Brutus_buckeye

The one certainty in all the time change discussion. No matter what decision is made, people will complain.

I dont think that site really supports an office even in the best of times. It is some combo of residential and even hotel. Your class A office space will always want to go on the river or have a river view. You dont see office built in today's environment North of 5th street. Look at the towers North of 5th now. 5/3 is a dated building but relevant because its 5/3 HQ (and benefits from Ftn Sq. 600 Vine has always struggled as a building, Macy's is now going apartment, 580 is now apartment, 700 Walnut is half empty and was mostly class B small law firm space. Kroger is full because it is Kroger but it would not qualify as Class A space. Given the neighborhood and new reality of the office market, that spot is not a class A office. However, if you were going to build an office on there, it could be a good spot for a new County administration building and all the jobs that would be based down there. It offers close enough access to the Courthouse and jail, it is near a lot of smaller law firms and county support services, and offers easy enough access to the interstates to people who need to come and go to the area.

Its difficult to get financing to justify condo projects now. The numbers do not work the same way they did 20 years ago.

1) Venting right after elections is pretty much what this is. IF it turns into policy positions, then be concerned. Right now it is venting. 2) What some low level state legislator who does not have a leadership role says is really nothing more than her opinion, she does not represent the leadership nor does she really have much authority to take action. While she may identify as a Republican, there is a dichotomy of opinions out there and she has an opinion, of which her opinion is a minority within her caucus. If this were coming from Stephens, Dewine or someone else in party leadership it would be different. 3) What some low level state rep said is really no different than some of the garbage that comes out of the left wing members of Congress like AOC, Cori Bush, etc. They have one vote, that is about it. The party leadership is not giving them serious attention. If you start to hear a consolidation of leadership around this opinion, then certainly be concerned. I think the fringe on both parties are pulling in dangerous directions. Certain actions of legislators should give some pause, but until they have the power to do something about it, they are just pontificating for their base. Again, this is a both sides thing. While you are solely concerned about the right fringe, the left fringe is equally as dangerous and bad. Neither are honest players. We need to have the pragmatic middle who acts responsibly be more assertive. Do I have concerns about the rhetoric going on? Of course. You see Donald Trump running an election where his only platform is to seek vengeance on his political enemies. While concerning to a certain level, I think history has demonstrated that the majority of voters are turned off by him and despite what some of the polls may say, he wont win and he will sink many of those who are following his path. While I may not like the rhetoric, I have faith in the checks and balances in the system to keep things from getting off the rails and turning into a Venezuela. So the thing about progressives is that they tend to believe in creating a world is devoid from reality and the thing about conservatives is that they dream of going back to a world that never actually existed. There is always going to be a tug and pull in politics. Politics, at the end of the day is about sales. WHat can you sell people on that may or may not be good for them. Pretty much everything that passes (no matter the party you are from) has flaws and policies that often pass along party line votes have the most flaws (and negative externalities). That will not ever stop either side from pushing the boundaries, that is just human nature. The key is that you have enough people who understand and work within the system who will work to uphold it (even if they do not agree with the results). The check on that is that occasionally, when the one side pushes too far, the voters typically reign them in and there is a pullback in the next election. The biggest change I have seen though is that you have the far right and far left dominating the policy now vs pragmatic compromising that has been the history of how legislation is done. The concern about the Obama, Trump, Biden, and ??? years is that the pendulum is swinging ever more strongly to each side. It makes the transition and pullback more painful whenever you go from D to R and then back to D or vice versa. Obama spoke about big change, but when you are trying to steer a giant ship, big changes will make the ship capsize, incremental changes are better that take a period of years. I think this was one of the things that made the founders visionaries, by making it difficult to amend the Constitution to minimize wild swings in policy.

I am sorry you may feel that way. You are welcome to your opinion on my posts as that is your perception. I can only try and convey to you my intent. And I am not trying to scapegoat for Republicans my point is before people go crazy about things recognize that it was a highly charged election and one side did not come out victorious. Given the emotions on the issue, it is very reasonable for the other side to be angry about the results. That is called being human. Some of the initial rhetoric you may hear from them may not sound pleasant or that they want to disregard the will of the voters. Initially, that may be the case, but before the other side overreacts to the rhetoric lets pause and let cooler heads prevail. What you hear after the election did not sound like people wanting to accept the results. However, after a few weeks, people typically resign themselves to doing so. Cooler heads usually prevail (unless you are Trump). Much of what you hear is just bluster (like the State Rep who wanted to remove judicial review). It really means nothing but venting. All I was saying is that before over-reacting (which may not apply to you but certainly applies to others here) wait and actually see what is proposed. If the Republicans actually tried to get rid of judicial review (which they couldn't because it is patently unconstitutional) then it is something to get angry about. But before getting upset, wait and see what if anything comes from this.

Because he did not read the post and just reflexively took it as a defense of what Republicans were doing when in fact it was the exact opposite and was a post decrying the state of politics not offering a defense. If he took the time to read it instead of react, he would have seen that and of course there could have been a dialogue. He has a history of doing that, hence the stronger language. I think many people realize that both sides use their dirty tricks to hold onto power. IN this case you see Republicans acting poorly, and we will have to see how it plays out over time and if it dies down and amounts to nothing more than a tantrum or something more serious. While you personally may understand that both sides play dirty tricks and engage in desperate antics, there is a faction that equates a moral superiority to their position and refuses to even acknowledge the flaws in their house because they feel that if a Democrat or progressive breaks the rules, it is because their heart was in the right place but when a Republican does it they are just evil. The individual I tend to spar with on this tends to hold that viewpoint.

Just remember - Trent Dilfer is a Super Bowl champion QB.

I cant see closures of minor state schools as they are economic drivers for their cities. Wright State, YSU, Akron are all strong research schools (not Ohio State or Cincinnati level but they have strong research programs). You will likely see a pullback at some of the branch campuses but for the most part the state schools really will be fine. Look at PA and their state system. They have a ton of schools that are not research oriented, in small college towns and have much smaller student bodies than the Ohio state schools. Cleve State, Bowling Green, Toledo, etc will always have a mission and purpose and that is typically to be that school for students in the city who may not be able to travel to college or need to work and go to school at the same time. Maybe their mission changes some but they will be around for the long haul. The schools that are going to have issues and struggle are the small colleges in smaller college towns that are typically private. They cannot rely on the local population to provide enough students for the school and they need to build a lot of residence halls and other physical plant to support a transient student body. Think Ohio Northern, Wooster, Ashland, Hiram, Mt. Union, Heidelburg. These are schools that will struggle in the next 10 years to keep the lights on.

wow, lets work on the critical reading there before you fly off the handle. You completely miss the point on this. Whether she was naive or whether she was chasing headlines or just trying to rile up her base, it is a pointless proposal that 1) could never pass and 2) even if it could, is patently unconstitutional and could never be enforced. The point was that you have more serious legislators in each party who actually work to get things done with the system in place and each party has their clown legislators. She would fall into the clown legislator category with a number of other Republicans and Democrats. I know you disagree that someone on your side could fall into the clown category because in your view, its ok to do the wrong thing when you have good intentions.

Naive legislators who enjoy building their personal brand more than learning how the legislative process works come up with these types of cockeyed proposals that they have no legal authority to actually pass and enforce. You see it on both sides and it is a symptom of unserious legislators who want to get press clippings over doing real work. I do give a little leeway to a new legislator who may not know how the process works, but if the person has been there a number of years or is in their second term, it is irresponsible to make such proposals that are patently unconstitutional.

I always liked Tafts, it was a cozy beer hall and not has big of a feeling as Rheinghiest. I think it has a purpose there, but seems like whomever takes over the concept would need to invest into a cool concept. It was a great place to stop before FC games and even Reds games. It was also just a cool beer hall to drink on a Saturday afternoon. I know competition certainly has affected their success but it has a cool setup, I find it hard to think that nothing will go into that space

Carew Tower is nice, but you will never get a tax levy to save Carew Tower, just like you did not get one to save the Terrace Plaza. Union Terminal and Music Hall were public buildings, Carew is privately owned. Certainly, like other historic structures, you can give TIF or other tax credit financing to renovate them but public funding through a bond levy is not really appropriate here.

Living in reality and not getting your panties in a wad based on sensational journalism is the key to making rational decisions. You should try it.

Ok, let's play this out. Obviously, the end game would have been for Trump to remain president. It was a half baked idea that would never have worked and the majority of them really did not have a plan besides "get angry" to actually make it happen. That is really the epitome of a tantrum. Assume, they breached congress and took over the Senate chambers, then what? It's not like they could have the ability to take action and vote Trump president. You need Congress to do that. So, they control the building, Capitol police and National Guard and other peace keeping forces are brought in to restore order. The idiots get kicked out and order is restored. To have a coup, you need the military behind you and those at all levels of government to be able to take control by force. THat was never going to happen in this case. Hence, it was really a bunch of idiots rioting. Now the Trump case with the false electors is a completely separate issue, but again that was a poorly thought out plan on their part that really had no opportunity for success. That plan though was definitely a more significant and serious plan that would upend the rule of law and will of the people, but again that was still something that would not have actually had a realistic chance of succeeding. It was a clown show by a bunch of desparate people who were quick to buy into Donald Trump's vanity project.

Nothing more then venting and like most proposed legislation it does not stand a chance at passing. Also, it is purely Unconstitutional since the legislature has no authority to remove judicial review from the process. Not anything to get your panties in a wad about.

Let's actually look at the difference between "Overthrow" the government and create a riot. Did a group or rioters storm the capitol and create a lot of damage, yes, that is true. Did they chant they wanted to kick out the bums, yes. But what was actually going to be the result if they got into Congress and even caused harm to Senators?? Do you actually think that their actions (the rioters, which are separate from the Trump issue) actually could overthrow the government? From a practical standpoint, the National Guard would come in and restore order and while it would have been a further stain on things, order would have been restored, Congress would have moved forward and Joe Biden would still be president today. A coup to overthrow the government is an organized activity that is well coordinated and has a plan on how actually run the government once they get control. There was no plan in this case, just anger and buffoonery by a bunch of asshats who loved Trump. They wanted to be seen and take their anger out and they obviously were pretty stupid in their actions. Even if they were more successful in their actions, they still had no plans to take over, they did not care and just wanted to break things. This is the difference. Lets keep things in perspective here. When you talk about a government coup, this was not it. For one, I have never talked about defying the will of the people, so do not include me in that conversation. Some people may take that position, but that is a few outliers who are angry at this point. When the dust settles, things will work itself out. Will abortion be an issue in the future, yes, but it will be on the fringes. There will still be battles on when it is reasonable to have an abortion and what is viability and when parents are required to give consent for their children. You will have battles over public funding for abortions. That is where teh battle lines will be drawn and those are worthy battles to have. However, at least for the next 5-10 years the 20 week standard will be pretty much accepted.

If you boil it down, it is pretty similar. This was not some organized coup attempt. They were never going to overthrow the government. Even if they had more success, what would the end game have been. They had no plan. It was nothing more than a mass temper tantrum where Trump fanned the flames. As time goes by, certainly Trump's actions behind the scenes with trying to steal the election through his alternate slates of electors are troubling, but a few thousand idiots storming a building was a temper tantrum. They had no plans to actually overthrow the government. What were they going to do if they were successful?? They would have eventually calmed down and come to reality and then let government take over again. Trump and his enablers, they were the ones who had some complicity here and that is a bit of a different story. I think you need to separate the two of them.

So of all places, how did you end up visiting Visalia? This is not a place that craves tourists. I had a good friend move out there after law school for a job and after 8 months he could not take it anymore.

I have never said that the riot at the capitol was normal behavior. It was an embarrassment, especially for people who should know better. But let's not forget in 2016 when people rioted in the streets causing property damage and other damage when Trump won the election. And no, I do not pretend that a bunch of angry rioters in 2016 is the same level as storming the capitol but, let's also pretend that 2021 was more than a riot that had a chance to accomplish anything on the rioters end. It was really nothing more than an angry temper tantrum. It is not acceptable and should never be condoned. What I did say that if a poster on a message board, after a loss of an election vents for a few days, or the politicians that led the loss want to vent for a few days, that is normal. If it goes on longer than a week, then you can get concerned.

Never flown SPirit. Frontier is not that bad if you can sit in the first 4-5 rows and have a normal tray table.

Yes, but Ohio did not have a Constitutional Amendment that protected the right so all abortion access was guaranteed by the federal right. Now, you no longer have a federal right to abortion and up to the states at this point. But Brown's chances will depend a lot on who comes out of the primary. I think if Bernie Moreno wins, Brown will cruise to victory. LaRose will give him a very competitive race, but he may have been wounded for the next couple of years with the whole Issue 1 debacle and how much political capital he spent on it. If Dolan wins the nomination, I think he would likely be a favorite in the race over Brown and would stand a decent shot of winning. There are certainly a lot of things that would have to happen first before you even get to the abortion issue at this point.

Well, they actually do similar stuff and they act pretty similarly too but it is easy to overlook when your side won. But lets at least acknowledge that both sides should get some short window to vent. WHen you have an emotionally charged issue and people lost, you got to give them a little time to vent the frustration and come down. Many in the GOP are angry at the right wing for not offering good policy to protect life and acknowledge that there needs to be reasonable exceptions, while at the same time there are others in the the GOP who feel that there are too many squishy Republicans who were not strong enough in their convictions. Just like when the Dems lose, what you are seeing is a natural response to the loss. It will die down in a couple of weeks at most and then the more serious minds will formulate an actual policy plan. However, just like those who won like to spike the football, you also need to allow space for those who lost to vent. I Can certainly grasp the will of the voters. This is what they voted for and I respect that this is the law of the land. It makes me sad. I would hope as a people we would be better than this and yes, i believe abortion is killing a baby. You disagree, I get that, but there are a lot of people who share my opinion. THat does not make them evil, or wrong or anything. I find it to be a sad state of affairs on society, but at the same time, it is the law of the land and would need to be respected. What is scary is your rhetoric against the conservatives and those you disagree with. You like to make things black or white depending on where you stand on the issue. It is never that way. If you stop and examine both sides and other perspectives, you may at least see the other side as human as opposed to the animals you like to make them out to be. That would go a long way to bringing back civil discourse in politics.

I am glad you presume that I do nothing for the community. Like many progressives, you seem to think it is all governments responsibility and you can just vote for someone to take car of the problem for you. That is the perfect example of neglecting your responsibility as a citizen if you ask me. But if you want to know, I actively contribute money to causes that I find worthwhile and give my time at those causes too.

I would not come away from the abortion amendment that the Republicans will lose control of the statehouse or any Ohio seats from this. I think as a single issue, Ohioans have shown they favor abortion. However, when you run a race that has multiple issues involved, people make choices on things other than abortion and generally Republicans have won on the other issues in Ohio. If anything, this amendment is bad news for Sherrod Brown. He cant really run on the abortion issue and protecting abortion since it has been guaranteed in Ohio now. So those who may have voted for him solely because his stances on abortion would be less motivated to do so now since his position on the issue is moot. It is one less thing he can use to blunt a GOP opponent going forward since it is no longer a relevant issue in Ohio

People are frustrated, that is what it is. It is a shame because in the last 15 years morality in this world has been turned on its head and killing babies is somehow a good thing. It was a sad day if you ask me. That being said, They will calm down and nothing will happen. Certainly if some progressive groups try and stretch the law to the absurdity you will see pushback and new amendments to chip away at things, but then you end up with reasonable legislation in the end if people cannot police themselves.