OH-PPP: All tied up

[BuckeyeNut]

Well,
If Trump wins the WH, Portman wins.
And if Clinton wins the WH, Strickland wins.

No party split ticket!

Not true. 

Strickland can well win Trump voters in Appalachia who would be turned off by Portman's trade record.

[BuckeyeNut]

Well,
If Trump wins the WH, Portman wins.
And if Clinton wins the WH, Strickland wins.

No party split ticket!

Not true.  

Strickland can well win Trump voters in Appalachia who would be turned off by Portman's trade record.

So you believe Strickland is going to overperform Hillary???

I don't think it's plausible Portman is elected if Clinton wins, but I do think it's plausible Strickland gets elected if Trump wins. Unlikely, but plausible.

It's less about outperforming and more about where they will be performing. I expect Clinton to have higher numbers in the North East than Strickland, and I expect him to have higher numbers in Appalachia, where he may well get some split-ticket support.

Portman: pro-trade, against TPP for election
Strickland: hard anti-trade
Clinton: pro-trade, against TPP for election
Trump: hard anti-trade

[BuckeyeNut]

Portman has a colorful résumé, and won more popular votes in 2010 than Strickland statewide.  Plus, wasn't Strickland an unpopular governor?  Anyway, this will be close, but my gut tells me Portman will narrowly prevail.

As Windhammer says, different races. Portman has a very easy election in '10, about as easy as Strickland had in '06. This race is going to be down to the wire.

[BuckeyeNut]

You're greatly underestimating disaffected, rustbelt independents. Trade is going to be the biggest issue here.

Also, yes, Portman has been fundraising more strongly than Strickland, but so long as Strickland can match pace, he's okay. Ohio Republicans always raise more. Mandel isn't Portman, but Brown had in excess of $40 million spent against him, and still pulled through.

[BuckeyeNut]

I only defend it as plausible, no one here thinks it likely.