Skip to comments.House Dems at historic low in PA
Posted on 07/26/2013 11:32:00 PM PDT by neverdem
Democratic politicians are becoming a rare breed in Pennsylvania, a state that voted twice for Obama. According to PoliticsPa, the last voting cycle was the (Democratic) partys worst performance in congressional races in a presidential cycle since before the Great Depression.
Aside from rural rednecks who cling to guns or religion, what accounts for the reddening of PA? Redistricting may be partly to blame, and if so, some very savvy Republican must have been in charge of drawing up this map.
PoliticsPA reports: Major prognosticators list 10 of the GOPs 13 Pennsylvania U.S. House seats as safe with three seats occasionally popping up on the likely Republican or lean Republican lists As such, barring an unforeseen tsunami in a mid-term election with the partys president in the White House, Democrats will continue to languish with a paltry number of U.S. House seats that just like in neighboring Ohio is historically unprecedented.
Pennsylvanians seems confused, however, or maybe they just like to mix it up. In 2012, despite giving their electoral votes to Obama, Keystone State voters elected the lowest number (five) and lowest rate (27 percent) of U.S. Representatives by a major party whilst simultaneously casting its electoral votes for that partys presidential nominee.
(This is made all the more surprising when one considers the trouble PA has had in trying to implement voting ID laws.)
Democrats are doing their best to cut their losses before Pennsylvania ends up looking like Oklahoma. They are in the process of mounting a momentous 2014 campaign to topple Republican Governor Tom Corbett, the so-called most endangered governor in the country. His approval ratings are down and falling, and few Pennsylvanians (24 percent) are keen on seeing him re-elected.
While Democrats remain optimistic about their chances to win Pennsylvanias 2014 gubernatorial race, that will not alleviate their deficit in the nations lower legislative chamber, at least to the extent redistricting has cornered the party into several ‘unwinnable’ districts across the state.
Pennsylvania should be red. It makes sense. You have union workers in Pittsburgh, and minorities and cosmopolitan liberals in Philly who tend to dominate the elections. Whats left, though, is affectionately known as Pennsyltucky, a wilderness of backwoods hunting, fishing, farming, camping, gun-toting, truck-driving, blue-collar, good-old boys and girls, and a healthy dose of Amish who, if they vote, are anything but progressive. (I am from there. I can say these things.)
Red’s Communist. Enough of the Orwellian newspeak.
Their vote in concentrated in their hellhole areas. They have as many seats as they should have.
It bugs me too. It escapes me how Eagle Publishing's Human Events decided to call it Redstate.com.
Exactly right. And if it wasn’t for the Philly dead voters and obama worshippers who voted straight ‘D’, Tom Smith would have won instead of the invisible, incompetent Casey. The obama voters could have cared less about who won senator, they just wanted to make sure they got their boy in for pResident. They walked into the voting booth, filled in the ‘D’ and walked out. Philly City won the state for obama.
PA still voted in a Liberal Pansy A$$ed firearm hating woman as Attorney General.Also don’t forget that Toomey turned into a flaming RINO!
Reason for destroying the economy, more food stamps welfare social security and disability made easy for your vote.
Another GOP mirage! Have no fear the RATS will come out of the woodwork to vote early and often, with the help of the DOJ who will not go after fraud voting.
Rural PA (which is most of it) is mainly conservative. Every day I hear someone complain about Obama, at the store or the gas station or wherever. And yet, populism runs deep and people also express resentment against big business and the rich. Worst of all, although I live rather far from any city — even the nearest mall is pretty far off — it is clear that in our area, there’s a tidal wave of refugees from the urban areas, from Philly, NY and NJ, mostly African-Americans and not a few muslims. The former are mainly looking for peace and quiet, a way out of the crime-ridden cities; the muslims — “we come in peace,” supposedly. These groups are not conservative and won’t vote R.
It was Gleason who strong-armed wavering GOP state senators to make sure it never made it past committee hearings. His excuse: we can win all 20. Yeah, we can, in a landslide election year like 1988 where they won't make a difference in the outcome. But in close election years, I'd sure as hell prefer 13 or 15 of them to zero.
The problem here in Pa. is that the liberal wing of the GOP controls the state leadership and effectively blocks conservative initiatives and candidates.
Fraud and corruption in the cities will continue to carry the Presidential elections. Until PA resodents gather the courage and wherewithal to destroy the powerbase of fraud and corruption, it will prevail
Some of the most conservative Liberals I know are from PA. It really makes me scratch my head. One guy in particular, is probably one of the most socially conservative guys I know...very upstanding, church going...a great guy. But he belongs to a Union and that is the end of his story politically. The mind reels....
A few trends helping in PA.
1. Republicans control the house, senate and Governor. They could do anything in the next 2 year. Maybe they will. Maybe even right to work.
2. Philly. Philadelphia has massive voter fraud. Voter ID may stick this time.
3. Philly. Philadelphia (and suburbia) public unions are insane, powerful and support democrats 99.999%. However, layoff after layoff and been reducing their power.
4. Philly. Nearly the old “big dog” philly democrat bosses are in jail or dead. Philly was also redistricted. Philly has much less power in Harrisburg nowadays. They are also bankrupt without getting much help from other state taxpayers.
5. PA (compared nearly all the socialist states it borders) is a low tax, gun friendly and freedom loving place. It attacts many like minded people. Shall issue CCW. Class III - no issues. 3% flat tax no matter how much income. No tax on IRAs, pensions or 401k withdrawals.
6. There is hope.
Even when PA liberal retirees from Philadelphia and Pittswurgh move to FL, the state stays liberal. But we hear of conservatives in the interior of the state, as shown by the House delegations. Isn’t this the same with Portland dominating OR?
I hope Sam Rohrer runs again. He would have made a far better choice than Tom Smith (Tom is also a real gentleman, by the way). There are powers that be in the PA Republican party that do a fine job suppressing Tea Party and conservative candidates..and that has to be rooted out. We still have the repressive Liquor Control Board..and there is plenty of Republicans in power who stonewall the efforts to get rid of it.
I think it's the same with all big cities as a general rule because the rats are bunched up in them. It has a number of consequences politically, e.g. the composition of the House of Representatives is increasingly determined by the vote in primary elections, a trend that first started in cities, and financially such as Detroit.
Yeah, friggin wusses.
In Pa’s case if a Republican wins it it’s likely they still have over 270 without it so this makes sense for us.
PA and MI are perfect states to do it in. Big states that lean rat in Presidential elections with most of the rats packed in a few congressional districts.
Nebraska similarly wussed out on abolishing it there were the only likely split is the rats winning the 2nd district like in 2008.
BTW if every state did it that way Romney would have won 274-264.
Hey Teresa : blow me !
When PA first considered a ME/NE-style method of allocating EVs in late 2011 or early 2012, I opposed it, because I thought that we may need all of PA’s EVs to get to 270; in fact, had Romney won the 24 states he did win plus FL, OH and PA, he would have gotten to 270 had PA had winner-takes-all, but fallen short had Obama won EVs from the 5 heavily RAT CDs in PA (although Romney came closer in VA than in PA, it easily could have resulted in the GOP nominee carrying PA but not VA).
For a switch by PA to make sense, it needs to be made in coordination with the other battleground states, which would result in the GOP nominee having a clear path to 270 without winner-takes-all in those states. The GOP needs for PA, OH, MI, WI, VA and FL all to switch to a system that allocates EVs by CD. And to make it really effective, instead of giving the two extra EVs to the statewide winner (as ME and NE do), they should give one extra EV to the statewide winner and one extra EV to the candidate who won the most CDs. A VA state senator proposed having both extra EVs be allocated to the winner of the most CDs, but that is less justifiable on oolicy grounds than if at least one EV is given to the statewide winner (which would help protect the allocation method from being struck down by the courts on one-man, one-vote grounds). BTW, if there’s a tie for first place in the number of CDs won in a state, that extra CD should be given to the tied candidate with the most statewide votes (normally, this would fesult in the statewide winner getting both extra EVs unless his opponent wins more CDs, but, in a three-person race, it would be possible for the statewide winner not being in the top two in CDs won).
Had the EV allocation method I listed above been in place in WI, MI, OH, PA, VA and FL (each of which had in early 2012, and still have today, both houses of the legislature and the governorship in GOP hands), Romney would have received 275 EVs, with only one EV-giving CD involving a Romney victory margin below 1%, so Romney would have defeated Obama irrespective of recounts.
The GOP state legislatures in those 6 states should change EV allocation methods post haste so that they are in ace for 2016 irrespective of what happens in the 2014 elections; well, in the case of VA, if it would hurt Cucinnelli in this November’s gubernatorial election to have the change made so soon prior to the election, they can wait, but they’d need to do it during the lame-duck session if either Cucinnelli or Lt. Gov. nominee Jackson lose (since the VA Senate is tied, with the Lt. Gov. serving as tie-breaker).
With all six states on board, the GOP would have a near lock on the presidency—it pretty much would need to win NC and those suburban CDs in the six battleground states. While having NC switch to the proposed EV allocation method would make winning the state unnecessary, it would be cutting way too close, and for now we’d need to keep NC as winner takes all and make sure we win it.
If the GOP wins back the legislature and governorship of MN next year, it should adopt the allocation method as well. And if lightning strikes and the GOP wins both houses of the NJ legislature this November—wow! Having NJ give the GOP between 4-6 EVs would really give us some wiggle room, and perhaps NC could change allocation methods as an insurance policy for the state going Democrat in the near future.
Of course, this is all a pile dream, since there is no way tbat six GOP state legislatures and governors will act in concert. Way too logical.
The immediate effect of such an adoption, even on a random individual basis would be more effort by the Democrats to play to the mushy middle and less effort on voter fraud in selected big cities to win the entire state.
Meaning we would get more personally ambitious candidates like Bill Clinton and less hard core ideologues like BO.