Going blue in the burbs
If Dems can keep gains in suburbs, is it ‘game over’ for GOP in Pa.?
Rachel Meta, 47, a personal trainer from Mt. Lebanon, says she doesn’t usually vote in midterm elections. But this year she did, and she voted for Democrats.
“I was trying to vote against Donald Trump,” she said recenty, outside the Panera at the Galleria in Mt. Lebanon.
Julie Slaughter, a 34-year-old restaurant manager from Dormont, does not always vote for Democrats. In the 2008 presidential election, for example, she said she voted for John McCain.
But in 2018, “I voted straight blue,” she said.
“I want to see more consistent checks and balances,” she said. “I think it’s more about making sure [Mr. Trump] doesn’t think he can get away with anything.”
Barbara Marasco, 71, of Dormont, said her vote changes election to election, but she “voted for the Democratic slate this time.”
Why? “Trump. One guy. I don’t care for him.”
Ms. Meta, Ms. Slaughter and Ms. Marasco were part of a wave of suburban voters who swung hard toward the Democratic Party in the the 2018 midterms, giving the party a gain of over 30 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.
But party candidates weren’t so successful in U.S. Senate races — Republicans increased their majority to 52 seats, up from 51-49 before the midterms.
Two years ago, racking up huge margins in rural Pennsylvania, Mr. Trump, a Republican, eked out a win, and incumbent U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey, RPa., beat his Democratic challenger, Katie McGinty.
Two years later, incumbents U.S. Sen. Bob Casey and Gov. Tom Wolf, both Democrats, each won by more than 10 points. And the Pennsylvania congressional delegation went from 15 Republicans and three Democrats to being evenly split, and not just because of redrawn districts. In two races, simultaneous special elections were held to fill the final months of
the term in the old districts. Democrats flipped both. In the Pittsburgh area, the new 17th District, which was narrowly won by Mr. Trump in 2016, went to Democrat Conor Lamb by over 10 points.
Republicans held their rural gains in the midterms. Turnout fell everywhere, as it always does in midterms, and there was little room for Democratic gains in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.
As Christopher Borick, a professor of political science at Muhlenberg College, put it: “This election in some ways was a completion of 2016’s election in terms of the sorting of rural and urban into their respective camps.”
So the Democratic gains came in large part from the third category: the suburbs. Democrats swung suburban voters, especially in higher income areas, by huge numbers. Allegheny County is no exception.
In the county, Mr. Casey’s biggest gains in 2018 compared with Ms. McGinty’s votes in 2016 occurred in Bradford Woods, Thornburg and Glen Osborne, three small municipalities with median household incomes over $100,000, according to the Census Bureau.
Ms. McGinty won Mt. Lebanon, the county’s thirdlargest municipality, with 55 percent. Mr. Casey got 69 percent there. Mt. Lebanon’s median household income is $86,000 per year.
High-income suburbs also saw high turnout. Mt. Lebanon’s turnout increased almost 20 percent over 2014.
These types of communities were not the only ones to see big shifts. One of the biggest jumps came from Swissvale, which is 39 percent nonwhite and has a median income of $40,391. Turnout surged 20 percent there, relative to the last midterm, and Mr. Casey did 8.7 points better than Ms. McGinty.
The Democratic base — generally African-American and city-dwelling voters — was vital to the party’s wins. In Allegheny County, Mr. Casey won over 90 percent in three municipalities: Braddock, Rankin and Wilkinsburg, all of which are over 60 percent black.
“The African-American population was probably the most stable,” Mr. Borick said.
Mr. Casey’s vote share in Braddock, Rankin and Wilkinsburg exceeded Ms. McGinty’s, but not by much: She won over 85 percent in each. They did see big turnout increases: Each jumped over 14 points compared to 2014. But there was not a lot of room for Mr. Casey to grow his share.
“Suburban voters who are often higher educated and wealthier make some of the most dramatic breaks in recent cycles,” Mr. Borick said.
“A few years ago, in 2012, they were more likely to vote Republican,” he said. “Now people with professional degrees are voting 2-to-1 for Democrats.”
That happened partly because of Mr. Trump, he said.
“There’s multiple factors, but one certainly is the president. The president’s popularity in that group is extremely low.”
Ms. Slaughter, who is currently in an MBA program, said, “He’s polarizing and divisive, not a unifying figure.”
“He’s a very crude person,” Ms. Marasco said. “He continually criticizes people. He twitters too much, doesn’t listen. We want to look up to our leader, and he isn’t one to look up to,” she said.
“I’ve definitely gotten more invested since Trump got elected,” said Elizabeth Reidz, a 39-year-old psychologist from Upper St. Clair, who added, however, that she was already very invested in 2016. “That was a sad day in our house,” she said of the 2016 election.
“We always consider [the suburbs] in between rural America and urban America,” Mr. Borick said. “But if they’re drawn to one direction, they’re drawn more toward urban areas.”
Part of the shift was also Democrats who “were not all-in for Hillary Clinton but who have been absolutely activated by the politics of the day to engage,” Mr. Borick said.
Turnout was high in Pennsylvani, a partially because of the newly competitive congressional map.
“How many people have voted in in-play congressional elections over the past years? Very, very few,” Mr. Borick said.
This election saw four races decided by less than 10 points, compared to two in 2016.
There were exceptions to the trend of suburban voters swinging toward the Democrats. U.S. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Bucks County held his seat, winning more votes than Mr. Trump did in the same area.
“Take Pennsylvania, New Jersey, all the districts in play, and he’s on an island,” Mr. Borick said of Mr. Fitzpatrick. “It really is the one survivor.”
He added, “It was hard to find a Republican that was more averse to President Trump than Congressman Fitzpatrick.”
Allegheny County’s suburbs had their fair share of Republican voters, too, though they did not rescue Republican Keith Rothfus, who lost to Mr. Lamb in the new 17th District.
Ed Schrieber, 79, of Moon, said, “I voted for Trump and I’d do it again.”
And even in a wave, candidates matter. Ms. Slaughter was more driven to vote against Rick Saccone, Mr. Lamb’s opponent in the March special election for the 18th District, than she was to vote against Mr. Rothfus, she said.
And just because suburban voters helped give the Democrats the House, it does not mean they agree on what the Democrats should do with their majority.
Ms. Marasco said, “I’d like to see [Mr. Trump] impeached,” while Ms. Meta said of extensive investigations, “I think their time could be better spent on other things.”
Ms. Meta was instead most energized by Mr. Trump pulling the United States out of the Paris Climate Accord. Other voters called for action on health care or gun control.
The diverse demands of the suburban demographic might pose a problem for Democrats, but if they can solve it, their prospects in Pennsylvania are very good, Mr. Borick said. “If Democrats continue to win the suburbs in Pennsylvania, it’s game over, really.”
Even holding every demographic’s vote constant, Mr. Borick does not think Mr. Trump’s 2016 win would be repeated in 2020 due to population growth in urban and suburban Pennsylvania, particularly around Philadelphia.