4 hours ago, Lazarus said:

 

 

Um, no.  I have no idea where all of these supposed white supremacists are hiding. 

 

Report: White supremacist activity on rise in Ohio, across U.S.

 

COLUMBUS, Ohio — When it comes to white supremacist activity, Ohio ranks third on the list.

 

That’s the assessment from a new report released by the Anti-Defamation League Center on Extremism. Specifically, the ADL documented 167 white supremacist events in 2022. Those events took place in 33 states, with Ohio being on the list for the third most active state.

 

https://www.10tv.com/amp/article/news/local/white-supremacist-activity-on-rise-in-ohio-across-us/530-e2a1b0e8-ae3a-4609-994f-ff7d3c8bcfcb

 

Polls are open, if you haven't already get out to vote!

 

 

 

15 hours ago, Lazarus said:

 

Yeah in the 80s we had Senators John Glenn and Howard Metzenbaum, both D's, and a D governor, d**k Celeste.  I don't recall a bunch of Republicans declaring that they were going to move to another state because of this situation.   

 

I also don't recall them gerrymandering the F*** out of the state and wantonly ignoring legislation they themselves passed to further consolidate their power.

Cincinnati Zoo levy will go on the ballot as a renewal, not increase.

 

https://www.wvxu.org/politics/2023-08-07/hamilton-county-commissioners-cincinnati-zoo-levy-tax-increase

 

 

7 hours ago, Lazarus said:

I have no idea where all of these supposed white supremacists are hiding, because I've never met one, despite having lived, gone to school, and worked in the south for 4-5 years with dozens if not hundreds of people, most of whom did not attend college and were not well-traveled people. 

You apparently are not listening to your "dog whistle" when it goes off and instructs you to mobilize, or you must be missing your "white supremacy bat signal"  lol. I find all of these comments on dog whistle statements quite amusing. I have never known there was some secret code for white people to communicate that their true intentions are to subvert the will and powers of African Americans. Sounds pretty cartoonish if you ask me, although it seems to be a nonsensical talking point among some in the political media. 

 

8 hours ago, westerninterloper said:

Obama's election was the signal to white supremacists that they could no longer count on the vast majority of whites to support their cause, just a very large majority.

 

Obama won because he captivated an audience, both black, white, asian, latino, etc to vote for him. He won because he had an outsized personality that captivated people. People were more enthralled with his personality and charisma than his positions. The same was true about Trump in 2016. He won because his personality and charisma appealed and captivated people even if they did not love his ideas (and by charisma and personality, I mean he captivated more people in that regard than Hillary Clinton, whereas a more charismatic Democrat would have likely won easier). 

 

8 hours ago, westerninterloper said:

But the crisis was always white supremacy.

The whole white supremacy thing is like the boogeyman and it is completely overblown. I find it amazing how so many people believe these idiot talking heads who say "white supremacy" is the greatest challenge of our time in 2023. These statements are completely devoid of reality. Now, this does not mean that racism is nonexistent, and there certainly are not challenges and issues that remain from our past, however, to call "white supremacy" the major issue of our time just ignores the facts and is insulting to many people who lived in the Jim Crow era.

 

Overall, the facts support that as a society, compared to 60, 40, 20 years ago, we are a lot more tolerant toward people of all races and creeds. Last I remember, I do not think there have been any calls to move back toward "separate but equal" amenities." Inter-racial marriage is common and growing. Back 30-40 years ago, inter-racial dating was not as common of a thing but now it is commonplace. In the last 20 years you have gone from the concept of a civil union being a novel concept in society to the majority of people being accepting of gay marriage and laws that protect the equality of people of all races and sexes. 

 

So to call "white supremacy" the greatest problem of the day is insulting to many people that have come before and actually forged those paths and fought those battles. it also does not reflect reality. 

43 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

So to call "white supremacy" the greatest problem of the day is insulting to many people that have come before and actually forged those paths and fought those battles. it also does not reflect reality. 

It’s not the old white guy’s greatest problem. Got it. Now take your gaslighting elsewhere. 
 

I can’t think of a greater problem than having a major political party in the US pander to white supremacists.
 

It’s your party, be a man and own it. 

Edited August 8, 20231 yr by Clefan98

5 minutes ago, Clefan98 said:

It’s not the old white guy’s greatest problem. Got it. Now take your gaslighting elsewhere. 

Gaslighting? I think you need to live in reality or at least gain some perspective. Can you honestly say that "white supremacy" is as big of a problem in 2023 as it was in 1963, 1973 or 1993? Can you name examples where as a society we have regressed to a position worse than where things were back then??   Take an honest look at history, maybe start living in reality for a bit instead of just parroting the hyperbole that is presented by so called talking heads.  

1 minute ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Gaslighting? I think you need to live in reality or at least gain some perspective. Can you honestly say that "white supremacy" is as big of a problem in 2023 as it was in 1963, 1973 or 1993?

Florida's educational guidelines would like a word.

Just now, Ineffable_Matt said:

Florida's educational guidelines would like a word.

I do not see how that is in any way is the same level as Jim Crow era laws, banning interracial marriage, etc. etc. etc. 

While you may find the law disagreeable, to act like it is the new Jim Crow is demeaning and insulting to those who lived through it and is just hyperbole that does not represent reality. 

1 minute ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Can you name examples where as a society we have regressed to a position worse than where things were back then??  

Charlottesville. 
 

And it doesn’t need to be “worse than things were back then” to still be an issue.

 

But you, like @Lazarus in every thread whether it’s about politics or bikes, believe your own anecdotal evidence to be the truth despite the world around you. 

Also laughable to accuse people about “listening to talking heads,” when you’re in here parroting Tucker Carlson talking points denying the existence of white supremacy. No surprise that’s coming from someone advocating a “Yes” on Issue 1 stance to disenfranchise voters. 

Fun fact, Ohio’s Constitution only received 53% of the votes back in 1851.

 

Under Issue 1, it wouldn’t have passed. Here are some amendments that wouldn’t have passed....

 

❗️Voting would still be limited to white males (1923)
❗️The Ohio National Guard would be limited to white people (1953) and only men (1964)
❗️The Governor wouldn’t have term limits
❗️We wouldn’t have home rule for counties (1933) or cities (1912)

4 minutes ago, Gordon Bombay said:

And it doesn’t need to be “worse than things were back then” to still be an issue.

But Charlottesville was shocking because it was a one time event. In the 60s these events were going on repeatedly. In the 60s African Americans did not have equal property rights and redlining was a major issue.  

Charlottesville was not a god event, but to act like it rises to the same level as the racial strife of the 60s or even much of the same issues in the 90s does a disservice. Acting as if the isolated event in Charlottesville is the same as the lynching of Emmitt Till or the desegregation of schools in the South trivializes those past heros who stood up against a system that was against them.  Charlottesville was not the same thing. 

 

To act as if "white supremacy" is a greater threat today than it was in the 1960s is just devoid for actual reality. Note, this does not mean racism does not exist, but the hyperbole around the "white supremacy" boogeyman does a disservice to all. 

9 minutes ago, Gordon Bombay said:

Also laughable to accuse people about “listening to talking heads,” when you’re in here parroting Tucker Carlson talking points denying the existence of white supremacy. No surprise that’s coming from someone advocating a “Yes” on Issue 1 stance to disenfranchise voters. 

If I actually ever watched Tucker or listened to him you may have merit in your comment, but i really have no clue what Tucker says since do not pay attention to him. 

 

What is amusing is that you reflexing want to attack this statement as meritless but you have absolutely ZERO facts to support your position that 1) White Supremacy is the greatest threat we face today and 2) White Supremacy is a greater problem in the US in 2023 than it was in 1963.  

 

Maybe if you had facts to compare the two times to show why it is worse off today than in 1960s or even 1990s then your statements will not be dismissed as nothing more than pure hyperbole. 

12 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Acting as if the isolated event in Charlottesville is the same as the lynching of Emmitt Till or the desegregation of schools in the South trivializes those past heros who stood up against a system that was against them.  Charlottesville was not the same thing. 

 

This is literally your own added hyperbole, the same tactic you're arguing against, not my words (or the words of anyone else here). 

 

Again, an issue doesn't need to be "as bad" as it was before to still be an issue. 

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Take an honest look at history, maybe start living in reality for a bit instead of just parroting the hyperbole that is presented by so called talking heads.  

 

Just to provide a bit of context for our discussion, my academic background encompasses a master's degree in History with a minor in Political Science.

 

What you appear to be missing is the striking resemblance between today's right wing and former SS officers I interviewed in German and Polish prisons, as they rotted to death, weak and full of shame. From a young age, I understood how strong and powerful propaganda can be on the feeble-minded.

 

And you know what!? It's similar propaganda I see from today's regressive party. It begins rather inconspicuously, then grows and grows and grows until a critical mass has bought into the BS. You don't notice this process happening in real time because you're either woefully ignorant, thus in denial, or just an outright dishonest person.

 

BTW - I've never watched cable news, or much TV at all. My preference is books.

Edited August 8, 20231 yr by Clefan98

On 8/7/2023 at 10:58 AM, Brutus_buckeye said:

you are correct. But from a practicality standpoint, why would anyone do this. Let's face it, politics have never been a noble profession no matter what many politicians try and make you think  (and not to say politicians are bad people, many get into it for the right reasons, but it is often the way the game just has to be played). 

 

And that's fine, but I was responding to the supposedly good faith assertion made here that they are not allowed to require a higher percentage. Let's not pretend that the reason they are not requiring 60% is anything but politics. 

59 minutes ago, Clefan98 said:

 

Just to provide a bit of context for our discussion, my academic background encompasses a master's degree in History with a minor in Political Science.

 

What you appear to be missing is the striking resemblance between today's right wing and former SS officers I interviewed in German and Polish prisons, as they rotted to death, weak and full of shame. From a young age, I understood how strong and powerful propaganda can be on the feeble-minded.

 

And you know what!? It's similar propaganda I see from today's regressive party. It begins rather inconspicuously, then grows and grows and grows until a critical mass has bought into the BS. You don't notice this process happening in real time because you're either woefully ignorant, thus in denial, or just an outright dishonest person.

 

BTW - I've never watched cable news, or much TV at all. My preference is books.

 

I love how Republicans think everyone else watches as much cable TV news as they do. 

7 minutes ago, GCrites said:

 

I love how Republicans think everyone else watches as much cable TV news as they do. 

It’s all projections, always has been with them. 

1 hour ago, DEPACincy said:

 

And that's fine, but I was responding to the supposedly good faith assertion made here that they are not allowed to require a higher percentage. Let's not pretend that the reason they are not requiring 60% is anything but politics. 

In this particular case, I agree with you. the issue at hands today is about pure politics. At least by the people that put it on the ballot.

1 hour ago, Clefan98 said:

Just to provide a bit of context for our discussion, my academic background encompasses a master's degree in History with a minor in Political Science.

I too am a history connoisseur. Like you,  It has also been a hobby of mine for the last 20 years. I also like studying WWII history too. I chose to spend my college degree on other disciplines but studying history is a nice hobby. 

 

I think your problem is your analysis and you are letting your collective feelings on certain issues cloud your rational judgement. Where I feel you struggle is that you see some of the news, whether true or misinformation, and you have no faith that the marketplace of ideas cannot create a correction. In an open society with free speech, you will not have what happened in Germany in WWII, which is why free speech (all speech including hate speech) should be protected. Yes, you will have occasional small groups who try and exert their evil influences, but in an open society that is truly committed to the free flow of ideas, hateful ideas will never grab a foothold and be able to truly grow.  I have always been someone who has been committed to free speech with really no exceptions. 

1 hour ago, GCrites said:

 

I love how Republicans think everyone else watches as much cable TV news as they do. 

never said anything about watching TV, a political talking head can be on TV, radio or in print. 

Also, it is always a quick retort for someone to accuse someone who does not follow the progressive mantle of just watching Foxnews or Tucker or O'Reilly so it cuts both ways. 

36 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

but in an open society that is truly committed to the free flow of ideas, hateful ideas will never grab a foothold and be able to truly grow.

 

1000 x's false. That's exactly the type of rhetoric I expected, and heard, in Germany.

 

I think your problem is you view life thru an extremely narrow lens of an old white guy who's never had to experience issues minorities live through everyday in this country.

 

 

Edited August 8, 20231 yr by Clefan98

38 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

...why free speech (all speech including hate speech) should be protected. Yes, you will have occasional small groups who try and exert their evil influences, but in an open society that is truly committed to the free flow of ideas, hateful ideas will never grab a foothold and be able to truly grow.

I hate to pile on, but that comment is crap. White people calling Black people the n-r or c-n words is wrong, dehumanizing, vile. Black people calling Asian people hateful words is equally wrong and should never be protected. And so on and so forth.

 

Hate speech often transforms into hate conduct and needs to be nipped in the bud EARLY. The free flow of ideas is what allowed dangerous Q'anon individuals like Gaetz, Greene, and Boebert become Congressional leaders and be privy to national security and sabotage. 

 

Look at DeSantis' behaviors in Florida. His hateful rhetoric and beliefs have gained a lot of traction and codified into state law. This evil goes far beyond harmless speech and benign "ideas".

48 minutes ago, Clefan98 said:

 

1000 x's false. That's exactly the type of rhetoric I expected, and heard, in Germany.

 

I think your problem is you view life thru an extremely narrow lens of an old white guy who's never had to experience issues minorities live through everyday in this country.

 

 

You obviously do not believe in free speech. I think the American Experience has shown over our history that the open marketplace of ideas has led to make our country a thriving success. When you suppress thought, even thought and speech that may be vile or disgusting, it allows things to fester. When you get them out into the open space, you allow them to stand or fail on their own. People will come to see vile thoughts and speech for what they are and reject them. 

 

History has shown this to be true. This is the problem with Germany. They "claim" to believe in free speech but they do not. They feel that certain speech needs censored because it is so vile. As you see in Germany, there is a seething underground of neo-nazi's and other people that want to usurp the rights of the people. The misguided belief of those in power believe that if this comes out in the open, people will find it acceptable. That is false. The majority of people will reject lies when presented with the truth. 

 

Furthermore, free speech in European countries has never been a core tenet as it has in the United States. That is why you see jurists from all political persuasions stand up for free speech, even in its most vile forms. I know it may be inconvenient to you and your personal beliefs but as a student of history as you may claim you are, I think it is important that you study the basis for free speech laws in the United States and how they should not be feared as you want to try and claim. 

Edited August 8, 20231 yr by Brutus_buckeye

29 minutes ago, TBideon said:

Hate speech often transforms into hate conduct and needs to be nipped in the bud EARLY. The free flow of ideas is what allowed dangerous Q'anon individuals like Gaetz, Greene, and Boebert become Congressional leaders and be privy to national security and sabotage. 

And the majority of Americans see them for what they are. They are a bunch of baffoons. However, like everyone, they are still entitled to their voice even it is wrong.   Take Greene for example, her speech has gotten her marginalized in Congress and even kicked out of the Freedom Caucus. She may be someone who gets press clippings, just like Anthony Weiner did years ago with the Democrats, but she was never someone taken seriously by her peers. she will never amount to someone with any real power beyond her district. Same with Gaetz, Same with Boebert, and same with AOC. 

 

 

Same with a certain reality star sexual predator.

 

Oh wait...

wait, what? I only post this because I've worked as a scanner inspector (fancy title for a poll worker) in New York for a few years, and when there's a jam you have to break the seal on the scanner door where the ballot box is located in order to try and fix the problem, and that's usually because ballots are going astray or it's so full that they're are piling up inside. The solution is to use another scanner. It's unlikely that all scanners can malfunction like this simultaneously. Just saying.

 

 

35 minutes ago, TBideon said:

Same with a certain reality star sexual predator.

 

Oh wait...

It is sad because he has the block of support that will run through a wall for the guy, but if you look at the numbers the majority of Republicans do not support him.  So, it is pretty tough to win an election when the best you have performed is 46% in his best year and that is before he went off the deep end and threw a temper tantrum after losing.  It is sad for the GOP because he commands so much attention in the field right now and may very well win a primary (I hope not), but again, his behavior is exposed and he really cant win.  Given 1/2 the GOP does not want him, they will not all rally around him as their nominee come election time. For me, I would sit out the presidential race again instead of vote for Trump.  There are a lot of people who feel that way. It is hard to win when you lose support like that.  It is an example of the marketplace of ideas rejecting the bad ideas. 

This is not a discussion of Trump or the 2024 race.

8pm and it’s already being called for NO. On to the next challenge!

 

 

12 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

8pm and it’s already being called for NO. On to the next challenge!

 

 

 

This is looking like a bloodbath for Republicans on Issue 1. If the margins end up anywhere near where they currently are, that would be a huge embarrassment for LaRose and his fascist friends.

Good news so far!  It looks like Issue 1 will not pass. As of 823pm, so far, with 24% of the vote it, its 69.1% No.  And that's only with 29% of Cuyahoga and 23% of Franklin and Hamilton County in so far.

Columbus Dispatch has called it. Issue 1 fails.

826PM: 

County. No. Yes.  Total votes.  Percent of votes in% In

Cuyahoga.  84%.  16%.  95,166.  29%

Franklin.  86%.   14%.    73,724. 23%

Hamilton. 80%. 20%.  55,026.  23%

 

(Issue 1). 

 

Statewide:  68.3% NO

What kind of people live in Putnam County (near Toledo, where my sister lives).  75% have voted YES so far!  That's the highest YES of any county so far.

Early statewide results

 

The Yes's have gained some ground now at 35.1% with 28% of the statewide in.

Putnam County is the most Catholic county in the state so it's not surprising at all. In fact, that whole strip of western counties is highly conservative Catholics so that's the result I expected. 

4 minutes ago, BigDipper 80 said:

Putnam County is the most Catholic county in the state so it's not surprising at all. In fact, that whole strip of western counties is highly conservative Catholics so that's the result I expected. 

 

Thanks. I didn't know that. Looks like single-issue (abortion) voters out there.

15 minutes ago, DinaB said:

The Yes's have gained some ground now at 35.1% with 28% of the statewide in.

 

Small conservative counties always count the fastest. The larger, and bluer, counties tend to come in more slowly. Yes still looks like a comfortable loss. I saw most predictions for the final tally being around 58% no, 42% yes, so I wonder if we'll see something like that in the end. 

In true conservative fashion, this absurd one-off special election also cost taxpayers millions of dollars just to hold.

34 minutes ago, BigDipper 80 said:

Putnam County is the most Catholic county in the state so it's not surprising at all. In fact, that whole strip of western counties is highly conservative Catholics so that's the result I expected. 

 

Very interesting. I figured pretty much all farm counties scored low in Catholic -- at least in Ohio.

5 minutes ago, DarkandStormy said:

In true conservative fashion, this absurd one-off special election also cost taxpayers millions of dollars just to hold.

This whole sh*t show blows my mind. It kind of encompasses @Brutus_buckeyelogic. 

Ohio banned August elections. Then the GOP planned one that could help preserve an abortion ban.

https://www.beaconjournal.com/story/news/politics/2023/08/08/ohio-issue-1-special-electionresults-voters-decide-tuesday-on-august-8-ballot-issue/70487461007/

Interestingly (and perhaps not surprisingly) the current results map looks a bit like the typical election map from back when Ohio was a purple bell whether. Not exactly though, the showing in Columbus, Cincy, and Dayton suburbs is stronger. 

 

 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2023/08/08/issue-1-ohio-results-abortion/70555725007/

 

https://decisiondeskhq.com/election-results-ohio-issue-1-and-the-mississippi-primary/

I hope this shows the gerrymandered Statehouse that they can't just listen to their Appalachian river counties and Amish Country that they all represent (due to said gerrymandering) then force their will on the entire rest of the state. Their decisions were unpopular. Face it.

If Republicans would've only proposed changing the passage rate to 55 or 60% this might've passed. But instead they added a lot of other nonsense about signature collections, which probably swayed a lot of people. We should be happy the Republicans were so greedy to fully consolidate power that they submitted a deeply unpopular amendment.

 

We might not be so lucky next time.

30 minutes ago, GCrites said:

 

Very interesting. I figured pretty much all farm counties scored low in Catholic -- at least in Ohio.

The western Ohio counties are called “the land of the Cross-Tipped Churches” because of the humongous Catholic Churches built by German Catholic immigrants. The churches are really cool - better than some in the cities and just as large, but literally in corn fields. 

54 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

If Republicans would've only proposed changing the passage rate to 55 or 60% this might've passed. But instead they added a lot of other nonsense about signature collections, which probably swayed a lot of people. We should be happy the Republicans were so greedy to fully consolidate power that they submitted a deeply unpopular amendment.

 

We might not be so lucky next time.

If it was simply 60% AND it wasn’t rammed through to stop an abortion measure in November, then maybe it would have been closer. 
 

I imagine they can’t just try again with a simple measure in the near future. The stink from this loss will be hard to wash off.

Edited August 9, 20231 yr by 10albersa

Their representative on Fox 28 was nonsensical tonight. They literally can't believe they lost. They are stuck with confirmation bias because they only talk to their own. Unlike Ohio Democrats who are always being told they are wrong by their personal network. 

Showing how Ohio counties vote vs how Ohioans vote is a big difference. As the old saying goes, land doesn't vote; people do...

Feels like the Ohio I knew when I moved here 16 years ago.

 

Strong coalition building and clear messaging, as well as blatant overreach by the state GOP, and LaRose's comments in May about abortion led to this result.