Jump to content
Twin Tiers Living

Pennsylvania Continues Tradition As "Keystone State" In Presidential Elections

Recommended Posts

file-20240916-16-c462kt.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1

Kamala Harris campaigns in Pennsylvania, a state Donald Trump won in 2016 and Joe Biden won in 2020. AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

 

by Robert Speel, Penn State

Pennsylvania’s role as a swing state in presidential elections is a modern continuation of a characteristic noted as early as 1802. At a rally celebrating the election victory of President Thomas Jefferson, Pennsylvania was reportedly referred to as “the keystone of the federal union” – a keystone being the central stone in an arch that keeps all the other arch stones in place.

Since the nation’s earliest days, Pennsylvania has in many ways been at the center of the action. The state hosted the Continental Congress in Philadelphia in the 1770s and was the final state to make approval of the Declaration of Independence unanimous in July 1776. At the time of independence, Pennsylvania was also at the geographical center of the 13 original Colonies, with six states to its south and six states to its north and east.

The state hasn’t always been a swing state, but it has usually been central to presidential campaigns – and remains so today. Pennsylvania includes voters with a broad range of political views, usually keeping results close in statewide elections.

Philadelphia voters are almost entirely liberal on all issues, while most rural Pennsylvania voters are usually conservative and skeptical of urban politics. The state’s main suburban areas are split, though, with Philadelphia’s supporting Democrats and Pittsburgh’s supporting Republicans.

Meanwhile, the often-overlooked smaller metro areas of Pennsylvania, like Harrisburg, Allentown-Bethlehem, Erie and Scranton, are the true swing areas of the swing state.

A man in a suit stands in a crowd, holding up his hands.

Donald Trump has campaigned extensively in Pennsylvania, including this June 2024 trip to Philadelphia. AP Photo/Chris Szagola

Pennsylvania transitions from swing state to solid Republican

As the regional political divide between North and South grew in the 19th century, Pennsylvania’s key role in presidential elections grew as well. Between 1828 and 1880, Pennsylvania was the only state to vote for the winning candidate in every presidential election. Pennsylvania voters vacillated between supporting Democrats and Whigs from the 1830s to the 1850s, and then voted for all of the winning Republican presidential candidates in the 1860s and 1870s.

Pennsylvania was not a swing state for many decades after the Civil War. Voters there supported Republican candidates in every presidential election between 1860 and 1932 – including Progressive Republican Theodore Roosevelt in 1912.

A man and a woman stand on a train balcony over a sign reading 'Pennsylvania Railroad.'

Outgoing President Herbert Hoover, aboard a Pennsylvania Railroad train, heads to the 1933 inauguration of Franklin D. Roosevelt. HUM Images/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

Pennsylvania switches to lean toward Democrats

Through the 1940s, Pennsylvania continued to support Republican presidential candidates more than the rest of the country did as a whole. But then the state switched abruptly and began to support Democratic presidential candidates by margins larger than the nation’s electorate as a whole for 60 years from 1952 through 2012.

That is partly because the power of the Republican political machine in Philadelphia disintegrated. There has been no Republican mayor there since 1952.

When the South began to trend Republican in the 1950s and 1960s, and Philadelphia became more Democratic, the state of Pennsylvania also became more Democratic than the country as a whole in presidential elections. Pennsylvania continued to lack status as a swing state in Electoral College politics, as Democrats won all the close presidential elections there for 60 years, even when Republicans won nationwide. That included 1968, when Democrat Hubert Humphrey won the state; 2000, when Democrat Al Gore won Pennsylvania, but lost a close and disputed national electoral vote; and 2004, when Democrat John Kerry won the Keystone State.

The years when Pennsylvanians voted for a Republican presidential candidate were only those when the Republican won the nation as a whole by particularly large margins – twice for Eisenhower, for Nixon’s reelection, and twice for Reagan.

Pennsylvania returns to swing state status in the 21st century

However, early this century, in a series of closely contested presidential elections, Republicans began to sense opportunities for Pennsylvania to play a role in national Electoral College calculations.

The proliferation of state political polling meant campaigns could determine state-specific voting trends. Most states were found to reliably vote for one party in every presidential election – spawning the labeling of “blue states” and “red states” that began after the 2000 election. That left only a small number of swing states with close polls to be perceived as crucial for victory.

During the 2000 election campaign, the media repeatedly emphasized that Pennsylvania, Florida and Michigan were the key battleground states, based on polling and on their large share of electoral votes. When Gore was announced the winner of all three states early on election night, everyone assumed that he would therefore become president. However, later that night, the projection that Gore won Florida was retracted, leading to a long legal battle that ended with George W. Bush as president.

Pennsylvania continued to be perceived as a potential victory for Republicans in the next three presidential elections, even though Democrats won each time. The Republican efforts were sometimes criticized as futile in the media and among political consultants.

A man smiles widely in front of a crowd of celebrating people.

Philadelphians celebrate the 2020 presidential win of Joe Biden. Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis via Getty Images

Pennsylvania flips to Trump and then to Biden

But with Trump in 2016, the Republican Party had a breakthrough in Pennsylvania, not only winning the presidential election there for the first time since George H.W. Bush in 1988, but also performing better there than in nationwide results.

The deciding factors included Trump’s high popularity in the rural parts of the state and in suburban Pittsburgh, and Hillary Clinton’s not making campaign appearances in many cities outside the state’s two major metro areas. Trump’s surprising – though very small – wins in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin that year provided the margin of his Electoral College victory and have led to a national media and political focus on those three key swing states ever since.

Biden, who was born in Scranton, Pa., won the state back for Democrats in 2020. But Trump still won a higher vote percentage in Pennsylvania than he won nationwide.

In 2024, both the Trump and Kamala Harris campaigns will likely continue to focus a lot of time and resources on the Keystone State as one of the main opportunities for an Electoral College majority in November.

 

This is an updated version of an article originally published July 18, 2024.The Conversation

Robert Speel is Associate Professor of Political Science at Erie Campus, Penn State

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if we were a true Union of States, no one, or handful of them should decide the outcome of a National election. regardless of size or population, each State should get one electoral vote. the candidates would be forced to spend time in each state to hear the concerns of its People, and the People need to know their votes would actually count. it could also minimize the actions of States with Sanctuary cities in that as their populations swell with illegals in particular, when next census rolls around, those states(often left leaning/dominant) gain more seats in CONgress as well as electors... gaining an unfair apportionment advantage over States more inclined to follow Laws of the Land

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you get rid of the electoral college votes the Republicans lose every time remember that pa is one of those state in which they can't figure out who they want to win as a whole so I'm not surprised if they go red this year 😕 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Pvt Snowball said:

If you get rid of the electoral college votes the Republicans lose every time remember that pa is one of those state in which they can't figure out who they want to win as a whole so I'm not surprised if they go red this year 😕 

im more interested in what is fair and better for the Nation than which party might lose a spot at the feed-trough.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fact at the same time voting for crazy never goes the nation way weather you vote or not crazy is something the nation doesn't need 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...