Rando Sinclair

Ohio used to be a state where sticking to your morals (whether Dem or Republican) gave you the best shot. Not anymore. It's the college football, NASCAR, Ricky Bobby "if you not first you're last" mindset now on the right. Funny that Sherrod Brown, who has always been knocked as a liberal leftist with a Commie wife even before MAGA took over the GOP, never had to pander to the "left fringe" to win a primary in what is a becoming a political cesspool of a state. He's been running (and winning) on the same platform for about 30 years. Ironically, Brown and Trump (who all these GOP candidates are trying to emulate) somehow share a lot of the same voters. Makes no sense, other than these GOP candidates (whether reasonable or not) either have no backbone, or the majority of the GOP is now what you described as the fringe of that party.

So, you are admitting the base is a now a bunch of lunatics and in order to keep them on board, you have to pander to the lowest point possible. Makes me feel REALLY better about the "reasonable" wing of the Republican Party, smh. Quit trying to rationalize and defend this stuff. ... unless it's really what you want. If so, just admit it. Same goes for Portman, DeWine or any other "reasonable" Republican. I'll leave Kasich out because he is one of the few who kept to his "conservative" morals. Which in this day in age makes him a leftist radical RINO within that party.

The Plain Dealer (cleveland.com) has 2015 being the 10-year high for general cargo, so it wouldn't follow your hypothetical graph. Though, a graph like that with actual numbers would be nice to visulize.

You missed what I was saying. I meant between the inevitable PBS renovations, plus the cost of a new arena would be a $1 billion investment (300-500 million for PBS and 500 million for an arena that can compete with its regional peers). It's why I think Cincinnati would be better off putting all that toward doming/renovating PBS into a major event stadium. I know you can look to Kansas City as a city that built an NBA/NHL type arena on speculation (though as crazy as it sounds, I'm assuming it being now close to 15 years old would probably already need some sort of upgrades if the city were to land an NBA team ... plus, realistically the NBA is the only feasible of the two leagues as the state of Missouri already has the NHL in St. Louis, but no NBA team. Even then, I would put KC behind at least Seattle and Las Vegas as the top two expansion/relocation choices for the NBA. Plus, I think KC vs. Cincinnati is apples to oranges when it comes to the viability of building that type of arena without a marquee tenant. Kansas City is geographically isolated. The nearest cities with arenas capable of hosting the events needed to justify an 18,000-20,000 venue are St. Louis (250 miles) and Oklahoma City (300 miles). After that, you're looking at about 500 miles plus. So, KC is essentially the capital of the eastern Great Plains, so it can land enough events, based on that, to make it worthwhile. Look at the competition Cincinnati has with a comparable arena: Coumbus (110 miles), Indianapolis (110 miles), Louisville (100 miles), Cleveland (250 miles), Detroit (260 miles), Pittsburgh (290 miles). That is six metros that are as close or closer to Cincinnati than Kansas City has to its nearest competitors (St. Louis/Oklahoma City). I didn't include Chicago, which is 290 miles, because Chicago is going to be a stop on virtually any arena type tour.

Cleveland also has the Monsters, which is minor league, which is still arguably the No. 2 hockey league in the world (though from my more limited knowledge on hockey, it seems like some of the European leagues are catching up to the AHL). The Monsters have drawn between 9,000-10,000 per game in recent years, so Cleveland is just fine as an AHL market, just like Columbus, which draws well with minor league baseball, is fine as a AAA baseball market. Plus, it's not even really whether or not Cincinnati could support an NBA or NHL franchise, it's just not going to happen. I doubt either league has any interest in adding a second Ohio franchise (realistic best case Cincinnati is in the 5-10 range for expansion/relocation). And neither the Cavs nor Blue Jackets are in a position where they are on the verge of being forced to move to remain solvent. To me, it doesn't make sense to pump money into an arena that won't have a marquee tenant, when you could put the resources into an existing 60,000 seat stadium and turn it into a venue that very few markets have in order to be a player for the mega events.

MLB just rejected the Rays plan to split between Tampa and Montreal about a week ago. And yes, the Expos tried splitting between Montreal and San Juan before that was rejected and the team moved to D.C. Splitting a team is absolutely a last-ditch effort, or done out of necessity ... IE, the New Orleans Hornets/Pelicans playing/splitting in OKC in the aftermath of Katrina (which also opened the door for Clay Bennett to move the Supersonics from Seattle to his hometown of OKC once there was evidence OKC could support an NBA franchise). I just don't see any avenue available for Cincinnati to land a major winter sports franchise. The NBA is doing fine in Cleveland (haven't been lower than 15th in attendance in 20 years and usually have been top 10 even in the two post LeBron stints; and the Cavs have been top 3 for local TV ratings every years in that same timeframe). Plus, for NBA purposes, Columbus is for all intents and purposes considered a "local" market for the Cavs. The NHL is better off suited in Columbus than Cincinnati because it is closer to northern Ohio, which does have more support for hockey in general than southern Ohio). And I'm sure at least Cleveland is considered "local" for NHL purposes. Toledo, which also is a pretty big hockey area, probably leans more toward the Detroit Red Wings, though. So, going back to my post a couple of days ago, I think a retrofitted PBS with a dome is how Cincinnati can separate itself from at least its instate peers for these huge events and really the only nearby competition is Indy, Detroit and St. Louis for those. As for cost, PBS is going to have to undergo significant renovations anyway (the NFL will force that hand). So, that is already going to have to happen whether or not a new arena is built. If a new arena is built, you are looking at at least $500 million on the low end (the RMFH renovations were about $250 million and that was mainly aesthics). So, Cincinnati is looking at probably close to $1 billion regardless. Might as well put that all into PBS. Automatically missing out on would I would guess is 10 percent of arena events (which still wouldn't be a 100 percent shot to land anyway given even with a new arena every nearby metro already has one that can hold those), would easily be offset by landing some of these major indoor stadium events, that not a lot of places have the capacity to host. ... And Cincinnati is the only one in Ohio at this point where it could even be discussed. Cleveland has three major arenas/stadiums that all have received significant upgrades; no way Cleveland can build a domed stadium (at least in the next couple decades) unless it's privately financed, which won't happen. Columbus can't build a big domed stadium and Ohio State is never going to dome Ohio Stadium. That leaves Cincinnati, which still would have three decent sized arenas within 5 or so miles of downtown anyway, even if they aren't up to the level of handling major arena events, between them, are capable of handling the other 90 percent of bookings.

It seems like NuCLEus got close on a couple occasions in a couple different capacities, but this one I think has a legit shot at materializing into something huge. Remember, NuCLEus first was proposed at almost the same time that LeBron announced he was "coming home," it seems like Stark was banking off that excitement (and knowing there would be 20,000 people at the Q/RMF 50-plus days a year). Once LeBron left again, I think it killed some of the interest outside of Bensch, which correct me if I'm wrong was the only entity fully committed until the end. Common thought, for good reason, was the Cavs were only going to be successful if LeBron was there and the Guardians/Indians for legitimate reasons has a tepid fan base. It became more of a risk to jump aboard a project like that not knowing how many people would still be attending sporting events in Gateway if the Cavs went back into a decade(s) long funk and it was status quo for the Guardians/Indians. Now, the Cavs have a legitimate up-and-coming team that the core will be around for at least the next half decade and they have created a buzz that is starting to get back to what it was the LeBron years (the Milwaukee game the other week was a playoff atmosphere). On top of the foundation this Cavs team has, you also now have a sports book that will be somewhere in that vicinity (which will be a big draw, especially during big sporting events ... which from a gambling perspective is year-round) and the Guardians' new ownership can't possibly hurt since so much of the casual fans have been turned off on them for well over a decade now due to the Dolans' penny-pinching. With the expected change in ownership from the Dolans to Blitzer and Blitzer's development portfolio and ambitions for the same area, it's safe to say that his group will try to make an early splash to get the fans back on board, and also help cement some of their development interests in the area. It seems like everything is aligning at once between Cavs, sports book, Guardians ownership where the entertainment component shouldn't have too much difficulty filling up; if Bensch still wants in and the Quicken Cleveland staff moves in, that fills up a big chunk of the commercial aspect. Residential doesn't seem to be slowing downtown so shouldn't be a sticking point for groups that have deeper pockets than Stark, especially since this I'm assuming will be a TMUD applicant. We'll see, but this could make the past 8 years of waiting out what is going on with NuCLEus worth it at the end.

I think the thought process as Brutus alluded to was that a new arena is going to cost 400-500 million and PBS is probably going to "need" hundreds of millions in improvements (I put need in quotes because it's really not a need but will be forced). At that point, I think it would be doable for a renovation of PBS with a roof. Honestly, it's something I wished Cleveland would have done for the same reasons, but with the hundreds of millions that have been put into Rocket Mortgage FieldHouse and FirstEnergy in recent years, that is not going to happen unless it's fully privately funded, which isn't going to happen. Actually, Cincinnati not having an adequate arena makes it much more likely that a project like this could be feasible there if all the chips are moved toward it. And there are some definite benefits.

I think US Bank could get the first round as is. I guess I haven't paid that close attention (know Cleveland and Columbus have gotten it regularly) and assumed Cincinnati was also already in that rotation. I think the NCAA has gone to more NBA/NHL type facilities, but wasn't that long ago that Cleveland's first-round NCAA games were at the Convocation Center (with CSU technically being listed as the host school).

I may have to try to see if I can dig up the ratings by markets, but IIRC, the four years the Cavs-Warriors met in the NBA Finals, I believe the top four in overall ratings were: 1. Cleveland 2. San Francisco 3. Columbus 4. Cincinnati I specifically remember Columbus being No. 3 each year and I want to say Cincinnati was No. 4 all four years, though I believe there was a pretty big drop off from Columbus to Cincinnati.

It may not be the perfect solution, but I think this could be the most beneficial one for Cincinnati. Repurposing PBS with a roof (preferably retractable) could make the city a big-time player for major events, especially college. I could see it in the regular rotation for the men's basketball Final Four considering its central proximity to a lot of the blue blood programs that have huge fan bases. With UC going to the Big 12, I could see it getting into some sort of rotation for the Big 12 football title game (to help expand the league's footprint into Ohio). I could see the Big Ten putting its football title game there occasionally in an effort not to cede the market to the Big 12 (and Ohio State would likely push for that over Indy). Then you have these marquee season-opening games that Atlanta and Dallas have hosted. I think an annual one in Cincinnati would be a slam dunk at PBS (Notre Dame, Ohio State, Michigan I would think would be willing to do a neutral game in the north against an SEC/southern blue blood). Super Bowl may be tough, but Indy has landed it, so it's not out of the question either. I haven't followed WWE in years, but if their big events are still in the 60,000-plus indoor stadiums, would be a legit possibility. While it doesn't solve the state-of-the-art, 18,000 to 20,000 seat arena dilemma, that one is always going to be tough for Cincinnati regardless of whether the city had one or not. The NBA is not going to expand or move a team there. As was mentioned Dan Gilbert (who like him or hate him, would have a powerful voice) would block that. The NHL isn't going to move there because it's way to close to Columbus and they aren't going to split the Blue Jackets' fan base. Even the bigger concerts/comedy shows are still going to be tough because they can't go everywhere and there still will be competition with Indy, Columbus, Cleveland and Pittsburgh for those. And between the existing arena and Fifth-Third and Cintas, the city still has three venues that can fill the needs of 90 percent of the smaller events that are booked.

I agree with this and think the Dems need to just bite the bullet and not fight this and make this the 10-year map. Doing so, could make it 13-2 in 2022, but Ohio 1, Ohio 9 and Ohio 13 will be tossups, so it could be 11-4, and actually a +1 for them since that would be the GOP losing the seat the state lost. The long-game in this map looks encouraging for Dems and I think the GOP misplayed their hands if this isn't challenged. I think they fully expect this only to be a four-year map then redraw them to secure an 11-4 advantage in 2026/2028/2030. Plus, it seems like the GOP is basing these maps a lot on results of Trump year elections in 2016 and 2020. But if you look at the results in 2018 (yes, a big Dem year and it had two marquee races in governor and the Brown-Renacci U.S. Senate Race). The results from that year shows signs that while Ohio was a Trump state, it still remains a purple state. I looked up what the results of 2018 would have been if these districts were in place then (I also looked at the 2020 presidential results). Ohio 1: Sherrod Brown carried the district by more than 22,000 votes (+7) and DeWine carried the Gov. race by 4,500 (+1.5). In 2020, Biden won it by 10,000 votes (+3). Obviously, Chabot is an incumbent and will be tough to beat. But this is a district that will continue to move blue and probably would be one of the most competitive House races in the country in 2022. Maybe Chabot holds it for one more cycle, but doubt this one can stay red from 2024 and beyond. Ohio 9: Sherrod Brown carried this district by 47,000 in 2018 (+16) and Cordray carried it by 8,000 (+3). In 2020, though Trump carried it by 17,000 (+4.5). That seems like bad news for Macy Kaptur, but like Chabot, she is an incumbent. Plus, I wouldn't underestimate her support in what the GOP thinks are now solid red counties of Ottawa, Sandusky and Erie. However, those are areas that Kaptur is a known commodity and counties that supported Brown in 2018 (well, Sandusky was essentially 50/50 but Ottawa and Erie were blue). This will be another very competitive race, but take Trump out of the equation, and I don't think Kaptur is in danger in 2022. The map is a lot less favorable, but she still won the snake on the lake by +26 in a Trump year in 2020. Then, lets remember that 2024 is setting up to be a doozy. Sherrod Brown will be up for re-election and there is a possibility Trump is on the GOP ticket again (those are the two most popular politicians in Ohio and both have support from blue collar whites, which make up a big chunk of this district). If that happens, I could see a lot of Trump/Brown/Kaptur votes out of this district. Ohio 13: Brown carried this district by 43,000 in 2018 (+14) and Cordray carried it by 12,500 (+4). Trump and Biden essentially split in 2020 with Biden winning by 2,200 (+0.5). Dems have to really like there chances here because like Ohio 1, the demographics will continue to get more blue. And unlike Ohio 1, there isn't an incumbent in the race. The issue may be finding a candidate who can get the support from both the city of Akron and the suburban Cleveland suburbs. I think that is what the GOP is banking on here in that Akron voters won't show up to support a suburban Cleveland candidate and suburban Cleveland voters won't show up for a city of Akron candidate. But this is a district that realistically is a lean Dem district in 2022 and should continue to shift safer Dem as the decade progresses. Not sure all could go blue by 2022, but all seem very realistic by 2024, which would make the overall split 10-5, even if nothing else changes. Now, a +3 change for Dems compared to the current make-up. Then you have a couple more districts that you have to closely monitor. Ohio 10: Brown carried it by 21,000 in 2018 (+7) and DeWine carried it by 18,000 (+6). I didn't look up the Clark County portion in 2020, but just between Montgomery and Greene, Trump carried it by 11,000 (+3). I don't think Clark would have changed it too much since that portion includes the city of Springfield. Mike Turner, as an incumbent, doesn't have much to worry about in 2022 or even 2024, but this is one that could very much be in play by 2026 if demographics take their course. Montgomery should continue to trend more blue and the demographics of Greene don't look promising for the GOP to offset it there. Ohio 14: Brown carried it by 18,500 in 2018 (+6) and DeWine carried it by 19,000 (+7). Trump carried it by 48,000 (+12) in 2020. This is another one that is safe for incumbent Dave Joyce for 2022 and 2024, but adding Parma/Parma Heights to this district is a big risk for Republicans. Alone, those cities make up about 13 percent of the district and while that area took a big swing toward Trump, they aren't areas that I would consider solid GOP yet, especially since the demographics there are changing faster than any of the west side Cleveland suburbs (old blue collar whites dying/moving away and being replaced by blacks and especially Puerto Ricans in pretty big numbers). Like Ohio 10, this is one that could look very good toward the end of the decade for Dems. I didn't even try to add up Ohio 15 since that one would take forever to try to figure out which places in Franklin County are there and which ones are in Ohio 3. But indications are that it profiles similar to Ohio 10 and Ohio 14. Just flipping one could make it a 9-6, which is the best Dems could have hoped for (and never were going to get now anyway). Flip two and you are looking at the state basically mirroring how it should go. Plus, there are two others, that I'll throw out (though don't see either being realistic, but you don't know what the situation will be like 6-plus years from now. Ohio 6: Brown carried it by 10,000 in 2018 (+4) and DeWine carried it by 26,000 (+10). Trump carried it by 93,000 in 2020 (+24). The Trump numbers make this one appear a foregone conclusion. But Trumbull and Mahoning counties make up more than 50 percent of the district and like Parma/Parma Heights it may be too early to put them in solid red territory. It's a longshot, but if the Dems can find a Joe Manchin type, it could put it in play. Ohio 5: Renacci carried it by 10,000 in 2018 (+4) and DeWine carried it by 53,500 (+18). In 2020, Trump carried it by 102,000 (+24). This is a stretch, but Lorain County up until 2020 was reliably Blue and usually by a significant margin. Trump did flip it though and won by 4,000 there in 2020. But the fact that northern Lorain County makes up almost 1/3 of the district's population (and less than 5 percent of the land area) at least makes it one to monitor. Especially since Lorain County is growing pretty quickly and the rest of the district contains rural counties that mostly are losing population at a pretty big rate. If Lorain County can get to 40 percent of the population within the district and returns to its +15 to +20 blue rate, it could make things interesting way down the line. This is long, but hopefully somewhat informative. IMO, if I had any say in the Dem party, I would just take this map and then use the next couple of years building up a pool of candidates that could really compete in four years. The GOP is playing with some pretty thin margins in a lot of these races (which is a breathe of fresh air overall because the last decade has been a joke ... you didn't even need an election to know who was winning any of the 16 races). You do that and not only does the national GOP have to start putting money into these races, but the national Dem party will also start putting money in a lot of these races. As much as putting money in races can be seen as candidates being "bought" seats, the reality is money being put into a race also means an incumbent is not comfortable and knows my seat isn't a given. On that front, while a foreign concept currently in Ohio, seeing some competitive races would not be a bad thing for the state, regardless of "which side" ends up winning.

Not the sharpest, but here are a couple I took yesterday from Metro on a dreary day. The real narrow one is from the 7th floor (and I tried, and think I got, both the tower cranes from Church and State (far left??) and Lumen). The one with the houses in the foreground is from the 11th floor.

First time poster, longtime lurker. I was thinking along the lines of Pilot Flying J, but to be bigger than Progressive, maybe it involves a merger/acquisition between it and Travel Centers of America, which is based in Westlake, with the new headquarters being located downtown. The current Pilot Flying J headquarters could remain in Knoxville in a regional capacity. I doubt Haslam, who is too invested in Tennessee, especially politically, would abandon the state. A merger between the two would put it on par, revenue wise, as Progressive. Also, there is talk of cultural institutions being involved. Could Cleveland Clinic's $260 million gift it received play a role in this? https://www.cleveland.com/business/2019/11/cleveland-clinic-receives-the-largest-gift-in-its-history-from-the-lord-foundation-of-ohio.html