Pennsylvania specific discussion of vote share and mathematics behind impact on delegate allocation of its 189 Delegates. This is part of mathematics of delegate allocation notes in the series of Delegate Mathematics stories. Statewide Pennsylvania Democratic Party is affiliated with and participates in Presidential Nomination with National Democratic Party umbrella.
Basic Data: Pennsylvania has 189 delegates available. There are 18 Congressional Districts. So including state-wide allocations PLEO and at-large delegates, there are 20 different delegate allocation units. Number of delegates available in each are as follows: 5 from CD5 CD9 CD10 CD16 and 6 from CD3 CD4 CD11 CD12 CD15 CD18 and 7 from CD6 CD8 CD17 and 8 from CD7 and 9 from CD13 CD14 and 10 from CD1 and 14 from CD2 . Additionally 20 PLEOs (Party Leaders and Elected officials) and 42 At-large delegates allocated from state-wide results. With 9 out of 20 allocation units having an odd number of delegates opportunity for ample delegate advantages exist.
Primary Election Information: Primary ballot/vote is scheduled for 26th April 2016. It is a closed primary. Participation is open only to registered members of the Democratic Party. Party affiliation/enrolment must be completed 30 days prior to the primary (by 28th March). There is still time to register to vote in General Election. Same day registration is not available.
More annoyingly pretty web portal but damn unintuitive {is that even a word? anything a ten year old cannot spell should not be allowed to be a valid word} hard to find easily stuff at Election Division of State government http://www.dos.pa.gov/VotingElections/OtherServicesEvents/Pages/Everyone.VotesPA.aspx
Much better presented stuff here http://www.votespa.com/portal/server.pt/community/home/13514
State party website is very beautiful {to me anyway, any website designed to not hurt the eyes and head trying to read damn too small writing and crammed stuff is much better. SO thank you PA Dems } party web portal http://www.padems.com/ with lots of easy access/click state party stuff. Usual FAQ here http://www.padems.com/vote/faqs/ State parties do much more than just presidential primaries so do not take offence at how little attention is given to it at this time. For those looking to be a bit more involved locally, try your county party instead http://www.padems.com/counties/
Voter ID Laws: Pennsylvania has very relaxed requirements regarding voter id. ID is only required for first time voters. {This is only because State Laws with extremely restrictive Photo ID requirements were struck down by Court in 2014. }
First time Voters: A very encouraging support for first time voters, with demonstrations here First Time voters: http://www.votespa.com/portal/server.pt
ID is required. Surprisingly Student ID is acceptable. Here is the list of acceptable IDs straight from election commission website.
“All voters who appear at a polling place for the first time must show proof of identification. Approved forms of photo identification include: Pennsylvania driver’s license or PennDOT ID card, ID issued by any Commonwealth agency, ID issued by the U.S. Government, U.S. passport, U.S. Armed Forces ID, Student ID, Employee ID {From a state registered employer} .
If you do not have a photo ID, you can use a non-photo identification that includes your name and address. Approved forms of non-photo identification include: Confirmation issued by the County Voter Registration Office, Non-photo ID issued by the Commonwealth, Non-photo ID issued by the U.S. Government, Firearm permit, Current utility bill, Current bank statement, Current paycheck, Government check”
Just to clarify: ID Required for First time voters at a polling station (you are still a first time voter for a polling station if you previously voted at different polling station). {Thank you Karl B}
Early Voting/Absentee Voting: There is no early voting. State legislature has resolutely refused to consider any early voting. State has done as much as possible to limit absentee voting. Absentee voting is only available to qualifying voters with valid/acceptable reasons. Listing of valid/acceptable reasons here. {On a side note: Military personnel however qualify unconditionally. Military do not even have to be registered voter to qualify for absentee voting.}
Double Barrel Primary: Presidential Primary coincides with state/local primary elections. Local primaries include , State legislature seats, US House seats, US Senate seat, State Attorney General, State Auditor General. And a few more other local stuff at county levels. So expecting turn out at primary to be a substantially higher.
Congressional District Based Delegate Allocation Triggers: (See table below). Due to proportional representation formula being used to allocate delegates from various districts, the number of delegates each candidate wins changes at certain specific percentage levels. Crossing/going past the vote percentages at those levels triggers a change (increase) in number of delegates awarded. The triggers for congressional districts based allocations are listed below. With nine districts having odd number of delegates, there are good opportunities for advantages.
Delegates ACquired
Out of available
|
5 del
CD5 CD9
CD10 CD16
|
6 del
CD3 cd4
CD11 CD12
CD15 CD18
|
7 del
CD6 CD8
CD17
|
8 del
CD7
|
9 del
cd13 cd14
|
10 DEL
CD1
|
14 DEL
CD2
|
Delegate Allocation Triggers
1 del |
15 |
15 |
15 |
15 |
15 |
|
|
2 del |
30 |
25 |
21.4 |
18.8 |
16.7 |
15 |
15 |
3 del |
50 |
41.7 |
35.7 |
31.3 |
27.8 |
25 |
17.9 |
4 del |
70 |
58.4 |
50 |
43.8 |
38.9 |
35 |
25 |
5 del |
85 |
75 |
64.3 |
56.3 |
50 |
45 |
32.2 |
6 del |
|
85 |
78.6 |
68.8 |
61.2 |
55 |
39.3 |
7 del |
|
|
85 |
81.3 |
72.3 |
65 |
46.5 |
8 del |
|
|
|
85 |
83.4 |
75 |
53.6 |
9 DEL |
|
|
|
|
85 |
|
60.8 |
10 DEL |
|
|
|
|
|
85 |
67.9 |
11 DEL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
75 |
For 5 Delegates at CD5 CD9 CD10 CD16: First delegate acquired at 15%, second delegate at 30.%. Third delegate trigger is nicely balanced at 50%. Fourth delegate costs a whopping 70%. This 70% votes are needed to get a 4-1 split might be a bit too demanding. These four districts become very crucial as they break just with small % hovering at 50%, a whole delegate is available. Goal for any Campaign is to cross the 50% and obtain a 3-2 split in their favour. Successfully breaking these districts will give an 1 delegate advantage straight away. These 5 delegate awarding districts will be contributing to delegate advantages. Campaign activity might be a bit more heavy here.
For 6 Delegates at CD3 CD4 CD11 CD12 CD15 CD18 : Within the whole range of 41.7 — 58.3 the delegate split will be straight 3-3. Interesting points are at 41.7%. and 58.3%, if candidates are hovering around either of these mark, then some extra effort would break the district 4-2 split. For an advantage a candidate has all the incentive to break it 4-2split. with 58.3% votes. Expecting some heavy campaign here for those lucrative advantage breaks. Otherwise we are looking at a straight 3-3 split.
For 7 Delegates at CD6 CD8 CD17 : First two delegates are cheap at 15% and 21.4%. Within the range of 35.7% — 50% the 3 delegates each will be allocated. The fight for the 7th delegate is again precariously balanced at 50% marker to make the overall break 4-3 split. To achieve a 5-2 split votes need to be at 64.3% or higher. To maintain competitiveness, each campaign should be aiming to maintain at least 35.7% vote share and retain a 3 delegates and then slug it out for final odd delegate for an advantage by crossing 50%. These 3 districts will provide an opportunity to gain delegate advantages.
For 8 Delegates at CD7: First two delegates are cheap at 15% and 18.8%. Any vote share between 43.8% and 56.3% will result in a 4-4 delegate split. Crossing a threshold trigger 56.3% results in two delegate advantage 5-3. The next trigger at 68.8% for 6-2 split. Unless there is some major event 68.8% is quite a huge barrier. 7-1 split is just extremely improbable it needs 81.3%. Aim here would be to attempt for 56.3% or better vote share and grab the 2 delegate advantage of 5-3 split.
For 9 Delegates at CD13 CD14: First delegate acquired at 15%, second at 16.7%, third at 27.8% and fourth at 38.9%. Each delegate needs roughly 11% shift in support. The tipping point is again at 50% for the advantageous break with 5-4 split. Additional delegates acquired at 61.2% and 72.3%. For a campaign a smaller movement in these districts could still trigger an extra delegate.
For 10 Delegates at CD1: First two delegates achieved cheaply at 15%. Subsequently every extra 10% gives an additional delegates. Any vote share between 45% and just under 55% will result in a 5-5 delegate split. Crossing a threshold trigger 55% results in two delegate advantage 6-4. The next trigger at 65% for 7-3 split. Unless there is some major event 75% is quite a huge barrier for 8-2 split. 85% will give all 10 delegates.
For 14 Delegates at CD2 : First two delegates are cheap at 15%. Third delegate only at 17.9%. Each subsequent 7.1% rewards an extra delegate. Between 46.5% — 53.6% district breaks even with delegates split (7-7). For that upper hand vote share of 53.6% is needed. The next advantage is at 60.8%. A Small shift is more rewarding here. The district has a good history of Democratic Party voting patterns and population, which is reflected in the number of delegates from the district.
Delegate Allocations Based On State-Wide Results: Statewide results work towards two different category of delegates; 42 At-Large delegates and 20 pledged PLEO delegates. Statewide winner will only get delegate advantage if the vote share exceeds the trigger for additional delegate. Due to very large number of delegates small changes are enough to trigger additional delegate allocations.
The four tables below show triggers in specific ranges (30% — 85%) together with corresponding delegate numbers in each category. The triggers are all listed together with corresponding number of delegates in each category at that trigger point. { I think these might be interesting range. If anyone wants to see the numbers for different range either post a comment or send me a kosmail and I will add new tables or columns}
Vote Share% |
15 |
15.5 |
17.5 |
29.8 |
32.2 |
32.5 |
34.6 |
37 |
37.5 |
39.3 |
41.7 |
Triggers and State-wide Delegates for Vote% Share
PLEOs (20) |
3 |
3 |
4 |
6 |
6 |
7 |
7 |
7 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
At-Large Del(42)
|
6 |
7 |
7 |
13 |
14 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
Vote Share% |
42.5 |
44.1 |
46.5 |
47.5 |
48.9 |
51.2 |
52.5 |
53.6 |
56 |
57.5 |
58.4 |
Triggers and State-wide Delegates for Vote% Share
PLEOs (20) |
9 |
9 |
9 |
10 |
10 |
10 |
11 |
11 |
11 |
12 |
12 |
At-Large Del(42)
|
18 |
19 |
20 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
24 |
25 |
Vote Share% |
60.8 |
62.5 |
63.1 |
65.5 |
67.5 |
67.9 |
70.3 |
72.5 |
72.7 |
75 |
77.4 |
Triggers and State-wide Delegates for Vote% Share
PLEOs (53) |
12 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
14 |
14 |
15 |
15 |
15 |
15 |
At-Large Del(105)
|
26 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
30 |
31 |
32 |
33 |
Vote Share% |
77.5 |
79.8 |
82.2 |
82.5 |
84.6 |
85 |
|
|
|
|
|
Triggers and State-wide Delegates for Vote% Share
PLEOs (20) |
16 |
16 |
16 |
17 |
17 |
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
At-Large Del(42)
|
33 |
34 |
35 |
35 |
36 |
42 |
|
|
|
|
|
For 20 Pledged PLEOs: Exactly {oh how i love to say exactly. it is so rare} 5% votes translate to 1 delegate. At the viability 15% vote share 3 Delegates are acquired. Fourth at 16.1%. Each subsequent delegate from then on at 5% increments. Between 47.5% and 52.5% the delegates split evenly (10-10). Advantage accrued only after 52.5%
For 42 Delegates State-wide (at-large): (See tables above.) Because of a high number of available delegates, the incremental steps are fairly small. Results should reflect the similar percentages. The some of the extra delegates achieving triggers are listed below. Roughly 2.4% votes translates to 1 delegate. Crossing 15% threshold gives a starting point of 6 delegates. Seventh delegate is cheap at 15.5%. Subsequently every 2.4% gives an extra delegate. Between 48.9%-51.2% delegates are split evenly (21-21). Crossing the 51.2% votes statewide awarding advantageous (52-20)split.
Taking all statewide the triggers combined, there are lots of percentage points which award extra delegates. Most have (0.5% to 1.5%) gaps. Thus the margin of statewide votes will have a very definitive advantages in delegate numbers. Just crossing 50% (resulting in equal 10+21 vs 10+21) compared with 5% extra votes at 55% (triggers 51.2%, 52.5% and 53.6%) awarding (11+23 vs 9+19) giving 6 more delegates to winner than the runner up.
Some Casual Scenarios: With so much interest in margins and delegate acquiring numbers, I thought I would add a few numbers and save interested people the hassle of having to do back of a cigarette packet napkin mathematics on the fly.
All calculations in the next bit, based on uniform distribution of votes (ie. same proportion of votes in all districts). Vote share percentages based on relative vote share of two candidates. Implied assumptions, there are two qualifying candidates, all others receive less than qualifying (aka viability threshold) votes.
For anyone who wants to verify the numbers:
Step by step, for each state, for each allocation unit ( each district, PLEO, at-large),
delegates_acquired = rounded value of (total_delegates_available x (decimal_vote_share))
where, decimal_vote_share = votes_for_candidate/total_valid_votes
Viability_threshold = higher value of {100/(2 x total_delegates_available) or 15}
Where are the interesting numbers?: Trigger at 50% in 5, 7, 9 delegate awarding districts are basic stuff of whoever has more gets one extra. There are plenty (nine) of these.
Taking into account the congressional districts based allocations as well as the statewide results, big impact and the most interesting triggers for congressional districts are in 6 delegate districts which need 58.4% for favourable split. Since there are 6 districts in this category, an advantage of (4-2) here instantly means 12 delegate advantage. At the same time 58.4% is also trigger for statewide results at-large categories. So this has an extra delegate impact thereby widening the difference to 14 delegates.
There are few other minor trigger points of single delegates sporadically spread between 50% and 60%. Six triggers just from statewide results in this section and additional individual single district triggers (at 53.5% and 55% and 56.3%)
56.3% is interesting as it is shared between one single district and also statewide category.
Next big changes are at 61.2 and 64.3.
Lets See Some Interesting Numbers:
Scraping past 50%: districts (12+18+12+4+10+5+7) statewide (10+21). Total 99 vs 90
Scraping past 53.6%: districts (12+18+12+4+10+6+8) statewide (11+23). Total 104 vs 85
Just under 58.4%: districts (12+18+12+5+10+6+8) statewide (12+24). Total 107 vs 82
Scraping past 58.4%: districts (12+24+12+5+10+6+8) statewide (12+25). Total 114 vs 75
Scraping past 61.2%: districts (12+24+12+5+12+6+9) statewide (12+26). Total 118 vs 71
Just under 64.3%: districts (12+24+12+5+12+6+9) statewide (13+27). Total 120 vs 69
Scraping past 64.3%: districts (12+24+15+5+12+6+9) statewide (13+27). Total 123 vs 66
Lets see blowout 70% numbers Just under 70%: districts (12+24+15+6+12+7+10) statewide (14+29). Total 129 vs 60
Scraping past 70%: districts (16+24+15+6+12+7+10) statewide (14+29). Total 133 vs 56
Next (Rest of) bit is my personal opinion:
Background: With such a lot of delegates available from the state there are many gradual increases in delegate allocations based on statewide results. So overall margin of victory will have delegate impact. Many instances just 0.5% is enough to grab an extra delegate. I expect campaigns to be aiming hard at grabbing statewide share even if they are not doing well in some specific districts.
Factors in play: The big impacts as we have seen from the numbers in previous section happen at 50%, 58.4% , rest is just a few here and there. For a sufficiently large delegate differences, those pesky {or perhaps interesting battlegrounds is what I mean} 5 and 7 delegate districts become important. District 2 with whopping 14 delegates is definitely going to reward campaign with lopsided influence and delegate numbers.
Military: On a side note, Pennsylvania, appears to display quite a lot of fawning for military, military installations, veterans and “military adventures”. It has been one of the popular destinations for resettling accepted, evacuated and sheltered US allies from Korean war and Indochina war (aka Vietnam war), has some distinct pockets and populations sizes tracing from Korea and Indochina (Vietnam, Combodia, Laos) and some smaller contingents from other neighbouring countries. Not forgetting the children of US Veterans from same places. Any candidate with links to military always plays well and is worth a few percentage points.
Absence of Early/Absentee Voting: Due to absence of early/absentee ballots the whole state efforts in the last few weeks prior to primary is likely to pay off better than other states. An important and reliable feature of Clinton campaign is neutralized effectively to be completely null and void as far as the state is concerned. Turnout overall will be lower than people expect.
Decline of Population and Manufacturing: General population and industry has been in decline in the state. Especially with multiple companies relocating their operations to other parts of USA, or Mexico. Subsequent losses of jobs and associated economics and politics, this provides a fertile ground for both Trump and Sanders.
Campaign Efforts/Organization: Given that Hillary Clinton campaign usually has a solid ground game and early voting, absentee voting efforts in most states, the same effect will not be available here. This will hurt a lot in terms of vote share. However the primary is closed (only registered voters enrolled as Democrats at least 30days in advance allowed to participate) Hillary Clinton has an advantage that lies within the Party core base and improve vote share.
Conversely same factors play in opposite direction for Bernie Sanders. Closed primary is a definite disadvantage for Bernie Sanders, on the other hand lack of early/absentee voting makes it more advantageous.
Consequently, Get Out The Vote efforts on the day of primary will be very important for both campaigns. Level of success will rely on the turnout for respective campaigns on the day itself. For campaigning locally and getting organization in shape, Sanders campaign had a presence here earlier than Clinton but not much early. It was only opened on 22nd March. Much too late to have effective organization to be able to get new voters registered or party affiliations to be switched from Independent to Democrat. Hence the campaign has to rely on informal efforts made previously and on existing organizations, or focus on persuading existing Democrats. Informal groups campaigning for Sanders while heavy on online/web presence has been very low in actual holding events. The informal efforts however have been operational for very long time, pretty much from the day he announced he was running for president. Much of the political calendar and process knowledge is missing from these group. On the positive side, there does indeed appear to be some sort of campaign presence and enthusiastic footprint in every county and every major population centre localities. This be everywhere effort will undoubtedly be beneficial on the day of the primary.
Clinton campaign has been much slower in opening formal offices. Clinton campaign is perhaps relying a bit too heavily on long term allies and supporters. Plenty of local allies and supporters who already hold elected offices or have contested elections, run organizations have been on Clinton side for long enough. Many state legislature campaigns in core Clinton supporter areas appear to be more optimistic about perhaps grabbing a few more state legislature seats due to Clinton pull at the election. Many Clinton allies will benefit in certain areas which are Democratic Party territory thus the winner of primary for state legislature is virtually guaranteed to win their own seats. The mutually beneficial combination in play is effects of party core turn out for most people who normally seek offices (aka the establishment apparatus) and Clinton.
Sanders campaign however has been making a play at trying to limit Clinton gains here. Expecting a lot of corruption/wall street/jobs lost arguments to be played out fully in hope of drumming up support and chipping away from Clinton by association.
State Local Primaries Effect:
With the all in Primary taking place (US Senate, State house seats, State Senate seats, US House seats, Attorney General etc etc) the turnout should be slightly higher than normal. Some very competitive Democratic Party primaries happening at all levels of government. Due to virtually impossible for early or absentee voting, turnout will not be as high as in other states. There are conflicting advantages/disadvantages at play in the state.
Sadly quite a number of state legislature seats are not being contested by Democrats. Some US House seats are also not being contested. Although given the continuous low level corruption sprinkled with occasional big corruption stories that seems to permeate Pennsylvania politics, probably should not be surprised that it puts of most people from entering unless they already have their own source of fund or at least a well defined territory which will support them no matter what.
The funds needed to compete in this expensive media market of Pennsylvania is substantially higher, although not as high as New York or California.
US Senate Primary: Meanwhile multi-way Democratic primary for US Senator from Pennsylvania between Joe Sestak and Kate McGinty and John Fetterman and Joseph Vordvarka is definitely attracting a lot of attention and national press. Core party operations along with President Obama, Vice-President Joe Biden and Emilys list endorsing Kate McGinty during primary, this looks to be an interesting race. Governor Tom Wolf (Dem) endorsement of Kate McGinty should not be surprising as McGinty was chief of staff of Wolf. The engine that elected Tom Wolf to governorship is firmly behind Kate McGinty. Joe Sestak, a former US House Rep, has superb credentials as a very much anti-establishment and independent streak. Additionally he has an excellent name recognition in the state. John Fetterman also fiercely independent and extremely popular in his tiny local town of which he is the Mayor. Added to that Fetterman has displayed a phenomenal capability in rescuing and turning his town around. It promises to be competitive thus again drive up numbers of votes cast. {Note_To_Self: Check Emilys List}
State Treasurer: Two Democrats, one Albert Knoll hoping to that their parents name recognition (former Lt Governor Knoll) and support will translate to help them get an edge over the other. The other some time member of US delegation to the UN but not much else. This is one of the least interesting, least discussed, least considered but at the same time 3rd most important job in the state executive. Naturally Governor being first and Attorney General being second.
State Attorney General Primary: With current AG Kathleen Kane not running for re-election, a three way primary between John Morganelli, Josh Shapiro, Stephen Zappala, all very much capable candidates is mildly interesting. Josh Shapiro hopes to have an advantage over the rest due to support from President Obama and other notables in Democratic Party as well as the core of the state party.
AG Kathleen Kate Factor: The Kathleen Kane effect is also worth mentioning. The Republican Kingdom of Pennsylvania and the knights of porn-table , went all out to ravage and persecute the first Democrat Attorney General and a woman to boot.
The added factor of “porngate” {Ah Nixons everlasting contribution to lexicography. It is not a scandal of sufficient proportions unless we add gate to it} and subsequent highlighting of existing misogyny, racism, corruption and whole gamut of crap at all branches of state government which that came to light during persecution of Attorney General Kathleen Kane (Democrat) is probably having mixed effects. The fallout from the fiasco {I need a decent thesaurus} has claimed many heads including state supreme court justices. The Republican dominated state government and old boys network went all out for Kane. Perhaps all people fed up with the permanent crap at state government will turn out in droves for Trump and Sanders. Perhaps it will energize the Democratic Party core base to turn up to support Democrats which seems better for Clinton. For general election though Republicans will batter Kane to drive up their core constituency turn up. Any politician who has an association with Kane is likely to be spending some time trying to do the complex calculation of advantages and disadvantages of the association. Republicans are bound to attempt double barrelling the Democrat candidates name with Kane. Expecting plenty of speeches and adverts touting Kane-Generic_Smith vision for PA is wrong, blah blah.
Disproportionate Female:Male ratios: Democratic Party heartlands in the state seem to have disproportionately higher female:male ratios as well as higher African American population. The disproportion is not present in other areas of the state. The female:male ratios are higher even when compared to traditional concentrated African American population areas in other states like comparable areas in Maryland/Baltimore.
Six Degrees of DWS and lack of funding: Democrats following either cultist or individualist agenda which precludes teamwork and promotes individualism had been on the rise in state. Directly affecting party organizational structure and subsequent empty coffers. Running for US House seat in Pennsylvania, at least running a competitive campaign, costs at least Seven Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars. Million or more is better. Funding availability has been very poor in most of the house seats. This is usually due to unrealistic expectation of what it means to run for office and how much it costs. Sometimes also due to personalities and egos being bigger than party where the candidates expectation of being able to raise sufficient funds are dealt a jolt of shock when their intended methods do not raise enough funds. Occasional good showing in Democratic heartlands does not compensate for lack of funding and subsequent poor showing for US House and state House/Senate seats. A lot of it has been discouraging very good candidates from even considering a run. {State Party coffers are mostly in negative with party trying to always pay off old costs. Currently not even able to afford its existing operating costs. No doubt we can all play 6 Degrees of DWS and trace everything to DWS and blame DWS and Clinton for it.}
Party needs a long term plan and efforts to make progress on the ground in the state. While the state itself is usually a battleground for presidential elections, this does not translate easily into other offices.
Now for district by district: {Anyone with more local state insight, please add and share your thoughts in the commentary. My own thoughts will definitely have shortcomings}.
First thought that springs to mind is, What on earth is with the congressional districts map? The weird hammer shaped district 12, unnecessary upside down wig in district 9, tailless dragon at district 17, the sheep stomach at district 16, twisted pigs tail with warts in district 7, unkempt Mongolian moustache in district 6, and many many more weirdness.
Second thought is, the gerrymandered or natural population reflection and segregation that divided the state into a small portion of elected offices in very high density Democratic Party supporters, and large portion of elected offices into thinly spread out Republican dominance. {The Democratic Party dominance in some areas are utterly complete (beyond 80% electorate) thus democratic primaries effectively function as election. Republican Party dominance everywhere else seems to be floating around between 55% to 60%.}
While the mid-term voter turnouts are lower across the whole of USA for both parties, in Pennsylvania the Republican Party turnout in midterm elections do not suffer as much as in other states. {Or perhaps that was Just Rick Santorum fans and tea party allies disproportionately affecting election data.}
The Democratic party turnout however as usual is comparable with rest of the USA. Just to be clear, by that I mean it is abysmal here but it is equally abysmal in all other states.
Only some specific districts which I felt were interesting have been covered in greater detail. Rest I have only made some cursory notes.
CD1 (10 Delegates): (District consists of some clumps and lumps patched onto a strip of Southern Philadelphia) : Rough demographics: 26% white, 46% black, 6% Asian: (20%Hispanic). Disproportionately higher female (53) :male (47) ratios.
A decidedly heavy in AA population, with a strong Democratic Party enrolment and voting turnout. Incumbent for US House Representative Robert Brady is very popular and allegedly was very politely upset in 2014 mid term election when he heard he might just manage to get slightly above 80% votes when most Democrats elsewhere being chased out of their offices.
He is also infamous for stealing drinking water glasses from the Pope during popes visit and Barack Obama during inauguration. Gave hope to all Biden enthusiasts when he quipped “I like Hillary Clinton very much, but Joe [Biden] is a personal friend”. Sometimes I wonder if he does these things on purpose to get on the state news when it is being eclipsed by events beyond him. Subsequently, Robert Brady has campaigned for Hillary Clinton in other states including Iowa. Brady election engine is firmly behind Clinton. This district with its 10 delegates will be heavily going for Clinton at most likely (7-3) or better.
CD2 (14 delegates): (District consists of a blob right in the middle of Southeast Philadelphia) : Rough demographics: 32% white, 59% black, 5% asian: (6%Hispanic). Here also disproportionately higher female (54.3) :male (45.7) ratios.
Even for a predominantly Black population centres, the level of female:male ratio is too severe. Local primaries for both state legislature and US House promising to be very interesting. US House Rep Chaka Fattah, currently under racketeering charges for misappropriation of campaign funds, and his allies are all out defending primary challenges that look credible. Some of his allies happen to be up for re-election to state legislature at the same time. A few of them also have own primaries. The Fattah Team seems to be doubling down for a contest. They must be feeling pretty good about their prospects as there are other very viable candidates for US House in Fattah circle who were ready to jump in if Fattah had to quit/decided to quit blah blah. Republican election engines in the state trying very hard drum up support for GOP under the banner of “fed up of corruption, Vote for GOP”. However it is unlikely to have as much effect as they hope since state is run by Republicans and there have been plenty of Republican corruption scandals.
Demographics favour Clinton heavily in the district. Sanders campaign going all out to make corruption at state and even Democrats synonymous with Clinton with hope of limiting Clinton gains. The Team Fattah electioneering machine a bit busy getting their own team re-elected. So a vital part of normally what would have been a walkover re-elections for the team thus enabling them to focus on Clinton promotions has been deprived. However I suspect Clinton will still benefit from the efforts of both Fattah and his primary challengers.
I suspect the district will still break very heavily in Clinton favour with (9-5)split.
CD3 (6 delegates): (Bordering Ohio, district consists of Northwest Pennsylvania ( Crawford, Mercer, Butler, Armstrong Counties and bits from Erie, Clarion and Lawrence Counties). Rough demographics: 98% white. Sanders early campaign presence and absolute lack of any credible Democratic Party presence makes this a more promising target. US House seat is being surrendered to Republican incumbent without any efforts to present competition. The Republican US House Rep has previously always had a competitive runs and barely scraped into 60% even with with weak opponent and incumbency advantage in 2014 slaughter of Democrats.
I expect the district to be in Sanders favour coming close enough to be pushing for (4-2) delegate split instead of (3-3).
CD4 (6 delegates): (Bordering Maryland, district consists of a chunk in south Pennsylvania, Includes state capitol Harrisburg, Adams, York counties and bits from Dauphin, Cumberland) . Rough demographics: 86% white 8%Black. Mild and mediocre Republicans have been able to keep this too easily due to lack of that dreaded thing called resources (money and people and time) on Democratic Party side. Democrat Joshua Burkholder holding fort as sacrificial lamb for Democratic Party.
Expecting the district to break even (3-3). 6 delegate districts are a bit hard to break favourably as it needs 58.4%
CD5 (5 delegates): (In north bordering Canada and New York, big and sprawling rural district). Rough Demographics, 95% white, 2%black, 2% Asian. Incidentally, female:male ratio is less than 1. That is , there are more men than women. This is a reliably Republican district with Republican Rep. There is no Democratic primary for house seat. Democrat Kerith Strano Taylor is attempting a second run to capture the House seat for Democrats. So it is a rematch of 2014 election. However even with the presidential election run, there might not be enough push and interest to get the seat. Taylor suffers once again from not having very little money to run an effective campaign. The district is definitely a fertile ground for Sanders campaign. Added to that Taylor has been a vocal campaigner and very early supporter of Sanders.
I expect the district breaking in favour of Sanders (3-2).
CD6 (7 delegates): In the Southeast, a crooked wig shaped district that seems to have been especially designed just to exclude Reading. Rough Demographics, 88% white, 4%black. Another reliably Republican district. There is a definite core baseline of Democratic Party voters. Manan Trivedi has three times attempted to take this seat, unsuccessfully, losing each time with same margin to an incumbent twice and on third occasion of open seat to a different Republican. Vague and dirty sounds have been rumbling on the current primary on Democratic Party side this time round. Some hopefuls and hacks hoping and suggesting that a name that does not sound foreign and preferably Christian is better suited to win a better share since at least 42% was guaranteed even to any Democrat. Two democrats in primary, Mike Parish and Lindy Li toughing it out. {updated: Mike Parish onto General as Lindy Li withdrew couple of days ago. problems with number of valid signatures on petition. }
Expecting the district to break in favour of Sanders (4-3).
CD7 (8 delegates): Another in the Southeast, and yet another rotting teeth shaped crazy map of district. Rough Demographics, 89% white, 6%black, 4% asian. Another reliably Republican district. Once again due to absolute lack of funds for Democratic Challengers. Voter turnout is unusually higher even for Republicans.
Expecting district to break in favour of Clinton (5-3).
CD8 (7 delegates): Another in the East bordering New Jersey. Rough Demographics, 90% white, 4%black, 4% asian. Another incumbency reliant otherwise competitive seat current Republican district. The Republicans attempting to transfer the district between brothers, from current rep Michael G FitzPatrick to brother Brian J FitzPatrick. It looks like they will be successful. While the seat is open, the name recognition factor should play well for Republicans. On the Democratic Party side fairly competitive primary for one of the few openings should drive voter turnout.
Expecting district to be tightly fought over between Sanders and Clinton with a small advantage towards Sanders (4-3).
CD9 (5 delegates): Another in the South Central, shape of a bowl made by a three year old playing with clay. Rough Demographics, 95% white, 3%black. Reliably Republican US House seat is being surrendered to long term Republican incumbent without any efforts to present competition. Fertile grounds for Sanders. I expect the district to be in Sanders favour with just 50% for (3-2).
CD10 (5 delegates): Another in the sprawling mess in the Northwest. Rough Demographics, 94% white, 2%black. Another reliably Republican US House seat is being surrendered to long term Republican incumbent without any efforts to present competition. Fertile grounds for Sanders. I expect the district to be in Sanders favour with just 50% for (3-2).
CD11 (6 delegates): Another reliably Republican district in the Northeast. Rough Demographics, 90% white, 5%black. Seat is being contested by Democrat Mike Marsicano. No primary on Democrats. I expect the district to break even (3-3) which is in whole range of 41.7 to 58.4 percentages. Clinton might be nearer to pushing for advantage.
CD12 (6 delegates): Weird hammer in southwest. Swingy district with just two term Republican Rep. Rough Demographics, 94% white, 3%black. There is a lopsided Democratic primary between Steve Larchuk and 2014 candidate Erin McClelland. However McClelland should be able to handily get nomination again for a rematch in general election.
Here also I expect the district to break even (3-3) which is in whole range of 41.7 to 58.4 percentages. Clinton might be nearer to pushing for advantage.
CD13 (9 delegates): Scorpion pincers in southeast with a bit of Philadelphia. Rough Demographics, 67% white, 18%black, 8%asian. Female:male ratio is disproportionately higher. This reliable Democratic Party heartland was successfully transferred from previous Democrat Rep to current Democrat Rep (Brendan Boyle). No primary on either side. On funding side, Boyle has a decent war chest and is attempting to get a better performance than in 2014. Large concentration of Democratic Party core support base. Sanders started campaigning here early.
Here I expect the district to break in favour of Clinton at (6-3) which needs 61.2%.
CD14 (9 delegates): The big blob of whole of Pittsburgh and a some bolt ons makes up the district. Rough Demographics, 72% white, 22%black, 3%asian. Here also Female:male ratio is disproportionately even higher. This is another reliable Democratic Party heartland where occasionally Republicans are unable to field a candidate. This year included. A token Primary against incumbent Michael F Doyle is being mounted by Janis Brooks. However this is more geared towards getting Brooks name more familiar in the electorate for other future elected offices and a training run for the campaign team. Even though Sanders started campaigning and holding rallies early here, the large concentration of Democratic Party core support base is more favourable towards Clinton.
Here I expect the district to break comfortably in favour of Clinton at (6-3) which needs 61.2%.
CD15 (6 delegates): A strip on eastern parts consisting of left over bits of other places that did not fit anywhere else. Demographics, 87% white, 4%black, 2% asian. Although currently Republican district, the margins suggest that this is barely being held together with just incumbency advantage. A well funded campaign from Democrats should stand a good chance of flipping the district. Rick Daugherty, who made a previous attempt to unseat the Republican Rep is going to try again this year. There are no primaries for the US House seat here.
Here also I expect the district to break even (3-3) which is in whole range of 41.7 to 58.4 percentages. Clinton on the boundaries of pushing for advantage.
CD16 (6 delegates): A twisted intestine that deliberately went out of its way to acquire the appendage of city of Reading. Demographics, 84% white, 6%black, 2% asian. Although currently Republican district, the margins here also suggest that this is barely being held together with just incumbency advantage. However this time the seat is open. Democrats have an opportunity to pick up the seat. There is a primary on Republican side. On Democratic side quite decently funded (compared to other Democrats) capable Christina Hartman already campaigning hard and no primary. This race will probably boil down to funding and more importantly voter driving organization and group support.
Here also I expect the district to break even (4-2) in Clintons favour which needs 58.4 percentages.
CD17 (7 delegates): Another weird shape in the East. Rough Demographics, 89% white, 6%black. Another incumbency reliant otherwise competitive seat current Democratic district. The current Democratic Rep Matt Cartwright not facinmg any primary challengers.
Expecting district to be tightly fought over between Sanders and Clinton with a small advantage towards Clinton (4-3).
CD18 (6 delegates): Surprisingly not too unusual shape. Rough demographics: 94% white, 2%Black 2% asian. This is a reliably Republican district. Sanders early campaign presence and absolute lack of any credible Democratic Party presence makes this a more promising target. US House seat is being surrendered to Republican incumbent without any efforts to present competition.
I expect the district to be in Sanders favour coming close enough to be pushing for (4-2) delegate split instead of (3-3).
Statewide: Overall statewide I expect Sanders at 45% Clinton at 55%. giving statewide delegates Sanders (9+19) vs Clinton (11+23). From districts Sander (55) vs Clinton (72).
Total Sanders 83 vs Clinton 106,
Previously covered states are all listed with the individual state links in this single document. I will be updating it as and when new states get done: All-Links-Collection-Delegate-Mathematics-Series-2016-Democratic-Primary
Enjoy and hopefully you will have spotted where you might tip the balance personally and like to campaign or make that extra push for your preferred candidate.
Meanwhile today I invite you to peek at news from Nepal from our Kossack guavaboy here at http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/04/01/1508423/-Nepal-news-roundup-April-1st-2016-global-health-and-one-hundred-million-condoms
For those you want an inkling about what to expect for those first footsteps into political ladder, here from Chris Reeves another fantastic jewel -Nuts-amp-Bolts-Inside-a-Democratic-Campaign-Recognizing-And-Building-Community and whole series at Nuts and Bolts/history
For the quartermasters of revolutions, this is the time to prepare for contesting 2017/2018 state and federal elections.