Will Republican Party make a play for PA in 2016? (Philadelphia: residency, market)

[PacoMartin]

Originally Posted by jazzy jeff

A Republican Latino would of course have to be one that supports Comprehensive Immigration Reform (assuming it does not pass before then) in order to pick up more Hispanic vote.

So you think that a Republican Latino would at least make Pennsylvania a battleground state? One in which campaigns are waged.

It seemed to me that Mitt Romney considered several states battleground states that eventually lost to the Democrates by a higher percentage.

Electors State % Democrat in 2012
3 District of Columbia 90.91%
4 Hawaii 70.55%
3 Vermont 66.57%
29 New York 63.35%
4 Rhode Island 62.70%
10 Maryland 61.97%
11 Massachusetts 60.65%
55 California 60.24%
3 Delaware 58.61%
14 New Jersey 58.38%
7 Connecticut 58.06%
20 Illinois 57.60%
4 Maine 56.27%
12 Washington 56.16%
7 Oregon 54.24%
16 Michigan 54.21%
5 New Mexico 52.99%
10 Wisconsin 52.83%
10 Minnesota 52.65%
6 Nevada 52.36%
6 Iowa 51.99%
4 New Hampshire 51.98%
20 Pennsylvania 51.97%
9 Colorado 51.49%
13 Virginia 51.16%
18 Ohio 50.67%
29 Florida 50.01%

[jazzy jeff]

Originally Posted by PacoMartin

So you think that a Republican Latino would at least make Pennsylvania a battleground state? One in which campaigns are waged.

It seemed to me that Mitt Romney considered several states battleground states that eventually lost to the Democrates by a higher percentage.

Electors State % Democrat in 2012
3 District of Columbia 90.91%
4 Hawaii 70.55%
3 Vermont 66.57%
29 New York 63.35%
4 Rhode Island 62.70%
10 Maryland 61.97%
11 Massachusetts 60.65%
55 California 60.24%
3 Delaware 58.61%
14 New Jersey 58.38%
7 Connecticut 58.06%
20 Illinois 57.60%
4 Maine 56.27%
12 Washington 56.16%
7 Oregon 54.24%
16 Michigan 54.21%
5 New Mexico 52.99%
10 Wisconsin 52.83%
10 Minnesota 52.65%
6 Nevada 52.36%
6 Iowa 51.99%
4 New Hampshire 51.98%
20 Pennsylvania 51.97%
9 Colorado 51.49%
13 Virginia 51.16%
18 Ohio 50.67%
29 Florida 50.01%

What I think is Pa, is no longer a purple state. It is a blue state. A moderate Republican who is not anti-union, that did not talk about abortion could put Pa into play. But that being said any talk of making in roads with Hispanics will not happen with a "self deportation attitude" such as Romney had.

[PacoMartin]

Originally Posted by jazzy jeff

What I think is Pa, is no longer a purple state. It is a blue state.

A candidate like Senator Ted Cruz is obviously of interest since he might carry Florida, the key battleground state in any Presidential election.

In PA the demographic shift is less obvious. From 2000 to 2010 the change in PA is documented as:

+325,572 Net gain in Latinos
+153,077 Net gain in African Americans
-57,324 Net loss in all other demographic groups


Most Latinos in PA are born in the continental USA of Puerto Rican ancestry. They are not Cubans. It is not clear if a candidate like Ted Cruz would have any significant impact.

But President Obama beat Mitt Romney by 309,840 votes in PA in 2012. That was roughly half of the margin in 2008.

It may be just enough of a shift that PA will join FL and OH as the key battleground state in 2016 instead of an ignored state.

[jazzy jeff]

Originally Posted by PacoMartin

A candidate like Senator Ted Cruz is obviously of interest since he might carry Florida, the key battleground state in any Presidential election.

In PA the demographic shift is less obvious. From 2000 to 2010 the change in PA is documented as:

+325,572 Net gain in Latinos
+153,077 Net gain in African Americans
-57,324 Net loss in all other demographic groups


Most Latinos in PA are born in the continental USA of Puerto Rican ancestry. They are not Cubans. It is not clear if a candidate like Ted Cruz would have any significant impact.

But President Obama beat Mitt Romney by 309,840 votes in PA in 2012. That was roughly half of the margin in 2008.

It may be just enough of a shift that PA will join FL and OH as the key battleground state in 2016 instead of an ignored state.

Ted Cruz is pretty right wing, to right wing for Pa. He will never be POTUS. A guy that could win Pa for example would be a guy like Jon Huntsman or maybe Chris Christie. I will also keep hammering home the immigration issue and Hispanics. Over 60 percent of the Hispanics in this country have friends or family that are undocumented and want to see them given a chance at earning legal status. Same goes for Asians. Ted Cruz wants none of that. Immigration is a huge personal issue with those two groups.

[I_Like_Spam]

Originally Posted by jazzy jeff

[/color]

A Republican Latino would of course have to be one that supports Comprehensive Immigration Reform (assuming it does not pass before then) in order to pick up more Hispanic vote.

However the key for Repubs in Pa, are the suburbs of Phila, especially Montgomery County which is home to a lot of social liberals.

Of course, support for Comprehensive Immigration Reform would be very unpopular in other sectors of the electorate- the same could be said if the Republicans were to change their policies on guns, abortion, taxes, unions, gay marriage, etc.

Gaining votes from Republicans in Montgomery by flipflopping on an issue might cost votes in other counties, maybe more votes. Further, this kind of flexibility looks like pandering- I really doubt that for voters who think that amnesty and in-state rates for foreign students are their major issue, that many will switch and vote "R". I think there would be a huge amount of doubt as to the sincerity of the policy change.

Considering the fact that the Republican Party did limit the Democrat to 52%, convincing 2%+ of the voters of the correctness of their current views seems an easier row to hoe than a wholesale switching of policies.

[jazzy jeff]

Originally Posted by I_Like_Spam

Of course, support for Comprehensive Immigration Reform would be very unpopular in other sectors of the electorate- the same could be said if the Republicans were to change their policies on guns, abortion, taxes, unions, gay marriage, etc.

Gaining votes from Republicans in Montgomery by flipflopping on an issue might cost votes in other counties, maybe more votes. Further, this kind of flexibility looks like pandering- I really doubt that for voters who think that amnesty and in-state rates for foreign students are their major issue, that many will switch and vote "R". I think there would be a huge amount of doubt as to the sincerity of the policy change.

Considering the fact that the Republican Party did limit the Democrat to 52%, convincing 2%+ of the voters of the correctness of their current views seems an easier row to hoe than a wholesale switching of policies.

Maybe so, but the Philly burbs is the prize and has been for about 20 years now.

[I_Like_Spam]

Originally Posted by jazzy jeff

Ted Cruz is pretty right wing, to right wing for Pa. He will never be POTUS.

I don't know if Senator Cruz will ever be President, but guessing that he is too "right wing for Pennsylvania" isn't an opinion that holds up to historical analysis.


Santorum won statewide election twice and Sen. Toomey definitely ran as a conservative as well and won even more recently.


Some moderate candidates have crashed and burned pretty convincingly statewide, McCain, Specter, Lynn Swann.

Its a guess that a move to the left would help the Republicans, but there is no proof. And if I were a GOP operative, I'd be suspicious of the this theory as it is mostly pushed by folks in the media that would never vote for a Republican anyhow and really don't have the party's best interests at heart.

[PacoMartin]

Originally Posted by jazzy jeff

Maybe so, but the Philly burbs is the prize and has been for about 20 years now.

PA is rather unique in that every one of the 20 congressional districts voted for the party's presidential candidate that was the same party of their congressional representative. So the 5 democratic congressmen corresponds to the 5 congressional districts that voted for Obama.
1st, 2nd, 13th districts are Philadelphia and close urban suburbs
14th is Pittsburgh
17th includes Scranton, Wilkes-Barre, and Easton


Romney%
8.95% 2nd — Rep. Chaka Fattah [D]
16.89% 1st — Rep. Robert Brady [D]
30.64% 14th — Rep. Michael “Mike” Doyle Jr. [D]
32.91% 13th — Rep. Allyson Schwartz [D]
43.26% 17th — Rep. Matthew Cartwright [D]

49.42% 8th — Rep. Michael Fitzpatrick [R]
50.36% 7th — Rep. Patrick Meehan [R]
50.57% 6th — Rep. Jim Gerlach [R]
50.78% 15th — Rep. Charles Dent [R]
52.35% 16th — Rep. Joseph Pitts [R]
53.92% 11th — Rep. Lou Barletta [R]
55.60% 3rd — Rep. Mike Kelly [R]
56.95% 5th — Rep. Glenn Thompson [R]
57.07% 4th — Rep. Scott Perry [R]
57.81% 12th — Rep. Keith Rothfus [R]
57.95% 18th — Rep. Tim Murphy [R]
60.11% 10th — Rep. Tom Marino [R]
62.82% 9th — Rep. Bill Shuster [R]

While Romney won the last two Philadelphia suburban districts, he won by a tiny number of votes
8th - 255 votes
7th - 6,703 votes

------------
The 9th and 10th districts (large area, mostly rural) still contain a healthy percentage of Democratic voters.

[jazzy jeff]

Originally Posted by I_Like_Spam

I don't know if Senator Cruz will ever be President, but guessing that he is too "right wing for Pennsylvania" isn't an opinion that holds up to historical analysis.


Santorum won statewide election twice and Sen. Toomey definitely ran as a conservative as well and won even more recently.


Some moderate candidates have crashed and burned pretty convincingly statewide, McCain, Specter, Lynn Swann.

Its a guess that a move to the left would help the Republicans, but there is no proof. And if I were a GOP operative, I'd be suspicious of the this theory as it is mostly pushed by folks in the media that would never vote for a Republican anyhow and really don't have the party's best interests at heart.

Voter turnout is always far less during mid-term years, especially in the urban areas. Had Toomey ran during a presidential election year things may of turned out different since he only won by a 2 point margin.

[Duderino]

I think the bottom line is that the demographics of Pennsylvania -- and most of the country, for that matter -- are not in the Republicans favor. The much less diverse, rural, and older parts of the state (read Republican) are stagnant, whereas the much more diverse, younger and urban parts of the state (read Democratic) are responsible for practically all of the growth. Not to mention the vast majority of Pennsylvania's in-migration is coming from surrounding states that are highly Democratic (NY, NJ and MD), which will only accelerate PA's more solidly Democratic trend. In 2016, I think it's safe to say that the current one-million plus Democratic registration margin in the state will have grown even higher.

Overall, Pennsylvania has been described as "fool's gold" for the GOP, due to its supposed potential to vote for a Republican candidate but consistently voting Democratic since the late 1980s. It's a bid absurd to call it a "swing state" at this point -- Democratic-leaning still means it's in the Democratic column. The 5-10% margins for the Democrats in the past two elections don't exactly lend themselves to much competitiveness.

If I were the GOP, I'd hardly want to waste my limited resources on Pennsylvania (whose largest media market is pretty expensive: Philadelphia), especially as other Republican states become more competitive (North Carolina, Virginia, and Georgia), forcing the party to increasingly defend their current turf.