Jump to content

Cincinnati: Mayor John Cranley

Cygnus
in Ohio Politics

Featured Replies

Cincinnati Firefighters just endorsed John Cranley for mayor and:

 

-Chris Smitherman

-Chris Seelbach

-Yvette Simpson

-Charlie Winburn

-Pam Thomas

-Wendell Young

-Greg Landsman

-Kevin Flynn

-PG Sittenfeld

  • Replies 1.6k
  • Views 79.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Most Popular Posts

  • taestell
    taestell

    It was also revealed recently that the 56% of the city's streets are in fair, poor, or worse condition. There was only a 1 percentage point improvement in road quality from 2016 to 2017. So Cranley's

  • ryanlammi
    ryanlammi

    He spent 6+ months to say the finalists are his acting city manager and his assistant city manager? Wow. EDIT: And if they aren't approved, they are still in that position.

Posted Images

Baffling. If you're supporting, say,  Yvette Simpson, why would you support Charlie Winburn, her polar opposite with regards to policy?  Or if you're supporting Simpson and Seelbach, why would you not also support Quinlivan, since they tend to vote together?

Baffling. If you're supporting, say,  Yvette Simpson, why would you support Charlie Winburn, her polar opposite with regards to policy?  Or if you're supporting Simpson and Seelbach, why would you not also support Quinlivan, since they tend to vote together?

 

Quinlivan has been jonesing to cut police and fire for YEARS, unlike Simpson and Seelbach.  How could you possibly miss that?

Quinlivan has been jonesing to cut police and fire for YEARS, unlike Simpson and Seelbach.  How could you possibly miss that?

 

Somehow I did. That makes sense, then.

Maybe they think there's job security in having a lot of vacant, fire trap buildings all over town.

It just occurred to me the Enquirer is likely to endorse Qualls. Their editorial board was an early supporter of the parking lease deal (though I think they back-pedaled a bit during the controversy) and there was an unsigned editorial saying the streetcar controversy should be put to rest (despite fanning the flames to keep their bread and butter going). Since the center of Cranley's platform is opposition to both, they are most likely to support Qualls.

 

Then there's also the fact Buchanan is on the board of 3CDC, so preaching against downtown development is unlikely. I also think they have a handle on the fact that Qualls has been involved in helping other neighborhoods, despite Crankey's assertions otherwise. They also have more to gain from keeping the "downtown vs. the neighborhoods" thing going as it's a reliably popular article theme. Since Cranley won't even support anything they can't be sure how many eyes on the pages he can garner. What would they write about if he successfully killed the streetcar? That's gotta be a crisis situation they'd rather avoid.

Quinlivan has been jonesing to cut police and fire for YEARS, unlike Simpson and Seelbach.  How could you possibly miss that?

 

Somehow I did. That makes sense, then.

 

Remember, these endorsements have a very limited scope: "who protects us and supports us?" That's essentially what it's decided by. Laure has been calling for "right sizing" of police & fire for years.

 

Here's the better question: if you support Simpson how can you not support Qualls! They have had virtually the exact same voting record through the last two years. Exact same.

There's a miniscule chance the police department will support qualls. Kathy harrell goes on 700wlw railing against council seemingly every week agreeing with the hosts on every issue

My CPD slate guess is:

 

Cranley

 

Smitherman

Winburn

PG

Murray

Mann

Landsman

Flynn

Maybe Wegman

Maybe Young

LOL, yeah, Qualls had Herrell tossed out of council chambers for screaming obscenities during  meeting once (at least). She definitely seems like more of a Cranley/Smitherman girl.

"I will make Downtown and Clifton the greatest urban area in America"

 

- John Cranley

 

 

has Cranley answered a question without blaming the streetcar?

Discussing jobs, Qualls never mentioned the streetcar

sigh...

Cranley has somehow managed to link every ill in the city with the streetcar. Ugh.

Discussing jobs, Qualls never mentioned the streetcar

sigh...

 

I know!!! Argh. She should be talking about how much investment and how many jobs the streetcar has already brought, and mention how much money will be lost by canceling the project, every time she gets to rebut an answer in which Cranley mentions the streetcar.

 

Cranley is winning this debate. She's letting him get away with his BS.

she's finally hitting back

she's finally hitting back

 

Unfortunately, she's demonstrably wrong on the point she's fighting back on.  The annual payments of the lease ARE capped at a max lifetime total of $105M like Cranley said.  The language in the lease is perfectly clear on that point.

wow, Cranky sure squandered his closing remarks.

Sounded like Qualls got more applause. I don't think these guys are the low information types Cranley is depending on.

Discussing jobs, Qualls never mentioned the streetcar

sigh...

 

I know!!! Argh. She should be talking about how much investment and how many jobs the streetcar has already brought, and mention how much money will be lost by canceling the project, every time she gets to rebut an answer in which Cranley mentions the streetcar.

 

Cranley is winning this debate. She's letting him get away with his BS.

 

 

Some of you may be very disconnected. People's minds are set. Roxanne is NOT going to change anyone's mind about the streetcar. Neither are we. There are people who still think the freedom center gets million in tax support a year. Roxanne telling people there has been investment along the streetcar line isn't goin to help her. They don't believe it.

She did a terrible job of speaking to her base. She also did a bad job of speaking to the black community, which Cranley frequently addressed.

 

When asked directly about black unemployment, she opted to use inclusive language, like "everyone", which maybe she thought of as less patronizing. But I think Cranley's direct language about AA's/minorities is more effective.

 

She needs to brush up on her talking points. When asked about how to address the budget, why on earth didn't she talk about investing to expand the tax base?

 

Yikes. How many debates are there? When is the next?

She did a terrible job of speaking to her base. She also did a bad job of speaking to the black community, which Cranley frequently addressed.

 

When asked directly about black unemployment, she opted to use inclusive language, like "everyone", which maybe she thought of as less patronizing. But I think Cranley's direct language about AA's/minorities is more effective.

 

She needs to brush up on her talking points. When asked about how to address the budget, why on earth didn't she talk about investing to expand the tax base?

 

Yikes. How many debates are there? When is the next?

 

The end made up for it in my opinion.  Cranley got bizarre demanding her to apologize.  A lot of the media is perplexed by his little outburst

Discussing jobs, Qualls never mentioned the streetcar

sigh...

 

I know!!! Argh. She should be talking about how much investment and how many jobs the streetcar has already brought, and mention how much money will be lost by canceling the project, every time she gets to rebut an answer in which Cranley mentions the streetcar.

 

Cranley is winning this debate. She's letting him get away with his BS.

 

 

Some of you may be very disconnected. People's minds are set. Roxanne is NOT going to change anyone's mind about the streetcar. Neither are we. There are people who still think the freedom center gets million in tax support a year. Roxanne telling people there has been investment along the streetcar line isn't goin to help her. They don't believe it.

 

Talking about what a waste of money canceling the project would be is important. Cranley used this as an opportunity to rally his base. Qualls should have done that, too. The informed voters are already decided. She needed to work on reaching the uninformed voters with her big picture vision and how the streetcar and parking lease fit into that. She actually has vision, which is one of the biggests contrasts between her and Cranley. That didn't come through in this debate at all.

 

Edit: Re:Canceling the streetcar... I missed the beginning, but did she say anything about it being like a repeat of the subway? Everyone knows how stupid the abandoned subway is, so it's a good talking point.

I agree tha she should say canceling the streetcar will give us out second subway embarrassment. That's all she should say on the topic. That we will lose 40+ million and have nothing to show

Enquirer is live tweeting interviews with Cranley and Qualls right now..

 

Cranley first

Enquirer is live tweeting interviews with Cranley and Qualls right now..

 

Cranley first

link?

@Cweiser

 

@Janeprendergast

 

Cranley just cited Pericles as an example he would follow as mayor

@Cweiser

 

@Janeprendergast

 

Cranley just cited Pericles as an example he would follow as mayor

 

Seems like a good choice, Pericles did found the rule of law in Athenian society.

Found this interesting.  From the article in 2002:

 

"Through a series of secret meetings with council colleagues that lasted throughout the day Sunday, Mr. Cranley forged a consensus by adding a few council members' pet projects and enforcing budget discipline"

 

http://enquirer.com/editions/2002/12/17/loc_finance17.html

 

In the debate Tuesday, he yelled at Qualls for being "Secretive" in her dealings with the streetcar and parking meter.  He said she was 'Not transparent'

 

Another Cranleyism

I just read through the transcript.  just like every other time he dodges questions about his budgets when he was on council and just blames every and all issues on streetcar/parking deal.

 

 

Can anyone whip up a good image I could use as a Facebook cover photo? I would like one that has the Qualls for Mayor logo (blue background) in it and something along the lines of "ask me how to register to vote for Qualls". Or something like that. I'm terrible at designing things and would rather it not look like a middle-schooler did it. As long as it gets the point across that I can tell them how to register and implies they should vote for Qualls while avoiding any conflict with the profile picture in the bottom left I will be happy.

Thanks. I would prefer one that doesn't have her face on it, but that might work. Unless someone feels the desire to create one that meets my additional qualifications, I will just use that one.

Charter Committee endorses Qualls.

^Are the democrats ever going to?  They don't have to denounce Cranley, but they're doing everyone a disservice if they stay silent and let the better candidate fight it out with that nut.

^Are the democrats ever going to?  They don't have to denounce Cranley, but they're doing everyone a disservice if they stay silent and let the better candidate fight it out with that nut.

 

Not a chance.

^Are the democrats ever going to?  They don't have to denounce Cranley, but they're doing everyone a disservice if they stay silent and let the better candidate fight it out with that nut.

 

Not a chance.

yeah, in endorsing one of them they would be endorsing/condemning all of the candidate's supporters at the same time.

It would be nice if more Democrats, like Berding, would just man up & join the Republican party.

Police endorsed Cranley and Pretty much an entire GOP slate for council. 

 

Kathy Harrell strikes again

^^I think that if done properly, they can show a preference for one candidate without condemning the other. Isn't that what happens every 4 years on the national level with the presidency?  Shouldn't Cranley be forced to run as an independent?  You're probably right that they won't take the chance of alienating anyone, but that leaves squalls more vulnerable than necessary.

^^I think that if done properly, they can show a preference for one candidate without condemning the other. Isn't that what happens every 4 years on the national level with the presidency?  Shouldn't Cranley be forced to run as an independent?  You're probably right that they won't take the chance of alienating anyone, but that leaves squalls more vulnerable than necessary.

 

You are operating under the assumption that the leadership in the Hamilton County Democratic Party sees Qualls as the one true Democrat and Cranley as some sort of Republican trojan horse. Simply not the case. Plenty of longtime Democrat donors and grassroots volunteers have lined up for Cranley. Tim Burke is staying neutral and rightly so. After this race the party will come back together and unite for the statewide candidates in 2014.

No, I favor Qualls, and it just seems odd to me that they'd let two democrats square off like this, when they could save everyone the trouble by endorsing one or the other.  Unless they fear one of the candidates flipping to republican and still running, I don't see the down side of them picking one to endorse.

2005 was the exact same. Pepper vs Mallory, party doesn't endorse. Cranley used to be a major democrat on Council. A lot of people remember that and not that he's gone far right. Plus, there are plenty of democrats against the streetcar.

No, I favor Qualls, and it just seems odd to me that they'd let two democrats square off like this, when they could save everyone the trouble by endorsing one or the other.  Unless they fear one of the candidates flipping to republican and still running, I don't see the down side of them picking one to endorse.

 

But this is our system. We don't have a partisan primary. Just because YOU favor Qualls doesn't mean that the party that includes her and Cranley needs to endorse her. Aside from essentially backing away from the non-partisan primary concept we have in Cincinnati, the down side of picking one to endorse is that you piss off loyal democrat volunteers and donors that are backing Cranley - in addition to alienating Cranley himself who could be a viable candidate for other offices in the future.

 

 

2005 was the exact same. Pepper vs Mallory, party doesn't endorse. Cranley used to be a major democrat on Council. A lot of people remember that and not that he's gone far right. Plus, there are plenty of democrats against the streetcar.

 

Exactly, and it didn't damage the party then and it won't damage the party now.

 

 

she's finally hitting back

 

Unfortunately, she's demonstrably wrong on the point she's fighting back on.  The annual payments of the lease ARE capped at a max lifetime total of $105M like Cranley said.  The language in the lease is perfectly clear on that point.

 

Sorry, I just missed this.  The lease is not nearly as simplistic as some are making it out to be. 

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2013/09/18/heres-why-cincinnati-could-get-more.html?page=all

 

Go to topic listing

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.