You know what we should look for in today’s Democratic Pennsylvania primary? News items telling us what to look for in today’s Democratic Pennsylvania primary. They seem to be everywhere.
The Washington Post’s Dan Balz highlights the “8 Questions About The Pennsylvania Primary.” The Politico’s Carrie Budoff Brown and Ken Vogel deliver the “Five things to watch in Pennsylvania.” At the Huffington Post, Seth Grahame-Smith tells us the “Ten Things to Remember on Tuesday Night.”
It’s like having multiple viewing guides for a major event. Given that the results are likely to be in line with expectations, it’s probably not entirely necessary.
I found Balz’s take on the conventional wisdom to be about right.
Conventional wisdom has taken such a beating in this campaign that setting expectations for today’s primary continues to confound the experts. The only thing everyone can agree on is that, given the makeup of Pennsylvania — an older population with a significant blue-collar constituency and a sizable proportion of Roman Catholics — Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton should win the popular vote. But as Democrat Matt Bennett put it, the candidates are like publicly-traded companies that need to hit an earnings target to lift their stock price.
But just what are the targets? Some say Clinton needs to win by 10 points — which was her margin in Ohio last month. Others say eight points. Some say, given the amount of money Sen. Barack Obama is spending on television ads, anything over five points would be a respectable victory for Clinton. Staying within five points would give Obama the opportunity to assert that he overcame a state whose demographics tilted heavily to Clinton.
But the margin in the popular vote ultimately will be secondary to how Pennsylvania affects the battle for pledged delegates. Pennsylvania is the biggest remaining prize on the calendar, with 158 pledged delegates. Clinton badly needs to make up ground in the delegate fight and, given the way they’re distributed, that could be difficult.
In the words of one Democratic strategist, the popular vote margin is a “feel-good barometer that may play out over a few days and longer if there is a big win, but then we will be on to the next contests. Ultimately, the second indicator [delegates] is more important and will have a longer effect because it is still the criteria we use to select a nominee.”
It’s odd how little has changed. Six weeks ago, Clinton was seen as the all-but certain winner in Pennsylvania; the only question was whether she’d win by single or double digits. Today, we’re still right where we were.
The Politico’s item also had some helpful angles to consider:
* Check for turnout at 1 p.m. “[The campaigns] will look first to Philadelphia, where a crush of voters early in the day will bode well for Obama and badly for Clinton since it will signal that he could win the big margin he needs to take out of the city. Plus, African Americans tend to go to the polls later in the day in Philadelphia, according to a city-based Democratic strategist, which means Obama can expect a late surge from voters who support him in disproportionately high numbers.
* Don’t be fooled by early results. “The cities and suburbs usually report their returns first, which gives the candidate favored in those areas a quick – and sometimes fleeting – lead. The conservative-leaning small towns through the center of the state usually filter in much later in the evening.”
* Follow the undecideds. “Voters who decide late usually go with the candidate who represents something new, potentially giving the edge to Obama. But in this Democratic primary season, voters who have decided in the last three days have more often broken in Clinton’s favor.”
* Watch these towns and neighborhoods. “While the campaigns are reluctant to disclose the places they will be looking at, here are some key precincts, wards and towns that unaffiliated Pennsylvania political strategists say they will be monitoring.”
* Key counties to keep an eye on. “Political analysts point to the 2002 Democratic gubernatorial primary between Ed Rendell and Bob Casey Jr. as the closest comparison to the match up between Obama and Clinton. Rendell won that closely contested race with a coalition of African Americans and upscale, highly educated white voters — a coalition like the one assembled by Obama. Casey focused on blue collar workers, union households, lower-income individuals and ethnic white voters — strikingly similar to Clinton’s base in Pennsylvania.”
Your guess is as good as mine. What are you expecting tonight?