Why Pennsylvania isn’t Ohio or Wisconsin
Dante Chinni
Posted: 03.24.2008 / 4:14 PM PDT
The Pennsylvania primary on April 22 – a pivotal moment in the presidential contest – will be determined in part by a demographic question: Is the Keystone State more like Wisconsin, which Barack Obama won by a landslide, or like Ohio, where Hillary Rodham Clinton coasted to a convincing victory?
The answer is nuanced and may well depend on a swath of counties that haven’t played much of a factor in previous Midwestern contests: those where service workers predominate. “Service Worker Center” counties (in rust) are one of 11 voter communities identified in the Monitor’s Patchwork Nation project.
States’ characteristics
There are reasons to group Wisconsin, Ohio, and Pennsylvania together. All are swing states that saw close presidential contests in 2004 – each had President Bush and Sen. John Kerry within three percentage points. All have some old industrial economic base. All play Big Ten football.
But the primary results in the first two states highlighted the differences among them. Senator Obama defeated Senator Clinton by 17 percentage points in the Wisconsin primary Feb. 19. The final tally, about 58 percent to 41 percent, was seen as portentous for the Ohio primary on March 4.
Many in the media predicted big things for the Illinois senator in Ohio. CNN wrote: “Heading into Wisconsin, most thought the contest was a toss-up. Obama’s sweeping win there Tuesday can’t be encouraging for the Clinton camp heading into Ohio as there are a lot of similarities between the blue-collar, Rust Belt states.”
Obama had cut into Clinton’s base of “lunch-bucket” white voters. He was picking up voters from all over the spectrum. His momentum was rolling. People wondered how long Clinton might be able to stay in the race.
But as the coronation was being readied, a funny thing happened. Clinton thumped Obama by 10 points in Ohio on March 4.
The easy comparisons between Wisconsin and Ohio turned out to be wrong. For instance, Wisconsin has many “Campus and Careers” counties (in dark green) – places full of the young college-age voters with whom Obama tends to do well.
Almost 15 percent of Wisconsin’s electorate is located in these counties. In contrast, in Ohio a little more than 5 percent of people live in locales of Campus and Careers.
Among the three states, Pennsylvania has less of the overall college-age vote, with only about 4 percent of the electorate coming from such counties.
Those numbers would seem to favor Clinton on April 22.
However, Obama could be helped by the size of Pennsylvania’s “Industrial Metropolis” (in black) voting group – counties where big cities like Philadelphia and Pittsburgh are located. Almost 22 percent of the state’s population resides in big cities. Wisconsin and Ohio have smaller numbers of city-dwellers by comparison. Obama won Industrial Metropolis areas in Wisconsin’s Milwaukee County and Ohio’s Hamilton and Cuyahoga counties by sizable margins.
What do the results of Wisconsin and Ohio say about Clinton’s strengths with the groups of Patchwork Nation? She did well in Ohio with voters in “Emptying Nests” counties, places with slightly older voters who are more likely to be living on fixed incomes.
In Wisconsin, where Clinton lost, Emptying Nest counties account for only 9 percent of the population. In Ohio, where she won, they represent more than 28 percent of the population. In Pennsylvania, about 13 percent of the population lives in Emptying Nests counties.
The keys to the Keystone State
So what will matter in Pennsylvania? For sure, Campus and Careers, Industrial Metropolis, and Emptying Nests counties will be key to the outcome. Obama will have to draw as many votes as possible from Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, while Clinton will look to the voters in Emptying Nests areas on the state’s north and south borders.
But two other kinds of communities will be crucial. “Monied ’Burbs” counties (in peach), with their affluent residents, hold the largest number of voters – 36 percent of Pennsylvania’s population. Counties where a sizable number of service workers reside, dubbed Service Worker Centers, hold 19 percent.
Most of Pennsylvania’s Monied ’Burbs are clustered around Philadelphia and are seen as crucial to any statewide race – indeed to most states with big cities.
Diversity abounds in Monied ’Burbs counties. Some are extremely conservative. Some are very liberal. But on the whole they are evenly split.
How have Obama and Clinton fared in Monied ’Burbs? In Wisconsin, Obama carried these counties. In Ohio, Clinton carried them. Overall they tend to be a bit more friendly territory for Clinton. When she does win in these affluent areas, it tends to be by bigger margins than when Obama wins. For instance, Clinton won all the Monied ’Burbs counties around Cleveland by double digits – some by big double-digits.
The biggest question, however, will be how the Service Worker Centers tilt. Ohio and Wisconsin have 10 such counties between them, and Clinton won four of these: Iron County in Wisconsin as well as Jefferson, Mahoning, and Mercer counties in Ohio. Pennsylvania has 19 such counties, which tend to be clustered together. These include North Umberland, Armstrong, Westmoreland, and Cambria.
Which community types they are near hint at how they could vote. Some are packed around the Industrial Metropolis Pittsburgh, some are around Campus and Careers counties, and some border Philadelphia’s Monied ’Burbs.
If the race tightens in the next few weeks, the story of the Pennsylvania primary may hinge on which of those identities the Service Worker Centers take on most.
March 25th, 2008 at 9:22 am PDT
If you read the Cincinnati Enquirer published the day after the Ohio election you will see that large numbers of Republicans voted in the Democratic primary for Hilary Clinton. In Clermont county, a predominantly wealthy Republican county east of Hamilton County (in which Cincinnati is located) they ran out of ballots because so many non-Democrats voted. Many Democrats who arrived after picking up their kids from daycare were told they would have to wait until 7.30 p.m. while new ballots were being printed. Republicans who voted for Senator Clinton did so because they thought she would be easier to beat in the general election.
March 25th, 2008 at 10:26 am PDT
Jacqueline Stone’s comment is important.
Some might see the heavy African-American turnout in favor of Obama as a counter to the “Republicans for Hillary” vote, but it is genuine support. African-American voters will respond similarly in the general election, while the Republicans will be voting for McCain.
March 25th, 2008 at 11:23 am PDT
In Pennsylvania, Republicans and Democrats can only vote for their party candidates and if you are a registered Independent, you cannot vote in the primary election. Several people I know changed their party line from Independent to Democrat, so they can have their say in the primary and I did exactly that. Although I voted neither for Clinton nor Bush in the last elections, Hilary has my vote. I want someone with lots of experience in the office and I would like to see a woman for a change of pace with the hope the war in Iraq will end soon.
March 25th, 2008 at 11:38 am PDT
Team Obama is really getting pathetic if they have to try to explain away Clinton’s resounding victory in Ohio as based on Rush Limbaugh Republicans trying to make mischief with the DNC.
My take: Obama’s popularity has peaked, and he is now viewed as less of a messiah bringing “hope” and “new politics” than more of the same old politics, albiet in a slick package. (He is right down in the trenches, throwing mud like every other cantidate EXCEPT John McCain.)
If I am wrong, then why cannot Barack Obama close the deal? Why is he even with Hillary in the national tracking polls, and very close in the pledged delegatge count?
Do people realize that if there is a second ballot at the Democratic National Convention (because enough super-delegates abstain from the first ballot or for other reasons), then the pledged delegates will be released to vote anyway they want, for whatever candidate they want?
Anything can happen, and Hillary could get the nomination.
After all, the underlying premise of the Obama candidacy has been undermined.
March 25th, 2008 at 3:41 pm PDT
The previous comments are all on point. I grew up in surburban Philadelphia (Chester County) and still have many family/friends in that area. A large number of these people have re-registered as democrats over the last few months and will be voting for Hillary to help propel her to victory on April 22. The talking head pundits and so called “experts” continue to try to downplay and discredit the large number of republicans that are successfully sabotaging the democratic primary process. This effort has been caused by the early settlement of the republican race and the general weakness of the republican field. I cannot help but laugh out loud when I hear the talking heads repeatedly gushing over how many more people are participating in the democratic primaries and how this is “clear” evidence that the general election will result in a landslide for the democrats. Of course, I can only speak for myself (here in Virginia) and those friends and family who I have spoken with, however, ALL of us will definitely be voting for McCain come November.
March 25th, 2008 at 5:42 pm PDT
I hope everyone does their research and is able to explain their position. With Hillary it is becoming clearer each day that her “experience” she sites is not based on truth. I would prefer to see our country move in a new direction with the leading heads of the Democratic party in charge. The Clintons have changed. They’re rich and entrenched with the special interests to a greater degree than Obama. Robert Reich is with Obama so the economy has great leadership. Governor Richardson is an inspiring figure as well and has spoken against the tactics used by the Clintons, many military generals have backed Obama. I think Obama will offer intelligence and less fabrication. I am ready to hear someone speak to us, be for us and not have to listen to someone read a speech and have to prove their so-called “toughness”. We need a younger president who offers hope, energy and serves as a beacon to repair our country. I will vote for Barack Obama.
March 25th, 2008 at 7:53 pm PDT
I have lived in Ohio, West Virginia, and southwestern Pennsylvania and what I am about to say is based on first hand knowledge and experience living in these states. Race is going to be a bigger factor in the Pennsylvania primary, just as it was in Ohio and will be in West Virginia, than in the country at large. Racial prejudice in these states is deep and culturally ingrained. It may not be acknowledged, but it will be reflected in the outcome of the vote. As much as we want this issue to be tackled and overcome, there are places where that is going to be a much bigger issue to confront than in others. Pennsylvania (as least the western part) certainly falls into that category.
March 25th, 2008 at 8:08 pm PDT
Hillary did not win Ohio convincingly. She won by a small margin.
More than 100,000 Republicans crossed over, illegaly, into Democrat registration on the day of the vote or a day or two before to vote for Hillary. Rush Limbaugh and Bob Frantz urged them to do so because Limbaugh and Frantz (and many other pundits) believe that McCain would beat Hillary but lose to Obama. Those cross-over votes were fraudulent, criminal, and politically illegitimate. They ought not count.
Hillary got Ohio 1,212,362 votes. Obama got 982,489. If one subtracts from the Hillary vote just 100,000 fraudulent cross-over votes (of the more than 100,00 illegal cross-over votes), one finds that her victory margin was 129,873 (or less).
The total vote was 2,233,156 (38,305 being for Edwards). So, Hillary’s win-margin was only 5.8% (or less).
That lesser percentage, too, is impeachable, because Hillary lied — wilfully — to make Ohioans beliwve that Obama lied in stating his NAFTA poisition. Hillary knew that the Canadian government had repudiated the Canadian diplomatic memo, a low-level-authored memo, that misquoted one of Obama’s unoficial economic advisors to suggest Obama’s NAFTA position was just political posturing and that Obama had disproved utterly the damaging content of that memo. But, still, she used the memo against Obama. Most pundits agree that the NAFTA matter was voting-significant.
March 25th, 2008 at 9:32 pm PDT
What KATHRYN DUGOVICH wrote and most of the comments on this site are pure Propaganda. First of all, I live in Cincinnati Ohio, which is in Hamilton County and has a large black population. I suppose many people of African American Decent may be voting for Obama simply because he is black, or cute, but many of us in Ohio did not. Also “in Ohio,” you may not vote in the Democratic primary if you are a registered Republican, however I did notice very many Republicans with Obama signs on they’re lawns. The idea is for people to make us believe that Obama can win the contest for president should he become the nominee. Many of us here in Ohio simply don’t see it that way. He is young and too inexperienced to lead this nation out of the mess it is in. It is true that ignorance abounds in much of our communities. It is also true that this is not the case for us all. I see this tactic as divide and conquer the Dems. “and divide and conquer us working people.” We working class people, “all of us” suffer under Republican Rule. We must pick a champion who can win. Because there is racism now, and it will be much more prominent in the general election should Obama be the nominee. People say he will be assassinated, I don’t think so. But he will loose big time, and that lost is a big probability evan if he was white, given his youth and inexperience.
Moreover, people who say the Republicans are voting for Hillary are outright lying “period.” Independent Republicans who can vote Dem. are voting for Obama in droves. I work for a staunch Republican, and hear them talking about the primaries. They are rooting for Obama with a frenzy, they will become very angry at my saying this; and that should be the indication for every intelligent person who reads this comment. My last word is this; if you are an African American and you vote for Obama because he is an of African decent then you are a Racist just like the Nazi’s, the ***, and every other racist on the planet. Being African American does not exclude you from being a racist. I set the example as myself: Voting for the person, not based on the color of their skin but on the content of their character and their ability to win, and lead our nation. I don’t know the Clintons personally, but I do know that I faired well in Ohio during the Clinton Presidency. And I hope to do well for myself, my family; “I suppose I should say for my nation” again. Doing well is easy in my dreams, reality is a totally different experience. My ‘hope’ is for Clinton to win, this is Change, Hope and Reality all rolled into one.
PS: If Andrew Young Jr., or Colon Powell was running during this Primary election I would support one of them because of their proven ability and experience. I support Hillary because she was “first lady” of a successful administration and this gives her proven ability and experience.
March 26th, 2008 at 6:01 am PDT
I’m sighing because it seems again that the choices are too few, the issues have been narrowed artificially, the characters of the candidates are carefully concealed by “handlers”… only years later do we discover character issues that would have affected our votes. I do not expect any candidate to have a particularly beneficial influence on our nation. What we do as a people should be determined not by politicians but by unselfish persons who do their best to act in the common good. Such people exist. How in heaven’s name do we get them into positions to wield some of the power the politicians have usurped?
March 26th, 2008 at 6:22 am PDT
First, this nomination process is done. The party is over. The fat lady has sung. How do I know. The blogs have noting new to say. Same old tired statements and cliches. She will likely take Pennsylvania by 14% but it will not alter the delegate count or popular vote significantly. They split the rest. Nothing changes and the Superdelegates decide.
Bill was popular with people on the street. Just a shameless good-ol-boy that you wanted to hug and forgive him his sins because he didn’t really mean it. The Democratic party machinery was never fond of Bill. Possibly they saw the self interest and his little concern for the Party. Hillary was never popular with anyone. Except a small diehard core of mainly women of her generation.
Her current approach seems to be that she has won the states with the large electoral votes while Obama has won the small states that will not vote Democratic. The problem is that it assumes that Obama will not carry those same Big states against McCain.
I would like to see how the Superdelegates explain to the average voter that they gave Hillary the nomination because she won the ‘important’ states, even though Obama had the most delegates. These are professional politicians who are the most risk-averse people on earth, and are not about to split the party at a time when there is a liklihood of winning.
So it is very easy for a lot of party professionals to drift away from her as it gets ugly. There is no loyalty in either direction. And I cannot imagine them risking their own jobs just to try to put her in the White House with her baggage.
The Richardson endorsement was a signal that it is nearly time to end this before we all lose our phoney-baloney jobs. (as Mel Brooks would say and the super delegates must be thinking)
She has a 5% chance of winning at this time. I can understand someone with her ambition doing anything to win and holding on until forced out. The Presidency is the most powerful job on earth, so one should not expect her to play by some set of mytholgical ethical rules of fairness, or care about the Democratic Party. I would expect a number of new endorsements by significant party officials to begin going to Obama, unless she wins big in North Carolina. Highly unlikely in view of the domographics.
For a real dream ticket… Obama, plus Sen. Diane Feinstein, Sen. Maria Cantwell or Spkr. Nancy Pelosi. Real experience without the exaggerations, scandals and divisivness.
March 27th, 2008 at 9:56 am PDT
Oh all us Republicans are hoping Hillary gets that Democratic nomination so John McCain will coast to an easy win! If Obama gets the nomination all bets are off and McCain will most likely lose. So please, please Republicans in Pennsylvania, switch parties and vote for Hillary to prolong the Democratic process and allow McCain to look more presidential before the Dems tear themselves apart in Denver in August. Divide and conquer!!