Armstrong County goes to Romney
By Mitch Fryer
Published: Wednesday, Nov. 7, 2012, 2:36 a.m.
The message in the numbers came across loud and clear: Armstrong County in this presidential election is Republican country.
Armstrong voters, who turned out at 68 percent, showed their support for Republican candidates running for office at the national level.
In the presidential race, Armstrong voters made the Republican ticket of Romney and Ryan their choice with 19,231 votes, 68 percent, to 8,694 votes, 31 percent, for the incumbent Democratic team of Obama and Biden, according to unofficial returns.
Not surprisingly, the hometown candidate for the U.S. Senate for Pennsylvania, Republican Tom Smith of Plumcreek, garnered 18,572 votes, 66 percent, to Democrat Bob Casey Jr.'s 9,141 votes, 32 percent, in the county, according to the unofficial count.
For U.S. representative in the U.S. Congress in the 3rd District, which includes all of Armstrong County, the incumbent, Republican Mike Kelly, had the most votes with 18,056, 65 percent, to 8,305, 30 percent, tallied for the challenger, Democrat Missa Eaton, according the unofficial numbers reported in the county. Overall Kelly, 64, of Butler was beating Democrat Missa Eaton, 49, of Sharon for a second term, 54 percent to 42 percent.
“There was a lot of dissatisfaction with President Obama that was bringing out a lot of people and Tom Smith was bringing out a lot in this area,” said Republican Jeff Pyle, winner of the state House 60th District race.
“There were very concerted efforts by the GOP and an awful lot of people to bring people out and drive out the vote. There was no doubt the county was going to go Republican.”
Mitch Fryer is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-543-1303 or email@example.com.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.