There is another major factor beyond just job training programs.  Location of jobs.  The complexity and specialty of jobs has grown quite significantly over the years.  As such, very specialized type of jobs are available in a variety of places that the job seekers are not.  That means that the population must be more mobile and willing to travel or move to where the new job is, whether it is across the state or out of state in California or wherever.  If one is not prepared to move right away for a new job, that job can be lost.  I feel this is a significant percentage of the unemployment.  It is systemic and job training programs will not ever solve the problem of location. 

 

The governor has the best way of creating jobs through infrastructure improvements to improve shipping for industry and agriculture and tax policy changes as well as easing of other regulations.  I do not see a mass exodus of companies leaving Ohio because of harsh tax policies.

 

Last point is this is going to be an ugly 60 day period because the corporations will be getting involved in politics with commercials likely for the republicans so that the republicans win the re-apportionment board and put the republican stamp on Ohio again for another 10 years.

Right, but I don't get where you're going with this. It's not an either/or proposition afterall. Gov't inevitably has an impact on macroeconomics, and no one is suggesting that control of private businesses be given over to random economists. Maybe there is a role for both?

 

Saying "a role" is generic enough that of course I agree with you.

The OCC is trying to: 1. Counter the Ohio labor movement and 2. Setup Ohio for republican dominated gerrymandering in the next redistricting after the census. 

 

The national CofC has been running climate-change-denialist-propaganda ads.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2010/09/ohio_chamber_of_commerce_loses.html

 

Chamber president Andy Doehrel on Thursday acknowledged the chamber was taking an "unusual step" by endorsing any candidate in a statewide executive office race and added that the decision "is not without risk."

 

The chamber also endorsed Republicans Jon Husted for secretary of state and Mike DeWine for attorney general.

 

The chamber changed its bylaws in 1998 to allow it to make political endorsements. But until now, the chamber had only supported Republican Supreme Court candidates.

 

Countering the climate alarmist fearmongering is a much better use of Chamber resources than endorsing specific candidates for elected office, particularly given the fact that Strickland has hardly been some kind of anti-corporate crusader.

I wonder if NRA's endorsement of Strickland will help his chances of re-election.

Honestly, in this election, I doubt it, for the reason that Mona Charen, one of National Review's hardline social conservatives, identified in a recent article: This election is going to be overwhelmingly about economic issues, not social issues.  She wrote an article basically conceding that the social issues that she cares about most are going to be secondary in this environment.  I think she was right.  Endorsements from social-issues factions are going to have a little bit of strength, but not all that much.

I think the majority of voters are going to rely on what matters to them most: physical appearance.

 

Is it me or has Governor Strickland looked kind of gray and colorless lately? Kasich "The Trainophobe" practically conveys youthful exhuberance in comparison.

 

Either way, I'm not sure either candidate could find the city of Cleveland without the aid of mapquest.

 

 

 

Honestly, in this election, I doubt it, for the reason that Mona Charen, one of National Review's hardline social conservatives, identified in a recent article: This election is going to be overwhelmingly about economic issues, not social issues. She wrote an article basically conceding that the social issues that she cares about most are going to be secondary in this environment. I think she was right. Endorsements from social-issues factions are going to have a little bit of strength, but not all that much.

Rundown on recent polls from The Columbus Dispatch.  The polls on the Governor's race are posted here.  Information on the Senate race is posted in the Ohio Senate Race 2010 thread:

 

UPDATED: New polls show governor's race tight - but not Senate contest

September 28, 2010 - 11:45 AM

 

Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland has closed to within the margin of error in of GOP challenger John Kasich in new polls released today.  A breakdown of today's polls:

 

Fox News - Kasich's lead is 45-43% in the survey Saturday of 1,000 likely Ohio voters, with 10% undecided.  The margin of sample error is plus or minus 3 percentage points in the poll, conducted by Pulse Opinion Research.  The former GOP congressman and Fox commentator was ahead by 6 points a week ago, and 5 points two weeks ago in the Fox poll.

 

Reuters/Ipsos - Kasich is up 47-46%, down from a 9-point lead in early August. "Democrats generally don't engage until later in the cycle, and they are showing signs now of becoming more involved," Ipsos pollster Chris Jackson said.

 

New York Times-CBS - Kasich leads by a single point in this poll, too: 43-42% among likely voters. Among registered voters, Strickland is actually on top, 44-39%..

 

The new measures come on the heels of a Columbus Dispatch/Ohio Newspaper Organization survey published Sunday that showed Kasich up by 4 points.  Earlier polls showed Kasich with a double-digit lead.

 

MORE: http://blog.dispatch.com/dailybriefing/2010/09/strickland_within_margin_of_er.shtml

So for those of you are voting for Strickland because of 3C, what will happen if he is powerless to keep it alive when the state legislature kills it (at least for the next 4 years)?

^Vote Democrats to the legislature.

Haha we will see

I am not currently planning on voting for Strickland 'because of the 3C'.... but Kasich's politicizing of this issue is certainly troubling.  This kind of reminds me of 2008, when I really liked John McCain... until he started campaigning (in fact, I was probably going to vote for McCain if Hilary had won the primary) (NOTE: I do not think that Palin would have been on the ticket if that was the case).

So for those of you are voting for Strickland because of 3C, what will happen if he is powerless to keep it alive when the state legislature kills it (at least for the next 4 years)?

 

I would hope that the members of the legislature would recognize that Kasich lost at least in part due to his stance on 3C, and reconsider their own opinions due to the overwhelming support of the citizens of Ohio!

Correct.  The republicans have framed the governor's race as a contest of ideas mainly revolving around the 3C.  The reason Kasich will lose is because he decided to tie this issue around his neck.  Otherwise, there are other issues he could've gone after Strickland on.  I think Strickland has done a decent job overall considering all the political jockeying we have in this state.  Could there be room for improvement?  Certainly.  But I won't even bother to look at Kasich and I'm sure there are many others based on this issue alone. 

Nate Silvers 538 Blog is hosted by the New York Times now, complete with some nifty graphics

 

538

 

He has a post on the recent Ohio polls, and is still favoring a Kasich win.

 

"We now show Gov. Ted Strickland, a Democrat, with a 13 percent chance to save his seat, up from 8 percent last week."

 

"I’m sure some people will ask why Mr. Strickland is still at 13 percent and not higher, when the two polls released Tuesday show him only 1 point behind Mr. Kasich among likely voters. There are several reasons. First, while the polls show Mr. Kasich’s lead narrowing, they still show him with the lead, and even a small lead can be surprisingly meaningful with barely more than a month left in the campaign. Second, the model is not in a rush to discard some slightly older polls, like those from SurveyUSA and Quinnipiac University, which had given Mr. Kasich a double-digit advantage"

 

 

538's Ohio Page

 

 

I think the 3-C rail discussion is such a small issue for the big picture of voters.  Sure it gets hotly debated on this site and is a passionate issue for some, but of the total electorate, how many are even well informed enough on the subject to make a reasonable decision?  Hell I bet most voters don't even know what 3-C is...

I think the 3-C rail discussion is such a small issue for the big picture of voters.  Sure it gets hotly debated on this site and is a passionate issue for some, but of the total electorate, how many are even well informed enough on the subject to make a reasonable decision?  Hell I bet most voters don't even know what 3-C is...

 

Spot on.  That is how the Kasich campaign is able to misrepresent the issues so blatantly and get away with it.  It is either that, or he falls into the "uninformed" category himself.

 

And BTW, it is Kasich who made and is making this a wedge issue.

Hell I bet most voters don't even know what 3-C is...

 

Which makes it all the more bizarre that Kasich has made it the primary policy issue of his campaign!

 

Turning away the 3C money is about the only specific action we know the hypothetical Kasich administration would perform.

^^Interesting comments.  Primary Kasich issue is Jobs Jobs Jobs.  How Strickland didn't hang on to the jobs and how he will. 

 

I've seen every tv ad for both sides of the Governor's race probably 50 times and I can't recall the 3C train being mentioned ever....

^^Interesting comments.  I've seen every political ad for both sides of the Governor's race probably 50 times and I can't recall the 3C train being mentioned ever....

 

Right, all you hear is nebulous talk about jobs. "I will create jobs, and my opponent will take them away" is not a legitimate platform, though.

 

If you read the slightly more substantive articles from the state's major news outlets, though, you'll notice just how front-and-center this issue is. Like I said, giving back the 3C money is the only specific policy proposal which has come out of Kasich's mouth. (That might not be 100% the case, but if not it is certainly close. I can't recall anything else.)

Well now you're changing your tune, your earlier post said Kasich was making 3-C the primary policy of his campaign...  I just went back & looked at his website for 10 mins and I didn't see it.  Not trying to be a pest, just trying to educate myself.  Back to my original comment though, I think this 3-C issue is minor compared to alot of other alarming things about "privatization" on his website...

 

Could the governor actually "give back the money" that is designated for the 3C project?  I thought these types of budgets were usually tied to other items so states had to accept or lose funding to other programs like education or road construction

 

The jobs issue is going to be front & center in pretty much every race, local, state & federal, and I honestly think it should be considering we're still hanging around 10% unemployment.  The state is broke.  I think focusing on much else besides how to attract & retain jobs is skirting the issue...

I suppose I should qualify what I was trying to say. I say it's the central policy issue because his other "issues" are so abstract. This one is very concrete, and he is vocal about it. Maybe you're right, and I should be more charitable, but it's hard to think of an abstract policy as any policy at all.

What I said is that it is the "wedge issue"... Both candidates are all for fixing the economy, improving the job market, fixing the budget, and any other platitude you can think of.  The 3-C is a point of definitive divide... hence, why it is has gotten so much press during the campaign.  Just google "3-C and Kasich" and see how many hits you get.

The Cleveland City Club had a recent program about the fiscal crisis in the state which provided some decent insight.  The most interesting take-away to me was that some of the fiscal crisis was actually a result of the new Commercial Activity Tax, which is much more volatile than the older inventory and tangible property taxes.  To me that's an indication that when the economy rebounds, some of the spike in CAT revenue should go into a larger rainy day fund to help smooth out future revenue volatility, but I don't know how realistic this is.  Money in pocket is hard not to spend...

...some of the fiscal crisis was actually a result of the new Commercial Activity Tax, which is much more volatile than the older inventory and tangible property taxes. ...

Good information

Someone wrote into the Dispatch the other day saying that they were voting for Kasich primarily because he was against 3C. So those kind of people are out there.

 

Just because someone says they are voting for Kasich because he is against 3C doesn't mean that they would have voted for Strickland in lieu of 3C.  3C simply becomes a straw man for the ever-present wasteful government spending trope.

I think 3C is a political loser according to the polls, right?

Someone wrote into the Dispatch the other day saying that they were voting for Kasich primarily because he was against 3C. So those kind of people are out there.

 

There are those kind of people out there, but those kind of people will find some excuse to be those kind of people.  No one ever wins 100% of the vote.  Well, unless you believe Baghdad Bob.

 

There are also people like me who are undecided and still weighing the pros and cons, who are economically inclined to lean towards Kasich, and who nevertheless think that his stance on 3C is a check in the "con" column for Kasich.

I think 3C is a political loser according to the polls, right?

 

Not among the age group (18-34) we need to focus on right now for the good of our state.  It is a quite popular idea with them from the last poll I saw - something like 3 in 4 were in favor of the 3C

All I'm saying is that some on here were trying to paint 3C as an issue that voters aren't concentrating on or paying attention to, that letter clearly stated that at least 1 person is.

 

Right, but for the purposes of an election, the set of voters who would vote for Strickland but for 3C is probably tiny to nonexistant.  Also, the comments on this thread already show that at least some voters are concentrating on 3C, they just happen to be in favor of it.  The comments of one voter, be he idiosyncratic (an actual Strickland but for 3C) or typical (supposedly against supposedly wasteful spending of which 3C is an supposed example) don't amount to much of a nullifying counterpoint.

Is it still terminating in Sharonville?

All those articles you post, and you're too lazy to look this question up?

 

http://xingcolumbus.wordpress.com/2010/09/25/updated-3c-schedule/

 

No, it goes past Sharonville to Lunken.  But this discussion probably belongs over in the 3C thread.

Haha working off my phone sorry. Noticed the wrong thread after the fact. So CUT beat out Sharonville? That's good. Yep, wrong thread.

 

 

So regardless of who you support, who do you think will win? I'm thinking Kasich hands down

A couple weeks ago, I would have said "Kasich, hands down" as well.  Now I say "probably Kasich" as it looks like the race has tightened up a little.

It will take a miracle for Strickland to win... especially after groups like Crossroads get into full campaign mode.

Sometimes polls aren't that accurate. Strickland is hard to hate, unless you unreasonably blame him for the global/national financial crisis hitting Ohio. Kasich is a big unknown. I remain hopeful that the voting public understands these two basic facts.

It's going to come down to a matter of voter turnout.  Conservatives are very motivated to vote.  Liberals are more "bleh" at the moment.  The polling today, especially when viewed collectively, is fairly accurate for "likely voters."  I would have thought that the ethusiams gap would lead to innaccuracies in the polls, but that has not proved to be the case in other similar years, such as 1994 and 2006.

I agree that polls are generally accurate, taken as a whole, but every election cycle there are a couple races which surprise the pollsters. This could be one of them.

I'd also say that is part of the Republican strategy.  They want to make the polls look like there is no chance in important close contests that people will stay home.  Plus there is a self-fulfilling prophecy to see someone pull ahead in the polls and people decide to vote for that candidate "because everyone else is, he must not be that bad of a guy".  Yes, the republicans are charged up by the tea party.  But I would say the progressive groups are as charged up but the mainstream media barely wants to talk about this since that doesn't jibe with the ongoing storyline of the year of "tea parties on the march."

 

I saw a recent report that noted in 2008 how there was a 3-4% difference in the polling from actual voting due to lack of landline phones to reach likely younger voters(18-30 age group).  I would say that is more pronounced today.  I would say it now reaches (18-35+) as a difficult group to contact.  So depending on the polling company and their calling lists, expected results could be off quite a bit on election day or not if the youth vote actually doesn't show up at the polls..

 

^The better polling companies take all this into account.  The latest I saw from Nate Silver, probably the best poll analyst out there (he nailed the 2008 presidential election as far as electoral votes), gave Strickland less than a 1/5 chance of winning.

^Plus the 18-35 crowd tend to be the least likely to show up at the polls in non-presidential election years.

^And minorities.  But it is what it is.  If people don't exercise their right to vote, then that's all on them.

Strickland looked very calm and polished in last night's debate at the University of Toledo.  Kasich looked unhinged.  His responses jumped from subject to subject like he had ADD. 

 

Thank the newspaper people for asking questions about helping Ohio's cities. 

I did not see the debate ... but I'm betting that Boreas saw what he wanted to see.  I'm kind of wondering what he'll say if Kasich wins.  Probably accuse a few million Ohioans of being racists and retards.

I think you need to go outside.  Get some fresh air.  Clear your mind

Moderator Note

 

Knock it off. Both of you.

Now statistically a tossup

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2010/10/13/rasmussen-poll-ohio-governors-race-a-toss-up/

 

 

Now statistically a tossup

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2010/10/13/rasmussen-poll-ohio-governors-race-a-toss-up/

 

 

 

Interesting... considering Rasmussen polls usually trend to the right for whatever reason.  I still think Strickland has little hope.  There just is no special appeal about him IMO (not saying that there is with Kasich) and he will likely fall as a victim of circumstance.

I still don't get the appeal of Kasich. I get the appeal of his basic ideology to some people, but he's all sizzle and no steak. He hasn't given me one quantifiable thing that I can hang my hat on that I can say Kasich will do _______ during his term. Candidly, I wonder if he's up for the job. I've been through the 'good ol' boy that isn't detail oriented' thing before.

 

Now Crains did an analysis of his plans for privatizing the Dept of Development and said that there's no discernable improvement with a public/ private model vs the purely public. Both models rely heavily on public money...only Kasich's model has higher paid employees, with bonuses they don't have to report.

 

Kasich's economic development plan creates political battlefield

Gubernatorial candidate Kasich touts plan to privatize economic development, but experts say it's no panacea for state's woes

By JAY MILLER

4:30 am, October 11, 2010

 

A look at the experiences of other states indicates a plan advanced by John Kasich to replace the Ohio Department of Development with a private, nonprofit organization might not be the economic development elixir touted by the Republican candidate for governor.

 

Conversations with economic development professionals and academics suggest the success of state business growth programs is more a reflection of each state's appeal to site selectors rather than a function of the organizational structure of the business attraction effort.

 

 

...Under the Kasich plan, the development department would be dismantled and those operations that aren't related to business attraction and retention would be moved into other departments...

 

...Democratic Attorney General Richard Cordray also has come out against the plan, saying it lacks public accountability and transparency.

Mr. Kasich opened the door to the reservations expressed by Mr. Cordray and others when he said privatization would allow the nonprofit to attract the best people by offering high salaries and bonuses, then added, “The whole bonus thing, we will not require them to disclose their bonuses.”

 

http://www.crainscleveland.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101011/SUB1/310119980

 

I still don't get the appeal of Kasich. I get the appeal of his basic ideology to some people, but he's all sizzle and no steak. He hasn't given me one quantifiable thing that I can hang my hat on that I can say Kasich will do _______ during his term.

 

Yes he has.  He will kill the 3-C.  Beyond that... I don't know.