NPR is airing a debate between Mandel and Brown.  The audience seems to be about 50-50 and is very lively.  The candidates are taking questions from the crowd.  But the Mandel supporters are really trying (intentionally or not) to turn this into a campaign talking points match, avoiding any real substance.  Brown is spending his time answering idiotic, falsely premised Mandel ad claims being regurgitated by the Madel supporters in the audience.  What a shame.  What has happened to our democracy?  On top of that, the moderator has to keep reminding Joshy to answer the f'in question asked.

As someone who lives in what was Mandel's House district, I find him to be one of the phoniest politicians I've ever witnessed. Before he was elected to Columbus, he ran on a bi-partisan moderate, change Columbus platform. Then he got there and voted with the Repubs. 98% of the time. On top of that, he accomplished nothing. He only had one bill signed into law and introduced a handful in total. If jobs are so important to Mr. Mandel, why did he not introduce any bills to create them in Columbus? Why did he never compromise on anything and show bi-partisanship? And for that matter, why is it he never runs on his record as a State Rep? Maybe its because his record is awful.

 

The only reason Mandel won as treasurer and is somewhat popular in the Cuyahoga burbs is his last name. Give him a more generic name and he'd have a much harder time of winning anything with his record. For the record, I see much fewer Mandel signs in my neighborhood than I have in the past. Perhaps people around here have finally looked at his empty record and see that his rhetoric doesn't match his past.

^^ It went both ways. Brown had his share of avoiding questions too. Unfortunately for Mandel, he looked like a complete fool in half of the questions. He had one line about tuition going up, gas going up, healthcare costs going up, etc that he used in at least three of the responses. Essentially if he couldn't answer the question he had one response to counter. He seemed stuck on saying every word out of Brown's mouth was "Washington Speak".

 

Also, Mandel got booed to his rebuttal once. I don't believe Brown got booed. Mandel's failed joke at the beginning was kinda funny too. Overall Mandel looked in over his head during this debate.

 

(^You posted exactly one second before me.... :whip: )

^I was only able to catch about 30 mins of it on the radio when leaving my last appt, so maybe I just caught it at a bad time for Mandel and a good time for Brown.  I just couldn't believe the questions.  Did no one pre-screen these morons?  They sounded something like - "Senator Brown, you are a POS who spits on the American flag every morning, can you please explain how you live with yourself?"......... or "Senator Brown [fill in long monologue of *facts* you learned from Glen Beck this morning], can you tell the people of Ohio why you did that?"  I was embarrassed for the candidates and our state.

Ahahaha, sounds like a zoo.

This was one of the folks who just went on a tirade against Brown for a solid minute before asking his question. It was about the "war on coal". There was a really awkward moment where the guy with the microphone wouldn't let go and the person asking the question grabbed the microphone and pulled it in front of him. The moderator had to tell him to ask the question and stop preaching about four times before he finally did.

 

^ and it reminded me of this (first 30 seconds or so):

 

This was one of the folks who just went on a tirade against Brown for a solid minute before asking his question. It was about the "war on coal". There was a really awkward moment where the guy with the microphone wouldn't let go and the person asking the question grabbed the microphone and pulled it in front of him. The moderator had to tell him to ask the question and stop preaching about four times before he finally did.

 

Then Senator Brown sussed him as a member of Mandel's campaign staff. 

Sherrod Brown looked quite composed and in his element in that debate.  Well done.

The only reason Mandel won as treasurer and is somewhat popular in the Cuyahoga burbs is his last name.

 

I think it has more to do with the fact that 2010 was a big year for the 'Pubs nationally and he rode that wave.  A monkey could have won a statewide election in Ohio in 2010 if he had an "®" after his name.

Fact. People thought that would turn America back to 1962 or 1997. And the Dems are going to clean up this year because it didn't happen. Then in '14 the elephants win because it's still not '62. The realization that the end of American Exceptionalism has happened is the cause of all this political turmoil.

The SSE suburbs are full of Mandel signs, and not just in the traditionally Jewish areas either.  I've seen a lot in Walton Hills, Northfield, and Sagamore Hills. 

 

I work in Willoughby and have seen a few up here too.

 

My predicition is Josh will run three to five points behind Romney in Ohio.  If Mitt surges, Josh could get into office on his coattails.

The SSE suburbs are full of Mandel signs, and not just in the traditionally Jewish areas either.  I've seen a lot in Walton Hills, Northfield, and Sagamore Hills. 

 

I work in Willoughby and have seen a few up here too.

 

My predicition is Josh will run three to five points behind Romney in Ohio.  If Mitt surges, Josh could get into office on his coattails.

 

I was driving through the Chagrin Valley yesterday (Solon, Moreland Hills, Orange, etc.) and I saw a significant amount of signs for Mandel.  He may be a terrible candidate, but the wealthy folks at least that will benefit from having him in Washington seem to be circling the wagons a bit.

 

I agree with your analysis, this will be a closer election than the polls from a week ago indicated, but I still see Brown winning by a few points.

Mandel has invested heavily in signs

Mandel has invested heavily in signs

 

After the election's over he can collect them, paint over the word "Senate," and re-use them for whatever office he runs for next. 

If Romney wins, Mandel still might get in if Portman takes a cabinet position. Though I haven't seen Kasich really push Mandel. Or Romney for that matter.

If Romney wins, Mandel still might get in if Portman takes a cabinet position. Though I haven't seen Kasich really push Mandel. Or Romney for that matter.

 

I don't expect him to do a lot for Josh. 

 

He'll step in for Mitt a little closer to election day, for three reasons:

 

1)  Obama is trying to take credit for Ohio's economic improvements, and he believes he deserves most of the credit.

 

2)  Mandel's chances are directly tied to Romney surging in Ohio.

 

3) Obama campaigned for Strickland (never mind that this backfired).

The SSE suburbs are full of Mandel signs, and not just in the traditionally Jewish areas either.  I've seen a lot in Walton Hills, Northfield, and Sagamore Hills. 

 

I work in Willoughby and have seen a few up here too.

 

My predicition is Josh will run three to five points behind Romney in Ohio.  If Mitt surges, Josh could get into office on his coattails.

 

I was driving through the Chagrin Valley yesterday (Solon, Moreland Hills, Orange, etc.) and I saw a significant amount of signs for Mandel.  He may be a terrible candidate, but the wealthy folks at least that will benefit from having him in Washington seem to be circling the wagons a bit.

 

I agree with your analysis, this will be a closer election than the polls from a week ago indicated, but I still see Brown winning by a few points.

 

Really?  The people I know think he's an idiot and would do more harm, for (NE) Ohio, than good in Washington.

^

 

At the end of the day, Ohio is a purple state, it's a toss-up year, and he's the Republican candidate.  Those facts alone dictate that he's going to almost automatically have ~45% of the vote. 

 

As for your anecdote, please don't take this the wrong way, but it reminds me of a fictional story I once heard that I recall goes like this: In 1984 there was a woman from Manhattan that said that she was shocked that Reagan won re-election because everyone she knew voted for Mondale.

^

 

At the end of the day, Ohio is a purple state, it's a toss-up year, and he's the Republican candidate.  Those facts alone dictate that he's going to almost automatically have ~45% of the vote. 

 

As for your anecdote, please don't take this the wrong way, but it reminds me of a fictional story I once heard that I recall goes like this: In 1984 there was a woman from Manhattan that said that she was shocked that Reagan won re-election because everyone she knew voted for Mondale.

 

I don't think 45%.  Also, when it comes to topics like this I relate person facts instead of a gross generalization.

^

 

At the end of the day, Ohio is a purple state, it's a toss-up year, and he's the Republican candidate.  Those facts alone dictate that he's going to almost automatically have ~45% of the vote. 

 

As for your anecdote, please don't take this the wrong way, but it reminds me of a fictional story I once heard that I recall goes like this: In 1984 there was a woman from Manhattan that said that she was shocked that Reagan won re-election because everyone she knew voted for Mondale.

 

I don't think 45%.  Also, when it comes to topics like this I relate person facts instead of a gross generalization.

 

I'm not sure what you mean...your informal polling data is biased by the people with whom you associate in your everyday life.  That was the point of the story.  Mandel is going to get a lot of votes and I think it's going to be close.  He probably won't win, but I don't see this being a landslide, either.

47% will vote for Mandel no matter what because they are dependent on government and he will supply them with free phones.

Sarcasm?

Cross post with the presidential race:

 

Somewhat lost in today's NYTimes given the hurricane coverage, Roger Cohen's column focuses on Jewish voters in Cuyahoga County: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/opinion/global/the-jews-of-cuyahoga-county.html?ref=opinion&_r=0

 

Cross post with the presidential race:

 

Somewhat lost in today's NYTimes given the hurricane coverage, Roger Cohen's column focuses on Jewish voters in Cuyahoga County: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/opinion/global/the-jews-of-cuyahoga-county.html?ref=opinion&_r=0

 

 

Interesting to say the least.  Mandel may have swayed some Jews to his side due to certain loyalty considerations, but I'm not sure it's really that far-reaching or long-lasting.  More like a one-time situation and something that may not even carry over to other Republicans in this election.  Judaism has a deep humanistic tradition, one that in a lot of ways is at odds with a large chunk of the Republican platform, and one that, for the moment, transcends blind, unquestioning support for Israel.

Cross post with the presidential race:

 

Somewhat lost in today's NYTimes given the hurricane coverage, Roger Cohen's column focuses on Jewish voters in Cuyahoga County: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/opinion/global/the-jews-of-cuyahoga-county.html?ref=opinion&_r=0

 

 

Interesting to say the least.  Mandel may have swayed some Jews to his side due to certain loyalty considerations, but I'm not sure it's really that far-reaching or long-lasting.  More like a one-time situation and something that may not even carry over to other Republicans in this election.  Judaism has a deep humanistic tradition, one that in a lot of ways is at odds with a large chunk of the Republican platform, and one that, for the moment, transcends blind, unquestioning support for Israel.

 

Yeah, I used to think Josh was going to run three to four points behind Romney as no one would vote for him that didn't go for the latter.  But that's not true, from what I've heard.  A lot of people are voting for "Bruce and Rita's son".  Also, the Ratners are quietly backing him  It doesn't make any of them more or less likely to vote for Romney.

 

There is an increasing tendency to vote for Romney in the Jewish community, but it's a result of influences from Florida and Israel, and is strictly a vote against what is seen as Obama's antipathy for Israel.

I love how there are two possible views on Israel:

 

blind, unquestioning support for Israel.

 

or

 

antipathy for Israel.

I love how there are two possible views on Israel:

 

blind, unquestioning support for Israel.

 

or

 

antipathy for Israel.

 

It's simple. You're either for or against. We're simple people. We cannot handle anything even remotely thoughtful on the subject.

I love how there are two possible views on Israel:

 

blind, unquestioning support for Israel.

 

or

 

antipathy for Israel.

 

That's how you frame it in order to manipulate people. Nothing against either poster -- that really is how Israel is framed in this country.

Honestly, I don't see how a vote for or against Mandel can be seen as much more than a referendum on Brown.  I know that's perhaps as simplistic as the above false dichotomy of unquestioning support or antipathy for Israel, but I think that it may well be nearly that simple.

 

I know that Israel had nothing to do with my vote.  I know that Brown is an ardent Keynesian and ardent protectionist.  Therefore, I will basically always vote for his opponent.  Others who favor Keynesian fiscal policies and protectionist regulatory policies are going to vote for Brown; they can reasonably assume without ever even visiting Mandel's Web site that he will oppose such policies, or at the very least, not be as gung-ho in favor of them as Brown.

Mandel and I have some mutual acquaintneces.  It is not at all clear where he would stand on any given issue.  He may be a lot more socially liberal than anyone expects.  A lot more.  Then again, he may not.

I tend to vote against pathological lying sociopaths like Mandel but it looks like he's going down anyway.

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2012/10/31/new-poll-shows-brown-with-strong-lead.html

There is an increasing tendency to vote for Romney in the Jewish community, but it's a result of influences from Florida and Israel, and is strictly a vote against what is seen as Obama's antipathy for Israel.[/color]

Only on Bulls hit Mountain.  President Obama is polling better  in the Jewish community than he did in 2008.  You're not Jewish, are you?  Are you claiming to speak for them?

 

edit: in the Jewish community

There is an increasing tendency to vote for Romney in the Jewish community, but it's a result of influences from Florida and Israel, and is strictly a vote against what is seen as Obama's antipathy for Israel.[/color]

Only on Bulls hit Mountain.  President Obama is polling better than he did in 2008.  You're not Jewish, are you?  Are you claiming to speak for them?

Which does not make sense.  How many people do you know or know of that didn't support Obama in '08 are supporting him this year?  How many the other way around?

Josh Mandel's lack of in-law support from Ratner side shows up in Cleveland Jewish Newsletter

 

http://www.cleveland.com/tipoff/index.ssf/2012/11/josh_mandels_lack_of_in-law_su.html

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Josh Mandel married into the Ratner family when he wed Ilana Shafran Mandel four years ago. She’s the granddaughter of one of nine Ratner siblings. A number of relatives are closely linked with the company that the first generation started, Forest City Enterprises, a publicly traded real estate developer with projects nationwide.

 

It’s been widely reported that not all of his in-laws are in his camp in his run for the U.S. Senate as the Republican candidate.

Mandel and I have some mutual acquaintances.  It is not at all clear where (Mandel) would stand on any given issue.  He may be a lot more socially liberal than anyone expects.  A lot more.  Then again, he may not.

In the debates, Josh Mandel said that we should eliminate useless military spending, like the command in Europe that is a relic of the Cold War.  He is quite right about that. 

There is an increasing tendency to vote for Romney in the Jewish community, but it's a result of influences from Florida and Israel, and is strictly a vote against what is seen as Obama's antipathy for Israel.[/color]

Only on Bulls hit Mountain.  President Obama is polling better than he did in 2008.  You're not Jewish, are you?  Are you claiming to speak for them?

Which does not make sense.  How many people do you know or know of that didn't support Obama in '08 are supporting him this year?  How many the other way around?

 

Another belief supported by anecdotes winds up being untrue. What a surprise. Also, I do know of at least one person who completes the requirement of your challenge, actually.

There is an increasing tendency to vote for Romney in the Jewish community, but it's a result of influences from Florida and Israel, and is strictly a vote against what is seen as Obama's antipathy for Israel.[/color]

Only on Bulls hit Mountain.  President Obama is polling better than he did in 2008.  You're not Jewish, are you?  Are you claiming to speak for them?

Which does not make sense.  How many people do you know or know of that didn't support Obama in '08 are supporting him this year?  How many the other way around?

 

Again with this.  It's already been pointed out several times on this forum why this is poor reasoning.  Let me guess, though, you're not going to let your posts be dictated by the fact checkers?

Which does not make sense.  How many people do you know or know of that didn't support Obama in '08 are supporting him this year?  How many the other way around?[/color]

 

I personally know 5 people who have told me they will vote for Obama even though they didn't in 2008.  I know 0 who are voting for Romney that voted for Obama in 2008.

Sherrod Brown is being declared the victor by multiple news organizations.

The networks are starting to call the race for Sherrod. I'm so ready to see this thread buried in obscurity.

^ I'm happy to oblige.

All it took was ten seconds of the voice of Connie Schultz, and I immediately regretted that Brown was re-

elected.

Mandel and his outsized ego will be back in the game again.

I expect he will get ten million dollars or whatever he needs from the oil industry, rather like how Portman became a senator.

Mandel and his outsized ego will be back in the game again.

I expect he will get ten million dollars or whatever he needs from the oil industry, rather like how Portman became a senator.

 

He'll run for re-election in 2014, and he will probably be the frontrunner for governor in 2018.  If those both click and he's re-elected in 2022, then look out for 2024. 

 

He has a plan, and winning this year wasn't a core part of it.  It was name recognition, and the chance to set himself up as the gubernatorial frontrunner in 2018 if he didn't just decide to stay in the Senate.

First: I appreciate the change from "Ohio Treasurer Josh Mandel running for US Senate?" to "Ohio Treasurer Josh Mandel ran for US Senate."

 

Gave me a chuckle.

 

Second: I don't think Josh Mandel has a chance of reaching higher office than Treasurer of Ohio. Brown won Ohio by a larger percentage than President Obama did. Brown is much more liberal than Obama. And I think there is a general lack of trust people have with Mandel. He is also terrible at debating. He would fall flat on his face in a gubernatorial debate and anyone who thinks Mandel has what it takes to succeed in higher office has blinders on. I think Portman has the opportunity to continue his political carreer further. Do I necessarily like his ideas and policies? No. I think he is highly partisan and simply rants about right wing talking points instead of making changes. But I think he presents himself in a much more confident, sophisticated, and intelligent manner than Mandel. Sure he rode the coattails of the Republican tide in 2010, but I honestly believe he has potential in politics.

What was really exposed through this election was Josh's significant lack of experience in actually running anything (something he's been able to stay ahead of up to this point). He needs to slow down, complete his term as Treasurer, and take some time to truly learn about how the state government operates, and what his role should be. He would also benefit from studying up on the issues he's building his platform on, and establishing his own position. It became very clear in every interview / debate where I heard him that once he was off his talking points, he began to flounder.

 

If he had won, he would have been completely out of his depth in the Senate.

Brown won Ohio by a larger percentage than President Obama did. Brown is much more liberal than Obama.

 

Debatable.  Obama had been rated the most "liberal" US senator.  I'd have to look up their ADA/ACU ratings.  Maybe later.

 

If I'm not mistaken, Brown had the United Mine Workers endorsement.  They refused to endorse Obama.  That makes a difference downstate.  So, to be real, does race.  Ken Blackwell found that out.

 

We're still a state with 100% GOP officeholders.  I doubt that changes in 2014, with a Democratic President incumbent.  We tend to vote for the party that doesn't have the Presidency for state offices.

^ I believe it was Brown who was rated the most "liberal" US senator.

 

And I'm comparing the presidential election to the US Senate election in Ohio. Obama's presidency is much more moderate than Brown's Senate stint.

 

Also, it's common for the United Mine Workers to endorse Democrats since Republicans generally don't support unions. It seems contradictory, but mine workers unions often support Democrats who more restrictive on fossil fuels, but are more open to unions.

 

Also, in a rematch of Kasich vs. Strickland, I could see Strickland winning. Especially if Obama's next two years go well and unemployment comes down.

I think it's crazy to believe that Kasich is going to roll to re-election in 2014.  He's going to be pummeled over SB5 no matter who he faces, whether it's Strickland or a dark-horse such as FitzGerald.  Either way, it's not going to be a cakewalk.

 

As for Mandel, I think this was his chance.  Unless the GOP Ohio bench consists of guys like Shelley Duncan, Aaron Cunningham, and Ezekiel Carrera, there has to be somebody better out there who will knock him off in any statewide primary.  He can't be well-liked enough by Republicans to get several chances at the big-time.

I completely agree Clevelander. This was his shot. From the consensus of my friends who either consider themselves moderate or conservative, none of them really cared for him at all. They felt like he never stated any true positions of his own. He was the lesser of two evils. He faces another politician on either side of the aisle who is less liberal than Brown and he's toast. I also don't think anyone is going to forget about his pledge to stick out his four years as Treasurer. He wasn't in Columbus for two months before he started campaigning for the Senate. Brown's Senate seat was his best shot.