Yeah, that is. You guys are starting to sound like crybabies and sore losers because you aren't getting the streetcar or rail. Get over it, another 3.5 years and he is gone most likely.

 

Political dissent, bro.  Welcome to America.  Speaking out against sitting politicians does not make you a "crybaby" or a "sore loser".  I suppose you think exercising your 5th Amendment right would make you a wussy?

 

No, believing that you can strongarm the will of the people - who voted him in on a MAJORITY plurality vote, by using bullsh!t recalls is doing nothing but resorting to the lowest form of trickery to achieve your personal ambitions and beliefs. I expect this sort of stuff from conservatives, because it's been mentioned before (e.g. think the 2000 Bush-Gore election mishap), but from liberals?

Yeah, that is. You guys are starting to sound like crybabies and sore losers because you aren't getting the streetcar or rail. Get over it, another 3.5 years and he is gone most likely.

 

Political dissent, bro.  Welcome to America.  Speaking out against sitting politicians does not make you a "crybaby" or a "sore loser".  I suppose you think exercising your 5th Amendment right would make you a wussy?

 

No, believing that you can strongarm the will of the people - who voted him in on a MAJORITY vote, by using bullshit recalls is doing nothing but resorting to the lowest form of trickery to achieve your personal ambitions and beliefs. I expect this sort of stuff from conservatives, because it's been mentioned before (e.g. think the 2000 Bush-Gore election mishap), but from liberals?

 

Kasich did not win a majority. He got 49.4% of the people who showed up to vote. He won a plurality... by 2.7%

Yeah, that is. You guys are starting to sound like crybabies and sore losers because you aren't getting the streetcar or rail. Get over it, another 3.5 years and he is gone most likely.

 

Political dissent, bro.  Welcome to America.  Speaking out against sitting politicians does not make you a "crybaby" or a "sore loser".  I suppose you think exercising your 5th Amendment right would make you a wussy?

 

No, believing that you can strongarm the will of the people - who voted him in on a MAJORITY vote, by using bullsh!t recalls is doing nothing but resorting to the lowest form of trickery to achieve your personal ambitions and beliefs. I expect this sort of stuff from conservatives, because it's been mentioned before (e.g. think the 2000 Bush-Gore election mishap), but from liberals?

 

See my post upthread.  I personally don't support a recall and wouldn't vote for one if it could even be held.  But there should be a process, so long as simple majority is insufficient to complete that process.  If, say, 2/3 of Ohio electors want him gone (for whatever reason), they should have recourse.  JMO.  There should be a process for doing just about anything in this Country.  It's not like that 'plurality' of electors who actually decided to vote in this mid-term election would not get a chance to block his recall.  There just has to be a point where the people he represents can say that they don't want him representing them anymore.

Yeah, that is. You guys are starting to sound like crybabies and sore losers because you aren't getting the streetcar or rail. Get over it, another 3.5 years and he is gone most likely.

 

Political dissent, bro.  Welcome to America.  Speaking out against sitting politicians does not make you a "crybaby" or a "sore loser".  I suppose you think exercising your 5th Amendment right would make you a wussy?

 

No, believing that you can strongarm the will of the people - who voted him in on a MAJORITY plurality vote, by using bullsh!t recalls is doing nothing but resorting to the lowest form of trickery to achieve your personal ambitions and beliefs. I expect this sort of stuff from conservatives, because it's been mentioned before (e.g. think the 2000 Bush-Gore election mishap), but from liberals?

 

My suggestion is tongue-in-cheek, but I don't think it's illegal. Also, it's not impeachment, nor a recall, but something much more absurd and fitting of the way Kasich looks at laws and governance.

No, you can't make a law that applies only to one dude.  A simple recall provision would suffice, but it should be limited to actual corruption or criminality.  Having an affair?  No.  Making policy decisions, however unpopular?  No.  Hate to say it but an electorate that chooses a one-party state government, including the judiciary, deserves whatever it gets.  Hopefully the same mistakes won't happen again, and it takes a whole series of mistakes to get to this point. 

^^I think there is a process: elections. If the people aren't happy with Kasich, and they clearly are not (his support for his policies has greatly waned), then he'll get booted out at the end of his term. I don't see why there should be a process to nullify the election process, when it has been clearly established since statehood that this is the method used to elect and eventually evict people from office.

 

Agreeing with what others have said, what did you expect from Kasich? He hasn't lied: he's done exactly what he has set out to do, and made campaign promises to do just that. No surprises, just a lot of jackassery and actions that clearly a lot of people disagree with him on (including myself). I wish we had more governors like him - bold and rather abrupt, but most Democrats are pretty weak, IMO.

I guess I wasn't clear enough.  There should be a "mid-term" process.  Not a re-run of the election, but some process which could express the clear and unequivocal will of the people, if such a will truly exists.  Let's delve back into the public v. private sector debate, since it has been coming in so handy for me these past few weeks..... CEO's, managers, directors, etc. can all be fired.  Why do you want Kasich to have some kind of immunity which his.... ummmmmm..... private sector "counterparts" do not?

I guess I wasn't clear enough.  There should be a "mid-term" process.  Not a re-run of the election, but some process which could express the clear and unequivocal will of the people, if such a will truly exists.  Let's delve back into the public v. private sector debate, since it has been coming in so handy for me these past few weeks..... CEO's, managers, directors, etc. can all be fired.  Why do you want Kasich to have some kind of immunity which his.... ummmmmm..... private sector "counterparts" do not?

 

Because you don't even know if the decisions he has made is bad for the state.  Maybe two years from now, we will begin to see the benfits from the decisions that he has made.  If a new CEO steps in to run a company, and lays off 250 of it's employees, he/she is not going to get fired for that.  Now, if productivity goes way down, and they can no longer can fullfill their contract obligations for costomers, and they begin to lose customers, then they probably will get fired.  Or, they may turn the company around do to the tough decisions they had to make.  You can't just start canning people before you see the results of the decisions made. 

Once AGAIN, I (as in me, myself and I) am not advocating for 'canning' Kasich, or whatever you want to call it.  But I just can't agree with the system being designed so that Kasich (or any elected official) is immune from recall regardless of how unpopular he becomes with those he represents.  AGAIN, I am just speaking theoretically here.  I (HTS121) am willing to let the chips fall where they may with his policies.

Once AGAIN, I (as in me, myself and I) am not advocating for 'canning' Kasich, or whatever you want to call it.  But I just can't agree with the system being designed so that Kasich (or any elected official) is immune from recall regardless of how unpopular he becomes with those he represents.  AGAIN, I am just speaking theoretically here.  I (HTS121) am willing to let the chips fall where they may with his policies.

 

Well you really don't make it sound like that when asking "Why should he have some kind of immunity unlike his private sector counterparts".  Then you say you are willing you are "willing to let the chips fall with his policies".  Those statements coming from the same person are completely contradictory.

Yeah, that is. You guys are starting to sound like crybabies and sore losers because you aren't getting the streetcar or rail. Get over it, another 3.5 years and he is gone most likely.

 

How is that [amending the Ohio Constitution to prohibit Kasich from being governor] illegal, Sherman?  Do you have a cite?

There won't be a recall provision.  The "mid-term review" will be the 2012 elections for the Ohio House and half the Senate.  That's where dissatisfaction will be expressed (if it is). 

Yeah, that is. You guys are starting to sound like crybabies and sore losers because you aren't getting the streetcar or rail. Get over it, another 3.5 years and he is gone most likely.

 

How is that [amending the Ohio Constitution to prohibit Kasich from being governor] illegal, Sherman?  Do you have a cite?

 

And to be clear, I ask this because if it's a constitutional amendment, it would clearly supersede all previous state laws and constitutional provisions, and I am racking my brain for a federal constitutional provision it would conflict with.

 

Of course it would never happen in reality, but I am wondering where you are coming from in saying it would be "illegal." 

Yeah, that is. You guys are starting to sound like crybabies and sore losers because you aren't getting the streetcar or rail. Get over it, another 3.5 years and he is gone most likely.

 

How is that [amending the Ohio Constitution to prohibit Kasich from being governor] illegal, Sherman?  Do you have a cite?

 

No, I referred to the amendment that was designed to exclude funding for the Cincinnati streetcar, not to prohibit Kasich from being governor.

Yeah, that is. You guys are starting to sound like crybabies and sore losers because you aren't getting the streetcar or rail. Get over it, another 3.5 years and he is gone most likely.

 

How is that [amending the Ohio Constitution to prohibit Kasich from being governor] illegal, Sherman?  Do you have a cite?

 

No, I referred to the amendment that was designed to exclude funding for the Cincinnati streetcar, not to prohibit Kasich from being governor.

 

Huh? I took it the same way as jdm00.

 

Read the three posts starting here:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,24703.msg553791.html#msg553791

Sorry, that wasn't what I was meaning. I mean, I am not in favor of any process to get rid of Kasich early sans something that he has done that is illegal and impeachable under our current statues and laws, so I wouldn't be in favor of amending the constitution to prohibit him from being governor now or to prohibit him from running again. I may have misquoted something above.

There won't be a recall provision.  The "mid-term review" will be the 2012 elections for the Ohio House and half the Senate.  That's where dissatisfaction will be expressed (if it is). 

 

And by then, the SB 5 referendum will be well underway with heavy political campaigning on both sides.

Once AGAIN, I (as in me, myself and I) am not advocating for 'canning' Kasich, or whatever you want to call it.  But I just can't agree with the system being designed so that Kasich (or any elected official) is immune from recall regardless of how unpopular he becomes with those he represents.  AGAIN, I am just speaking theoretically here.  I (HTS121) am willing to let the chips fall where they may with his policies.

 

Well you really don't make it sound like that when asking "Why should he have some kind of immunity unlike his private sector counterparts".  Then you say you are willing you are "willing to let the chips fall with his policies".  Those statements coming from the same person are completely contradictory.

 

Well, let me try to help you out then:

 

1. I don't personally support a recall of Kasich

2. I support there being a process for recall of elected officials in Ohio

 

That's what I believe and there is nothing contradictory about that.  It would be the same as me saying:

 

1. I didn't personally support Kasich for Governor

2. I supported there being a process for an a-hole like Kasich being elected as governor.

 

Nothing contradictory in that either.

Yeah, that is. You guys are starting to sound like crybabies and sore losers because you aren't getting the streetcar or rail. Get over it, another 3.5 years and he is gone most likely.

 

How is that [amending the Ohio Constitution to prohibit Kasich from being governor] illegal, Sherman?  Do you have a cite?

 

No, I referred to the amendment that was designed to exclude funding for the Cincinnati streetcar, not to prohibit Kasich from being governor.

 

Huh? I took it the same way as jdm00.

 

Yeah, double huh?

 

natininja: Neither is it illegal to amend the constitution to block him from holding office.

 

Sherman: Yeah, that is.

 

Not sure there's more than one way to interpret that exchange.

Sorry, that wasn't what I was meaning. I mean, I am not in favor of any process to get rid of Kasich early sans something that he has done that is illegal and impeachable under our current statues and laws, so I wouldn't be in favor of amending the constitution to prohibit him from being governor now or to prohibit him from running again. I may have misquoted something above.

 

That's fine.  Thanks for clarifying. 

Do you guys think this petition effort to recall Kasich will be successful in the end?

No.  It is not a petition effort, either, to my knowledge.  It is symbollic at best..... a phantom puch of sorts.  If you want to strip Kasich of his powers, work towards swinging at least one branch of our government away from his party.  Fact is, the governor's office, the house, the senate, and the supreme court are all dominated by his fellow republicans.  Such a governmental make-up does very little to make him want to abandon his "my way or the highway" (no pun intended) approach.  Some balance would be a welcome sight.

No.  It is not a petition effort, either, to my knowledge.  It is symbollic at best..... a phantom puch of sorts.  If you want to strip Kasich of his powers, work towards swinging at least one branch of our government away from his party.  Fact is, the governor's office, the house, the senate, and the supreme court are all dominated by his fellow republicans.  Such a governmental make-up does very little to make him want to abandon his "my way or the highway" (no pun intended) approach.  Some balance would be a welcome sight.

 

I misread an earlier article.  Ya the bill has no chance of getting through the state congress.  But is this  “fall back option to write the power of recall into the Ohio Constitution by collecting almost 400,000 signatures of registered voters" a plausible reality?

 

 

Plausible?  Sure.  Unfortunately, all you need is a simple majority of those who show up at the polls in any given election to amend our State Constitution.  It is how we somehow, someway perverted our Constitution by including a negative right - i.e. the ban on gay marriage - a few years back in this document which is supposed to grant our individual liberties, not deny them.

 

All that said, if you wanted to create a recall process in Ohio, a constitutional amendment is the way to go.  Perhaps the only way.  I don't have a problem with that, even if I think it should be much more difficult to amend the constitution than what it takes.

Every twenty years, there is a process where the Ohio Constitution is opened up for changes.

I describe it as a recurring "constitutional convention". 

Every twenty years, there is a process where the Ohio Constitution is opened up for changes.

I describe it as a recurring "constitutional convention". 

 

When is the next one due?

Every twenty years, there is a process where the Ohio Constitution is opened up for changes.

I describe it as a recurring "constitutional convention". 

If the political momentum was swinging in the opposite direction of you lean at the time of said convention, you might be in for 20 years of hurt.

Every twenty years, there is a process where the Ohio Constitution is opened up for changes.

I describe it as a recurring "constitutional convention". 

 

When is the next one due?

 

Based on the dates of the other conventions that have been called (1851, 1873, and 1912) I would say some time in the 2011-2013 range.

 

He's all over the map. I know he's no fan of Cleveland (even though its the largest economy in the state), but now he's threatening to derail the Casino before it ever starts--by adding new taxes to the casino--that even violates his republican beliefs about low taxes creating jobs. He has to be removed before before the state is in shambles.

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/04/unsettled_tax_and_fee_issues_c.html#incart_hbx

The main reason I would support a recall of Kasich (if Ohio allowed it) is his approaches, more than his policies (as bad as they are). He does not play by the rules. He tries to change rules arbitrarily to fit his whims -- and I do call them whims, because I don't think he has any defined, consistent vision for the state. The casino stuff is just one example this week. I don't like casinos as an economic strategy, and I voted against the amendment, and I think it was horrible to use the constitution to address such a specific and bad proposal. But support for the casino amendment was the will of the people. Kasich thinks his will is more important. Another one this week was the Cincinnati streetcar. Kasich's irrational hatred of rail led him to disregard the process designed to take politics out of major transportation funding decisions. No matter how you look at it, what happened this week clearly brought politics to the forefront of these decisions.

^ These things are not impeachable offenses. They are not moral scandals. They are just wrong and unfair exercises of arrogance that go beyond mere disagreement with policy. These seem to me to be precisely the kinds of infractions that make recall an option in some states.

The guy is clueless... But, I highly recommend reading the comment section!

 

 

Kasich: We have to make Ohio ‘cool’

2:19 pm, Apr 13, 2011 | Written by cweiser

 

 

Gov.  John Kasich says he wants to make Ohio “cool” for young people – like Austin or Raleigh.

 

So? What are your ideas? How do we make Ohio cool? (And yes I know someone will offer: get rid of Gov. Kasich.)

Those comments are awesome.

And spot on.

Wow

Can this guy be a bigger dope....Raleigh is cool?  Sure, in his old white man (by the way, this is me) suburban Republican mind.  He is out to destroy this state and he doesn't even know it.

Can this guy be a bigger dope....Raleigh is cool?

 

My thoughts exactly.  He probably thinks Dublin is cool and wishes more of Ohio could be like that.

Well that link is going on my FB page tonight....I loved the guy who said "get out of the way" three times when listing what Kasich could do.

Some of the best comments I've ever seen at cincinnati.com

That comment section is awesome. I know every recent college grad i talk to says "i wish there were more strip malls and more Olive Gardens around here." and "I think this place could use fewer sidewalks and be much more spread out...and when are they going to do something about the Death Tax?"

 

Yep, those are the things that will attract twenty somethings.

 

 

Kasich wouldn't know cool if he was naked at the North Pole

That comment section was some seriously uplifting reading.  For a long time I thought I merely disagreed with Kasich, but now I'm starting to think he's just profoundly out of touch with a lot of things.

Maybe he should walk or take transit to Short North, just a stone throw north from his office, and see "cool."

He wants to make agriculture "cool" too

 

Kasich charges department with making ag “cool” again

 

http://ohiocornandwheat.org/kasich-charges-department-with-making-ag-fun-again/

We're &%$^ed!

Good grief! Kasich wants to make agriculture cool?!!?? Agriculture already is cool. Look at urban farming. Look at farmers markets. Look at innovative producers and processors like those who market milk from Snowville Creamery and Hartzler Family Dairy. Look at all the local cheesemakers around the state.

 

But the Kasich administration already has eliminated the agriculture department's office of Sustainability Coordinator and the Food Policy Advisory Council, which was charged with promoting local food around the state. Local food just isn't on the state's ag agenda any more.

This reminds of the scene from Seinfeld where George Costanza vows to do the opposite of everything he's ever done in the past...

 

"Every decision I've ever made in my entire life has been wrong. My life is the complete opposite of what I want it to be. Every instinct I've had in every aspect of life - be it something to wear, something to eat - it's all been wrong, every one!"

 

Dutchman,

 

The opposite effect would do wonders

 

Just yesterday I was at McDonalds and two mules were arguing over state politics.  One got up and angrily left - proclaiming loud enough for all to hear:

 

"You're as stubborn as a Kasich"

Guys this is not funny. Im so upset right now.

Gov.  John Kasich says he wants to make Ohio “cool” for young people – like Austin or Raleigh.

 

 

At least Austin has a new 32-mile commuter rail service plus daily Amtrak service to Houston, Dallas, Chicago and Los Angeles, and Raleigh has six state-sponsored passenger trains daily to/from Charlotte, plus other daily trains to the Northeast Corridor and Florida.

 

Austin....

 

 

Raleigh....

 

 

Columbus....

 

 

Yes, Columbus is the nation's most populous metro area without any passenger rail transportation. And John's response is......