Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Tue Aug 30, 2016, 06:14 PM Aug 2016

Exclusive: Kochs pull out of Ohio Senate race

Source: The Hill

The powerful network helmed by billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch is canceling advertising in the Ohio Senate race, a sign that Republican Sen. Rob Portman is viewed as increasingly likely to win.

The Koch network, which has already spent more than $10 million on TV, radio and digital advertising in Ohio, is cancelling about $2.1 million of ad reservations for late September because network officials believe Portman is in a strong position to defeat Democratic challenger Ted Strickland.

“Rob Portman has run one of the strongest campaigns of the cycle, he maintains a significant lead in virtually every poll, and the dynamics of the race have changed,” Koch network spokesman James Davis told The Hill on Tuesday.

“We will remain on air through Sept. 14 with our current ads, but given Portman's strong position in the race, we are going to drop the remaining reservation and reserve flexibility over future spending.”

-snip-

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/293854-exclusive-kochs-pull-out-of-ohio-senate-race

18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Exclusive: Kochs pull out of Ohio Senate race (Original Post) DonViejo Aug 2016 OP
I will vote for Strickland. Buckeye_Democrat Aug 2016 #1
I don't get why Strickland is doing so poorly against Portman. SunSeeker Aug 2016 #2
He used his past experience as a pastor to win votes. Buckeye_Democrat Aug 2016 #4
The problem is Portman isn't all that offensive ProudToBeBlueInRhody Aug 2016 #7
There has been so much negative advertisement against Strickland. Hardly LisaL Aug 2016 #9
Sounds like he is a victim of Kochs' spending for Portman rather than for Trump. nt SunSeeker Aug 2016 #10
Sure does. Negative ads against Strickland have been on for months. LisaL Aug 2016 #12
Portman had a small advantage but I think it was the "rain day fund" ads Imperialism Inc. Sep 2016 #16
If Strickland hadn't used the rainy day fund, the economy would have tanked even worse. SunSeeker Sep 2016 #18
Thank you so much. Sad to see Strickland do far behind. riversedge Aug 2016 #3
Bleh. This means the maggots will be shifting even more money to keep the House in Republican hands. cstanleytech Aug 2016 #5
It's been all anti-Strickland on TV here for months...... dawnie51 Aug 2016 #6
I'm sure there's a place for Strickland in the Clinton Administration, but I don't like Portman. NBachers Aug 2016 #8
Maybe Strickland needs to run "educational " commercials about what he will do in the senate kimbutgar Aug 2016 #11
We're all doomed not fooled Aug 2016 #13
I'm voting for Strickland, but..... Wuddles440 Aug 2016 #14
I think that Strickland had the misfortune of being Govenor during the Republican Financial Collapse mackdaddy Aug 2016 #15
I suspect at least some of that difference was do to crossovers in the primary. Imperialism Inc. Sep 2016 #17

Buckeye_Democrat

(14,847 posts)
1. I will vote for Strickland.
Tue Aug 30, 2016, 06:23 PM
Aug 2016

Despite him being a former Governor, I'm a little disappointed that he was apparently the best that the Democrats could offer. He's too religious for my taste, but I'll vote for him.

SunSeeker

(51,369 posts)
2. I don't get why Strickland is doing so poorly against Portman.
Tue Aug 30, 2016, 06:33 PM
Aug 2016

I'm not from Ohio, so I am not familiar with him, but he seems relatively decent. What do you mean by "too religious"? Is he a Bible-thumping, forced birth, homophobic 1%er's lapdog, like almost all Republicans?

Buckeye_Democrat

(14,847 posts)
4. He used his past experience as a pastor to win votes.
Tue Aug 30, 2016, 06:46 PM
Aug 2016

He's NOT one of those Pharisee-types who uses religion as a weapon to judge others harshly, but just the fact that he was ever a pastor and he advertised that experience to help become governor didn't appeal to me.

He also doesn't have "it" as a speaker. I basically like the guy, but I'm not too surprised that he's struggling in the polls. I suspect that Sherrod Brown would be kicking Portman's butt.

ProudToBeBlueInRhody

(16,399 posts)
7. The problem is Portman isn't all that offensive
Tue Aug 30, 2016, 07:27 PM
Aug 2016

He's not a far right night job, despite being an awful Senator fiscally. He has a gay son, so my guess is he avoids the religious bullshit. He's already into his second term, which makes him harder to get rid of on top of that. It does seem strange Ohio would have a senator like Brown and one like Portman, but that's the way it is.

LisaL

(44,962 posts)
9. There has been so much negative advertisement against Strickland. Hardly
Tue Aug 30, 2016, 08:36 PM
Aug 2016

any against Portman. So nobody should be surprised over these results.

Imperialism Inc.

(2,495 posts)
16. Portman had a small advantage but I think it was the "rain day fund" ads
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 04:08 PM
Sep 2016

that really opened the spread.

You see, Strickland had the misfortune of being governor during the financial crash and , not surprisingly, used the rainy day fund to keep people like cops and teachers paid. Portman has turned this into a flood of ads about how Strickland took the fund down to nothing. As he should have! It was a very rainy day! Anyway, it seems to have worked; no-one has ever accused Americans of having long attention spans.

SunSeeker

(51,369 posts)
18. If Strickland hadn't used the rainy day fund, the economy would have tanked even worse.
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 10:50 PM
Sep 2016

Laying off all those cops and teachers would have had a devastating domino effect on the economy, and caused untold human misery among the public from lack of needed services by those public servants.

Shame that he was put on the defensive. Strickland should have been bragging about what he did!

dawnie51

(959 posts)
6. It's been all anti-Strickland on TV here for months......
Tue Aug 30, 2016, 07:04 PM
Aug 2016

the Koch money was early and obvious. And the push back from Strickland didn't start until just very recently. Strickland is not a religious nut; he is very laid back and deserves better than this. Portman is a useless tool, but then, all of state government is that.

kimbutgar

(20,882 posts)
11. Maybe Strickland needs to run "educational " commercials about what he will do in the senate
Tue Aug 30, 2016, 09:17 PM
Aug 2016

And present himself as an alternative who will get things done instead of being an obstructionist like Portman. Show the votes where Portman voted against doing bills to help the American people. It never hurts to try new approaches to reach voters. Unique innovative ways. Something tells me people are sick of those negative attack ad commercials. Try an "educational " approach.

Wuddles440

(1,098 posts)
14. I'm voting for Strickland, but.....
Wed Aug 31, 2016, 03:27 PM
Aug 2016

Ohio Democratic Party needed to promote an inspiring candidate who could actually be competitive, instead of, an old retread like Strickland. They had an such an opportunity with Sittenfeld, but they didn't appreciate him questioning their coronation of Strickland as the Party's endorsed candidate. Strickland lacks charisma and his term as governor was unremarkable and coincided with the Bush recession. Of course, all the negative ads to date have placed the blame for those economic conditions solely on his mismanagement. Inaccurate, but very effective at "defining" him. Portman, who is NOT a moderate republican as some have described him, has really never been threatened by the Strickland candidacy and considered him a non-factor. Strickland was toast before he even left the starting blocks. While the new Party Chairman, David Pepper, has been a tremendous improvement over his predecessor, Chris Redfern, his unconditional support of Strickland was not one of his finest moments.

mackdaddy

(1,520 posts)
15. I think that Strickland had the misfortune of being Govenor during the Republican Financial Collapse
Wed Aug 31, 2016, 10:29 PM
Aug 2016

of 2008.
Kasich and the Kochs did a good job of blaming Strickland for the Republican caused job losses which is why Kasich was able to beat Strickland in 2010, and Gerrymander the hell of of the state. They have just continued the smear in Strickland's run against Portman.

Strickland is still one of the best Democrats out there, but there are plenty of RW dumb-asses in this state. The Hillary hatred is pervasive, and I have seen many Trump yard signs already. (OMG) This is not helping Strickland either.

There were close to double the number of Republican votes cast in the primary election this year vs Democratic votes cast. Over 2 million total votes for Repubs vs 1.2 million for all Democratic candidates.

Thank god Trump is such an idiot or I am not sure we would have a chance in Ohio this year.

Imperialism Inc.

(2,495 posts)
17. I suspect at least some of that difference was do to crossovers in the primary.
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 04:24 PM
Sep 2016

My wife and I both crossed over and voted in the Republican primary for the first time ever just so we could vote against Trump. Kasich won of course and at the time it seemed like there might be a chance to stop Trump. Plus we were happy with either Democratic candidate.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Exclusive: Kochs pull out...