OH-Sen: Cincinnati Councilman P.G. Sittenfeld likely running

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I'm ashamed of the ODP. We're starting to go into FDP bad territory by nominating perennial losers for offices again and again (Fisher and now Strickland), and I had hoped when we got rid of Redfern we would see a good amount of reform in the selection process. Guess not.

Giving Chairman Pepper the benefit of the doubt he did want to remain neutral plus the endorsement of Strickland was really out of his power to stop (the blame goes on Strickland's organized labor friends who got this vote called). However, our party bylaws specifically state that an endorsement needs to be held in the year the primary takes place (2016, not 2015) and the endorsement needs to be "carefully considered" if there's more than one person running for the nomination and they completely ignored Sittenfeld's candidacy. In fact, the only reason they had this meeting rushed was because they knew Sittenfeld would be absent (due to pre-scheduled campaign events) and they wanted to keep this as secret as possible. If this endorsement says anything, it says that Strickland after finding out he's been out-raised is beyond desperate to crush Sittenfeld's candidacy and is scared to run on his record in a Democratic primary.

I'm usually against competitive primaries, but after what happened last year, and given the large contrast between Strickland and Sittenfeld, we should be given an engaging, contested primary. I myself would much rather prefer Strickland drop out, but that's much more unlikely than a primary.

A primary would help Strickland get back into fighting shape and Sittenfeld would be able to build his name statewide (look how well the Chiles-Nelson FL primary went for Nelson or how well the Lausche-Gilligan OH primary went for Gilligan). There's Ohio Democrats who want an experienced candidate next year, but there's also Ohio Democrats who want a change from the past retreads towards younger aspiring and energetic candidates.

Lol

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I'm ashamed of the ODP. We're starting to go into FDP bad territory by nominating perennial losers for offices again and again (Fisher and now Strickland), and I had hoped when we got rid of Redfern we would see a good amount of reform in the selection process. Guess not.

Giving Chairman Pepper the benefit of the doubt he did want to remain neutral plus the endorsement of Strickland was really out of his power to stop (the blame goes on Strickland's organized labor friends who got this vote called). However, our party bylaws specifically state that an endorsement needs to be held in the year the primary takes place (2016, not 2015) and the endorsement needs to be "carefully considered" if there's more than one person running for the nomination and they completely ignored Sittenfeld's candidacy. In fact, the only reason they had this meeting rushed was because they knew Sittenfeld would be absent (due to pre-scheduled campaign events) and they wanted to keep this as secret as possible. If this endorsement says anything, it says that Strickland after finding out he's been out-raised is beyond desperate to crush Sittenfeld's candidacy and is scared to run on his record in a Democratic primary.

I'm usually against competitive primaries, but after what happened last year, and given the large contrast between Strickland and Sittenfeld, we should be given an engaging, contested primary. I myself would much rather prefer Strickland drop out, but that's much more unlikely than a primary.

A primary would help Strickland get back into fighting shape and Sittenfeld would be able to build his name statewide (look how well the Chiles-Nelson FL primary went for Nelson or how well the Lausche-Gilligan OH primary went for Gilligan). There's Ohio Democrats who want an experienced candidate next year, but there's also Ohio Democrats who want a change from the past retreads towards younger aspiring and energetic candidates.

Lol

Thank you for your insightful contribution!

Any time

I get that you really like Sittenfield, but about 99% of what you said in that post is simply not based in reality.  You're just not being objective about this and what you posted was really just a bunch of unskewedpolls.com-level spin.  Yes, I could explain point-by-point why pretty much none of your analysis in that post was sound as I've done with some of your past posts on this race, but its pretty clear that nothing I or anyone else says is going to make you see the light here and if that's the case, what's the point?  I don't wanna keep going in circles just for the sake of arguing. 

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Please X, do not criticize Lebron's *skills*. You should remember how right he was about Fitzgerald in 2014.

It's not his fault that FitzGerald was banging Irish girls.

Yeah, to be fair, Fitzy looked like the perfect candidate. It's not like he was a clear bomb from the beginning.

Nah, he only ran because Cordrey, Ryan, Strickland, and Sutton all said no.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Please X, do not criticize Lebron's *skills*. You should remember how right he was about Fitzgerald in 2014.

Everyone makes mistakes, but I see I'm becoming the new Keystone Phil now.

Edit: Keep in mind, I said like 3 months before the election (right around the time of the implosion) that FitzGerald would lose. That, and I think we can all agree that most of our 2014 predictions sucked miserably (especially Governor races).

You know obviously quite well OH politics. However, you're so skewed, I hope you realize that.

Thanks for saying that, and oh yeah I can admit I'm skewed towards Sittenfeld. I do come off as someone who's biased for him and I am dedicated to his campaign from this point on, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't know he would lose the primary. This is more personal support of him at this point due to his strong stances on equal rights issues and the inspiration his bold candidacy brings to some fellow Millennial's like myself.

My issue isn't that you support Sittenfield so much as that you do stuff like calling the ODP's support for Strickland an FDP move that shows Strickland is scared of Sittenfield, talk about the fundraising numbers completely out-of-context, or get so intense in your opposition to Strickland that I almost wondered if you'd vote Portman, etc that can be rather off-putting.  I'd think we could both agree that neither Strickland nor Sittenfield is an awful candidate.  What we really disagree on is whether Strickland can beat Portman.  Yes, there's stuff about Sittenfield that rubs me the wrong way (the ageism in the speech of his I saw at an FCDP event, the fact that he's literally said to another elected official that he's running because "the state legislature is too small for me," and the fact that he repeatedly promised to drop out if Strickland ran) but I could overlook all of that if I thought he could win and Strickland couldn't.

You are right about one thing though, I can be a bit condescending sometimes when talking about something I know a lot about (in this case Ohio politics) with someone whom I think is completely wrong.  It's not one of my better qualities.  However, I'm self-aware enough to realize this and I am working on it.  While it isn't really a problem IRL at this point, the feeling of anonymity that comes with talking online with folks I'll never meet means that every now and then I make posts that unintentionally have a bit of a condescending tone to them.  We all have our weaknesses, this is one of mine.  I didn't need to respond in such a dismissive manner and I apologize for that (even though I was completely right on the substance of my post ).  I could've just not responded to your post if I didn't feel like debating at the time.

In any event, if you like Sittenfield, you should be hoping he drops out or at least cuts back on the negativity/ageism because he's burning a lot of bridges.  If he dropped out and ran against Chabot he'd probably lose, but he could still boost his name recognition for a 2018 row-office run, establish serious national fundraising connections, repair the bridges he's burned so far, and prove that he can overperform in tough territory in the Cincinnati area.  

I don't want to see him go the way of Paul Hackett.  Unlike Sittenfield, Hackett had a right to be pissed since IIRC Brown originally said he wasn't running in 2006, but once Brown got in, Hackett should've dropped out and run against Schmidt in OH-2.  Had he done so, he definitely would've won.  However, he stayed in even though he just was not ready to play at that level yet and would've probably lost to DeWine.  Eventually Hackett dropped out, but by then he had burned any bridges he had in the ODP and couldn't even run in OH-2.  He became a McCain-level bitter and hollow shell of his former self and hasn't been heard from since.  I have less sympathy for Sittenfield since he promised everyone and their brother that he'd drop out if Strickland or Tim Ryan ran for Senate...until Strickland got in the race.

I do have to ask though, why exactly do you hate Strickland so much?  A lot of your attacks on him are pretty out there For example, no offense, but I think we can agree Strickland isn't homophobe just because he's friends with someone who is one (Garrison).  And a lot of the stuff you said about the budget being completely his fault, the state economy being a mess because of him, claims about him being really unpopular, etc simply isn't true.  That's not my opinion or me being condescending, I mean what you've said sometimes directly contradicted the objective facts.  So why the intense Strickland hate?

Lastly, the ODP decided (with about 80% voting in favor) to make an exception to the bylaws and endorse Strickland.  That isn't Strickland being afraid, it's something that was clearly going to happen if Strickland got in no matter what.  Most OH Democrats (especially in the ODP establishment, but even the rank-and-file) really like Strickland.  He does have some work to do in terms of improving his GOTV operation in African-American communities (especially in eastern Cuyahoga County), but the fact that he's already reaching out to local elected officials makes me optimistic that he's learned from his one big mistake in 2006.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

A new editorial is out by Brent Larkin reporting that after Sittenfeld said he would stay in the race after the ODP's endorsement of Strickland, party leaders within the party are about to start a smear campaign against him.

It's not completely the same as in this situation of course, but five years ago, both Brunner and Fisher weren't racking in as much money as they could have had Democrats backed behind one candidate and to make matters worse there were internal and public bombshells being thrown in the primary to weaken each other when Democrats should have used that time uniting against Portman. Those who don't learn history just might be doomed to repeat it, I guess.

As a young college Democrat from Cleveland I don't have any authority to say what happens high up in the ODP down in Columbus, but a toddler could figure out that trying to ruin the career of one of the party's top rising stars is not a good idea, either.

Sittenfield isn't a rising star at this point. 

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

How does getting crushed 3-1 in a primary help his career again?

Name recognition!1!!

But it doesn't help that this is likely to be a very low turnout primary. Didn't Strickland also represent an Appalachian district? I don't really see then how Sittenfeld gets protest votes from them (because of soshulist obummer) if Strickland represented them.

Ohio Democratic primaries always have low turnout, but yeah he did used to represent a district that extended from Youngstown on down to the Kentucky border. Strickland will carry Appalachia in the primary in a blowout no matter what.

It wouldn't be worthwhile for Sittenfeld to campaign in Appalachia in the primary anyways. Just to provide some reasons behind this, 1) Democrats there aren't the Democrats who Sittenfeld wants to identify with, 2) He's naturally a bad fit for SE Ohio, 3) He's running against Ted Strickland and 4) The region doesn't supply all that many votes due to weak registration/turnout numbers (for example, in Strickland's 2006 Democratic primary he got roughly only 16-18% of his total overall votes from Southeast Ohio). It might be best for him to avoid Central Ohio as well (that's very solid, unbreakable Strickland territory).

Sittenfeld's best strategy as long as he stays in is to continue campaigning on college campuses with the youth voting block, and to focus on the two regions where he has the strongest potential of doing well (Southwest and Northeast Ohio). Most of his donors and support are coming from SW Ohio (to be expected) and Strickland under-performs all the time up here in NE Ohio with Democratic base votes, so if I were Sittenfeld I would take full advantage of that.

That aside, he has a floor of about 30% and a ceiling of 40% when all's said and done.

He has a floor of 12% and a ceiling of 28%.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

How does getting crushed 3-1 in a primary help his career again?

Name recognition!1!!

But it doesn't help that this is likely to be a very low turnout primary. Didn't Strickland also represent an Appalachian district? I don't really see then how Sittenfeld gets protest votes from them (because of soshulist obummer) if Strickland represented them.

Ohio Democratic primaries always have low turnout, but yeah he did used to represent a district that extended from Youngstown on down to the Kentucky border. Strickland will carry Appalachia in the primary in a blowout no matter what.

It wouldn't be worthwhile for Sittenfeld to campaign in Appalachia in the primary anyways. Just to provide some reasons behind this, 1) Democrats there aren't the Democrats who Sittenfeld wants to identify with, 2) He's naturally a bad fit for SE Ohio, 3) He's running against Ted Strickland and 4) The region doesn't supply all that many votes due to weak registration/turnout numbers (for example, in Strickland's 2006 Democratic primary he got roughly only 16-18% of his total overall votes from Southeast Ohio). It might be best for him to avoid Central Ohio as well (that's very solid, unbreakable Strickland territory).

Sittenfeld's best strategy as long as he stays in is to continue campaigning on college campuses with the youth voting block, and to focus on the two regions where he has the strongest potential of doing well (Southwest and Northeast Ohio). Most of his donors and support are coming from SW Ohio (to be expected) and Strickland under-performs all the time up here in NE Ohio with Democratic base votes, so if I were Sittenfeld I would take full advantage of that.

That aside, he has a floor of about 30% and a ceiling of 40% when all's said and done.

He has a floor of 12% and a ceiling of 28%.

If TEACHOUT can get 34%, so can Sittenfeld.

Arbitrarily choosing a race for a different office from a different state with very different political dynamics isn't really comparable.

Wulfric's example isn't the best. For a better example, if you look back at Strickland's 2006 Democratic primary race, his opponent Bryan Flannery got 21% of the vote against Strickland. He won that 21% despite jumping in only a few months before the actual primary race, raising just $100K-$200K, and as a result he had no chance to get his name out there with Ohio Democratic voters.

Sittenfeld is a stronger candidate/fundraiser than Flannery was and as opposed to 2006, there's obviously more reluctantly now by some Democratic voters about backing Strickland.

Anything at or below a Flannery performance would require Sittenfeld to not even try to campaign. At the bare minimum, he'll likely get around 30% of the vote.

You're basically the only one feeling more reluctant about supporting Strickland

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

How does getting crushed 3-1 in a primary help his career again?

Name recognition!1!!

But it doesn't help that this is likely to be a very low turnout primary. Didn't Strickland also represent an Appalachian district? I don't really see then how Sittenfeld gets protest votes from them (because of soshulist obummer) if Strickland represented them.

Ohio Democratic primaries always have low turnout, but yeah he did used to represent a district that extended from Youngstown on down to the Kentucky border. Strickland will carry Appalachia in the primary in a blowout no matter what.

It wouldn't be worthwhile for Sittenfeld to campaign in Appalachia in the primary anyways. Just to provide some reasons behind this, 1) Democrats there aren't the Democrats who Sittenfeld wants to identify with, 2) He's naturally a bad fit for SE Ohio, 3) He's running against Ted Strickland and 4) The region doesn't supply all that many votes due to weak registration/turnout numbers (for example, in Strickland's 2006 Democratic primary he got roughly only 16-18% of his total overall votes from Southeast Ohio). It might be best for him to avoid Central Ohio as well (that's very solid, unbreakable Strickland territory).

Sittenfeld's best strategy as long as he stays in is to continue campaigning on college campuses with the youth voting block, and to focus on the two regions where he has the strongest potential of doing well (Southwest and Northeast Ohio). Most of his donors and support are coming from SW Ohio (to be expected) and Strickland under-performs all the time up here in NE Ohio with Democratic base votes, so if I were Sittenfeld I would take full advantage of that.

That aside, he has a floor of about 30% and a ceiling of 40% when all's said and done.

He has a floor of 12% and a ceiling of 28%.

If TEACHOUT can get 34%, so can Sittenfeld.

Arbitrarily choosing a race for a different office from a different state with very different political dynamics isn't really comparable.

Wulfric's example isn't the best. For a better example, if you look back at Strickland's 2006 Democratic primary race, his opponent Bryan Flannery got 21% of the vote against Strickland. He won that 21% despite jumping in only a few months before the actual primary race, raising just $100K-$200K, and as a result he had no chance to get his name out there with Ohio Democratic voters.

Sittenfeld is a stronger candidate/fundraiser than Flannery was and as opposed to 2006, there's obviously more reluctantly now by some Democratic voters about backing Strickland.

Anything at or below a Flannery performance would require Sittenfeld to not even try to campaign. At the bare minimum, he'll likely get around 30% of the vote.

You're basically the only one feeling more reluctant about supporting Strickland

Because Atlas is totally representative of the OH Dems as a whole. Right

If anything Lebron's existance means the forum has a strong pro-Sittenfield bias relative to Ohio Democrats.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

How does getting crushed 3-1 in a primary help his career again?

Name recognition!1!!

But it doesn't help that this is likely to be a very low turnout primary. Didn't Strickland also represent an Appalachian district? I don't really see then how Sittenfeld gets protest votes from them (because of soshulist obummer) if Strickland represented them.

Ohio Democratic primaries always have low turnout, but yeah he did used to represent a district that extended from Youngstown on down to the Kentucky border. Strickland will carry Appalachia in the primary in a blowout no matter what.

It wouldn't be worthwhile for Sittenfeld to campaign in Appalachia in the primary anyways. Just to provide some reasons behind this, 1) Democrats there aren't the Democrats who Sittenfeld wants to identify with, 2) He's naturally a bad fit for SE Ohio, 3) He's running against Ted Strickland and 4) The region doesn't supply all that many votes due to weak registration/turnout numbers (for example, in Strickland's 2006 Democratic primary he got roughly only 16-18% of his total overall votes from Southeast Ohio). It might be best for him to avoid Central Ohio as well (that's very solid, unbreakable Strickland territory).

Sittenfeld's best strategy as long as he stays in is to continue campaigning on college campuses with the youth voting block, and to focus on the two regions where he has the strongest potential of doing well (Southwest and Northeast Ohio). Most of his donors and support are coming from SW Ohio (to be expected) and Strickland under-performs all the time up here in NE Ohio with Democratic base votes, so if I were Sittenfeld I would take full advantage of that.

That aside, he has a floor of about 30% and a ceiling of 40% when all's said and done.

He has a floor of 12% and a ceiling of 28%.

If TEACHOUT can get 34%, so can Sittenfeld.

Arbitrarily choosing a race for a different office from a different state with very different political dynamics isn't really comparable.

Wulfric's example isn't the best. For a better example, if you look back at Strickland's 2006 Democratic primary race, his opponent Bryan Flannery got 21% of the vote against Strickland. He won that 21% despite jumping in only a few months before the actual primary race, raising just $100K-$200K, and as a result he had no chance to get his name out there with Ohio Democratic voters.

Sittenfeld is a stronger candidate/fundraiser than Flannery was and as opposed to 2006, there's obviously more reluctantly now by some Democratic voters about backing Strickland.

Anything at or below a Flannery performance would require Sittenfeld to not even try to campaign. At the bare minimum, he'll likely get around 30% of the vote.

You're basically the only one feeling more reluctant about supporting Strickland

Because Atlas is totally representative of the OH Dems as a whole. Right

If anything Lebron's existance means the forum has a strong pro-Sittenfield bias relative to Ohio Democrats.

Dude, if anything this is a pro-Strickland forum. I'm like the only Sittenfeld supporter on here.

There's Ohio Democratic leaders (notably former state party chairs like Jim Ruvolo (who was a very successful chairman who knew how to run the party back in the 1980s), very successful veteran strategists like Jerry Austin who's backing Sittenfeld, Ohio Supreme Court Justice Bill O'Neill, etc.) and they don't want a retread as our candidate after they saw how Lee Fisher blew over. Even our own ODP Chair David Pepper personally doesn't want to back Strickland.

There's voters who feel the same way about Strickland - whether it's because of concerns with his age and his past record he brings to the table, some that believe a new face should be given a try, or others that believe that he doesn't deserve another chance after he couldn't get the job done against Kasich.

Ohio Democrats will nominate Strickland, but the fact that you think every single Ohio Democrat likes Strickland reflects more on the Strickland bias on this forum, more than anything. Sorry to say.

Never heard of Ruvolo, Austin and those other random strategists just want to milk Sittenfield for all the money they get from him (if they were real players, they'd be backing Strickland), O'Neill is a whacktivist who got lucky in 2012, and Pepper is pretty solidly in Strickland's camp.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Would be dumb to piss away his future by enraging locals/DC/Clintons.

That ship sailed a long time ago...

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

So q is how much damage.

Basically

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Sittenfeld wants 6 debates.

I want $50 billion, but that isn't happening either.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

*snip*And yes, I'd take Sittenfeld over him. *snip*

This is like claiming that Alan Grayson is better candidate than Patrick Murphy.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I seriously doubt you can compare Strickland to Thompson who said Medicare is a bad program.

No one said it was was gonna be easy. But, no way this is gonna be a landslide race.

You are totally missing the point.

Don't get in the way of his computing system.

*snip*And yes, I'd take Sittenfeld over him. *snip*

This is like claiming that Alan Grayson is better candidate than Patrick Murphy.

The difference being that Patrick Murphy is actually doing okay and meeting up with his goals.

And yet nominating Sittenfield still makes about as much sense as nominating Grayson.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Strickland is not a good fundraiser and his record as Gov is not good. Even if its not his fault the state lost 400K jobs when he was Gov. and had huge budget deficits. I think Tim Ryan or Richard Cordray would've better candidates.

Cordrey's not interested in running for office again, from what I've heard.  Tim Ryan is a rising star and could be a Governor/Senator some day, but we'd need a more disciplined candidate against Portman.  Strickland is really our best shot against Portman (against someone like Dave Yost or Steve Stivers...not so much).