Pennsylvania Shapiro Re-Election 2026

{ "overall_summary": "Pennsylvania respondents coalesce around a pragmatic, results-first standard: visible, operational wins (roads, permit speed, broadband reliability, school basics) drive favorability more than rhetorical framing or national ambition. Geography and daily role largely determine which failures register as urgent - rural trades and caregivers focus on roads, EMS/hospital access, utility make-ready and county broadband; working families emphasize childcare, grocery and healthcare affordability; suburban/collar voters are persuadable split-ticket pragmatists who reward calm managerial competence. Talk of 2028 is tolerated only when paired with auditable, local deliverables (published KPIs, county-level scorecards, specific timelines); otherwise national ambition erodes trust. Practical, transactional asks (permit SLAs, posted progress maps, childcare relief, clear healthcare eligibility, energy timelines) repeatedly emerge as the conditions under which respondents would retain support.", "key_segments": [ { "segment": "Rural trades & infrastructure workers", "attributes": { "locale": "Rural", "occupations": ["Construction/trades", "Engineering/project roles", "Small business owners"], "age_range": "30–65+", "primary_concerns": ["Permitting speed and SLAs", "Road repair and maintenance", "Utility/ pole make-ready", "Broadband reliability", "Energy costs and supply stability"] }, "insight": "This group rewards measurable process improvements and quick fixes to workplace friction (faster permits, make-ready schedules, visible miles of road fixed). They are skeptical of press-first governance and will withhold support if operational metrics lag, even if they like broader policy language.", "supporting_agents": ["Frankie Palmer", "David Roblyer", "Thomas Means", "Kathrine Richmond"] }, { "segment": "Rural parents & community caretakers", "attributes": { "locale": "Rural", "roles": ["Librarian", "Community volunteer", "Retiree involved in local services"], "age_range": "33–65+", "primary_concerns": ["Hospital/EMS access", "School basics (transportation, staffing)", "County-level broadband and service timelines"] }, "insight": "Caregivers want county-by-county accountability (maps, timelines) for healthcare and schools - grant announcements are insufficient. They judge leadership on whether it prevents closures and restores basic services.", "supporting_agents": ["Kathrine Richmond", "Elizabeth Akers", "Ruben Reyes"] }, { "segment": "Working families / mid-income parents", "attributes": { "occupations": ["Recruiter", "Sales/IT support", "Project coordinators"], "income": "Mid household incomes (~$50k–$150k)", "household": "Parents, renters or aspiring homeowners", "primary_concerns": ["Childcare availability and cost", "Grocery and energy affordability", "Healthcare clarity and eligibility"] }, "insight": "This cohort evaluates the governor by week-to-week friction: does policy reduce childcare burdens, lower groceries/energy pain, or clarify healthcare access? Small, visible household relief (school breakfast expansion, childcare credits) matters more than aspirational spending totals.", "supporting_agents": ["Shauna Anwar", "Raven Sanchez", "David Manley", "Elizabeth Akers"] }, { "segment": "Suburban / collar persuadable voters", "attributes": { "locale": "Suburbs / collar counties", "age_range": "30s–50s", "priorities": ["Calm managerial leadership", "K–12 outcomes", "Infrastructure reliability", "Avoiding culture-war theatrics"], "voting_behavior": "Open to ticket-splitting; reward competence" }, "insight": "These voters are swingable by a low-drama, results-first narrative. They will split tickets when local service delivery or schools outperform rhetoric. Nationalized fights or perceived distraction for higher office push them away.", "supporting_agents": ["Ruben Reyes", "David Manley", "Raven Sanchez"] }, { "segment": "Younger urban/suburban workers & students", "attributes": { "locale": ["Philadelphia", "Pittsburgh", college towns"], "age_range": "19–30s", "roles": ["Students", "Early-career IT/trades"], "priorities": ["Education funding that improves classroom experience", "Affordability", "Public safety"] }, "insight": "Younger voters are transactional: they want record education spending to translate into smaller class sizes, tuition relief or concrete campus services. They are less moved by culture-war posturing and more by tangible benefits.", "supporting_agents": ["Caleb Snyder", "David Manley", "Ruben Reyes"] }, { "segment": "Higher-income management & executives", "attributes": { "income_bracket": "$150k+", "occupations": ["Directors", "Senior managers"], "focus": ["Predictable permitting and timelines", "Broadband and workforce pipelines", "Operational transparency (KPIs)"] }, "insight": "This group values 'boring competence' - streamlined permitting, measurable workforce pipeline outcomes and published SLAs. They may tolerate statewide ambition if local KPIs are published and met.", "supporting_agents": ["Frankie Palmer", "Raven Sanchez", "Kathrine Richmond"] } ], "shared_mindsets": [ { "trait": "Result-oriented pragmatism", "explanation": "Across demographics, respondents privilege concrete, auditable outcomes (miles of road repaired, permit turnaround times, school program rollouts) over grandstanding or ideological signaling.", "agents": ["Frankie Palmer", "Kathrine Richmond", "Raven Sanchez", "Ruben Reyes"] }, { "trait": "Transactional tolerance for ambition", "explanation": "National ambition (2028 talk) is acceptable to many only if paired with clear local deliverables and published KPIs showing the governor isn't neglecting state responsibilities.", "agents": ["Frankie Palmer", "Ruben Reyes", "Raven Sanchez", "Elizabeth Akers"] }, { "trait": "Skepticism of spectacle and culture-war framing", "explanation": "A broad swath - especially suburban and younger voters - rejects culture-war theatrics and prefers calm, managerial problem-solving on schools, roads and costs.", "agents": ["Ruben Reyes", "David Manley", "Caleb Snyder"] }, { "trait": "Demand for place-based accountability", "explanation": "Rural and small-town respondents repeatedly ask for county-level maps and timelines (broadband, hospital service, road projects) rather than statewide headline grants.", "agents": ["Kathrine Richmond", "Elizabeth Akers", "Thomas Means"] }, { "trait": "Operational metrics as political currency", "explanation": "Publishing SLAs, permit turnaround data, and project completion trackers is perceived as the clearest way to secure or regain trust across income brackets.", "agents": ["Frankie Palmer", "David Roblyer", "Raven Sanchez"] } ], "divergences": [ { "segment": "Rural trades vs Suburban persuadables", "contrast": "Trades workers prioritize permitting, make-ready, and immediate road/utility fixes tied to jobs; suburban persuadables emphasize K–12 outcomes, calm leadership and anti-theatrics. A successful message must address both operational workplace friction and suburban desire for stable schools without leaning into culture-war frames.", "agents": ["Frankie Palmer", "David Roblyer", "Ruben Reyes", "David Manley"] }, { "segment": "Working families (childcare & cost) vs Higher-income executives", "contrast": "Mid-income parents demand household relief (childcare credits, grocery/energy help, healthcare clarity) while higher-income executives focus more on permitting efficiencies and workforce pipelines; tradeoffs exist in prioritization and perceived urgency.", "agents": ["Shauna Anwar", "Raven Sanchez", "Frankie Palmer"] }, { "segment": "Younger urban voters vs Older rural caregivers", "contrast": "Younger urban/suburban respondents want education spending to change classroom experiences and affordability; older rural caregivers are more focused on sustaining local hospitals, EMS and basic school operations (bus routes, staffing). Messaging must localize education and healthcare impacts.", "agents": ["Caleb Snyder", "David Manley", "Elizabeth Akers", "Kathrine Richmond"] }, { "segment": "Tolerance for 2028 ambition by income/role", "contrast": "Higher-income, management respondents are likelier to accept future presidential ambition when paired with KPIs; many mid-income and rural respondents view ambition skeptically unless direct local outcomes are demonstrable.", "agents": ["Raven Sanchez", "Frankie Palmer", "Elizabeth Akers"] }, { "segment": "Cultural conservatives vs Broad anti-extremism sentiment", "contrast": "A minority (notably younger rural conservatives) hold harder culture-war stances and prioritize social issues, while most respondents across other groups reject extremes and prefer pragmatic governance; this creates a narrow but potent divergence in messaging receptivity.", "agents": ["Caleb Snyder", "Thomas Means", "Ruben Reyes"] } ], "next_questions": [ "Which specific KPIs (permit turnaround days, broadband latency by county, miles of road fixed per quarter, EMS staffing levels) would most credibly change vote intent among each segment?", "How should messaging package 2028 ambitions so they register as complementary to - not replacing - state-delivery (e.g., explicit timelines and escrowed commitments for in-state projects)?", "What are the top 3 infrastructure projects in each key county that, if completed on time, would shift perceptions among rural and suburban persuadable voters?", "What childcare policy design (direct childcare credits, sliding subsidies, employer tax incentives) most effectively addresses working families’ affordability concerns?", "How salient are energy-price protections versus job-preservation messaging for trades and rural energy workers when evaluating the governor?", "Would publication of county-level progress maps (broadband, hospital capacity, school staffing) measurably increase trust - and which format (interactive map, monthly scorecard, audit report) is preferred by each segment?", "How does the presence of specific Republican opponents (low-drama manager vs ideologue) change persuadability among swing suburban and rural voters?", "What turnout intensity differences exist between voters who prioritize operational metrics and those motivated by cultural issues?" ], "stats": { "total_responses": 70 } }

Voters grade Shapiro at a B for calm, crisis-tested execution but demand auditable, local receipts before 2026: enforceable permit SLAs, rural roads/bridges and broadband reliability, a clear energy roadmap with bill impacts, school stability without voucher whiplash, and tangible affordability relief (childcare, healthcare clarity). National-ambition talk is tolerated only if paired with posted KPIs and on-time delivery. The plan below prioritizes visible, county-level delivery, not new rhetoric.

0–90 days: Launch 10‑county Delivery Scoreboard (MVP); publish 'Worst 500 Miles' + bridge list; sign utility make‑ready MOU and SLA; start Permit Fast Lane pilot; breakfast waste/quality tweaks; AVR guardrails rollout.

3–6 months: Expand Scoreboard to 25 counties; finalize Energy Roadmap draft; first resurfacing/bridge projects underway; publish EMS/Rural Health plan; Pennie simple‑plan design + navigator schedule set.

6–12 months: Statewide permit SLAs for top categories; construction season 1 completes 40–50% of roads/bridges; broadband uptime improvements with backup power installs; KPIs publicly audited; childcare credit bill advanced or EITC fallback deployed.

12–24 months (into Nov 2026): ≥90% 'Worst 500 Miles' and 100 small bridges done; make‑ready SLA compliance ≥85%; EMS coverage meets 30‑min standard; CTE seats up and placement tracked; measurable energy bill stability; school stability accord enacted; visible county‑level wins for voter contact.