Would Sanders win Pennsylvania?

[Bidenworth2020]

Would Sanders win Pennsylvania or would low black turnout in Philly spell loss?

[PragmaticPopulist]

I think he'd win it, but take the more traditional route of victory for a Democrat. That is, keeping the margins down in central PA, while picking up just enough voters in ancestrally Democratic southwestern PA to offset any dropoff in minority turnout.

[Old Man Willow]

No. Muh culture war.

[Beet]

The Scanton/Wilkes-Barre and Allentown areas frequently get ignored in PA, since everyone only focuses on the Philadelphia metro area, the "T", and the Pittsburgh area. But this area has been crucial in the R turn of PA. I have a hard time seeing any Dem overcome Trump's inroads into the region, except possibly Joe Biden. But not Sanders. People have to remember Pennsylvanians had a chance to vote Sanders but turned out for the GOP primary instead, and gave Trump a win in every county.

[Lord Admirale]

I think he'd win it, but take the more traditional route of victory for a Democrat. That is, keeping the margins down in central PA, while picking up just enough voters in ancestrally Democratic southwestern PA to offset any dropoff in minority turnout.

That has not happened since 2008, nor will it happen with a social justice warrior.

Trump wins PA. Philly is crucial to a Democratic win.

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

Would Sanders win Pennsylvania or would low black turnout in Philly spell loss?

I'd be surprised if he got within ten points.

[Thank you for being a friend...]

If he can't win Pennsylvania, he's not winning the election, so he'd have to.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Nope! Most only claimed they would vote for Bernie in the General just to spite Clinton. They still would have pulled the lever for Trump.

[Bidenworth2020]

I  must disagree. I think Sanders would do 7 points better in the T, while losing ground in the the burbs of Philly, and gaining in Pittsburgh burbs. Also, getting 60-40 in Erie

[m11dsauce]

I think it would depend on who he would be running against. If it was against Trump, I would guess that Bernie would win by a slim majority.

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

I think that Pennsylvania will decide the election, and it will all depend on his approval rating and the situation in 2020.

[PragmaticPopulist]

I think he'd win it, but take the more traditional route of victory for a Democrat. That is, keeping the margins down in central PA, while picking up just enough voters in ancestrally Democratic southwestern PA to offset any dropoff in minority turnout.

That has not happened since 2008, nor will it happen with a social justice warrior.

Trump wins PA. Philly is crucial to a Democratic win.

Tom Wolf managed to win four southwestern PA counties, (not including Allegheny, which is safe D) so I don't think it's completely out of the picture. And Obama won PA twice without carrying any of those counties. A Sanders win in PA may look something like a combination of Kerry's and Obama's winning coalitions. Not as reliant on nonwhite voter as Obama's, and maybe slightly worse than Kerry's showing with white voters, but holding onto the levels of support from young voters that Obama had.

[Liberalrocks]

No way

[TML]

I think yes.

The key area in PA for 2016 was the rural areas, especially the northeast. In that area, the urban centers of Scranton and Wilkes-Barre were won by the Democrats, but the rural areas were won by Republicans by huge margins. This area is dominated by white working-class voters. The final statistics showed that merely matching Obama's 2012 turnout levels in Philadelphia and surrounding areas would not have been enough for Hillary to offset Trump's gains elsewhere in the state.

Sanders would have been able to appeal to white working-class voters and millennial voters better than Hillary did. It is plausible that he could use his appeal to such groups to his advantage to at least revert Northeastern PA to Obama 2012 levels and thus flip PA to the Democrats.

[GoTfan]

No way

Yes he would. I know yoi think that since Hillary lost PA it will be a red state from now on, but Sanders would be able to ru  up the numbers in the industrial areas to a much better effect than Hillary did.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The Scanton/Wilkes-Barre and Allentown areas frequently get ignored in PA, since everyone only focuses on the Philadelphia metro area, the "T", and the Pittsburgh area. But this area has been crucial in the R turn of PA. I have a hard time seeing any Dem overcome Trump's inroads into the region, except possibly Joe Biden. But not Sanders. People have to remember Pennsylvanians had a chance to vote Sanders but turned out for the GOP primary instead, and gave Trump a win in every county.

Pennsylvania has a closed primary.

[Shadows]

Comfortably. Bernie will do better with blacks in turnout as most of Hillary's voters are hardcore Dems who would vote for any & every Democrat. Even a racist Democrat would win most of Hillary's votes. Bernie is good with expanding the party, bringing dis-illusioned, non-party voters into the mix & ofcourse young people to the existing Democratic coalition (80-90% of the black votes is guaranteed for any1).

It will be a strong win & will not be a battleground state.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

I view Trump's win in PA as a bit of a fluke, along the lines of Carter carrying AL and MS in 1976.  It's not going to happen under normal circumstances.  The Democrats have to make PA their top priority, however, along with FL.

[BushKerry04]

Yes because he would do better than Clinton in Philly & Pittsburgh.

[MAINEiac4434]

Maybe? Probably? Who knows what the GOP has in terms of oppo that Hillary didn't want to use. Who knows if he could've gotten the black vote out in Philly. Who knows how he would've performed in the debates, how his VP choice would've performed in the debates. Who knows how potentially independent candidate Bloomberg would've done.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

I don't think so. I'm skeptical that the rural voters who voted Obama-Obama-Trump are going to vote for anyone other than Trump no matter what happens. And I doubt someone as far left as Bernie will do nearly as well in the suburbs as Hillary did. I'd think Trump would improve enough in Bucks and the rest of the Philadelphia collar counties to offset any losses anywhere else in the state.

And that's still barring any opposition research the GOP has on Bernie.

Trump's Michigan win has all the makings of a fluke, but not so much the win in Pennsylvania. This one has been in the works for a while.

[Liberalrocks]

No way

Yes he would. I know yoi think that since Hillary lost PA it will be a red state from now on, but Sanders would be able to ru  up the numbers in the industrial areas to a much better effect than Hillary did.

I have never said this about Pennsylvania and resent you projecting this/ putting words in my mouth. My response was solely toward Sanders winning the state. I'm clear it will remain an open battleground. Don't presume you know my thoughts and project them out., I will check you every time.

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

I think yes.

The key area in PA for 2016 was the rural areas, especially the northeast. In that area, the urban centers of Scranton and Wilkes-Barre were won by the Democrats, but the rural areas were won by Republicans by huge margins. This area is dominated by white working-class voters. The final statistics showed that merely matching Obama's 2012 turnout levels in Philadelphia and surrounding areas would not have been enough for Hillary to offset Trump's gains elsewhere in the state.

Sanders would have been able to appeal to white working-class voters and millennial voters better than Hillary did. It is plausible that he could use his appeal to such groups to his advantage to at least revert Northeastern PA to Obama 2012 levels and thus flip PA to the Democrats.

You know who WWC love? An atheist socialist who hates the US and wants to take their money. It's their dream candidate. Oh, wait.

[Alabama_Indy10]

I think yes.

The key area in PA for 2016 was the rural areas, especially the northeast. In that area, the urban centers of Scranton and Wilkes-Barre were won by the Democrats, but the rural areas were won by Republicans by huge margins. This area is dominated by white working-class voters. The final statistics showed that merely matching Obama's 2012 turnout levels in Philadelphia and surrounding areas would not have been enough for Hillary to offset Trump's gains elsewhere in the state.

Sanders would have been able to appeal to white working-class voters and millennial voters better than Hillary did. It is plausible that he could use his appeal to such groups to his advantage to at least revert Northeastern PA to Obama 2012 levels and thus flip PA to the Democrats.

You know who WWC love? An atheist socialist who hates the US and wants to take their money. It's their dream candidate. Oh, wait.

[Hammy]

The people answering "no" here need to realize turnout would've been significantly higher among younger progressives, who effectively boycotted the election over Clinton's nomination--only 45,000 more votes for the Dems would've put them over the top, which isn't a lot in a state with PA's population.