Making sense of Pennsylvania
April 21st, 2008 – 3:52 PM by Dennis J. McGrathSure, Hillary Clinton needs a big win Tuesday in Pennsylvania. But what, exactly does that mean?
Here’s an all-purpose, everything-you-need-to-know look at the Pennsylvania primary and the overall race for the Democratic nomination.
Delegates at stake
Pennsylvania will award 158 pledged delegates based on the primary results. Of that amount 55 will be allocated based on the statewide results, and the remaining 103 delegates will be distributed based on results in each of the state’s 19 congressional districts.
Latest polls
Clinton’s lead over Barack Obama has been running at about 5 percentage points. That’s generally within the margin of sampling error, and it’s down considerably from the 10- to 15-point margin she held during February and March. Two polls released Monday showed Clinton with leads of 7 points and 10 points.
Turnout: Up, up, up — including Republicans
(Staff Writer Bob von Sternberg contibutes this section on turnout.)
One big number — 300,000-plus — looms over the Pennsylvania primary. That’s how many newly-registered Democrats have been added to the voting rolls since the beginning of the year.
Nearly half were first-time voters joining the party, and slightly more than half are voters who switched their registration from Republican or independent to Democratic, allowing them to vote in the Democratic primary.
A recent poll conducted by Franklin and Marshall College shows nearly two in three (62%) of the new voters plan to vote for Obama.
In the five-county Philadelphia region, the Democrats gained 140,000 voters and the Republicans lost 42,000 over the last year. An analysis published by the New Republic found that about half of the newly-registered Democrats live in those counties, which are heavily African-American and home to affluent, college-educated voters. That makes the region “fertile ground for Obama,” the analysis concluded.
Pennsylvania’s politics
The state voted Republican for president in 1980 and 1984 (Reagan) and 1988 (Bush). But it has voted Democratic since then: 1992 and 1996 (Clinton), 2000 (Gore) and 2004 (Kerry).
Its governor is a Democrat — Ed Rendell — and it has a Republican senator — Arlen Specter — and a Democratic senator — Bob Casey.
Obama likely will do well in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, but many suburban areas and rural counties have the type of demographics that favor Clinton — heavily white, blue collar, older, Catholic, Reagan Democrats.
Endorsements
For Clinton: 15 of the state’s superdelegates, including Gov. Rendell and Rep. John Murtha, have endorsed her. She also received the endorsement of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, owned by conservative Richard Scaife.
For Obama: 5 superdelegates, including Sen. Casey. Newspapers include the Philadelphia Inquirer and Daily News, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Allentown Morning Call.
Pennsylvania snapshot
Population: 12.4 million
White: 84%
Black: 10%
Urban population: 77%
Rural: 23%
The delegate battle
Obama leads with 1,645 delegates to Clinton’s 1,507. The magic number for nomination is 2,025.
Clinton still leads among superdelegates, but Obama has dramatically cut into her margin among this group. For example, on the eve of Super Tuesday (Feb. 5), Clinton had 86 more delegates than Obama (213 to 127). Now, she leads by only 26 (257 to 231). Put another way: since Super Tuesday, Obama has won the support of 104 superdelegates while Clinton has added only 44 more to her total.
An Ohio comparison
It’s obvious that Clinton needs a big win in Pennsylvania. But what would that mean in terms of delegates?
For comparison, look back at Ohio, which was a big win for Clinton on March 4. She won the primary by 10 points — 54 percent to 44 percent. That translated into nine more delegates for her than for Obama — 74 delegates for Clinton to 65 delegates for Obama.
So, if Clinton wins Pennsylvania by, say, 10 points, it likely would earn her 10 to 20 more delegates than Obama (depending on the margins in each of the congressional districts). That won’t make an appreciable difference in the overall delegate count. But a big margin of victory gives her more reason to persevere and hope that the delegate trend grows in her favor and that Obama’s troubles (Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his “bitter” comment) are more serious than her’s (Bosnia sniper fire).
Exactly how big a win does Clinton need?
John McIntyre at Real Clear Politics says that a narrow win (by 2 to 4 points) would doom her. He expects she’ll remain in the race if she has a modest win (6-9 points) and she’ll have a real chance of turning the nomination battle around if she wins by 10 points or more — because it will fuel doubts about Obama’s ability to win key blue collar states like Ohio.
Toby Harnden, Washginton editor for the British Daily Telegraph, lists 10 reasons why Obama might squeak out a win Tuesday.
A Philadelphia City Paper blog predicts Obama by 5 points.
The Boston Globe notes that recent polls show that about 10 percent of likely voters remain undecided, and that could favor Clinton, because she holds an edge over Obama in winning those late-breakers.
Polling hours
The polls close at 7 p.m. Central (8 p.m. EST).
After Pennsylvania
Next up — the Guam Territorial caucuses are Saturday, May 3. Guam will pick four delegates to the national convention. Then on Tuesday, May 6, Indiana (72 delegates) and North Carolina (115)
Your predictions
What do you think will happen on Tuesday — and afterwards?
Sources: AP, Almanac of American Politics, New York Times
4 Responses to "Making sense of Pennsylvania"
Your predictions
What do you think will happen on Tuesday — and afterwards?
Sources: AP, Almanac of American Politics, New York Times
My prediction is that these two morons will continue to act like a couple of jackasses, represent the DFL party poorly, and allow McCain to win in November rather easily.
Way to go out on a limb with your sources, Dennis. I’m sure they’re spot on.
Hillary lost already, so the outcome of this primary is unimportant.
She feels entitled to the presidency, regardless of what the will of the voters might be - she’s not unlike the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania in that respect.
I don’t think she’s going to concede - she’s said she won’t, and I believe her. She needs to, or she’s giving the general election to McCain, regardless of the outcome of this primary.
I know for a fact that she and Bill are smart enough to see the writing on the wall, and that they’re smart enough to see what they’re doing to their party.
President Clinton is still technically the figurehead leader of the Democratic party, being the last person (besides Gore) to have won a presidential election, and his personal conflict of interest is stopping him from acting in the best interest of the party, trying to influence Hillary to quit.
In addition, the Gore/Dean/Kerry/Edwards second tier heads-of-party seem to have been intimidated out of filling this important role by the Bill Clinton conflict of interest. Usually, a head of party would broker a compromise, make sure that retribution was limited and appropriate, and protect the public image of the party.
This time, retribution for supporters of the losers, if Hillary wins, is guaranteed not to be limited or appropriate. And the second tier heads of party are afraid to stick out their necks, personally, even though it seems from polls to be terribly damaging to the party’s general presidential hopes, not to mention the legislative super-majorities that might have been hoped for before Clinton’s actions started undermining new-voter enthusiasm for Obama.
Long winded Justin,
I got to the (besides Gore) part before I realized it was your comment. That’s where I stopped because you are obviously sitting on your grassy knoll, watching the third plane dive purposely into the Pentagon.
P.T. Barnum was right.
We will know we are a free country, free at last, when it is not a natural conclusion that a black man will do well in a black community