Hillary Clinton is lagging in the usually must-win state of Ohio and as a result, the New York Times has decided that Ohio just isn’t as important as it used to be.

Jonathan Martin writes:

Ohio, Long a Bellwether, Is Fading on the Electoral Map After decades as one of America’s most reliable political bellwethers, an inevitable presidential battleground that closely mirrored the mood and makeup of the country, Ohio is suddenly fading in importance this year. Hillary Clinton has not been to the state since Labor Day, and her aides said Thursday that she would not be back until next week, after a monthlong absence, effectively acknowledging how difficult they think it will be to defeat Donald J. Trump here. Ohio has not fallen into step with the demographic changes transforming the United States, growing older, whiter and less educated than the nation at large. And the two parties have made strikingly different wagers about how to win the White House in this election: Mr. Trump, the Republican nominee, is relying on a demographic coalition that, while well tailored for Ohio even in the state’s Democratic strongholds, leaves him vulnerable in the more diverse parts of the country where Mrs. Clinton is spending most of her time. It is a jarring change for political veterans here, who relish being at the center of the country’s presidential races: Because of newer battleground states, Mrs. Clinton can amass the 270 electoral votes required to win even if she loses Ohio.

So basically, Ohio no longer matters because Trump is leading there and Hillary doesn’t need it to win anyway.

At the time of this writing, Trump has a two point lead in Ohio, according to the Real Clear Politics average of polls.

When it comes to Ohio, nothing has gone the way the New York Times wanted. You may recall that they threw their weight behind John Kasich during the Republican primary back in January.

In an editorial, they wrote:

A Chance to Reset the Republican Race Gov. John Kasich of Ohio, though a distinct underdog, is the only plausible choice for Republicans tired of the extremism and inexperience on display in this race. And Mr. Kasich is no moderate. As governor, he’s gone after public-sector unions, fought to limit abortion rights and opposed same-sex marriage. Still, as a veteran of partisan fights and bipartisan deals during nearly two decades in the House, he has been capable of compromise and believes in the ability of government to improve lives. He favors a path to legalization for undocumented immigrants, and he speaks of government’s duty to protect the poor, the mentally ill and others “in the shadows.” While Republicans in Congress tried more than 60 times to kill Obamacare, Mr. Kasich did an end-run around Ohio’s Republican Legislature to secure a $13 billion Medicaid expansion to cover more people in his state.

Do you think the New York Times would be dismissing Ohio if Hillary was leading there?

Not a chance.



