Ted Strickland: Mission Accomplished!

Ohio Governor Ted Strickland has had his Mission Accomplished Moment.

Most recently, he bragged about receiving the Governor's Cup for the state's supposed "New and Expanded Business Facility Investment" as awarded by the 'only known by the Ohio Department of Development' Site Selection magazine.

"One of the reasons I believe in Ohio is that companies know Ohio is a great place to do business," Strickland said. "We have reduced taxes and regulations, we have increased the skills and education of our workforce, and we have been recognized once again by setting the pace for the nation in new and expanded capital investments."

Additionally, after an interview with the Columbus Dispatch, he convinced them to run with the headline, Ohio Economy Enters Recovery.

Except for one giant, humongous, enormous problem.

It isn't.

• Ohio has now suffered 10 straight months of 10+ percent unemployment.
• Just in the past 12 months, there are 185,214 less Ohioans with jobs.
• And most obviously, the most recently released unemployment numbers show the number of unemployed Ohio workers increased in January.

In one of the most amazing paragraphs I've read in an Ohio media publication, another article about this so-called "recovery" included this quote from Strickland speaking about a meeting with his economic advisors:

"They all seem to agree that we have reached the bottom of the recession and are in a position now to start seeing the signs of recovery," Strickland said Tuesday afternoon. "We had some discussion about how rapidly that recovery would occur and how soon jobs would be created, and I think there is widespread agreement that unemployment is going to continue to be a problem for quite some time."

Wait. What?

"[Ohio is] in a position now to start seeing the signs of recovery."
"...there is widespread agreement that unemployment is going to continue to be a problem for quite some time."


In what messed up world can these two statements coexist? How many of the more than 1 in 10 unemployed Ohioans will agree that Ohio is some kind of economic recovery? What about their family members? Their friends?

How can Ohio be "entering recovery" when even Strickland's own economic advisors foresee unemployment staying stagnant at 10+%? That's not a recovery. That's a failure. That's an unemployment rate that Ohio has not seen for 27 years.

Something else blew my mind. The Site Selection article quoted a Tax Foundation analysis of Ohio's business climate to highlight how Ohio has proven to be the top expanding business state in the country.

Except they leave out the important parts of the Tax Foundation's analysis.


Specifically, in an article entitled Ohio's Tax Burden, Poor Business Tax Climate Hurting Economy, they state...

Although Ohio has phased out its corporate franchise tax in favor of a commercial activity tax (CAT), the latter is a particularly harmful type of gross receipts tax that results in what economists call "tax pyramiding" because it applies to all transactions, including business-to-business purchases of supplies and other materials.

This may be why they judge Ohio to have the 4th worst business tax climate in the nation.

And yet, Strickland claims all is well. In fact, he's trying to convince Ohioans that we've entered a magnificent recovery.

I guess you can say Strickland has now officially adapted The Chip Diller Strategy.



Now, you can't blame Strickland for attempting to b.s. Ohio voters. After all, his campaign slogan in 2006 was Turnaround Ohio. Seeing as 10+% unemployment isn't exactly what voters would define as a Turnaround, the only real strategy is to pretend there is some type of recovery, despite the evidence in their bank accounts.

But to see Ohio's media buy into the obvious campaign strategy is particularly frustrating. Governor Strickland needs to be held accountable for his failure to live up to his promise to Turnaround Ohio. Simply printing his claims without substantive counterpoint is a failure from the Fourth Estate.

The Plain Dealer and Cincinnati Enquirer disappoint me.

Both the Plain Dealer and Cincy Enquirer should be ashamed.

Once again they've bought into a desperate non-controversy that has lefty blogs and the Ohio Democratic Party foaming at the mouth. What's it about? Whether Rob Portman is a birther because he didn't interrupt two state representatives in the middle of their speeches during a Lincoln Day Dinner because they made bad, overdone jokes about Obama and his birth certificate.

Seriously.

Now think for a moment why the Ohio Democrats would act so desperately to bring up such a non-issue. Because their health care bill is totally and completely unpopular? Because unemployment is through the roof? Because the stimulus has been a total and complete failure?

Yes, yes, and yes.

It's called deflection, PD and Enquirer. And you bought into it hook, line, and sinker.

So, why do these papers propagate the story? Because they need hits on their website. Hits mean revenue. And after a year of so-called "controversial" stories like this one, they hope that revenue ads up.

So, while the Plain Dealer and Cincy Enquirer harass the Portman campaign asking for a comment about this non-issue, I'd like to issue them both a challenge.

Call up the Fisher and Brunner campaigns. Ask them this question:

Does the candidate agree with their wannabe future boss, Majority Leader Harry Reid, and his comment that losing 34,000 jobs is "really good"?

It's timely. It's a controversial statement from a major national leader. It addresses an issue important to Ohio voters. And most importantly to your editors, the answer will drive hits to your website.

Yost nets a big fish.

As I've said many times again and again, it's rare where an endorsement means much more than the press release it's printed on, but this time Ohio Auditor candidate Dave Yost netted a big one.

Ken Blackwell.

He's a member of the NRA, Club for Growth, NTU, Family Research Council, and he's one of the most popular columnists on the widely popular Townhall.com.

Did he get smacked around by Ted Strickland in 2006? Yes. Does that make one lick of difference when it comes to his effect on the Yost/Morgan race? No.

Why? Because Tea Partiers love him. Absolutely love him.

If an endorsement is going to carry any weight, it has to come from someone the voter trusts. That won't be County Parties, ambiguous interest groups, or even State Senators. But for many in the conservative wing of the Party, they trust Ken Blackwell.

Will we see him doing commercials for Yost? Probably not. Will we see him on mailings directed at strong R homes? If Yost wants to win, I damn well hope so.

Blackwell's endorsement also is a blow to those who say Yost is owned by the establishment.

As OPO Editor Kevin Holtsberry so sarcastically tweeted not long ago, "Ken Blackwell has clearly been manipulated into backing the establishment candidate for political favors from Kevin DeWine..."

Here is a copy of the press release:

A Warning to Congressmen Driehaus and Boccieri

Congressmen Driehaus and Boccieri, earlier this month you were both listed by Charlie Cook as being in highly competitive races in your respective districts.

And that was before the forthcoming Health Care Reform vote.

Before you decide which button to push, I highly recommend you look at an important poll result recently released by the prominent Tarrance Group.

• When asked if they support Obama's health care plan, only 39% of OH-1 and 38% of OH-16 voters said yes.
• When asked if they support Reconciliation as a tool to pass HCR, those numbers dropped to 34% and 28%, respectively.
• 76% and 77% believe Obamacare will raise their taxes.
• And most importantly when considering the above numbers, 75% of OH-1 and 69% of OH-16 voters said how their Congressman votes on the bill will be "very important".

Now, of course Driehaus and Boccieri will hear threats of Pelosi, et. al withholding the all-important campaign dollars that House Leadership can offer. But does anyone honestly think these same Democrat leaders will risk losing control of the House because of a threat they made a few months previous? Didn't think so.

So in other words, Mr. Boccieri and Mr. Driehaus, if you are tired of being a Congressman, vote yes. If you want a fighting chance, vote no.

Mitt Romney: Et Tu, Club for Growth?

As many of my loyal readers have figured out by now, I'm not much of a fan of Mitt Romney. To me, he's our John Edwards. Good on paper, but wishy-washy, opportunistic, and a proven failure as a candidate.

And now it seems even the group who so unabashedly supported him in 2008, the Club for Growth, has started to turn their nose at his b.s.:

As you may have heard, Mitt Romney went on Fox News this past Sunday and described the universal health care plan he passed in Massachusetts four years ago as “the ultimate conservative plan.”

Romney made the eyebrow-raising claim because he aspires to the GOP presidential nomination in 2012, and thus wants to put as much distance as possible between Romneycare and Obamacare, which is loathed by conservative GOP primary voters — even though the two plans are very similar in various ways.

But guess who disagrees with Romney’s assessment? The Club for Growth, a powerhouse conservative group with a lot of sway in GOP primaries. A top Club official tore into Romney, telling us that if Romney believes this, then he’s “in the wrong party.”

“We can say unequivocally that that is not a conservative plan,” Andy Roth, Club for Growth’s vice president for government affairs, told our reporter Ryan Derousseau when asked for comment on Romney’s claim about Romneycare.

Now on top of that we have this little back and forth between Romney and Don Imus this morning:

DON IMUS: Talking with Mitt Romney here on the "Imus in the Morning" program. This book is called No Apology in the Case for America's Greatness. Now, when you changed your mind abortion and went from pro choice, I guess, to pro-life, what -- walk me through the, what caused that.

MITT ROMNEY: Well, you know, I never really called myself pro-choice, but I did say when I was running for governor that I would keep the law as it was.

As the American Spectator states, "there are lots of examples of Romney calling himself either 'pro-choice' or 'effectively pro-choice,' but the simplest example came from his exchange with Sen. Sam Brownback at the 2007 GOP Iowa straw poll debate."

ROMNEY: Look, I was pro-choice. I am pro-life. You can go back to YouTube and look at what I said in 1994. I never said I was pro-choice, but my position was effectively pro-choice. I changed my position. And I get tired of people that are holier-than-thou because they've been pro-life longer than I have.

Mitt Romney can't be the GOP nominee in 2012.

Mary Jo Killjobs: Pelosi Clone

You may or may not have seen the below clip from this week's Saturday Night Live, where Obama explains that Nancy Pelosi can’t be defeated no matter what she does because of the ultra liberal district she represents.



Now consider that in the highly competitive 15^th district, Mary Jo Killjobs votes with Pelosi 98.6% of the time. We round up to 99% and you have a clone….a mutation, a San Francisco liberal out to normalize a radical agenda in one of the official test markets of the United States….Columbus, Ohio.

It's no wonder why Kilroy is on the list of 10 most likely congressional seats to switch hands in November.

Still think Reconciliation is such a good idea, Dems?

I've never said Democrats aren't allowed to use reconciliation to pass their version of health care reform.

What I did say was that doing so would be politically dangerous.

Maybe I should have used "suicidal" instead of "dangerous".

According to a new AP poll:

More than four in five Americans say it’s important that any health care plan have support from both parties. And 68 percent say the president and congressional Democrats should keep trying to cut a deal with Republicans rather than pass a bill with no GOP support…

"Speaker John Boehner". I could get used to that.

Portman goes high profile

Conservative magazine, The Weekly Standard has one helluva profile on Rob Portman this week.

While the whole piece is solid, this excerpt speaking to Portman's potential opponents gave me the biggest laugh:

Brunner proudly claims to be the grassroots candidate, but she’s raised under $600,000 and has only some $100,000 on hand. Observers, moreover, question her tenacity on the stump. Fisher stands at events, backslapping and engaging crowds, while Brunner sits at a table awaiting voters.

Wonder if Jennifer left her dogs in the car at these events, too.

When Paula Brooks isn't avoiding the 12th District, she's at Talking-Terrorism School

Terrorists are bad.

That much we can agree on.

So how confident will voters in the 12th congressional district be in voting for a candidate that needs special schooling to learn how to use the proper rhetoric necessary to sound tough on terrorism?

To combat the problem [of being perceived as soft on terror], House Democrats have asked Third Way, the centrist Democratic think tank, and California Rep. Jane Harman, a leader on intelligence issues in the House, to help lead training sessions on the issue.

[...]

Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) attended one of Harman’s sessions when he was running for office in 2008. Now the president of the Democratic freshman class, he helped lead a session for other Democrats late last month. He said his party has to “avoid the trap of looking soft and weak” and that “there are strong adverbs, adjectives and verbs as opposed to weak.”

One example he offered: “I’m going to fight for American interests abroad” as opposed to “I’m going to defend American values.”

And who was a part of this school? Pat Tiberi's opponent, Paula Brooks, of course.

But amazingly, it isn't the fact that Brooks has no idea what to think on terrorism that surprises me most. It's that her attendance means she actually is still trying to make the 12th congressional district competitive.

Maybe someone should wake her up.

Democrats lie on health care reform abortion language....

We all know politicians distort the truth. It's what they do. Unfortunately, we've all come to accept it.

But the kind of egregious lying from Nancy Pelosi in this clip is downright despicable.

Paul Krugman versus Paul Krugman

Yesterday, Erick Erickson at RedState summarized an absolute obliteration of Paul Krugman:

...Paul Krugman attacked Jim Bunning last week for blocking the extension of unemployment benefits. Krugman said “What Democrats believe is what textbook economics says”, namely that the government should keep paying unemployment benefits.

There’s just one problem. As James Taranto pointed out, a Nobel Prize winning economist has written a very popular textbook that points out exactly what Republicans are saying — “Public policy designed to help workers who lose their jobs can lead to structural unemployment as an unintended side effect . . . . Generous unemployment benefits in some European countries are widely believed to be one of the main causes of “Eurosclerosis,” the persistent high unemployment that affects a number of European countries.”

The author? Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman and his wife Robin Wells.

Paul Krugman, editorial hack, loses.

Yost cleans up.

In the battle between conservatives Dave Yost and Seth Morgan, there has been a lot of hay from both sides regarding endorsements.

Some matter. Some don't.

• The ORP endorsement matters. It opens up doors financially, gets your name on the all-important ORP slate card, and makes it a lot easier to effectively manage a campaign.
• County Party endorsements matter little. They don't bring in cash and County Parties aren't known for going out of their way to organize grassroots efforts to support their endorsed candidates in competitive races like this one.
• Legislators matter, sorta. Morgan has obtained a small number of State Reps. Yost has scored 16 of 21 State Senators. But like County Parties, this is a bit of a wash since seldom do these endorsements lead to any tangible benefits besides a press release.
• Interest Group Endorsements sometimes matter. For example, Morgan has scored the endorsement of something called the Citizens for Community Values Action PAC. These kinds of endorsements can be helpful if they lead to actual grassroots activities for the candidate.

But it's the endorsements that can resound with the public at large that can have a real effect on a race.

And Dave Yost scored.

More than 98% of Ohio’s 51 GOP county auditors have endorsed Dave Yost for Auditor of State.

Yost, currently the Delaware County Prosecutor and a former county auditor, said he was humbled by the outpouring of support.

“These are my peers, people I’ve worked with,” Yost said. “To have the county auditors endorse my work – and judge me worthy to be Auditor of State -- is hugely encouraging.”

This is the type of endorsement you will see time and time again in paid media leading up to the primary. It highlights Republicans, but most importantly, elected public officials who can speak with authority about what it takes to be an Auditor. That communicates to the average primary voter far more effectively than any statement from a State Senator or interest group.

In conjunction with the messaging efforts from the ORP, this endorsement has the potential to be a dagger to Morgan's hopes of an upset.

Breaking it Down: The 3/8 Rasmussen Ohio Gubernatorial Poll

Kasich leads 49-38.

That's the topline of the new poll from Rasmussen gauging support of John Kasich and Governor Ted Strickland. And that's what is reported most across the media.

I can't say I blame them. That's the sexiest number. And at the end of the day, it's who is voting for who is that matters.

But as I've said many times when discussing polls here on 3BP or with colleagues, this isn't the end of the day.

The fact is, the most important question being asked of the voters right now is not which candidate they support, it's this: "do you approve or disapprove of the job Ted Strickland is doing as Governor?"

Why is it so important? Because of what virtually any serious political scientist will tell you - elections that include an incumbent are first and foremost a referendum on that incumbent.

So right now the bad news for Ted Strickland is not specifically what the latest Rasmussen Poll says, it's what each of Rasmussen's polls have said.

We now have four polls over the course of the past four months that gauge what likely voters in Ohio think of Governor Strickland. It's safe to say this is a substantive sample. In each of the polls, no more than 4% of the sample did not know enough to have an opinion. In other words, the overwhelming majority of these likely voters knew enough about Strickland to approve one way or another of his job as Governor.

So, where does Strickland stand? This graph breaks it down for you:


What stands out? First and foremost, it's his disapproval number among those who don't identify as Republicans or Democrats, or Independents. It shows a consistent problem for Strickland among the vital swing vote. Now some cynics may want to dismiss these Independents as simply members of the Tea Party in disguise. Well, as we mentioned yesterday, the Ohio Senate Rasmussen poll showed only 13% of those who are a part of this subgroup identify as members of the Tea Party movement. That means these are true swing voters who have a major and consistent problem with Strickland's job as Governor.

Second, on average 27.5% of Democrats disapprove of his job as Governor. That's over 1/4 of Ohio's likely Democrat voters who don't like how their Democrat Governor is doing his job. Anyone who doesn't think that won't have an effect on Strickland's Get Out the Vote efforts is fooling themselves.

Finally, the overall approval and disapproval of Strickland's job as Governor has remained relatively stagnant, averaging a poor 45-53. That's what many would consider "underwater".

The particularly bad news for Ted Strickland is the consistency of this disapproval. After four months, it highlights an ingrained disapproval among those voters most likely to vote come November.

Remember the quote from Quinnipiac's Peter Brown that I've discussed several times here on 3BP:

Voters are much less complex than many of us think. They like things. They don't like things. Most of them don't focus on specifics. [In 2008,] Barack Obama was the antidote to George W. Bush. In Ohio, John Kasich is the antidote to Ted Strickland.

Well right now Ohio voters do not like Ted Strickland.

It's hard to imagine anything other than a massive and swift reduction in the unemployment rate that could provide Strickland an opportunity to make this race competitive in November.

And according to a pollster I spoke to at this event, "we both know that's not going to happen. Ohio is the first in and the last out of recessions. And that's bad news for Ted Strickland."

Indeed.

Ohio is number 1 at something.

...and that's my having my alma mater being listed as the most beautiful college campus in the world.

From Forbes magazine:

Mike Evans, a principal at Norfolk, Va., design firm Hanbury Evans Wright Vlattas Company, says to be beautiful a campus must have a "signature campus space as a carrier of the campus brand." At Kenyon College, that space is "Middle Path," a 10-foot-wide footpath that serves as the Gothic hilltop campus' central artery. More than just a trail, it's a village green for the tight-knit campus community. Sergei Lobanov-Rostovsky, who teaches 17th-century poetry at Kenyon, says the college, both isolated and pastoral, is "a small place to think big thoughts.

Lobanov-Rostovsky nails it. I couldn't imagine having nearly as good a college experience as I did at Kenyon.

Here's a sampling.


And a video...

Portman's Lead: A Model of Consistency

The latest poll from Scott Rasmussen of likely Ohio voters shows Portman once again with a lead over his potential Democratic rivals [read: Lee Fisher], up 44-39.

While both Portman and Fisher improved their standing among their own Party, it was Portman's big jump among Independents that helped entrench his lead over the Democrat.

In February, Portman led among Indies 43-25. Not bad, right?

Well in March that lead is up to 53-19. A 16-point jump.

Approval numbers once again benefit Portman. Overall approval sits at 45-27. Meanwhile Fisher is stuck at nearly 1-1 with 41-37 approval. Needless to say, 1-1 is not a good position to be in.

Rasmussen included a couple interesting questions in the March poll, asking about approval of and participation in the Tea Party movement.

To the dismay of liberals everywhere, overall approval beats disapproval 40-37. But what should really give those who attack the Tea Party pause is the approval among Independents....45-26. Now the first reaction among libs may be to say that the approval is only because so many Independents consider themselves a part of the Tea Party.

Not so much.

According to Rasmussen, only 13% of those who don't identify themselves as Republicans or Democrats consider themselves members of the Tea Party movement. These Independents may not be a part of the organization, but they seem to like what it stands for.

As is par for the course with Rasmussen, their Senate poll also asked a question regarding approval of the Governor. In what may be a precursor to an upcoming bad poll for Governor Strickland, his approval rating shrank by 6 points, going from 49 in February to 43 in March. His disapproval stayed stagnant at 53%.

Keith Olbermann is an idiot.

Major props to the leaders of the Dallas Tea Party organization for this video.

Absolute and total ownage.

The Governor's Message is Officially Undermined

The primary theme of the Governor's final State of the State speech in January was "Accelerating Ohio's Advanced Energy Economy to Create Jobs".

On the Governor's website, it's front and center as the #1 highlight...


In the speech, Strickland specifically stated his Administration was "not just sitting back and letting other states pass us by" in regards to "advanced energy", or as it's more commonly known, "green" jobs.

While I've posted previously about how forcing Ohio to focus on green jobs will in no way come close to solving Ohio's massive jobs crisis, it at least came across as a halfway decent campaign theme. The Governor was attempting to communicate that he was addressing the jobs crisis and trying to be innovative in doing so. It was b.s., but the media was at least buying into it.

Until now.

With one investigation by the Toledo Blade, the Governor's entire theme for his re-election campaign has been totally and completely undermined.


Remember what Strickland said? "We are not just sitting back and letting other states pass us by."

Yes, we are.

From the Blade:

Toledo and its northwest Ohio neighbors have missed out on coveted manufacturing jobs in the solar industry because of a failure by state officials to attract companies with tax incentives or create a viable market for solar panels in Ohio, a Blade investigation shows.

Since 2007, thousands of those jobs have gone to states where companies were enticed by a mixture of tax credits, grants, and additional incentives to make solar products there.

Toledo's ABC affiliate reported on the investigation, stating "despite having successful solar research companies in our area, the state's tax structure has prevented companies from creating manufacturing jobs in Ohio."

3BP's favorite video contributor put together this gem to highlight the difference between the rhetoric and reality:



It cannot be understated just how much this undermines Strickland's primary message.

He claims his Administration has been working harder than any other state to promote advanced energy jobs. Remember his quote, "we are not sitting back and letting other states pass us by."

The Toledo Blade very clearly states that isn't the case.

His only rebuttal is to say they weren't working as hard as the other states, but are now ramping up efforts. Unfortunately for Strickland, that only reinforces the label he's earned during the past three years as a kick-the-can-down-the-road governor.

Strickland likes to say Ohio's situation can only be blamed on the "international recession". And yet, this story clearly and directly contradicts that claim. If the Governor not only fails to make the necessary efforts to properly execute his pet issue, and then misrepresents those efforts in the State of the State, what possible reason do the people of Ohio have to see him fit for re-election?

There is none.

As if you needed more confirmation that Strickland is a total and complete failure....

The Daily Beast is an online news and opinion website that gets about 3 million unique hits a month. The publisher is Tina Brown, formerly of arch-conservative magazines Vanity Fair and The New Yorker. Their writers include such hardcore Republicans as Matt Yglesias and Eric Alterman.

And yes, I'm being sarcastic with those descriptions.

The Daily Beast is anything but conservative. I just want the liberals that obsess over 3BP to be prepared when they read this little bit of analysis.

Which states offer the best chance for hungry workers to find work, or content employees to stay employed? And which are the worst?

For this analysis we first took into account 2006-2016 employment projections prepared by each state’s labor department, and updated it using national employment projections through 2018, which better reflected post-meltdown realities. While these long-term forecasts incorporate trends that transcend the current situation, in order to check any enthusiastic pre-crash numbers, we also equally weighed the actual change in employment from 2006-2009 for each state, and the current unemployment rate.

We’ve also included the median individual salary for each state, courtesy of the American Community Survey, and growth industries, according to the US Census Bureau’s Local Employment Dynamics. For a state to perform well in these rankings, they need to reflect a high projected employment growth rate, show real employment growth over the past three years, and boast low current unemployment rates. And the jobs just might be in a state you least expect.

And who pulled in at #50? You guessed it.Congratulations on this ranking must go out to Ted Strickland and Lee Fisher, with whom none of this would be possible.

An honorable mention goes out to our lovely slew of Congressional Democrats, especially that aptly named Mary Jo Kiljobs, for her undying devotion to all that is liberal policies and politics.

Without you, we wouldn't be where we are today.

Oh, and while we're bringing up Mary Jo, we should also congratulate her on making the latest Top Ten list on NBC's First Read. What's the list?

The 10 most likely congressional districts to switch parties in November.

Mary Jo, just hand over the keys now. Don't make this tougher than it already is.

It's Friday, so let's finish up the week with some fun stuff....

If you have yet to see what I think is the best video in a long frickin' time, watch this and enjoy....



I still have some love for the original video for this song, but it's hard to beat a rube goldberg like this.

Have a great weekend, everyone.

It's the Jobs Crisis, stupid.

We can all agree that by September, political advertisements will be flooding our televisions.

You won't be able to switch the channel without seeing Kasich, Strickland, or Portman. (Fisher has some serious cash to raise if he wants to join that group)

We can also agree on another fact - Ohio's economy and the jobs crisis is the number one issue in the minds of Ohio voters.

So, in order for Governor Strickland and Jobs Czar Lee Fisher to have a fighting chance, they need Ohio's economy to rebound sufficiently to satisfy their Turnaround Ohio promise of which both Kasich and Portman will most surely make them accountable.

Well, this morning the most widely reported indicator of the economic situation, the unemployment rate, once again showed increased job loss with a stagnant and disgustingly high rate of 10.8% unemployment in Ohio.

• The number of employed Ohioans decreased.
• The number of unemployed Ohioans increased.
• And it's the 10th straight month of an unemployment rate in the double digits.

It's that simple. The Governor and his Jobs Czar have failed to deliver on their promise.

And Strickland's defense? 'It's not my fault'.

Please list in the comment section how many times that strategy has worked in modern political history. Didn't think so.

And especially in this case, it can't work. Why? Because unemployment is such a personal issue to each and every individual.

The BLS recently reported total unemployment in Ohio for 2009 was a mindboggling 17.2%. That's nearly 1 in 5 Ohioans that are either out of work, gave up looking for work, or took part-time work in lieu of being unable to find a full-time gig.

In other words, there is a very good chance each and every Ohio voter knows someone who is suffering from the jobs crisis.

Is "it's not my fault" a good enough excuse to a family whose bread winner has been out of work for 12 months?

Or, as Kevin at OPO stated so clearly:

Ted Strickland is going to try and argue that he made the hard choices during the worst economy since the great depression and that he has the experience to lead the rapidly approaching recovery. And that John Kasich is a reckless conservative who used to work at Lehman Brothers.

Voters are going to see double digit unemployment, mounting budget deficits, stimulus dollars wasted and taxes going up – not to mention cabinet members resigning and staffers in court.

Can you honestly tell me that voters will then choose to give Ted Strickland four more years to try again?

Of course not.

For more analysis, check out my post, The Minutiae of Modern Politics.

Thank God for Jake Tapper...

...if he wasn't in the White House briefing room to ask the tough questions, who would?

From yesterday's press briefing transcript:

TAPPER: And then another question. The president, when he was running for president, told the Concord Monitor that you have to break out of the 50-plus-one pattern of presidential politics; we're not going to pass health-care reform with a 50-plus-one strategy. He was talking more about building consensus. And I understand that the health-care reform bill, the first iteration of it passed the Senate with 60 votes, with a supermajority. But is he not pursuing a 51 - 50-plus-one strategy for this final step?

GIBBS: No, because -- he's talking about electoral strategy, not vote-counting in the House --

TAPPER: But he did say “we’re not going to pass health-care reform with a 50-plus-one strategy."

GIBBS: We're not going to -- we're not going to get it through -- we're -- you're not going to get legislation through Congress if only 50 percent plus one in the country think it's a good idea. That's why, if you look at poll after poll, people want -- people want health-care reform and the debate on health-care reform to continue. They want to see progress made. They want to see Democrats and Republicans work together to get something done. That's what the --

TAPPER: Well, Robert, the polls indicates that the American people are very divided about this bill. In fact, pluralities disagree with it, this bill.

GIBBS: And majorities believe we have to keep going. And if you break out individual concepts of what's contained in the president's plan, some of which are Republican ideas, they poll in the upper 60s, so --

TAPPER: Right. But on this specific bill, can you say anything other than the president is doing anything other than pursuing the 50- plus-one strategy?

GIBBS: I don't believe he's pursuing that strategy. I think there are far more than 50 percent of the people that live in this country know and understand that we have to change, for them, the cost of health care. Yes.

TAPPER: They don't support this bill.

GIBBS: Well, we're working on that Jake.

Gibbs is so bad at this.

The Pressure is on Ohio Democrats...

There's a new poll out that should have some targeted Ohio Democrats a little worried...

...the Susan B. Anthony List announced the results of a series of polls conducted in congressional districts by the polling company,inc/WomanTrend. The surveys asked registered voters about abortion funding and healthcare reform in the following members’ districts: Jason Altmire (PA-04), Paul Kanjorski (PA-11), Brad Ellsworth (IN-11), Baron Hill (IN-09), Steve Driehaus (OH-01), Charlie Wilson (OH-06), Marcy Kaptur (OH-09), and John Boccieri (OH-16).

The most important question asked was the following...

Would you be (ROTATED) more likely or less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman/Congresswoman ______ this year if (s)he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion?

The results?

Driehaus - 55% less likely
Wilson - 64%(!!!) less likely
Kaptur - 47% less likely
Boccieri - 62% (!!!) less likely

Driehaus is pretty much doomed already in his race against Chabot, but this poll indicates an easy push over the edge if he votes for the bill. Both Wilson and Boccieri are in similar situations, and these poll results have to give them pause. Kaptur looks to be on safe ground, but who knows in this political environment.

Want to vote for HCR? Fine. But we'll be needing those office keys back in a few months.

Liberals Believe...

Andrew Klavan is a fun one to watch.

Jump ahead to 1:13 for the good stuff....

Governor Envy, Part 937

Today's winner? NJ Governor Chris Christie.

This has been going around the internet a bit the past day or two, but it's so damned good that I had to share it with my readers.

I like to think this gives us a good indication of what to expect from a Kasich Administration's first couple months.

Highlights from a speech to municipal government officials:

And so we need to get honest with each other. In this instance, the political class,for which unfortunately all of us are a member of, the political class is lagging behind the public on this. The public is ready to hear that tough choices have to be made. They're not going to like it. Don't confuse the two. But they are ready to hear the truth.

In fact, they find it refreshing to hear the truth.

They are tired of hearing, don't worry I can spare you from the pain, because they have been hearing that for a decade, as we have borrowed and spent and taxed our way into oblivion.

[...]

And so the path to reform and success is clear. We know what it is. We just have to have the courage to go there. What we are doing is showing people that government can work again for them, not for us. Government has worked for the political class for much too long.

There's no time left. We have no room left to borrow. We have no room left to tax. So we merely have room left now, to do this.

And what are his spending cuts and freezes doing to his poll numbers?

Fifty-two percent approve of his job performance less than two months in, while 21 percent disapprove. Support is somewhat divided along party lines, with Republicans backing him 74-7, and Democrats split 38-33. Independents approve by a margin of 43-17 percent. Christie's fav/unfav is now 47 / 25, an improvement from a 41 / 44 split in a poll just before last November's election.

Pretty damn good.

Strickland wins Governor's Cup! Ohio Saved!

From the Dispatch:

State leaders are trumpeting that Ohio had the most new corporate facilities and expansions open last year, the fourth time in a row that the state has placed No. 1 in the annual list compiled by Site Selection magazine.

The ranking can cause "site-selection professionals to take a closer look at Ohio," said Lisa Patt-McDaniel, director of the Ohio Department of Development. "We've been battling this image of Ohio as a Rust Belt state for a long time, and I do think that this kind of recognition helps."

Notice how Patt-McDaniel is very careful to not say, "things are still realllllllly bad out there."

Smart move.

But my favorite quote of the article was this one:

Alex Fischer, president and CEO of the Columbus Partnership, said the expansion projects should precede job growth.

"Capital investment is a leading indicator of job creation," Fischer said.

Now, it's very important to note that this is the fourth year in a row that Ohio has won this "prize". It's safe to assume that after F-O-U-R Y-E-A-R-S of being the BEST IN THE NATION that we'd be seeing this job growth, right?

But in the past year, the number of employed Ohioans has shrunk by 212,000 people. The unemployment rate has increased by 2.2 points to 10.8%. And the labor force has shrunk by 90,000 since the previous January.

The fact of the matter is this, if you can’t make the Site Selection data flow to the state’s bottom line, it’s just white noise and the "award" loses all sense of legitimacy.

Strickland has had four years of awards to build that bottom line and do you know what it's gotten Ohio? A total unemployment rate of 17.2% for all of 2009, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

By putting his entire focus on this award, and celebrating it via every public medium possible, it truly shows his cluelessness. Somehow he believes he is winning the battle between the states, even though the private sector revenues funding state coffers is in massive decline.

Let's look at it another way. The magazine measured each state in the union and divided them by region. Of the five states in Ohio's region, Wisconsin measured the worst with the number of expansions equaling a measly 1/9th of Ohio's total. And yet, at the end of 2009, Wisconsin's employment rate was 2.3 points lower than Ohio's at 8.5%.

Maybe Ted can work out a trade with Wisconsin's Governor. They can have the "prize", if we can have their unemployment rate.

In reality, all this award gives Ohio is a fancy trophy to place on the Governor's mantle and to highlight in his campaign commercials. That's it.

Fortunately, 3BP was able to obtain a preview copy of the magazine cover that shows some of the other amazing items that impressed them about Ohio....

Obama is a hypocrite.

But you already knew that.

In case you wanted a bit more proof, check out this video highlighting what candidate and Senator Obama used to feel was the only way to pass health care reform properly...



Oh, and bribing congressmen? Sure, why not?

Tonight, Barack Obama will host ten House Democrats who voted against the health care bill in November at the White House; he's obviously trying to persuade them to switch their votes to yes. One of the ten is Jim Matheson of Utah. The White House just sent out a press release announcing that today President Obama nominated Matheson's brother Scott M. Matheson, Jr. to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

Yes we can.

Shooting blanks.

Mark Naymik of the Cleveland Plain Dealer is the latest to debunk false accusations against John Kasich.

Ohio Republican gubernatorial candidate John Kasich did not have special access to an investment he reported on his 1999 congressional financial disclosure statement.

The report – which Kasich's gubernatorial campaign now says was filled out incorrectly – led one blogger to suggest Kasich had inside information.

[...]

A spokeswoman for Goldman Sachs told The Plain Dealer that nobody could have purchased shares in the fund early because they were not available until October. The spokeswoman said that mutual funds are sometimes marketed to investors before they go on sale but cannot be purchased early. She was still investigating whether the Internet Tollkeeper Fund was marketed early.

So, for those that have lost track, here's the latest tally on the scorecard...

Dems: “John wasn’t involved in balancing the budget.” Dispatch: “Wrong.”

Dems: “John got a sweetheart deal on his house.” Plain Dealer: “Wrong.”

Dems: “Mary Taylor’s an absentee auditor.” Dispatch and Beacon Journal: “Wrong.”

Dems: “John bought funds early.” Plain Dealer: “Wrong.”

How many pieces of fake dog poop do the Dems have to keep throwing at the wall in hopes that they find something? Nothing is working.

Clearly, the Democrats are scared. Why else would they keep pushing lie after lie? They feel their only hope is to smear Kasich before he starts spending money on paid media and takes advantage of an electorate primed to oust Strickland.

Your desperation isn't attractive, Dems. But considering the Governor you're trying to save, I can't say I blame you.

Inching Closer to the Nuclear Option

The WSJ has a fantastic editorial today on the state of the Health Care debate.

A string of electoral defeats and the great unpopularity of ObamaCare can't stop Democrats from their self-appointed rendezvous with liberal destiny—ramming a bill through Congress on a narrow partisan vote. What we are about to witness is an extraordinary abuse of traditional Senate rules to pass a bill merely because they think it's good for the rest of us, and because they fear their chance to build a European welfare state may never come again.

This paragraph particularly interested me.

President Clinton preferred to use reconciliation to pass HillaryCare in the 1990s, but he was dissuaded by West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd, who argued that it would be an abuse of the process. Mr. Byrd, author of a four-volume history of Senate rules and procedures, told the Washington Post last March that "The misuse of the arcane process of reconciliation—a process intended for deficit reduction—to enact substantive policy changes is an undemocratic disservice to our people and to the Senate's institutional role," specifically citing health reform and cap and trade.

If only current Democrats were as principled as President Clinton and Sen. Byrd. [ed note: writing that made me gag a bit]

Read the rest of the editorial here.

The New World

I've heard a lot of frustration from friends in politics back home in Ohio about how the "old guard" isn't embracing social media in the way it should when it comes to campaign strategy.

Now, I know that means these same folks probably aren't reading this blog, but that doesn't mean you can't sit them in front of your computer right now and make them watch this video:

Space Cadet.

In a fight for his political career, Rep. Zack Space is clinging to a National Journal report that graded him as a moderate.

Jesse at Athens Runaway decided to take a closer look at his votes in 2009 and found that with 88% party unity and 90% presidential support votes, things are far from what they seem. Read his entire post here.

Space's likely opponent, State Senator Bob Gibbs, also released a stinging statement asking why the Congressman hasn't returned the $21,000 he accepted from ethically deficient Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel.

This morning, Congressman Zack Space joined the growing chorus of legislators calling on fellow Democrat Charlie Rangle (D-NY) to step down as Chair the powerful House Ways and Means Committee. Space was quoted in today’s Columbus Dispatch saying it would be “undeniably wrong” for Rangel to remain in that post, now that he has been reprimanded by the House. Rangel’s reprimand was for taking a Corporate-financed trip to the Caribbean, in violation of House Rules, and Space has committed to voting for a Republican measure to force Rangel out from his post if the defiant Congressman doesn’t give up his post soon, according to the Dispatch .

“If Zack Space suddenly considers Charlie Rangel so bad, then why is he hanging on to the $21,000 in campaign cash he’s gotten from Rangel?” Bob Gibbs, Republican candidate to replace Rangel asked. “He ought to do the right thing and return that tainted money,” Gibbs said “simply calling for him to step aside is just another misdirection from Zack Space, who’s entrenched in Nancy Pelosi’s culture in Congress – and we don’t want Charlie Rangel’s cash being used to promote Zack Space’s agenda of Cap and Trade, Government-run Health Care, and more federal spending – all of which is bad for our district.”

Hell, even Kilroy and Sutton have said they are returning the cash they accepted from Rangel. Is Space that desperate?

Strickland's "Green" strategy to save Ohio's economy is frightingly off-base.

Yesterday, the Columbus Dispatch had two interesting articles. One, an editorial highlighting how much of the stimulus is feeding dollars to foreign companies in the guise of green jobs. The other was about how Ted Strickland was working to make Ohio "a national leader in advanced- and renewable-energy technology."

But they never connect the two. I submit that the two specific issues discussed aren't completely germane to eachother, but with green jobs becoming such a focus of the Strickland Administration, more attention must be paid to its feasibility and if it's worth the massive investment of taxpayer dollars. The Dispatch failed to connect pessimism about green jobs to our Governor's obsession with making them the focal point of Ohio's recovery. In fact, on the Governor's own website reviewing the highlights of the SOTS, "advanced energy" (read: "green jobs") is front and center at the very top of the page.

But can "green jobs" really save Ohio from the jobs crisis it currently faces?

If you ask the Washington Post, the answer is a very loud, "no."

...how valid is the assumption that a "clean-energy" economy will generate enough jobs to mitigate today's high level of unemployment -- new jobless claims were up 22,000 this week -- and to meet the needs of future generations? A green economy would have to spout jobs in the millions to do both. The facts challenge the prevailing thinking among some policymakers and officials that green jobs are a principal reason for transforming the economy.

[...]

In other "clean-energy" sectors such as solar and wind energy, jobs are predicted to emerge in the same broad categories of installation, manufacturing, R&D and IT services, but the near-term expected levels of investment in and adoption of these renewable sources of energy mean that net job creation should top out in the tens of thousands, as opposed to the desired hundreds of thousands or more.

[...]

For the purpose of creating jobs, then, a "clean-energy economy" will not offer a panacea. This does not necessarily mean that America should not become green to alleviate climate change, to kick its addiction to foreign oil or to use energy sources more efficiently. But those who take great pains to tout the "job-creation potential" of the green space might just end up inducing labor pains all around.

I must admit, I've been particularly frustrated at the mainstream Ohio press who have been more than happy to give Governor Strickland a total and complete pass on his efforts to build Ohio's recovery around green jobs. Sure, it sounds all well and good, but the reality states otherwise.

Going green will not save Ohio's economy. Nor will microtargeting where we should focus our efforts.

Ohio needs restructuring at the macro-level. Ohio is a state in trouble that can't afford to do anything less than become a beacon for all businesses and entrepreneurs. We don't have the time to pick and choose.

Learn more about Green Jobs and the free market here.

Yost, Morgan, and Endorsements

Last night, the Cuyahoga County GOP voted to endorse Seth Morgan for Ohio Auditor.

Actually, less than 20% of the members of Cuyahoga County's GOP voted to endorse Seth Morgan for Ohio Auditor.

How big of a deal is that?

The Cleveland Plain Dealer didn't even cover it.

Morgan supporters like to claim the string of County endorsements, many of which have been voted on by a small minority of central committees that decided to show up to the meeting, is an indication of momentum in his candidacy.

Fine. Believe that if you want. But it means nothing.

By and large, these County endorsements don't actually result in anything. These County Parties don't go to work on the phones raising dollars for their endorsees. As evidenced above, they don't even get decent news coverage. If lucky, the most Morgan can expect is being placed on the County Party's slate card, if they even have one.

Now, some may say Yost is at fault for not working the County Parties harder. You know how it works - you take a central committee member or two to coffee or breakfast and schmooze them to get their vote.

So is Yost's time better spent doing that, or using those meeting times to spend with contributors?

Exactly.

Back in 2006, Jim Petro learned how important endorsements are when he won endorsements from nearly every county GOP, the Ohio Right to Life, and every major newspaper. Remember him being the nominee? Neither do I.

But let's refocus on this race. Do you recall how many registered voters knew who John Kasich was in the last Quinnipiac poll? 38%. Barely over a third.

What do you think that number is for Dave Yost and Seth Morgan? Jack and Squat.

So at the end of the day, it's cash that will win this race - cash that can be spent expanding your name ID.

In a discussion I had with Yost back when he was still running for AG, he had already developed solid relationships all over the state with top contributors, but they were tepid about donating due to Mike DeWine's commanding lead. Well, now all those relationships can be cashed in.

Additionally, Yost announced the endorsement from 16 of 21 State Senators yesterday, including Leader Bill Harris. Think that helps fundraising? Thought so.

And then there is the ORP. 'Nuff said.

With these factors all included, I'll be absolutely shocked if Yost doesn't have a commanding fundraising lead come the next financial report.

Finally, Yost is the superior candidate. He's a tough conservative. He's the only candidate who actually has actually served as Auditor for local government. And he distinguished himself when he did so.

Morgan is a CPA.

Whoopee.

That doesn't mean Morgan doesn't have potential, but his scorched earth style of campaigning is quickly burning bridges that didn't need to be burned.

UPDATE: A reader informs me that the Plain Dealer posted a story about the endorsement later in the morning today. That's nice and all, but that doesn't defeat the greater point - name ID for both Yost and Morgan is extremely low. Neither have run in statewide general elections before. And both need cash to help the primary voters understand who they are and what they are about. My bet is Yost is the only one who will be able to raise the necessary dollars to ensure a win.

But if you're a conservative that supports Morgan over Yost, great. Go get 'em. Work your butt off and do what you can to get him a win in May. I simply think the likelihood of such a win is very unlikely.

Bad blood in the water.

From yesterday's Campaign Spot:

Buried in the 36th paragraph of the front-page, above-the-fold, "If only everyone had listened to Rahm" story in the Washington Post today is this damning quote from an unidentified House Democrat: "There is this growing sense in the House that this White House is tone-deaf and doesn't care about 2010, that it is sacrificing members for 2012 and that the president thinks he doesn't need to get engaged, or that he thinks politics don't matter and that he could care less about what is happening on the streets of our districts. That's not Rahm."

Ooo. Not only is the Obama honeymoon over, but it looks like there is already chatter about divorce.

Blowing up.

Yesterday saw the launch of a new website for conservatives - Rightosphere.

“Rightosphere's mission is to be a forum for discussion and debate among grassroots conservatives as to who should be entrusted with the leadership of our movement. As well as to hold those currently in office accountable as our standard bearers.”

I've had the honor of being asked to be one of the Contributing Editors to the site. While it's likely you'll see much crossposting of my material from 3BP onto Rightosphere, I highly encourage you to visit the site often and enjoy the insight from many other solid contributors on national politics.

Rightosphere is the brainchild of the founders of the Race42008.com website which had up to 500-600k hits a day during the 2008 Presidential season. Their goal is to make Rightosphere bigger and better.

Click here to check it out.

My first post since the site's launch can be viewed here.

The Toxic President Strikes Again.

Previously on 3BP, we highlighted how the President's campaign visits to New Jersey and Massachusetts had, in fact, damaged the standing of the Democrat running for office.

Well, he's at it again.


Currently, Obama's Strong Disapproval numbers are hovering between 38 and 43 nationally.

Additionally, his Strong Approval numbers have shrunk to between 22 and 26 as of late.

Remember, in New Jersey and Massachusetts, his Strong Approval numbers were 38 and 37, respectively. So even with Strong Approval about 1/3 higher than it is now, he still damaged those Democrat candidates.

That means we shouldn't be surprised when we see the numbers above.

The President is Toxic.

In case there was any doubt about Mary Jo Kilroy...

....and her clear disinterest in continuing to represent Ohio's 15th Congressional District, take a look at this chart....


Of all the toss-ups, she is the MOST LIBERAL. Know what that means in a state where Obama currently suffers from a -19 approval rating among Independents?

Really. Fun. Ads.

Oh, and don't think we don't see you there, Steve Driehaus....

Kasich campaign on track

An article by Jon Craig in the Cincy Enquirer yesterday echoed several sentiments I've been making about the Ohio gubernatorial campaign over the past few months.

• The Kasich campaign should be patient when it comes to establishing his identity among the voters:

The former congressman from the Columbus suburb of Westerville has plenty of time to define his campaign through debates, public appearances and TV ads, said Herb Asher, professor emeritus of political science at Ohio State University.

• Ted Strickland took much more time in 2006 than Kasich has when it came to presenting himself and his plans to the media:

Strickland and his campaign spokesman, Keith Dailey, met one-on-one with reporters in 2005 and early 2006. Except for a conference call announcing his candidacy in May 2005, Strickland didn't hold his first press event until May, 2006.

• Until voters start paying more attention, Kasich should continue to focus on a grassroots strategy of working local low key events, particularly among activists, that will be most effective in the long-run:

Kasich makes himself available to local media whenever he speaks to county GOP committees. He's been to 84 of the state's 88 counties during the past year, according to Nichols.

• Kasich's position in Quinnipiac polling is nothing unusual, and in fact, puts him in a positive position:

Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute, said 62 percent of voters said they didn't know enough about Kasich to have an opinion on him. Even so, poll respondents thought Kasich would do a better job handling the economy and state budget.

"John Kasich remains unknown to most voters,'' Brown said. "But that's not an unusual number for a candidate in February of an election year, especially when they haven't run statewide before.''

"John Kasich is no different than most challengers. He has his base of support,'' Brown said. "By election day he'll be virtually as well-known in the state as Ted Strickland. He won't have a name ID problem. Whether he's as well-liked is another story.''

[...]

Nichols and Asher agreed Strickland can't win with job approval ratings below 50 percent.

Perspective, history, and a basic understanding of campaign strategy helps a lot when determining where things stand in this race.

More on My Man Mitch

The Mitch-mania has continued since the Indiana Governor's admission last week that he'd consider running for President.

Seeing as he's been the central point of so much of my Governor Envy series, I'm finding myself quickly migrating towards preferring him over the other potential contenders.

Daniels wasted no time taking advantage of his increased profile by submitting a column to the Wall Street Journal that dissects what he has done with health care as Governor.

The Indiana experience confirms what common sense already tells us: A system built on "cost-plus" reimbursement (i.e., the more a physician does, the more he or she gets paid) coupled with "free" to the purchaser consumption, is a machine perfectly designed to overconsume and overspend. It will never be controlled by top-down balloon-squeezing by insurance companies or the government. There will be no meaningful cost control until we are all cost controllers in our own right.

Americans can make sound, thrifty decisions about their own health. If national policy trusted and encouraged them to do so, our skyrocketing health-care costs would decelerate.

Additionally, Ross Douthat has a great column in the New York Times that highlights yet more of the reasons why some activist Republicans seem to be slowly warming up to a Daniels candidacy.

Check him out. An Anti-Obama sounds awfully good right about now.

Does a Republican Congress create more jobs?

Apparently so.


h/t: Political Math

Raising Money: Ted isn't very good at it.

Last night the Columbus Dispatch wrote a piece highlighting the out of state trips made by Ohio's candidates for Governor.

John Kasich went on 3 trips to raise money in 2009.

Governor Strickland went on 25.

25? He does realize there is a jobs crisis going on, right? He does remember he's the Governor?

Is this for real? 25 trips?

The worst part? They weren't even worth it!

According to the Dispatch, in those 25 trips, Strickland raised $1.2 million, or a measly $48,000 per trip.

On the other hand, Kasich raised $266,000 per trip. In other words, if Strickland was as efficient as Kasich with raising money out of state, he would have amassed $6.65M just in out of state dollars.

Instead, he's at $1.2M.

Remember, one of the best gauges of where a race stands is how the fundraising is going. After all, big donors won't contribute unless they think you have a solid shot.

In light of these revelations of all of Ted's trips, it's worth mentioning that from July through December last year, Strickland raised only $1.18M. During that same period, Kasich raised $4.55M.

Clearly, Kasich is getting the most bang for his buck when it comes to out-of-state trips, and is expertly utilizing the momentum gained from maintaining a five-point lead on Pollster.com.

Al Gore forgot how to count.

Our former VP was recently quoted in the New York Times stating there have been only two instances of errors among Climate Cultists in their research of the environment.

Well, Mark Landbaum has been kind enough to list all nineteen known errors.

Click here for the full list.

Just one poll.

That's all well and good, but it doesn't explain why Kasich's situation with Qpac in Feb. 10 is WORSE than it was in Nov. 09.

Still waiting for why you shouldn't be concerned about that ....

Tom Blumer
BizzyBlog.com

That was a comment left on my last post about the Quinnipiac Poll that showed Ted Strickland up on John Kasich, 44-39.

And it's a reasonably good question.

But its premise is faulty.

Kasich's "situation" is not necessarily "worse". In fact, it's virtually unchanged.

As we begin looking into this more in-depth, let's remember the margin of error (MOE) of the poll was 2.4%.

From the previous poll, overall support for Kasich dropped by only 1%. Clearly, well within the MOE.

But despite the negligible drop, we can still ask how the support changed that led to losing that single digit.

Kasich only dropped 1% among Independents. 1% among Democrats. And 3% among Republicans. Miniscule changes, but they add up.

Essentially, this poll wasn't about Kasich performing substantively worse, but more about Strickland improving his standing among Democrats and Independents.

Of course, it didn't have much of anywhere to go but up.

Among Democrats, his approval numbers enjoyed a net gain of 9 points, and a net gain of 10 among Independents.

But what's most important is name ID.

As I've been reinforcing, Quinnipiac only tests registered voters this far out from the election. Not likely voters. This means they are testing people less likely to vote, and history shows that these types of polls virtually always help Democrats.

Furthermore, since the opponent is almost always unknown among registered voters, polls of registered voters tend to only be a decent gauge of where the incumbent stands. Ultimately, until Kasich's name ID substantively improves, polls of registered voters won't provide an accurate picture of how the two candidates stack up against eachother. That's why the Ohio News Poll and Rasmussen have provided a more accurate picture - because they focused on likely voters.

But as I reviewed the Quinny poll, I wanted to do a little toying with the numbers to project where Kasich could end up among the all-important Independent vote.

Overall, Kasich's name recognition improved by 7%, going from 69% not knowing him to 62%. The good news is that as more got to know him, they still approved and disapproved of him at the same rate as the last poll with the approval to disapproval ratio remaining unchanged at 2.5-1.

Among indies, his name ID went from 72% unknown to 61%. Interestingly enough, as name ID among this demographic improved, so did his approval. His approval rating among Indies improved by 7 points while his disapproval only went up by 5.

So, just for the fun of it, let's assume Kasich's approval/disapproval numbers increase at the same rate for every 11% of Independents that get to know him. Furthermore, let's assume, by the time of the election, Kasich will be just as well known among Independents as Strickland is right now after nearly 3.5 years as Governor. That means his name ID will improve by 45%. Multiply that out and you have his approval increasing by 28% and disapproval increasing by 20%.

In other words, his approval/disapproval numbers among Independents would be at 57-30. Compare that to Strickland's current number of 45-37. +27 to +8 means one heckuva win among Independents. And where do Independents stand now? Tied at 38. In other words, Kasich would win the Independents big, and swing the election.

I know, I know. You were told there would be no math. Sorry about that. And ultimately, who knows where Kasich will end up among Indies?

But it's done to reinforce an important lesson - that name ID means one helluva lot. And that's why polls like this one, where only registered voters are tested, makes it difficult to honestly gauge where the opponent stands in the race. Afterall, it's hard to analyze anything where nearly 2/3 of voters don't yet have an opinion.

But they do have an opinion of Ted Strickland. And as I've stated before, it isn't good.

As I mentioned in my last post on this poll, Nate Silver did an analysis of polls where incumbents tested under 50 in early polls and compared them to where they ended up.

He states the following:

5 of the 15 incumbents to have under 45 percent of the vote in early polls also won their elections.

That's Ted Strickland. He has less than 45 percent of the vote.

Additionally, he comments on the latest poll from Quinnipiac:

If we instead look at those cases within three points of Ted Strickland's 44 percent, when the incumbent had between 41 and 47 percent of the vote in early polls, he won on 11 of 17 occasions.

That may give some Democrats hope. But it shouldn't.

Silver, who is unabashedly liberal, is being a bit dishonest with the numbers by isolating the single Quinnipiac poll in his analysis of where the race stands.

If he wanted to play fair, he would use the same standard he used in his overall analysis, the incumbent's average in the early polls, and according to Pollster.com, Strickland is averaging 40.5%.

So, using his method and looking at cases within three points of where Strickland is actually averaging, from 37.5% to 43.5%, 7 incumbents lost and 4 incumbents won.

In other words, with nearly a 2-1 ratio, the odds are against Ted Strickland.

Ultimately, the Quinnipiac poll is just that, one poll. Both sides are going to go up and down over the next few months. As Kasich's name ID improves and as voters start paying more attention, these polls will become more and more accurate.

Until then we'll learn what we can from the information we have. This last poll showed us two things:

1. Strickland has marginally improved his standing among his base and Independents.
2. Registered voters don't know John Kasich.

That's it.

But it's the trend that matters. And one poll does not a trend make.

The trend shows Kasich is stagnant, and will likely remain that way until his name ID improves. And Strickland's support in early polls is still at a dangerously low level.

Ultimately, I'm very happy with where things stand.