Could Obama Win OH while losing PA?

[Skill and Chance]

Recent polling has him doing consistently better in OH than in PA.  Maybe he could even win OH while losing nationally?

[Skill and Chance]

How about this vs. Romney?

[Bull Moose Base]

Extremely doubtful.  If he wins Ohio, he's won them both.  If he loses Pennsylvania, he's lost them both.

[izixs]

In the most basic sense, Ohio is sort of a split between a voter universe similar to Indiana and a voter universe similar to Pennsylvania (which itself is a mixture). Unless there are major demographic or structural changes to how politics works in Ohio, for Obama to win Ohio and loose Pennsylvania would imply Obama is doing very well in the parts of the state like Indiana and thus probably doing very well in Indiana. If he's doing well in Indiana this suggests he's doing well with other places like Indiana (aka, farm heavy regions of the country that sometimes vote dem like Iowa and Missouri or even the Dakotas) and probably doesn't need Pennsylvania to win.

For Obama to loose in this situation, as mentioned before, would require major changes in Ohio. If the changes are demographic it would probably mean some sort of mass migration into or out of Ohio. For migration into Ohio the folks would have to be coming for a reason. Perhaps everyone in Detroit finally gives up on the city and moves to Ohio in hopes for a better life. Or some sort of super coal disaster strikes Pittsburgh and they all move to Dayton. These options are very unlikely. For a migration out of Ohio that would tip things to Obama it would mean the most conservative regions of the state depopulate. These are mostly rural or ex/suburb areas. A localized farm crisis might work on the rural regions (very unlikely) but a new housing bust might force people out of ex/suburb areas, but would it be enough to get them to leave the state? Unlikely.

So this leaves a change in the dynamics of Ohio politics that at the same time doesn't come to PA. The nearest thing to that would probably be the anti-union stuff the governor and his cronies have been pushing. But is not this issue observed across the boarder and serve as a warning to what Republicans are really about in union heavy Penn?

[Bull Moose Base]

Extremely doubtful.  If he wins Ohio, he's won them both.  If he loses Pennsylvania, he's lost them both.

And... half an hour after I write this, a poll comes out showing his approvals lower in PA than OH.

[Reaganfan]

Yes but unlikely.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

No. As Joementum said, if he wins OH, there's no way he loses PA, and if he loses PA, there's no way he wins OH.

[Yelnoc]

Maybe in an election as close as 2000. 

[DS0816]

Re: Could Obama Win OH while losing PA?

No.

[Badger]

Re: Could Obama Win OH while losing PA?

No.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Re: Could Obama Win OH while losing PA?

No.

[King]

Lose. Lose. Lose.

No loose.

[TheGlobalizer]

Barring extraneous goings on, no.  OH goes GOP before PA.

[TJ in Oregon]

Pretty much zero chance of happening. My first thought of an explanation for how this might be possible is some kind of mega-failure by Kasich (Senate Bill 5 isn't even close to enough), but not even Taft was bad enough to do this and in '04 Bush won Ohio and lost PA. Kasich cannot possibly be more unpopular than Taft, so no.

[Devils30]

Unlikely

[J. J.]

Yes, if there is someone from PA on the GOP ticket.  You could get a favorite son effect.

I think if that would happen, Obama would win reelection. 

[Badger]

Yes, if there is someone from PA on the GOP ticket.  You could get a favorite son effect.
I think if that would happen, Obama would win reelection. 

But that won't happen. Ridge? No pro-choicers need apply. Santorum? Just no. There are at least a dozen other more politically relevent choices available to appease social conservatives, and Santorum's performance in the primaries isn't about to change that calculus. Toomey? Meh, a far outside shot maybe notwithstanding his recent election since he served a few terms in the House, but unless the sole goal of the nominee's Veep choice is "to maximize my shot at PA" there's just no compelling reason to pick him over at least a dozen other more prominent conservatives.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Absolutely not.

[J. J.]

Yes, if there is someone from PA on the GOP ticket.  You could get a favorite son effect.
I think if that would happen, Obama would win reelection. 

But that won't happen. Ridge? No pro-choicers need apply. Santorum? Just no. There are at least a dozen other more politically relevent choices available to appease social conservatives, and Santorum's performance in the primaries isn't about to change that calculus. Toomey? Meh, a far outside shot maybe notwithstanding his recent election since he served a few terms in the House, but unless the sole goal of the nominee's Veep choice is "to maximize my shot at PA" there's just no compelling reason to pick him over at least a dozen other more prominent conservatives.

I think that depends on who the nominee is.  I would say, however, that Ridge, Toomey, Santorum, and Corbett could be that person.  BTW, there was no "compelling" reason to choose Biden (except he'd help in PA).  And, for political "odd couples," Reagan/Bush.

That is the only way I could see Obama losing PA, while winning OH.

[Badger]

Yes, if there is someone from PA on the GOP ticket.  You could get a favorite son effect.
I think if that would happen, Obama would win reelection. 

But that won't happen. Ridge? No pro-choicers need apply. Santorum? Just no. There are at least a dozen other more politically relevent choices available to appease social conservatives, and Santorum's performance in the primaries isn't about to change that calculus. Toomey? Meh, a far outside shot maybe notwithstanding his recent election since he served a few terms in the House, but unless the sole goal of the nominee's Veep choice is "to maximize my shot at PA" there's just no compelling reason to pick him over at least a dozen other more prominent conservatives.

I think that depends on who the nominee is.  I would say, however, that Ridge, Toomey, Santorum, and Corbett could be that person.  BTW, there was no "compelling" reason to choose Biden (except he'd help in PA).  And, for political "odd couples," Reagan/Bush.

That is the only way I could see Obama losing PA, while winning OH.

First off, to address Corbett, while not as unpopular as Kasich, Walker, Scott, et al, he's not exactly helpful there. Likewise with the fact he's been governor for less than 2 years and is as white bread as they come.

Secondly, you couldn't be more wrong about Biden or Bush. Biden had serious foriegn policy credentials and nearly 30 years in the Senate to counter act charges of inexperience; his working class background was compelling and fit Obama's campaign narrative like a glove, and when he can stay on message he's an effective campaigner. Bush helped unite the party and appease moderates who (correctly) suspected he was too extreme a conservative.

The potential PA veep choices carry no benefits beyond geography, especially compared to numerous other more viable options.

[Misoir]

The last time Ohio went Democrat while Pennsylvania went Republican was in 1948. That election was between Truman and Dewey; a Midwestern Democrat against a Yankee Republican. If 2012 happens to be Obama against Romney that would be basically the same set-up although it does not mean the results will turn out OH going Democrat and PA going Republican. What is strange however is that so far the polls are showing Obama is stronger in Ohio than Pennsylvania now.