What to make of Pennsylvania's status as a top tier battleground state? According to RealClearPolitics, Obama has a 13.8 lead in that state, far greater than his lead in NJ or OR, both of which are assumed to be safe states for the Democrats, and haven't warranted a visit from either candidate.
Politico is featuring a story today on McCain's continuing attempts to win the state, calling it a "risky play:"
Pennsylvania hasn't voted Republican for president since 1988. Democrats have increased their registration numbers here by more than a half-million over the past year, and Barack Obama has a double-digit lead in the polls.Yet John McCain's campaign continues to signal that it intends to contest the state and its 21 electoral votes to the end. It is a high-risk, high-return endeavor: Pennsylvania represents a costly gambit, one that siphons resources from must-win states such as Ohio and Florida, but a win here would enable McCain to lose a few other states that George W. Bush carried and still capture the White House.
Of course, McCain could be making a "Hail Mary" attempt to carry the state in the hope of pulling off a miracle as his chances sink across the board. But if that was the case, wouldn't the Obama campaign just ignore him and focus on making inroads elsewhere?
Instead, Obama was in PA just yesterday, with four separate rallies in just two hours.
And Biden, whose Scranton roots were part of the reason for his pick, has made several visits to the state, including a rally tomorrow with both of the Clintons:
Biden will stump in Scranton Sunday with Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, a schedule that will bring Biden's total days campaigning in the state to five -- the same as Palin.
In other words, Obama's team is taking McCain's efforts to contest PA seriously, UNLIKE IN IOWA, where they don't seem to be.
And here's Rendell at the rally yesterday, making them sound like the underdog here:
At one rally, in a North Philadelphia neighborhood near Temple University, Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, the popular former Philadelphia mayor who backed Clinton in the primary, warned the crowd of 20,000 that Obama would need a massive turnout in Philadelphia to carry the state."In the primary, only 53 percent of registered voters in Philadelphia turned out," Rendell said. "Ladies and gentlemen, 24 days from today, 53 percent will not cut it. It will not cut it. If we want to make sure Barack Obama is the 44th president of the United States, we need to turn out at least 75 percent."
In 2004, Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry crushed President Bush in the city by more than 400,000 votes on his way to winning the state by about 144,000 votes. Since then, Democrats have increased their voter registration edge substantially in the city.
Rendell told reporters after a rally in city's Germantown section that his goal is for Obama to drive a historic turnout in Philadelphia and then to meet or exceed Kerry's showing in Pittsburgh and the rest of the state. Rendell predicted the best opportunities for improvement are in south central Pennsylvania, which is becoming less conservative as it absorbs population from Philadelphia, and traditionally Democratic northeastern Pennsylvania.
So what's the deal with the polling here? Clearly, both campaign's internals must show a closer race than 13 points, but how much closer? And, if that's true, why are the polls so far off?
|
|
|
Permalink :: 34 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
