There was a huge political upset in Western Pennsylvania in yesterday’s elections that… There was a huge political upset in Western Pennsylvania in yesterday’s elections that bested even the most informed political scientists and analysts, but it wasn’t the loss of Rick Santorum.

Democratic challenger Jason Altmire defeated Republican incumbent Melissa Hart in the race for the U.S. House of Representatives seat for Pennsylvania’s fourth congressional district.

In late October, polls by both Susquehanna Polling and Research, a Harrisburg-based political polling company, and the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review placed Hart ahead of Altmire by 4 percent of total votes, Hart with 46 percent and Altmire with 42 percent.

The much-anticipated race for the Pennsylvania Senate seat between incumbent Santorum and Democratic challenger Bob Casey was decided by a little past 10 p.m. when Santorum conceded.

The result was consistent with the Susquehanna polls, in which Santorum was predicted to lose with 32 percent of the vote compared to Casey’s projected 52 percent.

Democrats won because they were successful in making Pennsylvania’s District 4, as well as other districts across the country, close races by making the race about the war in Iraq, Jon Delano, political editor for KDKA TV, said.

“Melissa Hart, for years, has touted her local performance,” Delano said yesterday afternoon. “If the race were just about that, she would win in a landslide.”

By making the race about national issues, Democrats like Altmire may give themselves a chance at victory, but they complicate things for incumbents who have supported their party.

“It makes it very tough for the local politician who does the right local things but sides with the wrong national political figure,” Delano said.

Despite the near-hairline differences in the October polls, some never thought Hart was in any real danger.

“I don’t buy those polls,” William J. Green, a political analyst, said of the Susquehanna polls.

Green, who lives in the fourth district, said Pittsburgh media outlets were responsible for distorting the actual figures in the race in order to reduce Hart’s chances of victory.

He said the media’s attempts seemed forced and called them “ridiculous and hypocritical.”

Susan Hansen, a political science professor at Pitt, also gave Hart the advantage before the election.

She said Republicans are generally better at mobilizing their voters, which has put Democrats at a disadvantage in the past, but some “very angry and anxious Democrats” that have been trying to change that trend.

Hart benefited from redistricting as well, Hansen said. This redistricting spread Hart’s constituency over five counties and may have increased the number of voters sympathetic to her.

“They just tried to find little pockets of Republicans hither and yon,” Hansen said.

Hansen added that Hart had the advantage of incumbency, which means a lot in Pennsylvania, but she was still off in her political predictions.

“If she does lose, that would be a pretty big upset,” she said on Monday, “but I don’t really expect it because she has the advantages of redistricting and incumbency.”