Discussion: Report: National Democrats Delay Ad Buy For Ted Strickland In Ohio Senate Race

Ok DNC, if Strickland is fading, take those ad dollars and put them into the Nevada Senate race…

4 Likes

Or North Carolina. Or Florida. Or Arizona. Or even Missouri.

Personally, I think Ohio and Iowa are lost causes. I never bought off on the notion that Judge was the best person to go after Grassley because her name is “Judge” (which apparently, was the main driver for why everyone wanted her to the nominee), and Strickland has been a big disappointment for over a year, first in his lackluster fund raising efforts and more lately by his inability to fight back on the barrage that Portman is putting on him.

3 Likes

Ohio is a completely lost cause, unfortunately. I live here and wouldn’t know that Strickland was even running a campaign except for the ads attacking him.

2 Likes

Steickland is dead in the water. He needs to be cut loose. Any money spent on him would be wasted.

Jesus christ DNC, get in the fucking game. Portman is an atrocious senator - if you have to work a bit harder to knock him off, do so.

They haven’t hit Portman hard at all.

3 Likes

I live here and wouldn’t know that Strickland was even running a campaign except for the ads attacking him.

Is that because Strickland doesn’t have the $$ necessary for an aggressive communications effort? And if so, why?

3 Likes

well, that’s incompetence. There’s no reason they couldn’t still knock off Portman. Get to work you guys.

2 Likes

Jesus christ DNC, get in the fucking game.

This is why I wanted DWS out over a year ago. She helmed the DNC during the disastrous 2014 midterms, and the DNC has been an incompetent organization when it comes to going after Republicans.

3 Likes

Oh come on, we should own the Great Lakes states except for Indiana which even looks good for us this year.

1 Like

It’s not the DNC but the DSCC. And if they’re delaying running an ad, then they’ve written him off. They’re not throwing good money after bad. Damn shame we have to lose this seat but if Strickland was the best of the D crop available, there’s not much more to say about it.

3 Likes

This is an extremely important distinction. This has nothing to do with the DNC, and everything to do with where the DSCC wants to invest it’s money and when. If Strickland looks like a lost cause, which is too damn bad because I like him, then it’s fine with me if they want to invest in other candidates in other states. At least we have that option this cycle.

I got a call from the DSCC, and I asked which candidates they had in mind for me to contribute to. “Let’s see, there’s Arkansas [to which I almost said don’t you know how solid the Rs are there], and there’s also California’s Loretta Sanchez.” I know something about this, so I informed the guy Kamala Harris was up over Sanchez by 21 points, she’s going to lose and I wouldn’t donate. Maybe it’s their mission to fundraise for underdogs.

I must be misremembering, but I thought Portman was flip-flopping on all kinds of issues to keep his seat. Anyone have a clue why I’m thinking that, 'cuz I sure don’t.

Given Strickland’s age, he was a one term shot anyhow.

If he looks weak and he is out after one term anyhow, cut our losses.