It’s not hard to see the three Democratic State Supreme Court justices facing retention elections Nov. 4 drawing more “no” than “yes” votes and, you know, ending up disrobing.

Why? Easier to vote “no.” Don’t need to know anything. “Yes” implies voter-awareness of justices and their body of work (as if). The electorate isn’t especially happy. And, Republicans, touting new registration gains, see a chance to prove Pennsylvania’s getting redder.

Then again, in the half-century-plus that we’ve had retention elections — via a 1968 constitutional amendment — only one justice lost (Philly Democrat Russell Nigro, 2005, due largely to voter anger over a legislative pay raise Nigro had no role in, and reports of excessive expenses). That’s quite a record of voters doing the same thing. So, maybe

See Full Page