This entire article is describing how the national BLM movement, and its official chapter in Cleveland, is rejecting this endorsement by a fringe, off-shoot group also in Cleveland.
Came here to post this as soon as I saw the thread title. The OP is like saying that because the some guy who is a member of the Tipp City, OH NAACP endorsed Portman, the NAACP must've endorsed Portman
I knew about this already, Portman's actually been getting a lot of flak around here from Republicans who think Strickland is more conservative candidate because of this. It seems to have backfired for Portman, tbh.
He also was endorsed by the Ohio Teamsters and Fraternal Order of Police
The Ohio Fraternal Order of Police leans Republican in statewide races and always has, SB5 debate not withstanding. It's far more telling when they endorse Democrats because it's a sign the Republican candidate is perceived as incredibly right-wing. The OH Teamsters endorsement was a big deal (although I should note that almost all the other unions so far have endorsed Strickland, so it appears to be more of a one-off, albeit an important one) and I'd loved to have been a fly on the wall at that meeting. They're not stupid and I'd love to see what Portman said when he spoke to them. They're obviously not gonna lift a finger to actually help Portman, but it was still very interesting.
The idea that this race isn't extremely competitive at this point in the campaign is ridiculous. Strickland could certainly win and the DSCC would be fools to pull out as one poster suggested. That said, Strickland needs to be careful or he could end up blowing this race by the time we get to late September/early October. I've always said that while Portman's anonymity is such that he will never get even remotely entrenched (unless the Democrats start giving him Grassley-style passes for no apparent reason, which seems since even if Strickland loses, it'll be by 5-6 points at most and probably by even less than that tbh) and doesn't really have an incumbent advantage, he is a deceptively strong candidate. Portman may be less exciting than a moldy wheel of cheese, but he has always been remarkably disciplined and has such an intellectual mastery of economic issues (whatever you think of his economic views, Portman knows that stuff – especially trade policy – like the back of his hand and it really shows whenever he talks about it). Portman is also a fundraising machine, a really right-wing Senator who comes across as being too boring to be an extremist, and I'm pretty sure he's gonna eat Strickland alive in their debate
. That said, no one knows who Portman is and he has a tendency to piss off everyone by transparently trying to weasel his way out of offending anyone (a good example is his attempt to endorse Trump and be seen by Republicans as an ally of his without using the word "endorse," campaigning with him, or appearing at the RNC because he also wanted to be seen as a #NeverTrump Republican by everyone else).
I agree with the poster in another thread who said Strickland somehow doesn't seem to be all there anymore. I don't think it's at the point where it would ever hinder his competency as a Senator, but he's clearly not the man he was in 2010. He's also had abysmal fundraising and – as I've said elsewhere – his campaign has started making some serious unforced errors (most notably the anti-Chinese race-baiting which he actually doubled-down on and still insists wasn't offensive regardless of what Chinese-Americans think of it and sending out a fundraising e-mail which basically said that he needed donations because polls now show him losing ). Strickland can definitely turn things around and still has a golden brand in the Appalachian part of OH (and huge bipartisan appeal in that region), but his campaign needs to get its act together.
