Politics in PA (Republic: violent crime, transfer, minimum wage)

[Dawne]

I think you misunderstood me, or maybe I didn't explain myself well enough. If you look at a map that shows whether counties in PA are Republican or Democrat, most of the state will show Republican because most of the counties are more rural, with a less dense population than the city areas, and those counties swing to the Republicans. However,the city areas tend to vote Democrat, so even though there are fewer counties that swing to the Democrats, there are more votes for the Democrats in the entire state. Did that make more sense?

[wowbaby]

i read somewhere that pa hasn't been red since reagan.

[Dawne]

Okay, here's what I mean. The link below shows the 2000 and 2004 elections by county. You can see that PA seems to be mostly Republican (actually the whole country looks to be mostly Republican):

USATODAY.com

And now I'll shut up about it.

[North Beach Person]

PA is just like MD: the more or less sparsely populated counties trend Republican but those votes are overwhelmed by the heavily populated Democratic urban areas.

[Icy Tea]

Pa is neither a "liberal" nor a "conservative" state so in that we're lucky. You have liberal areas and conservative areas and areas in between.
Berks County elected a democrat district attorney, replacing a republican, and at the same time replaced a democrat county commissioner with a republican. Berks and Montgomery and Chester re elected a conservative republican congressman over a liberal opponent( twice). Pa. has a republican attorney general and consensus is he may well be the next Governor in a few years. Lebanon county and Schylkill county have a very conservative democrat blue dog congressman that republicans love too.
I think Rendell is liberal on many issues but puts most of his attention going after business interests. Money and influence drive him, not social causes.
Governor Bob Casey Sr. was pro life and got snubbed by liberals because of it.
Tom Ridge was elected twice.
Hazleton looks like it may elect a republican congressman over a 12 term democrat.
So Pa is more of a conservative blue collar democrat state than anything and isn't making any shift towards going liberal than it is towards republican. Issues and candidates concern voters in all areas outside the major urban areas.
As I said before, the Philly suburbs are becoming less republican, but the new residents also become less liberal. Pa. will never be an Alabama or a Massachusetts, Thank God.

[HappyRider]

Originally Posted by Icy Tea

Pa is neither a "liberal" nor a "conservative" state so in that we're lucky. You have liberal areas and conservative areas and areas in between.
Berks County elected a democrat district attorney, replacing a republican, and at the same time replaced a democrat county commissioner with a republican. Berks and Montgomery and Chester re elected a conservative republican congressman over a liberal opponent( twice). Pa. has a republican attorney general and consensus is he may well be the next Governor in a few years. Lebanon county and Schylkill county have a very conservative democrat blue dog congressman that republicans love too.
I think Rendell is liberal on many issues but puts most of his attention going after business interests. Money and influence drive him, not social causes.
Governor Bob Casey Sr. was pro life and got snubbed by liberals because of it.
Tom Ridge was elected twice.
Hazleton looks like it may elect a republican congressman over a 12 term democrat.
So Pa is more of a conservative blue collar democrat state than anything and isn't making any shift towards going liberal than it is towards republican. Issues and candidates concern voters in all areas outside the major urban areas.
As I said before, the Philly suburbs are becoming less republican, but the new residents also become less liberal. Pa. will never be an Alabama or a Massachusetts, Thank God.

What explains the rural/Republican/conservative, urban/Democrat/liberal divide? What is also interesting is that Republican constituency is actually low income folks. I can see that when riding through poor neighborhoods. In contrast, you see far more Obama signs in rich sections of Radnor township for example. A complete 180 from the two parties reputations.

[zip95]

Originally Posted by HappyRider

What explains the rural/Republican/conservative, urban/Democrat/liberal divide? What is also interesting is that Republican constituency is actually low income folks. I can see that when riding through poor neighborhoods. In contrast, you see far more Obama signs in rich sections of Radnor township for example. A complete 180 from the two parties reputations.

To my mind... your observation, about the demographics of party affiliation, is one of the only interesting discussions in politics.

Policy wise, the Democratic party is absolutely trying to make life better for the middle classes on down, while the repbulican party is soley focused on making life better for the Billionaire Club.

By logic, the Republican party should be utterly uncompetitive... Yet they compete. Bush authors the largest transfer of wealth in history, from the middle class to the upper class... Yet they compete. Regan literally replaces a nation full of unionized factory workers with a nation full of minimum wage sales people who work at Lowes, Kohls, and the mall... Yet they compete... It's truly amazing to me.

And they do it by appealing directly to the poor, uneducated, rural vote... Western Pennsylvania is the perfect example. It is absolutely flabbergasting to me, that the Repbulicans can purposefully economically decimate this entire half of the state... destroying community after community... and then with a straight face say... hey... the blacks, gays, and Jews are coming to get you... and Obama is an Arab name... How can you trust a guy with an Arab name...

Just go read the presidential support thread... see how every republican talks about their feelings... completely skipping over all policy matters.

Bottom line: I think the Replican party is able to exist for two reasons. (1) The world is complicated, so they are able to make up complete nonsense and convince people that their nonsense is true... Like, it's not fair to tax rich people at a higher rate... since they're only rich because they work harder, so you should work harder too, for less money... and no benefits... or... our entire economy collapsed because Carter and Clinton gave home loans to those bad minorities. We had the greatest industrialized country the world has ever seen, and we shipped the entire thing over to China... but that has nothing to do with the collapse. We basicaly cancelled all laws governing wall street, gave them unlimited free money, and told them to run hog-wild, but that has nothing to do with the collapse either... its the blacks and Mexicans??? The other reason for the GOP's existance is (2) that "the masses are asses". This allows the Republicans to rob the middle class blind, while they distract them with wishy-washy feelings based nonsense. Don't worry about the fact that we shipped your job to India... some dude you've never met, and never will meet, 7 states away, hates America!

So yea... You tend to see more McCain signs in poor uneducated rural neighborhoods, and more Obama signs in better off educated neighborhoods.

[Icy Tea]

I think that peopel turn towards republican candidates over issues like crime and maintaining traditional family values, job creation and low taxes. I don't think either party has a handle on taxes anymore and both spend like crazy. People vote democratic over issues like social programs and health care. Neither party is perfect or even represents its constituents very well.
The "big tent" concept that both parties strive for is pure B. S. The bigger the tent, the more people you have in it that won't agree with each other. And many will get ignored in favor of others.
We have laws preventing monopolies in business but none in politics. We should split the major parties up into 4 or 6 or even 8 smaller parties that have one or two key issues.
I think you see affluent and educated people supporting both just as you see many uneducated and poor supporting both. You just look in different areas to find them.
There's a very funny audio of a reporter asking people in Harlem why they support Obama. These poor people have no idea what Obama stands for, who his running mate is, and don't know what McCain stands for either. I'm sure you could find equally confused McCain supporters way out in the sticks but the cluelessness of these people is appalling.

[zip95]

First, politics aren't mixed and random...absolutely not. Any political consultant will tell you... "Give me some ones income, education level, ethnicity, and area of residence and I'll tell you how they vote"...this is well researched fact. Politics is absolutely a demographics game... and politicians know this.

Originally Posted by Icy Tea

I think that people turn towards republican candidates over issues like crime and maintaining traditional family values, job creation and low taxes.

Exactly... This is the point I'm making. (1) The world is complicated, and most people have no idea how things work. So the republicans can get away with nonsense like..."Lowering taxes, ie transfering wealth away from the working class, is good for job creation"????...or... (2) Crime in that big city 4 hours away from where you live effects your life... And family values???? What the hell does that have to do with government. Are they going to legislate work ethic and integrity????


Like I said... Its amazing to me.

[kpoeppel]

Originally Posted by zip95

By logic, the Republican party should be utterly uncompetitive... Yet they compete. Bush authors the largest transfer of wealth in history, from the middle class to the upper class... Yet they compete. Regan literally replaces a nation full of unionized factory workers with a nation full of minimum wage sales people who work at Lowes, Kohls, and the mall... Yet they compete... It's truly amazing to me.

And they do it by appealing directly to the poor, uneducated, rural vote... Western Pennsylvania is the perfect example. It is absolutely flabbergasting to me, that the Repbulicans can purposefully economically decimate this entire half of the state... destroying community after community... and then with a straight face say... hey... the blacks, gays, and Jews are coming to get you... and Obama is an Arab name... How can you trust a guy with an Arab name...

Gee, I can't see why western PA doesn't vote for self-appointed coastal elites who think the rest of the country is made up of poor, uneducated, racist, rural hicks who "cling to guns and religion."