Ty Webb;713141 wrote:Considering I'm working two jobs and going to school I don't get to live on here like many of you

His approval rating is an average of 48 percent(according to RCP) which is much higher than any of you thought it would be at this point

I'm just sayin' you didn't seem all that busy a month ago when he was at 52...coincidence I'm sure.

Writerbuckeye;713192 wrote:All of this is total BS and people like Ty and Doggie know it.

Strickland was an ABJECT FAILURE as a leader. If he wasn't, he would have actually taken steps to address the pending $8 billion deficit, instead of using federal dollars that just creates a wider debt pool (Ohio and the US).

Kasich is doing the dirty work that Strickland was too scared to do (or inept, take your pick). And it's not popular work, so I would expect poll numbers to be down...for a while.

Let's give Kasich time to fix the budget hole and come up with proposals to help make the state better for business, and attractive to young people who are graduating from its colleges and universities, but going elsewhere to work -- before we start any serious judging.

Of course, these two don't want to wait that long...God forbid if Kasich actually has some success at fixing the problems Strickland ignored or made worse.

Then all their ranting will look ever more stupid than it already does (quite an achievement, I know).

Yes your so smart!!!! Answer this question then. How much does John Kasich’s State budget introduced today cut State general revenue spending from its current levels under Governor Strickland’s last budget?:

A) Around $8 billion.

B) Around $10 billion.

C) Around $2 billion.

D) It actually INCREASES State general revenue spending by 10%.

Answer coming after Writer and LJ continue to make fools of themselves.

Bigdogg;713322 wrote:
Answer coming after Writer and LJ continue to make fools of themselves.

Make a fool of myself? I am still waiting for you to explain how New Albany and Columbus both making bids for Bob Evans proves anything? I am wondering if you even can?

Bigdogg;713322 wrote:Yes your so smart!!!! Answer this question then. How much does John Kasich’s State budget introduced today cut State general revenue spending from its current levels under Governor Strickland’s last budget?:

A) Around $8 billion.

B) Around $10 billion.

C) Around $2 billion.

D) It actually INCREASES State general revenue spending by 10%.

Answer coming after Writer and LJ continue to make fools of themselves.

If you're going to plagiarize, at least link the nutblog, man.

Does Kasich's budget proposal balance the budget?

I believe the answer is yes.

Does it put back on local governments responsibility for figuring out which services they can REALLY afford, as opposed to having the state keep paying more? Yes. Could that mean LOCAL tax increases for services? Yes. But that's up to each community to figure out -- as it should be.

Looking over what he's proposed, it looked to me like he did a very good job of balancing moderate cuts to a lot of areas while shifting resources as needed.

I think we'll have a better idea of how this will all play out as more and more of the budget is dissected in the coming weeks -- and as legislation is introduced to privatize certain aspects of state government to provide revenues.

As for the increases in the overall budget: I'll weigh in on that when I see more information on exactly how the funding will be used, and what other functions of state government might end up being consolidated and privatized in the next two years.

Bigdogg;713322 wrote:Yes your so smart!!!! Answer this question then. How much does John Kasich’s State budget introduced today cut State general revenue spending from its current levels under Governor Strickland’s last budget?:

A) Around $8 billion.

B) Around $10 billion.

C) Around $2 billion.

D) It actually INCREASES State general revenue spending by 10%.

Answer coming after Writer and LJ continue to make fools of themselves.

A little history.

Strickland's first budget passed almost unanimously for the first time in the history in Ohio. Strickland cut $2 billion in the State’s General Revenue Fund spending in the last budget. Ohio, as the was the case with every other state, used stimulus funds from the federal government to balance the budget during the worst economic conditions since the Great Depression.

During the campaign, Kasich mocked Strickland for promoting his fiscally conservative budget and suggest that a $2 billion cut in general revenue funds was inadequate. According to GONGWER, Kasich’s budget increases GRF spending by $5 billion, a 10% increase over Strickland. Ohio has never spent more GRF money than it will under Kasich’s budget!

So much for that fiscal conservative you thought you elected. Now he is selling off our assets, (using one time money that he campaigned against) and passing the buck to the cities, counties and schools. Get ready for more taxes, more inefficient local government and worse services. By the way, what did he and his corporation backed buddies sacrifice?

And yes the answer is D

LJ;713346 wrote:Make a fool of myself? I am still waiting for you to explain how New Albany and Columbus both making bids for Bob Evans proves anything? I am wondering if you even can?

Go talk with anybody on Albany's City Council. I have a friend there. I know you don't know what your talking about on this one.

Bigdogg;713992 wrote:Go talk with anybody on Albany's City Council. I have a friend there. I know you don't know what your talking about on this one.

Not sure I'd take anecdote as a trump card, but if you mean that there are facts, I'd be open to hearing them.

It wouldn't surprise me to find Kasich doing something shady, but I'm not going to call something a spade until I know it is one.

Bigdogg;713992 wrote:Go talk with anybody on Albany's City Council. I have a friend there. I know you don't know what your talking about on this one.

sure ya do

Writerbuckeye;713192 wrote:All of this is total BS and people like writer and quaker know it.

Bush was an ABJECT FAILURE as a leader. If he wasn't, he would have actually taken steps to address the pending $2.5 trillion8 deficit, instead of using federal dollars that just creates a wider debt pool (Ohio and the US).

BHO is doing the dirty work that BUSH was too scared to do (or inept, take your pick). And it's not popular work, so I would expect poll numbers to be down...for a while.

Let's give BHO time to fix the budget hole and come up with proposals to help make the country for business, and attractive to young people who are graduating from its colleges and universities, but going elsewhere to work -- before we start any serious judging.

Of course, YOU two don't want to wait that long...God forbid if Obama actually has some success at fixing the problems Bush ignored or made worse.

Then all their ranting will look ever more stupid than it already does (quite an achievement, I know).

Uncanny

Thread Bomber;714022 wrote:Uncanny

Best start studying the numbers a little more.

QuakerOats;714033 wrote:Best start studying the numbers a little more.

I think his point (and Bomber can correct me if I'm wrong) was that the argument itself is identical depending on the circumstances.

O-Trap;714038 wrote:I think his point (and Bomber can correct me if I'm wrong) was that the argument itself is identical depending on the circumstances.

Right ........ and wrong.

QuakerOats;714130 wrote:Right ........ and wrong.

The argument ... not the details or the circumstances ... the defense used in eah case has indeed born an uncanny resemblance.

O-Trap;714135 wrote:The argument ... not the details or the circumstances ... the defense used in eah case has indeed born an uncanny resemblance.

i agree w/o-trap on this one. and people were on this site after probably 60 days posting unemployment rates and other statistics after obama was elected and being very critical of him, just as some here are giving stats about things when kasich is just getting into office. the arguments are very similar and almost mimic the other conversation.

Gblock;714149 wrote:i agree w/o-trap on this one. and people were on this site after probably 60 days posting unemployment rates and other statistics after obama was elected and being very critical of him, just as some here are giving stats about things when kasich is just getting into office. the arguments are very similar and almost mimic the other conversation.

Is such a short time in office enough to judge the person in office?

R: "If it's Obama, yes. If it's Kasich, no."
D: "If it's Kasich, yes. If it's Obama, no."

Bi-partisan hypocrisy at its finest.

Again....... Uncanny :eek:

Thread Bomber;714179 wrote:Again....... Uncanny :eek:

Okay, I missed the reference that time.

O-Trap;714193 wrote:Okay, I missed the reference that time.

It was directed to you in an off hand way

I put up a perfect trollable quote, and you come in with the perfect tone of reasonableness, and stopped the onslaught of Obama haters from making fools of themselves.... Thanks, Thanks a fuckin lot!

Thread Bomber;714204 wrote:It was directed to you in an off hand way

I put up a perfect trollable quote, and you come in with the perfect tone of reasonableness, and stopped the onslaught of Obama haters from making fools of themselves.... Thanks, Thanks a fuckin lot!

Damn! Sorry. It's the diplomat in me.

Actually, I think people can criticize ANY politician, and it doesn't make them look like "fools".
Where people make themselves look like fools is when they can't even make their critiques make sense

Thread Bomber;714204 wrote:It was directed to you in an off hand way

I put up a perfect trollable quote, and you come in with the perfect tone of reasonableness, and stopped the onslaught of Obama haters from making fools of themselves.... Thanks, Thanks a fuckin lot!

TBQH, it wasn't that great of a trolling job. I doubt you would have done that well had Trap not stepped on it.

Bigdogg;713322 wrote:Yes your so smart!!!! Answer this question then. How much does John Kasich’s State budget introduced today cut State general revenue spending from its current levels under Governor Strickland’s last budget?:

A) Around $8 billion.

B) Around $10 billion.

C) Around $2 billion.

D) It actually INCREASES State general revenue spending by 10%.

Answer coming after Writer and LJ continue to make fools of themselves.

Too damn funny. Kasich managed the budget in a way that those most vulnerable (where most of the costs are now, and the costs are expected to keep increasing rapidly i.e. Medicaid) will not be as adversely affected as they probably should have been, given the deficit.

If Kasich had cut to the bone in other areas -- YOU AND YOUR ILK WOULD BE THE FIRST TO LAMBAST HIM FOR HURTING PEOPLE.

Don't deny it, because we'll all laugh at you.

I'd like to see state government shrink more, but I'm going to take some time and see what the final budget ends up being, and what Kasich's long-term plans are, before I get to invested in this.

I understand you have hate you need to vent -- so have at it. But I find it hilarious that you are criticizing a budget that was pretty even handed in distributing the pain of closing an $8 billion hole.

fish82;714353 wrote:TBQH, it wasn't that great of a trolling job. I doubt you would have done that well had Trap not stepped on it.

Ok... I will have to up my game

There has been reference made here of Kasich "privatizing" certain services of the state goverment. Can anyone please be specific on what programs or services he is thinking of?