Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Governor Hypocrite

Yesterday, the Ohio Republican Party came forward with their first major attack against the Strickland campaign.
The Ohio Republican Party called Gov. Ted Strickland a hypocrite today for criticizing GOP challenger John Kasich's work at Lehman Brothers while taking contributions from Wall Street and giving state business to Lehman.
Politically speaking, the timing was impeccable.

Ted Strickland and his allies have made attacks against John Kasich's tenure at Lehman Brothers the centerpiece of Ted's re-election campaign. He's fully invested into the strategy. And after months of television advertisements, the voters know it. They connect Strickland and the Lehman attack as one.

Polls show Kasich's approval numbers have only been minimally damaged by the attacks, and in some cases have improved. And despite it all, Kasich still maintains a lead over Strickland.

At the same time, polls from PPP and Quinnipiac show Strickland's disapproval numbers actually increasing since the ads hit the air.

So what happens when those same voters that connect Strickland with Wall Street attacks find that their very own Governor doesn't have much of a problem cozying up to Wall Street himself?

It damages the Governor.

Now in response, Strickland's campaign team laughably tried to dismiss the entire attack based on the inclusion of certain professions as being considered a part of "Wall Street". Nevermind the fact that they ignored two important things in their response.

First, in fact, Strickland did accept contributions from high powered individuals and PACs representing "Wall Street", including heirs of the Lehman Brothers family. In other words, individuals that directly and greatly benefited from Lehman Brothers and its downfall, likely far more than John Kasich ever did, were found worthy of contributing to Ted Strickland as recently as 2009 and 2010.

But second, and most importantly, Strickland's team failed to recognize that the Democratic Governors Association didn't just use "Wall Street" ties to attack Kasich, but also tied in contributions from the "financial industry".

From one of the DGA's commercials:

Why does that distinction matter?

Republicans later explained that Strickland, while still a member of Congress in the 1990s, voted for the commodity futures modernization act and financial services modernization act. Both measures, according to Republicans, broadly defined the financial services industry as including insurance companies along with investment banks.

"These are the terms that were defined by Ted Strickland and his Democratic allies. We used the same filter when we went through and looked at all his campaign contributions," DeWine said. "They are the ones who defined Wall Street as the State Farm agent."

Republicans also charged that Strickland or one of his appointees has awarded over $6 billion in work to Lehman or Barclay since 2007 through several deals.

Those transactions include two huge deals from the Ohio Housing Finance Agency which awarded one contract to Lehman in August 2008, a month before the firm collapsed, and another in October 2008, a month after Lehman went under, to Barclays, which took over part of Lehman.

Strickland's campaign manager Pickrell did not address those charges.

Silence, Aaron?

You might as well have exclaimed, "guilty as charged!"

UPDATE: Watch the ORP presser here...


  1. Keeling, your hyocrisy would be breathtaking if it weren't so predictable.

    Kasich would not start his first ad of the campaign with a defensive ad about Lehman Brothers and the ORP would not be attempting to co-op the attack and using against Strickland UNLESS it was working.

    Every media outlet has covered this has pointed out how ridiculous the ORP's attack is. The fact that you have to spend most of your post defending the criticism is reflective of that.

    If by minimum you mean almost a double digit move solidly in unfavorables, then I guess your right. I guess "minimum" depends on your perspective. But I would consider that 3/4 of his unfavorables appeared after the DGA ads begun to be more than minimial, but c'est la vie.

    Please, I'm begging you, keep attacking Ted Strickland over Wall Street while your candidate is caught in lie after lie about his role at Lehman Brothers.

    Nothing would make me happier than to see Kevin DeWine continue to vilify the entire financial services industry that Mary Taylor is a part of a lump together Nationwide Insurance with Lehman Brothers.

    Trot out the old legislative leaders who are so outraged at this that.... they've never uttered a peep about until this hastily called press conference was thrown together.

    Attack Ted Strickland for having the support of the Ohio business community! It's killing us.... Please, sir, mercy! /snark

    Just like everything you write, you're basic formula is this:
    1) If a Democratic does it, it's a sign of a failing campaign engaging in smears.
    2) If a Republican does the exact same thing, it's a brilliant strategy that demonstrates the campaign's strength and likely victory in November.

    How else do you explain knocking Paula Brooks but praising Johnson? Or praising Portman's early ad but knocking Cordray's?

    You don't live in Ohio, you're probably getting paid under the table to write this crap (or am I really to believe that you organize trips of D.C. former Hill staffers to pose as local Stivers and Chabot supporters in '06 for FREE) and you have absolutely no concern about your own credibility.

    By lead, you mean a polling average that is heavily weighted by more frequently polling by Rasmussen? Because PPP says tied and Ohio Poll and Quinny says Kasich's behind.

  2. Know how I know I'm right? You wrote a comment longer than the original post in a style that has me picturing you frothing at the mouth.

    As far as responding to this mess of human thought, I'm not sure how to respond to something so poorly thought out and inaccurate. Nor am I going to let you waste my time. But as an example, I'll start with the first couple...

    2nd paragraph: The other option is that the negative attacks have actually damaged Strickland more than Kasich, and, just how McDonnell furthered the negative attacks on him by pushing the story further, Kasich extended the story by acknowledging it in an ad. It's been done before here in VA. It worked.

    2nd paragraph: No, they didn't say they were ridiculous. Most, not all, reported the defensive attack meant to dismiss all the charges, but they were all explained quite well. The PD in particular was pretty harsh.

    Third paragraph: There have been no double digit moves in unfavorables for John Kasich in the regularly polls of the race: PPP, Rasmussen, or Quinnipiac. You lied. Again.

    And so on and so on....

    Brian/Modern, I'd like to thank you for wasting so much time on my blog. Your priorities are fascinating.

  3. Mr. Modern, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

  4. applause to Scarlet>Fire for the Billy Madison quote. I laughed until I cried.

  5. I would call a nine point jump almost a "double digit jump." I didn't lie you just misquoted me. I'll make a deal, you stop lying, and I'll stop writing about you.
    For god's sake, you're now lying by accusing me of lying over something I never even said!

    Yet again, your reading skills fail you. Keeling, you like to preen like your a political expert, so I'll ask you again, what successful political races have you been a part of? Because by my count you were involved in the losing AWB congressional campaign, the losing Stivers campaign, the losing Chabot campaign, the losing McCain in Ohio campaign...

    Well, you live in Virignia, so you really don't see the coverage here in Ohio except over the Internet. However, even that clearly showed that the media wasn't buying the broad brush that the ORP was trying to paint. The DDN did a story about one of the donors today mocking the ORP.

    You keep telling yourself whatever you want in Virginia.

    But the fact is that Ted Strickland is tied or leading in all polls except Rasmussen, and we're going to win.

    And nobody buys that the ORP did this because the Wall Street attacks aren't working.

    Ted Strickland ain't Craig Deeds, kid.

    You can't respond to your own hypocrisy because you've been stone cold busted. You pimp Johnson and dismiss Brooks even though financially and from a district demographic standpoint Brooks is in substantially better shape than Johnson. You attacked Cordray for the very same thing you praised Portman.

  6. Brian/Modern,

    Like all polling, an aggregate of all the polls is the only fair way to judge any increase in disapproval. The average increase between Quinny, PPP, and Rasmussen was 4.6%. That's NOT "almost double digits". You're wrong.

    LOL @ only seeing the coverage over the internet. Right. Exactly how everyone else sees it. The only coverage I don't see is the daily news each evening, and those stories are usually up on the internet. What a weird attack that was. I read each article. And I agree the DDN article today was a good pull from you guys. Too bad the DDN didn't attack the DGA for using the same definition as the ORP.

    Nobody buys it? They don't have to. The numbers speak for themselves.

    Correct, Ted Strickland is not Creigh Deeds. Good job.

    I "pimp" Johnson because he has the political wind at his back. Brooks is going the opposite way. Does that mean Johnson is favored? No, and I've never stated as such. That's why his call for debates is a good move. Additionally, he is actually making an effort, which Brooks clearly isn't.

    I attacked Cordray because he doesn't have the cash flow that Portman does. Portman has $9 million COH. Cordray doesn't have anything close to that. Portman can afford to go on TV early. Cordray, while decently funded, doesn't have the cash for a high and sustained media buy the way Portman does, but Cordray is doing it anyway. Why? He's either stupid or desperate. Either one is bad.

    I've had to warn you about this before, but your repeated insults are growing tiresome. If you're going to continue to obsess over this blog and comment on nearly every post, please do so in a respectable manner.


  7. Aggregates averages only work as well as the data in it. And it has twice as much Rasmussen data as all other pollsters.

    Aggregate is different from aggregate averages. And the aggregate data shows that Strickland has the momentum from the winter and is either slightly ahead or tied.

    Johnson has half the money Blasdel did at this point in '06. He has twice the CoH disadvantage that Brooks has, and unlike Blasdel he has virtually no name recognition in the district. Johnson has no chance. It would be like me writing that Boehner's Democratic opponent was a threat.

    I think you mocked Fisher's request for debates (which was nearly half the number Johnson is asking) saying it showed what a doomed candidate he was.

    Cordray has 3:1 money and we're less than 100 days from the election. His move isn't nearly as stunning as you attempt to paint it. Stunning news... political campaign starts in August. Think early voting might have to do with it instead? Nah, it MUST be because Cordray is panicking... Come on.

    You falsely accuse me of lying by alleging I said something I never said, and then you lecture me? Yes, the comment threads here have been a model of respect for political discourse.

  8. Wrong again.

    I only compared the two most recent polls from each of the three pollsters, so there was only one data point from each. (i.e., no "oversampling" by Rasmussen). That came out to 4.6 point increase in disapproval. That's not close to double digits. So your statement is wrong in every sense of the word.

    As for Johnson, '06 was a completely different animal. And you also completely ignore my point that I never said Johnson was favored. Only that he had a shot, which in this environment is completely true.

    Yes. Cordray is panicking. When did Marc Dann go up in the last cycle? This early? Seriously doubt it.

    I appreciate you trying to conduct yourself in a more appropriate manner.


No profanity, keep it clean.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.