I boldly predict that Smitherman and Murray lose. 

That is bold, and would be very welcome

Can someone make the argument for Michelle Dillingham and Leslie Jones for me?  I've got two left to pick and these two seem to be ones that you folks are bringing up more than others.

That is bold, and would be very welcome

 

Amy Murray is a Republican, a party I can't even consider these days, but I think she's done a rather fair job with the Streetcar despite being opposed to the project before. She's fairly level headed and mature.

^ City council technically is a non partisan election. Yes the parties may weigh in with their endorsement but even if you are a staunch Dem, there is nothing wrong with voting for Amy Murray if you feel she has handled the local issues well. Political Party should not really play a role on the local level like it does on more of a national scale or state level.

 

I mean does it really matter what Amy Murray's stance on social issues are at this level, absolutely not. What matters is she keeps the streets paved and the city moving forward which she has done a good job with. Also, she is someone who really is not beholden by party and does not really have any aspirations to climb to higher office in her career.

Right, the ballots do not list party affiliation and I imagine for every one of us, here, who know which candidates belong to which parties and will factor that into the decision, there are ~5 people who walk into the voting booth, have no idea at all, and vote based on name recognition.

I predict all 6 incumbents win plus Landsman, Dennard, Quinlivan. Bauman, Dillingham, Frondorf, and Pastor are on the bubble.

Amy Murray isn't beholden to the Republican Party???  Not only has she sided with those who refuse to increase the too-low fines for blocking the streetcar, she's continued to trash it on talk radio, from what I've heard.  And who says she doesn't have ambitions for higher office?  During the last year, her name was floated to run for some sort of statewide race IIRC. 

 

Bottom line, I think she's a snake who talks out of both sides of her mouth and I won't be voting for her!

I've never been able to cast 9 votes for council and this year is no exception.  I voted early, and for only 6.  Besides, the Republican Party is encouraging voters to only cast votes for 3-4 candidates!  I've never understood the rationale for casting a smaller number of council votes but would appreciate someone explaining the advantages to me, even though I never like 9 candidates enough to cast that many votes anyway!

 

What about The Enquirer article today prominently featuring Smitherman and his wife's breast cancer battle?  While I'm sincerely very sorry for the family -- battling cancer is hard on everyone involved and it's happening right now in my own family -- this story isn't exactly timely, news-wise -- and it's obvious what the paper is up to by publishing it less than a week before the election.  There, I've said it.

What about The Enquirer article today prominently featuring Smitherman and his wife's breast cancer battle?  While I'm sincerely very sorry for the family -- battling cancer is hard on everyone involved and it's happening right now in my own family -- this story isn't exactly timely, news-wise -- and it's obvious what the paper is up to by publishing it less than a week before the election.  There, I've said it.

 

It was blatant pandering right before election season.  Considering that a Nate Livingston blog post accusing Chris of adultery has remained online for 10 years, I question Mr. Smitherman's true dedication to his wife during this illness. 

 

 

What about The Enquirer article today prominently featuring Smitherman and his wife's breast cancer battle?  While I'm sincerely very sorry for the family -- battling cancer is hard on everyone involved and it's happening right now in my own family -- this story isn't exactly timely, news-wise -- and it's obvious what the paper is up to by publishing it less than a week before the election.  There, I've said it.

 

It was blatant pandering right before election season.  Considering that a Nate Livingston blog post accusing Chris of adultery has remained online for 10 years, I question Mr. Smitherman's true dedication to his wife during this illness. 

 

 

 

There's a story up there now too about Cranley's wife's family starting Gold Star.

^Yeah, looks like a way for Cranley to advertise to right wingers that he didn't marry a Muslim.  Because God forbid. 

 

Plus, back around the time he met his wife, he posted a bunch of photos from a visit to Jordan on his facebook account.  The people who assume were her relatives were living in compounds surrounded by 15-foot walls.  I don't trust the biography published in today's Enquirer -- that her family was from nothing. 

 

Smitherman and Cranley have each written and re-written their autobiographies several times throughout their careers to suit the moment.  About 3 years ago Smitherman declared that he was raised Catholic.  Um, okay. 

 

I may be wrong but I thought I heard The Enquirer wasn't going to make endorsements for this year's elections (it's probably afraid of offending the AA community by endorsing its favorite, Cranley, if I had to guess.  Recall that it also took a weaselly stance before the primary). 

 

Instead, it seems the paper's found a sneakier, less forthcoming way to try to sway voters by publishing puff pieces about certain candidates -- or their families.  Who will be in the spotlight next, I wonder?  SMH...

I may be wrong but I thought I heard The Enquirer wasn't going to make endorsements for this year's elections (it's probably afraid of offending the AA community by endorsing its favorite, Cranley, if I had to guess.  Recall that it also took a weaselly stance before the primary). 

 

Instead, it seems the paper's found a sneakier, less forthcoming way to try to sway voters by publishing puff pieces about certain candidates -- or their families.  Who will be in the spotlight next, I wonder?  SMH...

 

It also seems that they are posting hit pieces against the candidates they don't like too...

I have only tuned to 700wlw about four times in the last year.  Made the mistake of doing so today on my lunch break. 

 

They brought in Pete Witte to do a 10-minute rant on Seelbach and Laure Quinlivan.  The world of 700 is an upside-down one.  Luckily their propaganda reaches very few city voters. 

 

 

Not a Seelbach  or Quinliven fan. Personally don't think Laure really is anything but a shill who really has no policy besides the arts (nothing against the arts but we are more than a one issue city) and Seelbach, I personally find to be a jerk.

From my recollection Quinlivan was one of the most effective on council during her tenure. She led the LEED tax abatement program, was a vocal streetcar proponent, created neighborhood entertainment districts, and pushed the food truck program. I think she did a lot while she was on council.

Unfortunately, she also undertook some really stupid initiatives, like branding Cincinnati "The city that sings". I think she's fine, but probably focuses a bit more on the cosmetic issues than I'd like a council person to. It would be great if we could trade her for Murray.

^I personally don't get why anyone cares about that. It blows my mind that people even remember that. Who cares?

^ As much as I am not a fan of hers, I would probably trade her for Seelbach.

Unfortunately, she also undertook some really stupid initiatives, like branding Cincinnati "The city that sings".

 

Sure, but this was superficial at best and really nothing more than an attempt to help keep the city's promotion of The World Choir Games in the news. It all amounted to what... a mural painted by volunteers on the old CL&N vehicle approach? Hardly a controversy.

^I personally don't get why anyone cares about that. It blows my mind that people even remember that. Who cares?

 

What people don't get is that arts and culture alone differentiate a place for the better -- much more so than the prevailing tax rate.  Both Nashville and Austin have emerged from obscurity over the past 20 years almost entirely based on popular music and an a reputation for being places where there is fun stuff to do.  Public money spent advertising a city through culture is not wasted money. 

 

 

 

^-Plus Cincinnati literally is sitting upon a treasure trove of disused cultural assets.  More so than any other city its size.

^Totally agree, but the government coming up with corny branding slogans that no one will use anyways does not enhance a city's culture. I don't care at all that Laure was behind the whole 'city that sings' thing, but it just seemed like a lot of her ideas and initiatives she supported were fairly silly. In a city with terrible childhood poverty metrics, a weak transit system (at best), rampant disinvestment in numerous communities, etc. her pet projects seemed out of touch.

Yeah 700 keeps attacking her for "flower pots".  They weren't pots, they were planters.  Back in 1999, council approved a $15 million "beautification package" for Fort Washington Way.  That's why it has pavers, street trees, decorative lighting and not just "cobra head" lights, and the textured material in the trench rather than bare concrete.  Nobody even remembers it.  But $100,00 for planters back in 2012 or whenever it was was an outrage. 

I've never been able to cast 9 votes for council and this year is no exception.  I voted early, and for only 6.  Besides, the Republican Party is encouraging voters to only cast votes for 3-4 candidates!  I've never understood the rationale for casting a smaller number of council votes but would appreciate someone explaining the advantages to me, even though I never like 9 candidates enough to cast that many votes anyway!

 

Short answer: Math.

 

Long answer: Assume you ranked your candidates in preference of how much you liked them 1-9 and you vote for all 9. There is a small probability that your vote for your 9th favorite candidate makes it so your number 1 ranked candidate doesn't make it onto council. That's essentially the reason; you dilute your vote. However, by voting for all nine you're also giving all 9 a better chance to get on council. And the likelihood of the above happening is slim. But that's the reasoning. I say: vote for however many you like, up to 9.

Sorry to report that former councilman Greg Harris is trolling Simpson supporters on Facebook.  What favor is this guy expecting from the Cran-man?

I've never been able to cast 9 votes for council and this year is no exception.  I voted early, and for only 6.  Besides, the Republican Party is encouraging voters to only cast votes for 3-4 candidates!  I've never understood the rationale for casting a smaller number of council votes but would appreciate someone explaining the advantages to me, even though I never like 9 candidates enough to cast that many votes anyway!

 

Short answer: Math.

 

Long answer: Assume you ranked your candidates in preference of how much you liked them 1-9 and you vote for all 9. There is a small probability that your vote for your 9th favorite candidate makes it so your number 1 ranked candidate doesn't make it onto council. That's essentially the reason; you dilute your vote. However, by voting for all nine you're also giving all 9 a better chance to get on council. And the likelihood of the above happening is slim. But that's the reasoning. I say: vote for however many you like, up to 9.

 

FWIW, here is advice from Laure Q from her final or almost-final campaign email:

 

 

This “Cleaner, Greener, Smarter” candidate has been supported by a great team led by Campaign Manager Liam Neess, all our volunteers, and my wonderful friends and family. You have all worked very hard to help me win and I can not thank you enough for being in my life!

 

It takes a village,

 

Laure Quinlivan

 

P.S.  Final tip- Maximize your vote by NOT voting for 9 people for council.  Vote only for the short list of candidates you really want to help win. Thank you!

Here are my predictions for tomorrow:

 

1. P.G. Sittenfeld (D): 33,000

2. David Mann (C,D): 24,000

3. Wendell Young (D): 24,600

4. Chris Seelbach (D): 21,500

5. Akili Smith (D): 20,050

6. Gapper ®: 18,500

7. Shadow Hare (I): 18,499

8. Henry Frondorf (I): 18,498

9. Norma Rashid (D): 18,497

I've never been able to cast 9 votes for council and this year is no exception.  I voted early, and for only 6.  Besides, the Republican Party is encouraging voters to only cast votes for 3-4 candidates!  I've never understood the rationale for casting a smaller number of council votes but would appreciate someone explaining the advantages to me, even though I never like 9 candidates enough to cast that many votes anyway!

 

Short answer: Math.

 

Long answer: Assume you ranked your candidates in preference of how much you liked them 1-9 and you vote for all 9. There is a small probability that your vote for your 9th favorite candidate makes it so your number 1 ranked candidate doesn't make it onto council. That's essentially the reason; you dilute your vote. However, by voting for all nine you're also giving all 9 a better chance to get on council. And the likelihood of the above happening is slim. But that's the reasoning. I say: vote for however many you like, up to 9.

 

FWIW, here is advice from Laure Q from her final or almost-final campaign email:

 

 

This “Cleaner, Greener, Smarter” candidate has been supported by a great team led by Campaign Manager Liam Neess, all our volunteers, and my wonderful friends and family. You have all worked very hard to help me win and I can not thank you enough for being in my life!

 

It takes a village,

 

Laure Quinlivan

 

P.S.  Final tip- Maximize your vote by NOT voting for 9 people for council.  Vote only for the short list of candidates you really want to help win. Thank you!

 

wow. So she's giving advice that other people used to keep her out of office in the last election..... From a candidate's point of view, you want everyone to only vote for you and stop. So I understand that, but this is what made her finish 10th behind Amy Murray in 2013.

wow. So she's giving advice that other people used to keep her out of office in the last election..... From a candidate's point of view, you want everyone to only vote for you and stop. So I understand that, but this is what made her finish 10th behind Amy Murray in 2013.

 

 

Not necessarily. She was hurt just as much, if not more, by the Dems endorsing 10.

I still think it's a better strategy to vote for only the candidates you actually want in office and not vote for 9 if you don't actually like 9 candidates. Remember that you are not ranking your candidates, you are giving an equal vote to all of the candidates you choose.

Right, but you shouldn't stop short to give the ones you love a shot at winning at the expense of a good council. You should be voting a full 9 if there are 9 candidates you do in fact like. Don't stop short if you would be happy with additional people making it.

Early voting top 9:

 

Sittenfeld

Mann

Seelbach

Young

Smitherman

Landsman

Murray

Dillingham

Pastor

The top 9 is shaping up to be:

 

P.G. Sittenfeld

David Mann

Chris Seelbach

Wendell Young

Christopher Smitherman

Tamaya Dennard

Greg Landsman

Amy Murray

Jeff Pastor

 

 

So if this holds true, we:

- Lost Winburn, Simpson, and Flynn

- Gained Dennard, Landsman, Pastor

 

 

So pretty much expect 4 more years of the same. Not much changes in City Council makeup.

In a way I'm kind of surprised Derek Bauman came in 14th.  Media people seemed to think he had a shot in spite of being a newbie.

Here are my predictions for tomorrow:

 

1. P.G. Sittenfeld (D): 33,000

2. David Mann (C,D): 24,000

3. Wendell Young (D): 24,600

4. Chris Seelbach (D): 21,500

5. Akili Smith (D): 20,050

6. Gapper ®: 18,500

7. Shadow Hare (I): 18,499

8. Henry Frondorf (I): 18,498

9. Norma Rashid (D): 18,497

 

Can't believe Norma Rashid and Shadow Hare actually made it tonight!

I boldly predict that Smitherman and Murray lose.

 

 

Bold!

The top 9 is shaping up to be:

 

P.G. Sittenfeld

David Mann

Chris Seelbach

Wendell Young

Christopher Smitherman

Tamaya Dennard

Greg Landsman

Amy Murray

Jeff Pastor

 

 

So if this holds true, we:

- Lost Winburn, Simpson, and Flynn

- Gained Dennard, Landsman, Pastor

 

 

So pretty much expect 4 more years of the same. Not much changes in City Council makeup.

 

Swapping Winburn for Dennard is significant and should make it harder for Cranley to pocket veto so much.

In a way I'm kind of surprised Derek Bauman came in 14th.  Media people seemed to think he had a shot in spite of being a newbie.

 

I am pretty shocked that Bauman came in so low. He was beaten by Ozie Davis, Lesley Jones, and Laure Quinlivan; and Derek definitely worked harder than those three. Derek is also a former police officer, a regular guest on WLW where he seems to appeal to conservative listeners, as well as being probably the #1 choice for urban progressives. So I'm not really sure what went wrong today.

Swapping Winburn for Dennard is significant and should make it harder for Cranley to pocket veto so much.

 

To me, it's more like swapping Winburn for Pastor, Dennard for Simpson, and Landsman for Flynn.   

 

I'm really sorry to lose Yvette Simpson on Council.  While I criticized her mayoral campaign, I nevertheless really like her.  I hope Tamaya Dennard can fill her shoes.

Swapping Winburn for Dennard is significant and should make it harder for Cranley to pocket veto so much.

 

To me, it's more like swapping Winburn for Pastor, Dennard for Simpson, and Landsman for Flynn.   

 

I'm really sorry to lose Yvette Simpson on Council.  While I criticized her mayoral campaign, I nevertheless really like her.  I hope Tamaya Dennard can fill her shoes.

 

Right. The makeup of council is virtually unchanged. The only difference for the next 4 years is that I bet some council members are going to step down starting around 2020, and appointing hand-picked replacements to their seat. I am still amazed that no one elected in 2013 stepped down before their term was over.

Swapping Winburn for Dennard is significant and should make it harder for Cranley to pocket veto so much.

 

To me, it's more like swapping Winburn for Pastor, Dennard for Simpson, and Landsman for Flynn.   

 

I'm really sorry to lose Yvette Simpson on Council.  While I criticized her mayoral campaign, I nevertheless really like her.  I hope Tamaya Dennard can fill her shoes.

 

Right. The makeup of council is virtually unchanged. The only difference for the next 4 years is that I bet some council members are going to step down starting around 2020, and appointing hand-picked replacements to their seat. I am still amazed that no one elected in 2013 stepped down before their term was over.

 

Idk Travis, I know how big a booster of urban Cincinnati you are, like all of us here, really. But I think you are taking this too much like the fire Urban Meyer crowd after they lost to a good team.

 

This Council is MUCH better than before, Landsmann will be a big progressive upgrade over Flynn who was mostly non-communal on anything real substantial though nicely independent. Pastor would be an upgrade over Winburn progressively though I don't understand why people voted for him, not certain what his stances were really, but really seems more like a John Cranley clone but is a Republican instead of a DINO.

 

I think progressives can get a lot done here.

Utterly shocked about Derek Bauman losing. If you followed his Facebook page you would see that the guy was everywhere. Knocking on doors, street corners, even had a massive billboard and was endorsed by so many. I have no idea how he lost. He invested almost more time and energy than 90 percent of the other council members running, yet lost by a massive margin. So confused.

Utterly shocked about Derek Bauman losing. If you followed his Facebook page you would see that the guy was everywhere. Knocking on doors, street corners, even had a massive billboard and was endorsed by so many. I have no idea how he lost. He invested almost more time and energy than 90 percent of the other council members running, yet lost by a massive margin. So confused.

 

All rich-boy Sittenfeld had to do is call his daddy.  Daddy bought him a blanket of TV ads.  Dude has never had a full-time job in his life.  Has never done anything other than take a seat his dad bought for him. 

 

 

 

^Careful what you seem to wish for Jake.  What if Smitherman runs for mayor next time?  Sittenfeld is probably one of the few on council who could raise what it would require and then go on to beat him.  It makes me sick that part of my bill helps to pay for Smitherman's cable TV public access so he can rant and promote himself ad nauseam.  It seems like an unfair arrangement that shouldn't be permitted. 

 

 

I know some who've commented on this thread aren't wild about Laure Quinlivan but along with Derek Bauman, I had hopes for her too.  For some reason I don't trust Greg Landsman.  I hope I'm wrong.

 

 

Well, it could always be worse I guess.

So what does this mean for larger developments? Such as 4th and Race, Skyhouse, ect.? I am a huge supporter of large urban developments and what them to continue not only downtown and OTR but all over the city.

Landsman, supported the streetcar years ago, he even wrote a blog entry for Urbancincy.com. I'd have to imagine he and the other 6 Dems can vote in simple fixes like higher fines for parked cars and kiosk fixes, along with other urban issues like complete streets. We'll see. Disappointed in Bauman's result, anyone know if he'll run in 4 years?

 

edit: Landsman Pro-Streetcar article: http://www.urbancincy.com/2013/08/greg-landsman-riding-the-cincinnati-streetcar-to-success/

Swapping Winburn for Dennard is significant and should make it harder for Cranley to pocket veto so much.

 

To me, it's more like swapping Winburn for Pastor, Dennard for Simpson, and Landsman for Flynn.   

 

I'm really sorry to lose Yvette Simpson on Council.  While I criticized her mayoral campaign, I nevertheless really like her.  I hope Tamaya Dennard can fill her shoes.

 

Right. The makeup of council is virtually unchanged. The only difference for the next 4 years is that I bet some council members are going to step down starting around 2020, and appointing hand-picked replacements to their seat. I am still amazed that no one elected in 2013 stepped down before their term was over.

 

I know Flynn had pressure to do so when he said he would not run again, I also thought there was pressure on Wendell Young to step down and let his wife take his seat.

I know Flynn had pressure to do so when he said he would not run again

 

The one thing I will say for Flynn is that he doesn't really do that stuff. He hates the politics of city government, so I couldn't see him doing that.

 

I also thought there was pressure on Wendell Young to step down and let his wife take his seat.

 

Because we saw how well that worked for Pam Thomas in 2013.