July 5-7, 2009
Jul 05 04:51 A Little Dip Or a Big Fall? Jul 05 06:28 Honduras, OAS & the US Jul 06 03:38 The World's Biggest Idiot? Jul 06 05:58 Entenza's Economy Jul 07 02:38 That's BS, Mr. Vice President Jul 07 03:29 The DFL's Path To Prosperity? Jul 07 10:33 D'Andrea-Tyson Admits First Stimulus Bill Failed Jul 07 14:10 Will Ohio Lead the GOP Comeback?
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
A Little Dip Or a Big Fall?
If Ted Strickland's JA rating keeps dropping like it's done the last two months, they'll need a microscope to find it. Accoring to this Columbus Dispatch article , Gov. Strickland's approval rating is dropping precipitously:
Strickland's approval rating has plummeted by 11 points in the last two months and Ohioans now give him a thumbs down on the way he is performing his job, including that he has failed to keep his campaign promises, according to a poll released this morning by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.If I was advising the Strickland campaign right now, I'd probably be telling him he'd better change dramatically. I'd tell him that this next polling is more troubling than the 11 point plunge:
Troubling signs for Strickland include that Ohio voters by 53-33 disapprove of his handling of the economy, and they disapprove of the way he is handling the state budget by a nearly identical margin, 53-32.This isn't an isolated situation. President Obama's rating on the economy is tanking, too. If these trends continue, the GOP could be looking at a pretty good year in 2010.
At this point, I'm counting Ohio as a GOP pickup. Ted Strickland is a cookie-cutter politician. They're a dime a dozen. John Kasich is a charismatic, once in a generation type of politician. More importantly, John Kasich's record of reform and fiscal restraint are exactly the types of things that voters in 2010 will be looking for.
With Ohio's economy struggling, the argument should and will be made that Ohio can't afford another 4 years of Strickland's incompetence. I suspect that, once it's framed that way, John Kasich will open an outside-the-margin-of-error lead, a lead that he won't relinquish.
There's something that Mr. Kasich has done well thus far that will help him later in the race. His RechargeOhio website and his travels thoughout Ohio have reintroduced him to Ohio.
One thing that challengers often have trouble doing is fundraising. That won't be a worry for Kasich. He's a proven fundraiser with national connections. Don't be surprised if he raises more money than Strickland.
Something else that's working in John Kasich's favor is that the top-of-the-ticket slots are filled with great GOP candidates. Starting with John Kasich at the top is great but then there's Rob Portman running to hold the seat currently held by George Voinovich, then former Sen. Mike DeWine running for Attorney General.
That's as close to an all star lineup as you'll find in any state this cycle. By far.
Finally, let's remember 2004. It's important because that's the last time the Ohio GOP was this jazzed. That year, Ohio turned out in droves in the suburbs and especially the exurbs. That's what gave GWB his margin of victory in Ohio.
I remember reading numerous posts in 2004 talking about how many volunteers turned out to help with President Bush's GOTV operation. I remember reading a post somewhere that said there were so many volunteers turning out for President Bush that they started shipping them to Pennsylvania to help out. Unless I'm totally misreading the situation, I think that's what's happening again.
These findings can't put a smile on Strickland's face either:
"Strickland's extremely sharp drop-off in so short a time reflects growing public frustration," Brown said. "Voters don't see the economy improving and have decided that after almost three years in office they should start holding Ted Strickland at least partially responsible. The question now is whether this is the start of a larger move or just a temporary reaction.There comes a time when people understand that a person's solutions have either worked or failed. It's becoming obvious to Ohioans that Strickland's plans haven't succeeded. Once a politician has lost his constituents' trust, the path forward becomes increasingly uphill.
Couple that with John Kasich's resume of cutting federal taxes while balancing the federal budget and Strickland's fight likely goes from uphill to scaling the Tetons without hiking boots. That isn't impossible but it's a serious uphill challenge.
Strickland swept into office in 2006, with a corruption-riddled Republican governor in office and with a strong Democratic headwind. Now Strickland's running for re-election at a time when people are losing faith in the Democrat president's economic plan and at a time when the only significant issue to be debated is the economy.
I'd wish Gov. Strickland good luck but I'd rather see him fail in his re-election bid. He's done next to nothing in getting Ohio's economy running right.
Posted Sunday, July 5, 2009 4:57 AM
No comments.
Honduras, OAS & the US
Yesterday, the United States celebrated its 233rd anniversary of its independence. This president, however, doesn't seem to put a priority on liberty. Instead, he's joined with Daniel Ortega, Hugo Chavez, the Castro brothers and the OAS in criticizing Honduras for throwing out its tyrant leader. Now the OAS has suspended Honduras' membership in the OAS:
A week after Central America's first coup in more than a quarter of a century, tensions were at breaking point in the Central American nation as ousted President Manuel Zelaya planned to return.Let's first put in place the foundation of facts on why Zeleya was ousted. Here's Jim Hoft's post on Zeleya's ouster:
The country's interim leaders were more defiant than ever in the face of growing isolation and public anger, apparently set on staying put until November elections despite freezes in aid, withdrawn foreign ambassadors and temporary trade blockages.
The Organization of American States suspended Honduras late Saturday, in the first such move since the exclusion of Cuba in 1962, adding to the growing international pressure.
Honduran El Heraldo reported:
The president should not allow Barack Obama a victory of "Chavism" in Honduras and should take into account that the impeachment of president Manuel Zelaya was made by order of the Supreme Court and of respect for institutions, said Wednesday the Wall Street Journal.In other words, Zeleya was planning on rewriting Honduras' constitution so he could stay in power forever. The Honduran Supreme Court said that that action violated the Honduran Constitution, at which time Zeleya tried throwing out the Honduran Surpreme Court.
Zelaya was plotting to remain in power, the Journal reported in an editorial. He added that the Honduran president had help from Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez to reform the constitution to run for reelection and to meet its target as it did the same Chavez.
"The events of Honduras should be interpreted in light of the decade of chavismo in Latin America," said an editorial in the Journal.
The minute that happened, the Honduran Supreme Court gave the Honduran military the authority to remove Zeleya from power, which it did.
It's at that point that Hugo Chavez, Raul Castro, Daniel Ortega and President Obama criticized the Honduran Supreme Court for enforcing the Honduran Constitution. That's what led to the OAS' suspension of Honduras from the organization. The next logical step is for the OAS to impose sanctions on Honduras.
This is insanity but it's perfectly understandable. It's insanity because an organization of thugs is criticizing a sovereign nation for abiding by its constitution. It's perfectly understandable because Chavez, Ortega, Castro and Obama have little regard for their nation's constitutions.
Especially in light of yesterday's Independence Day celebrations, We The People should send President Obama the message that siding with Ortega, Castro, Chavez and Zeleya is the worst possible decision he could've made. We The People should also insist that the Honduran Constitution be obeyed and that sanctions not be imposed.
We're supposed to be the nation that stands for liberty and the rule of law. Had this happened during the Bush administration, there's little doubt but that we wouldn't have sided with power-crazed thugs like Castro, Chavez, Ortega and Zeleya. We would've sided with the rule of law and Honduran sovereignty.
It's charitable to say that President Obama's foreign policy is erratic. It's accurate to say that President Obama's foreign policy hasn't been properly thought through and that there isn't a hint of consistency in it. Frankly, he's looked ill-equipped to make important foreign policy decisions.
As for the OAS, they're disgracing themselves by siding with a lawless thug like Zeleya. What does it say about an organization that sides with a thug that tries rewriting his country's constitution and criticizes a nation's leaders for obeying their constitution?
Posted Sunday, July 5, 2009 7:32 AM
Comment 1 by eric z. at 05-Jul-09 06:51 PM
Is the suggestion that if Obama wished to advocate a constitutional amendment a majority of our Supreme Court could authorize a military coup.
I thought you embraced a nation's chief executive as commander in chief. You did, I thought, up to January of this year. Even as to secrecy in decision making.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 05-Jul-09 10:19 PM
Eric, This has nothing to do with a president's responsibilities as commander-in-chief because Honduras wasn't at war.
Zeleya simply tried unilaterally undoing Honduras' constitution. When Honduras' Supreme Court told him that his actions were unconstitutional, Zeleya tried disbanding the Honduran Supreme Court.
What do you think the reaction would've been had an American president tried pulling a stunt like that? Would the citizens have accepted that president's actions? Of course they wouldn't have.
That president would've been impeached & convicted in a heartbeat.
Comment 3 by J. Ewing at 07-Jul-09 12:12 AM
The question was, why wasn't he removed through the legal impeachment process, rather than sending in the military? If we err, as I believe we have on all sides, by calling this a "Military coup" rather than a "legal reaction to an illegal Presidential plot," then I think we need to somehow distinguish between the two and show how the facts support the latter description.
The World's Biggest Idiot?
There's an old saying that "Somewhere, a village is missing its idiot." In the instance of Joe Biden, it's proper to modify that quote to say this: "Somewhere in Delaware, a village isn't missing its idiot." He's possibly that big of an idiot. Joe Biden is in Iraq, where he's made one of the most boneheaded declarations in American VP history. (H/T: Gateway Pundit ) Here's what he said:
Vice President Biden warned Iraqi officials Friday that the American commitment to Iraq could end if the country again descended into ethnic and sectarian violence.That's dumber (by alot) than John Murtha's plan to redeploy to Okinawa. Biden's remarks prove yet again that this Democrat administration isn't putting a high priority on standing with faithful allies.
During the campaign, then-Candidate Obama talked about his administration restoring America's credibility in the world. How is America's credibility restored by abandoning democratic allies? Let's remember that then-Sen. Biden proposed, after Iraq had been freed from Saddam's tyrannical regime, the United States split that sovereign nation into 3 parts rather than defeat the Islamic extremists.
That, coupled with the Obama administration's support of dictator-thug Zeleya of Honduras and their willingness to meet with Iran's thugs, tells me that President Obama and Vice President Bidenwon't think twice of supporting anti-democracy thugs or about throwing democratic allies under the bus.
I thought I'd never say this but the Obama administration's foreign policy/national security record my outduel Jimmy Carter's pathetic record for the worst record in U.S. presidential history.
Posted Monday, July 6, 2009 3:40 AM
No comments.
Entenza's Economy
According to Matt Entenza's issues page on energy, Entenza thinks that Minnesota can be the clean energy equivalent to Silicon Valley, CA:
When I travel the state, I tell people Minnesota can be the Silicon Valley of clean energy and clean technology. What I mean is that we can lead a revolution even more profound than what began in California nearly 40 years ago. This time, there's more at stake: our economic future and the health of our planet.A serious reporter should question Mr. Entenza what information he's viewing that makes him think that this planet's health is in dire straits. Is he viewing 30-year-old statistics that are now obsolete? Or is this just a matter of faith, that the IPCC declared global warming threatens the existance of the planet and that's all he needs to be convinced?
Minnesota can leverage the potential of clean energy and clean technology to renew and diversify its economy, create jobs and help our entire country move forward. What we need is a vision, translated to policy and legislation that will put Minnesota in the leadership position.
The clean energy and clean tech economy is characterized by things we have traditionally been good at in Minnesota: innovation, the creation of value-added products, and the development of a skilled labor force.
Perhaps Entenza thinks that clean energies warrant the investment because he thinks they're the next growth industry. If he thinks that, why does he think that? If he thinks they're such a great growth opportunity, why aren't more private investors flocking to the cause? If clean energies are the next big thing, what role does state government play in helping this industry prosper?
Does state government have a role other than stepping aside and getting out of the way? Is it that Mr. Entenza thinks state government's role is to subsidize these industries for the next decade?
Perhaps Mr. Entenza can answer why he thinks that government should play a role in picking economic winners and losers. Perhaps Mr. Entenza should tell us whether he'd support cap-and-trade legislation that puts fossil fuels at a competitive disadvantage.
Most importantly, does Mr. Entenza think that solar, wind and other alternative energies can replace fossil fuels in powering power plants, cities and industries? I doubt he does. I suspect, rather, that he's just trying to win his share of delegates amongst teh environmentalist wing of the DFL.
There's nothing wrong with playing endorsement politics. It's just that Mr. Entenza isn't helping him for the general election.
Posted Monday, July 6, 2009 5:58 AM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 06-Jul-09 06:36 AM
I believe I've discovered why you are not understanding the situation. You are using Mr. Entenza-- a hard-left Democrat-- and the word "think" in the same sentence.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 06-Jul-09 07:22 AM
It isn't that I don't understand things, Jerry. It's that I'm enjoying pointing out things that people will question Mr. Entenza about.
Comment 3 by J. Ewing at 06-Jul-09 05:47 PM
Of course. I forgot the :-^
Comment 4 by Jason at 07-Jul-09 10:05 AM
A serious reporter (the on your refer to after the quote) would have already done their homework and known that Matt is echoing the mainstream scientific community on climate science.
Comment 5 by Gary Gross at 07-Jul-09 02:18 PM
Matt is echoing the mainstream scientific community on climate science.Matt is echoing the mainstream climate theory. It's far from science.
That's BS, Mr. Vice President
According to this Washington Times article , Vice President Biden wants us to believe that the reason why the economy isn't doing better is because they simply couldn't comprehend what awful shape the Bush administration left the economy:
Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. said the administration underestimated the severity of the slumping economy when it assumed control in January, but he added that it's too early to consider a second massive economic-stimulus measure to help jump-start the economy. "We misread how bad the economy was," Mr. Biden said Sunday on ABC's "This Week."It isn't that this administration misread the economy. It's that the Obama administration, working with the Democrat-dominated congress, passed a stimulus bill that wasn't a prescription for prosperity. Instead, they just went on a spending spree in which they paid off their political allies.
This isn't arguable. President Obama admitted it at the congressional Democrats' retreat in February:
"So then you get the argument, well, this is not a stimulus bill, this is a spending bill. What do you think a stimulus is? (Laughter and applause.) That's the whole point. No seriously. (Laughter.) That's the point. (Applause.)"Vice President says that the Democrats couldn't have known that the economy was awful. The more accurate statement is that the Obama administration thought they could pass a $787,000,000,000 spending bill that didn't stimulate the economy and nobody would notice.
They thought they could immunize themselves by just blaming the Bush administration for everything. That hasn't worked because people are noticing that the Obama administration's economic plans aren't productive.
When President Obama saw big Democratic majorities at the other end of Pennsylvania Ave., he thought he could pass the Democrats' wish list. He didn't think about people who were unemployed or underemployed actually insisted on results. Now he's finding that people expect him to get important things done.
Kevin Hassett debunks the Obama-Biden myth in this article :
The Obama administration has no shame, and is willing to abandon reason altogether to achieve its short-term political goals. Ronald Reagan ran up big deficits in part because he believed that his tax cuts would produce economic growth, and ultimately pay for themselves. He may well have been excessively optimistic about the merits of tax cuts, but at least he had a story.As noted above, President Obama admitted that ARRA was nothing more than spending alot of money. There wasn't a logic behind it. This administration didn't put things into the bill that gave small businesses an incentive to invest or to grow their company.
Obama has no story. Nobody believes that his unprecedented expansion of the welfare state will lead to enough economic growth. Nobody believes that it will pay for itself. Everyone understands that higher spending today begets higher spending tomorrow.
After the $787,000,000,000 are spent, what will have been done to make American industry productive and prosperous? The best that can be said is that some roads and bridges will have been built. (That's if the environuts don't ruin things .) After that, the only think that will have happened will be that a few million fistfuls of money will have been spent.
BIG WHOOP!!!
This administration is giving us abundant proof, at least on a weekly basis, that they're clueless as to what makes the U.S. economy prosperous. Pissing away money won't make us stronger. It'll just tell the Chinese that our debt is worthless.
My final judgment? It isn't that the Obama administration didn't realize how bad the economy was. It's that the Obama administration doesn't have a clue about building a strong economy.
Posted Tuesday, July 7, 2009 3:26 AM
No comments.
The DFL's Path To Prosperity?
Before the State Fair opens, Minnesotans likely will be sick of hearing the word unallotment and rightfully so. What they should be more upset about, though, is what led to unallotment. My of my fellow conservative bloggers will say that unallotment was made necessary because the DFL didn't pass a balanced budget until the closing minutes of the session.
That's certainly accurate but it's more basic than that.
The biggest reasons why unallotment became necessary is because the DFL refused to set intelligent priorities or to say no to their special interest allies.
When the DFL conducted its Cherrypicked Testimony Tour, the DFL's attempt to rig the testimony was exposed :
From: Gene Pelowski [mailto:Rep.Gene.Pelowski@house.mn]TRANSLATION: Let's tell everyone that we can't cut any HHS budgets. Every penny spent isn't just important. It's sacred. We can't cut. We can't reform.
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:13 AM
This Friday, February 20, there will be a bicameral hearing held in our region. Senators and Representatives from both political parties will be in Winona from 3:30 to 5:30 PM, Winona City Hall, 207 Lafayette St. The purpose of this hearing is to get testimony from affected programs in every level of government, education, health care or service impacted by the cuts suggested by the Governor's state budget.
I am writing you to ask that you or a designee get scheduled to testify. You may do this by going to the House website at www.house.mn and clicking on "Town Meetings".
We would ask you to focus your comments on the impact of the Governor's budget including what is the harm to your area of government or program. Please be as precise as possible using facts such as number of lay offs, increases in property taxes, cuts in services, increases in tuition, elimination of programs. To be respectful of the time necessary to hear from a large number of constituents it would be advised to use no more than 3-5 minutes to convey your message. If you choose to provide handouts or printed materials, please plan to bring approximately 25 copies, enough for committee members and media.
Sincerely,
Representative Gene Pelowski
District 31A
The vast majority of the people who testified at these hearings were the DFL's special interest allies. Of those allies, most rely on the state government for funding. The DFL didn't bother questioning whether the programs were important. The DFL didn't bother questioning whether the services provided could be done at a cheaper price.
The DFL simply said yes to the requests.
That's why the DFL kept pushing their gigantic tax increases. Until the DFL starts saying no to their special interest allies more often, their only option is to attempt to raise taxes on millionaires and factory workers alike.
When the Cherrypicked Testimony Tour visited St. Cloud , a spokesperson for the Great River Regional Library system begged the legislators assembled to "have the courage to raise taxes" so that GRRL wouldn't have to cut back hours that they were open. This request for political 'courage' didn't happen because the GRRL had asked whether the various GRRL libraries needed to be open. Quite the opposite: it was done because this GRRL representative didn't think about cutting the libraries' hours.
It didn't dawn on her that people could've survived just fine even if the hours were trimmed.
Because the DFL refuses to say no to its special interest allies, it's impossible for the DFL to set intelligent priorities. At this point, the DFL has lost the ability to say no to anyone, which means that the DFL won't consider reforming existing programs. At this point, the DFL won't consider saying that some programs shouldn't be funded. At this point, the DFL won't consider a longterm reduction of some budgets.
Businesses want to know what types of things states are spending money on absent any fiscal restraint, they'll avoid doing business in Minnesota. Some existing Minnesota businesses will leave the state for Sioux Falls, SD. Others will simply keep plugging along without expanding.
It's reasonable to say that the DFL's priorities are preventing Minnesota from having a thriving economy that businesses can't wait to participate in. It's reasonable to say that the DFL's inability to set pro-proserity priorities are hurting Minnesotans on a daily basis.
Posted Tuesday, July 7, 2009 3:29 AM
Comment 1 by R-Five at 07-Jul-09 07:16 PM
Cut library hours? How about cutting library pay? When the bankrupt Minneapolis system was merged into the Hennepin County system, we learned that book sorters made $26 an hour in Minneapolis, $20 in Hennepin County. You can get all the sorters you want for $15 an hour.
Oh, but pay cuts? That's for the private sector, not government.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 07-Jul-09 08:16 PM
Exactly right R-Five. Sacrifices for thee but not for me is the DFL's doctrine. In fact, that sounds like a good title (& subject) for a post.
D'Andrea-Tyson Admits First Stimulus Bill Failed
While Laura D'Andrea-Tyson didn't admit it directly, she strongly suggested (wink, wink, nod, nod) that Obama's first stimulus bill failed . Here's how she conveyed those thoughts:
The United States should be planning for a possible second round of fiscal stimulus to further prop up the economy after the $787 billion rescue package launched in February, an adviser to President Barack Obama said.That last paragraph is as revealing as it is pure BS. The Democrats sold the stimulus as providing a sudden jolt to jumpstart the economy. The Right Blogosphere debunked that within hours of the first stimulus bill being published online. We noted multiple times how the bill was just a bunch of spending that didn't set intelligent priorities.
"We should be planning on a contingency basis for a second round of stimulus," Laura D'Andrea Tyson, a member of the panel advising President Barack Obama on tackling the economic crisis. said on Tuesday.
Addressing a seminar in Singapore, Tyson said she felt the first round of stimulus aimed to prop up the economy had been slightly smaller than she would have liked and that a possible second round should be directed at infrastructure investment.
"The stimulus is performing close to expectations but not in timing," Tyson said, referring to the slow pace at which the first round of stimulus had been spent on the economy.
I particularly questioned whether the stimulus that passed was important:
Hearing President Obama admit that this bill isn't perfect is barely worth noting. We KNOW that it isn't perfect. Passing this bill is a disaster. President Obama saying that we shouldn't make the essential the enemy of the good is irrelevant. This bill isn't essential. Most of its provisions are taxpayer-funded payoffs to the Democrats' political allies.Frankly, this administration's credibility is questionable and heading south. Ms. Tyson said something else that's laughable:
That's certainly not essential. Those provisions should be dropped immediately. One time 'tax cuts' should be dropped immediately, too. If the goal is creatng jobs, those gimmicks should be immediately replaced with permanent tax cuts for small businesses and blue collar workers.
Tyson dispelled concerns about the ballooning U.S. fiscal deficit that is estimated to hit nearly 10 percent of gross domestic product, and its possible inflationary consequences. "The Federal Reserve is not going to allow the U.S. to inflate away its debt," she said. Asked about the value of the dollar, Tyson said the market was wrong to be concerned about inflation in the U.S. economy, given the amount of slack in most industries.Right. The Democrats just spent tons of money on things that won't make American businesses productive or prosperous but we're asked to believe that that won't cause inflation? The Federal Reserve dumped $800,000,000,000 into the financial markets' system, money that isn't being used BTW, but that won't cause inflation either?
Inflation will happen. It's just a matter of how much tightening of the money supply the Fed does when inflation happens. It's either a matter of sending Obama's economy into a double-dip recession. At this point, I think that's a definite possibility.
The Obama administration's credibility on economic issues is sliding towards nonexistance. It's only a matter of time before people totally disregard their evaluations and opinions.
Posted Tuesday, July 7, 2009 10:41 AM
No comments.
Will Ohio Lead the GOP Comeback?
If I were a campaign strategist, I'd be asking whether President Obama's poor polling numbers , combined with Gov. Strickland's tanking poll numbers , signal a strong GOP comeback in Ohio. First, let's remember Gov. Strickland's tanking poll numbers:
Strickland's approval rating has plummeted by 11 points in the last two months and Ohioans now give him a thumbs down on the way he is performing his job, including that he has failed to keep his campaign promises, according to a poll released this morning by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.Next, let's look at President Obama's latest approval numbers in Ohio:
A new Quinnipiac poll shows President Obama's approval rating has dropped 13 points over the last two months in Ohio , a key battleground state with plenty of critical Congressional contests in 2010.I'd say that Gov. Strickland is the first governor to feel the effects of President Obama's flagging approval ratings. In fact, Strickland's ratings drop almost mirrors Obama's ratings drop.
Obama now only holds a 49 percent approval rating, with 44 percent of voters disapproving. It's his lowest approval rating in any Quinnipiac statewide poll taken since Obama's inauguration. In May, Obama held a 62 percent approval rating in the Buckeye state.
Meanwhile, a 48 percent plurality of Ohio voters disapprove of the way Obama is handling the economy, with 46 percent approving. Two-thirds of Ohio voters are dissatisfied with the way things are going in the state.
"The economy in Ohio is as bad as anywhere in America. These numbers indicate that for the first time voters have decided that President Barack Obama bears some responsibility for their problems," said Quinnipiac pollster Peter Brown.
I'm thinking that Ohio can lead a GOP revival for several reasons. Let's go through them one-by-one, starting with this:
1. John Kasich vs. Gov. Strickland at the top of the ticket favors Republicans. Rep. Kasich is a charismatic personality with a long record of reform, job creation and fiscal responsibility. Gov. Strickland is a cookie cutter politician who's defending himself during an economic downturn.
2. Rob Portman is the GOP candidate for U.S. Senate, where he'd replace George Voinovich. Portman is a proven fundraiser with a strong economic track record. He'll face either Lee Fisher or Jennifer Brunner in Novermber, 2010. Here's where the race sits right now:
Fisher leads Portman by four points, 37 to 33 percent. Brunner leads Portman by just one point, 35 to 34 percent. In May, Fisher held a double-digit lead over Portman, and Brunner led Portman by eight points .Yet again, the Democrats' leads have shrunk dramatically. That isn't a good trend, especially with the economy continuing to underperform expectations.
3. Mike DeWine is running for Attorney General. Former Sen. DeWine is a proven fundraiser with statewide name recognition.
In other words, the top of the GOP ticket in Ohio is extremely talented. Each candidate has statewide name recognition and is well-financed, too.
Finally, there's this to consider:
The changed environment in Ohio could have serious implications for Democratic members of Congress, many of whom benefited from Obama's coattails in 2008. Republican Steve Stivers announced today that he is running in a rematch against Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy (D-Ohio), and cited the improved national environment for the GOP as a reason for his decision. Former GOP congressman Steve Chabot, who lost to Rep. Steve Driehaus (D-Ohio) last year, is also making a comeback for hid old seat.The midterms will be won by the candidates who the voters judge as the most competent on the economy. If the election were held today, that'd give the GOP a distinct advantage.
Republicans are also actively looking to recruit strong candidates against Reps. John Boccieri and Zack Space, and have attacked them for their votes on the cap-and-trade energy legislation.
Something else that's aiding Republicans is the latest news that the Obama administration is admitting that their first stimulus bill failed and they might need another one to get the economy growing again. At some point, people will start questioning this administration's and this congress's credibility on diagnosing and fixing the economy. I don't think that time is far off. In fact, I think the tipping point has already been reached in Ohio.
Posted Tuesday, July 7, 2009 2:15 PM
Comment 1 by Anonymus at 08-Jul-09 10:58 AM
The AG's race is not a given.
First, Dewine has not even announced he is running for the AG's office.
Second, Dave Yost is already running for AG and he is finding that many Republicans across the state are very much anti-DeWine getting back into politics. If DeWine enters the race, look for it to be a dog fight.
