Pennsylvania
Is Pennsylvania still a swing state?
By MARC LEVYThe Associated Press
HARRISBURG — The drubbing Democrats took in Pennsylvania in this year’s election has prompted predictable vows to rebound, but it has also sowed doubts about whether Pennsylvania might be leaving the ranks of up-for-grabs swing states for a right-leaning existence more like Ohio’s.
The introspection over voters’ rejection of Democrats comes amid growing speculation about Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro as a contender for the party’s 2028 presidential nomination.
Widely expected to seek reelection in the 2026 mid-terms, Shapiro was considered a rising star in the party even before he garnered heavy national attention for making Vice President Kamala Harris’ shortlist of candidates for running mates.
Some Pennsylvania Democrats say 2024’s losses are, at least in part, attributable to voters motivated specifically by President-elect Donald Trump. Many of those voters won’t show up if Trump isn’t on the ballot, the theory goes, leaving Pennsylvania’s status as the ultimate swing state intact.
“I don’t think it’s an indicator for Pennsylvania,” said Jamie Perrapato, executive director of Turn PA Blue, which helps organize and train campaign volunteers. “I’ll believe it when these people come out and vote in any elections but for the presidency.”
Pennsylvania’s status as the nation’s premier battleground state in 2024 was unmistakable: political campaigns dropped more money on campaign ads than in any other state, according to data from ad-tracking firm AdImpact.
Plenty of that money was spent by Democrats, but their defeat was across the board. Democrats in Pennsylvania lost its 19 presidential electoral votes, a U.S. Senate seat, three other statewide races, two congressional seats and what was once a reassuring advantage in voter registration.
Some of those losses were particularly notable: Democrats hadn’t lost Pennsylvania’s electoral votes and a Senate incumbent in the same year since 1880. The defeat of three-term Sen. Bob Casey is especially a gut-punch for Democrats: the son of a former governor has served in statewide office since 1997.
An echo of what happened everywhere
The same debate that Democrats are having nationally over Harris’ decisive loss is playing out in Pennsylvania, with no agreement on what caused them to be so wrong.
Some blamed President Joe Biden, a Pennsylvania native, for backtracking on his promise not to run for reelection. Some blamed the party’s left wing and some blamed Harris, saying she tried to woo Republican voters instead of focusing on pocketbook issues that were motivating working-class voters.
JIM LOCKWOOD/STAFF PHOTO
FILE – Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., left, stops to speak to members of the media before voting, Tuesday, Nov. 5, 2024, in Scranton, Pa. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke, File)
In Pennsylvania, finger-pointing erupted in the Democratic stronghold of Philadelphia — where Trump significantly narrowed his 2020 deficit — between the city’s Democratic Party chair and a Harris campaign adviser.
The nation’s sixth-most populous city is historically a driver of Democratic victories statewide, but Harris’ margin there was the smallest of any Democratic presidential nominee since John Kerry’s in 2004, and turnout there was well below the statewide average.
Rural Democrats suggested the party left votes on the table in their regions, too. Some said Harris hurt herself by not responding forcefully enough in the nation’s No. 2 natural gas state against Trump’s assertions that she would ban fracking.
Ed Rendell, the former two-term governor of Pennsylvania and ex-Democratic National Committee chair, said Trump had the right message this year and that Harris didn’t have enough time on the campaign trail to counter it.
Still, Rendell said Pennsylvania remains very much a swing state.
“I wouldn’t go crazy over these election results,” Rendell said. “It’s still tight enough to say that in 2022 the Democrats swept everything and you would have thought that things looked pretty good for us, and this time we almost lost everything.”
That year, Shapiro won the governor’s office by nearly 15%, John Fetterman was the only candidate in the nation to flip a U.S. Senate seat despite suffering a stroke in the midst of his campaign, and Democrats captured control of the state House of Representatives for the first time in a dozen years.
Bethany Hallam, an Allegheny County council member who is part of a wave of progressive Democrats to win office around Pittsburgh in recent years, said the party can fix things before Pennsylvania becomes Ohio. But she cautioned against interpreting 2024 as a one-time blip, saying it would be a mistake to think Trump voters will never be heard from again.
“They’re going to be more empowered to keep voting more,” Hallam said. “They came out, finally exercised their votes and the person they picked won. … I don’t think this was a one-off thing.”
The ever-changing political landscape
Shapiro, assuming he seeks another term in 2026, would likely benefit from a mid-term backlash that has haunted the party in power — in this case, Republicans and Trump — in nearly every election since World War II.
The political landscape never stays the same, and voters two years from now will be reacting to a new set of factors: the state of the economy, the ups and downs of Trump’s presidency, events no one sees coming.
Rendell predicted that Trump’s public approval ratings will be badly damaged — below 40% — even before he takes office.
Democrats, meanwhile, fully expect Republicans to come after Shapiro in an effort to damage any loftier ambitions he may have.
They say they’ll be ready.
“He’s on the MAGA radar,” said Michelle McFall, the Westmoreland County Democratic Party chair. “He’s a wildly popular governor in what is still the most important battleground state … and we’re going to make sure we’re in fighting shape to hold that seat.”
In 2025, partisan control of the state Supreme Court will be up for grabs when three Democratic justices elected a decade ago must run to retain their seats in up-or-down elections without an opponent. Republicans have it marked on their calendars.
Democrats will go into those battles with their narrowest voter registration edge in at least a half-century. What was an advantage of 1.2 million voters in 2008, the year Barack Obama won the presidency, is now a gap of fewer than 300,000.
University of Pennsylvania researchers found that, since the 2020 presidential election, Republican gains weren’t because Republicans registered more new voters.
Rather, the GOP’s gains were from more Democrats switching their registration to Republican, a third party or independent, as well as more inactive Democratic voters being removed from registration rolls, the researchers reported.
Democrats have won more statewide elections in the past 25 years, but the parties are tied in that category in the five elections from 2020 through 2024.
Daniel Hopkins, a political science professor at the University of Pennsylvania, said it is hard to predict that Pennsylvania is trending in a particular direction, since politics are evolving and parties that lose tend to adapt.
Even when Democrats had larger registration advantages, Hopkins said, Republicans competed on a statewide playing field.
Hopkins said Democrats should be worried that they lost young voters and Hispanic voters to Trump, although the swing toward the GOP was relatively muted in Pennsylvania. Trump’s 1.8 percentage-point victory was hardly a landslide, he noted, and it signals that Pennsylvania will be competitive moving forward.
“I don’t think that the registration numbers are destiny,” Hopkins said. “That’s partly because even with Democrats losing their registration advantage, whichever party can win the unaffiliated voters by a healthy margin will carry the state.”
Originally Published:
Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania opens door for opioid funds to support overwhelmed public defenders
Pennsylvania
UPenn faculty condemn Trump administration’s demand for ‘lists of Jews’
Several faculty groups have denounced the Trump administration’s efforts to obtain information about Jewish professors, staff and students at the University of Pennsylvania – including personal emails, phone numbers and home addresses – as government abuse with “ominous historical overtones”.
The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is demanding the university turn over names and personal information about Jewish members of the Penn community as part of the administration’s stated goal to combat antisemitism on campuses. But some Jewish faculty and staff have condemned the government’s demand as “a visceral threat to the safety of those who would find themselves identified because compiling and turning over to the government ‘lists of Jews’ conjures a terrifying history”, according to a press release put out by the groups’ lawyers.
The EEOC sued Penn in November over the university’s refusal to fully comply with its demands. On Tuesday, the American Association of University Professors’ national and Penn chapters, the university’s Jewish Law Students Association and its Association of Senior and Emeritus Faculty, and the American Academy of Jewish Research filed a motion in federal court to intervene in the case.
“These requests would require Penn to create and turn over a centralized registry of Jewish students, faculty, and staff – a profoundly invasive and dangerous demand that intrudes deeply into the freedoms of association, religion, speech, and privacy enshrined in the First Amendment,” the groups argued.
“We are entering territory that should shock every single one of us,” said Norm Eisen, co-founder and executive chair of the Democracy Defenders Fund on a press call. The fund is representing the faculty groups along with the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania and the firm Hangley Aronchick Segal Pudlin and Schiller. “That kind of information – however purportedly benign the excuses given for it – can be put to the most dangerous misuse. This is an abuse of government power that drags us back to some of the darkest chapters in our history.”
The EEOC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The University of Pennsylvania was among dozens of US universities to come under federal investigation over alleged antisemitism in the aftermath of the 7 October 2023 Hamas attacks and Israel’s subsequent war in Gaza. In response, the university established a taskforce to study antisemitism, implemented a series of measures and shared hundreds of pages of documents to comply with government demands.
But the university refused to comply with the EEOC’s July subpoena for personal information of Jewish faculty, students and staff, or those affiliated with Jewish organizations who had not given their consent, as well as the names of individuals who had participated in confidential listening sessions or received a survey by the university’s antisemitism taskforce. A university spokesperson said in November that “violating their privacy and trust is antithetical to ensuring Penn’s Jewish community feels protected and safe”. Instead, the university offered to inform all its employees of the EEOC investigation, inviting those interested to contact the agency directly.
But that was not enough for the commission, which brought the university to court to seek to enforce the subpoena.
“The EEOC remains steadfast in its commitment to combatting workplace antisemitism and seeks to identify employees who may have experienced antisemitic harassment. Unfortunately, the employer continues to refuse to identify members of its workforce who may have been subjected to this unlawful conduct,” the EEOC chair, Andrea Lucas, said in a statement at the time. “An employer’s obstruction of efforts to identify witnesses and victims undermines the EEOC’s ability to investigate harassment.”
The EEOC request prompted widespread alarm and condemnation among Jewish faculty, and earned rebukes from the university’s Hillel and other Jewish groups.
Steven Weitzman, a professor with Penn’s religious studies department who also served on the university’s antisemitism taskforce, said that the mere request for such lists “instills a sense of vulnerability among Jews” and that the government cannot guarantee that the information it collects won’t fall “into the wrong hands or have unintended consequences”.
“Part of what sets off alarm bells for people like me is a history of people using Jewish lists against Jews,” he said . “The Nazi campaign against Jews depended on institutions like universities handing over information about their Jewish members to the authorities.”
“As Jewish study scholars, we know well the dangers of collecting such information,” said Beth Wenger, who teaches Jewish history at Penn.
It’s not the first time the EEOC’s efforts to fight antisemitism have caused alarm among Jewish faculty. Last spring, the commission texted the personal phones of employees of Barnard College, the women’s school affiliated with Columbia University, linking to a survey that asked respondents whether they identified as Jewish or Israeli.
Pennsylvania
How Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro’s removal is impacting Pennsylvania
-
Montana4 days agoService door of Crans-Montana bar where 40 died in fire was locked from inside, owner says
-
Technology1 week agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Delaware5 days agoMERR responds to dead humpback whale washed up near Bethany Beach
-
Dallas, TX6 days agoAnti-ICE protest outside Dallas City Hall follows deadly shooting in Minneapolis
-
Dallas, TX1 week agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Virginia4 days agoVirginia Tech gains commitment from ACC transfer QB
-
Iowa1 week agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Education1 week agoVideo: This Organizer Reclaims Counter Space


