U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, D-IL, got a campaign boost when previously-neutral U.S. Sen. Bob Casey Jr. – perhaps the most popular elected Democrat in the state – came out March 28 for the Democratic front-runner who is nonetheless running behind in the April 22 primary here.

Like many other endorsers before him, Casey cited pressure from his four daughters who all seemed to be solidly in the Obama camp, for jumping off the fence.

Casey said of Obama: "I believe in this guy like I've never believed in a candidate in my life, except my father."

After announcing his decision to an over-packed forum at Pittsburgh’s Soldiers & Sailors Memorial Hall, the junior senator from the Keystone State hopped aboard Obama’s campaign bus for a weekend swing through Pennsylvania that was due to arrive in the state capital Sunday night for a rally at the Capitol’s Forum Auditorium.

On Saturday, hundreds of central Pennsylvania residents stood in line up to four hours or more to get coveted tickets to the event but the tickets ran out while the crowd kept coming. Obama supporters said another Harrisburg event will be held on April 12 at one of the city’s parks.

On a bigger scale, Obama finds himself outmanned by the Clinton family whose three members are criss-crossing the state on behalf of Hillary Clinton’s candidacy. While daughter Chelsea continues her tour of college campuses, former President Bill Clinton does secondary markets, such as Carlisle, attracting great local attention and media coverage in smaller towns that rarely see a former chief executive.

So Obama is fighting back with television commercials. Spending from his superior internet-funded campaign war chest, Obama is roughly airing twice as many as Clinton on Pennsylvania stations.

In just the first three weeks of this nearly seven-week campaign for Pennsylvania, the Obama campaign has also attacked U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., just as hard and negatively as you would expect from a campaign trailing hers by at least a dozen points in all the polls of the state.

While Clinton is sticking to her argument about experience and familiarity and voter trust, older voters and women here are staking her to most of her lead, and questions about Obama’s experience have essentially tied the two among male voters, whom Obama needs to win about 3-2 to have any shot in this election.

So the positive candidate’s campaign is attacking her several times a day: for not telling the truth, for trying to mislead voters about her positions on NAFTA and the war in Iraq, for not releasing her tax returns, and for not really having much more genuine experience in governance than Obama. On March 26, Obama took the latest step by releasing seven years of his own tax returns, and challenging Clinton to do the same. She has promised to release tax returns in April, but has not said how many years she will release or exactly when. That was a rare case where Obama himself challenged Clinton, a job he has mostly left to his campaign or his surrogates, which has also successfully brought the issue of Clinton’s misleading account of supposed sniper fire upon her landing at a military airport in Bosnia a dozen years ago before the public. The Washington Post gave Clinton 4 Pinocchios, its worst grade its fact-checking articles give, for that claim. Clinton then apologized during an interview with a Pittsburgh TV station, saying she misspoke one time in 12 years when talking about that incident. The Obama campaign immediately pointed out she told that story at least four times in recent weeks.

Barack Obama Hillary Clinton

So maybe it is something in our water, or maybe it is something about politics here in the Keystone State, but as soon as even Obama got here, the gloves came off.

Except for one thing: Obama has yet to air a negative TV ad about Clinton, even after she began to do so against him in Ohio and Texas, and her campaign plans to do so here again.

And political pros on both sides say if a negative attack doesn’t happen on TV nowadays, it didn’t really happen. Without ads, attacks don’t really penetrate into the minds of voters who are undecided or persuadable.

But they do fire up a candidate’s voter base and help Obama make his case to young voters and other supporters that they ought to get excited, talk up his candidacy, register and vote.

Because both sides agree that if we stay near the record turnout for a Pennsylvania Democratic primary – just over 1.5 million in 1980 – Clinton will win. Because more likely voters here favor her candidacy. But Obama’s campaign thinks that voter turnout will be a new record -- closer to 1.7 million or 1.8 million, about half of the actual registered voters in the state (It is estimated there are about 400,000 to 500,000 of the state’s 4.1 million Democrats who are just duplicate registrations or folks who moved away or died).

And it looks like the two campaigns – with the Obama campaign taking the more dominant role – added about 200,000 Democrats to the state’s voter rolls, a huge increase.

Assuming most of the newly registered vote and two-thirds of them vote for Obama, a prediction many analysts think is accurate, Obama cuts Clinton’s lead by 50,000 to 60,000 votes just from new voters.

And that is all before Obama’s bus trip kicked off this past weekend for six days across the state.

And when you add into all of this that Obama can show he has always opposed the war in Iraq while Clinton voted for it – a hot-button issue for Democratic voters – and he opposed NAFTA while Clinton’s husband, the president passed it – in what many western and northern Pennsylvania Democrats say was his worst act as president - he still has a puncher’s chance.

And remember, the real importance of the Pennsylvania primary is not so much who wins it, as the margin: If Clinton can mush Obama here by a 3-2 margin or close to it, say 57-43 or above, it will mean she has busted the balloon of hope and “a different kind of politics and campaign” that Obama has kept going to this point.

If Obama can hold Clinton to a victory of 53-47 or less, that will mean in a state where Clinton ought to win, he fought back, held her margin down and lost only a tiny portion of his 120-delegate lead to her.

That is not the kind of win that will put undecided super-delegates into Clinton’s column, or allow her to take Obama-leaning states like North Carolina and Oregon from him.

The expectations are high for Clinton in Pennsylvania, and she and her husband may each make 20 speeches or appearances here before primary day, an unprecedented investment in any state not named Iowa or New Hampshire. Part of that, of course, is because primaries don’t usually run this late, and there isn’t anything else on the schedule until after Pennsylvania votes on April 22.

Also, with endorsements and active campaigning for Clinton from Gov. Ed Rendell, Philadelphia Mayor Mike Nutter, Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato and Congressman Jack Murtha, the Democratic establishment is doing all it can for its old pals, the Clintons.

So if she wins big, it could help her in North Carolina and Oregon, where Obama has to win to keep going, and help her win Indiana and drive up the margin in West Virginia.

As important, it will show the super-delegates that in the big states the party needs – Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia – Clinton is beating Obama.

So again, the margin matters.

Obama basically has three goals: he has to win the two majority-black congressional districts in Philadelphia, those of Bob Brady and Chaka Fattah, by margins or 2-1 or larger, which means he could get 12 or 13 of those 17 delegates. Then he has to win four or five of the six Philadelphia suburban districts, a much tougher task, because Clinton is slightly leading in all of them.

But if he can pick up a small lead, say 3-5 delegates, in those Philadelphia suburban districts, he can come out of that region 12 or 13 delegates ahead, and Clinton will have a tough time taking more than a 5-delegate lead overall in the congressional delegate elections.

So the Philadelphia suburbs are a key battleground, since Clinton leads there now but demographically, they are the kind of educated, better-off districts where Obama wins big.

Obama’s other job is to get his college students and elite and black voters to turn out big while his campaign extols Clinton’s negatives to depress turnout in the rest of the state: northern, central and western Pennsylvania.

That is also why he is raising the NAFTA issue and the question of Clinton’s truthfulness. Because it makes voters doubt Clinton on her main positives: voters think they know her and trust her to be tough and an advocate for bigger government to help them.

So Obama is campaigning positively while his campaign is slashing and burning Clinton three times a day.

Of course, Clinton’s campaign has been doing that to him for two months. The difference is that after turning his cheek for months, Obama is letting his big brother hit back.

And we have more than three weeks left, folks.

Go back to Insider Info

An even dozen
An open congressional seat in northwestern Pennsylvania leads to a spirited contest between 9 in the GOP and 3 Democrats

When you ask the most powerful politicos and elected officials about the 9-Republican and 3-Democrat race for the 5th Congressional District, now held by retiring U.S. Rep. John Peterson, everyone shrugs their shoulders and says it’s unpredictable.

Few issues set the candidates apart. More than one candidate and maybe as many as four will spend tons of money in the cheapest media buy district in the state, even though you have to buy a lot of different TV markets, including some Buffalo, N.Y., television stations, to reach all of it.

On the Republican side (and it would be a major upset if Peterson’s successor were not a Republican, President Bush won this district easily both times), there are at least four candidates who you can make a plausible case that they are the winner.

But in each case, you can also see why they might lose in the biggest district, geographically, east of the Mississippi River.

First, there are the three rich candidates whose personal wealth is pouring into their campaigns:

Matt Shaner, whose personal fortune comes from the Shaner hotel chain, is one of those three. He lost a Republican primary in 2006 to Barbara Spencer, who then lost a traditionally state GOP House seat to Scott Conklin, D-Centre.

Shaner lost that seat because of a series of problems with the law in the last few years. None of it was all that serious, but in general, voters prefer their lawmakers to support law enforcement, not get charged by law enforcement, even for disorderly behavior, etc.

Now, Shaner has poured so much money into the district that his opponents can use the federal “millionaire opponent” exception and raise $6,900 from each contributor, triple the normal legal limit.

Shaner is smart, working hard and spending big, with some estimates that he will pour about $2 million of his $30 million fortune into the race. While he still has big negatives in Centre County from his 2006 and the perception that he got his supporters to abandon Spencer so she lost to Conklin, the Democrat, his money is helping him get known in the rest of the district.

So Shaner is probably the candidate second-most-likely to win, after another scion: Derek Walker, son of C. Alan Walker of Bradford Coal. C. Alan Walker is to the Centre/Clearfield/central Pennsylvania region what David L. Cohen is to Gov. Ed Rendell or David Girard-DiCarlo was to Gov. Tom Ridge: the top insider and moneybags.

Being his father’s son has helped Walker round up the endorsements of many in the political establishment in that district: House Minority Leader Sam Smith of Jefferson County and the Corman family of former Sen. Doyle Corman, and Becky Corman. Becky Corman is widely considered to be the state’s best central Pennsylvania grassroots GOP organizer.

So while Walker’s trust fund isn’t as large or helpful in this race as Shaner’s, his campaign committee lists many of the best fund-raisers in the district: Smith, his dad and the Corman family.

The big question is what will Peterson do? Insiders say he might back Mayor John Stroup of Clarion, who needs to unite the west to win, because Walker, Shaner, bread company heir Jeff Stroehmann and half of the other six all come from State College and its exurbs. A similar theory is given on behalf of Pastor Keith Richardson of First Baptist Church in Clarion, an evangelist who is growing strong ties to the born-again community. While conservative Christians make up a fourth or less of the likely vote, if Richardson can surpass Stroup as the western candidate and add evangelical voters, as one insider says: “He has a recipe that could win, but a lot of baking left to do. In this race, there are at least six guys who have a good recipe, but we will see what their cakes taste like on April 22.

John Peterson

“Shaner or Stroehmann or Walker could just run the best ads and out-spend everyone else. Or they and the three other easterners could fight over the same voters, and free up Richardson or Stroup to get most of the west, which they are trying not to do, but this is a tug-of-war district. The west wants its candidate and got him in Peterson for the last dozen years or so, Centre County wants its candidate but the same thing is happening this time that happened last time: too many candidates from Centre and Clearfield.”

One development all are awaiting is if Peterson endorses Richardson, Stroup (which many insiders guess he will soon do) or some other candidate.

“Once John endorses, the Centre County guys will know who the preferred western candidate will be,” said one elected official. “Right now, there could be a strong western candidate voters out there unify around, but until someone starts raising the money and doing the things you need to do out there, there is not one now.

“If Peterson gets behind a candidate that would certainly help that person in the west and give that person a shot to be the champion of the western voters. But he has to do that before the ads of Walker, Shaner and Stroehmann already get voters leaning towards them. So there is time, but not a lot of time.” Peterson has so far not said whom he will endorse.

Meanwhile, while Stroehmann initially looked like a strong candidate, a 2006 divorce case ruling by Lycoming County Judge William Kiesser said Stroehmann not only made his wife sign a pre-nuptial on her wedding day, driving her to tears, but that he concealed his actual wealth in doing so. Kiesser ruled the pre-nuptial invalid, writing that Stroehmann did not tell his wife his net worth, but rather concealed several six-figure accounts and trust funds from her.

Another candidate, Glenn G.T. Thompson, the chairman of the Centre County Republican, has spent 26 years as a health care professional for Susquehanna Health in Lycoming County. He has a son who earned a Purple Heart for his military service. He supports America’s troops in their efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, and elected officials should lean heavily on military leaders leading those battles.

Jeff Stroehmann of Linden said he believes the Republican primary election is going to be “a really great race with nine candidates who stand for the same things. There are different messages on how we will attack the issues.

He said, if nominated and elected, he would put service to his constituents first, by establishing three offices, one each to serve the western, central and eastern sections of the far-flung district.

“I would have a staff bus that would be out on the same day of every month with either me or a member of my staff, when I’m not in Washington,” he said. “We would be out talking to the people because that’s what’s important as a public servant.”

Former Centre County Commissioner Chairman Chris Exarchos of Lemont says he is pro-life, is a member of the National Rifle Association and a gun collector, three qualities he shares with most of his competitors.

Also running are John Krupa, who has done little campaigning, and Elk County Coroner Lou Radkowski from Elk County – a long-shot contender to Richardson and Stroup for western champion, if Peterson surprised insiders by endorsing Radkowsk.

The Democrats include three candidates who would be formidable in a district that elects Democrats, but probably aren’t very elect able in this one. They are well-regarded Lock Haven Mayor Rick Vilello, Clearfield County Commissioner Mark McCracken and journalist-turned Marine in Iraq Bill Cahir.

Some GOP insiders say there is a small possibility that if they nominate a vulnerable candidate – some name Richardson or Stroehmann or Shaner – then Cahir, an untraditional Democrat, could pull off an upset.

More likely, Cahir or the others if nominated will do what now state Rep. Scott Conklin did when Congressman Bill Shuster was first elected: run hard, scare the Republicans, make them spend extra money, then lose to the GOP nominee.

This is just not hospitable ground for the Democrats. Even with the apparent realignment of State College into the Democratic column of late and the two Democrats Clearfield sends to the state House, the Republicans still lead in state House seats by about 8-3. And that tells you where the voters are, in addition to the fact that President Bush is still popular enough to visit here, although this big district doesn’t have many airports big enough for him to land at, outside of Williamsport and State College.