OH-Quinnipiac: Portman trails Strickland, crushes Sittenfeld
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 18, 2024, 06:14:56 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 Senatorial Election Polls
  OH-Quinnipiac: Portman trails Strickland, crushes Sittenfeld
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: OH-Quinnipiac: Portman trails Strickland, crushes Sittenfeld  (Read 2606 times)
MT Treasurer
IndyRep
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,276
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: June 22, 2015, 05:02:56 AM »
« edited: June 22, 2015, 05:06:17 AM by TNvolunteer »

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
Logged
Skye
yeah_93
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,586
Venezuela


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: June 22, 2015, 10:40:09 AM »

...well, at least he's down by six, and not by 9.
Logged
International Brotherhood of Bernard
interstate73
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 651


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 22, 2015, 11:01:36 AM »

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.
Logged
publicunofficial
angryGreatness
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,010
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 22, 2015, 11:53:22 AM »

Always a bad sign when even some of the people that approve of you are voting against you.
Logged
Ebsy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,001
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: June 22, 2015, 12:44:13 PM »

Never would have thought that Portman would be way more vulnerable than Toomey.
Logged
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,459
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: June 22, 2015, 12:49:27 PM »

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.
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,839
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: June 22, 2015, 01:53:26 PM »

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.
Logged
Holmes
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,765
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -5.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: June 22, 2015, 02:12:16 PM »

Um. What. No. Specter would not have beaten Toomey.
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,839
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: June 22, 2015, 02:48:44 PM »

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.
Logged
International Brotherhood of Bernard
interstate73
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 651


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: June 22, 2015, 02:57:28 PM »

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.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 89,420
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: June 22, 2015, 04:09:30 PM »

Nice to see Strickland keeping pace with Portman.
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,840
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: June 22, 2015, 07:57:49 PM »

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.

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.
Logged
Free Bird
TheHawk
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,917
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.84, S: -5.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: June 30, 2015, 07:23:43 AM »

How'd a shady poll like this turn into a discussion about Arlen Specter?
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,084
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: June 30, 2015, 08:10:58 AM »

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.
Logged
Xing
xingkerui
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,299
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -3.91

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: June 30, 2015, 01:13:48 PM »

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.
Logged
Clarko95 📚💰📈
Clarko95
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,615
Sweden


Political Matrix
E: -5.61, S: -1.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: June 30, 2015, 01:43:19 PM »

I'm always surprised to remember that Strickland is 73. He looks like 10-15 years younger
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.043 seconds with 13 queries.