OH-Sen 2022: So you’re telling me there’s a chance

[Unelectable Bystander]

It's not 0 percent, but when you have states like LA being in play and KS and AK the 3o4 blue wall can easily include adding OH, NC or FL, Kennedy isn't safe anymore he isn't gonna win 90 percent there is probably gonna be a runoff in LA, with multiple candidates in the race and he can easily fall short and get 49 percent

It's wave insurance and Biden isn't at 39 percent he is going to win WI, PA and MI and NV

Last poll had it Josh Mandel 44/40 and JD Vance tied 42)42 and on Tim Ryan website it's 38/38

Bill Walker will win he was Gov already and last poll that we had of KS had Kelly up 5 over Schmidt

There isn't any AK poll but I bet it's Dunleavy 52 Walker 40

Dunleavy isn't gonna win 90 percent of the vote he is in a competitive race

We need to see more polls so they can show us the mirage that Vance is winning 48-46

[Unelectable Bystander]

Vance is the future of the GOP. Economic populism and non-religious/non-preachy cultural conservatism. Vance is heavily underestimated.

Yep. That was the fundamental difference between Trump and Cruz too. That's what Mandel doesn't get.

I think sadly a lot of Trumpers think that his unique appeal is his loud mouth and standoffishness when in reality it’s his economic populist outsider message with a little bit of tells it how it is while trying to keep the traditional GOP coalition assembled

[Unelectable Bystander]

If the Ohio Republican Party eats each other up by now and May and there is still divisions, Tim Ryan better go on the offense and attack Republicans as fascists who want to give tax cuts to the rich and etc.

He should campaign in Southeast Ohio with Sen. Brown, try to win Meigs County.

He needs to rack up Brown 2006-Brown 2012-Brown 2018 numbers.

Yeah this is why Vance is the best candidate, he can effectively turn Ryan's populism on it's head.

Ryan needs to can all of them, Mandel, Vance, Gibbons, Timken, Dolan.

He can effectively call Dolan a plutocrat since his cousin and uncle and father are sports tycoons. However, Dolan may counter act saying that Ryan is part of the PC left that forced him to change the Cleveland Baseball Team to the Guardians.

However, in southeast Ohio, are most people there Pirates fans or Reds fans? Or Guardians fans?

Any other republican can accuse Ryan of that, Dolan cannot as it’s his own family that changed the name lol

[Unelectable Bystander]

I wish Ryan wasn't DOA because he's perfect for the state.

https://twitter.com/TimRyan/status/1511110495557890049

That’s impressive

[Unelectable Bystander]

https://twitter.com/MarcACaputo/status/1514653428579975172

Pretty good news I think. Vance seems like a decent candidate and fits Ohio well. Mandel is unnecessarily standoff-ish and Gibbons made a stupid gaffe

[Unelectable Bystander]

https://twitter.com/BuckeyePolitic1/status/1516935980871204865
According to someone who visited a Vance town hall, he plans to vote against McConnell, which could be a reason Trump endorsed him.

Legal immigration should be fine as long as it’s secure and organized. Other than that, this seems like a really good platform particularly for Ohio

[Unelectable Bystander]

Dolan would automatically become one of the most liberal republicans in the GOP conference.. voted against the Ohio heartbeat bill, supports same sex marriage, voted against a ban on down syndrome abortion.

This could be absolutely catastrophic. I actually wonder if Tim Ryan would be better. He’s at least authentic and not a rich trust fund baby letting cancel culture run amuck in baseball. And moderate Dems might govern better than lying snake Lincoln project types

[Unelectable Bystander]

Not sure if it means much, but Vance is dominating Google searches in Ohio during the last couple hours.
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=now%201-d&geo=US-OH&q=%2Fg%2F11c6v_wj1r,%2Fm%2F043rh3n,gibbons

It’s all these crossover voters looking for his stance on Roe. They’ll come out in droves to vote for #moderateMatt. In fact there won’t even be a D primary because every single person will be crossing over

[Unelectable Bystander]

Vance is gonna win the nomination anyways he looks like Eric Trump

This is the best thing I’ve read maybe anywhere haha

[Unelectable Bystander]

I don’t blame democrats for pushing this narrative because it’s working in PA but I do blame you if you actually believe it. Is the guy supposed to suspend his campaign for every Saturday until December? I get it if it’s Michigan but people are going to change their votes over him not watching Toledo?

[Unelectable Bystander]

I don’t blame democrats for pushing this narrative because it’s working in PA but I do blame you if you actually believe it. Is the guy supposed to suspend his campaign for every Saturday until December? I get it if it’s Michigan but people are going to change their votes over him not watching Toledo?

You’re not from Ohio, I wouldn’t expect you to understand.  No one is going to show up for or pay attention to a Trump rally on the night of a major football game

Ah yes, I forgot that on Atlas there is a rule that you are unable to form an educated opinion on a topic unless you originate from the location in question. What kind of logic is that? Does this mean that I should say the same thing to all the European liberals on this site when they comment on American politics?

I am well aware that a certain significant segment of the population will not pay attention to a rally that is held at the same time as a football game. Nobody is talking about that. I simply implied that doing so does not automatically preclude him from being “real Ohio”, which is what Tim Ryan and others have said.

I actually question your knowledge of tOSU football for referring to a game against Toledo as a major football game. It will be effectively over within 15 minutes. I should also point out that playing a team like Toledo in the evening is extremely rare. I’m not sure when the game time was finalized, but it’s possible that the Vance campaign thought that it would be a noon kickoff, as is usually the case when hosting MAC opponents.

[Unelectable Bystander]

https://twitter.com/timryan/status/1568585673929621506?s=46&t=fbkdTuJDJKl_Vb...

Tim Ryan is running a good campaign, but he's going to lose simply because of Ohio's Republican lean and polarization. I think this explains why Vance has not bothered to campaign and has sat on his laurels. He knows that he is virtually guaranteed that seat on a silver platter. He doesn't need to lift a finger.

That's a good way to lose.  Ohio may have a Republican lean, but it's not Alabama or Wyoming.

It's not, but after seeing the result in that state two years ago, when it had seemed like Biden could win there, I'm not that optimistic. Trump is supposed to hold a rally for Vance soon, and he's trying to ride his coattails to coast to victory.

I’m curious because you seem to be one of the few genuine swing voters on here. It sounds like you are cheering for Ryan and planning to vote democrat in your home state. Are these both race specific preferences, or do you prefer democrats to hold both houses this year?

[Unelectable Bystander]

Ryan is a neoliberal internationalist. All of the flaws of Sherrod Brown, with none of the upside. He's likely to lose 10+ in a year in which Dems hold the House+Senate.

The people of Ohio are too smart to vote for someone who supports his evil brand of politics.

All of the flaws of... a man who won the state by seven points four years ago. Brilliant logic.

Brown won by less then Trump against a candidate described as "Edward FitzGerald with a driver's license." FitzGerald had lost by 30 in the 2014 gubernatorial race, even while winning a rural Trump +54 county over local issues.

I've been disillusioned by 2020 results, almost outright swinging rightward. It's conceivable that Ryan could greatly overpreform, winning Delaware County and taking back some ground up here in the northeast. But he won his district, gerrymandered as a Democratic sink, by less then Trump's margin statewide.

Even with momentum on his side, are the votes there anymore? A Vance+1.5 result is ultimately the same as a Vance +10 result in regards to the winner, at least the former wouldn't be yet another gut punch.

It is very true that Ryan is much less appealing than Brown as well. I don't like him for one. There are plenty of voters that aren't scared off by Trumpism and it's anti-Democratic attitudes, not to mention continued disregard of the environment, who voted Brown and would do so again but would prefer the phony populism of Vance over the weird meditation of Ryan.

I read an interesting article (I believe it was in the conservative Washington Examiner) in which several Ohio voters, living in Ryan's district, were interviewed about the race between him and Vance. These voters identified themselves as former Democrats, having voted for Obama and for Ryan himself in the past. However, they are now thoroughly unsatisfied with the Democratic Party and believe that it has abandoned them, and they are enthusiastic converts to Trump. They believe Ryan is out of touch with them and their values, and plan on supporting Vance.

The Washington Examiner is (barely) one step above the New York Post, so I wouldn’t read anything into that.  Knowing them, they probably kept looking until they found a few people who told them what they wanted to put in the story.

I figured that there wouldn't be a positive reception of the source, but I still found it notable. And if you want to look at hard electoral data, it is undeniable that Ryan's congressional district, which was originally designed as a Democratic vote-sink, has swung heavily to the right over the past decade. Ryan won reelection 73-27% in 2012, but in 2020, he was reelected 53-45%, barely outrunning Biden, who won the district 51-48% over Trump. A similar overperformance of Biden, who lost Ohio 53-45% in 2020, would have Ryan still losing to Vance by 2-3%. It may be better, however, to compare Ryan to Strickland in 2016 (who lost to Portman 58-37%), and that is why I think it more likely that his margin of defeat will be closer to Biden's.

I’m old enough to remember when democrats were so excited that Dolan was coming back to win the primary over Vance and closing in on him by the day, only to lose to both him and Mandel. Polls found too many democrats even in a republican primary! The places where Vance ran up the score? Mahoning, Trumbull, Lorain, even the Akron area.

I’m also old enough to remember when a poster was laughed off the stage for correctly predicting that Trump would carry Lorain.

Tim Ryan’s area and the surroundings are leaving for good

[Unelectable Bystander]

https://twitter.com/CNBC/status/1577018237354639370

That’s because Thiel knows Ohio is safe lol.

That’s actually what Ryan’s announcement is about. He’s confirming that Vance is conceding because Ryan is so far ahead.

[Unelectable Bystander]

I have this race as Likely R, but there’s one contradiction I haven’t seen people to address.

We know Brown won his re-election by a sizable margin, if less than the big leads he was showing in polls. But if you bring that up as a template for Ryan, you hear that Brown is an established incumbent first elected at a time when Ohio was more competitive, and doesn’t represent today’s partisanship.

Ok. Fair enough. But if Ohio is uncompetitive because Trump won by a wide 8 points in 2020… isn’t Trump’s incumbency a factor in the size of his win, too? Or does incumbency only help Democrats in Ohio?

This is a legitimate point, but it's hard for me to imagine anyone saying, "I don't like Trump, but I'm going to vote for him because he's currently President." It wasn't just incumbency that caused Trump to win Ohio by 8 points.

I think incumbency is a fair point but it’s only worth 1-2% and it was present for Trump nationally (part of the reason why it was close). The point is he was an incumbent in all the other states and still won Ohio by 12% more than his margin elsewhere.

The area where incumbency is more valuable is senate and (even more so) the house. These candidates are personally known and liked by their constituents and outrun their partisan baseline as a result. Nobody in Ohio voted for Trump because they had a personal relationship.

[Unelectable Bystander]

https://twitter.com/AP_Politics/status/1577742425405243401?s=20&t=OnsEWInQla...

This is reported by the AP? That may be all she wrote.

[Unelectable Bystander]

https://twitter.com/jacobfhsmith/status/1579471021467635714

2020 NBC exit polls (this poll):

46% under age 50 (48%). Note this is even less realistic when considering it’s a midterm

39% R / 31%D / 30%I (37% R / 33%D / 26% I / 4.5% not sure). Why would the share of republicans drop in a midterm?

40% conservative / 21% liberal / 39% moderate (37% conservative / 21% liberal / 37% moderate / 5% not sure)

32% white evangelical Christians (26%)

34% under 50k income (36% under 40k income)

Not to mention that the issues don’t track with the recent student debt polls in the state or that NBC had 44% saying abortion should generally be illegal in 2020. Also, conducted by college students?

[Unelectable Bystander]

2020 NBC exit polls (this poll):

46% under age 50 (48%). Note this is even less realistic when considering it’s a midterm

39% R / 31%D / 30%I (37% R / 33%D / 26% I / 4.5% not sure). Why would the share of republicans drop in a midterm?

40% conservative / 21% liberal / 39% moderate (37% conservative / 21% liberal / 37% moderate / 5% not sure)

32% white evangelical Christians (26%)

34% under 50k income (36% under 40k income)

Not to mention that the issues don’t track with the recent student debt polls in the state or that NBC had 44% saying abortion should generally be illegal in 2020. Also, conducted by college students?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_limit_theorem

I am aware of the CLT definition but can you explain it’s applicability here? I’m assuming you mean that certain traits of a sample can be biased while the sample is fine as a whole. But isn’t the whole point of weighting a sample to account for the fact that you think your original sample is inaccurate? I’m not sure that you can look at those numbers from the weighted sample and say they will resemble the Ohio electorate with a straight face.

[Unelectable Bystander]

Share of Republicans could drop in a midterm because a) educated voters, who are high propensity, are moving parties and b) Trump was an extraordinary draw in 2016 and 2020. I’m not saying it will happen, but it’s possible. And I haven’t mentioned Dobbs.

I would buy that but the college educated share isn’t any higher, the white share isn’t any higher, and the electorate is supposedly much poorer.

[Unelectable Bystander]

2020 NBC exit polls (this poll):

46% under age 50 (48%). Note this is even less realistic when considering it’s a midterm

39% R / 31%D / 30%I (37% R / 33%D / 26% I / 4.5% not sure). Why would the share of republicans drop in a midterm?

40% conservative / 21% liberal / 39% moderate (37% conservative / 21% liberal / 37% moderate / 5% not sure)

32% white evangelical Christians (26%)

34% under 50k income (36% under 40k income)

Not to mention that the issues don’t track with the recent student debt polls in the state or that NBC had 44% saying abortion should generally be illegal in 2020. Also, conducted by college students?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_limit_theorem

I am aware of the CLT definition but can you explain it’s applicability here? I’m assuming you mean that certain traits of a sample can be biased while the sample is fine as a whole. But isn’t the whole point of weighting a sample to account for the fact that you think your original sample is inaccurate? I’m not sure that you can look at those numbers from the weighted sample and say they will resemble the Ohio electorate with a straight face.

Weighting is about representation, not measurement. The central limit theorem applies to both. To take party ID as an example, you could credibly argue self-ID Republicans are underrepresented here based on the 2020 exit poll. The central limit theorem would posit that, assuming the sample is not structurally biased, this underrepresentation would be corrected by, potentially, the self-ID independent subsample leaning more Republican than it possibly should. This is a very clean example, and doesn't take into account intersection with other demographics that could also have a measurement error that potentially corrects a representation error, or vice versa. And of course the margin of error complicates all of this as well. This is why "unskewing" polls is a fool's exercise and generally discouraged and why most internal pollsters use subsamples only directionally.

Interesting, my two follow-up questions would be:

Would this still apply to features that are very strongly associated with voting behavior? For example, if the true proportion of self ID liberal and urban black voters this November in Georgia is 15% (arbitrary number) and a poll reports this group as 12%, is it possible for the sample to contain enough variation to still be accurate while underestimating a group by 3% where everybody in the group has basically a 100% chance of voting democrat? Or the converse, if a certain republican demographic is underrepresented, how much pro-R variation can you get from liberal and urban black voters?

Would you then say that we should be skeptical of polls with “perfect” cross tabs, such as ones with 8 different factors and the proportion looks right for each variable, because they have perhaps massaged their sample too much?

[Unelectable Bystander]

Mod request: how about taking the debate on the relative merits of Alex Jones and Rachel Maddow to a separate thread.  It's veering this one off the rails.

My apologies didn’t see that