Google Ads


Site Stats

OH-Sen: Dems Increase Leads Over Portman

by: Crisitunity

Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 6:18 PM EDT


Quinnipiac (9/8-10, likely voters, 6/26-7/1 in parentheses):

Lee Fisher (D): 42 (37)
Rob Portman (R): 31 (33)

Lee Fisher (D): 41 (36)
Tom Ganley (R): 29 (30)

Jennifer Brunner (D): 39 (35)
Rob Portman (R): 34 (34)

Jennifer Brunner (D): 39 (35)
Tom Ganley (R): 31 (31)
(MoE: ±3%)

Lee Fisher (D): 26 (24)
Jennifer Brunner (D): 17 (21)
(MoE: ±4.8%)

Rob Portman (R): 27 (33)
Tom Ganley (R): 9 (10)
(MoE: ±5%)

Here's the second half of Quinnipiac's poll of Ohio (they did the Governor's race yesterday). Despite the rough patch a lot of Democrats running for the Senate have run into in the last month or two (see today's spate of Rasmussen polls), the Democrats seem to be holding their ground in the open seat Senate race in Ohio, in fact gaining a bit from the so-so numbers they put up in July. This sample also sees Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher putting a little distance between him and his Democratic primary challenger, SoS Jennifer Brunner.

We're still a long way from decisively knowing anything here, though, as seen by the large undecideds in each category (especially the primaries). Fisher is the best known of the four, and even he has only a 33/13 favorable (with 55% "haven't heard enough"). By contrast, ex-Rep. Rob Portman, who seems well-known only in the Cincinnati area despite time on the national stage (as Bush's trade rep and then budget director), is 72% unknown.

RaceTracker Wiki: OH-Sen
Crisitunity :: OH-Sen: Dems Increase Leads Over Portman
Tags: , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

OH-Sen: Dems Increase Leads Over Portman | 74 comments
If Fisher is actually pulling away from Brunner
(even though this poll's MoE is a large 4.8) I wonder if it's not too late for her to decide to switch back to the SoS race and go for re-election.
One more senate race the DSCC doesn't have to worry about...
Extra resources can be spent winning Kentucky.
Wouldn't go that far
Portman is a money machine. But there should be no excuses here and in Missouri. Speaking of which, we really do need another Carnahan-Blunt poll.
[ Parent ]
OH
Hopefully this compells Brunner to go back to the SOS race so we have someone good in place for 2014 Gov. race.

29/D/Male/NY-01
The issue is
that Fisher would make a horrible senator because he has been a mediocore politician. Brunner would make an excellent senator, I'd much rather have Brunner than Fisher, he'd be a do nothing senator.
I don't know how you'd make that assessment
Especially considering the limited powers of the LG. Fisher seemed to me to be a good politician with a great deal of past experience, in fact he is among the most popular of State Democrats.

Democrats lost one of their best people in Ohio with AG Marc Dann's disappointing scandal and downfall.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

[ Parent ]
Brunner would be 10 times better than Fisher
just look at her record. That is all.
[ Parent ]
They both seem equally liberal
It just seems to me a matter of wanting the more old school old fashioned labor-liberals or the "younger" new generation liberals who tend to be more outspoken and pro-environment/culturally liberal.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
Fisher's not terrible, but not great either.
It's not a matter of age and style, it's a matter of substance.  Take the labor day messages they put out.  Fisher's was a generic acknowledgement of the holiday while Brunner talked about specific issues facing working Americans and put forward original policy proposals from card check to pension reform.  Or the whole gay rights thing, where Fisher was pretty much changing his position to keep up with Brunner.  It's a matter of substance, and that can't be so easily dismissed on the basis of Fisher being a rusty old codger.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
Part of the problem here...
...is lack of information. I have this sense that Jennifer Brunner has been excellent as Secretary of State - but cannot provide specific evidence as to what she has done to support that claim. I also have this sixth sense that Lee Fisher is weak-kneed, the type of politician that could easily end up kowtowing to corporate interests - but again, I have little evidence to support that claim.

It makes it difficult for me to make the case that Brunner is the progressive and that Fisher is the centrist. It makes it difficult for me to make convincing pro-Brunner arguments to my family back in Ohio. I could probably be good for some 10-12 votes in Brunner's column between friends and family, maybe more, if I had some hard evidence as to why Brunner is the preferred candidate.

And if it's difficult for me to make this argument, as someone who pays a LOT of attention to this kind of stuff, then we're going to have trouble reaching Joe Sixpack.

That said, I've never been more convinced of the importance of parsing out the details between two people like Fisher and Brunner and making sure that we elect the more progressive candidate, though. This is not, and cannot, simply be about which person has the biggest bankroll at this time. (In fact, it should be about everything BUT that.) If this health care debate has taught us nothing else, it's that we need to do everything we can to elect the most progressive officials possible.

[ Parent ]
However, since money does matter in politics
And since Ohio is a large state requiring fairly expensive media buys (that's not something which can be disputed) saying that a person's (campaign) bankroll shouldn't factor into the equation is ridiculous.

Yes, I agree that ideology and issue positions are extremely important in the selection of primary candidates, but even then, the question of who is a stronger general election candidate must matter, especially if we all agree that Rob Portman would be a bad choice.

Let me put it this way, even if we concede that Brunner is the more progressive candidate of the two (I don't concede this point, but we'll assume it for the sake of argument), if Brunner is less likely to win (which, I think anyways, can be objectively justified) then the question to ask is whether the risk is justified. If on the scale of "Ideology" (a catch-all for issue positions and progressive values) we decided that Brunner was a 90 and Fisher was an 80, but in terms of chances of being elected Brunner had a 60% of winning while Fisher stands an 80% of winning, then who is better? Well, let's do the math:

Brunner is 90*0.6 = 54, while Fisher is 80*0.8 = 64.

These numbers were all pulled out of my ass, so take them for what they're worth, but my point is that if Brunner seems less likely to win a general than Fisher is (by the numbers that seems true enough to me) and that I can't see any reason to believe that Brunner is substantially more progressive than Fisher is, then there isn't a good reason to back Brunner. I appreciated her SoS work in 2008, but that's not a good enough reason to back her in a contested primary (especially since the only possible reason to back her seems to be to reject the establishment, whatever that means).

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

[ Parent ]
Besides
First female senator ever elected in Ohio? I like the sound of that.
[ Parent ]
Apples and oranges
"The issue is that Fisher would make a horrible senator because he has been a mediocore politician"

That's like saying he would make a bad baker because he isn't a good circus geek.

Lots of great elected officials make poor politicians, and many great politicians make horrible elected officials.

[ Parent ]
Brunner's going to win the primary.
That poll has a whopping 55 percent undecided in the Democratic primary, and there are several demographic trends that favor Brunner-not the least of which is the large number of Democratic women that have been organized in Ohio in the past campaigns (most recently and most significantly Hillary's) on behalf of women candidates.  Fisher's campaign is largely reacting to whatever Brunner does, and she's running a pretty agressive campaign I might not add.  Besides, Fisher has a looooooooonnnnngggg track record of blowing it, so I'm fairly confident in this prediction.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
I think she'd be a better senator frankly
Fisher is liberal but too cautious.
[ Parent ]
Yeah, she's sure going places with that $165,000 cash on hand.

[ Parent ]
Wouldn't be the first underfunded candidate to win.
[ Parent ]
yeah but she's not going to win
with the money disadvantage, Fisher's name id, and on top of that the fact that both the State Party Establishment and Big Labor is supporting him, that simply carries the day.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
Here's the thing
Traditionally, Brunner's been really good about raising money at a steady pace, starting off small but steadily improving.  That's how its worked in all her races.  Further, Fisher's maxed out a lot of his donors and can't use all the funds he's raised in the primary, the advantage isn't as skewed his way as he'd like people to think.  Add to that the better ground game Brunner is running and the demographics trends and you've got a recipe for a Fisher defeat.  But hey, if I'm wrong I'm wrong, so what the hell?

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
Demographic trends?
Women are not going to carry her to a victory. Past elections have shown female candidates shouldn't even hope to count on voting to be as gender-polarized as it is racially. All I know is that Fisher is likely to win the black vote, the union vote, and of course the vote the establishment can crank out.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
How about I let an old hand in Ohio politics break that one down.
[ Parent ]
The first sentence of that kind of calls that guy's credibility into question
"I've endorsed Jennifer Brunner, largely because I think she can win the 2010 general election, and Lee Fisher can't."

All evidence points to Fisher being a stronger candidate than Brunner.

[ Parent ]
Indeed I agree
Fisher is all around stronger from having more money, to being more well known, and to appealing to more Demographics.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
If his money and name recognition advantage is so strong
Why is he barely leading Brunner with so many undecideds?

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
How does she reduce the growing poll deficit
When she has a tenth of his CoH?
[ Parent ]
So you just address the first line and not the reasoning he offers for it?
According to buckeyestateblog, Russo's an old hand in Ohio politics going back to the 90s.  He knows his stuff, and he lays out a compelling argument, comparing this race to a previous one where an underfunded woman nearly routed a similar candidate in similar circumstances, among other compelling arguments.  Read the whole thing and comment on the analysis, but it's unfair to just attack that one line without putting it in the context of the rest of the article.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
I read the whole article and I'm not impressed
When his writings are basically:

The last time a US Senate primary featured a Cuyahoga County east side suburban Jewish male vs. a woman was in 1994, when Joel Hyatt faced Mary Boyle, who had never run statewide.

or this:

Lee's base is split in this manner 9 months out from the primary.  Lee's already lost quite a few long time fundraising supporters to Jennifer Brunner, not just in eastern Cuyahoga, but in his own hometown of Shaker Hts.  There is plenty of anecdotal evidence that this is the tip of the iceberg throughout Cuyahoga County.  Just ask around a bit.  If this is happening in Cuyahoga, I can only imagine how fractured Lee's base is statewide, whatever base there is to speak of outside of Cuyahoga.  Which ain't much.

He doesn't quantify this, he just says there are "quite a few fundraising supporters" that are backing Brunner over Fisher, I can't make anything of that, especially in light of Brunner's atrocious fundraising.

His whole spiel seems to be anecdotes and how horrible Fisher is, without actually telling us what makes Brunner so wonderful (other than she's apparantly not Fisher).

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

[ Parent ]
If
Brunner doesn't improve on the mediocre fundraising this quarter, she should switch back to the SOS race.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
Folks, quit saying that, she's not going to do it.
She wants to run for the Senate and, hey, more power to her.  All the folks saying she should get back in are succeeding in is sounding like a bunch of broken records.  She's not going to run for reelection-we've hashed that much out.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
Then maybe you all should stop claiming
that Brunner is going to magically win the primary despite being far behind in money (and she's been outraised two quarters in a row, so it's not like Fisher's fundraising has dried up as some have claimed it would) and behind in the polls.

This reminds me of the Lt. Governor primary here in Virginia this year. Some supporters of Mike Signer kept swearing up and down that he would win despite being outspent and behind in the polls. Signer never made it above 12% in any primary polls, and Wagner started out at 9%, was in the 20s for most of the primary, and ended up at 41% in the final poll. They kept claiming that as the establishment candidate, Wagner should be doing much better than she was, and this was obviously a sign that she would go down in flames to the bloggers' preferred candidate.

[ Parent ]
Nothing magic about it.
It's just a prognostication, which is a little different from stating again and again that a candidate, who has said until she's blue in the face that she won't do it, should drop out and run for reelection, especially when the democratic primary for that race is already under way.  Besides, if we're wrong, we're wrong.  What's it matter?

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
On another note I am glad to see both of them
improving. I was beginning to think it was going to start slipping away when it is a race Democrats should win. What's more is that the primary is not getting terribly ugly, even though this one many of us kind of predicted would get ugly, meanwhile for some unknowable reason Mongiardo is taking to KY-SEN to a high level of nastiness and basically serving to sink both candidates general election chances and trying to harpoon Conway as a liberal. It doesn't make sense there seeing as Mongiardo should consider that if he wants a political future he should not burn his bridges with the pro-Conway camp.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
Pretty sure Portman and Ganley
Only "pretty sure?"
(Thanks!)
[ Parent ]
Re: Fisher vs Brunner
As I've said all along, I feel Jennifer Brunner is the superior public servant, and would do better in the US Senate.  The job she's done as SOS has been nothing short of outstanding, especially in the face of the ridiculous lawsuits brought about by the Ohio GOP prior to the 2008 election.  She's battle tested, and knows how to run a campaign.  And she's very liberal too.

That being said, Fisher's not a dunce, and he's not a bad guy.  I think he has some good stances on policy, and is fairly popular.  The fact that he's so far ahead on Portman tells me that he might actually be more electable in the general than Brunner, who's a little more outspoken and freewheeling.  Fisher's more conservative, but at times it does make him seem a bit averse to change, despite his obvious partisan leanings to the left.  

The biggest issue in the state of Ohio in 2009, much like Kentucky, is gambling.  Ohio needs gambling.  We're losing hundreds of millions of dollars annually with people going to places like Detroit, Niagara Falls, Erie, and Wheeling to spend their gaming dollars.  Dan Gilbert, the owner of the Cleveland Cavaliers and founder of Quicken Loans, has put together a proposal that would build four casinos in Ohio, 1 each in Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, and Toledo.  Of these four cities, only Columbus is doing well, and Toledo in particular is in dire straits.  Building these casinos would be a huge draw to these downtown areas, and would spur economic development in places that BADLY need it.  

Bottom line is, Ted Strickland was quite frigid on gambling.  I have a hard time believing that Lee Fisher would go for something like this.  Brunner is backing it all the way.  That's enough to keep me in her column, but I'll be rooting for the Dems all the way.  

23, Male, Democrat, OH-13

Gambling
I hate to tell you this but gambling usually doesn't spur economic development, it usually kills a lot of other businesses because it discourages savings.  It also allows people easy access to bad behavior which tends to encourage them tog et pay day loans etc. and just ecumulate a lot of debt.   I lived in a casino town in Oklahoma and  it wasn't pretty.
[ Parent ]
Agree
I enjoy a little casino gambling myself. I go to Vegas every couple of years and visit casino's in Minnesota and Iowa 3 or 4 times a year. That having been said IMO casino's are bad for most localities and the Goverment shouldn't be in that bussiness. I also don't like lotteries which prey more on the poor than the well to do.  

"Where free Unions and collective bargaining is forbidden, freedom is lost." - Ronald Reagan
[ Parent ]
Actually, I would like to disagree
I think the data is quite clear. Shreveport was struggling economically in the 1980s and Louisiana finally legalized gambling. Today Shreveport has a thriving tourist industry and is one of the largest southern gambling centers, with huge elegant hotels that generate the city hundreds of millions of dollars of income a year.

Look at other ares, Tunica's casino's are a major source of wealth, as our Memphis'.

What do you think drives the economies of Atlantic City? Or Las Vegas? The scenery? It has worked also in helping many Indian Reservations economically.

Whats more is people should have the freedom to decide to gamble, with the addition though of laws like those for guns that stop people with a history of abuse from gambling in the future. But gambling is a major tourist attraction and can be a fun activity. I would disagree with your statement on multiple levels, even as someone who has seen firsthand the destructive behavior that can be created by gambling.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

[ Parent ]
You can assert that but it obviously is not true
Drive from east Wendover Utah to west Wendover Nevada sometime.

There is no way to possibly dispute that as long as their is a patchwork of different state gambling laws, that the states with gambling extract value from those that don't.  If there was no gambling around Ohio it would be a different story, but it is surrounded by it.  Ohio needs to keep its gambling dollars in its own borders.

[ Parent ]
Gambling is not really a US Senate issue
Just sayin.

"Where free Unions and collective bargaining is forbidden, freedom is lost." - Ronald Reagan
[ Parent ]
4 possible new female senators
Coakley, Brunner, Marshall, Carnahan
Too bad Lisa Madigan isn't running
Carnahan
That would also make Missouri the fourth state with both senators being women, and the most unexpected of the four.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
[ Parent ]
Could be six states
if Marshall wins and (God forbid) Ayotte wins.  
[ Parent ]
Could, potentially, be seven states...
It's plausible that we could see the following scenario play out in the next election:

CO-Sen: Jane Norton (R) over Andrew Romanoff or Michael Bennet (D)
MA-Sen: Martha Coakley (D) over --who knows (R)--
MO-Sen: Robin Carnahan (D) over Roy Blunt (R)
NC-Sen: Elaine Marshall (D) over Richard Burr (R)
NH-Sen: Kelly Ayotte (R) over Paul Hodes (D)
NV-Sen: Sue Lowden (R) over Harry Reid (D)
OH-Sen: Jennifer Brunner (D) over Rob Portman (R)

That's seven potential pickups by women candidates.

Current statistics: the United States has 17 female and 82 male Senators. This includes 4/40 female Republicans (10%), and 13/59 female Democrats (22%).

Now, if one assumes that...
1. all of these (except for Coakley) are potentially in play for the next Senate race;
2. Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX-Sen) will almost certainly be placed by a male;
3. Blanche Lincoln is somewhat vulnerable, then:
...it would seem that the range of female Senators for the next race is probably 16-23, with the Republican range being 3-6, and the Democratic range being 13-17.

I don't think of this as an incidental consideration. There may be something to the idea that the next few years will see the parties trying to "out-diversify" each other. Obama's election shattered a glass barrier, and I believe that the 2010 decade will be characterized largely by both parties are going to try to outflank one another on the idea of "Hey, we're more than a bunch of white dudes making the rules."

[ Parent ]
I meant to say
six states with two female senators; California, Washington, Maine, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina.  
[ Parent ]
Ironically
Until 2006, NH had NEVER elected a woman to Congress. Now, it has a famale senator and a female House member.

What states have yet to elect a woman to either house of Congress?

[ Parent ]
I know
Iowa is one
[ Parent ]
I think South Carolina and Mississippi hold that dubious honor
New Mexico has only elected one woman to the House (Heather Wilson) and will likely elect it's first female governor in 2010.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

[ Parent ]
South Carolina
had Liz Patterson in the early 90s (defeated by Bob Inglis, no less, in 1992) and Elizabeth Hawley Gasque for a brief period in 1938. Wikipedia says: "She was elected to the House of Representatives on September 13, 1938, to fill the vacancy caused by the death of her husband, Congressman Allard Henry Gasque. She never actually attended Congress, which was not in session during her months of office."

Of course, they also had a Lindsey, a Carroll, and a Robin, but those are all guys. Southern male names are weird.

[ Parent ]
This was a trivia question on Talk of the Nation a couple weeks ago
The answer is: Vermont, Iowa, North Dakota, Mississippi and Delaware.

North Dakota, however, is a bit of an asterisk, because while they had a female Senator, Jocelyn Burdick, she was appointed after her husband Quentin Burdick died, but she was never elected to Congress.

[ Parent ]
OH
I'm going to sound like a Republican here, but I get the feeling, the majority of Brunner's support comes from people who just prefer her because shes a woman.  She's not fundraising as well, Isn't polling as well and is not getting State wide support as well(Unions and the like).  Seeing as how they are so close on the issues, the only thing Brunner has really is charisma and agressiveness, two things which don't overcome Fischers strengths.

29/D/Male/NY-01
OH
That's not to say I don't think we couldn't use more Woman Senators.  We certainly could.

29/D/Male/NY-01
[ Parent ]
More to it than that
I suspect that her support comes more from her work as SoS in standing up to R efforts to disenfranchise voters.

Personally, I like them both and haven't yet decided which of them I'll vote for.

[ Parent ]
Please Brunner, run for re-election
Make sure Ohio in 2012 (and 2014) is fair.  Run for governor in 2014.  If you're good, you can run for president in 2016 or 2020.  

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
Or
She could win the Senate election and run for President in 2016, just like Obama. :)

That'd be 20 rather troublesome electoral votes in the bag.

23, Male, Democrat, OH-13

[ Parent ]
True.
My point was her chances of winning the primary don't look so great right now.  Running for re-election gives us a defense against Republican electoral shenanigans and would give Brunner the chance to win the governor's mansion in a few years.  Plus, more governors have been elected to the presidency than senators.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
[ Parent ]
Doesn't Fisher have a history
of losing statewide elections?  I thought that was the reason why folks liked Brunner over Fisher - he's been in the Ohio political scene for a couple decades and is a known quantity whereas Brunner was a judge before becoming SoS and is a fresher face.  So, in truth, this seems like a battle between folks who want a younger candidate that, while she may have some shortcomings in fundraising and support, has a perceived higher potential "ceiling" versus a known figure who, while we know can produce solid results as a politician, doesn't have as much potential to be a star.  Again, these seem to be people's perceptions, as I have no real allegiance in this race as I'm not from Ohio (although I've had enough brush-ins with their State Troopers while driving through there I might as well be).  Or am I completely off?
Back then
Democrats have had an awful time in trying to win statewide elections.

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
That seems to be kind of why I like Brunner over Fischer
It isn't a solid liking over Fischer or anything tangible, it's more just an inkling.

She's younger and is more of a fresh face vs old guard Fischer who has been around awhile.  And I think as a gay man, I kind of tend to root for women candidates over males, when no other factors make the decision for me, due to the whole overcoming gender/straight male dominance, etc sentiment.  

Makes me wish I had taken a gender studies class or something, gay rights and gender rights go pretty hand in hand from what I've gathered and I'd be able to fully understand why I naturally root for women candidates over men.  (Waits for someone to bring up Madia vs Bonoff.)

But whatever, Im from MN, have a good clean primary Ohio!

[ Parent ]
you make a good point
About the State Troopers in Ohio.  They're everywhere.  We're the #1 state in the country for traffic tickets and getting stopped on the interstate.

I-71 between Cleveland and Columbus is just brutal.

23, Male, Democrat, OH-13

[ Parent ]
My old roommate was from Akron
But he moved here to New Mexico and, as it turns out, apparantly when you get convicted of DWI in Ohio, you have to get a license plate that looks a lot like the older design of our normal plates. As you can imagine, whenever he went back to Ohio, he would get pulled over all the time.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

[ Parent ]
I hate the Ohio Turnpike
I used to compete in college speech and debate on the East Coast, and we traveled to Ohio a lot for their local torunaments (Akron, Bowling Green, OU, OSU).  We hated going there, and I've gotten a number of tickets for going 5 over the speed limit between the PA border and Cleveland.
[ Parent ]
Same here
When I was going to law school in Toledo, I would use the turnpike to get from their to my home in Trumbull County (and vice versa). The police presence there was ridiculous. I was pulled over once but was only given a warning.

Now that I go to Akron, I just have to use 80 and 76, but even there the troopers are waiting in the wings like vultures.

[ Parent ]
You got to law school in Akron?
I've had some friends that went there for undergrad.  Nice campus, but Jesus Christ it's in a depressing part of Ohio.  And yes, the troopers on 80 are waiting like vultures.  I feel like I've contributed enough to the state of Ohio's revenue I should get a vote in this primary!  Can't complain though, just moved to LA and will now have the chance to vote for either Newsom or Brown.
[ Parent ]
You're lucky!
I wish I could have that chance!

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
No, actually
Law school did not work out for me, so I'm pursuing a Master's in PoliSci at Akron. It is a nice campus, not as nice as OSU, but better than Toledo.

Having been to much of OH, I have to say that the best place to live was Columbus. I wasn't crazy about my apartment, but at least there was always something to DO there. My hometown of Youngstown is both dull and dead. Sometimes I take drives through the cemeteries, looking for funny names, to amuse myself!

[ Parent ]
Yikes! lol


My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
Fisher lost in 1994
but then, so did Ted Strickland that year.

He lost the governor's race in 1998, but he had to run against a Taft (who wasn't incredibly unpopular until midway through his second term).

Brunner has only run statewide once, and had the benefit of Strickland's coattails.

[ Parent ]
Fisher's only lost two elections
Once in 1994, when Betty Montgomery beat him for AG.

Once in 1994, when Bob Taft beat him 50-45 for governor.

Before then, he had been very successful. He was elected to the state house in 1980, the state senate in 1982, and AG in 1990.

Interestingly, I recall some of the exact same complaints made against Sherrod Brown in 2006. People reasoned that because Bob Taft had ousted him as SoS in 1990 that he wasn't that strong a candidate. They were forgetting that, at that time, Taft was the scion of Ohio's premier political family and was considered a rising star. It was only later when most realized what a doofus he was.

What happened? Brown beat DeWine 56-44 and the much-vaunted Hackett faded into complete obscurity.

I should make clear that I am NOT comparing Brunner to Hackett. I think she still has a chance and would make a great senator if she won.  

[ Parent ]
What has Fisher done????
to make Ohio voters even consider him for senator over the very accomplished secretary of state Brunner. All I have heard is that he looses one election after another.  
Way back when it was tough for any Dem to win statewide in Ohio.


My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
The
90's were extremely brutal towards Democrats. The Democrats in that state collapsed like what happened in Georgia from 2002 to now. It wasn't until 2006 did Democrats manage to fight their way back into power. I don't have a dog in this primary, but if Brunner can't raise the money to run an effective campaign, she should run for reelection as SOS.  

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
Up until 2006
we didnt have a single state-wide elected person in OH did we and then we swept the lot of them IIRC.  
[ Parent ]
Is Brunner ready?
Again, I have no horse in this race, but is she ready for prime-time, considering her anemic fundraising?  It'd be a shame if such a good candidate were to ruin  her chances by jumping the gun too early.  Is there perhaps a Congressional race she could move to so she could keep her federal dollars?
OH-Sen: Dems Increase Leads Over Portman | 74 comments

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

About the Site

Publisher: DavidNYC

Senior Editor: James L.

Senior Editor: Crisitunity

Contributing Editor: Jeffmd

Search the SSP archives:

SSP Resources

Presidential Vote by CD

SSP Document Collection

Race Tracker Wiki

Dave's Redistricting App

Blogroll

Daily Kos Elections
DemConWatch
Five Thirty Eight
Governing
Hotline On Call
Political Wire
Pollster.com
Prop*50
Public Policy Polling
The Thicket
Powered by: SoapBlox