Would Sittenfield be doing better than Strickland?

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Now that Strickland seems to be going down like a Lead Balloon, should we all write apology cards to lebron Fitzgerald?

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

I actually would be curious to know myself. My guy says yes. Younger, more charismatic, etc.

[Sir Mohamed]

Likely yes. Strickland is obviously not the best candidate.

[Ebsy]

Who?

[Heisenberg]

At first I though Sittenfeld was worse, but I think he'd have actually been the better candidate (more charismatic, younger, no baggage).

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

ROTFLMFAO

No, Sittenfield would get like 38% at best.  Strickland will probably lose, but it'll still be by something like 53-47%.

[Xing]

No, I doubt it. Portman's just not as vulnerable as people thought. I'm not even sure Tim Ryan could have taken him down.

[The Other Castro]

No, Portman is running a good campaign and successfully distancing himself from Trump. Strickland might not be a good candidate, but let's not fall into the grass is always greener trap and pretend like Sittenfield could have done any better.

[Kingpoleon]

Sittenfeld would have provided a much stronger debate. He could have won using the same method as Sherrod Brown used in 2012: campaign as a staunch, sane progressive and someone fully supportive of Obama besides on maybe TPP and healthcare. Granted, Portman's a stronger opponent than Mandel, but Clinton v. Trump could be more lopsided than Obama v. Romney was. I think his top surrogates in the state would be Sherrod Brown, Richard Celeste, Mark Mallory, Tracy Heard, Tom Sawyer, and Obama.

[Vosem]

Hard to say. Portman has gone very negative on Strickland, and it's worked like a charm. He has successfully distanced himself from Trump too, but Sittenfeld would be able to play as Generic D in a way that Strickland just wouldn't. I think it would be about the same, myself.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

No, I doubt it. Portman's just not as vulnerable as people thought. I'm not even sure Tim Ryan could have taken him down.

Yes he was, Strickland simply blew it.

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

No, I doubt it. Portman's just not as vulnerable as people thought. I'm not even sure Tim Ryan could have taken him down.

Yes he was, Strickland simply blew it.

Just curious, but what's going on in-state/how is he a bad candidate? I haven't picked up much other than the fact that he is, but I'm 1/3 of the way across the country.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

No, I doubt it. Portman's just not as vulnerable as people thought. I'm not even sure Tim Ryan could have taken him down.

Yes he was, Strickland simply blew it.

Just curious, but what's going on in-state/how is he a bad candidate? I haven't picked up much other than the fact that he is, but I'm 1/3 of the way across the country.

He's going a bit senile and saying a lot of stupid stuff, he's had weak fundraising, and he's been doing a lot of pretty transparent anti-Asian race-baiting.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

No.

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

No, I doubt it. Portman's just not as vulnerable as people thought. I'm not even sure Tim Ryan could have taken him down.

Yes he was, Strickland simply blew it.

Just curious, but what's going on in-state/how is he a bad candidate? I haven't picked up much other than the fact that he is, but I'm 1/3 of the way across the country.

He's going a bit senile and saying a lot of stupid stuff, he's had weak fundraising, and he's been doing a lot of pretty transparent anti-Asian race-baiting.

Yeesh. Well, that'll do it.

Shame, I still hope he wins. The party needs more  paleo-dems.

[Maxwell]

nah

I'm not sure if there's a Democrat out there that would be doing better - maybe Cordray?

[BuckeyeNut]

PG would do better in SW OH, and that's about it.

[Kingpoleon]

nah

I'm not sure if there's a Democrat out there that would be doing better - maybe Cordray?

But everyone on Atlas told me Tim Ryan is invincible and definitely not a paper tiger.

[Landslide Lyndon]

If Sittenfeld was a good candidate he'd have beaten Strickland in the primary.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

If Sittenfeld was a good candidate he'd have beaten Strickland in the primary.

[JMT]

If Sittenfeld was a good candidate he'd have beaten Strickland in the primary.

This. And the primary wasn't close, at all. I don't think Strickland is the best candidate, but I don't think Sittenfield would be doing any better. Portman is a strong candidate who is good at fundraising, and he has been effective at distancing himself from Trump. Not to mention, while Clinton has the edge in Ohio and I expect her to win, Trump has kept it close in Ohio, unlike some of the other swing states (NH, PA and FL polls generally are giving Clinton a larger margin of victory than Ohio is). I wouldn't count Strickland out yet, but clearly Portman is favored. I see this as a testament to Portman's strengths rather than Strickland's weaknesses.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

If Sittenfeld was a good candidate he'd have beaten Strickland in the primary.

*snip* I see this as a testament to Portman's strengths rather than Strickland's weaknesses.

It's really has nothing to do with Portman.

[Trapsy]

wow, why is everyone so anti sittenfield? We need some fresh blood in the dem party stop pushing these dinosaurs. Portman success is due to him running a good campaign and the infrastructure OH republicans have.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

wow, why is everyone so anti sittenfield? We need some fresh blood in the dem party stop pushing these dinosaurs. Portman success is due to him running a good campaign and the infrastructure OH republicans have.

Because Sittenfield would've gotten crushed.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

If Sittenfeld was a good candidate he'd have beaten Strickland in the primary.

I'm not sure that's a good standard for whether a candidate is good for a general election. Todd Akin was not the best candidate Missouri Republicans had on the primary ballot in 2012.