Loading ...
See how Ohio has voted in the past 23 presidential elections
View Chip Bok's political cartoons
A new feature has been added to the comments section of The Point. The image below illustrates the preview feature, which allows you to see how your comment will look. This is particularly helpful for our readers who like to add HTML to their posts.
Thanks to our technical team at Ohio.com for adding this to our site.
Due to the current Democratic infighting, many in the party are looking for a quick solution that will end their mess. More and more one name keeps popping up. Al Gore. Gore himself keeps saying he is not going to run, but the drumbeat is getting louder (Joe Klein of Time is one of the most recent to write about this).
While I don't think this will happen, it is still interesting to talk about. The Democrats are always talking how every vote should count. Al Gore has not been on the ballot for any primary or caucus in 2008. If Howard Dean and his braintrust did decide to approcach Gore and if he accepted, all Democratic voters would be disenfranchised!! Not just voters in Michigan and Florida, as is currently the case. Only the people who still wake up every day convinced that the 2000 election was stolen and wrote in Al Gore's name this year would have their votes counted. In addition, the Democrats would be potentially be pushing aside both the first female and first African-American president. Some questions: Would the donors who have so supported Obama keep their money coming to Gore? Would he be able to convert votes against him in 2000 into votes for him in 2008? Do Democrats want to take a second chance on another charmless candidate (Mondull, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry)? Would Gore himself want to run and risk losing again? But don't forget, Richard Nixon ran as an incumbent VP and lost narrowly only to come back 8 years later and win.
From an article I was reading today: Former Gore aides now believe he could emerge as a compromise candidate acceptable to both camps at the party's convention in Denver during the last week of August.
Seriously? We know Hillary Clinton won't be like "Oh sure, Al, I will defer to you." I don't think St. Obama would back down either. Plus, if Gore did run, I don't know if the momentum could be kept up on one of the biggest scams this country has ever seen - "carbon offsets."
Two Ohio blogs also weigh in on the Gore possibility: Nix Guy (via AOL) on the right, and De Magno Opere on the left.
Kyle: Ben, I gotta weigh in here and correct the record on Al Gore's environmental credentials. This week, the top vote getter in 2000 (Gore) will be launching a $300 million campaign to try and push the country to address climate change. The ad campaign will feature Pat Robertson, Al Sharpton, Nancy Pelosi, and Newt Gingrich. Here is their debut ad:
Visit WeCanSolveIt.org for more information.
The past couple weeks have been a bit of a spring beak from presidential politics for Democrats, but the break is over. Prominent Senators Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Pat Leahy have called for Hillary Clinton to drop out of the Presidential campaign and support Barack Obama. This morning, Senator Clinton responded in the Washington Post: "I know there are some people who want to shut this down and I think they are wrong," Clinton said in an interview during a campaign stop here Saturday. "I have no intention of stopping until we finish what we started and until we see what happens in the next 10 contests and until we resolve Florida and Michigan. And if we don't resolve it, we'll resolve it at the convention — that's what credentials committees are for."
Wow. Think about that statement for a second. The Democratic National Convention does not start until August 25th. Senator Clinton is suggesting that we continue to duke it out until then. As a Democrat, I see nothing healthy for our party about this protracted battle. Our chances of beating John McCain diminish slightly each week this infighting continues.
The Democratic Primary season ends June 10th. That should mark the official end of this process so that our nominee can have time to recover before the convention. All signs seem to be pointed towards a protracted battle until then. National polling shows Senator Obama with a 4% average lead on Senator Clinton. However, Pennsylvania is looking like it will give Senator Clinton a bump. Polling there shows Senator Clinton with a solid lead and she needs to keep it big to help her close the popular vote gap. Michael Barone wrote a lengthy article that breaks down a hypothetical scenario where Clinton can overcome Obama's popular vote advantage without Florida and Michigan. It requires Clinton winning PA 60% - 40%, which is unlikely to happen.
The Pennsylvania Primary is April 22nd and it is shaping up to be an intense battleground. Democrat Senator Bob Casey endorsed Obama. This was great news because Obama lacked a real statewide endorsement here in Ohio and I think that made him more vulnerable to last minute attacks by the Clinton campaign. Prominent Congressman Jack Murtha endorsed Senator Clinton. This endorsement helps Senator Clinton deal with her Iraq vote question in PA because Murtha has been one of the most vocal critics of President Bush on the Iraq war. Governor Ed Rendell is following the Ted Strickland model by being the lead surrogate for the Clinton campaign in his state. The split of these prominent endorsements is indicative of the kind of division we have in our party which seems destine to continue.
More: Tom Abrahams at TheVote.abc13.com has more on Hillary and her determination to fight on today at his site. Check it out.
DNC Chairman Howard Dean: While we honor McCain's military service, the fact is Americans want a real leader who offers real solutions, not a blatant opportunist who doesn't understand the economy and is promising to keep our troops in Iraq for 100 years.
So McCain is now a "blatant opportunist" for using his military record and images in a commercial. While the Democrats continue to go after each other, McCain is starting to draw the contrast between himself and the other two senators in the race. I think McCain actually believes he is doing the right thing when he votes the way he does (Iraq included) even though I disagree with many of his past votes on a variety of other issues, such as immigration and campaign finance reform. He wouldn't have voted the way he has on certain things in the past if he was such an opportunist, Mr. Chairman - because it made many Republicans detest him (like me, here are two examples). But back to the issue at hand, if I remember correctly, which I do, McCain was one of those who stood up when John Forbes Kerry (sorry, I know we aren't supposed to mention middle names anymore) was being attacked on his military record in 2004. I will be waiting for Kerry to return the favor here. The thinking of Dean and people like him must be: "Republicans who served are warmongers, murderers, and blatant opportunists, and Republicans who didn't serve in the military are "chickenhawks.'" That is what Dean's latest outburst tells me that he thinks.
I don't think the attack is out of bounds - when you are a candidate for president, nothing is really off limits to me. You are running for the most powerful job on Earth; everything is fair game. I do, however, think that Dean's remarks are dumb and will backfire. If this is what Dean wants to do, go for it. I just thought even he had more political skill than this. Dean isn't going to win a battle against Senator McCain. I would actually say the attacks are "in bounds;" they hit at one of his major selling points. Like I said, the ad is directed at both Clinton and Obama - but more so Obama by saying he isn't ready to lead the country, which he isn't.
Footnote: Love the "I'm John McCain and I approved this message" at the end of the commercial. McCain- Feingold, baby!!
Here is the McCain commercial to which Dean was responding to:
The news came out yesterday that former U.S. Representative John Kasich is laying the groundwork to run for Ohio Governor in 2010. The news was not entirely unexpected. Kyle and I each have a take on a possible Strickland - Kasich showdown in 2010.
Ben: Kasich said Ohio is in an economic "death spiral." It is. Bob Taft left a mess for Ted Strickland to clean up, but Strickland hasn't done anything except make things worse. He is also making things worse for himself by so closely aligning himself with Hillary Clinton. The Ohio economy is still in shambles - 5th worst tax burden and 2nd worst state business climate. The "education governor" hasn't come up with his plan yet. He wants to install Keno machines against the will of the state's voters. But again, he did move the location of the governors desk - one of his major achievements so far.
In the article, Kasich is quoted as saying: "Frankly, I believe the (state) income tax has to be phased out." Obviously if he wants to do that, he better have another good way of bringing in money, since the income tax currently accounts for 34% of Ohio's operating budget. Florida and Tennessee also have no income tax and are doing just fine. It is this kind of thinking that Ohio needs. Otherwise we are going to end up just raising taxes and we might as well just merge with Michigan.
The only problem with this is that it leaves Rob Portman out, unless there is a primary, which we don't need. I think Portman wants to be governor, and not a senator, so we shall see how this shakes out. We will still need a strong candidate to take on Sherrod Brown in 2012. Things can change, but as of right now Kasich and Portman would be the best two Republican candidates statewide. Brown gaining senority scares me - he could end up like Howard Metzenbaum.
Mike DeWine is also going to take a hard look at this race. Keep looking, Mike. Everyone else will be looking to the Republican nominee to get us out of the bigger hole Ted Strickland put us in. John Kasich would be a very formidable candidate - and Ted Strickland, Roger Strickland, and Ohio Democrats know it.
Ohio righty blog Nix Guy also weighs in.
Kyle: John Kasich's name comes up every time there is a major statewide race where the Republicans need to field a candidate and every time he sits on the sidelines while another race is lost. He will be a formidable opponent if he decides to run and will be able to use his Fox News star power to raise the profile of his candidacy. It was probably smart for him to sit out in 2006 because it would have been near impossible to overcome the damage done to the Republican Party by the Taft Administration. I do think Strickland is going to pay a political price in 2010 for his excessive support of Senator Clinton in 2008. It would be a political consultants dream to go through the hours of footage of Governor Strickland and Senator Clinton to cut 30 second spots. However, as a one term incumbent, Strickland will be able to go to the people with his list of accomplishments and ask for a second term. I know he will have a compelling case to make. I also hope that President Obama will come to Ohio and campaign vigorously for Governor Strickland's re-election.
Jill at Writes Like She Talks discusses a possible Cordray / Fisher Democrat Primary in 2010 if Ted Strickland becomes our country's next Vice-President.
Openers: About 17,100 Republicans and 3,000 Democrats in Cuyahoga County switched parties in the March 4 primary, the county Board of Elections found during an investigation of whether voters lied when they signed affidavits pledging allegiance to their new party.
But Ohio's elections chief warned Tuesday against prosecuting any of these 20,119 crossover voters because doing so could be a violation of free-speech rights.
This whole notion is just dumb. CC Board of Elections member Sandy McNair wants county prosecutor Bill Mason to look into this whole situation (now known as Rush Limbaugh's "Operation Chaos"). Mason said "It's going to be very difficult if not impossible to make a case against a voter who has switched parties." No kidding. The county's prosecutors office is overworked as is, you know, with stuff that is actually important. Our "exceptional" SoS, Jennifer Brunner, doesn't even think this is practical. (Exceptional is how my liberal colleague here, Kyle, termed Brunner in his post yesterday. Obviously I do not share the same opinion.)
I suppose if we did go forward and try to go after the offending voters then we would also need to find out which staffers from the Clinton and Obama campaigns called known Republican households and asked them to switch parties while soliciting their vote. Maybe even Barry and Hillary themselves would be found to have made a call or two. Get Ken Starr on the line!!
Democrats are just mad that Republicans are influencing their primary - even though many of them have voted for McCain in the past and they orgainzed an effort to vote for Romney in Michigan last month because they thought he would be easy to beat. It is your own fault for having the best two candidates ever!! Which party and their complicit media partners have also been planting fake documents and stories to influence elections in the past? Democrats. Maybe some of those people should be facing jail time, no? Are we going after the 3,000 Dems that picked up a Republican ballot as well?
If this whole crossover voter thing is that big of a deal to you, here is my advice: start thinking of strategies to change the law and make it a closed primary. McNair himself could run for elected office and make this issue his main platform. But prosecution sure doesn't seem like a real smart way to "unite" the country, now does it? Did it ever occur to you people that maybe some of the people actually plan on voting for the Democrat candidate in November? It shouldn't, since all I hear is how bad Republicans are. If anything, maybe Bill Mason should take look at McNair's role on what has to be one of the most poorly run board of elections in the United States.
The Reynoldsburg based blog, Fundamental Truths, disagrees with me and says Brunner needs to go after the party switchers. King of King's Right Site agrees with me.
(UPDATE, 3/28): Limbaugh safe from voter fraud charges.
What say you?
