Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ky and Ok are NOT PA, a democratic stronghold for years.
No, it has not trended republican and I can say that with certainty because the last election the man who has owned the seat for 35 years was re-elected.
Whereas you have only your "feelings" on the matter.
Are you aware there are over 60 districts that currently have a dem rep where Republicans have performed better than this one?
The seats that are key for the republicans are those taken over by dems in 2006&2008, that are clearly republican districts. It is in those districts that hold the key to a majority for the Rs.
I know the Left and the media would like to claim this is a "must win" for the Rs, but really it is not.
Just because a well entrenched Incumbent keeps winning does not mean a district is not trending to the other party. We have this happen quite a bit, a party remains so long with one party because the Incumbent is well entrenched, but when the seat becomes open it becomes much more competitive because despite the Incumbent winning for so long the district really is no longer a stronghold for their party. This is why we the GOP lost some of the districts they did in 06 & 08. Just because the GOP held many of these seats prior to 06 & 08 and did not hold Murtha's seat prior to then doesn't make them more GOP than Murtha's seat.
In 2006 the Dems picked up 31 seats, the GOP lost 30 (one of the Dems gains was the VT-AL seat which was held by Sanders).
Special Elections in 2008, Dems picked up three seats. So heading into the 2008 Election the GOP was down 33 seats.
In 2008, the total net pickup for the Dems was 21 seats. They picked up 26 GOP seats, the GOP picked up 5 Dem seats. Out of the 5 GOP gains, three were seats they lost in 06, one was a special election 08 loss they gained.
The GOP has lost one seat in a special election during this cycle.
So if you look at the seats the GOP lost since 2006 and still do not hold, you have 27 seats from 06, 2 seats from the 08 Special Elections, 26 seats from the 08 GE, and 1 seat from the last round of special election. So that is 51 seats. Now to compare how those 56 seats compare to PA-12...
Out of the 27 they lost in 06 and still don't hold. 7 of them McCain did better than he did in PA-12, 19 of them Obama did better than he did in PA-12, and one of them was the same.
Out of the Special Election losses they had in 08, 1 McCain did better than PA-12, one McCain did worse.
Out of the 26 seats they lost in 08, 9 McCain did better than PA-12, 15 Obama did better than PA-12, 2 were the same.
The special election seat they lost, Obama did better than PA-12.
So out of the 56 seats the GOP held heading into 06 and no longer hold, 17 of them Obama did worse than he did in PA-12, three of them were the same, and 36 he did better than PA-12. That shows right there that many of the seats the GOP was losing the last few years were not these conservative districts, but rather Dem leaning districts in which the GOP previously held, but the Dems were able to pick off.
So when you take a look at that to say that the GOP has a better chance of winning many of those 06 & 08 losses than they do of PA-12 is just insane.
I happened to think the Dems will hold this seat btw, but the district is no longer a Democratic stronghold
So when you take a look at that to say that the GOP has a better chance of winning many of those 06 & 08 losses than they do of PA-12 is just insane.
I happened to think the Dems will hold this seat btw, but the district is no longer a Democratic stronghold
It is not insane. Those districts that McCain won handily in 2008, that have incumbent democrats, elected in 2006&2008 when conservatives abandoned the GOP en masse - PA12 is NOT one of those.
Just because this district (and many others in the surrounding area) didn't like obama (these people are the bitter clingers obama talked about) doesn't mean it is not a dem stronghold.
It is clear why the dems are so desperate to portray this seat as a must-win for the GOP.
It is not insane. Those districts that McCain won handily in 2008, that have incumbent democrats, elected in 2006&2008 when conservatives abandoned the GOP en masse - PA12 is NOT one of those.
Just because this district (and many others in the surrounding area) didn't like obama (these people are the bitter clingers obama talked about) doesn't mean it is not a dem stronghold.
Conservatives did not abandon the GOP en masse in 06 & 08, they turned out and voted the GOP at the same clip they typically have. The GOP lost in 06 & 08 because they got stomped on, kicked, and thrown around like a rag doll among moderates and Independents.
The district also moved to the GOP a great deal in 04 when Kerry barely won it. The district has a cook PVI of R+1. It is a marginal district at this point, its not a Democratic stronghold.
Over the past decade or so many Appalachia type of districts (which is exactly what this one is) have trended Republican, meanwhile many suburban districts have trended GOP. Previously solid Dem districts in Appalachia are no longer Dem stronghold, previous solid GOP districts in the suburbs are no longer GOP strongholds. This is nothing new, it has been trending in that direction for years.
Also keep in mind that with redistricting district lines are constantly changing. The lines of PA-12 has changed quite a bit over the years, his current district is nowhere remotely close to the district he had when he started. Not only from a political aspect, but from a geographic standpoint. I would easily say more than half of the district was not represented by Murtha for the majority of the time he was in Congress.
Conservatives did not abandon the GOP en masse in 06 & 08, they turned out and voted the GOP at the same clip they typically have. The GOP lost in 06 & 08 because they got stomped on, kicked, and thrown around like a rag doll among moderates and Independents.
Completely wrong. Conservatives stayed home, especially in 2006 and the democrats regained control of congress because of it.
Quote:
The district also moved to the GOP a great deal in 04 when Kerry barely won it. The district has a cook PVI of R+1. It is a marginal district at this point, its not a Democratic stronghold.
Well, Kerry still won it, as well as Gore, Murtha, a staunch liberal was re-elected many, many times, McCain just barely won the district - 900 votes, even with the intense dislike of obama in the region.
So, until republicans actually start winning the district, you cannot say it is trending toward the GOP, not with a 2-1 advantage in voter registration for the democrats.
I would easily say more than half of the district was not represented by Murtha for the majority of the time he was in Congress.[/quote]
I could say that, but just because you do doesn't make it true.
Completely wrong. Conservatives stayed home, especially in 2006 and the democrats regained control of congress because of it.
Well, Kerry still won it, as well as Gore, Murtha, a staunch liberal was re-elected many, many times, McCain just barely won the district - 900 votes, even with the intense dislike of obama in the region.
So, until republicans actually start winning the district, you cannot say it is trending toward the GOP, not with a 2-1 advantage in voter registration for the democrats.
I would easily say more than half of the district was not represented by Murtha for the majority of the time he was in Congress.
I could say that, but just because you do doesn't make it true.[/quote]
Simply incorrect, conservatives did come out. The GOP lost because they lost moderates and Independents by 20 points. Murtha was not a staunch liberal. He was liberal on economic issues, but he was fairly socially conservative, to the right socially to most of the Dems in Congress.
Kerry's margin wasn't much more than McCain's margin, also while McCain won by as you say 900 votes, he lost nationally by more than 7. Staunch districts don't go to the opposing party even by a small amount, especially when your party wins by more than 7 nationally.
And yes it is true that most of those currently in PA-12, were not represented by Murtha during most of his tenure. Due to the fact each redistricting has called for the population of each district to increase and we are dealing with an area that has seen limited and negative growth over a number of years, the district has expanded quite a bit from the majority of his time in Congress.
Simply incorrect, conservatives did come out. The GOP lost because they lost moderates and Independents by 20 points. Murtha was not a staunch liberal. He was liberal on economic issues, but he was fairly socially conservative, to the right socially to most of the Dems in Congress.
Simply correct. In those districts where Blue Dogs now reside, that will be key to winning back the House, conservatives definitely DID stay home, not all, but a lot, enough to allow a democrat to win the seat.
It also was a big turnout success for Democrats. They drew more voters than Republicans for the first time in a midterm election since 1990, Gans said Wednesday.
Quote:
And yes it is true that most of those currently in PA-12, were not represented by Murtha during most of his tenure. Due to the fact each redistricting has called for the population of each district to increase and we are dealing with an area that has seen limited and negative growth over a number of years, the district has expanded quite a bit from the majority of his time in Congress.
Ever taken a look at the district? Sliced and diced.
Not true that most of PA-12 was not represented by Murtha.
Simply correct. In those districts where Blue Dogs now reside, that will be key to winning back the House, conservatives definitely DID stay home, not all, but a lot, enough to allow a democrat to win the seat.
Ever taken a look at the district? Sliced and diced.
Not true that most of PA-12 was not represented by Murtha.
The GOP lost in 06 & 08 due to 20 point shallacking among moderates, especially in many suburban districts. Most of those districts are NOT blue dogs. Yes some are, but a decent amount of the seats he GOP lost in 06 & 08 were in districts that were trending away from them for some time, much like how PA-12 has been trending away from the Dems.
Yes, the district is sliced and diced, and it was Republicans who sliced and diced it because they were the ones who drew the lines the last round of redistricting. However, the district has not always looked like that, the borders of the southern portion of the district are reversed completely. Now it goes all the way west, that use to be PA-20 (which was lost in the last rd of redistricting). The old portion of PA-12 that was along the southern border is now in PA-9. Really the only area that has been with Murtha during the entire time is the Johnstown area, which like much of Appalachia has been hit quite hard economically for decades and has bled population.
The GOP lost in 06 & 08 due to 20 point shallacking among moderates, especially in many suburban districts. Most of those districts are NOT blue dogs. Yes some are, but a decent amount of the seats he GOP lost in 06 & 08 were in districts that were trending away from them for some time, much like how PA-12 has been trending away from the Dems.
Nonsense. Yes, Independents can always make a difference, but it was mainly the lack of enthusiasm from conservative voters that allowed the Blue Dogs to pick up seats in conservative districts.
Nonsense. Yes, Independents can always make a difference, but it was mainly the lack of enthusiasm from conservative voters that allowed the Blue Dogs to pick up seats in conservative districts.
It is a FACT that the dems, for the first time since 1990, beat the republicans in voter turnout.
This was about Independents, you aren't going to win even if your base comes out strong when you lose Independents by 20 points, that simply isn't going to happen. If you lose Independents by 20 points you get demolished, and that is what happened to the GOP in 06 & 08.
Just because someone joins the blue dog coalition doesn't mean they are a conservative Democrat or is in a conservative district. Murphy in PA-8 is a perfect example.
This was about Independents, you aren't going to win even if your base comes out strong when you lose Independents by 20 points, that simply isn't going to happen. If you lose Independents by 20 points you get demolished, and that is what happened to the GOP in 06 & 08.
Just because someone joins the blue dog coalition doesn't mean they are a conservative Democrat or is in a conservative district. Murphy in PA-8 is a perfect example.
Yes, Indies almost always determine elections, but in this case, many conservatives stayed home in disgust.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
