Bush had it Gore didn't, Kerry didn't have enough; Obama had it, McCain and Romney didn't have enough; Trump has it, Hillary Clinton was - perhaps - the most lacking in this field of any presidential candidate in modern history.

 

You're exactly right, and you can observe the pattern much further back than 2000. It'd probably hold true for most Presidents since TV became a thing. (Biggest exception that comes to mind is Nixon.) I figured this out after Obama got reelected, and it had me worried as a Hillary supporter all throughout 2016.

Trump would be a nightmare to drink with.  Smug, hostile, grabby... you can't take him anywhere.

I wanted a beer with Bernie. But that wasn't allowed.

Trump would be a nightmare to drink with.  Smug, hostile, grabby... you can't take him anywhere.

 

I wouldn't say that he excels in the "have a beer(/diet coke)" department, he'd just talk about himself the whole time, but I would say that he edges out Hillary. Many would say gender has something to do with this, and I do think it's tougher for a woman to be seen as "laid back" but still taken seriously, but I also think in spite of that she's incredibly awkward. At best, we had two un-beerable candidates, and that's why so many were dissatisfied with their choices.

No one wants to have a beer with Mrs. Clinton.

 

And yet she got 3 million more votes nationwide than Trump, and more votes for president than any other candidate in history besides Obama

 

The deciding factor was a specific appeal of racist, xenophobic, anti-muslim, anti-abortion, gun-toting eff yous to intellectuals and the establishment that appealed to just enough low education conservative whites to flip the rust belt

 

Because it worked, everyone and his brother on the R side is now trying to use the exact same playbook to win this cycle

 

 

 

Trump would be a nightmare to drink with.  Smug, hostile, grabby... you can't take him anywhere.

 

Gotta agree with this. The "someone I want to have a beer with" thing does not explain Trump's appeal.

 

Kasich, as stiff as he is, checks off that box much better than Trump or Clinton. Of the main contenders in the 2016 race, Bernie would be the top guy to meet for a beer.

No one wants to have a beer with Mrs. Clinton.

 

And yet she got 3 million more votes nationwide than Trump, and more votes for president than any other candidate in history besides Obama

 

The deciding factor was a specific appeal of racist, xenophobic, anti-muslim, anti-abortion, gun-toting eff yous to intellectuals and the establishment that appealed to just enough low education conservative whites to flip the rust belt

 

Because it worked, everyone and his brother on the R side is now trying to use the exact same playbook to win this cycle

 

 

 

 

 

These are the exact dystopian ads I was talking about. Straight-up Robocop stuff

^^ Trump did not capture all those Obama districts by emphasizing conservatism like these people are.  Instead he adopted specific leftist positions that were calculated to appeal in those districts.

That first add, the one titled "Voting", has already been amended as it airs on TV today. It no longer mentions Obama at all, only that Dewine voted with Clinton. My guess is polling or focus groups made them realize people actually miss Obama and only have negative connotations with Clinton.

^The demo version is still being aired in Seabus.

Trump would be a nightmare to drink with.  Smug, hostile, grabby... you can't take him anywhere.

 

 

Gotta agree with this. The "someone I want to have a beer with" thing does not explain Trump's appeal.

 

Kasich, as stiff as he is, checks off that box much better than Trump or Clinton. Of the main contenders in the 2016 race, Bernie would be the top guy to meet for a beer.

 

I went to the Roger Waters show at Nationwide last year and Kasich was there -- he likes live music. Waters spent 20+ minutes of the show blasting Trump musically, visually (it's Floyd, so the live visuals are a big part) and through between-song banter. Kasich ate it up. Kasich is #3 on my beer list after Bernie and Jill Stein. Trump and Hillary are tied for 27,842.

^Kasich comes off a bit too faux folksy-preachy for me, but particularly so since he got bitten by the White House-seekers' bug. I don't find the notion of sharing a beer with him any more appealing than one with Trump or Clinton, honestly. All three are deeply flawed people, but not at all in a remotely charming or reassuring way, IMHO. Contrast them with Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, who for their own respective deep character flaws at least give off a more authentic "not pretending to be something they really aren't" vibe, which might also at least be partially responsible for their relative successes in politics.

No one wants to have a beer with Mrs. Clinton.

 

And yet she got 3 million more votes nationwide than Trump, and more votes for president than any other candidate in history besides Obama

 

The deciding factor was a specific appeal of racist, xenophobic, anti-muslim, anti-abortion, gun-toting eff yous to intellectuals and the establishment that appealed to just enough low education conservative whites to flip the rust belt

 

Because it worked, everyone and his brother on the R side is now trying to use the exact same playbook to win this cycle

 

 

 

 

 

These are the exact dystopian ads I was talking about. Straight-up Robocop stuff

 

Seriously, WTF with these ads? Larry Householder is just pissed that he still had a big fat tube TV in 2018...so he shot it. Then again, if he shot a flat screen his constituents would have perceived him as bougie for having one.

 

Received this text yesterday:

 

Hi Travis, I'm John w/Kucinich for Governor. We’re for healthcare4all, legal cannabis, great public transportation! Will you vote Dennis May 8?

Did you respond?

Ugh, just saw a bunch of those ads last night.  How embarrassing.

I am conflicted on who to vote for in the primary. Based on what I know about Kucinich and O'Neil, neither seem like a candidate I could get behind. I can't really find much on Cordray as far as what his policy proposals are (can't find any mention on public transit) and he seems to lack charisma and uniqueness, although I guess you could say he has nerve and talent. I think I most align with Schiavoni...he has a very detailed policy page and I like the majority of his proposals and past performance.

 

I want to vote for Schiavoni, but I am worried that he won't win and I'm more worried that Kucinich will. If Kucinich does win I'm going to have a real hard time voting for him and might consider voting for Mike DeWine if he wins the Republican primary.

 

How's everyone else feeling about this election?

Still leaning toward Cordray but wishing he would talk more like Kucinich.

Leaning Cordray also. 

I'm voting Cordray. Kuccinich has been too pro-Trump, pro-Syria and pro-Fox News for me to consider him. Plus he hasn't lived in Ohio for several years.

I'm voting Cordray. Kuccinich has been too pro-Trump, pro-Syria and pro-Fox News for me to consider him. Plus he hasn't lived in Ohio for several years.

 

To me this run just feels like another Kuchinich stepping stone to national office.  Not that all politicians don't aspire to that, but Dennis! doesn't seem to hide it.

I'm voting Cordray. Kuccinich has been too pro-Trump, pro-Syria and pro-Fox News for me to consider him. Plus he hasn't lived in Ohio for several years.

 

To me this run just feels like another Kuchinich stepping stone to national office.  Not that all politicians don't aspire to that, but Dennis! doesn't seem to hide it.

 

He'll be 72 in October.  A stepping stone for...national office when he's 76?

 

Also wtf his wife is 40?  And they got married in 2005.  So when she was 27 she married a 59-year old Kucinich?

I'm excited to see Mary Taylor get out of the race - her & husband Don have a lot of work to do cleaning up messes they made while she was in office and he was pushing her connections to his construction clients...

As a progressive, I'm supporting Cordray. I like Schiavoni, but I don't think he quite has what it takes for the job. Kucinich is just terrible (and O'Neill is basically a joke barely worth mentioning). Here's a really good old article by Cleveland Scene (from 2007) which does a great job of exposing Kucinich for who he really is: a self-serving noise-maker who isn't really interested in real policy: https://www.clevescene.com/cleveland/the-king-of-spin/Content?oid=1503534

 

I've been spreading that article around to my progressive friends who have been considering Kucinich, and I think I've changed some minds.

I hope the general election comes down to DeWine and Cordray so that no matter what we get a normal competent governor. 

I already voted Cordray. I honestly might have to vote DeWine if Kucinich wins.

I already voted Cordray. I honestly might have to vote DeWine if Kucinich wins.

 

I usually vote absentee but I want to take my kids to the polls.  I will be voting for Cordray too.

I hope the general election comes down to DeWine and Cordray so that no matter what we get a normal competent governor. 

 

You mean the "DRAIN THE SWAMP" and "I STAND WITH TRUMP" ads don't do anything for you?

I'm just an out of touch elite, but anything anti-establishment (from the left or right) has become a huge turnoff for me. Makes me roll my eyes all the way back in my head.

^for all you guys above voting for Cordray, the NRA thanks you!

Also, on the Republican side, I wouldn't totally count Mary Taylor out yet. She's clearly trying to appeal to the Trump-wing of the party, and for whatever reason those types of Republican candidates have been under-polled lately. If you look at the Virginia gubernatorial primary last year, and the Illinois gubernatorial primary this year, each of those races had a somewhat similar setup: an establishment Republican (Ed Gillespie in VA and Bruce Rauner in IL) and a Trump-type Republican (Corey Stewart VA and Jeanne Ives IL). In both races, the establishment Republican was comfortably ahead in the polls, but in the end they only narrowly won their primaries. Though she's still far behind, Taylor has been gaining in the polls. Her supporters seem to be more enthusiastic and she's also been getting dark money from god-knows-where.

^^They'd probably prefer Dennis because then they could fearmonger more.

Just curious---did the NRA endorse Cordray in the Dem primary or do they endorse no one--to not offend the GOP?

 

^for all you guys above voting for Cordray, the NRA thanks you!

 

My eyes roll so hard when progressives say they're voting against Cordray specifically for this reason. I was (still am) a big Bernie Sanders supporter and I will be voting Cordray. He's progressive and he also knows how to get stuff done and relate to the common person (which is unfortunately uncommon). He has the support of Elizabeth Warren and has an excellent record of standing up against corrupt financial institutions. Yes, he's more moderate on guns, but people seem to forget that Bernie was also moderate on guns which is why it's a little strange that the Bernie-supporting wing of. The CFPB chief is not a position that the NRA rates, and if Cordray was to be re-rated again, I guarantee he'd probably get a C at the absolute most.

 

Cordray is still pro gun control - he just doesn't beat that drum as hard as some do. Remember, Ohio is a very moderate state which has only grown more conservative in recent years. Trump won Ohio by 8% (compare that to 9% in TEXAS). We need a candidate who is both highly qualified and also able to appeal to more moderate voters and Cordray is the person who can do that. This absolute gun purity test is a good way to keep holding Democrats back from gaining in Ohio.

Maybe Cordray is exactly the kind of pro-gun control/moderate on guns candidate that can show the NRA they don't all need to be whack-a-doodles appearing in internet ads in full camo carrying a bible. 

Also, on the Republican side, I wouldn't totally count Mary Taylor out yet. She's clearly trying to appeal to the Trump-wing of the party, and for whatever reason those types of Republican candidates have been under-polled lately. If you look at the Virginia gubernatorial primary last year, and the Illinois gubernatorial primary this year, each of those races had a somewhat similar setup: an establishment Republican (Ed Gillespie in VA and Bruce Rauner in IL) and a Trump-type Republican (Corey Stewart VA and Jeanne Ives IL). In both races, the establishment Republican was comfortably ahead in the polls, but in the end they only narrowly won their primaries. Though she's still far behind, Taylor has been gaining in the polls. Her supporters seem to be more enthusiastic and she's also been getting dark money from god-knows-where.

 

I don't know how Mary Taylor can appeal to the Trump wing when she & Kasich boycotted the convention and skipped is recent visit to NE Ohio...  she's neither an insider nor an outsider....  and she really has no track record whatsoever.  Hell, most average voters don't even know she's been the Lt. Governor for the past 8 years...

^^^ I don't agree with your read, because I think Trump won Ohio in part because he flanked Hillary on the left on some issues, especially trade. I think I've said it before in this thread, but I think Kucinich would stand a good chance of pulling the Obama-to-Trump voters back into the Democratic column. Are these people moderates? Or are the Hillary-voting Democrats who are talking about voting for Dewine if Kucinich is nominated moderates? Point being, I don't think the term "moderate" is useful for framing the electorate in this race.

^for all you guys above voting for Cordray, the NRA thanks you!

 

My eyes roll so hard when progressives say they're voting against Cordray specifically for this reason. I was (still am) a big Bernie Sanders supporter and I will be voting Cordray. He's progressive and he also knows how to get stuff done and relate to the common person (which is unfortunately uncommon). He has the support of Elizabeth Warren and has an excellent record of standing up against corrupt financial institutions. Yes, he's more moderate on guns, but people seem to forget that Bernie was also moderate on guns which is why it's a little strange that the Bernie-supporting wing of. The CFPB chief is not a position that the NRA rates, and if Cordray was to be re-rated again, I guarantee he'd probably get a C at the absolute most.

 

Cordray is still pro gun control - he just doesn't beat that drum as hard as some do. Remember, Ohio is a very moderate state which has only grown more conservative in recent years. Trump won Ohio by 8% (compare that to 9% in TEXAS). We need a candidate who is both highly qualified and also able to appeal to more moderate voters and Cordray is the person who can do that. This absolute gun purity test is a good way to keep holding Democrats back from gaining in Ohio.

 

The City of Cleveland had a law on its books from 1991--27 years ago---banning assault weapons in the City of Cleveland. Cordray fought--successfully-- in Ohio Supreme Court to overturn that AND to prevent Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus and other cities from creating laws in their own cities about guns.

 

He claims Dennis brought about the financial disarray of the 70s, that's absolutely not true.

 

Kucinich is a more passionate leader--and while I agree that Cordray may stand up better against the GOP, Kuninich is the better candidate.

^for all you guys above voting for Cordray, the NRA thanks you!

 

My eyes roll so hard when progressives say they're voting against Cordray specifically for this reason. I was (still am) a big Bernie Sanders supporter and I will be voting Cordray. He's progressive and he also knows how to get stuff done and relate to the common person (which is unfortunately uncommon). He has the support of Elizabeth Warren and has an excellent record of standing up against corrupt financial institutions. Yes, he's more moderate on guns, but people seem to forget that Bernie was also moderate on guns which is why it's a little strange that the Bernie-supporting wing of. The CFPB chief is not a position that the NRA rates, and if Cordray was to be re-rated again, I guarantee he'd probably get a C at the absolute most.

 

Cordray is still pro gun control - he just doesn't beat that drum as hard as some do. Remember, Ohio is a very moderate state which has only grown more conservative in recent years. Trump won Ohio by 8% (compare that to 9% in TEXAS). We need a candidate who is both highly qualified and also able to appeal to more moderate voters and Cordray is the person who can do that. This absolute gun purity test is a good way to keep holding Democrats back from gaining in Ohio.

 

The City of Cleveland had a law on its books from 1991--27 years ago---banning assault weapons in the City of Cleveland. Cordray fought--successfully-- in Ohio Supreme Court to overturn that AND to prevent Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus and other cities from creating laws in their own cities about guns.

 

He claims Dennis brought about the financial disarray of the 70s, that's absolutely not true.

 

Kucinich is a more passionate leader--and while I agree that Cordray may stand up better against the GOP, Kuninich is the better candidate.

 

Kucinich is a fraud.  Always has been always will be.

 

 

^Care to elaborate?

Looks like RCP is already giving it to Dewine and Cordray:

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/governor/oh/ohio_governor_dewine_vs_cordray-6426.html

Columbus had a handgun ban in the 2000s but it went away sometime when I was living in Cincinnati in the late 2000s.

^^^Just look at his career.  He has always shifted with the wind.  When he ran for mayor he ran a Trump like campaign based on people's racial fears.  The when he ran for congress and the west side was more progressive, he decided to have much more progressive views.  Now, he has spent the last 2 years defending Trump on Fox News.  Dennis! blows with the political winds.  That's what populists do.

"in the late 2000s."    You mean like the year 2950?  Just kidding.

 

"Columbus had a handgun ban in the 2000s but it went away sometime"

 

It didn't passively 'go away'---Cordray fought to prevent Columbus from having such a law.

 

Well, basically I was wondering what happened to the Columbus handgun ban.

^ State law doesn't allow individual municipalities to craft different gun laws. I believe this was passed in 2006. Columbus's law would have been voided when it took effect in 2007:

 

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/gp9.68

 

9.68 Right to bear arms - challenge to law.

 

(A) The individual right to keep and bear arms, being a fundamental individual right that predates the United States Constitution and Ohio Constitution, and being a constitutionally protected right in every part of Ohio, the general assembly finds the need to provide uniform laws throughout the state regulating the ownership, possession, purchase, other acquisition, transport, storage, carrying, sale, or other transfer of firearms, their components, and their ammunition. Except as specifically provided by the United States Constitution, Ohio Constitution, state law, or federal law, a person, without further license, permission, restriction, delay, or process, may own, possess, purchase, sell, transfer, transport, store, or keep any firearm, part of a firearm, its components, and its ammunition.

^Care to elaborate?

 

I already provided a link to a very good and detailed article which explains why he's mostly a fraud. I hope you give it a read. I've voted for Kucinich in the past, but I never will again. https://www.clevescene.com/cleveland/the-king-of-spin/Content?oid=1503534

"It's not every day in Cleveland or any other city that you have the mayor calling the city council a bunch of lunatics and buffoons," says Brent Larkin, The Plain Dealer's editorial director, who covered Kucinich's reign for the now-defunct Cleveland Press. "You don't call everybody a bunch of fucking crooks, and that's what he did."

 

Kucinich may have been right about corruption and lethargy, but he was now proving to be a much worse alternative. After all, a mayor's job is a yeoman's task, about paving streets and ensuring safety. But Kucinich had allowed style to manhandle substance; he was against everything, rather than providing solutions of his own.

 

Who does that sound like?

 

 

Hint: Trump

Cordray v Dewine will definitely be a rather boring election

"It's not every day in Cleveland or any other city that you have the mayor calling the city council a bunch of lunatics and buffoons," says Brent Larkin, The Plain Dealer's editorial director, who covered Kucinich's reign for the now-defunct Cleveland Press. "You don't call everybody a bunch of fucking crooks, and that's what he did."

 

Kucinich may have been right about corruption and lethargy, but he was now proving to be a much worse alternative. After all, a mayor's job is a yeoman's task, about paving streets and ensuring safety. But Kucinich had allowed style to manhandle substance; he was against everything, rather than providing solutions of his own.

 

Who does that sound like?

 

 

Hint: Trump

 

For a while, I've thought of Kucinich as the Trump of the left.