May 4, 20223 yr Interesting that Dewine couldn’t even clear a majority, despite name recognition and running against a group of jokes. Had his opponents been smart and consolidated the anti-Dewine vote, Dewine could’ve been defeated. Wonder if this could end up being good news for Whaley in November? Could Renacci or Blystone be convinced to run third party/independent? 😈
May 4, 20223 yr 49 minutes ago, amped91 said: Interesting that Dewine couldn’t even clear a majority, despite name recognition and running against a group of jokes. Had his opponents been smart and consolidated the anti-Dewine vote, Dewine could’ve been defeated. Wonder if this could end up being good news for Whaley in November? Could Renacci or Blystone be convinced to run third party/independent? 😈 Doubt it. I also don't think many Renacci and Blystone voters have Nan Whaley as their second choice. They'll still come out and vote because there's a senate contest and then they'll vote DeWine with a scowl on their face. I think Whaley would have had a much easier time facing Renacci or Blystone. It's pretty hard for me to imagine DeWine losing. EDIT: Also, to flesh this out a bit more, as much as Trump and DeWine hate each other, if Renacci ran against DeWine in the primary, DeWine would be smart enough to call up Trump and complain about it. And Trump would be smart enough to tell Renacci to back off. Edited May 4, 20223 yr by LlamaLawyer
May 4, 20223 yr 1 hour ago, taestell said: He actually ended up losing Hamilton County, although only by a few votes. I had no idea how the D race would go. Whaley crushing Cranley is very satisfying. Hopefully that gives her some additional momentum going into November. 39 minutes ago, amped91 said: Interesting that Dewine couldn’t even clear a majority, despite name recognition and running against a group of jokes. Had his opponents been smart and consolidated the anti-Dewine vote, Dewine could’ve been defeated. Wonder if this could end up being good news for Whaley in November? Could Renacci or Blystone be convinced to run third party/independent? 😈 Could Renacci or Blystone be convinced to run third party/independent? I don’t think so, but that would definitely be hilarious. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
May 4, 20223 yr 28 minutes ago, LlamaLawyer said: Doubt it. I also don't think many Renacci and Blystone voters have Nan Whaley as their second choice. They'll still come out and vote because there's a senate contest and then they'll vote DeWine with a scowl on their face. I think Whaley would have had a much easier time facing Renacci or Blystone. It's pretty hard for me to imagine DeWine losing. EDIT: Also, to flesh this out a bit more, as much as Trump and DeWine hate each other, if Renacci ran against DeWine in the primary, DeWine would be smart enough to call up Trump and complain about it. And Trump would be smart enough to tell Renacci to back off. Would Renacci/Blystone voters back Whaley? I don’t think that would happen. But, there’s still a lot of apprehension towards Vance in MAGA Land, so I could see some of them deciding to sit this one out. Will it be enough to make a significant impact for Whaley? I really don’t know. Really, I’m just trying to look at it in a positive light. Over the last ~decade, I’ve lost most hope for this state.
May 4, 20223 yr Whaley's win over Cranley was entirely predicable. He's an uncharismatic jerk, to put it very mildly. To say he wasn't well-loved in Cincy would be an understatement. His anti-street car stance turned off a whole lot of people to him there who might have otherwise taken up the case for him around the state. Last night was his karma come due. I don't see how Whaley beats DeWine though, unless some massive scandal blows out and takes him down between now and mid-October. Facing Renacci or the Cosplay Cowboy would have been an entirely different story, however. Hopefully she at least uses this cycle to gain some name recognition and set the stage for a future statewide effort. It's not like the Dems have much of a bench or better alternatives waiting in the wings.
May 4, 20223 yr I could see Blystone running third party (still unlikely, but possible). He has no loyalty to the party or to DeWine. He's just crazy enough to think he could win.
May 4, 20223 yr 21 minutes ago, amped91 said: Would Renacci/Blystone voters back Whaley? I don’t think that would happen. But, there’s still a lot of apprehension towards Vance in MAGA Land, so I could see some of them deciding to sit this one out. Will it be enough to make a significant impact for Whaley? I really don’t know. Really, I’m just trying to look at it in a positive light. Over the last ~decade, I’ve lost most hope for this state. I don't think there is enough excitement to drive MAGA voters to the polls in November. Comments I've seen from some of our local crazies makes me think they see the governor choice as between two Democrats and vote for neither, hopefully some random third-party candidate is on the ballot to be Ohio's Jill Stein. I didn't have a ton of hope for Nan in the general, but supreme court shenanigans have me rethinking things. I don't know what the polling looked like for the primary (was there polling?), but I suspect there was a huge surge of support yesterday for any female, pro-choice candidates. Given our's state's recent history, it's not difficult to see some extreme ban finding its way to DeWine's desk, and he would almost certainly sign it. That would almost definitely drive turnout enough to cost him his job.
May 4, 20223 yr 6 minutes ago, DEPACincy said: I could see Blystone running third party (still unlikely, but possible). He has no loyalty to the party or to DeWine. He's just crazy enough to think he could win. I might be wrong about this, but doesn't Ohio have Sore Loser laws that keep a primary loser from running third party in the general? Regardless, his supporters should still "make a statement" by voting for him write-in...
May 4, 20223 yr We all know there are a lot of headwinds for Democrats heading into the general election in November, but I think there are a few "knowns" out there that could really change the political landscape. (1) With the leak of the the SC ruling overturning Roe it could energize an otherwise apathetic Democratic base. This could also turn away swing voters and moderates that would have otherwise supported Republicans in November. (2) The January 6th committee is still set to hold its public hearings and release their findings. Leaks from that suggest quite a few Republicans will receive some negative press from this, including Ohio Rep Jim Jordan. This could be followed by action by the Justice Department. Revelations from that committee could go either way; further pushing moderates and independents away from the Republican party, or galvanizing Republicans who feel constantly under attack. I hope the former rather than the latter.... (3) The full extent of the First Energy Bribery scandal, there is so much smoke around DeWine that its hard to believe he didn't at least know what was going on. Now that Whaley is out of the primary she can really nail DeWine and Republicans for corruption in Ohio between First Energy and the continual scandals around charter schools.
May 4, 20223 yr 8 minutes ago, Luke_S said: 1) With the leak of the the SC ruling overturning Roe it could energize an otherwise apathetic Democratic base. This could also turn away swing voters and moderates that would have otherwise supported Republicans in November. I so not see this resonating with state voters in a state who generally favor more abortion restrictions. New York or California, I could see, but statewide in Ohio, I do not see it having much of an impact. Also, Dewine is too popular with moderates for how he handled COVID and he has been open about his right to life stance for a long time now. 10 minutes ago, Luke_S said: 2) The January 6th committee is still set to hold its public hearings and release their findings. Leaks from that suggest quite a few Republicans will receive some negative press from this, including Ohio Rep Jim Jordan. This could be followed by action by the Justice Department. Revelations from that committee could go either way; further pushing moderates and independents away from the Republican party, or galvanizing Republicans who feel constantly under attack. I hope the former rather than the latter.... That is a national matter. It may come into play more with the Senate election, but you have an incumbent governor who has never kissed Trump's ring and even took some hostile positions against Trump, I do not see how this effects the governors race. 11 minutes ago, Luke_S said: (3) The full extent of the First Energy Bribery scandal, there is so much smoke around DeWine that its hard to believe he didn't at least know what was going on. Now that Whaley is out of the primary she can really nail DeWine and Republicans for corruption in Ohio between First Energy and the continual scandals around charter schools. Whaley certainly is determined to make this an issue and try and tie the governor to it. I think it is too far removed at this point and the public does not really seem to care about it unless it shows a direct tangential line to the governors mansion. That is going to be hard to show at this point. It is far different than in 2006 when Taft's administration was stained by the coingate and a couple other scandals that were directly connected to people in the governors office. Whaley will be lucky to get 40% of the vote unless something major happens to cause Dewine to implode
May 4, 20223 yr 38 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said: Whaley will be lucky to get 40% of the vote unless something major happens to cause Dewine to implode Cordray got 46.7% in 2018, which was a blue wave year that included Sherrod Brown trouncing Renacci. Nan Whaley has no advantage that Cordray didn't and many more things going against her. So I think 46.7% is clearly her ceiling.
May 4, 20223 yr 25 minutes ago, LlamaLawyer said: Cordray got 46.7% in 2018, which was a blue wave year that included Sherrod Brown trouncing Renacci. Nan Whaley has no advantage that Cordray didn't and many more things going against her. So I think 46.7% is clearly her ceiling. I don't know about that. I think she'll definitely lose, but she's a more exciting candidate than Cordray. He's a nice guy but boring as hell and wonky. She's a better public speaker, is very popular in Dayton, and is a woman--which has been beneficial electorally the past few years in mobilizing suburban women.
May 5, 20223 yr That's the nicest thing he's ever said. Like, ever. "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
May 5, 20223 yr 11 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said: I so not see this resonating with state voters in a state who generally favor more abortion restrictions. New York or California, I could see, but statewide in Ohio, I do not see it having much of an impact. Also, Dewine is too popular with moderates for how he handled COVID and he has been open about his right to life stance for a long time now. Where is your evidence to support this assertion, besides feelings and/or anecdotes? Poll: Ohio voters support Roe v. Wade; oppose heartbeat bill abortion ban Despite Ohio laws limiting abortion, majority of voters think abortion should remain legal, poll shows Abortion Poll Results for Ohio voters - ISideWith.com
May 5, 20223 yr 10 hours ago, GCrites80s said: Harley Guys aren't going to turn up for DeWine so Whaley has that. The other thing to factor in here is boomerang voters who moved in from NYC and other liberal bastions for the pandemic. May not be enough to tip the scales in Ohio, but it could register. Are there any stats on GOP vs Dem ballots in this primary?
May 5, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, Cleburger said: Are there any stats on GOP vs Dem ballots in this primary? I heard on the news today that Dewine received more votes in the primary than Whaley and Cranley combined for what that is worth.
May 5, 20223 yr 40 minutes ago, brtshrcegr said: Where is your evidence to support this assertion, besides feelings and/or anecdotes? Poll: Ohio voters support Roe v. Wade; oppose heartbeat bill abortion ban Despite Ohio laws limiting abortion, majority of voters think abortion should remain legal, poll shows Abortion Poll Results for Ohio voters - ISideWith.com Let's break this down a bit. The numbers do show that people in Ohio oppose the heartbeat bill with 40% in favor. That is a strong opposition of it. Now the heartbeat bill is a pretty restrictive bill which means there are likely many other voters who would not go so far as to support the heartbeat bill but be open to other restrictions on abortion. How big is that? Probably at least 10% which makes it a 50/50 split. Now of those who say they support abortion with minimal restrictions, say the other 50%, how many of them are actually passionate about that position. I would argue you would get another 10-20% falloff there. So realistically, you have a strong passionate core on both sides and it is pretty squishy in the middle. The statistics have shown this has not changed much over the last 20-30 years so it is pretty even. Over the last 20-30 years Ohio has become a bit more aggressive in the abortion battle staking out pro-life positions. Over that period, the electorate has not offered much more than a whimper. The politicians who pushed these bills have not been punished at the polls and have won re-election in many cases and yet the politicians keep moving move and more to the pro-life side. At the same time, the Democrat side has moved more and more to the left on the abortion issue and has eschewed restrictions of any kind under most circumstances. They have pushed laws in New York and California and other more liberal states where they have had power. If these were so popular in Ohio, you would see voters moving to embrace these issues or at least pushing their Republican representative to temper their positions so they would remain in power. The fact is that in Ohio, that is not the case. It is one thing to claim pro-life or pro-choice in a poll, but another thing to consider it at the voting booth. Based on the way the elections have turned out, for the majority of voters, abortion does not really move the needle. You have a very passionate pro-life side that almost treats abortion as a single issue, but for everyone else, the abortion debate is jumbled in the mix and you would likely find many Pro-Choice minded voters treating it as a throw-away to other more important issues to them. That is why the polls about voters in favor of Roe V Wade do not mean much because the majority of the voters are not single issue voters who hold abortion as a litmus test. I would argue that to those who do, the pro-life side has a much larger base in that area.
May 5, 20223 yr 19 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said: I heard on the news today that Dewine received more votes in the primary than Whaley and Cranley combined for what that is worth. That is correct. Not just in the gubernatorial race, but across the board GOP turnout was WAY higher. But it's hard to read too much into that at this point because the the GOP US Senate primary was by far the most high profile race. The implications there were of general election proportions. There wasn't anything like that on the Dem side. Whaley vs. Cranley ... and even DeWine vs. Renacci/cowboy guy ... was small potatoes compared to that race, though turnout in the Senate race assuredly bled over to the GOP gubernatorial primary. The Dem US Senate primary was set in stone as soon as Ryan put his name in the hat. Ryan sure wasn't wasting any bullets on a primary. Not sure about Whaley-Cranley in the rest of the state, but there were very few ads in the Cleveland-Akron-Canton area that I saw, and the ones I remember were from Cranley (touting Cincinnati's population growth vs. Dayton's). I don't remember seeing any Whaley TV ads (though I'm a streamer who mainly watches sporting events as "live" TV). Edited May 5, 20223 yr by Rando Sinclair
May 5, 20223 yr 23 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said: Over the last 20-30 years Ohio has become a bit more aggressive in the abortion battle staking out pro-life positions. Over that period, the electorate has not offered much more than a whimper. The politicians who pushed these bills have not been punished at the polls and have won re-election in many cases and yet the politicians keep moving move and more to the pro-life side. Ohio has been ridiculously gerrymandered in favor of Republicans for at least the last decade, meaning those politicians only really face potential backlash during primaries if they aren't seen as being conservative enough by the base. Importantly, it is normally the most engaged and partisan voters voting in the primaries. You can push too far where even the R Next to the name won't be enough for some people and abortion may be the issue to do it.
May 5, 20223 yr Author On 8/10/2021 at 8:55 AM, ryanlammi said: If they are the only two major candidates on the ballot, I'll be interested to see how Dayton and Cincinnati both vote in the primary. I would guess Whaley would get something like 80-90% of the primary votes in Dayton, and maybe 30-40% of the Cincinnati votes. I doubt she would win Cincinnati, but a lot of people down here don't like Cranley, and he isn't going to get the votes from the Republicans he's accustomed to getting in city elections here. I stand corrected. I knew Whaley would outperform Cranley in their home markets. I didn't expect her to win over Cranley in Cincinnati or Hamilton County. It probably helps a lot that many typical Cranley voters probably voted in the Republican primary or stayed home. As I said, his voting base just isn't there in a democratic primary. Whaley got 81.84% of the vote in Montgomery County and 50.05% in Hamilton County.
May 5, 20223 yr 1 hour ago, Luke_S said: Ohio has been ridiculously gerrymandered in favor of Republicans for at least the last decade, meaning those politicians only really face potential backlash during primaries if they aren't seen as being conservative enough by the base. Importantly, it is normally the most engaged and partisan voters voting in the primaries. You can push too far where even the R Next to the name won't be enough for some people and abortion may be the issue to do it. At the US House level, not one seat has changed in Ohio in the last 10 years because the state was controlled at all three levels after the 2010 election when Kasich beat Strickland in the governor's race by 77,000 votes (49-47 percent). That gave the GOP all the power to ram through gerrymandered maps at the US level and even more gerrymandered maps than before at the state level. Consider that Kasich rode in the group of DeWine, Husted, Yost, etc. (all then either incumbents or essentially incumbents moving one step up the ranks who have had a major advantage), there has not been much accountability... though part of that is also on Dems for running out some awful candidates in the same timeframe.
May 5, 20223 yr 7 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said: Let's break this down a bit. The numbers do show that people in Ohio oppose the heartbeat bill with 40% in favor. That is a strong opposition of it. Now the heartbeat bill is a pretty restrictive bill which means there are likely many other voters who would not go so far as to support the heartbeat bill but be open to other restrictions on abortion. How big is that? Probably at least 10% which makes it a 50/50 split. Now of those who say they support abortion with minimal restrictions, say the other 50%, how many of them are actually passionate about that position. I would argue you would get another 10-20% falloff there. So realistically, you have a strong passionate core on both sides and it is pretty squishy in the middle. The statistics have shown this has not changed much over the last 20-30 years so it is pretty even. Over the last 20-30 years Ohio has become a bit more aggressive in the abortion battle staking out pro-life positions. Over that period, the electorate has not offered much more than a whimper. The politicians who pushed these bills have not been punished at the polls and have won re-election in many cases and yet the politicians keep moving move and more to the pro-life side. At the same time, the Democrat side has moved more and more to the left on the abortion issue and has eschewed restrictions of any kind under most circumstances. They have pushed laws in New York and California and other more liberal states where they have had power. If these were so popular in Ohio, you would see voters moving to embrace these issues or at least pushing their Republican representative to temper their positions so they would remain in power. The fact is that in Ohio, that is not the case. It is one thing to claim pro-life or pro-choice in a poll, but another thing to consider it at the voting booth. Based on the way the elections have turned out, for the majority of voters, abortion does not really move the needle. You have a very passionate pro-life side that almost treats abortion as a single issue, but for everyone else, the abortion debate is jumbled in the mix and you would likely find many Pro-Choice minded voters treating it as a throw-away to other more important issues to them. That is why the polls about voters in favor of Roe V Wade do not mean much because the majority of the voters are not single issue voters who hold abortion as a litmus test. I would argue that to those who do, the pro-life side has a much larger base in that area. That’s a reasoned post@Brutus_buckeyeand while I do not ultimately agree with every assertion you make I understand your logic in isolation. That being said, none of it proves or supports the supposition that Ohioans “generally favor more abortion restrictions.” From the Cleveland.com link (from 2020): “51.3% of likely voters who believed abortion should be legal all or most of the time, compared to 38.4% who thought it should be illegal all or most of the time”.
May 5, 20223 yr 7 hours ago, Luke_S said: Ohio has been ridiculously gerrymandered in favor of Republicans for at least the last decade, meaning those politicians only really face potential backlash during primaries if they aren't seen as being conservative enough by the base. Importantly, it is normally the most engaged and partisan voters voting in the primaries. You can push too far where even the R Next to the name won't be enough for some people and abortion may be the issue to do it. When we're talking about state elections specifically, though, the statewide races are by definition not gerrymandered. There may be General Assembly and Ohio Senate districts that are gerrymandered, and those could be vulnerable to the overreach you describe (this is the inherent weakness of gerrymandering--you're vulnerable to waves because you're trying to plan for a large number of narrow wins, which can turn into a large number of narrow losses). But for the subject of this thread, gerrymandering is a non-issue, except in the sense that if Whaley-Stephens wins, it affects the makeup of the legislature that they'll likely have to work with.
May 5, 20223 yr 12 minutes ago, Gramarye said: When we're talking about state elections specifically, though, the statewide races are by definition not gerrymandered. There may be General Assembly and Ohio Senate districts that are gerrymandered, and those could be vulnerable to the overreach you describe (this is the inherent weakness of gerrymandering--you're vulnerable to waves because you're trying to plan for a large number of narrow wins, which can turn into a large number of narrow losses). But for the subject of this thread, gerrymandering is a non-issue, except in the sense that if Whaley-Stephens wins, it affects the makeup of the legislature that they'll likely have to work with. Agree with what you're saying here, my mistake.
May 5, 20223 yr On 5/2/2022 at 7:23 PM, Brutus_buckeye said: Cranley is publicly pro choice now, he has not always been. In general he tends to lean pro life side but in today’s dem party you can’t say that out loud. There is nothing wrong with it. He is someone who actually understands both sides. He can be short and has a temper but he is a good guy on the whole So can the fetus be claimed on taxes? Can I take out an insurance policy for it? Should we start counting our birthdays 9 months early? What a bizarre 1920s take. you can’t even donate organs without express written consent when someone is dead but if someone gets raped force the birth, ah the modern day republicans who couldn’t wear masks for 20 minutes.
May 5, 20223 yr 2 hours ago, brtshrcegr said: That’s a reasoned post@Brutus_buckeyeand while I do not ultimately agree with every assertion you make I understand your logic in isolation. That being said, none of it proves or supports the supposition that Ohioans “generally favor more abortion restrictions.” From the Cleveland.com link (from 2020): “51.3% of likely voters who believed abortion should be legal all or most of the time, compared to 38.4% who thought it should be illegal all or most of the time”. I appreciate your position on the matter. While you see my reasoning, I will concede to you that all of these polls have been taken under the current law where abortion is allowed in every state so the Pro-Choice crowd is not a motivated or moved at the polls by politicians who want to restrict the right. Now, if it is taken away, does that create a different level of engagement than you currently see? I don't know. In my opinion, I still do not think you see the same single issue voter on the pro-choice side as you do on the pro-life side and that is partly just on how the issue directly impacts people. Inflation touches everyone, taxes touch everyone, military spending, social welfare effectively touch everyone. Also, it is important to remember that eliminating Roe v Wade will likely not affect 1/2 the states and probably less than 1/2 the population as the larger Blue states will not see any significant changes in abortion policy. The most restrictive states will likely be smaller states and states where the majority of the population is more prone to be pro-life. So at the end of the day, how much outrage will strong pro-choice activist X living in Cali or New York truly have over a Misissippi ban on the procedure when it does not directly affect them or their close friends?
May 5, 20223 yr 43 minutes ago, Clefan14 said: So can the fetus be claimed on taxes? Can I take out an insurance policy for it? Should we start counting our birthdays 9 months early? What a bizarre 1920s take. you can’t even donate organs without express written consent when someone is dead but if someone gets raped force the birth, ah the modern day republicans who couldn’t wear masks for 20 minutes. what does this have to do with Cranley?
May 5, 20223 yr 4 hours ago, Gramarye said: When we're talking about state elections specifically, though, the statewide races are by definition not gerrymandered. There may be General Assembly and Ohio Senate districts that are gerrymandered, and those could be vulnerable to the overreach you describe (this is the inherent weakness of gerrymandering--you're vulnerable to waves because you're trying to plan for a large number of narrow wins, which can turn into a large number of narrow losses). But for the subject of this thread, gerrymandering is a non-issue, except in the sense that if Whaley-Stephens wins, it affects the makeup of the legislature that they'll likely have to work with. The gerrymandering of the legislative bodies does effect the state-wide races though. If one party has twice as many reps than they should otherwise have, that means they have twice as many staffers on full-time payroll than they should. That turns into experience that really matters in those statewide races. It's like the farm system in baseball.
May 24, 20223 yr As if I needed another reason to vote for her: When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
June 7, 20223 yr Nan Whaley Proposes Inflation Stimulus Checks if Elected Ohio Governor Democratic governor nominee Nan Whaley is promising $350 checks to help Ohioans manage the rising cost of gas, groceries and other essentials. But with some economists pointing to federal stimulus as one of the drivers of inflation, her plan may not sit well with them. Whaley’s plan would take the $2.68 billion in American Rescue Plan dollars earmarked for Ohio and hand it out to residents directly. Checks would go to the same people who received federal stimulus checks — $350 per individual or $700 per couple. “We need to use this money to help Ohio families, full stop,” Whaley argued. More below: https://columbusunderground.com/nan-whaley-inflation-stimulus-checks-ocj1/ "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
June 7, 20223 yr ^basic economics. You do not stimulate the economy to stop inflation. The worst thing you could do the fight inflation is to give stimulus checks.
June 7, 20223 yr I get that this is just an attempt to try to get her name out there. But regardless, this is a really dumb proposal.
June 7, 20223 yr This is a good proposal. The simplest and most effective means of helping people is giving them money. The primary drivers of inflation have been pandemic-related supply chain issues, the Trump tariffs, and more recently Russia’s invasion of Ukraine affecting oil prices. Stimulus checks were probably number 4 (maybe even 5, considering the record profits of companies due to price increases), and Ohio-only checks would not have anywhere near the impact of the Fed checks. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
August 29, 20222 yr DeWine Won’t Commit to a Gubernatorial Debate Against Whaley Nan Whaley wants a debate with the governor. But will Mike DeWine go toe to toe with his Democratic challenger? He repeatedly avoided a clear answer on the subject Friday. “We’ll see. I suspect there will be joint appearances that some of the newspapers will be having, those will be available to people to watch live,” he said to reporters after a speech. “I’m out every day talking with the people in the state of Ohio. There has been no governor that has had more press conferences than I have.” DeWine said voters have his years of governor with which to evaluate him. More below: https://columbusunderground.com/dewine-wont-commit-to-a-gubernatorial-debate-against-whaley-ocj1/ "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
September 19, 20222 yr can someone explain how in the sam hail is dewine polling ahead of whaley? i would assume if it ends up true in the end it falls squarely on the backs of ohio women. and with ohio always being a bellweather state, even with its swing to the right lately, it doesnt bode well for dems nationally if temperate and sensible dem candidates like ryan and whaley fail against their extremist opponents.
September 19, 20222 yr 6 minutes ago, mrnyc said: can someone explain how in the sam hail is dewine polling ahead of whaley? i would assume if it ends up true in the end it falls squarely on the backs of ohio women. and with ohio always being a bellweather state, even with its swing to the right lately, it doesnt bode well for dems nationally if temperate and sensible dem candidates like ryan and whaley fail against their extremist opponents. Ohio isn't a bell weather any more, FiveThirtyEight has Ohio's partisan lean at R+12.4 (538's State Partisan Lean). DeWine has also, somehow, managed to maintain a moderate brand. Likely because he is moderate compared to the extreme legislature. And while he does nothing to try to reign them in--not even a symbolic veto--he "grudgingly" signs laws passed by the legislature to signal that he isn't totally comfortable with the laws, while privately he seems perfectly happy with their outcomes.
September 19, 20222 yr 4 minutes ago, mrnyc said: can someone explain how in the sam hail is dewine polling ahead of whaley? i would assume if it ends up true in the end it falls squarely on the backs of ohio women. and with ohio always being a bellweather state, even with its swing to the right lately, it doesnt bode well for dems nationally if temperate and sensible dem candidates like ryan and whaley fail against their extremist opponents. 1) power of incumbency. 2) Dewine has a name and has been recognized in the state for over 30 years now. Whaley has made a name in niche circles but is still relatively unknown statewide 3) Dewine camp has a lot more money than Whaley coupled with the name recognition. 4) Dewine was fairly respected and a fairly popular governor in Ohio amongst all coalitions (even though many on the far right did not like him because of COVID) 5) Ohio is a red leaning state. You can be a Dem and win in Ohio but you have to run as a conservative Dem to appeal statewide (see Paul Ryan). Whaley is not running that type of campaign and is still catering to niche interests that is popular amongst the progressive or more liberal leaning dem base but does not play well statewide. I think it is better to contrast the governor race with the Senate race and it paints a much clearer picture on what is going on 1) Governor race - Popular incumbent with statewide name recognition vs relatively unknown challenger vs Senate you have an open seat with seat with a slightly better known Democrat vs an upstart challenger who is running a poor race 2) Gov race - The big money players are not playing on the Dem side because they see the odds stacked against them (see #1) vs the Senate race is a much more attainable race (open seat vs incumbent) 3) Gov race - challenger is not well recognized and is also not as good of a campaigner. She ran for mayor of a small city 2-3 times but otherwise has not held public office. In the Senate race, Ryan has been there for a while, he is a much more experienced campaigner. 4) Gov Race - Whaley has not moved to the right to embrace the conservative tilt in Ohio politics and is running as an urban city candidate. That does not win statewide. Ryan, from Eastern Ohio understands where the race will be run and how to appeal to the voters in those areas. He is running to capture the rural, white voter in Eastern Ohio. Now he will not win those voters, but his goal is to create a split that allows him to win elsewhere.
September 19, 20222 yr 14 minutes ago, mrnyc said: can someone explain how in the sam hail is dewine polling ahead of whaley? He's known in the state and hasn't rocked the boat too much - he's been able to distract from his tyrannical (not really, but to hard r base) COVID decisions and pivot to abortion. Additionally, by refusing to debate Whaley he's not giving her the platform/keeping her unknown to a large part of the state. If they debated she'd get more attention than he's comfortable with.
September 19, 20222 yr 3 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said: 1) power of incumbency. 2) Dewine has a name and has been recognized in the state for over 30 years now. Whaley has made a name in niche circles but is still relatively unknown statewide 3) Dewine camp has a lot more money than Whaley coupled with the name recognition. 4) Dewine was fairly respected and a fairly popular governor in Ohio amongst all coalitions (even though many on the far right did not like him because of COVID) 5) Ohio is a red leaning state. You can be a Dem and win in Ohio but you have to run as a conservative Dem to appeal statewide (see Paul Ryan). Whaley is not running that type of campaign and is still catering to niche interests that is popular amongst the progressive or more liberal leaning dem base but does not play well statewide. I think it is better to contrast the governor race with the Senate race and it paints a much clearer picture on what is going on 1) Governor race - Popular incumbent with statewide name recognition vs relatively unknown challenger vs Senate you have an open seat with seat with a slightly better known Democrat vs an upstart challenger who is running a poor race 2) Gov race - The big money players are not playing on the Dem side because they see the odds stacked against them (see #1) vs the Senate race is a much more attainable race (open seat vs incumbent) 3) Gov race - challenger is not well recognized and is also not as good of a campaigner. She ran for mayor of a small city 2-3 times but otherwise has not held public office. In the Senate race, Ryan has been there for a while, he is a much more experienced campaigner. 4) Gov Race - Whaley has not moved to the right to embrace the conservative tilt in Ohio politics and is running as an urban city candidate. That does not win statewide. Ryan, from Eastern Ohio understands where the race will be run and how to appeal to the voters in those areas. He is running to capture the rural, white voter in Eastern Ohio. Now he will not win those voters, but his goal is to create a split that allows him to win elsewhere. Well put.
September 19, 20222 yr well thanks that all makes sense, except for the whaley being painted as relatively unknown part. unless the three red headeded step sister cities below the media hogging major three c cities of ohio really are such.
September 19, 20222 yr 3 minutes ago, GISguy said: Well put. If the matchup were Whaley vs JD Vance, I think you would be hearing a lot more about the governor race and the polling would look a lot different. For Whaley, it is almost be careful what you wish for. Her star crested in the wrong year. If this were 2018 or 2026 she would have been in a much different position. IMO the person who may benefit the most from this would be John Cranley. He lost the Dem primary, but whomever won the primary was pretty much destined to lose in November. This could potentially allow him an opportunity to reemerge in 2026 to position himself as a moderate who can win in Ohio (when the circumstances are easier to win due to an open seat) and can try and paint Whaley's loss as simply her politics not playing in Ohio. While that may partially be the case, the timing and circumstances have a lot more to do with it than the candidate this year.
September 19, 20222 yr Just now, mrnyc said: well thanks that all makes sense, except for the whaley being painted as relatively unknown part. unless the three red headeded step sister cities below the media hogging major three c cities of ohio really are such. Whaley is underfunded and cannot afford the huge media blitz. Tim Ryan has a huuuuge war chest. Whaley will win the cities, women, and college educated voters. However, Whaley is not well known in places like Youngtown, Wooster, Mansfield, Stuebenville, Eastern Ohio, etc. She is unknown in these areas and her problem is that she is really not trying in these areas. Back when Obama ran and won, he made the point that he was going to all the rural places to try and campaign there. He was not doing that to win in those areas, he was doing that to try and minimize his losses.
September 19, 20222 yr 7 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said: Whaley is underfunded and cannot afford the huge media blitz. Tim Ryan has a huuuuge war chest. Whaley will win the cities, women, and college educated voters. However, Whaley is not well known in places like Youngtown, Wooster, Mansfield, Stuebenville, Eastern Ohio, etc. She is unknown in these areas and her problem is that she is really not trying in these areas. Back when Obama ran and won, he made the point that he was going to all the rural places to try and campaign there. He was not doing that to win in those areas, he was doing that to try and minimize his losses. Yeah i don't see Whaley getting within 6% of Dewine.
September 19, 20222 yr yeah whaley easily beat dewine if she can get him to debate. she is a fantastic speaker and better all around human being and she would run rings around that old man. i guess she gets slightly more attention outside of ohio than dewine. or at least its positive attention when she does get any. the only time dewine gets in the news is when he is cracking down on people’s rights like with handling covid, or when he is taking away women’s rights, or ducking whaley.
September 19, 20222 yr 29 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said: Whaley is underfunded and cannot afford the huge media blitz. Tim Ryan has a huuuuge war chest. Whaley will win the cities, women, and college educated voters. However, Whaley is not well known in places like Youngtown, Wooster, Mansfield, Stuebenville, Eastern Ohio, etc. She is unknown in these areas and her problem is that she is really not trying in these areas. Back when Obama ran and won, he made the point that he was going to all the rural places to try and campaign there. He was not doing that to win in those areas, he was doing that to try and minimize his losses. that makes sense. no question she has a lot of work to do outside the bases. meanwhile dewine gets the old white man who never goes away pass. hopefully for whaley the youth vote gets more activated than usual. thats hers for the taking. the challenger certainly has to hustle more.
