Open borders...with Michigan?

"Socialist spending spree" aka spending that doesn't go to our donors in the top 1%

"Sky-High inflation" - aka inflation not yet borne out in the data but we need to scare our base.

What "historic foreign policy debacle" did Nan Whaley oversee?

ICE CREAM IS SOCIALIST NOW?? WHAT?

"Crushing tax hikes" - aka we don't want our top 1% donors paying more

 

 

Edited September 28, 20213 yr by DarkandStormy

https://www.journal-news.com/news/senate-candidate-mandel-asked-to-leave-lakota-school-board-meeting/NAAGKSG73NCKBCYC7K2PUAKHHU/

 

Quote

Josh Mandel, the state’s former treasurer who is seeking a U.S. Senate seat, told the Lakota school board members they “are using kids as pawns in a political game.”

 

.....Said the Politician who brought his one videographer to record the confrontation. 

 

Oh look it was posted Twitter w/in the hour: 

 

 

 

 

POLITICO Playbook: Washington’s mystery mansion buyer unmasked

By RYAN LIZZA, EUGENE DANIELS, TARA PALMERI and RACHAEL BADE 

 

11/15/2021 06:13 AM EST

...

 

According to multiple sources, the anonymous buyer is PETER THIEL, the German-born billionaire co-founder of PayPal and friend of Trump. It is “common knowledge” among neighbors and real estate sources, one well-informed person told Playbook.

 

The purchase of the splashy new Washington residence comes amid a burst of political activity for Thiel, who turned 54 in October. Previously he was best known in media and politics for secretly funding the HULK HOGAN lawsuit against Gawker.com that bankrupted the site and for his speech praising Trump at the 2016 GOP convention.

 

More recently, Thiel has become a major player in two top Senate races. He gave separate $10 million donations to a pair of super PACS to help elect J.D. VANCE in Ohio and BLAKE MASTERS in Arizona. As Alex Isenstadt reported in May, they are the largest donations Thiel has ever given and the largest donations that anyone has given to an outside entity supporting a Senate candidate, and they instantly transformed the two novice politicians into major contenders.

 

https://www.politico.com/playbook

The GOP primary TV spending has kicked off, first with this ad from Bernie Moreno.   It's going to be a long winter.  

 

 

 

^We’ve got an immigrant, a Jewish guy, an Ivy League educated investment banker, and a woman all competing to come across as the most pro-Tr**p candidate. Ohio is a special place. 

Gibson ads have been on Columbus TV since August or September. Vance shortly thereafter and now Moreno.

25 minutes ago, Pablo said:

Gibson ads have been on Columbus TV since August or September. Vance shortly thereafter and now Moreno.

 

All this plus anti-Vance ads:

 

I saw both the above ads on 19 basically back to back yesterday. The first one made me feel weirdly comforted that the first CityBlock project isn't happening.

 

The second one is far more disturbing to me because it reminds me of how recent J.D. Vance's descent into Trumpism is. The tweets the attack ad references are from 2016 and 2017, but those tweets didn't get deleted until July, 2021. The way the dominoes CONTINUE to fall for Trump astounds me. The party has solidified around Trump even more since January 6, and the Republican primary is clearly going to be a contest of who is Trump's best widdle boy.

 

 

1 hour ago, LlamaLawyer said:

The second one is far more disturbing to me because it reminds me of how recent J.D. Vance's descent into Trumpism is. The tweets the attack ad references are from 2016 and 2017, but those tweets didn't get deleted until July, 2021. 

 

Vance is pandering to get elected, which shows his lack of integrity. Once elected there's really no telling how he would govern. We have no idea who this guy really is. 

I bet a lot of people in the Columbus metro think he owns Vance's Shooting Supplies.

3 hours ago, Columbo said:

 

All this plus anti-Vance ads:

 

If only this old version of JD Vance was running.  All his statements were accurate.

This Mandel/Vance take is gold:

 

On 12/7/2021 at 12:40 PM, cle_guy90 said:

If only this old version of JD Vance was running.  All his statements were accurate.

The Club for Growth is sponsoring these, since Vance is more regularly attacking the economic policies of the GOP, the big tax cuts and trade deals, and not its social stances. Economic populism, social conservatism. It's moving the pieces around on the Reagan-era equation of neoliberal economic policies and neoconservative social policy. 

Meanwhile, the Ohio  Dems continue to sit on their hands as Ohio is one of the few states that the Democrats could possibly flip in the Senate.

At this point it feels like Ohio electing a Democrat not named Sherrod Brown is like West Virginia electing a Democrat not named Joe Manchin. I just don't really see it happening. I know WV is way more skewed Republican, but it just doesn't seem likely. The Dems should be focusing on Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, and maybe North Carolina or Florida. All of these seem more likely to vote Democrat than Ohio does (outside of maybe Florida)

Tim Ryan is a solid candidate for Ohio. The Ohio Democrats (and all dems for that matter) really need to be hitting on the absurtity of these GOP candidates. How they don't accept the results of an election, etc. Start doing this before the primaries even. Hell, I think Ohio could get a Democrat elected governor if the Ohio Dems weren't clueless.

5 minutes ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

Tim Ryan is a solid candidate for Ohio. The Ohio Democrats (and all dems for that matter) really need to be hitting on the absurtity of these GOP candidates. How they don't accept the results of an election, etc. Start doing this before the primaries even. Hell, I think Ohio could get a Democrat elected governor if the Ohio Dems weren't clueless.

 

Tim could get elected governor.   I'd even consider voting for him.  But he won't get elected to the Senate as long as the "progressives" dominate the Senate Democratic leadership.

17 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

Tim could get elected governor.   I'd even consider voting for him.  But he won't get elected to the Senate as long as the "progressives" dominate the Senate Democratic leadership.

 

I honestly think Tim has a 50/50 chance at the Senate seat solely based on how awful Mandel is. I can't see moderate Republicans showing up in droves to vote for that POS. Even his own family despises him.

Edited January 4, 20223 yr by Clefan98

53 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

Tim could get elected governor.   I'd even consider voting for him.  But he won't get elected to the Senate as long as the "progressives" dominate the Senate Democratic leadership.

 

Republicans on this board love to say "I'd consider voting for X candidate", but then never end up doing it. They keep telling everyone that if we nominate moderates they'll vote for them, and then come up with an excuse when we do nominate a moderate (Strickland, Cordray, etc). It's amazing that some of you would vote for Josh Mandell over Tim Ryan in a Senate race, but I know you would. Or you'd at best not vote for either and throw away your vote when you could do your civic duty to keep wholly unqualified candidates out of serving in the Upper Chamber of our legislature. Clearly there is a better choice in those two options, but pretending that you're independent and think both are bad is such a cowardly choice IMO. Like picking third party or Trump when the choices are Donald Trump and Joe Biden (king of the moderates). No candidate is ever moderate enough. I'm convinced that if John Kasich and Rob Portman ran as Democrats for Gov and Lt. Gov, many on this forum would claim that they just aren't moderate enough, and would end up voting for Josh Mandell and JD Vance if those were the choices. Nothing is ever moderate enough to actually sway your vote.

 

And pretending that the legislature is controlled by the progressives is laughable. They can't get BBB through the Senate, and any bill that could potentially get passed would be a watered down version of it's original plan, which itself isn't some crazy left wing takeover of government. It's providing some services that most of the developed world has provided for decades.

 

If progressives really controlled the legislature under the democrats, you would be seeing much more radical proposals than the modest BBB.

49 minutes ago, Clefan98 said:

 

I honestly think Tim has a 50/50 chance at the Senate seat solely based on how awful Mandel is. I can't see moderate Republicans showing up in droves to vote for that POS. Even his own family despises him.

 

I still don't think Josh ends up with the nomination, but if he does he won't run against Tim, he will run against Biden, Schumer, Pelosi, and Harris.  And it will work.   Irony, because Tim once challenged Pelosi for the House leadership.

25 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

 

Republicans on this board love to say "I'd consider voting for X candidate", but then never end up doing it. They keep telling everyone that if we nominate moderates they'll vote for them, and then come up with an excuse when we do nominate a moderate (Strickland, Cordray, etc). It's amazing that some of you would vote for Josh Mandell over Tim Ryan in a Senate race, but I know you would. Or you'd at best not vote for either and throw away your vote when you could do your civic duty to keep wholly unqualified candidates out of serving in the Upper Chamber of our legislature. Clearly there is a better choice in those two options, but pretending that you're independent and think both are bad is such a cowardly choice IMO. Like picking third party or Trump when the choices are Donald Trump and Joe Biden (king of the moderates). No candidate is ever moderate enough. I'm convinced that if John Kasich and Rob Portman ran as Democrats for Gov and Lt. Gov, many on this forum would claim that they just aren't moderate enough, and would end up voting for Josh Mandell and JD Vance if those were the choices. Nothing is ever moderate enough to actually sway your vote.

 

And pretending that the legislature is controlled by the progressives is laughable. They can't get BBB through the Senate, and any bill that could potentially get passed would be a watered down version of it's original plan, which itself isn't some crazy left wing takeover of government. It's providing some services that most of the developed world has provided for decades.

 

If progressives really controlled the legislature under the democrats, you would be seeing much more radical proposals than the modest BBB.

 

Nevertheless, the current leadership is very leftist, and is perceived as that way.   They may not be all powerful, but they have much more influence than if they were the minority party.  And their leadership is anything but moderate.

Edited January 4, 20223 yr by E Rocc

1 minute ago, E Rocc said:

 

I still don't think Josh ends up with the nomination, but if he does he won't run against Tim, he will run against Biden, Schumer, Pelosi, and Harris.  And it will work.   Irony, because Tim once challenged Pelosi for the House leadership.

 

I think Ryan made it easy for his Republican challenger to run against the big name progressives when he called for the Senate to end the filibuster.

IMO that invalidates whatever moderate views he may have. He may not be seen as a radical progressive, but his desire to eliminate the filibuster demonstrates his willingness to be a rubber stamp for their agenda nevertheless.

1 minute ago, Ram23 said:

 

I think Ryan made it easy for his Republican challenger to run against the big name progressives when he called for the Senate to end the filibuster.

IMO that invalidates whatever moderate views he may have. He may not be seen as a radical progressive, but his desire to eliminate the filibuster demonstrates his willingness to be a rubber stamp for their agenda nevertheless.

 

The irony is Mancin isn't threatening to filibuster, he is denying them a majority.   People forget it's the 50-50 split in the Senate that put him in this position.

2 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

The irony is Mancin isn't threatening to filibuster, he is denying them a majority.   People forget it's the 50-50 split in the Senate that put him in this position.

Manchin doesn't need to filibuster. You need a super majority of 60 votes to break a filibuster to bring a bill to vote. The only reason Manchin has leverage over BBB is because the Democrats are trying to circumvent the filibuster to pass their legislation through reconciliation. The Senate is limited in how many bills they can pass through reconciliation and those bills are limited in scope.

 

He also has leverage over the filibuster debate because it again only takes a simple majority to pass senate rules changes. 

 

The true irony is that if the Senate got rid of the filibuster it would likely result in more bipartisan legislating. 

4 hours ago, E Rocc said:

But he won't get elected to the Senate as long as the "progressives" dominate the Senate Democratic leadership.

 

LOL.  Where is the evidence of that?  Progressives are getting a lot of press, but probably for the drama -- because they're not winning.

 

Failing to cut the $7T-over-ten-years defense bill

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/12/09/defense-pentagon-policy-progressives-523964

 

Failing to convince leadership to hold off on voting on the infrastructure bill before Build Back Better?

https://www.vox.com/2021/11/5/22766086/infrastructure-biden-house-democrats-vote-pass-bbb-spending-bill

 

Failing to pass Bernie's $6T-over-ten-years in social spending bill, failing to pass the social spending bill after cutting it to $3T and then $2T -- not even getting a vote...

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/586826-progressives-look-to-regroup-after-build-back-better-blowup

 

Almost seems like the Senate leadership is playing the progressives...

https://www.booker.senate.gov/news/press/11-senators-back-house-progressives-in-demand-for-passage-of-entire-biden-agenda

9 hours ago, ryanlammi said:

At this point it feels like Ohio electing a Democrat not named Sherrod Brown is like West Virginia electing a Democrat not named Joe Manchin. I just don't really see it happening. I know WV is way more skewed Republican, but it just doesn't seem likely. The Dems should be focusing on Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, and maybe North Carolina or Florida. All of these seem more likely to vote Democrat than Ohio does (outside of maybe Florida)

Ryan could win if 1) he runs a perfect campaign focusing on kitchen table issues and runs away from progressive issues like identity politics and 2) the Republican candidate runs a lousy campaign. It happens quite frequently even in wave election type years. 
 

for example:

1) KY a solid red state has a dem governor. Why? Because the GOP incumbent was a giant a hole who picked a fight with every coalition in the state and tried to be a bigger Trump than Trump. 
2) back in 2010 Senste race in MO, what looked like a solid Republican pickup was derailed because the candidate was so poor and focused on issues like legitimate rape instead of issues that matter to the voters. 
3) similarly in Indiana around that time the GOP candidate seemed to be too focused on the social wars instead of actual issues that mattered and he was upset. 
 

it can very easily happen, even in a wave type year

15 hours ago, Foraker said:

 

LOL.  Where is the evidence of that?  Progressives are getting a lot of press, but probably for the drama -- because they're not winning.

 

 

Progressive do dominate the leadership and direction of Senate Democrats. Fortunately for the country, there are one or two actual moderate Democratic Senators who have, on some issues, kept the radical elements of the progressive agenda at bay.

 

Despite all the talk about Ryan being a "moderate," he would be much further to the left than someone like Manchin or even Sinema. That hurts his chances in Ohio - a state Trump won, twice, by ~8% (the largest margins of any presidential candidate since 1992).

5 minutes ago, Ram23 said:

 

Progressive do dominate the leadership and direction of Senate Democrats. Fortunately for the country, there are one or two actual moderate Democratic Senators who have, on some issues, kept the radical elements of the progressive agenda at bay.

 

Despite all the talk about Ryan being a "moderate," he would be much further to the left than someone like Manchin or even Sinema. That hurts his chances in Ohio - a state Trump won, twice, by ~8% (the largest margins of any presidential candidate since 1992).

 

I don't see how Ryan is any further left than Sherrod Brown?    

When did Schumer become a progressive? 

Tim Ryan's odds will increase as soon as he faces off toe-to-toe with his GOP opponent.

 

His dominating physical presence will serve him well during the debates. He's 6'4" 235-245lbs and was an all-Ohio football player at Warren JFK. Scoff if you will, but appearances do influence voters more in backwards, macho states like Ohio.

 

Not only will Tim run mental circles around the GOP candidate, he will also come off as more alpha compared to the short, weakly-built weasels like Mandel, Vance, Moreno etc.

Edited January 5, 20223 yr by Clefan98

An example of Tim Ryan just being bigger than most humans. The closest guy to him in stature is Jason Kokrak, who is a large man for a PGA tour-winning golfer.

 

Edited January 5, 20223 yr by Clefan98

49 minutes ago, Ram23 said:

 

Progressive do dominate the leadership and direction of Senate Democrats.

"Just keep saying it and they'll believe you"?  Your evidence is not very convincing.

 

37 minutes ago, Luke_S said:

When did Schumer become a progressive? 

LOL -- because he's left of McConnell!

48 minutes ago, Foraker said:

"Just keep saying it and they'll believe you"?  Your evidence is not very convincing.

 

LOL -- because he's left of McConnell!

 

All Democrats are super Far-Left.

Currently living in Warren, OH I do not think Tim Ryan has much of a chance.  Most people in this region no longer like him and if you look at his margin of victory it has shrunk so much that he almost lost the last time around.  That said, I think if he goes against Mandel he has his best chance of winning.  Mandel I think will lose the independents and center rights with how insane he is.

1 hour ago, Clefan98 said:

Tim Ryan's odds will increase as soon as he faces off toe-to-toe with his GOP opponent.

 

His dominating physical presence will serve him well during the debates. He's 6'4" 235-245lbs and was an all-Ohio football player at Warren JFK. Scoff if you will, but appearances do influence voters more in backwards, macho states like Ohio.

 

Not only will Tim run mental circles around the GOP candidate, he will also come off as more alpha compared to the short, weakly-built weasels like Mandel, Vance, Moreno etc.

 

I think Mike Gibbons is taller than Ryan, no? He's a big guy and his "Gridiron grit" commercials have pretty much cornered the market on the football tough approach. And Mandel was in the marines for 8 years, so I wouldn't be one to call him weakly-built. JD does look a bit like a chunky teenager, I'll give you that one.

 

Also, our very popular governor is like 5'-6" so you might be overestimating the importance of height in general here.

26 minutes ago, cle_guy90 said:

Currently living in Warren, OH I do not think Tim Ryan has much of a chance.  Most people in this region no longer like him and if you look at his margin of victory it has shrunk so much that he almost lost the last time around.  That said, I think if he goes against Mandel he has his best chance of winning.  Mandel I think will lose the independents and center rights with how insane he is.

 

Hi, I grew up in Warren. Tim still won so it's unfair to say that "most" people no longer like him. It's all about the match up, as you noted.

 

I also believe The Valley will pull for one of their own over a Mandel.

Edited January 5, 20223 yr by Clefan98

 

9 minutes ago, Ram23 said:

 

I think Mike Gibbons is taller than Ryan, no? He's a big guy and his "Gridiron grit" commercials have pretty much cornered the market on the football tough approach. And Mandel was in the marines for 8 years, so I wouldn't be one to call him weakly-built. JD does look a bit like a chunky teenager, I'll give you that one.

 

Also, our very popular governor is like 5'-6" so you might be overestimating the importance of height in general here.

 

I've met both in person, Tim is taller and wider. 

 

Mandel doesn't look or act like a marine, so there's that.

 

DeWine isn't popular with the red alpha's.

 

Your memory must be worse than your political views -->  https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/08/10/michigan-militia-targeted-ohio-governor-mike-dewine/5551948001/

 

 

 

 

Edited January 5, 20223 yr by Clefan98

7 minutes ago, Clefan98 said:

 

Hi, I grew up in Warren. He still won so it's unfair to say that "most" people no longer like him. It's all about the match up, as you noted.

 

I also believe The Valley will pull for one of their own over a Mandel.

Sorry "most" was not the right word.  But he did lose Trumbull County by about 1% but that is a drastic change from even 4 years ago.  The said thing for me being a Center-right person is that more and more I am unable to vote for the Republican candidate and this will probably be the same as well.  Matt Dolan seems to be the closest to that and based on polling it looks like he has no chance.

^ Matt has a conscience and is certainly qualified for the position. These characteristics are why he's polling so low and unelectable in today's GQP.   

Edited January 5, 20223 yr by Clefan98

35 minutes ago, Clefan98 said:

 

 

I've met both in person, Tim is taller and wider. 

 

Mandel doesn't look or act like a marine, so there's that.

 

 

 

 

A Marine friend of mine says he doesn't wear his uniform properly in pictures. I'm not familiar with the details but he said something about lens cleaning supplies.

2 hours ago, Clefan98 said:

An example of Tim Ryan just being bigger than most humans. The closest guy to him in stature is Jason Kokrak, who is a large man for a PGA tour-winning golfer.

 

 

This of course explains Mike Dewine's electoral success.....

7 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

This of course explains Mike Dewine's electoral success.....

 

Mike Dewine was helped because he was up against Richard Cordray, who is also not physically imposing. 

41 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

This of course explains Mike Dewine's electoral success.....

 

It does explain a lot of Trump's success over Hillary.

Edited January 5, 20223 yr by Clefan98

2 hours ago, GCrites80s said:

 

All Democrats are super Far-Left.

 

Compared to anywhere else in the world, Democrats are super conservative.  AOC and Bernie would moderates in many countries.  It's an illustration of just how far to the right the US really is.  It never really left its Puritans behind, unfortunately.  

1 hour ago, jonoh81 said:

 

Compared to anywhere else in the world, Democrats are super conservative.  AOC and Bernie would moderates in many countries.  It's an illustration of just how far to the right the US really is.  It never really left its Puritans behind, unfortunately.  

If by world you mean west, then you are overall correct.  There are still issues such as abortion where the United States is further left than most western countries including those in Europe.

31 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

 

Compared to anywhere else in the world, Democrats are super conservative.  AOC and Bernie would moderates in many countries.  It's an illustration of just how far to the right the US really is.  It never really left its Puritans behind, unfortunately.  

 

While parts of the right are descended from the Puritans, ever since Reagan (at least) as much of it has a culturally libertarian streak.

The unifying aspect, such that it is, is mistrust of government.  Specifically mistrust of government more than mistrust of corporations.

2 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

While parts of the right are descended from the Puritans, ever since Reagan (at least) as much of it has a culturally libertarian streak.

The unifying aspect, such that it is, is mistrust of government.  Specifically mistrust of government more than mistrust of corporations.

 

 

don't forget the promotion of religion into politics, racism and subjugation of women aspects, which also descends from the puritans.

23 minutes ago, mrnyc said:

 

 

don't forget the promotion of religion into politics, racism and subjugation of women aspects, which also descends from the puritans.

 

24 minutes ago, mrnyc said:

 

 

don't forget the promotion of religion into politics, racism and subjugation of women aspects, which also descends from the puritans.

 

Those aren't unifying aspects.  Religion is a faction, the others are very small factions.

 

What semi-unifies the right is a mistrust of government.  Which parts of the left share to a degree, though they distrust corporations more.

1 minute ago, E Rocc said:

What semi-unifies the right is a mistrust of government.  Which parts of the left share to a degree, though they distrust corporations more.

 

Neither the left nor right trusts government, so let's get that straight. The approval levels of Congress prove this notion.

 

The difference is the left believes what they hear and read from professors, scientists, doctors, health experts and historians....aka smart people.

 

The right unites behind hate, guns and the bible...ironic isn't it? If this weren't true, why is Mandel the leading US Senate candidate in Ohio?