guys seem to forget that, esspecially when you called PA two hours after the polls closed, even though, percentage wise, it was closer than Ohio.  Not to mention that this state used to give huge wins to Dem candidates and only flirted with landslide Republicans.  So, if the Republicans can't win here, the Dems have no shot in Ohio and Florida.

I thought Kerry won Pennsylvania because of the increasing Democratic strength in the suburbs.  It seems to me that to win Pennsylvania, a candidate just needs to win Philadelphia and Pittsburgh and some of the smaller cities like Scranton, Reading, and Allentown.  I'm not from Pa., but I do know that these towns are pretty blue-collar.  Shouldn't that help Democrats in Pennsylvania, or are the voters in these towns voting based on social issues?

Most of those smaller cities are still in the 55% Democratic column, but that is far less than they used to get in those places.

In order for a candidate to take Pennsylvania today, he must win by a large margin in one fo the three sections (Philly, "T", Pittsburgh) and at least finish above the majority in one of the other two.  Kerry barely accomplished this in 2004.  I think he carried the Pittsburgh area by about 53% which far, far, FAR less than the 70% majorities that Democrats could once reasonably expect to comand in the region.  Even in the Reagan landslide of 1984, the Democrats managed to poll 58% in this area.

This treand is offset, however, by Republican loses in the Philadelphia metro, but not quite.  As a whole, I would say that the state had pulled about 5% in favor of the Republicans since the days of Reagan.  True, Philadelphia is growing faster than other parts of the state, but Republican end roads into the Philly exurbs like Allentown and Reading are also aparent.  As well as the fact that the Lancaster-York area has expirienced tremedous growth in the past 30 years, as has State College and these areas don't see to be getting any less Republican.

Lancaster and York are two completely different cities. York county is very blue-collar...but it's blue-collar Republican. The city of York is a Democratic stronghold though. Lancaster has a totally different vibe. Much less blue-collar, more suburban looking...with a hip, liberal feel to downtown (though it's actually fairly Republican). The majority of Lancaster's growth is coming from Philadelphia and to a lesser extent New York, which would lead to a Democratic swing (I believe Lancaser county actually did see a slight Kerry trend). York's growth has been very rapid, and is coming mostly from Baltimore's suburbs, which at this time...seems to favor Republicans. Pennsylvania is just a state that in every little corner seems to be getting pulled in different directions. The Harrisburg metro is just a miniature Pennsylvania and is getting pulled in all directions with people moving in from all over the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic.

I've said for sometime that I expect Pennsylvania to continue to stay about the same....a Democratic leaning swing state. We would easily go Republican in a Republican landslide...but in close elections, we swing Democratic.

Reading and Allentown are not exurbs. They are cities that are now (especially Reading) becoming more and more affiliated with the Philadelphia metro. I believe Berks, Lehigh and Northampton are all at the peak of their Republican swing, and will slowly become more Democratic as they become associated with the urbane and liberal Philadelphia suburbs. Even the true Philadelphia "exurbs", which are really just subdivisions sprouting up across Lancaster and Chester counties, are swinging both counties more Democratic.

I also believe that Democratic losses probably won't get much worse across the Southwest, the areas economy by nature would give Democrats a slight advantage (though of course not as much as 50 years ago). So I'd say Democrats will still win the Pittsburgh area by about 50-55% (depending on the candidate).

Pennsylvania really isn't that hard to predict, it's just that it's so close it can swing either way. The state is seeing very little overall population growth or trend either way.

[danwxman]

Lehigh county is trending Democrat, at least on the Presidential level.

[danwxman]

1992 - Clinton - 41%
            Bush - 37%
            Perot - 22%

Dem win by four points.
           

1996 - Clinton - 46%
            Dole - 43%
            Perot - 10%
            Other - 1%

Dem win by three points.


2000 -  Gore - 49%
            Bush - 48%
            Nader - 3%

Dem win by one point.


2004 - Kerry - 51%
           Bush - 48%
           Other - 1%

Dem win by three points.


The county is not trending Democrat on the Presidential level.

What do you call 2000-2004? With the surge in population in the Lehigh Valley recently, I'd say this marks a good trend (for Democrats that is).

[danwxman]

1992 - Clinton - 41%
            Bush - 37%
            Perot - 22%

Dem win by four points.
           

1996 - Clinton - 46%
            Dole - 43%
            Perot - 10%
            Other - 1%

Dem win by three points.


2000 -  Gore - 49%
            Bush - 48%
            Nader - 3%

Dem win by one point.


2004 - Kerry - 51%
           Bush - 48%
           Other - 1%

Dem win by three points.


The county is not trending Democrat on the Presidential level.

What do you call 2000-2004? With the surge in population in the Lehigh Valley recently, I'd say this marks a good trend (for Democrats that is).

Surge in population?  I thought after the closure of Bethlehem Steel and other industries that this place would wind up economically stagnant.  Guess the Valley is becoming an exurb of the Philadelphia metro area.  Are McMansions popping up?

The Lehigh Valley has a pretty healthy economy right now. Much like my part of PA (south central) it is a prime location between many major cities, which tends to spur a lot of growth in the transportation industry. There is also spillover from New Jersey and the Philadelphia suburbs...people moving out from Philadelphia might not want to move into sparsely populated upper Montgomery or Bucks county and instead choose the nearest metro which is the Lehigh Valley.

[danwxman]

Are McMansions popping up?

Social conservativism is still pretty strong there, too.

I'm sensing that the Repubs up there are more along the lines of Charlie Dent, not Santoomey.  The economic populism is dying there I'll admit, but I'm also sensing a libertarian trend in that region in general.  That's why I think the Dems are holding on there at the presidential level.  Remember, I have said this before and I'll say it again- Democratic districts are by and large more Democratic than Republican districts are Republican.  The PA GOP can spead itself out better while the Dems are more dense.  Look at PA 132 (Mann) and PA 131 (Beyer, used to be Browne).  Mann's district is incredibly Demcoratic, say 75% while Beyer's is even, lean GOP.  This trend also holds true in Philadelphia.  You based NE Philly on being pro-life on 6 out of 8 districts having pro-life Reps.  Well, you can spaghetti string Crestmont Farms, Morrell Park, Parkwood, the more conservative areas of Somerton down to Fox Chase in one district thus effectively forcing O'Brien, Kenney into a primary battle and neutralizing Fox Chase at the same time.  You could also plop Perzel's base and spaghetti string a corridor down Harbison/Aramingo Ave to Taylor's base creating a Perzel-Taylor primary.  You do that I guarantee you will have 6 out of 8 pro-choice delegates from NE Philly in Harrisburg!  Boy would that be fun if we were to ever take back the PA House.

Wrong. If you look at the GOP primary, Dent got 52% and the two other conservative challengers made up the other 48%. Dent could have had a more serious challenge if O'Neill didn't run. The district is more Santoomey. PA 15 is not libertarian. Stop making it seem better for you. Toomey totally destroyed Specter there in the GOP primary so there's no arguing that the area GOP is more moderate and if you say the Democrats there are socially liberal, you've lost it.

Good luck taking back the State House anytime soon.

Quite honestly, I don't want the Democrats or the Republicans controlling the state assembly anymore. DeWeese is mentally retarded, and the Republican leadership is full of stuck-up fatcats who think they deserve more money while simultaneously trying to hurt the poor with an expanded sales tax.