Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Is Pennsylvania the Next Iowa? Not Quite.

Bookmark and Share

After the Wyoming caucuses on Saturday and the Mississippi primary on Tuesday (and perhaps even before those contests are finished), all attention will shift to the state of Pennyslvania in the next (though not necessarily last) showdown between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

The lengthy 6+ week run up to the Pennyslvania primary is drawing comparisons to Iowa, where most presidential hopefuls, not so long ago, spent most of their time and resources in 2007 before the first-in-the-nation contest was held on January 3rd. Of course, some candidates, like Tommy Thompson, John Edwards, and Sam Brownback, spent months in the Hawkeye State, so Pennyslvania's campaign will be more of a 'condensed Iowa' - both in terms of the number of weeks as well as the number of candidate options.

But there are some unique differences between Pennsylvania and Iowa. First, Pennsylvania has a much larger population—approximately 4.2 times that of Iowa—with 274 people per square mile, compared to just 52 persons per square mile in the less urban state of Iowa. The Mitt Romney campaign made a point to make a stop in each of Iowa's nearly 100 counties. The same will not be said of the Obama and Clinton campaigns, who will likely focus a large part of their resources to the more populous eastern (Berks County, Chester County, Delaware County, Lancaster County, Lehigh County, Luzerne County, Montgomery County, Northampton County, Philadelphia County) and western (Allegheny County, Butler County, Bucks County, Erie County, Fayette County, Lawrence County, Washington County, Westmoreland County) parts of the state

Pennsylvania also has a much higher non-white population, approximately 14.3 percent, compared to just 5.4 percent in Iowa. This should advantage Obama, as the difference in non-whites is largely comprised in the black demographic (10.7 percent in PA, 2.5 percent in IA), compared to Hispanics (4.2 percent in PA, 3.8 percent in IA), or Asians (2.4 percent in PA, 1.6 percent in IA).

Clinton, however, has been doing better in the Democratic primaries among less educated Americans, and Pennsylvania has a notably lower number of high school graduates (81.9 percent) than does Iowa (86.1 percent). Pennsylvania also has a higher poverty rate (11.2 percent) than Iowa (10.5 percent).

It has also been said, despite several endorsements by labor unions for Obama, that blue-collar working folks lean towards Clinton (as evidenced by her victory in Ohio). Pennsylvania has a significantly larger union household rate (31 percent) than does Iowa (22 percent), which should work to her advantage.

All this adds up to an exciting race, to be sure, although the first poll conducted after Clinton's big victories in Ohio, Texas, and Rhode Island on Tuesday, finds the New York Senator with a double-digit lead in Pennsylvania: 52 to 37 percent (69% likely voters, polled by Rasmussen on March 6th). The Keystone State is certainly being billed as Clinton's to lose.

Previous post: Live Blog: Texas Caucuses
Next post: SD's Tim Johnson Coasting in Early U.S. Senate Poll

Leave a comment


Remains of the Data

Strange Bedfellows: A Historical Review of Divided US Senate Delegations

Over the last century, states have been twice as likely to be represented by a single political party in the U.S. Senate than have a split delegation; only Delaware, Iowa, and Illinois have been divided more than half the time.

Political Crumbs

Haugh to Reach New Heights

The North Carolina U.S. Senate race between Democratic incumbent Kay Hagan and Republican Thom Tillis may go down to the wire next Tuesday, but along the way Libertarian nominee Sean Haugh is poised to set a state record for a non-major party candidate. Haugh, who previously won 1.5 percent of the vote in the Tar Heel State's 2002 race, has polled at or above five percent in 10 of the last 12 polls that included his name. The current high water mark for a third party or independent candidate in a North Carolina U.S. Senate election is just 3.3 percent, recorded by Libertarian Robert Emory back in 1992. Only one other candidate has eclipsed the three percent mark - Libertarian Christopher Cole with 3.1 percent in 2008.


Gubernatorial Highs and Lows

Two sitting governors currently hold the record for the highest gubernatorial vote ever received in their respective states by a non-incumbent: Republican Matt Mead of Wyoming (65.7 percent in 2010) and outgoing GOPer Dave Heineman of Nebraska (73.4 percent in 2006). Republican Gary Herbert of Utah had not previously won a gubernatorial contest when he notched a state record 64.1 percent for his first victory in 2010, but was an incumbent at the time after ascending to the position in 2009 after the early departure of Jon Huntsman. Meanwhile, two sitting governors hold the record in their states for the lowest mark ever recorded by a winning gubernatorial candidate (incumbent or otherwise): independent-turned-Democrat Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island (36.1 percent in 2010) and Democrat Terry McAuliffe of Virginia (47.8 percent in 2013).


more POLITICAL CRUMBS

Humphrey School Sites
CSPG
Humphrey New Media Hub

Issues />

<div id=
Abortion
Afghanistan
Budget and taxes
Campaign finances
Crime and punishment
Economy and jobs
Education
Energy
Environment
Foreign affairs
Gender
Health
Housing
Ideology
Immigration
Iraq
Media
Military
Partisanship
Race and ethnicity
Reapportionment
Redistricting
Religion
Sexuality
Sports
Terrorism
Third parties
Transportation
Voting