Democratic super PAC: Ohio isn’t a top priority in 2020

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

So basically "we're not even going to try to win and then blame everyone else" is going to be their the strategy again. Why bother even fielding candidates at this point?

Democrats don't need Ohio at all to win. I fail to see how it is a bad strategy.

When the Dems say a state isn't a top priority, that usually means they ignore it entirely--which in turn will lead them to losing other states with somewhat similar demographics, as they come off as arrogant and then we see repeats of Wisconsin and Michigan, where Hillary said Trump was wasting his money and she didn't need to bother with them because she'd win anyway, and voters seeing this and just deciding it's not worth showing up to vote at all.

wew lad

Do you have a citation for that claim? One super PAC saying they're going to prioritize other states over Wisconsin and you're saying Democrats are going to lose the entire Midwest. Seems a little specious to me.

Did you not see how 2016 played out?

Erm, in 2018 Democrats flooded PA/WI/MI with attention and went six for six in Senate/Gov races there plus enormous downballot success. Democratic 2020 hopefuls are already visiting these states. Down-prioritizing one state that is substantially to the right of the other three states (Cordray was one of the best credentialed gubernatorial candidates last year and lost in a wave year) as well as playing defense in other states with less resistance (NH/NV/MN) doesn't mean abandoning the entire rust belt.

[Hammy]

So basically "we're not even going to try to win and then blame everyone else" is going to be their the strategy again. Why bother even fielding candidates at this point?

Democrats don't need Ohio at all to win. I fail to see how it is a bad strategy.

When the Dems say a state isn't a top priority, that usually means they ignore it entirely--which in turn will lead them to losing other states with somewhat similar demographics, as they come off as arrogant and then we see repeats of Wisconsin and Michigan, where Hillary said Trump was wasting his money and she didn't need to bother with them because she'd win anyway, and voters seeing this and just deciding it's not worth showing up to vote at all.

wew lad

Do you have a citation for that claim? One super PAC saying they're going to prioritize other states over Wisconsin and you're saying Democrats are going to lose the entire Midwest. Seems a little specious to me.

Did you not see how 2016 played out?

Erm, in 2018 Democrats flooded PA/WI/MI with attention and went six for six in Senate/Gov races there plus enormous downballot success. Democratic 2020 hopefuls are already visiting these states. Down-prioritizing one state that is substantially to the right of the other three states (Cordray was one of the best credentialed gubernatorial candidates last year and lost in a wave year) as well as playing defense in other states with less resistance (NH/NV/MN) doesn't mean abandoning the entire rust belt.

I'm not saying they shouldn't play defense in those states--Dems need to keep every vote in every state they can. The problem is given their history, and these sorts of strategists having influence in the party, they're not likely to do that, instead trading states they might win for ones they have a barely non-zero chance of winning like NC/GA/AZ (I'd give them a 50/50 chance of winning AZ at best but nonexistent in the other two)

[Adam Griffin]

Hallelujah!

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

So basically "we're not even going to try to win and then blame everyone else" is going to be their the strategy again. Why bother even fielding candidates at this point?

Democrats don't need Ohio at all to win. I fail to see how it is a bad strategy.

When the Dems say a state isn't a top priority, that usually means they ignore it entirely--which in turn will lead them to losing other states with somewhat similar demographics, as they come off as arrogant and then we see repeats of Wisconsin and Michigan, where Hillary said Trump was wasting his money and she didn't need to bother with them because she'd win anyway, and voters seeing this and just deciding it's not worth showing up to vote at all.

wew lad

Do you have a citation for that claim? One super PAC saying they're going to prioritize other states over Wisconsin and you're saying Democrats are going to lose the entire Midwest. Seems a little specious to me.

Did you not see how 2016 played out?

Erm, in 2018 Democrats flooded PA/WI/MI with attention and went six for six in Senate/Gov races there plus enormous downballot success. Democratic 2020 hopefuls are already visiting these states. Down-prioritizing one state that is substantially to the right of the other three states (Cordray was one of the best credentialed gubernatorial candidates last year and lost in a wave year) as well as playing defense in other states with less resistance (NH/NV/MN) doesn't mean abandoning the entire rust belt.

I'm not saying they shouldn't play defense in those states--Dems need to keep every vote in every state they can. The problem is given their history, and these sorts of strategists having influence in the party, they're not likely to do that, instead trading states they might win for ones they have a barely non-zero chance of winning like NC/GA/AZ (I'd give them a 50/50 chance of winning AZ at best but nonexistent in the other two)

The media attention on the Rust Belt will reach unheard of levels next year. "Will Democrats be able to win back voters that they ignored who turned around and voted for Trump" is going to be the narrative of the election. "Hillary didn't visit Wisconsin" is basically a meme at this point. The only way they'd forget to focus there is if their campaign hires an actual space alien.

[Hammy]

So basically "we're not even going to try to win and then blame everyone else" is going to be their the strategy again. Why bother even fielding candidates at this point?

Democrats don't need Ohio at all to win. I fail to see how it is a bad strategy.

When the Dems say a state isn't a top priority, that usually means they ignore it entirely--which in turn will lead them to losing other states with somewhat similar demographics, as they come off as arrogant and then we see repeats of Wisconsin and Michigan, where Hillary said Trump was wasting his money and she didn't need to bother with them because she'd win anyway, and voters seeing this and just deciding it's not worth showing up to vote at all.

wew lad

Do you have a citation for that claim? One super PAC saying they're going to prioritize other states over Wisconsin and you're saying Democrats are going to lose the entire Midwest. Seems a little specious to me.

Did you not see how 2016 played out?

Erm, in 2018 Democrats flooded PA/WI/MI with attention and went six for six in Senate/Gov races there plus enormous downballot success. Democratic 2020 hopefuls are already visiting these states. Down-prioritizing one state that is substantially to the right of the other three states (Cordray was one of the best credentialed gubernatorial candidates last year and lost in a wave year) as well as playing defense in other states with less resistance (NH/NV/MN) doesn't mean abandoning the entire rust belt.

I'm not saying they shouldn't play defense in those states--Dems need to keep every vote in every state they can. The problem is given their history, and these sorts of strategists having influence in the party, they're not likely to do that, instead trading states they might win for ones they have a barely non-zero chance of winning like NC/GA/AZ (I'd give them a 50/50 chance of winning AZ at best but nonexistent in the other two)

The media attention on the Rust Belt will reach unheard of levels next year. "Will Democrats be able to win back voters that they ignored who turned around and voted for Trump" is going to be the narrative of the election. "Hillary didn't visit Wisconsin" is basically a meme at this point. The only way they'd forget to focus there is if their campaign hires an actual space alien.

And therein lies the fatal flaw with their strategy--they need to win back their own base that stayed home--the people who left and voted for Trump aren't coming back.

[jamestroll]

It is only a matter of time before Ohio becomes the most populated state that is reliable for the Republicans up and down the ballot. That time is coming is in only 606 days when the 2020 election hits.

If Trump is losing by like 9 to 10 nationally next year than maybeeee Ohio may be competitive.

We will have to scrape every vote we can from the Twin Cities metro, Milwaukee and Madison in Wisconsin, and Detroit metro in Michigan to win them in 2020. Those states appear a little more realistic to win back in 2020 compared to picking up Georgia, North Carolina and Texas but barely. Wasting any resource will be foolish and take away from winning Michigan, Wisconsin.


Normally, I would advise against applying midterm election results to the next Presidential election but considering how both parties were highly motivated last year we can assume that the 2020 election baseline can be seen from the previous midterm results compared to before!

We have no competitive house races, no senate contest, no state races, and it is not realistic to expect President Trump to lose it.

Triage Ohio entirely!