More Evidence of Democratic Surge in Ohio
The latest Rasmussen Reports survey in Ohio confirms the "mini-surge" for Democrats in the state suggested by a Quinnipiac poll earlier this week.

John Kasich ® leads Gov. Ted Strickland (D) by just one point, 46% to 45%. Early last month, Kasich led by 11 points.

Read more: http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/0...z0jtpV7Z7k

Democrats Gain in Ohio
A new Quinnipiac poll finds that Democrats are having a mini-surge in Ohio and now lead in both the U.S. Senate and Governor's races.

In the Senate race, Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher (D) leads Rob Portman (R) 41% to 37%, reversing a three point Portman lead in February. Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner (D) also edges Portman, 38% to 37%, reversing a five point Portman lead.

In the gubernatorial race, Gov. Ted Strickland (D) leading challenger John Kasich (R), 43% to 38%

Read more: http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/03/31/democrats_gain_in_ohio.html?ref=related-entry#ixzz0jtxo3Db1

gibby08 wrote: Strickland retakes lead

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/02/23/strickland_retakes_lead_in_ohio.html

Now leading by a margin of 44-39

Here is a link to the actual poll

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1284.xml?ReleaseID=1426&What=&strArea=;&strTime=0

That Quinn poll has been all but debunked. It's so skewed toward Democrats it's almost embarrassing.

Here's a breakdown of it (with commentary, admittedly biased toward Kasich) that shows how they skewed the numbers from previous polls. http://thirdbasepolitics.blogspot.com/2010/03/quinnipiac-gets-fishy.html

Then why would you post something debunking it from a right leaning sight and expect me to take you seriously?

As I mentioned before, the Rasmussen poll leans right too... they're all garbage.

gibby08 wrote: Then why would you post something debunking it from a right leaning sight and expect me to take you seriously?

Because inside the post is the actual skewed numbers PROVING it was changed to lean heavily in favor of Democrats.

Ignore the commentary all you want; the numbers don't lie. The demographics for this latest poll differs sharply from the numbers used in their last poll. There's no rhyme or reason except to improve Democrat numbers.

What you Republicans need to realize is that as more information about Kasich's time at Lehman Brothers and his plans to get rid of half of Ohio's school district comes out....the better that chances Teddy S has of being re-elected

The Lehman thing has already been debunked -- and Kasich will never use the force of the state to make schools consolidate. It's not in his makeup (he believes in local control). Suggesting it to save money is one thing; he's not a Democrat. He won't force it.

Then why does he keep bringing it up in campaign speeches??

What have we forced writer??

Healthcare? Voted on it

Stimulus?? Voted on it

Cap n' Trade??? Will vote on it

Try again

John Kasich got a bonus that tripled his Lehman salary while it was collapsing.

http://www.plunderbund.com/2010/04/02/kasich-tax-returns-shows-massive-lehman-bros-bonuses-a-year-before-collapse/

gibby08 wrote: What you Republicans need to realize is that as more information about Kasich's time at Lehman Brothers and his plans to get rid of half of Ohio's school district comes out....the better that chances Teddy S has of being re-elected

Why would consolidating school districts be a bad thing in the public's eyes? It would drastically reduce overhead costs.

LJ wrote:

gibby08 wrote: What you Republicans need to realize is that as more information about Kasich's time at Lehman Brothers and his plans to get rid of half of Ohio's school district comes out....the better that chances Teddy S has of being re-elected

Why would consolidating school districts be a bad thing in the public's eyes? It would drastically reduce overhead costs.

Agreed.

I'm not a Kasich guy, but it is something that needs to be done.

LJ wrote:

gibby08 wrote: What you Republicans need to realize is that as more information about Kasich's time at Lehman Brothers and his plans to get rid of half of Ohio's school district comes out....the better that chances Teddy S has of being re-elected

Why would consolidating school districts be a bad thing in the public's eyes? It would drastically reduce overhead costs.

Agreed. I argued this back in 2003 for my own county, Scioto. There are simply too many school districts out in the county.
Green
South Webster
Burg
East
Minford
New Boston
Northwest
West
Portsmouth

Half of them need consolidated. But, people are resistant to it.


As to the election, since I am not in the state anymore, I do not follow it that closely. But, from I've heard from talking to my parents and friends back home in Portsmouth, is Strickland isn't exactly too popular. He has managed to tick off some people with cuts and policies, specifically on education and SOCF.

I'm not sure if he will win reelection. I like him and he is a local guy, but I'm not sure if he wins.
I frankly do not know that much about John Kasich, so can't base a real opinion on him.

Too funny at calling the bonus he got "massive" in light of what big bonuses from Lehman Brothers were REALLY like.

It was a decent chunk of change by most standards but hardly massive and not even close to the "outrageous" bonuses many got.

It's only an issue if you are a typical liberal who likes to use class warfare and envy in your politics (oh wait, that's just about all of them. Silly me. )

My point about consolidation is simple: yes, there are too many smaller districts that should be consolidated BUT people in Ohio are very parochial and won't want THEIR districts messed with, and certainly not by the state.

The state could force the issue by law, but I don't see that happening with Kasich. He'll try and sell folks on the merits and let the chips fall where they may.

Strickland, on the other hand, has to run on his record -- which has been pathetic. Including pushing for a "high speed" rail system that is likely to be a huge boondoggle economically in a state that can ill afford such a thing.

LJ wrote:

gibby08 wrote: What you Republicans need to realize is that as more information about Kasich's time at Lehman Brothers and his plans to get rid of half of Ohio's school district comes out....the better that chances Teddy S has of being re-elected

Why would consolidating school districts be a bad thing in the public's eyes? It would drastically reduce overhead costs.

Oh I don't know....around 7,000 teachers would lose their jobs....I guess that doesn't matter much

gibby08 wrote:

LJ wrote:

gibby08 wrote: What you Republicans need to realize is that as more information about Kasich's time at Lehman Brothers and his plans to get rid of half of Ohio's school district comes out....the better that chances Teddy S has of being re-elected

Why would consolidating school districts be a bad thing in the public's eyes? It would drastically reduce overhead costs.

Oh I don't know....around 7,000 teachers would lose their jobs....I guess that doesn't matter much

How in the world would teachers lose jobs by combining administrative districts? You are only looking at the people at the top losing jobs.

People need to quit confusing combining DISTRICTS with combining SCHOOLS, which are 2 completely separate things.

Give Gibby a break. He hasn't been out of kindergarten that long.

Ouch writer.....

That one really hurt:rolleyes:

Back on topic....I see Strickland pulling out a squaker by 1 or 2 points