Buckeye State Blog - Challenging the narrative: ODB joins in saying Senate primary still a dead heat. - Comments

It's small, yes

redhorse — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:52:39 -0700

I wouldn't stake much on it now other than curiosity - shouldn't have brought it up - but it's wider now than it was a few months ago.

I also agree that he should have stronger numbers and that he's in trouble past the primary. That's why this race has frustrated me so much. Our superior general candidate is being suffocating in the primary by a machine that prefers milquetoast Lee. But hey, who's driving that bus?

Lest you think I was ignoring you, ME, I have only been busy. Been awhile, glad for the exchange.

That's kinda my point

redhorse — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:47:29 -0700

No average voters are paying attention right now - and when they do next spring, which candidate will break through? The one who has money or the one who doesn't? I also admitted Fisher isn't an ideal candidate - even that I'd vote for Brunner. But I'm not going to ignore the facts b/c I want her to win. Plainly, she's in bad shape. As for how he'll do against Portman or what Garrison's effect might be on the ticket, I can worry about that in June. All I see now is my preferred candidate in a world of hurt.

I haven't seen any such "trend" either

AmberCat — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 13:03:04 -0700

In fact, at this point, neither candidate has broken through with average voters. When one of them hits 40% in a poll that encourages respondents to pick "undecided" if they are and doesn't push them to make a selection, then I'll start to take notice.

Redhorse deserves respect

modernesquire — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 07:48:37 -0700

Because he can address people he disagrees without sounding like a child.

Well ...

Mike — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 04:11:42 -0700

You're probably right about moving back to SOS race at this late stage. She couldn't transfer the money and she'd have to start from essentially scratch raising money for that race again.

She's spent all of her state level money down (who buys all those cell phones as you are leaving a race?)

Sigh ...

Mike — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 04:05:33 -0700

I don't give two beans what *your* main point is (you've had several so far), I'm talking about who can win the primary.

Redhorse is absolutely right, and I notice that you're a hell of a lot more polite to him, but that's OK. I've had fun watching your face turn purple in abject rage.

It's not about the US Senate - it's about the State Senate. You have your priorities (and what has having 60 votes gotten us there, really?) and I have mine.

To be honest, in the climate we're going to have about 12 months from now, I suspect neither Democrat could win the seat in this state.

What polls are you reading...

modernesquire — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:53:04 -0700

Because there's been no such trend. Has the last Quinny poll shown some movement (four points) in Fisher's favor since the last one? Yeah, but that's hardly a trendline.

Fisher's numbers are anemic for someone with his experience. And they spell disaster.

As for Pollster, are you insane? Fisher's best primary number in any poll is barely 25% with a 9 point-lead. Fisher has to first have something to say to break thru to the voters.

So far, not so much...

You seriously think

AmberCat — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:55:01 -0700

ONLY 53% of the average voters who are not political junkies are undecided? In fact, there is no lead to "get wider' at this point. There are almost no average voters even thinking about this race. Polls are worthless at this point and without an actual campaign in full swing, you can't convince me any of the candidates have a postion at all.

However, if you so strongly believe that a bland, messageless, undefined (so far) candidate like Lee Fisher only need buckets of money to rocket past Jennifer Brunner, it's hard to see how he can win the general because Rob Portman's much more massive buckets of money AND his stronger self-definition (much as we might dislike what he stands for) will rocket him past Fisher easily. For the record, I believe neither of these things. I think by next May Jennifer will be well positioned to win. And I believe if Lee is the candidate, he CAN eke out a win — IF he crafts an effective answer to Portman's attacks on him for bailing on the director of devleopment job at such a crucial time and IF he locates an issue he is passionate about and really owns it. I don't share Modern's belief that Lee CAN'T win. But he is going to have to make a whiplash turn from campaigning mainly by boasting about his money to campaigning as an underdog and campaigning in a way that excites the Democratic base — because he won't be able to brag about money anymore

In addition, I think he will be hampered if Jennifer Garrison is the secretary of state nominee. I think that is going to play out badly on so many levels but I think it could be a real hindrance to Lee. Let's hope other candidates step up soon. (And no, I don't agree with the poster who keeps saying Brunner should quit the senate race and go back to the SoS race — I think that would be difficult and negatively received and I don't think she'd do that. I think if she loses the Senate primary, she'll take some time out to regroup and consder her next step.)

About those polls..

redhorse — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:14:12 -0700

Fisher has led in every poll listed at Pollster.com. More pertinent to this discussion, undecided has polled at an average of 53% in the Quinny polls this year.

Now, when most voters start to pay attention next spring, which candidate is going to break through to them? The one with money or the one that doesn't have the resources to get her message out?

Whistle Dixie all you want, but there's no clear evidence right now that Brunner's in position to win. Oh, and that trendline in the Quinny polls? Getting wider in Fisher's favor.

Seems thin ice as the basis of an argument, no?

Poor, Mike....

modernesquire — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:35:20 -0700

Still can't respond to the main point that Lee Fisher cannot win the Senate seat. Why should Brunner move out the way for a guy who isn't going to win the general election? Makes no sense. Then again, nothing you said does when you cannot speak logically, so you have to talk like a six-year-old.

It's not about Brunner, it's about the U.S. Senate. It's about protecting our ability to advance a progressive agenda nationally.

Rose

Mike — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:00:17 -0700

I've decided the color of the sky in your world (is that an insult? Dear me - take me to the fainting couch) is rose based on the glasses your wearing.

Can Jennifer win this race? Yes.

Will she? Probably not.

Did Jennifer Brunner orbit the earth? Not that I'm aware of (but that's irrelevant, of course)

Should she take one for the Democratic team in Ohio and retreat back to the SOS race, and thereby pushing the odious Garrison back into her 93rd district box for another term? Without question.

It's not all about her.

But clearly here, it's all about you. But then you knew that already.

Heading out now - cheers! Enjoyed poking my stick through the bars.

Mike... you're so full of it...

modernesquire — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 10:51:48 -0700

Your little comment about what color is the sky in my world... you knew exactly what you were suggesting. You're too clever by half.

But, Mike, you're apparently the one who's delusional as you're arguing against something nobody said. I never said name recognition wasn't important.

What I DID say is your point about Glenn's name recognition is an irrelevant, non sequitur. In fact, ODP didn't think it was relevant enough that it didn't stop them from endorsing Metzenbaum and trying to close Glenn out of the process.. Clearly, the leadership at ODP thought Metzenbaum could have overcome Glenn's name recognition. But what that has to do with the present situation escapes me and just about anyone else. Regardless, the fact is if that's all you can say in response, then you do a very poor job defending your position.

I've been in the field, sonny.... do tell me about your experience. Enlight me more about Mike who thinks playground talk passes for political discourse.

Touchy, Touchy Brian ...

Mike — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 10:37:02 -0700

I don't really see where I used the word crazy above, but I guess I was instinctively right on the mark, bub.

I stand by my hypothesis about how much the average primary voters knows about either candidate and if you don't think that name recognition plays a significant role in elections, especially in primary elections, then you really need to get out into the field with the rest of us and learn a bit, sonny.

(hope that didn't hurt your lil feelings - sniff)

Blue

modernesquire — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 09:28:16 -0700

Um, there's more to a race (and polling) than name recognition. I don't know even if there was any polling available at this point in the race back during that time. However, Brunner's name recognition in polling is just fine, especially when compared to Fisher's which is pretty remarkable given that Fisher has been in statewide politics for twenty years to Brunner's three.

The fact that all you could come back with is "name recognition" just shows how unable you are to defend your position. Fact is that Glenn's "name recognition" wasn't enough to convince ODP to back him over Metzenbaum who definately had lower name recognition.

The fact that you have to jump to suggesting I'm crazy, an ad hominem attack, shows how completely ineffective you are in arguing your side and how pointless it is to engage you.

If you want to engage in insults, go to an elementary school playground during recess. If you want to engage in an intelligent debate, grow the fuck up.

Wow

Mike — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 08:56:38 -0700

Facinating:

John Glenn beat Howard Metzenbaum despite the fact that Howard had the money advantage and the entire Ohio Democratic Party behind him.

Because John Glenn and Jennifer Brunner have the same name recognition.

I'd prefer Brunner over Fisher any day. I wanted Marilyn Brown and not Jennifer Garrison but wishing and hoping didn't make it happen and I even donated to Brown.

What color is the sky in your world, Brian, because here on planet Earth it's blue.

Challenging the narrative: ODB joins in saying Senate primary still a dead heat.

modernesquire — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 09:58:01 -0700

Thanks, Anthony. I totally agree:

From now until the primary, Brunner can raise a billion dollars, or collect pocket lint. I'm not convinced that it matters to her. It certainly doesn't look like she's going anywhere.
And why should she?
I have yet to see a poll that shows Brunner getting rocked by Rob Portman. Same goes for Lee Fisher. Certainly if Jennifer Brunner had a poll showing her suffering a humiliating loss in a primary, she'd possibly reconsider this race and pack the dogs in the truck for the weekend. But no such poll exists (at least I've not seen it) and no one is pulling away. Plus, with more than six months to go, it's anyone's guess what twists and turns this primary race could still take. Unfortunately, in our desperate attempt to be first to the keyboard, political journalists, bloggers, pundits, and psychics are carelessly leaving out the obvious fact : this race is still pretty even. That could no doubt change as Fisher starts spending the money he has.
Does Jennifer Brunner need to raise a lot more money? Probably. Does she need to raise as much as Fisher? Probably not.

And this new narrative is leaking over from the blogsphere over to Old Media. Check out today's Dispatch article.

First, it takes the focus away from just Brunner and points out the Fisher, too, is being substantially outraised by Portman:

Despite the difference in campaign cash, Brunner, encouraged by polls showing her competitive with Fisher and most voters undecided, says she's in the race to win.
The bulk of her donations in the quarter came from individuals, with no support from party groups and minimal backing from political-action committees, her report shows.
Brunner previously has complained about the difficulty in raising money because Gov. Ted Strickland is backing Fisher.

That's right. We cannot just look at the financials. We have to also look at the polls, and they show that Brunner is positioned to win this thing because, again, it's a statistical dead heat. Fisher has 20-years of history which make his numbers hard to move.

And I think people are slowing realizing that all this talk about Brunner MUST get out is premature and silly.