David Urban: Trump’s Pa. popularity no accident | TribLIVE.com
Featured Commentary

David Urban: Trump’s Pa. popularity no accident

President Trump addresses the crowd during the 17th anniversary observance of 9/11 at the Flight 93 National Memorial in Stoystown Sept 11.

There’s a reason why President Trump is becoming more popular in important Midwestern battleground states like Pennsylvania: Voters don’t want to lose the ongoing economic renaissance that is transforming their lives.

According to a recent opinion survey from The Wall Street Journal, the president “cumulatively leads a generic Democratic opponent, 46 percent to 40 percent,” in Pennsylvania, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin.

The survey’s findings are not surprising, and it’s no small coincidence that those states are all thriving under the president’s pro-growth economic policies.

Indeed, Trump’s economic agenda has had a profound effect on Pennsylvania: The state’s 4.0 percent unemployment rate is now the lowest it’s been in nearly two decades, and the economy continues to add new jobs at a dizzying pace.

Significantly, Trump has been committed to reviving the coal mining industry across America, slashing regulations that put too many Pennsylvania miners out of work in the past.

Pennsylvania voters, however, also have another compelling reason to support Trump in 2020: The Democratic Party is moving further and further to the left, touting an even more radical brand of the socialist policies that strangled America’s prosperity under President Obama.

“The more we have presidential candidates or newly elected congresspeople talking about the Green New Deal, talking about ‘Medicare for all,’ talking about socialism, the more that plays into the Trump campaign’s hands,” said former Pennsylvania governor and national Democratic National Committee chairman Ed Rendell.

Rendell is right — but there’s no sign that the Democrats are willing to abandon their radical ideas and shift toward the political center.

Despite the fact that the Green New Deal is projected to cost taxpayers as much as $93 trillion, or $600,000 per household, many leading Democratic presidential candidates have embraced the proposal, arguing that the country needs more environmental regulations no matter what the cost.

California Sen. Kamala Harris, for instance, recently insisted that she supports the Green New Deal “because we need … a bold agenda to address the climate crisis,” while New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker compared the initiative to defeating Nazi Germany and putting a man on the moon.

Yet, while voters have had more than two years to see the positive effects of Trump’s agenda, including the elimination of more than 30,000 pages worth of job-killing regulations from the Federal Register, Democrats are now asking them to forsake those benefits in exchange for pie-in-the-sky promises based on long-discredited socialist policies.

The Democrats may promise to create a workers’ paradise by embracing so-called “democratic socialism,” but the unsustainable policies that their ideology demands would only push those workers into poverty and destroy crucial industries such as coal mining.

Pennsylvania is prospering under Trump, and the latest opinion polling shows that voters know a good thing when they see it. The Democrats certainly have their work cut out for them in 2020.

David Urban, an Aliquippa native, is a commentator for CNN. He worked as senior adviser for the 2016 Trump campaign in Pennsylvania.

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.