ShareThis Page
Allegheny

Cook Political Report updates Rothfus-Lamb race to 'lean Democratic'

| Wednesday, July 25, 2018, 4:21 p.m.
Rep. Keith Rothfus, R-Sewickley, left, faces Conor Lamb, D-Mt. Lebanon, in the 17th Congressional District Race.
Rep. Keith Rothfus, R-Sewickley, left, faces Conor Lamb, D-Mt. Lebanon, in the 17th Congressional District Race.

A political forecasting website has updated its outlook for the race between U.S. Reps. Conor Lamb and Keith Rothfus, moving it to “lean Democratic” from “toss up.”

The Cook Political Report based its update on a Monmouth University poll released Tuesday that shows Rothfus, R-Sewickley, trailing Lamb, D-Mt. Lebanon, by 12 percentage points.

The Cook Political Report describes the state Supreme Court-drawn 17th Congressional District, where the two will face off in November, as “close to Lamb’s dream district.”

The district, drawn by the court after it ruled that old district lines had been unconstitutionally gerrymandered to benefit Republicans, covers suburban parts of Allegheny County along with all of Beaver County and a corner of Butler County.

The update makes Rothfus, who is seeking a fourth term, the second Republican incumbent seeking re-election in what it considers a Democratic-leaning district, according to the site.

Wes Venteicher is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Wes at 412-380-5676, wventeicher@tribweb.com or via Twitter @wesventeicher.

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.

click me