They Come Down the Stretch in the PA Primary

April 21, 2008 -- So many questions, so little time.

The primary election is Tuesday. It is the day the speculation ends and we finally get answers to the questions the public, the pollsters and the pundits have been asking for weeks. Here are some of the big ones:

Q: Can Barrack Obama win the Democratic Pennsylvania primary?

A few weeks ago, it looked within his reach. He had cut Hilary Clinton's margin in the public polls from 12-15 percent to somewhere around 6-8 percent.

The latest polls indicate the Illinois senator has stalled. He was 6-points behind in the Quinnipiac Poll of last week (April 15), to give one example.

So, it looks as if Obama will fall short unless – and there is always an unless – three things happen: higher-than-usual turnout among African-American voters and younger voters, plus a strong showing in the Philadelphia media market. I would define "strong showing" as Obama defeating Clinton in this region by 10 percentage points.

Q: Can Hilary Clinton win the Democratic primary in Pennsylvania?

It depends on how you define "win."

Clinton can get more votes, but she is also going to be judged by the margin of victory. I expect between 1.8 million and 2 million of Pennsylvania's 4.1 million Democrats to vote on Tuesday, so each percentage point will be worth close to 20,000 votes.

If she defeats Obama by the margins indicated in the final public poll (6 percent to 8 percent) it will be judged a clear victory. If it is between 3-5 percentage points, it will be seen as less decisive. If she wins by two points or less, it may be considered a defeat.

Even if New York senator does win by 120,000 or more votes, Obama will still capture nearly as many Democratic delegates because of the rules by which they are elected. In other words, regardless of what happens, Obama will keep his national lead in delegates.

Q: What could Mayor Nutter have been thinking?

You have to give the new mayor credit. He went early with Clinton (back when she was the inevitable candidate) and he has stuck with her, even defending his decision in terms that could offend black voters who support Obama.

(The exact quote: "There are no automatics in life that all black people are going to support a single black candidate in a race. All black folks don't eat fried chicken or eat watermelon. When do we make some progress here?")

But, I have another question: Why did he take such a firm stand in a race where he will have little influence on the outcome (Clinton v. Obama) but stayed neutral in the race where he could have had major influence -- the Vince Fumo seat in the First Senate District?

It is hard for me to believe that Michael Nutter wants John Dougherty to succeed Vince Fumo in the state senate.

(As the popular line goes: Why replace a politician under federal indictment with a politician under federal investigation?)

Dougherty, head of the local electricians union, has two lesser-known opponents: Larry Farnese and Anne Dicker.

A Nutter endorsement of either would have meant a tremendous boost to their candidacies. Yet, he has been silent on this race and declined to endorse.

Doc is a labor leader and an old-school, fist-in-the-face politician. He is being opposed by two bright newcomers with decent political credentials.

And Nutter decides to sit it out? And this is the guy who was elected last year as the reformer? Hmm.

As to the First District race, conventional wisdom is that Doc will win. I am not so sure.

Farnese has a shot if two things happen: Doc's vote is held to 35 percent or below; Dicker's vote is held to 25 percent or below.

I think both are doable. Doc is unpalatable to most voters in Center City and environs, who make up about 50 percent of the Democratic electorate in the First District. Dicker has failed to connect by running a campaign that ended up being (a) under-funded and (b) in disarray, due to the departure of her campaign manager and finance chair.

To a degree, this is a surrogates' war. Fumocrats, seeking to stop Dougherty, switched allegiance to Farnese when their guy dropped out. Dicker was encouraged by Dougherty operatives to stay in the race, the better to siphon off votes from Farnese.

Here is a brief summary of the other contested local races in the city on Tuesday, all of them for the Democratic nomination to state House seats.

179th District: Hunting Park, Northeast. This is the seat held by state Rep. Bill Rieger for several decades. The freshman incumbent is Tony Payton. He is facing veteran Guy Lewis, a local nurse who has the support of several important ward leaders in the Frankford/Mayfair end of the district. I give the edge to Payton.

182nd District: Center City. State Rep. Babette Josephs always draws opposition in the primary. This year she was lucky enough to get two opponents: Peggy Banaszek, a political activist from Society Hill, and Robert Gormley Jr. of Grays Ferry. Josephs is vulnerable, but much less so with two candidates siphoning off the anti-Babette vote.

184th District: South Philadelphia. This is a surrogates war between incumbent state Rep. Bill Keller, a Dougherty guy, and Christian DiCicco, son of the Councilman and a Fumo guy

(Fumo has contributed $140,000 to the Dicicco campaign.) Both candidates are spending big -- $225,000 as of two weeks ago and probably another $200,000 before Election Day. And it is nasty. It will be close.

188th District: South Philadelphia/Point Breeze. The incumbent is Rep. Harold James, who was nearly knocked off the ballot on a challenge by his opponent, Kenyatta Johnson, because of invalid signatures on his nominating petitions.

James survived that challenge. But, Johnson is running a vigorous campaign tying himself to Barack Obama. (The district is festooned with Johnson-Obama posters.)

198th District: Germantown. Rep. Rosita Youngblood is the incumbent and was considered safe, until Byron Davis came along. Davis, a teacher at Germantown Friends School, has run a well-financed campaign that should appeal to voters outside the core of the district, especially in Mount Airy and Chestnut Hill.

A final word about turnout: On paper there are about 784,000 Democrats registered to vote in the primary. In reality, about 75,000 are "inactive voters," folks who have moved or departed but have yet to be purged from the rolls.

Because of the super-heated race at the top of the ballot, there is speculation the city may set a record in terms of turnout. Anything over 360,000 votes cast by Democrats would constitute a modern record.