Sherrod Brown Tries Again

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH)

This morning, a long-rumored run for the US Senate was telegraphed by former US Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH).  While Brown has not officially launched his campaign, it appears to be confirmed, and with that, the Democrats have one of their best recruits of the cycle...and I have some thoughts.  Brown's interest in another office is not entirely unexpected.  The 72-year-old had, before his defeat last year by Sen. Bernie Moreno, held public office for most of the past 50 years, but I was not expecting him to run for the US Senate, and am honestly kind of surprised as to why he's undertaking this task.  Let me explain.

Brown was first elected to office in 1974, and with the exception of a two year stint after his 1990 reelection lost for Secretary of State to Bob Taft, he'd been in public office ever since, most of that time as a Democratic member of Congress (serving since 1993).  Brown's loss, though, was part of Ohio's continued rightward shift.  While he outran Kamala Harris in 2024, it wasn't enough, and it honestly looked to me like Brown's time in federal office was over.  If he couldn't beat Moreno, how exactly would it be that he could do it again, particularly against someone like Sen. Jon Husted (basically the definition of a "Generic Republican").  I thought that he would be more likely to go for the open gubernatorial election, capping off his career as Governor after a Senate loss (much like Mike DeWine, the guy who Brown beat to win his Senate seat initially, ended up doing).  The gubernatorial election looked more achievable (weaker opponent, and there's more crossover votes for state offices than federal), and it also was for a four-year term, whereas Brown, even if he wins, will have to run for a full term in 2028 (the mental math here would be a lot easier to understand if he was running for a six-year term as, if he won, he'd have a shot to serve with another Democratic president after 2028).  There's no chance of Brown getting a shot at a trifecta without also running in 2028...he might win Chuck Schumer back a majority, but it's a majority that (best case scenario) he won't do much more than gridlock.  Plus, there's the very real possibility that Brown will not win, meaning he'll have a double loss as the epitaph to his storied career.

This is actually the case for a lot of senators, including a number of Brown's former colleagues.  Lots of former senators (Bob Kerrey, Russ Feingold, Evan Bayh) have run in states that had shifted rightward after retiring or losing reelection, and all ended up with another (usually larger) "L" under their name.  Feingold, in particular, is a warning sign for Brown because he lost both in 2010 and 2016; getting a win after a loss for the US Senate is rare.  The last senator to do so was Slade Gorton in 1988, who after a narrow loss in 1986 (losing during the Reagan midterms, which cost the Republicans 8 seats), he was able to barely hold the seat in 1988 against a liberal congressman.  Gorton, in this case, had both a good environment (which, admittedly, Brown could have), but also a much weaker opponent (which he will not).  He also wasn't against an incumbent, which Husted technically is, and wasn't attempting a party flip (which is what Brown would have to achieve).

This was also almost 40 years ago, and you have to go pretty far back to find another case of a losing Senator getting a victory later.  Howard Metzenbaum in 1974 was an appointed senator who lost a primary to John Glenn (this was the campaign where Metzenbaum idiotically said that John Glenn, at that point an American hero to millions, hadn't "worked a day in his life"), and then was the Democratic nominee against Bob Taft in 1976, beating him while riding Jimmy Carter's coattails.  But again, this wasn't him losing a general election.  To find a case of an incumbent losing a general election, and then beating a different incumbent in a subsequent general election (what Brown's trying to achieve), you have to go back almost 80 years, to Guy Gillette in 1948.  It's very hard to do what the Democrats are attempting in Ohio, and it's not because senators haven't tried.  That Brown is doing it for just a two-year term, knowing full well he'd be an even bigger underdog in 2028 than he is in 2026, feels like he A) really didn't want to be governor and B) has something to prove.  He's clearly the candidate that the DSCC wanted (though part of me wonders if we'd been better off going with a potential rising star like Casey Weinstein to attempt a Beto 2018-style run), and the Democrats should be happy...but it's very hard to see what Brown gets out of this.

That said, the DGA now has an opening, as Brown was a potential frontrunner for the nomination in 2026.  I suspect that former Rep. Tim Ryan, who was widely seen as a potential candidate for whichever office that Brown didn't run for, will step in, and despite other figures (Weinstein, Amy Acton, Jennifer Brunner) rumored for the seat, he'd start out a healthy frontrunner.  Honestly, the biggest loser this news might have is on Rep. Emilia Skyes, who saw her Plan B destroyed if the Ohio State Legislature successfully gerrymanders her out of her seat (which appears to be likely) through mid-decade redistricting.  Ryan/Brown, especially with polarizing businessman Vivek Ramaswamy the probable Republican gubernatorial nominee, is a very strong ticket in 2026, and one or both could win if the blue wave is strong enough.  How that factors long-term as Democrats look ahead to the Senate race they'll have to quickly run in 2028, though, is (I guess) a problem for a different day.