Which members are likely to loose their seats due to reapportionment?

[Keystone Phil]

Pennsylvania is apparently going to be more interesting than just getting rid of Critz. Not sure if the rumored plan is for real though.

[Keystone Phil]

Pennsylvania is apparently going to be more interesting than just getting rid of Critz. Not sure if the rumored plan is for real though.

What games are yall gonna try this time.

Actually, it seems fair...almost too fair, if that makes sense. 

[Keystone Phil]

Pennsylvania is apparently going to be more interesting than just getting rid of Critz. Not sure if the rumored plan is for real though.

What games are yall gonna try this time.

Actually, it seems fair...almost too fair, if that makes sense. 

What do you make out of that?

http://www.politicspa.com/politicspa-presents-redistricting-scenarios/19431/

It's what everyone expects and it might end up that way but it doesn't seem that way. Hate to sound like Sam here but I won't give away details. 

[Keystone Phil]

Pennsylvania is apparently going to be more interesting than just getting rid of Critz. Not sure if the rumored plan is for real though.

Doing more than just getting rid of Critz in PA-12 would risk making a map where Democrats could pick up several more seats.  Republicans are already way overrepresented in the state now.  They have to protect PA-03, PA-06, PA-07, PA-08, and PA-11, and making PA-18 or PA-05 too Democratic could give Democrats an opportunity in those seats. 

Suggesting that the Dems would get PA 5 made your officially made your post laughable.

The rumored plan isn't risky at all. That was my point in following posts.

[Keystone Phil]

Pennsylvania is apparently going to be more interesting than just getting rid of Critz. Not sure if the rumored plan is for real though.

Doing more than just getting rid of Critz in PA-12 would risk making a map where Democrats could pick up several more seats.  Republicans are already way overrepresented in the state now.  They have to protect PA-03, PA-06, PA-07, PA-08, and PA-11, and making PA-18 or PA-05 too Democratic could give Democrats an opportunity in those seats. 

Suggesting that the Dems would get PA 5 made your officially made your post laughable.

The rumored plan isn't risky at all. That was my point in following posts.

Democrats have held PA-05 before.  Its no more laughable than Republicans getting PA-13. 

The current PA 5 hasn't had a Democratic Congressman.

Democrats have held PA-05 before. 

From what I can tell, not since one term in the mid-70s when it was PA-23. PA-5 used to designate a Philly district, FWIW.

I do remember PA-9 being competitive in the special election to replace Bud Shuster before 9/11 goosed all the Republicans' numbers.

The Dems were running a strong candidate - current State Representative and 2010 Lt. Gubernatorial nominee Scott Conklin - so that explains that. Ever since then, Shuster, Jr. has coasted with the exception of the 2004 primary which he almost lost.

  Although Phil personally, do you really want to give up on a shot at taking the 13th?  I'll say it's an uphill battle, but for a while I was a bit nervous and called it a sleeper in this past election.

It's possible to take it but I'd still personally prefer to be in the 8th and not care about the 13th.   

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sure we can lose the 7th in a wave year but not the 16th. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Bingo

[Keystone Phil]

As for reapportionment, the Republicans in Pennsylvania will get rid of Altmire and pack the 13th with Democrats with certainty.

You know for certain? Who are you?    Give me your idea for how Altmire is going to get axed and I'll see if you're for real. 

[Keystone Phil]

Pennsylvania is apparently going to be more interesting than just getting rid of Critz. Not sure if the rumored plan is for real though.

Doing more than just getting rid of Critz in PA-12 would risk making a map where Democrats could pick up several more seats.  Republicans are already way overrepresented in the state now.  They have to protect PA-03, PA-06, PA-07, PA-08, and PA-11, and making PA-18 or PA-05 too Democratic could give Democrats an opportunity in those seats. 

Suggesting that the Dems would get PA 5 made your officially made your post laughable.

The rumored plan isn't risky at all. That was my point in following posts.

Democrats have held PA-05 before.  Its no more laughable than Republicans getting PA-13. 

The current PA 5 hasn't had a Democratic Congressman.

It did from 1976 to 1978. 

And the Northeast Philadelphia part of the current PA 13 had a Republican Congressman (the legendary Charlie Dougherty) from 1979 to 1983. That means nothing now.

[Keystone Phil]

Altmire only won because Hart was too insane for even her conservative constituents and his 2010 challenger was very weak.

I'm assuming you're saying she was too conservative. She wasn't. She just didn't take Altmire seriously until it was way too late in a bad year for us.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I know he's a top target, dude, but that's not exactly the plan. It's more than just throwing in more Republican areas.

The PA-GOP needs to keep in mind that five CD's currently GOP went for Kerry.

Ok, can we realize that there comes a time when that's not relevant anymore?

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Thanks. Likely? No.

[Keystone Phil]

I didn't use insane as a malphemism for conservative. It was her staunch conservative attitude and Santorum closeness, not her ideology or voting record. Well, the Democratic wave was the main contributor but she lost to Altmire (a nobody at the time) because her own public image missteps made her more vulnerable. I don't know how conservative pro-life women manage to end up making caricatures of themselves once elected, but it seems to be a consistent type of thing.

Hart has always been personally popular there. Her closeness to Santorum and "staunch conservative attitude" were well known before 2006 and she was always fine. Altmire ran a great campaign in a tremendous year for Pennsylvania Democrats and Hart didn't take it seriously until literally the final week after the party pleaded with her to wake up.

[Keystone Phil]

I didn't use insane as a malphemism for conservative. It was her staunch conservative attitude and Santorum closeness, not her ideology or voting record. Well, the Democratic wave was the main contributor but she lost to Altmire (a nobody at the time) because her own public image missteps made her more vulnerable. I don't know how conservative pro-life women manage to end up making caricatures of themselves once elected, but it seems to be a consistent type of thing.

Hart has always been personally popular there. Her closeness to Santorum and "staunch conservative attitude" were well known before 2006 and she was always fine. Altmire ran a great campaign in a tremendous year for Pennsylvania Democrats and Hart didn't take it seriously until literally the final week after the party pleaded with her to wake up.

What you say may be true, but Santorum was also re-elected comfortably against a moderate challenger in 2000 when many Republicans were defeated in blue states (Gordon, Roth, Abraham, Grams). Santorum, like Hart, simply let too much of his inner firebrand out. Probably just a result of getting too comfortable. How else do explain losing in an R+6 district? The Republicans failed to pick up any D+6 or greater districts while gaining over 60 seats in 2010. It's more than you're admitting.

I understand your point with Santorum. Hart's ratings were fine though and she certainly wasn't as well known for being a "firebrand." The district wasn't R+6 in 2006. In fact, I'm 90% sure that the Dems still hold a registration advantage there.

[Keystone Phil]

Firebrand may have been a bit hyperbolic. But she certainly had no moderate tendencies to fall back on. To play on my earlier point, more in-touch politicians like Gerlach were able to hold a more Democratic seat mostly due to image. I have no doubt that PA-4 is a conservative district that will elect conservative Republicans, but Hart was 100% conservative instead of 95%.

And I'm just saying it wasn't a problem for her in 2006 or before that.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The rumored plan is more than that. Altmire will have other problems if this plan is the real deal. Think beyond the district being "more Republican." There's a step before that. 

[Keystone Phil]

Short of drawing Altmire into Doyle's district I'm not sure what you are getting at.

Oh, just ignore my whistling...

[Keystone Phil]

Short of drawing Altmire into Doyle's district I'm not sure what you are getting at.

Oh, just ignore my whistling...

Stop impersonating Sam Spade and spit it out.

If it isn't obvious by now...

[Keystone Phil]

I guess Phil is implying that Altmire's CD will be chopped up into pieces

...the answer was literally stated in a previous post.

[Keystone Phil]

I think it's safe to say that Pennsylvania's map is going to be a ridiculous mess.

It will look better. It's a real mess now but the rumored plan will be very fair.