Which is also surprising, since you would think that Clinton would have benefitted from Rendell's support more in Philly and the suburbs than elsewehere.

There does seem to be a cultural suspicion of Obama that he hasn't quite dealt with.  I don't know if Ohio and Pennsylvania could go to McCain if Obama is the nominee, but he hasn't managed to connect with certain voters.  It's interesting to watch...

Well, actually Philly and Pittsburgh do diverge in statewide races, but typically only when the candidate is from one side of the state or the other. They are almost never on the same page in Governor's races -- Rendell was an exception. To tell you the truth, I think race played a big role in the divergence this time. Though Pittsburgh is a relatively large city, there are comparatively few blacks there. I had a race discmination case out there once, and I remember wandering around the city at breaks in depositions, looking for the African-American population. Nada. I also suspect (though I don't know for sure) that P-burgh skews a little older than Philly. Fewer colleges, and no direct Northeast Corridor access. If you live in Pittsburgh, the closest other city for a night out on the town is Wheeling, West Virginia. The better choice? Toronto.  In short, though it has some lovely and sophisticated pockets, it's a little more tied to the Rust Belt than Philly, which is a bit more metrosexual.

Obama won most, but not all, of the critical burbs. He lost in Montgomery County, and that margin made all the difference in the state. That is the part of the world most under Eddie Rendell's influence -- a lot of Republicans there changed registration to vote for Ed for Governor. Those people are going to vote for Hillary, even if (or because) they intend to vote for McCain in the general. More than one interview with a local suggested that was the strategy.  I expect Ed wants to be Vice-President. He'll be shortlisted -- she could not have won without him.  Mayor Nutter did endorse her also, but I thought that was pretty obviously because he needs Ed Rendell and does not want to piss him off. Also, he's turning out pretty well as a mayor, and he's a young man still. He could be the first black governor of the state. Not gonna screw that up by going against the prevailing machine.

I do believe that she conceded Philadelphia from the get-go. I have yet to receive a single piece of campaign literature or a phone call from her. I'm so looking forward to that call.

I understand the reason for his surge -- Hillary is viscerally unlikeable, even while you acknowledge her virtues. She's stepped on a lot of toes, too, and there were a lot of people rooting for another candidate. When it looked like he was saleable to a wide demographic in Iowa, the dislike of her which simmers beneath the surface came to the fore. Unfortunately, at least in the case of Pennsylvania, he's black. Rendell called this exactly right in February -- there's a lot of folks in this state who would not vote for a black guy, period.  They'd rather vote for a native daughter, even if they have grave doubts about her. But mark my words -- those people in Scranton who voted for Hillary? They aren't voting for her in the general. They can't wait to vote for McCain. I've had a bunch of calls with relatives there on the topic. Took a lot to get them out of the house to vote for her, but the prospect of a black president was enough. Code words: "we don't trust him, what with that Hussain stuff.

I firmly believe in gridlock when it comes to politics. President and the Congress should never all be of the same party. Nothing good happens then. (See, Exhibit A, Iraq and Exhibit B, economy).  There are many things I like about John McCain, but every time he opens his mouth to discuss the economy my heart sinks. It's just so stupid. Ah well. May your future little one live in less interesting times.

Your points about Nutter and Rendell make a lot of sense.  I buy race as explanation  for a good chunk of the result, and I think you must be right about Clinton.   I wonder about race in one respect.   I guess in part it depends on how much you trust the opinion polls.  I was buying the idea that Obama got to within a 5-6% margin and then fell back to 10%.  If there was actual play (and this wasn't just the pollsters getting it wrong), I don't think the shifts can be explained by race. 

Perhaps I'm reading too much into what you are saying (I know nothing about Pittsburgh or Scranton) but might be that folks in Pittsburgh and Scranton still think of themselves as steelworkers even though most don't actually work in steel factories.  (Kind of like France, where most people live in cities but see themselves as tied to the countryside -- hence enormous power of farm lobby).   Race would then be one part of a larger constellation of the Reagan democrat profile.   I think topaz is right about the margins -- I think those margins come fin part from some folks  seeing Clinton as closer to them on trade issues and health care.  And if the economy is foremost in people's minds, Hillary benefits.  If the war again takes center stage, I'd expect some shift to Obama (Jesus that's obvious.  Yes folks, nothing like political commentary from august!  Next week's edition: "It all comes down to who puts the most points on the board."). 

I don't know, maybe I'm just expressing my stereotypes about other people's stereotypes.  But my model would be race as something that works in conjunction with issues.  I guess what I'm saying is, I think Obama does have a solvable problem (around issues and perceptions) alongside his not solvable ones (middle name, being a brother).

You are right the whole thing can't be explained by race, of course. HRC is a formidable candidate and since she is now willing to be a pro-gun, pro-life Christian, that would take Scranton right there. I think though that there is some phenomenon with African-American candidates in this state (or nation). People are willing not to see their color, so long as there's no overtly racial issues. Jeremiah Wright reminded them that he was black. These folks don't take to nuanced speeches on race. They just don't like Wright. I think people who may have previously either voted Obama or stayed at home came out to vote against Reverend Wright.