Pennsylvania: A Should-Win For Clinton

Politico: Demographics Favorable For N.Y. Senator's Success In Upcoming Primary

(The Politico)  This story was written by Charles Mahtesian .

---

Pennsylvania, where the Democratic campaign heads on April 22 for a dramatic and possibly decisive showdown, is another must-win state for Hillary Rodham Clinton.

But it is also a should-win state.

Like neighboring Ohio, where Clinton won 54 percent to Barack Obama’s 44 percent, Pennsylvania’s population is older and whiter than the rest of the nation. Its residents make less money than the national average, and are less well-educated. The issues that rank high on their list of priorities - like health care and the economy - are the ones on which Clinton tends to draw the most support.

And just as in Ohio, much of the state’s political establishment is aligned with Clinton, led by a popular Democratic governor who’s pulling out all the stops on her behalf.

“The voters in this state are more typical of the kinds of voters she wins in the exit polls,” said Terry Madonna, the director of the Franklin & Marshall College Poll. “In Pennsylvania, the issue configuration and the demographics are nearly perfect for her.”

Clinton’s advantages aren’t just rooted in demographics. Her late father, Hugh Rodham, a graduate of Penn State University, was born and buried in Scranton, an old coal town in northeastern Pennsylvania. As a child, she vacationed at the family cabin in Lake Winola.

Her husband, Bill Clinton, also spent considerable time in Pennsylvania, twice carrying the state despite his rocky relationship with popular former Democratic Gov. Robert P. Casey.

“The Clintons have been coming here for 16 years whether as candidates or as president,” said Larry Ceisler, a Democratic political analyst. “Pennsylvanians are very familiar with the Clintons and the Clintons are very familiar with Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania has given them lots of votes and money.”

The most important connection of all, however, may be to Governor Ed Rendell, an earthy, old-school pol whose prodigious fundraising and retail politicking skills obscure an interest in policy that mirrors Hillary Clinton’s.

Rendell, a former Philadelphia mayor and Democratic National Committee chairman, brings more to the Clinton campaign than just a standard endorsement. His fundraising operation is unmatched among Democratic governors and his popularity is rooted in Philadelphia and its populous suburbs, the regional lynchpin to any statewide victory.

“The Rendell factor is hugely important. There’s arguably no stronger Democratic leader in America,” said T.J. Rooney, the state Democratic party chairman and a Clinton supporter. “He has tremendous influence. He’s a Democratic governor re-elected with 60 percent. He’s a politically potent force and when it comes to fundraising, few can rival him.”

Yet it is in Philadelphia, the city that elected Rendell to two terms as mayor, and its suburbs, which gave him landslide margins in his 2006 re-election campaign, where observers expect Obama will draw the bulk of his support.

Though Clinton has the support of Mayor Michael Nutter, an African-American who was elected in 2007, Philadelphia’s heavy concentration of African-Americans, liberals and college students lead most observers to view it as Obama Country.

Madonna says about 15 percent of the statewide Democratic primary vote will be cast by black voters, with the majority of it coming from Philadelphia, by far the state’s largest city. The Hispanic vote is considerably smaller, closer to three percent, and distinctly different than in California and Texas since Pennsylvania’s Hispanics tend to be of Puerto Rican heritage.

The prosperous white suburbs outside the state’s largest city also offer fertile ground for Obama. Ceisler, who recently attended an Obama fundraising event at a home located in an affluent Main Line suburb, says he was stunned by the turnout.

---

Campaign Calendar
Check out the upcoming primary and caucus dates.

---

“They raised $180,000 in a house, with no candidate there,” he said. “I’ve never seen anything like it.”

“He’s gaining traction here,” said state Rep. Josh Shapiro of suburban Montgomery County, an Obama supporter. “The Democratic establishment is with Senator Clinton but elections are won, particularly in southeast Pennsylvania, not by machine-style politics but by connecting directly with voters, which Senator Obama does very well.”

Shapiro notes that the long period of time between the March 4 primaries and Pennsylvania’s April 22 contest - the longest extended stretch of time without any major primaries this year - affords Obama plenty of time to gain ground on Clinton.

“Senator Obama has six weeks to run a campaign here, as opposed to Ohio where he had only two or three weeks,” said Shapiro. “The results in Ohio will have little bearing, if any, on Pennsylvania.”

Attitudes toward cultural issues represent one big difference between the Philadelphia metropolitan area and the rest of the state. Support for gun control and abortion rights is considerably weaker outside of southeastern Pennsylvania, which explains why, unlike most other Democratic-leaning Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states, Pennsylvania remains a place where a pro-gun and pro-life Democrat can still win the party nomination for statewide office, as evidenced by the 2006 U.S. Senate victory by Bob Casey, the son of the former governor.

Many of those more culturally conservative voters can be found on the other end of the state, in the Pittsburgh area and in southwestern Pennsylvania.

In that part of the state, Obama begins at a slight disadvantage. The African-American population is considerably smaller in Pittsburgh than in Philadelphia, and western Pennsylvania is heavily populated by white ethnic, Catholic and blue collar voters with whom Clinton has proved popular.

“If the election were held tomorrow in western Pennsylvania, the numbers would be similar to Ohio,” said Jim Burn, Pittsburgh’s Allegheny County Democratic party chairman. “But the Obama campaign has 6 weeks to chip away here. And there’s a lot of movement on the Obama side. The Obama folks have an outstanding field game out here now so those numbers are fluid and will in all likelihood change.”

Burn noted that on February 10, county Democrats held a non-binding straw poll among the 1,400 party committeemen and women. Clinton won by a 2-1 margin.

In western Pennsylvania, said Burn, an Allegheny County Councilmember, “the economy and health care are going to be huge because there’s a large demographic of senior citizens and families out here who are struggling.”

[samthetvcat]

PS Like on some intuitive level, I think people fear that if Barack''s willing to roll over and concede a point to the She-beast where he enjoys a competitive advantage, then how is he going to fare in talks with the devious and slippery Ahmadinejad?

I think that''s how the blue-collar male vote is probably being played out (?)

[samthetvcat]

pt 1

---"Bringing up the Clintons'''' shady financials and having team Hillary shoot themselves in the foot with the Ken Starr reference might just be tough enough (?)"---
Posted by SamTheTVCat

omg okay I''m quoting myself and disagreeing with myself, but now I''m convinced Barack absolutely has to show more aggression.

Take this example of what happened to day - Hillary made the claim that another one of Barack''s advisors said something behind the scenes which was different to what he''s said in public, and Barack countered with his stance against the Iraq war.

This is NOT the right response imo for several reasons - first, Hillary was attacking his capacity for truthfulness and transparency, and he responded with a judgment argument which makes him look like he''s conceding a point; second, Hillary''s actually MORE devious and a BIGGER liar than him which makes it look like he''s not just unwilling to lock horns but unable to lock horns - this is why he lost Ohio and Texas... people think he''s being wimpy, not rising above the fray.

[samthetvcat]

pt 2

Hillary''s gone negative on a lot of levels which many people find distasteful - she''s played the black/''muslim'' card against Barack while he''s refused to play the black card in his favor, Hillary''s played the gender card in her for while Barack''s refused to play the gender card against her, Hillary engages in character assassination claiming he''s not fit to lead but Barack''s always been respectful to her . . .
BUT people do NOT think it''s staying above the fray when somebody''s basically bullying another person and they don''t fight back. The perfect place to show he''s willing to lock horns would be on areas of relevance like character for truthfulness - if Hillary points to specific instances to make the claim that he''s not honest, I think he needs to be willing to point to specific instances to make the claim that she''s not.

Apparently Hillary''s team also told the Canadians to take the NAFTA claims with a ''grain of salt'' - it''s not even clear Obama''s team even did that much. And Hillary''s complaining what she perceives to be contradictions in his Iraq policy, but she with all her 40 generals DOESN''T EVEN HAVE A WITHDRAWAL POLICY in place. If she wants to complain, let''s see her policy first!

[samthetvcat]

You know why Hillary''s in no better position than Barack on the issue of electability I think is because all the tactics she used to raise doubt against Barack in the final days before Ohio and Texas are ones the male blue-collar voters are likely to suspect she would be vulnerable to have used against her in a general election against McCain.

Like Hillary''s claiming (and probably believing) that the wins were actually votes FOR her, rather than merely votes to extend the race to give Barack time to develop defense mechanisms. Because aren''t blue-collar men likely to be aware of the fact that even though Barack is too classy to fear-monger against Hillary the way she''s fear-mongered against him, the GOP aren''t going to hesitate?

What did Hillary use to raise doubt against Barack - the red phone and the black/''muslim'' card. Blue collar guys I would guess also factored in that Hillary''s just as vulnerable to having the red phone and the female card used against her by the GOP to play into guys'' fears of being dominated by women and paradoxically also left vulnerable without a man in charge.

Like I think Hillary avoided a loss, but she''s not winning.

[smitafix8]

Hilarious discussion between Hillary and obama. Must watch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7150u9sfCo

[future_watch]

The idea that Hillary sat around hosting tea parties and picking out curtains and china just doesn''t fly. The woman has a Yale Law degree and proven track record of advocacy and initiatives in education, childrens'' issues, foreign affairs, speaking for those whose voices have been ignored and is respected around the world by many. If you don''t like or trust her then don''t vote for her, but her contributions are many and far reaching and no one can take them away from her. Public service isn''t just what she does, it''s who she is, and I greatly admire and respect her accomplishments.

[future_watch]

We all have the right to cast our votes based on our opinion of who will be able to best lead the country. Frankly, no one is 100% prepared to take on the job of President of the U.S. when they take the oath of office. When we elect an individual, it is based on their intellect, experience, and when it comes down to it, who we believe is trustworthy and will use good judgment. Even if you don''t want politics of old, there is something to be said for "knowing your way around the block." Presidents can not act on their own and must know how to operate within our system of government--be that as it may. Hillary found that out when she tried to put together universal health care in the 90s. She didn''t build the kind of coalition needed to be successful. But, she learned from that. She undertook many other initiatives while her husband was President and gained important experience during his term in office and as a U.S. Senator for the past 7-8 years.
(cont)

[armydog2]

FutureWatch
You can vote for whoever you want, that is your right as an American Citizen. I am just sick of bush, clinton, bush. What really qualifies her to be commander in chief? 8 years as the first lady doesn''t quite cut it for me. I am college educated too and I work for the federal government. Time for someone who is not jaded and someone who has not been in washington for years with all their special interest groups to repay. New ideas and a new way is what is needed in washington. Time to set term limits for the senate and house. career politicians are the ones ruining our Country!

[olcottr]

No matter how this Democratic primary shakes out, the Dems are going to disenfranchise voters. Serves them right, I would say, for politically manipulating women and African-Americans all these years.
Of course, the same thing happened to social conservatives in the Republican party the last mid-term election, which is why you didn''t see many vote in the Republican primary this time around.
It''s a healthy thing to have voting blocs evened out among the two parties. Let''s see if African-Americans and women will aid in this endeavor.

[barbjc1]

I am a middle-aged middle class woman with a college degree and I will vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination. If she loses to a man, I will write in my dog''s name on the ballot.