Sunday, October 3, 2010

Why the Plain Dealer endorsement is significant.

Last night we learned John Kasich won the endorsement of the Cleveland Plain Dealer. That endorsement has proven to be particularly significant.

Need to know why?

Ask history.

I looked back at whom the Plain Dealer endorsed for Governor going back 20 years. Since then, their endorsed candidate has won every time.

Additionally, in his column today, Tom Suddes takes a look at the numbers in Cuyahoga County and how Strickland can't spare a single one:
Beginning in 1958, a Democrat hasn't become governor without at least a 100,000-vote margin inside Cuyahoga over his GOP opponent.

A Democrat carried Cuyahoga by more than 100,000 votes and became governor in 1958, 1970, 1982, 1986 and 2006 (Strickland, albeit, facing GOP fiasco J. Kenneth Blackwell). Democratic candidates for governor failed to carry Cuyahoga County by at least 100,000 votes and lost statewide in 1962 (incumbent Michael V. DiSalle, seeking re-election), 1966, 1974 (incumbent John J. Gilligan, ditto), 1978 (Richard F. Celeste), 1990 (Anthony J. Celebrezze Jr., albeit, against fellow Clevelander George Voinovich), 1994 (albeit, Democratic fiasco Robert Burch), 1998 (Lee Fisher) and 2002 (Tim Hagan).
Only the shortsighted will consider the Plain Dealer endorsement as anything less than extremely significant in this race. "Endorsed by the Plain Dealer" on everything from television commercials to campaign literature to the paper's slate card can leave quite an impression on Cuyahoga County voters.

And all this doesn't even take into consideration the Democratic corruption scandal that has erupted county-wide and shows no signs of slowing down.

That scandal not only discourages Democratic voters, but it turns swing voters and has pulled the Democrats' traditional GOTV players out of the game.

Combine all these factors and its hard to see what chance Strickland has to win this election.

Don't be surprised if the Governor starts spending so much time in the Cleveland area that he takes up residence.

In the meantime, it will be interesting to watch if the Strickland team reacts to the Plain Dealer endorsement as childishly as they did the CPA and Ohio Chamber endorsements of Kasich.


  1. Your post suffers from post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. The PD endorsement didn't cause those candidates to win. In just about every instance, those candidates were viewed as likely to win already. You're confusing corrolation with cause and effect.

    Here's the breakdown of the PD's endorsements over the last "20 years.)

    1990- Hometown boy George Voinovich.

    1994: Voinovich again when he faces nominal opposition.

    1998: Are you sure they endorsed Bob Taft over Lee Fisher? I honestly don't remember. Again, though Taft was viewed as sitting on a pretty confortable lead by this point.

    2002: Bob Taft against nominal opposition.

    2006: Strickland over nominal opposition.

    In other words, most of the time the PD endorsed in the "last twenty years" those races were so one side poll wise that the PD just simply endorsed the leader.

    It does not mean, however, that those candidates did particularly well in Cuyahoga County as I'm pretty sure Taft never carried the region.

    But you kept telling yourself that this is somehow a predictor of something.

  2. Lis Smith, spokeswoman for the Democrat's campaign, said, "Ted has no interest in earning the support of The Plain Dealer..."

  3. 2010: Can a flailing incumbent whose campaign is limited to "my opponent has ties to Wall Street" be considered more than nominal opposition?

  4. Um, Strickland is running on his record of lowering taxes, cutting spending, and, yes, positioning Ohio to create new jobs as we emerge from this recession.

    The difference is that Kasich is trying to claim he'd do the same thing, too.

    Nice to see Keeling call AEP childish.

  5. Modern,

    Everyone agrees that Ted raised taxes retro actively.

    Everyone agrees that he has busted the budget and has relied on 8 billion of Federal money to patch it up.

    Run on Ted being a nice dude or something, because you can not lie and say that he has not raised taxes and there is no way you can say he has cut spending.

    You are intellectuality dishonest.

  6. We don't care about an endorsement from a right wing rag like the Plain Dealer.


No profanity, keep it clean.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.