A lesson in efficiency, courtesy Sarah Palin

Sneak Peek at 3-C Slow Speed Choo-Choo stations....

....in about 20 years.

Beneath the streets of Cincinnati, Ohio, a set of visibly unused tunnels and stations for a rapid transit system could be seen. It is the abandoned subway of Ohio, called the Cincinnati Subway, infamous for its incomplete construction. The subway has been termed as “one of the city’s biggest embarrassments” and “one of the Cincinnati biggest failures”.

The construction began from 1920 and continued till 1925 with finance of $6 million which relatively got exhausted before the completion of the project.

The pictures below are from what little construction was completed.

Ohio, I present to you, your future.

How's that new campaign manager working out for ya so far, Lee?

It seems that with a new campaign manager comes convoluted press releases that make the voting public say, "huh?".

Yesterday, Lee Fisher's campaign released their own study stating loans to small businesses shrunk by $5 million between 2006-2009.

And somehow that's Rob Portman's fault.

Riiiiight.

Fisher seems to forget the most important driver for securing small business loans isn't federal funding, but the simple laws of supply and demand. Simply put, if people don't have an income then there is no demand for services. If there is no demand for services then there is no incentive to attempt to start a business. If there is no incentive to start a business, then there is no need to attempt to secure a small business loan.

And what has history shown time and time again to be the best way to create jobs? Lower taxes.

Fisher seems to want to avoid discussing his time as the 'Jobs Czar' under Governor Strickland. After losing 300k jobs under his watch, I can't say I blame him.

But beyond the policy specifics, is this really the best Fisher's new campaign manager could come up with? Small business loans? I would love to sit in a Frank Luntz focus group and hear how well that resounds among the average voter. Laughable.

Portman's press secretary plays it smart by not allowing Fisher to run from his record. Expect to hear "jobs czar" more times than you can count this campaign season. That will resound.

The 3-C : What it can mean in November

This is it.

This, in a nutshell, is Ted Strickland's brilliant plan to solve Ohio's job crisis.

When the Governor announced Ohio's winning bid for $400 million in taxpayer dollars to pay for a slow-speed train system from Cleveland to Cincinnati, he was giving voters an opportunity to view his vision in a microcosm.

If, of course, a microcosm can be micro at $400 million bucks.

And most important from a political perspective, he claimed total and complete ownership of the idea.

Now, going back to last Spring 3BP has been yelling at the top of its blogolicious lungs about the lunacy behind the 3-C project. So, this post isn't about how dumb it is. Instead, it's about how it may affect the Governor's race in November.

Before the grant was announced at the end of January, and with relatively little discussion about the 3-C idea in newspapers across the state, a conglomerate of Ohio newspapers released a poll that stated Ohio voters disagreed with the project by 11 points.

That in itself is very telling, but you start to see how much potential trouble Strickland may find himself when you look a little closer at the numbers.

Below is a table broken down by age group. The columns include voter interest(gaugued by total percentage who said they were "extremely" or "very" interested in voting in the fall), support or opposition to the 3-C plan, and choice for Governor.


So, looking at these numbers, what do we learn?

First off, and most important, those who are most supportive of both 3-C and Ted Strickland are also the age group least likely to vote in the Fall.

All three other age groups oppose the 3-C project, two of them significantly so. And on average, these same three age groups support Kasich by a significant 9 point margin.

And most importantly, they are actually going to vote.

Now what's interesting about these numbers is that they came out before the announcement was even made and before a massive attack by newspapers and their columnists on the plan.

Outside of Democratic leaders, criticism was virtually universal.

Here's a sampling:

High-speed rail remains an enticing idea for Ohio. But this is a state where political expediency almost always trumps what's best for the taxpayers. So the rail plan rolled out by Strickland will be such a colossal failure that when the time is ripe for Ohio to consider a rail idea that is clean, fast and thoughtful, voters will still be so furious over the debacle of 2010 that they'll probably reject it." - Brent Larkin, Cleveland Plain Dealer

Never mind, if you can, the money. The federal government doesn't have the $400 million. More than likely, our children and theirs will end up paying back the Chinese for the loan. And Ohio, with an impending $7 billion hole in the next two-year budget, can hardly afford the $17 million annual subsidy to operate the rail system. - Joe Hallet, Columbus Dispatch

The challenge facing 3C planners is to create a system that provides convenience at a reasonable price to encourage ridership. I hope they succeed, but I’m not sure enough Ohioans will find the proposed rail system either fast or frequent enough to be worthwhile. - Michael Gorman, Dayton Daily News

...the only way huge investments like this make sense is that if they change the equation. If we can put business folks in these other cities in a fraction of the time it takes them to drive, and at a competitive price, trains might make sense. - Brian Tucker, Crain's Cleveland Business

Not to mention, how will voters feel in Toledo and SE Ohio when they're fully informed about how much of their tax dollars will go to fund a project they won't ever use?

Clearly, the media has been and will continue to perpetuate the conception of how idiotic an idea the 3-C project really is for the State of Ohio.

It would be in John Kasich's best interest to highlight this boondoggle as a perfect example of Ted Strickland's poor leadership and inability to understand what truly is best for Ohioans. Remember, the Rasmussen poll released earlier this week on the Ohio Senate race included a very important question - do you believe cutting taxes or increased spending will create jobs? By 54-17 Ohioans preferred cutting taxes.

Well, what could be a better example of misguided spending than $400 million for a train nobody will use?

Amazingly enough, other Democrats are jumping on board the Choo-Choo to financial ruin. Mary Jo Kilroy couldn't stop hugging Ted Strickland at the announcement.

Ultimately, and if properly utilized by Republicans, the 3-C slow-speed rail project could very well provide the exact kind of silver bullet Republicans can use in the fall.

Back to the Future

Yesterday, the NRCC had a little fun and red penned an old Nancy Pelosi press release from 2003 that went after President Bush for........wait for it......

.....a 6.2% unemployment rate.

Oomph.

(click to increase size)

New "IDEA" on Lee Fisher's site storms to the lead.

Lee Fisher had the bright idea of making his website more interactive by encouraging supporters to submit their "ideas". Readers can then read the ideas and vote on which they believe is best.

Well, a reader sent this to me a few minutes ago and I haven't stopped laughing yet.

Ohio Attorney General race = Game Over

This is the sound of Richard Cordray's chances in November.

With a new poll conducted by Neil Newhouse of Public Opinion Strategies, Mike DeWine might as well start his gig at the Ohio AG offices tomorrow.

I had the opportunity to take part in a media conference call with the DeWine camp to go over the new poll. According to the numbers, DeWine leads 50-32.

But it's the crosstabs that are particularly interesting. Completely refuting the theory that strong Republicans won't support DeWine, 66% of them say they will "definitely" support the former Senator. Compare that to the 60% of Strong Dems that "definitely" support Cordray and it's clear that DeWine's support is more enthusiastic among the base. Further reinforcing the point is that total support for DeWine among those who identified as "Strong Republicans" is an impressive 96-3. Comparitively, Cordray has 84% support.

Showing that Independents aren't just breaking for Kasich and Portman, DeWine wins them 48-22. Interestingly enough, Newhouse stated Scott Brown had the same 2-1 advantage among Indies when he polled up in Massachusetts.

Based on the sample size, the question not involving any type of push polling, and Newhouse's fantastic track record, it would be hard for anyone to not find these results legitimate.

It's safe to say a gap this massive will make raising funds even more difficult for Cordray to mount a credible defense of the seat. And whatever funds he does raise will most definitely go towards negative/comparitive ads, as is always necessary when down so significantly.

A side benefit of DeWine dominating this race is that it prevents Cordray from influencing the Ohio House races the way he was able in 2008 when in the last couple weeks he filtered $500k to a couple House races that were won by just 1000 or so votes. Instead, every cent he has will have to go against DeWine.

As I've been saying for months - Mike DeWine being elected AG has been inevitable - and that's thanks to one person and one person only - Mike DeWine. He built the right relationships over his 30 year political career and has deftly used them to his great advantage in this race. His name ID is off the charts and, without an October surprise of sorts, insurmountable to overcome.

The bad news? This means the ODP will be able to spend a little more cash on Strickland, Pepper, et. al.

A screencap of the poll can be seen by clicking on the image below.

Clearly, Mary Jo Kilroy hates being a Congresswoman.

Last month, a poll showed 3 out of 5 Ohioans disapproved of the President's health care plan. Only 20% felt lack of universal coverage was the biggest problem. Only 1/3 favored a single-payer system. And half hoped states would have the opportunity to opt out.

In response, Mary Jo Kilroy put her hands over her ears and started screaming, "LA LA LA LA LAAAAA!"

Even as President Barack Obama talks of a health-care summit with Republicans, Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy says Senate Democrats should use their majority to muscle through health-care reforms if they can't get the GOP to go along.

[...]

The idea, dubbed "reconciliation," has attracted support since the election on Jan. 19 of Republican Scott Brown to an open Senate seat from Massachusetts. Brown's election deprived Democrats of their filibuster-proof majority. Since then, Democrats have been casting for ways to salvage aspects of the health-care legislation from a political quagmire.

[...]

"To make broad-ranging, radical change in a system as important as health care on a narrow, partisan and fleeting political advantage is a prescription for ongoing national conflict," former state Sen. Steve Stivers, Kilroy's likely GOP opponent, said in a statement.

"Were Mrs. Kilroy and her colleagues in Congress willing to work in bipartisan fashion, we would already have health-care reform passed, and we would have a working relationship focused on the urgent priority of our citizens: job creation."

Senator Judd Gregg, the man President Obama thought highly enough of to nominate for Secretary of Commerce, explained the purpose of reconciliation in a way even Mary Jo Kilroy should be able to understand:

Reconciliation is not the right path to achieve this goal. The process first emerged to give Congress a tool to help bring spending and revenues in line with the fiscal policy assumed in the budget resolution. In short, the intended purpose of reconciliation is to make sure there is a way to enact, via a simple majority vote, changes to fiscal policy levers that will implement the budget totals, not to force through, using an expedited process, drastic and expensive new policies that will affect every American household.

The reality is this: if Democrats move forward with reconciliation, they will face a political disaster in November. Some Senate Democrats, like Bayh and Lincoln, have already come out against it. For that reason alone, it won't happen.

Kilroy putting herself out there as someone so absolutely unwilling to compromise that she would prefer to manipulate the lawmaking process says a lot about her character. That kind of partisanship will not go over well in her heavily Independent district.

Breaking it Down: The 2/9 Ohio Gubernatorial Poll

DJ Note: This post can also be seen at Race42012.com

Since the January 12th Rasmussen poll showing presumptive GOP nominee John Kasich up seven points, four major events have happened in the Ohio gubernatorial race.

1. Kasich announced Ohio Auditor Mary Taylor as his running mate.
2. Ted Strickland announced his campaign for re-election and his choice of former County Judge Yvette McGee Brown as his running "partner".
3. Ted Strickland gave his State of the State speech.
4. Ohio Democrats unveiled their first major coordinated attack against John Kasich.

As you can imagine, three of those four should have had a positive net effect on Governor Ted Strickland's numbers.

The reality says otherwise as the new numbers from Rasmussen released this morning show Kasich dropping a statistically insignificant point, and still leading outside the margin of error 47-41.

Most interesting of the four listed above is the last one; the coordinated attack from Ohio Dems designed to preemptively define Kasich. Headlines from newspapers across Ohio over the past two weeks included the following:

• "Pry calls Kasich tax plan devastating"
• "Democrats oppose Kasich income tax plan"
• "McNally Blasts Kasich Tax Cut Plan"
• "Treasurer rips Kasich goal of tax phase-out"

These headlines were the result of the 2010 Ohio gubernatorial campaign's first aggressive attack - in this case, an impressively coordinated effort by the Strickland campaign to have local Democratic leaders across the state host press conferences with the intent to define Kasich as extreme and irresponsible. It yielded substantive earned media and provided the Democrats the exact headlines they were looking for in newspapers from Toledo to Portsmouth.

And it failed.

How do we know? Kasich's total favorable number among likely voters one month ago was 47. And today? 47.

Totally and completely unchanged.

What did change? The number of Independents who have a "very favorable" opinion of Kasich - going from from 18 to 26.

It's particularly amazing that these numbers didn't drop when considering the Kasich campaign never took the bait and counterpunched these claims. But a number released in Rasmussen's Ohio Senate poll yesterday may explain why the Kasich campaign was happy to sit back and take a few jabs - when Ohioans were asked whether they believe tax cuts or more federal spending is a better way to create jobs, tax cuts were preferred 54-17.

Now take into consideration that Ohio Democrats just went on a massive media push to inform voters that John Kasich will cut their taxes (admittedly, it was framed in a way designed to be highly negative). On top of that, Strickland has repeatedly stated in the Ohio media that his efforts to solve Ohio's jobs crisis rely completely on obtaining more federal stimulus dollars.

With a strategy like this, it makes you wonder if Governor Strickland even wants to win this election.

Interestingly enough, despite the beneficial coverage of the past few weeks, it was Ted Strickland's approval ratings that suffered. For the first time, his overall favorable number jumped over the 50% mark. Even among Democrats, those with favorable opinions of the Governor shrunk by 5%.

Ultimately, this poll is far more important than any other we've seen to date. Thanks to the timing of the poll, we've had our first real test of whether a major Democrat line of attack was successful (it wasn't), how a State of the State was received (a collective 'meh'), and how Ohioans reacted to the Governor's re-election announcement (no one noticed). Even when polls don't change, they can still tell us quite a bit.

The fact is this, with nothing more than an innovative new media strategy and aggressive grassroots efforts among the activist base, Kasich has found himself consistently ahead. Once the Ohio Republican Party and Kasich campaign begin spending some of the millions of dollars they have on hand, they'll be able to highlight not only Ted Strickland's failures in ways never considered by Ohioans, but they'll be able to highlight John Kasich's solutions.

This election, like so many others around the country, will be about jobs. Unless Ted Strickland can turn things around, and fast, he will not win on 11.2.10.

The House is vulnerable.

Just three months ago, 34 House Democratic seats were considered competitive by the well-respected political handicapper Charlie Cook.

Now?

50.

50 seats are now considered vulnerable.

Additionally, three months ago the margin of vulnerable Dem to GOP seats was only 22. And now that number is up to 40. Add in the seat of Jack Murtha and we're at +41.

Now, this doesn't mean Republicans will win all 50 Democrat-held competitive races. But, historically speaking, when the environment is as overwhelmingly friendly as Republicans are currently enjoying, massive sweeps do occur.

The times, they are a-changin'.

Speaker Budish, you can't have it both ways.

There was a bit of a flap in the news yesterday after Armond Budish, the Ohio Speaker of the House, refused to allow a teenager be recognized on the House floor for winning an oratory contest sponsored by National Right to Life.

The Beachwood Democrat pulled the plug on the plan to honor Shelby County teen Elisabeth Trisler on Feb. 3 after becoming uncomfortable with the "politically sensitive" nature of the group sponsoring the contest, Budish spokesman Keary McCarthy said.

"You want to save these occasions for times when the House can jointly celebrate their constituents' achievements without the undertone of politics," McCarthy said.

[...]

"The Ohio House chamber is a monument to the importance of oratory and persuasion on the great issues facing our state," said Ohio Right to Life Executive Director Mike Gonidakis. "Silencing someone because you disagree is a terrible lesson to teach teens. The Speaker should reconsider his unfortunately petty decision."

But McCarthy said "the Speaker is not going to permit politically sensitive groups to use the House floor as a platform, whether it's a gay-rights advocacy group or a right to life organization," he said.

Nevermind that the child wasn't going to be speaking, but was only to be recognized by Members of the House for her achievement.

Now while I didn't take the time to go through the 43 resolutions to see who else had been recognized, a brief scouring of the House journal found that last October Speaker Budish had no problem recognizing supporters of a specific political agenda - environmental activists.


Now is this whole thing a huge deal? No. But it yet again shows political correctness run amok, along with a hint of hypocrisy.

"We're not handling any of these cases any different from the Bush administration."

A column in the Wall Street Journal says it all.

This weekend, Americans were treated to something new: Barack Obama defending his war policies by suggesting they merely continue his predecessor’s practices. The defense is illuminating, not least for its implicit recognition that George W. Bush has more credibility on fighting terrorists than does the sitting president.

Mr. Obama’s explanation came in an interview with Katie Couric just before the Super Bowl. Ms. Couric asked about trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in New York. After listing some of the difficulties, the president offered a startling defense for civilian trials:

“I think that the most important thing for the public to understand,” he told Ms. Couric, “is we’re not handling any of these cases any different than the Bush administration handled them all through 9/11.” Mr. Obama went on to add that “190 folks”—folks presumably just like the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks—had been tried and convicted in civilian court during Mr. Bush’s tenure.

Leave aside, for just a moment, the substance. Far more arresting is that Mr. Obama now defends himself by invoking a man he has spent the past year blaming for al Qaeda’s growth. You know—all those Niebuhrian speeches about how America had gone “off course,” “shown arrogance and been dismissive,” and “made decisions based on fear rather than foresight,” thus handing al Qaeda a valuable recruiting tool.

Want to know why the enthusiasm of the progressive left has so significantly curtailed? This is just one reason. The very basis of Obama's campaign when he first drawing a buzz was the massive distinctions he made between himself and W.

And now? Well....

Behind the Scenes of a Presidential Advance Team

While I'm absolutely flummoxed as to why the White House is spending money to produce videos like this, I'll admit it's particularly interesting. During the Bush years, I had the chance to advance a Presidential trip or two, and it's a crazy and exhilarating experience.

Take a look:

Behind "Not True"

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito caused a bit of a stir at the State of the Union last month when he was seen uttering "not true" in response to this part of the President's speech:

"With all due deference to the separation of powers, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections."

Leftists went bonkers over Alito. "Of course, they'd open the floodgates" they would scream. "Why don't these conservative judges understand that?!"

Daft.

As I contended to some on the left in January, Alito was saying "not true" to Obama's statement that the SC "reversed a century of law". The AP takes time to confirm that to be the case:

At the September argument, Alito suggested to attorney Seth Waxman that 20 years was the appropriate time frame, encompassing two high court decisions that upheld limits on corporate spending in campaigns.

"Mr. Waxman, all of this talk about 100 years and 50 years is perplexing," Alito said then. "It sounds like the sort of sound bites that you hear on TV. The fact of the matter is that the only cases that are being, that may possibly be reconsidered, are McConnell and Austin. And they don't go back 50 years, and they don't go back 100 years."

In the end, the court left untouched a 1907 law that bans contributions by corporations to candidates. But in overruling those two decisions, the court did strike down limits on corporations in a law that had been in place since 1947.

Finally, and also in response to the case itself, I wanted to link to a piece I found particularly interesting in response to the frustration on the left that the case determined corporations were deemed fit for the same free speech laws as individuals.

Key paragraph:

It’s true, of course, that corporations “are not human beings.” But their owners (the stockholders) and employees are. Human beings organized as corporations shouldn’t have fewer constitutional rights than those organized as sole proprietors, partnerships, and so on. In this context, it’s important to emphasize that most media organizations and political activist groups also use the corporate form. As Eugene points out, most liberals accept the idea that organizational form is irrelevant when it comes to media corporations, which were exempt from the restrictions on other corporate speech struck down by the Court today. The Supreme Court (including its most liberal justices) has repeatedly recognized that media corporations have First Amendment rights just as broad as those extended to media owned by individuals. Yet the “corporations aren’t people” argument applies just as readily to media corporations as to others. After all, newspapers, radio stations, and TV stations “are not human beings” and they too “have no consciences, no beliefs, no feelings, no thoughts, no desires.” We readily reject this reasoning in the case of media corporations because we recognize that even though the corporations in question are not people, their owners and employees are. The same point applies to other corporations.

Interesting stuff. And I'm glad it's left to people much smarter than me.

Breaking it Down: The 2/8 Ohio Senate Poll

According to Scott Rasmussen, Rob Portman's lead in the Ohio Senate race continues.

43-39 over Fisher and 42-38 over Brunner.

Statistically speaking, not much has changed since their 1/14 Rasmussen Poll.

And 9 months out, stagnation in statewide polls only 3+ weeks apart isn't much of a surprise.

Until we start seeing some ads on the air and major stories developing, we can't expect any substantive changes. The questions are, when will those ads begin, and who will be airing them?

Clearly, Jennifer Brunner won't be running any television ads on her own. She simply doesn't have the money for a serious ad buy. Lee Fisher will dominate the airwaves and win the day.

But what we don't know is whether Rob Portman will use his 6-1 cash-on-hand advantage to put up any adverts during the primary season. His primary opponent still hasn't shown any interest in throwing in enough of his own money to make the GOP primary competitive, but Portman may want to get his face on the air so Fisher isn't dominating Ohio televisions in the spring without competition.

Now looking a little deeper into the poll, we find that any efforts by Democrats to attack Portman have been ineffective, as his favorable to unfavorables are still at 2-1. The good news for Portman is Fisher's approval ratio is 1-1.

Looking down at some other questions asked by Rasmussen, one caught my eye in particular. The question asks which is a better way to create jobs, cutting taxes or increasing government spending. By 54-17, tax cuts were preferred. Even Democrats went for tax cuts by a margin of 32-24. In other words, the stimulus is not popular, even among the base, and any continued support of it by Lee Fisher will be a major misstep.

By 53-46, Ted Strickland is still finding a majority disapprove of him. But with another poll on the Guv race coming soon (hopefully), we'll go over that later.

Strickland is cutting school funding, and schools are noticing.

In Strickland's recent State of the State speech, Governor Strickland attempted to use lyrical gymnastics to avoid the fact that he had cut state funding for education.

Well, this cut is real, whether he likes it or not, and it's being felt throughout the education community.

Rising costs, state funding cuts and a drop in property values are causing school districts to struggle to keep out of debt.

Schools continue to ask their communities to fill the financial gap through operating levies based on property taxes. But, as the economy stays stagnant, districts are finding cash-strapped voters reluctant to pay additional taxes.

[...]

Schools are experiencing increased costs because of growth in enrollment, increasing health insurance premiums and rising costs of supplies and materials, and salary negotiations, among other things. But they are seeing a reduction in state funding based on recent reallocations under Gov. Ted Strickland’s education plan.

Nearly four years ago, Ted Strickland said his Administration should be considered a failure if school funding wasn't fixed under his watch.

Clearly, the educational communities in counties like Warren have a clear understanding of the Governor's failure to live up to his promise. The question then becomes, how much of an effect will it have on the Governor's re-election effort?

Rhetoric like his from four years ago can easily come back to haunt a campaign. Of course, a clear failure like this one isn't enough to disable a campaign, but it does provide Kasich an opportunity to knock Strickland off the tracks for a few days during key points in the fall.

Usually a pretty safe Dem voting bloc, many teachers in Ohio are not happy with Governor Strickland. Whether their unhappiness is enough to pull the lever for John Kasich or even not vote at all is yet to be determined, but Strickland clearly has some work to do.

Daniels/Ryan and the Party of Real Reform

For those that missed it, George Will had an intriguing column yesterday morning.

It pondered a Mitch Daniels/Paul Ryan presidential administration, and the substantive reforms they could provide to entitlements:

Funding entitlements -- especially medical care and pensions for the elderly -- requires reinvigorating the economy. Ryan's map connects three destinations: economic vitality, diminished public debt, and health and retirement security.

[...]

Compare Ryan's lucid map to the Democrats' impenetrable labyrinth of health-care legislation. Republicans are frequently criticized as "the party of no." But because most new ideas are injurious, rejection is an important function in politics. It is, however, insufficient. Fortunately, Ryan, assisted by Republican Reps. Devin Nunes of California and Jeb Hensarling of Texas, has become a think tank, refuting the idea that Republicans lack ideas.

Read the whole thing here.

Just how out of touch is Jennifer Brunner?

I don't post much about Jennifer Brunner anymore these days. I leave it mostly to just mocking her miserable failure of raising any substantive amount of cash for her campaign.

But a tweet I saw she posted during the Super Bowl just about made me wretch.

Before I get to that, some of you may have been following the hysterical ranting and raving from the left about the Tebow/Pro-life ad that was to air last night during the Super Bowl. Seeing as how unobjectionable and positive it was, the attacks from the left preceding its airing seemed pretty ridiculous. For those that didn't catch it, here it is:



Cute, eh? It isn't pushy and provides the viewer a way to hear more about the Tebow story if they are so interested. In fact, I wish Focus on the Family was a bit more straightforward. Alas.

But in light of how uncontroversial the ad turned out to be, the far left had to find something to whine about lest they look totally and completely vapid.

Well, leave it to Jennifer Brunner.


[facepalm]

Seriously, Jennifer? This is a joke, right?

And the left wonders why the middle is ever so increasingly abandoning them.

No, it's not because you can't spell 'Tebow'.

Bosom Buddies.

Pairing these two together at the hip is something I'm happy to encourage.

Love this cartoon from the Sandusky Register.

And they wonder why their circulation is shrinking.

It's a sad state of affairs when a newspaper serving a town of 13,000 has harder hitting stories than the Cleveland Plain Dealer and Dayton Daily News. Now I'm sure there are a scattered few who for some strange reason have a massive interest in how much time John Kasich spends giving interviews and whether he wears make-up for TV appearances, but I'd like to think those who assume the responsibility of informing the public of vital matters of concern to the state would write about the stories that matter.

Thank God for the Salem News:

Unfortunately, the governor still has not offered a blueprint for how the state will cope with severe budget shortfalls. His speech included no substantive recommendations for balancing the budget in the future.

Later in the week, Strickland did talk about money - by telling reporters Ohio will seek more help from the federal government.

State government seems to be suffering from a form of paralysis, with Strickland and legislators of both parties unable to face the fact that while they have done much to keep the budget in balance, much more needs to be done. Asking Washington for more aid in addition to the $8 billion it has provided for the current two-year budget cycle simply is not realistic.

Strickland is facing a tough year, in part because of a strong bid by Republican John Kasich to unseat him. Unless the governor takes a stronger leadership role on the budget, Ohioans may well decide that one term is enough for him.

About that unemployment number...

I wish it was good news. But it isn't.

Stivers stays on message.

Steve Stivers, the GOP candidate for the OH-15 seat currently held by Mary Jo Kilroy, is out with a new youtube slamming the incumbent for her vote on raising the debt ceiling.



It looks like they're taking a play out of the Obama/Kasich/ORP playbook by bypassing the media and taking their message straight to the voters. By utilizing youtube, these Ohio candidates are never going to get the huge number of hits, but they'll do two things very effectively:

1. Their base of supporters will have the satisfaction of hearing straight from the candidate's mouth.
2. They'll help shape the message in the media. Take a look at how many in the MSM covered Kasich's youtube response to the State of the State. No one had ever done anything like that before, and it worked.

Here's hoping the Stivers campaign keeps the heat on Kilroy. As we've discussed before, she's an extremely vulnerable target and with enough cash she'll be out of her seat come January.

UPDATE: Need proof for #2? Look no further than this link.

What do Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, and John Adams have in common?

They were in a rock band, of course.

Now, I'm very much not one for political song parodies, but I gotta admit, this one is pretty solid.

Pull up a chair and grab some popcorn.

For those that can't let go of the belief that Dave Yost could beat Mike DeWine, you're going to get your wish.

Thanks to Jennifer Brunner, it looks like you'll have the perfect seat to sit back and watch what would have happened had Dave Yost stuck it out against Mike DeWine.

Why? The races are virtually identical.

In her most recent report, Brunner announced she has a grand total of $60k on hand, or slightly more than Dave Yost had on hand at the end of December.....OR 1/30 of what Lee Fisher has on hand.

Lee Fisher has the support of the Democratic Party establishment, but is despised by the far left wing grassroots base that keeps Brunner alive in the race.

Are you starting to see the similarities?

The difference, and it's a big one - is Brunner has already won statewide. Dave Yost was, and still is, a relative unknown.

While many these days like to say that ideas can win over money, that isn't the case when you're massively outraised and don't have the cash to share those ideas with the electorate.

Jennifer Brunner will lose the primary. Just like Dave Yost would have had he stayed in the AG race.

UPDATE: This post has generated some interesting feedback. I'd like to reinforce what I said above - there is a massive difference between Brunner/Fisher and Yost/DeWine - both Brunner and Fisher have been on winning statewide ballots. The same can't be said for Yost. Being on a statewide ballot generates one heckuva lot of name ID that Yost wouldn't have had the ability to obtain considering the funds he had to work with. Thanks to that name ID, Brunner and Fisher currently are neck and neck. But my other point from above stands - Fisher's obnoxiously huge cash advantage will dominate this race, and Fisher will win due to Brunner's inability to communicate her message to the electorate.

Also, and this should be obvious, the game has changed for Yost. He's now raising the funds necessary - if I recall correctly, he raised 100k in his first week running for Auditor - and has secured the grassroots support necessary to take advantage of the very generous political environment. Yost will win.

The Absent-Minded Governor

We all know the story of NCR by now.

The longtime company who employed thousands in the Dayton area for 125 years picked up and left for Georgia after Ohio became increasingly too costly to do business.

But the story doesn't end there.

Bill Nuti, the NCR chief executive, had this to say in a recent article that appeared in the New York Times:

Mr. Nuti said that he attended a renewable energy conference in New York the month after that disastrous meeting, and during lunch sat next to Governor Strickland — who, he says, not only did not know who he was, despite his name tag, but never introduced himself.

Now, I don't care what happened before this interaction, but for the Governor of Ohio to have so little interest in the affairs of major Ohio employers that he doesn't even recognize Nuti's name is astounding. This is a simple matter of Ted Strickland being detached from his duties.

Apathy is not a trait required of a Governor.

Moron.

"Oh. You're naming a post office? I withdraw my remarks" -- House Democrat Maj. Leader Steny Hoyer, who mistakenly began eulogizing ex-Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-AZ) yesterday until "someone gave him a sign that Kolbe was still alive"

Who's dodging who?

When running for Ohio Secretary of State, there aren't exactly a plethora of winning issues that one can run on.

Jun Husted has found one.

Redistricting.

Now, I won't say I'm in favor of his plan to develop a non-partisan commission, but I will give him credit for introducing a simple, but politically astute idea that nails exactly what being Secretary of State is about.

And who is playing politics with the idea? Democrats, of course.

The Husted plan has the benefit of simplicity, a bipartisan, seven-member commission taking over the task of legislative reapportionment and congressional redistricting, the latter now handled by the state legislature and left untouched by Letson. Husted would include a competitiveness factor, but leave final decision-making up to the commission. Letson would set up a bipartisan panel of retired judges, but only as a means of keeping appeals out of the legal system, no doubt a recognition that Republicans control the Ohio Supreme Court.

To his credit, Husted is willing to keep working toward a ballot issue in November. He correctly concludes that the Democrats' timing greatly harms the prospects for compromise. As it is, Democrats would do well to think again as Wednesday approaches. They've crafted a complicated plan, raising more questions than answers. By comparison, Husted has a simple concept — and ready now for the ballot.

"These specifics will be answered when I'm ready to answer them, not when the questions are asked."

Yesterday, the Cleveland Plain Dealer played the part of spokesperson for the Strickland campaign, echoing the Governor's continuing campaign narrative that Kasich doesn't want to reveal any details of his plans to save Ohio from the incumbent's failures.

John Kasich believes in message discipline, which means he'll answer questions when he's good and ready. Ohio voters who want to know how the former congressman and Lehman Brothers executive would handle thorny issues in the state budget, for example, will find out when the GOP candidate for governor decides it is time to tell them.

The same goes for reporters. Especially reporters who have been frustrated by Kasich's media strategy. (To tell supporters how he felt about Gov. Ted Strickland's state of the state address, Kasich released a video -- and his campaign told reporters to watch it if they wanted his speech reaction.)

So Ohio media, know this: Strickland, the Democratic governor whom Kasich is challenging, feels your pain.

Cry me a river.

As we've mentioned before, begging for policy details right now is nothing but inside baseball. The only people that would be paying attention to any kind of rollout are the media and the very few Ohioans that are actually focusing on the race right now - the exact same folks who read blogs like this one.

First off, Strickland's complaint that Kasich hasn't unveiled enough details is awash with irony considering four years ago he didn't unveil any significant aspects of his Turnaround Ohio plan until mid-Spring of 2006. And when he did, he was universally panned by the press for its ambiguity. Strickland should be the last person complaining.

Additionally, it makes zero sense from a political perspective to unveil significant details when the vast majority of the state isn't paying attention to the race. If Kasich wants the voters to fully understand his upcoming policy proposals, he'll do it when they're tuned in. Releasing everything now would prevent the new policy initiatives from getting the adequate coverage down the road when the public is prepared to ingest more campaign specifics from both sides.

Finally, I find it amusing that the PD complains about Kasich utilizing youtube to deliver his response to the State of the State in a complete and unfiltered form.

To understand the Kasich strategy, read this passage from a recently released book on campaign strategy:

As was the case throughout the campaign, most people did not watch the speech on TV. It was delivered on a Tuesday morning, when just about everyone was at work. Instead, people watched it online, most of them on YouTube, either as it was happening or at their leisure later that day or in the days to come. Eventually, tens of millions of voters saw the speech through various outlets.

This marked a fundamental change in political coverage and message consumption, and one that will only continue as technology rolls forward: big moments, political or otherwise, will no longer be remembered by people as times when everyone gathered around TVs to watch a speech, press conference, or other event. Increasingly, most of us will recall firing up the computer, searching for a video, and watching it at home or at the office–or even on cell phones.

That is an excerpt from David Plouffe's The Audacity to Win; Obama's campaign manager's blueprint of campaign success. These paragraphs highlighted the Obama campaign's brilliant tactic of utilizing youtube to bypass the media and speak directly to the voters. It enabled the public to hear the campaign's message unfiltered and without any threat of media bias. And ultimately, it helped shape the message the media communicated via their own mediums.

The Kasich campaign has adapted to the digital age. They're using strategies that while new, have proven successful. And while Kasich's youtube videos will never go anywhere near as viral as Obama's, they will shape the message of the campaign.

And that won't make the media very happy.

The Party of No? Not according to the President.

The President's hypocrisy couldn't be more clear.

A lesson in Swiss...

There are some out there that like to make the claim that lower taxes do not = increased economic growth. After all, despite the moderate cut in Ohio's income tax, the state's unemployment rate still increased, right?

For the sake of brevity, we'll mostly ignore the fact that Ohio's taxes on business are particularly harmful:

Ohio is one of just seven states to impose a gross receipts tax, which is imposed on businesses regardless of their profitability. While politicians like gross receipts taxes because they have deceptively low rates and they are thought to be a more stable source of tax revenue, economists have found gross receipts taxes to be particularly harmful because they tax all transactions, including intermediate business-to-business purchases of supplies, raw materials and equipment. As a result, gross receipts taxes lead to taxes on taxes—something economists call "tax pyramiding.

But I digress.

An article in the Wall Street Journal recently took us across the pond to Europe for a better understanding of how a low tax environment can help state economies explode:

Switzerland's states, known as cantons, are offering rock-bottom tax rates meant to tempt multinationals into establishing regional headquarters or other operations in their jurisdictions. In doing so, other cantons are trying to take business away from Zug, the Swiss canton that has mastered the game of attracting business to such a high degree that it is beginning to run out of space.

[...]

The battle for multinational business comes as companies have become savvier about relocating more activities to regional headquarters to lower their tax burdens. According to consultancy McKinsey & Co., Switzerland attracted more than 180 regional headquarters of large foreign companies between 1998 and 2008. In just the last several years, Kraft Foods Inc., Yahoo and Google Inc. have established European headquarters in Switzerland, and more than 150 U.S. companies now have a presence here.

If Ohio truly wants to "Turnaround", Ohio needs massive restructuring in how we do business.

Because running to Washington and begging for $1.1 billion in taxpayer dollars isn't it.

Kasich appearance on CNBC...

Homerun.

Stop what you're doing and watch this right now.

Easily the most.....amazing?....I'm not sure what exactly is the right word.... piece of politically-oriented video I've seen in years.

Stay with it 'til 2:26 for one of the most laughibly horrifying shots in political commercial history.



Demon Sheep!

Yet more Governor Envy...

Ed Goeas wrote a column yesterday that helped me recognize I don't need to just look to Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels to see what a real Governor looks like. That kind of leadership is everywhere......except Ohio.

• After rebuilding Mississippi's rainy-day fund, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour fought his state Legislature's urge to spend that fund right away to balance the state budget. Instead, he's planning ahead by spreading the fund over four years and making serious budget cuts. His positive approval rating is 63 percent, including 62 percent with independents and 36 percent with blacks.

• Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels turned $700 million in red ink into a $1 billion surplus, and when revenues were projected further downward, his response was to continue cutting rather than raising taxes. He explained his budget success to the Wall Street Journal recently: "The answer is that we spent less money than we took in." How's that for straight shooting? Mr. Daniels was re-elected by 18 percentage points in 2008, notably winning nearly 60 percent of independents' votes. His job approval is at 69 percent.

• Gov. Rick Perry achieved balance in the Texas 2010 budget through cuts in general revenue spending of $1.6 billion - millions of which were achieved with the governor's line-item veto. His 2010 budget also contains tax cuts for tens of thousands of small-business owners - a popular move for an influential, jobs-creating constituency. When Texas sales-tax revenues were projected recently to be significantly down, Mr. Perry said he is looking to cut rather than raise taxes to compensate for any sales-tax shortfall. Fifty-seven percent of Texans approve of Mr. Perry's performance as governor.

• Gov. Linda Lingle plans to close a $1.23 billion revenue shortfall in Hawaii for the two-year budget cycle of 2009-2011 and already vetoed 10 bills in 2009 that would have increased the budget shortfall. She has a 51 percent favorable rating in one of the nation's bluest states.

These are responsible Governors making responsible decisions. They are cutting first, and not raising taxes. And most importantly, their job approval ratings indicate that the public agrees with these cuts and find them acceptable for the greater good.

Voters are smarter than many give them credit for. Give them what they deserve - a leaner, more efficiently run government.

The Scarlet Letter.

Back in May of last year, I wrote a post detailing how the GOP must begin a serious offensive against the President's stimulus bill.

President Obama's stimulus bill has failed.

That is a statement which Republican leadership nationwide must start repeating over and over again.

From a political perspective, it's vital for Republicans to gain the upperhand before the economy eventually does right itself(which it quite possibly would have done much faster without a stimulus in the first place) and the Democrats reap the benefits.

But will the public buy what we're selling?

All signs point to yes.

According to 2008's most accurate pollster, Scott Rasmussen, at time of its passing in Congress more Americans were against the stimulus than for it by a margin of 43-37. Among the all-important "unaffiliated" voters, a full 50% were against it. In other words, they came in thinking it was a bad idea. They are waiting to hear the news of its success or failure.

And now, it seems Republican opinion makers are finally starting to understand the great political benefits that such an offensive can reap. From Jonah Goldberg's column in USA Today yesterday:

Wrong or not, the Republicans were sufficiently appalled by both the substance and the process of the stimulus that they united against it, as did the public. The pork, fake ZIP codes and spending on items never intended to stimulate the economy fueled the migration of independents from Obama and set the tone for his first year: Bipartisanship was out; phony partisan spin was in. As a result, the GOP learned that opposing Obama was not a losing proposition, but potentially a path back to power. Obviously, Obama would be in better shape if the Republicans hadn't learned that lesson so early.

A year ago, the GOP was more irritant than opposition. Now it is a major force, completely outside his control.

Republicans must continue to use the stimulus as a political weapon. Each and every Democrat that supported it in the House must wear their yea vote like a Scarlet Letter.

The poll numbers continue to show it to be a winner. Don't let up.

"Green" Jobs in Ohio - The big joke.

Strickland officially transitioned from his "education means jobs" focus of 2009, to his "green means jobs" focus for the 2010 re-elect in his State of the State address in January.

The Governor stated:

The Council of State Governments scoured the nation to tally the total number of new green jobs created last year. And what did they find? Ohio ranks first.

We've made it this far, this fast on advanced energy because we pursued smart, responsible policies and we made smart, responsible investments.

In fact, Strickland is right. CSG did rank Ohio first, and by quite a bit. Here's a clip from the report:


But "smart, responsible policies and smart, responsible investments"? I don't think so.

Let's take a look.

What first struck me was how few jobs were listed. For something destined to be a centerpiece of Ohio's economy, as Strickland framed the argument, I can't say I'm that impressed with 2,500 jobs.

And Strickland failed to tell Ohioans something else - the analysis from CSG that the Governor based his braggadacio upon was a study of "green" jobs created by Obama's universally panned stimulus, not jobs created by his state government. In other words, Strickland can't take credit for these jobs.

But, for the sake of argument, let's take the Governor at his word and assume this is really how he wants Ohio's economy to grow - by begging for federal dollars to pay for environmentally friendly jobs.

Well, as the CSG reports shows, 2,296 of the 2,565 jobs Strickland is so proud of come from one single grant – the Weatherization Assistance Program.

The cost of this grant to taxpayers is $267 million. Now, to be generous, let’s say half of those dollars go to pay for materials. That leaves us with jobs that cost each and every one of us $58,144 each.

Keeping in mind these are the kinds of jobs Strickland wants to make the focus of the state economy, and remembering the number of unemployed Ohioans has increased by 339,900 since the Governor’s inauguration – at $58k a job it would cost taxpayers over $19.7 billion to pay for the jobs lost under Ted Strickland’s watch.

Now, we obviously don't assume Strickland wants to fill the hundreds of thousands of jobs lost in Ohio completely with "green" jobs funded by the federal government. But the immense cost of these jobs to the American taxpayer highlights how horribly inefficient it is to abuse the hard-earned money each Ohioan gives to the government each year.

Finally, the AP recently reported that the very program Strickland wants to emulate has proven to be vulnerable to abuse:

State inspectors look at just a fraction of the projects in Ohio's Home Weatherization Assistance Program. Critics say the program is vulnerable to abuse and that sloppy workmanship will go undetected as projects increase with new federal stimulus dollars.

The Columbus Dispatch reported Sunday that state inspectors routinely find mistakes — from leaky ducts to improper ventilation. Ohio is required to inspect one in 20 jobs.

This isn't play money you're playing with, Governor. Even though the project is funded with federal dollars, those same federal dollars still come from hardworking Ohioans.

This isn't the way to save Ohio's sinking economy. This isn't how you Turnaround Ohio.

Stivers making waves.

As I've discussed before, one of the NRCC's best chances to take back a GOP seat lies with former State Senator Steve Stivers in his race against 1st term incumbent, Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy.

I think this already got some play on twitter yesterday, but I wanted to make sure everyone saw this great profile in Time naming Stivers as one of ten GOP congressional contenders who could follow in Scott Brown's wake:

Ohio's 15th District has been the site of close battles in the last two election cycles, and this year should be no different. In 2006, Democrat Mary Jo Kilroy lost to the long-time incumbent by just 1,000 votes. Two years later she won, defeating Republican candidate Steve Stivers by just over 2,000 votes.

Now Stivers is back for a rematch, this time with promises of heavier backing from House Minority Leader John Boehner and the Republican Party — and an attitude. "When you've been shot at by real bullets, negative political attacks just don't matter," said Stivers, who has served in the Ohio National guard since 1985, including a stint in Iraq, and is now a Lieutenant Colonel.

An active Ohio state senator from 2003 to 2008, Stivers pushed legislation on tort reform, expanding health care coverage, cutting taxes and freezing college tuition rates.

For her part, Kilroy has consistently voted along party lines in the House. If public outrage over government spending persists she stands little chance of winning in a district that has recently provided tiny margins of victory and in which she was the first congressional Democratic since 1966.

Additionally, Mark Hemingway called out Kilroy for taking 10 grand in dirty money:

WHO: Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy, D-Ohio

WHAT: Kilroy received $10,000 from Rep. Charles Rangel's National Leadership PAC, the political action committee of the powerful New York Democrat who is chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee that writes tax law.

WHY IT'S DIRTY: Rangel is being investigated on multiple issues by the House Ethics Committee, including failure to report income from properties he owns in New York and the Dominican Republic. A company that gave $1 million to a New York school facility that will bear Rangel's name subsequently received lucrative tax breaks, and he has reportedly solicited political contributions on official stationery.

WILL KILROY GIVE IT BACK? Kilroy did not respond to The Examiner's request for comment.

Both are interesting stories, but most importantly they give me an excuse to re-post one of my favorite youtube creations:

The Tide Turns

Yesterday, Gallup released the first in its State of the States series, highlighting the political demographic breakdowns in each state.

Overall, both Democrats and Republicans can find good news in the results.

Nationwide, party support shifted in a slightly more Republican direction in 2009 after a historically strong Democratic year in 2008. Overall, 49% of Americans in 2009 identified as Democrats or said they were independent but leaned to the Democratic Party, while 41% identified as Republicans or were Republican-leaning independents. That 8-point Democratic advantage compares to a 12-point, 52% to 40%, Democratic advantage in 2008.

But interestingly enough, Ohio was the one state with the highest change in Democratic advantage.


Now Democrats may still like to tout their 10-point advantage in Ohio, but before they do so, they may want to take a look at the 29-point advantage in Massachusetts.

Oh the times, they are a-changin'.

The Meaning of Life.

Yesterday, the Plain Dealer published an interview it recently conducted with famed Calvin & Hobbes writer, Bill Watterson. Reading it took me back to 1990 when I travelled up from Columbus to Kenyon College, my future alma mater, for commencement.

Watterson was the speaker, and to me at the time he was only known as "the guy who wrote the funny comic with the kid and the tiger."

But despite my youth at the time, I still remember the speech he gave that day. I dug up the text and included some of my favorite excerpts. I highly recommend you take a few minutes and read it in its entirety by clicking here.

Enjoy....

"At school, new ideas are thrust at you every day. Out in the world, you'll have to find the inner motivation to search for new ideas on your own. With any luck at all, you'll never need to take an idea and squeeze a punchline out of it, but as bright, creative people, you'll be called upon to generate ideas and solutions all your lives. Letting your mind play is the best way to solve problems.

For me, it's been liberating to put myself in the mind of a fictitious six year-old each day, and rediscover my own curiosity. I've been amazed at how one ideas leads to others if I allow my mind to play and wander. I know a lot about dinosaurs now, and the information has helped me out of quite a few deadlines.

A playful mind is inquisitive, and learning is fun. If you indulge your natural curiosity and retain a sense of fun in new experience, I think you'll find it functions as a sort of shock absorber for the bumpy road ahead. "

[...]

"So, what's it like in the real world? Well, the food is better, but beyond that, I don't recommend it."

[...]

"Creating a life that reflects your values and satisfies your soul is a rare achievement. In a culture that relentlessly promotes avarice and excess as the good life, a person happy doing his own work is usually considered an eccentric, if not a subversive. Ambition is only understood if it's to rise to the top of some imaginary ladder of success. Someone who takes an undemanding job because it affords him the time to pursue other interests and activities is considered a flake. A person who abandons a career in order to stay home and raise children is considered not to be living up to his potential-as if a job title and salary are the sole measure of human worth.

You'll be told in a hundred ways, some subtle and some not, to keep climbing, and never be satisfied with where you are, who you are, and what you're doing. There are a million ways to sell yourself out, and I guarantee you'll hear about them.
To invent your own life's meaning is not easy, but it's still allowed, and I think you'll be happier for the trouble."

[...]

"Your preparation for the real world is not in the answers you've learned, but in the questions you've learned how to ask yourself."

Just how bad is Ted Strickland's fundraising situation?

Last week 3BP gave a rundown of John Kasich's buttwhoopin' of Ted Strickland on the fundraising front.

Well, after getting a closer look at Strickland's report, it looks like the situation is actually quite a bit worse for the Governor than initially discussed.

While financial reports were supposed to include contributions from 7/1/09-12/31/09, state campaigns are given the flexibility to include contributions in their report up until the filing deadline. In this case, that was 1/29/10.

In other words, campaigns can essentially include an extra month in their contribution report, if they so choose.

In this case, Strickland did include the extra month and Kasich did not.

So, how much did Strickland raise in his extra month? $1.44 million dollars.

That means Strickland raised a grand total of only $1.18 million from July-December. That's just $196,666/month, or only 48k more per month than Rep. Pat Tiberi raised in the 4th quarter for his 12th congressional district seat.

For comparison, Kasich raised $4.55 million during the same 6 month period, or nearly four times as much as the Governor.

It gets even worse for Jello Ted.

Of the $2.62M raised in the 7 months, $630,748, or nearly 25%, of his total contributions came from State or County Democratic Party organizations. To be fair, Kasich received 200k from State/County Party orgs, but those contributions account for only 4% of his total raised.

Now, Strickland's people can make whatever excuses they like for these disturbingly bad numbers, but facts are facts - Ted Strickland vastly underperformed.

Once again, I'm happy to consent that Strickland maintains a $2.1M lead in cash-on-hand, as he should as sitting Governor. And as an incumbent Governor, he shouldn't have any trouble maintaining that advantage.

That is, unless he performs this badly again.

ORP endorses Yost. Duh.

Dave Yost is the most qualified candidate available to run for Ohio Auditor. Period.

• He is the only potential nominee in either Party that has actually served as an Auditor.
• He already has a grassroots Party organization in place throughout the state.
• He has already developed relationships with the appropriate contributors throughout the state that will ensure he is well-funded.

As a CPA, Seth Morgan is qualified to hold the office, but he's not even close to having the organization in place or the fundraising base in place to mount a credible challenge to Democrat David Pepper.

All of the above are indisputable facts.

Additionally, there is no way Dave Yost had any chance to beat Mike DeWine. And that would be the case no matter who was the Chairman of the ORP.

And for the life of me, I can't comprehend the hub-bub surrounding the GOP nomination for the Auditor's race.

I understand many on the right don't support Mike DeWine. Fine, I can respect that. But that doesn't change the fact that Yost simply was not going to beat him. For reasons I've stated time and time again, it simply was not going to happen.

Now, some are saying there were back room deals among the DeWine family to get Mike DeWine an uncontested primary. In order to believe this theory one would have to believe 1) Yost could have won despite being overwhelmingly outraised, 2) that the ORP had a part in Yost being unable to raise money, and 3) Mike DeWine actually thought Dave Yost was a threat to beat him.

To believe (1) means you have zero idea about the reality of the race.

To believe (2) means that you don't comprehend how many connections Mike DeWine maintains after 30 years in politics. Not only was he able to raise what he wanted, but he also was able to toss in his own cash(which he is now doing) to ensure he wins. DeWine's inevitability is even starting to hurt Cordray's fundraising (it was cut in half from the last reporting period).

To believe (3) is just laughable. If true, DeWine would have been out there weeks ago using his loads of cash to knock Yost out.

Once again, I'm not touting DeWine because of any previous support of him. Read the blog archives - I never endorsed either candidate. I'm simply hoping some out there can come to understand the political realities of the situation.

Dave Yost played with the hand he was dealt. He recognized his impossible situation, he saw how well his own experience and organization translated to the Auditor's race, and he made the move of his own accord.

It's just that simple.

Now, if dissenters still want the state Party to feel their wrath, fine. But there are only two ways to do it, 1) Stop wasting your time protesting and start knocking on doors for Seth Morgan, and 2) Find someone else to run against Mike DeWine.

Yelling about conspiracy theories is an enormous waste of energy, especially when true conservatives should be concentrating on what's important - beating the left.

So much for playing offense.

Last night Dave Wasserman of the Cook Political Report tweeted that Ohio 12th Congressional District candidate Paula Brooks will report raising $230,000 at the end of the 4th quarter.

After the 3rd quarter, Brooks reported having only $153,000 cash-on-hand.

So, giving Brooks the benefit of the doubt, which is what each of her contributors are doing in assuming she'll actually eventually move into the 12th congressional district, she should have about $330,000 COH at the end of the year.

And her opponent, Congressman Tiberi? He outraised her by 93% and ends the year with $1.21 million COH.

If you can't find a white flag, Paula, just use the hotel towel you use when you stay overnight in the 12th district.

What's wrong with Ohio.

Joe Hallet's column in the Columbus Dispatch this Sunday had one sentence that defined why Ohio is in the mess it's in today.

By necessity, Strickland's fourth State of the State speech was anything but bold. There is no money for boldness.

Mr. Hallett, with all due respect, a real leader does not need to spend taxpayer dollars to be bold.

Boldness comes from making the tough decisions that will put Ohio back on track. That means restructuring government and cutting the waste.

For far too long Ohio has been suffering thanks to the political maxim that once a government program is created, it's virtually impossible to get rid of it.

Well, enough is enough.

Let's show what real boldness is about.

Details, Details....

About those 5000 jobs the Governor likes to brag about...


As Jon Craig of the Cincy Enquirer points out with this tweet, there is a huge difference between actually cutting 5000 jobs from the rolls and what is actual reality.

Washington Post: Ohio GOP candidates come out on top

The Washington Post released their list of fundraising winners and losers from across the country. Ohio twice gets a mention, and both are bad news for Democrats:

Winners

John Kasich: The Republican former Ohio congressman raised more than $5 million for his gubernatorial campaign in just six months, an astounding showing that coincides with his rise in polls testing him against Gov. Ted Strickland (D). While Strickland's $2.8 milion raised during the same period was far less than what Kasich collected, the incumbent has a whopping $6.1 million in the bank, compared with $4.1 million for Kasich.

Interestingly enough, it looks like Kasich may have had the best per month fundraising average in the entire country after this most recent report. By raising $758k per month, he even bests Crist's average by nearly $100k. Pretty astounding. Additionally, if the next six months go just as well as the past six months, that COH advantage of Strickland's will be gone with the wind.

Losers

Lee Fisher: Fisher, Ohio's lieutenant governor and the odds-on favorite for the Democratic Senate nomination, put together a very disappointing final three months of 2009 -- raising $780,000, a total dwarfed by the $1.4 million that former congressman and Bush administration budget chief Rob Portman (R) raised over the same period. Fisher, who has almost the entire Democratic establishment behind him, should do far better.

If this makes Lee a loser, imagine how that makes Jennifer Brunner feel.

Props to the Portman campaign for once again dominating fundraising in the Ohio Senate race.

We all know money alone doesn't win elections, but it sure as hell helps.

With visions of Dick Cheney dancing in their heads...

You can't be serious.

Ohio youth turkey hunters can enter to win a dream hunt with Gov. Ted Strickland or nationally-known hunting guides during the Governor's Celebrity and Youth Turkey Hunt, according to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife.

[...]

Nine lucky Ohio youth hunters will be able to participate in this annual turkey hunt on May 8. The specific location of the hunt will be announced later. A parent or guardian must accompany the young hunter for the overnight trip, but will not be a participant of the hunt.

[sarcasm font on] I can only imagine the thousands of entries they'll have for this contest.

It's well known that every Ohio boy and girl grows up dreaming of going camping and hunting with this guy.[/sarcasm font off]

On a side note, why in the hell are Ohioans paying for this nonsense?

1.25% is squat.

Today, the President unveils his new budget.

According to the White House, it will bring with it a record-smashing $1.6 trillion dollar deficit.

As political cover, the President has requested that one year from now the U.S. Government freezes all discretionary funding, or $200B.

Or 1.25%.

Unfortunately, many on the left consider the dollars the federal government spends something akin to play money. For some reason, they can't fully comprehend that each and every American is paying for each dollar spent. And as we go deeper into the black hole that is fiscal insanity, the worse our economic position becomes in the world economy.

Usually, their response to the above would be one of the following:

1) At least he is doing something.
2) George Bush spent a lot, too.

Both are true, and both mean absolutely nothing.

We can't change the mistakes of the past, but we can push forward to regain our rightful place as the dominating world economic power.

Because as Rich Galen so perfectly states, we're not alone at the top anymore.