Talk Elections

Portman (R, inc.)...................... 40%
Strickland (D)........................... 46%

Portman (R, inc.)...................... 49%
Sittenfeld (D)........................... 24%

Obama approval rating: 40%-56% negative
Portman approval rating: 49%-28% positive
Strickland favorability rating: 47%-29% favorable

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/ps/ps06222015_Sp52rg.pdf

...well, at least he's down by six, and not by 9.

I can imagine being unabashedly pro-trade (having been Bush's Trade Representative) really hurts Portman in Appalachia (in addition to Strickland's personal popularity there), which is what makes him alot more vulnerable than Toomey is as of right now.

Always a bad sign when even some of the people that approve of you are voting against you.

Never would have thought that Portman would be way more vulnerable than Toomey.

People on the forum overly focus on how the Democratic Party messes up, but this case it's a tale of two statewide Democratic Parties - Ohio recruited their best candidate and a guy who is generally a statewide institution, while Pennsylvania is actively trying to implode their main candidate in Sestak. There is the difference, which is noticeably shocking considering both Toomey and Portman are popular in their states.

Well, with Sestak there are still a lot of top democrats who hold a grudge on him for defeating specter 6 years ago, as Specter would have defeated Toomey in a general election. But the fact is that unless Ed Rendell runs, and all signs are that he won't, Sestak is the best democrats have here.

Um. What. No. Specter would not have beaten Toomey.

Specter would have been able to attract more of the right-leaning independent and republican vote than Sestak due to his bipartisan nature and past affilations.

If anything, Specter would've lost by more. The Democratic base was already depressed by the national environment and the gubernatorial election that Corbett was winning in a walk (ah, memories), and only would've been depressed more by having the 2004 GOP primary matchup as the general election, and Republican voters were turned off by his blatant opportunism and flip-flopping. Even if Specter had won Democrats would've lost the seat in 2012 because Specter passed, and Corbett would've appointed a Republican to the seat.

Nice to see Strickland keeping pace with Portman.

Nah, Specter's numbers in 2010 weren't what they were like in 2004. His approvals were quite toxic. Republicans hated him for switching parties, independents didn't trust him and saw him as an opportunist, and Dems were lukewarm.

Specter definitely would've lost by more than Sestak did.

How'd a shady poll like this turn into a discussion about Arlen Specter?

It's passing strange to me that both Portman and Hillary seem relatively weak in Ohio. Perhaps the explanation is that Strickland for the moment is very well liked in Ohio.

I'm skeptical of Quinnipiac's numbers. I don't buy Portman being down by 6 while Toomey is up by 11. Still, Portman really hasn't been polling well against Strickland, which is a bit surprising to me. I thought Portman would be relatively safe.

I'm always surprised to remember that Strickland is 73. He looks like 10-15 years younger