Ohio Isn't Off the Table: It's Still a Battleground and That's Bad News for Trump.

"President Donald Trump is currently struggling in Ohio, suggesting his path to a second term may be very difficult. No Republican has ever won the White House without Ohio, and only twice since 1896 has a Democrat become president without it. Trump himself has proclaimed that 'you can’t win unless you win the state of Ohio.'"

For the rest of this USA Today opinion piece I co-authored with Robe Alexander from Ohio Northern University and Lauren Copeland from Baldwin Wallace University, click here.

Veepstakes: The Case for Sherrod Brown

The presidential campaign season has reached a point where each of the party nominees need consider their most important decision of the entire campaign: whom to choose as their running mate for a position that is one heartbeat away from the presidency. Potential names are being floated currently in the media and personal info is being vetted by the campaigns. Both nominees will announce their running mates at or before their respective conventions in July. For a number of reasons, Secretary Hillary Clinton, the presumptive nominee for the Democratic Party, should strongly consider tapping Sherrod Brown, the senior Senator from Ohio. Here’s why.

 

1. Geography. The Electoral College works in a different manner than a typical election decided by popular vote. Rather, the general presidential election campaign is waged state-by-state in a dozen or less battleground states in an effort to win at least 270 total electoral votes. And no battleground state is more important than Ohio. Simply put, because of the electoral math, it is nearly impossible to win the White House without carrying Ohio. A Republican candidate has never done so; a Democrat hasn’t achieved that since 1960. Even though there is evidence that a running mate does not help carry their home state in the November election, it is possible that in a close election they could make a difference. Having won two elections for Secretary of State, as well as two U.S. Senate elections, Sherrod Brown has proven throughout his career that he is able to run an effective statewide campaign in Ohio.

2. Ideological-Counterbalancing. Secretary Clinton is disliked and distrusted by many in the progressive base who support her primary rival, Senator Bernie Sanders, and who view her as a conservative. Many Sanders’ supporters have indicated through polling and an unrelenting social media campaign that they will not vote for Clinton in the general election. Picking Sherrod Brown as running mate could help salve the wounds laid bare during a rough and tumble primary campaign. Despite being a loyal party insider, Brown is well-known, well-respected, and long supported by the Democratic Party’s progressive wing. He also has high name recognition, not only in Ohio, but also in the country among progressives as he is a frequent guest on MSNBC. Besides being popular with progressives, Brown is beloved by the blue collar and union crowd—a demographic presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump has made inroads with during the primary season.

3. Background. Does the person being considered as running mate have the necessary experience, intelligence, and temperament to be an effective president from Day 1? This is the most important question any presidential nominee should ask but often they and the media fail to ask it. By virtue of his educational background, his years spent in both state and federal elected office, and his decades spent under the glare of the klieg lights on the national stage, Sherrod Brown is well-prepared to be president. With eight years in the Ohio legislature, eight years as Ohio Secretary of State, fourteen years in the U.S. House of Representatives, and nine years and counting in the U.S. Senate with membership on some of that institutions most influential committees, Brown’s credentials far surpass that of most recent presidents, vice presidents, and potential VPs being discussed in the 2016 election cycle.

For all of these reasons, Sherrod Brown would be a stellar pick for vice presidential running mate. This choice does not come without costs, however. Brown has repeatedly and publicly declared he does not have vice presidential aspirations and wants to remain in the Senate. Also, were the Clinton-Brown ticket to be successful in November, Brown would have to vacate his Senate seat by January 20 thus almost assuredly ceding the seat to a Republican who would be appointed by Governor John Kasich. However, surrendering one Senate seat to the Republican Party would be worth it for Democrats if it means that Brown could help Clinton carry Ohio and, more importantly, a highly-qualified individual would be serving as vice president. Protestations aside, I suspect that if asked, Sherrod Brown would do what he has always done during his long career in public service—serve the people of Ohio and the country as a whole and say yes.

This op-ed originally ran on Cleveland.com on May 13, 2016, and in the Cleveland Plain Dealer. You can access the original here.

Ohio, the Battleground States, and Candidate Visits During the 2012 Presidential Election

Here is some travel data from the 2012 presidential election. As you can see, Ohio led the way in combined candidate travel, followed by Virginia, Florida, Iowa, and Colorado.

Battleground state travel for 2012:

	Obama	Biden	Obama-Biden Total	Romney	Ryan	Romney-Ryan Total	Campaigns Combined
CO	15	1	16	7	8	15	31
FL	15	4	19	13	9	22	41
IA	12	3	15	11	7	18	33
MI	2	0	2	2	1	3	5
MN	1	0	1	0	1	1	2
NV	10	1	11	5	4	9	20
NH	7	1	8	6	2	8	16
NM	1	0	1	1	0	1	2
NC	5	1	6	3	0	3	9
OH	21	3	24	15	16	31	55
PA	2	0	2	4	2	6	8
VA	21	3	24	11	9	20	44
WI	8	3	11	3	3	6	17

First term travel by POTUS to Ohio has steadily increased since the early 1980s:

Reagan	9
Bush 41	18
Clinton	18
Bush 43	30
Obama	37

Dan Coffey: The Myth of the Ohio Bellwether County

My colleague, Professor Dan Coffey, the primary author of Buckeye Battleground, has written a highly-relevant post that should be of much interest as we enter the final few days of the 2012 presidential election. It is titled "The Myth of the Ohio Bellwether County."

Coffey observes that: "One of the questions that I often get is what counties are the most important bellwethers for Ohio. Many pundits claim that these counties can predict the outcome of the national election and so observers should keep a close eye on them (see here or here). Generally, I point out that this notion is largely a myth and...go through some of the reasons these “bellwether” counties are competitive, but why the impact of these counties tends not to mean that much in helping to understand the presidential race in Ohio."

Instead Coffey argues observers should focus on regions: "it is not really useful to think of individual counties. Rather counties are within regions and regional differences do tell us something important, a point which me and my co-authors make in covering the Five Ohios in our book Buckeye Battleground. Individual counties are often driven by the same sets of forces, and aggregating counties into regions provides a better sense of the whole picture.

Coffey's post is located here: "The Myth of the Ohio Bellwether County."

Obama's Swing State Travel Log

During presidential election years, I get asked by the media quite a bit about Ohio's role as a battleground or swing state. Besides the fact that Ohio is known as the "Mother of Presidents" with a direct connection to 8, in the modern era Ohio maintains its strategic importance to fashioning an electoral vote majority. If it wasn't important, presidential contenders and their campaign surrogates wouldn't visit Ohio as much as they do.

This concept of presidential travel and the electoral map motivated me to actually look at the data. What I present below is just a first swipe--I haven't drilled down into the numbers much. And, this is the beginning of what I hope will be a long-term project tracking the travel destinations of presidents, presidential candidates, and their surrogates.

President Obama's First Term Travel to 13 Swing States I have identified for 2012 election (as of July 13, 2012):*

Colorado: 10/4
Florida: 18/5
Iowa 10/4
Michigan 10/3
Minnesota: 6/1
Nevada: 10/4
New Hampshire: 6/2
New Mexico: 3/1
North Carolina: 10/3
Ohio: 22/6
Pennsylvania: 19/2
Virginia: 49/9
Wisconsin: 8/1

*First number is total separate trips to state; second number is separate trips to state in 2012 so far.

Although Virginia is the most visited battleground state by President Obama, many of those visits were in conjunction with his role as Commander-in-Chief and other official duties (e.g. visits to the Pentagon, CIA, etc.). Also, given Virginia's proximity to the White House and ease of travel to get there, it is unsurprising that it ranks first.

Ohio, it should surprise no one, ranks second, with Pennsylvania close behind. Obama has made 22 total visits to the Buckeye Battleground and 6 in 2012 alone with another one scheduled for this coming Monday in Cincinnati.

Another question intrigued me: how does Obama's travel to Ohio compare to other recent presidents in their first term? I did a quick check and here's what I came up with:

Reagan: 9
GHW Bush: 18
Clinton: 18
GW Bush: 30

It seems that even as Ohio's electoral vote totals have declined over time, Ohio is becoming increasingly popular with sitting first-term presidents.

More to come on this topic as the campaign season rages on.

The Ohio Presidential Connection

Below is an essay I published in the Winter 2008 edition of Northeast Ohio Municipal Leader Magazine. Although it is four years old, it is still very relevant today.

The Ohio Presidential Connection

“There’s nothing like an early morning rally in the great state of Ohio. I can’t think of a better place to kick off the last day of this campaign.”

--President George W. Bush, November 1, 2004, in Wilmington, Ohio.

Ohio has always played an important role in the presidential election system since achieving statehood in 1803. Because of its size and diversity, both in terms of geography and population, Ohio has been, and will continue to be, a microcosm of the rest of the country. In recent elections, Ohio has been a key electoral battlefield—a must win state for those seeking the presidential office. It’s possible to win the presidency without winning Ohio’s electoral votes; it’s just not likely. Since 1964, no individual seeking the presidency has won the office without winning the Buckeye State and only twice since 1896 has that happened. In fact, no Republican has ever become president without winning Ohio. It is also no accident that eight presidents can trace part of their lineage to Ohio.

The Buckeye Eight

Ohio has a long rich history of playing a vital role in American presidential elections. This is most keenly embodied in the number of presidents and presidential contenders who have had connections to the Buckeye State, earning Ohio the moniker, “mother of presidents.” In 1836, William Henry Harrison became the first Ohioan to win electoral votes in a presidential election and in 1840 was elected as the nation’s first Whig president. Though born in Virginia, Harrison had served in the Ohio State Legislature as well as represented Ohio in both the U.S. House and Senate. Harrison also became the first president to die in office, expiring after only 30 days from pneumonia, likely the result of giving the longest inauguration speech in history without a hat or overcoat during inclement weather.

Union Civil War General Ulysses S. Grant was born in Point Pleasant, Ohio, in 1822. He was elected president in 1868, and reelected four years later, beginning a succession of Gilded Age Republican presidents with Ohio ties. Fremont’s Rutherford B. Hayes and Mentor’s James A. Garfield followed in 1876 and 1880 respectively. Hayes, winner of perhaps the most controversial election in American history, became president despite losing the popular vote to Democrat Samuel J. Tilden of New York. A corrupt Electoral Commission reversed the contested electoral votes of three Southern states (Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina), thus handing the election to Hayes with an electoral vote margin of one. Hayes pledged to serve only one term—a term most notable for his ending Reconstruction of the South and ushering in a new era of discrimination that would last well into the latter part of the Twentieth Century. James Garfield, only 49 years old, became the second American president felled by an assassin’s bullet when he was shot by a frustrated office-seeker just shy of four months after his inauguration. Garfield’s murder cut short a promising presidency—the former president of Hiram College, Union General, and U.S. Representative was perhaps the most prepared and most intelligent of all the individuals elected in the Gilded Age. After a four-year respite, North Bend-born Benjamin Harrison, the grandson of William Henry Harrison, defeated incumbent President Grover Cleveland in an exceedingly close election. Harrison lost the popular vote by 90,000 votes but won the electoral vote. In 1892, Cleveland exacted his revenge on Harrison by defeating him in a rematch, becoming the first and only president to serve two non-consecutive terms.

In 1896, William McKinley of Canton became the sixth president with Ohio connections, and four years later became only the second Ohioan to win a second term. McKinley continued the streak of bad-luck for Ohio presidents becoming the third U.S. president to be assassinated, this time by an anarchist in Buffalo at the Pan-American Exposition in 1901. Eight years later, Cincinnati’s William Howard Taft succeeded the iconic Theodore Roosevelt only to have his predecessor challenge him in 1912, thus ensuring his defeat. Warren G. Harding of Marion was elected eight years later and during his term appointed his Republican predecessor, Taft, as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Ohioans couldn’t lose in 1920—Ohio Governor James M. Cox was the Democratic nominee who lost to Harding that year. Harding became another Ohio president who failed to survive his entire elected term, serving just over two years before his death from an embolism while in San Francisco.

Not all of the eight presidents with Ohio connections were the best and the brightest. In fact, some such as the intellectually-challenged Harding were much less than that. However, they all had one thing in common—a lineage traced to electoral vote-rich, yet often up-for-grabs Ohio. In the pre-modern era of brokered conventions and backroom deals, sacrifices were made regarding the qualifications of individuals—instead, strategic considerations based on geography ruled the day.

Though U.S. Senator Robert A. Taft, the son of the 27th president and another in the long line of Ohio Tafts, nearly wrested the GOP nomination away from General Dwight Eisenhower in 1952, Ohio’s grip on the White House ended with Harding’s death. A large reason for this is that as the era of the post-1968 primary system was ushered in by both major parties, Ohio’s power during the nomination stage decreased dramatically. This is due to the fact that Ohio’s primary usually occurs later on the calendar when the results are all but official, at least in the recent era of rampant frontloading. Thus in the primary season, Ohio is largely ignored by the campaigns in favor of states such as Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina that are much less representative of the nation as a whole, but are important simply because they are at the head of the line.

This situation is particularly exacerbated in 2008 as the Iowa Caucus will occur January 3, and a scant five days later the New Hampshire primary will take place, both contests occurring far earlier than at any point in history. Ohio lawmakers have not given into temptation and followed the great rush by other states to move Ohio’s primary date to the beginning of the calendar. Because of this, Ohio’s March 4 primary will hold little interest as both party nominees will have likely been chosen long before. However, both campaigns will have all but taken up residence in the Buckeye State as the general election phase will have begun, and few states will equal the attention Ohio will garner.

The Presidential Connection and 2008: An Ohioan as VP?

The 2008 election has brought rampant speculation as to whether or not Ohio’s popular Governor, Ted Strickland, will be chosen as a runningmate by the eventual Democratic nominee. Strickland’s endorsement in November 2007 of Senator Hillary Clinton, the Democratic Party favorite, has fanned the flames of speculation. The choice of Strickland as a runningmate makes all kinds of tactical sense. The Lucasville-born Strickland is exceedingly popular with the Ohio electorate with approval ratings consistently hovering between 60% and 70% in his first year. As a moderate Democrat and Methodist minister whose base is Southern Ohio, Strickland appeals more to crucial border and Southern states than any potential Democratic nominee. Strickland has cross-over appeal as evidenced by the support of large numbers of Republicans and independents in his 2006 gubernatorial election, as well as in his easy reelection victories as a U.S. Representative from the 6th Congressional district in Southeast, Ohio. Strickland’s support of Second Amendment rights and his good working relationship with the NRA, who endorsed him in 2006, further increases his across-the-aisle appeal.

And let’s not forget Ohio’s electoral vote bonanza of 20—a total sure to bring victory to any Democrat able to capture it. And this more than anything means Strickland is at or near the top of any short list of potential runningmates. Strickland may well turn down a future offer for the VP slot and has publicly and repeatedly stated that he is “not interested.” However, that won’t quell the speculation. No serious Democratic Party nominee could fail to consider the popular Ohio Governor as a vice presidential runningmate.

Perhaps no election demonstrates the importance of Ohio in the electoral milieu as does 2004. No state was visited more by the major candidates in the nine months leading up to the election. An immense amount of money was spent by both campaigns in Ohio as well as their surrogates. Ohio voters were repeatedly inundated with political advertising, including the infamous Swift Boat ads, throughout 2004. The 2008 election will be no different. In a state carried by President George W. Bush by only 119,000 votes, a mere 2% of the popular vote total, Strickland’s name as part of the Democratic ticket could be just the elixir to make Ohio a blue state for the first time since 1996.

Ohio's Abominal Congressional Map: Final 2011 Edition

 

I have written here previously about Republican attempts to gerrymander Ohio's U.S. congressional districts to the extreme. At the time, Democrats blocked the effort promising to put the map before the voters in the form of a November 2012 referendum ballot issue. Well, that effort is dead as Ohio Democrats caved to the GOP, agreeing to a map that had roughly the same ratios as the original proposed map: 12 safe GOP districts and 4 safe Dem districts.

What happened? Well, it appears that the GOP was able to buy some support by consolidating urban areas in Cincinnati, Toledo, and Columbus. That, and serious questions arose as to whether Dems would be able to collect enough signatures to put the measure on the ballot.

According to the Plain Dealer:

"The legislative deal came Wednesday as lawmakers adopted an alternative congressional map offered by Republicans last month, which replaces a map Republicans approved in September that Democrats opposed. Democrats had originally rejected the revised map when it was offered by GOP lawmakers last month because they said it did not go far enough, and they threatened to take the issue to a referendum. The new map creates what appear to be 12 solidly Republican districts and four Democratic ones....The revised congressional map incorporated some changes sought by black Democrats, drawing districts that keep urban areas in Toledo, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati together. It also squeezed U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Cleveland by adding more than 90,000 Lucas County voters into a solidly Democratic district that follows the Lake Erie shoreline from Westlake to Toledo, resulting in more-favorable turf for Toledo Rep. Marcy Kaptur. Kucinich and Kaptur have filed to run against each other in a Democratic primary because their districts were consolidated in the original map."

Regardless of what party made out with this map, it is a tragedy that in a 50-50 state like Ohio, one party will have 75% of the Congressional seats. Ohio is not alone as most state congressional districts are gerrymandered if that state has one party control. It's a system begging to be fixed.

Building a Sleazier Ohio

What the "Building a Better Ohio" group did to Ohio great-grandmother Marlene Quinn is one of the most blatant, under-handed, dirty tricks I have witnessed in recent politics.

From Cincinnati.com: "[Marlene Quinn's] appearance in a television ad suggesting she supports a cause she doesn't continued to swirl in the hard-fought campaign over Senate Bill 5. Meanwhile, more than two dozen television stations serving the Ohio market, including two in Cincinnati, pulled the controversial ad produced for Building A Better Ohio, the Republican- and business-dominated group that supports SB 5. Quinn opposes SB 5 and agreed to be part of an ad produced by We Are Ohio, a Democratic- and union-dominated group fighting enforcement of the legislation. In it, she thanks Cincinnati firefighters for saving the lives of her great-granddaughter, Zoey, and son, Jan, in a November fire. Building A Better Ohio took sections of Quinn's audio and video from the We Are Ohio ad and used them in their own, leaving the impression that Quinn supports SB 5."

View both ads below:





I am no legal expert but it seems to me that legal action could and should be taken in this case. It is politics at its worst. It does beg the question: are the arguments in favor of SB5 that tenuous that forces supporting the law can only resort to this type of underhanded tactic? My hope is that the controversy goes viral and this type of sleazy tactic backfires.

Disclaimer: I am a union member of AAUP. Regardless, had We Are Ohio used this type of tactic I would have decried it as well.

Let's Hear It For Parma

One of my three loyal readers sent me this video link. Too funny.

All Eyes Will be on Ohio Again in 2010

John King of CNN has a report about the 2010 races for Senate and Governor in Ohio. Once again, the Buckeye State will be in the bull's eye.

The Republican field looks set. As expected, former Congressman from Southwest Ohio, OMB Director, and U.S. Trade Representative, Rob Portman, will be the GOP nominee. Portman's experience is deep and his resume is impressive. John Kasich, the former U.S. Representative from Central Ohio, Wall Street executive, and television pundit will likely be the GOP nominee for Governor.

On the Democratic side, Governor Ted Strickland will be the nominee running for a second term. Viewed as unbeatable just a few months ago, a very tough budget fight and controversial plan to fix education in Ohio leaves Strickland vulnerable. In a recent Public Policy Polling survey, Strickland's lead was only within the margin of error in a match up with Kasich, 44-42%.

The race for the Democratic nomination for Senate could be murkier. Though Lieutenant Governor Lee Fisher is the choice of the Democratic establishment, Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner is a big name and is thought to be have an advantage with powerful women's groups such as EMILY's List (though EMILY has yet to go all-in for Brunner). If Brunner is able to close the fundraising gap with Fisher and hang on until Spring, this could be a tough battle. Based on current polling, either candidate beats Portman in a match up; however, expect that to change and the race to significantly tighten in coming months, regardless of the Democratic nominee.

Historically, the president's party struggles in congressional midterm elections as the president makes tough choices which angers supporters and mobilizes critics. There are of course exceptions to this general principle, 2002 being the latest example as the GOP was able to capitalize on a post-9/11 pro-security environment. Expect both races to be tough, long, expensive slogs.

So, When Will I See My Kids?

So, when will I see my kids? That's the question that immediately popped into my brain as I read Ohio Governor Ted Strickland's 6 point education plan which was unveiled as part of his State of the State Address today in Columbus. Besides the fact that the plan was short on specifics on how he would fix the school funding problem in Ohio, Strickland proposed that Ohio begin: "Phasing in 20 additional days to the school calendar each year over a 10-year period, bringing the state's school year up to the international average of 200 days and lengthening the school day with additional activities, such as community service, tutoring and health and wellness programs."

So let me see now, besides the fact that most schools are having a really tough time passing their levies and keep their school budgets in the black, schools should now stay open an additional month and for longer hours each day. Well, I'm no accountant but that sounds like an extra financial burden on schools that can barely keep up now. Will Ohio really have the cash to back this all up or will this be an unfunded mandate?

The extra month in school and extra hours in the school day would also be a burden on many families. You see, call us strange, but my wife and I cherish the time we have with our young children. I really don't want the state mandating that they be stuck an additional month in school and for more hours in the day. Most parents keep their children busy with after school extra-curricular activities as is. Kids also need their summer break to re-energize and to...be a kid. Families often use the time in the summer to go on vacation and do things as a family. An extra month in school? Kids will be in school until after the Fourth of July? Heck, why stop there? Why not keep kids in school all year round? Having a one month summer break is about the same thing.

A state-funded, voluntary summer school, especially for those kids that are struggling, would be great. State-funded, voluntary extra-curricular activities for kids, especially for those latch-key kids that need a place to go until a parent gets home from work, would be great. But mandating any of this is a mistake in my opinion.

Northeast Ohio is Shaping up to be the Bullseye of 2008

As Rubber City Radio and Akron News Now's Ed Esposito points out, Northeast Ohio will be inundated with candidates over the next 48 hours: "The big push of presidential politics surrounds Akron today with Obama's in Cleveland and Palin in Canton; tomorrow McCain/Palin include Lakewood, Cleveland and Columbus while Joe and Jill Biden hit Copley High School for a Monday night quickie."

Anyone that lived in Ohio in 2004 who wasn't in a cave with soundproofed walls and no TV knows the routine. The fact that all four candidates and their spouses will be in Northeast Ohio for much of their last-minute Ohio push demonstrates that this part of the state, a Democratic stronghold, will be a key to winning Ohio.

For Obama it will be about GOTV in the urban areas and activating voter groups that are harder to activate typically: African-Americans, young people and college students, and first time voters. Obama needs to overperform in Northeast Ohio to offset losses in red Western Ohio. McCain needs to perform well in places like the Mahoning Valley and rural, suburban, and exurban parts of Northeast Ohio that surroung the urban centers. we'll find out Wednesday which campaign had a better plan to win the Buckeye State.

Recent Ohio Polls Give Obama Edge in Buckeye State

Two new polls give Obama the edge in the Buckeye State. Both the Ohio Newspaper Poll and the Bliss Institute Akron Buckeye Fall Poll gives Obama about a 3-4 point advantage in Ohio, corroborating many other recent polls.

McCain has to win Ohio to have a chance in this election; for Obama it's a luxury. Its been said a million times already--no Republican has ever won the White House without carrying Ohio. The way the electoral math works, this election is no exception. If McCain can't win Pennsylvania, which is almost a certainty at this point, he has to carry Ohio. Even by carrying Ohio though, with Obama looking like he will win Colorado, New Mexico, & Iowa, McCain has to add a Kerry state to his column and that looks really hard at this point.