By Sherri

November 12, 2008 2:51 PM | Link to this

No dirt to dig on Kasich.No connection to Taft. No connection to Bush. But certainly no outsider when it comes to balancing a budget! He was the “architect” in balancing the federal budget during the Clinton years. Ohio desperately needs this man of integrity and his leadership to, as Sammy Hagar put it,”turn this thing [Ohio] around right now!”

By Karl

November 11, 2008 4:56 PM | Link to this

Looks like John Kasich is winning this poll hands down…a great choice in my opinion for Ohio’s future.

By Karl

November 11, 2008 4:56 PM | Link to this

Looks like John Kasich is winning this poll hands down…a great choice in my opinion for Ohio’s future.

By Karl

November 11, 2008 4:55 PM | Link to this

Looks like John Kasich is winning this poll hands down…a great choice in my opinion for Ohio’s future.

By Philman

November 11, 2008 7:46 AM | Link to this

The DDN want’s to know who the GOP will pick to run for GOV. they want to have plenty of time to dig up and make dirt and have him weakend before the race, just look at all we know about Gov. Palin, but know very little about Obama. just watch how they will treat Palin the next 2-4 yrs.they are scared to death over her appeal to Americans.

By TRS

November 10, 2008 5:51 PM | Link to this

While it is true that Gov Palin appealed to evangelicals I would say that was only part of the deal. She brought with her some fiscal conservatism as well and some other credentials in her record. I am unaware of any particular speech she gave on social issues. Alaska is known to have some of the more lenient abortion laws in the nation yet she advanced no agenda to change them during her tenure in office so far. That being said, I agree that social issues are evolving; but, if the Democrats seek to pass something like the “Freedom of Choice” act which which removes all restrictions and limitations on abortion, ie partial birth, etc that have evolved. If the Dems put that on the agenda, the honeymoon will not last - hopefully they won’t. That being said, there is much on the plate. Both Clinton and Bush entered office at a time of limited issues, but with terrorism and the economy on the front burner there is enough to do without hitting on the controversial issues.

By mwm

November 10, 2008 5:39 AM | Link to this

During this past election cycle, Palin was chosen due to her belief and voice in the evagelical movement. It did not help the republicans at all. Yes, clearly some of the christian conservative base was on board with her. However, that group is somewhat divided between age groups. The younger evangelicals look towards the social justice issues while the older evangelicals cling to the anti-abortion/anti-gay stand. When I say “ditch the evangelicals” it means that there are many more voices to listen to in other sectors of the public. If the republicans want to attract voters, they cannot do it with moral issues as they did in the past. Especially with the immoral activity that occured within their ranks. Another problem with the republicans is that they are nothing like the republicans of old. Reagan, Goldwater, Ike and others stuck to their core beliefs. The current republicans are lost and have nothing in common with the past GOP. They don’t even have leadership skills anymore. The republican attitudes of “real america” or “our way or the highway” divides the country. Divisionary politics will not currently work. I realize that these characteristics may have worked in the past. But, the public has gotten wise to the evils of it. And, are angry about it. Don’t expect a quick change to republican ideology until the republicans change their views. And, learn that they work for us, we don’t work for them.

By Fargo44

November 9, 2008 9:43 PM | Link to this

If you want to help rebuilt the conservative movement go to: http://www(dot)rebuildtheparty(dot)com/

By TRS

November 9, 2008 8:23 PM | Link to this

If we are to ditch the evangelicals then we should then also ditch the liberal “social justice” Christians. We an even use the same reasoning “Their narrow minded focus is not going to help the Democrats at all. Perhaps the Democrats should consider helping our country instead of focuing on a narrow and partisan issue.” Why is the concern for saving innocent life is partisan? Are you saying you don’t care about innocent life? Is something wrong with advocating the traditional family unit? Studies show that the lack of such a unit is the main reason for poverty. You seem to have made a judgment that God only gives a rip about those things you care deeply about and if anyone has a concern about other cultural issues, they should just shut up. Dr Dobson is not a foreign policy expert, he is someone who is concerned about the culture and that is what he is addressing. Fargo44 is right - just four short years ago, we were saying the same thing about the Democrats. There is no queston governing is much more difficult. If Obama listens to the left as spoken by Krugman in the editorial page this AM, then the comeback will be sooner than later, providing the Republicans can articulate some of the good alternatives that are available, then with 24 hour news cycle, cable channels and a much wiser use of the internet, it could happen fast.

By mwm

November 9, 2008 2:36 PM | Link to this

As stated, the GOP should ditch the evangelicals. In this time of our economy being in the toilet, two wars; the one in Iraq being based upon lies, and no acceptable foreign policy, people like Dobson are more concerned about abortion and the gay issue. The narrow minded focus of the evangelicals are not going to help the republicans at all. Perhaps the republicans should consider helping our country instead of being focused on narrow and partisan issues. Bush is gone in 72 days. The neocon agenda will be history in 72 days.

By Fargo44

November 9, 2008 2:19 PM | Link to this

wmw: “Fargo, there are reasons to remember the past, so we don’t make the same mistake in the future.” I suspect — given the past two times the dems have taken over — that those are words you will want hang on to. Looking at polls it is clear that 50% of those who voted Obama were true believers — the other half those were swayed by the “image” helped by an embarassingly poor GOP campaign. When their eyes open it will be intersting to watch. And yes Bush’s second term gave ample ammunition to the democrats — that advantage is now gone — memories are short. Which brings the topic back to what the GOP should do now.

By mwm

November 9, 2008 12:08 PM | Link to this

Fargo, there are reasons to remember the past, so we don’t make the same mistake in the future. As far as “my kind”, goes, we won and you lost. Plain and simple. What the republicans need in the future has been stated.. Ditch the evangelicals, and work for the people. Don’t use lies to start a war. Don’t protect criminals within their inner circle. Quit being two issue idiots. Most Americans really don’t care about abortion or the gays when the economy is in the toilet.

By Fargo44

November 9, 2008 11:55 AM | Link to this

And, we look towards the future with leadership… Something Bush never gave us. More malarkey from mwm. Why should we “expect” leadship from Obama who has never lead anything? What a joke. Besides the topic in case you had not noticed (your kind rarely do) is what the GOP should do in the future not the past.

By mwm

November 9, 2008 9:58 AM | Link to this

As stated, nothing positive has come from the Bush years. A war, based upon lies, a failed economy and a failed foreign policy. The republicans and conservatives may try to embellish the past 8 years. But, facts are facts. Bush was a failure. And, we look towards the future with leadership… Something Bush never gave us.

By Fargo44

November 9, 2008 9:55 AM | Link to this

This is typical for the Ohio GOP — wondering about what candidate they can run and what they can tar Strickland with. Why not worry of something important? Let’s try these for size: How about wondering what happend to our traditional voting constituencies? Or what is wrong with our message? Or what does the GOP stand for these days (other than not being democrats)? Are we conservatives or is being democrat-light seem to be working out pretty well? Or where is our voter registration plan? Specifically has the GOP ever looked to see if we are getting all the votes we can from rural and small town Ohio? What is the status of voter registraion in those areas that generally support conservative ideas (when we have them that is)? Why doesn’t the Ohio GOP make effective use of the internet and email? What are we waiting for? (Or do we think that computers and the internet a “passing fancy”?) Where is our outreach program to the under-40 voters? Do we have a plan to investigate the obvious voter fraud the is going on today in the Sec. Brunner’s office? Do we have a plan to get a referrendum on the ballot to demand photo IDs for voters — 80% if Ohioans support that? Where are you Ohio GOP? The Ohio GOP is in pathetic dissarry and that is why the State is now controlled by democrats and we have a corrupt Sec of State. Before you can have an effective candidate you need a coherent message and a functional party.

By Fargo44

November 9, 2008 9:28 AM | Link to this

mwm: “Bush was never a good leader. And did our country an injustice. As stated, historians are already judging him as incompetent.” Here is democratic logic at its best. “Historians” write about history -mwm - is that term in your mental lexicon? At this point in time Bush IS the sitting president — any historian writing about the history of Bush is “cooking the books” — normal behavior for the mwm types in this world. What a joke.

By TRS

November 7, 2008 9:13 PM | Link to this

Mike - I’m not defending this but I believe the rationale is simple. At this point there is no Republican agenda because its up to Obama and the Dems to set it. Besides, who would listen anyway? The only thing they can do at this point is react. Its a page from the Democratic books from the early 2000’s when they had no power and probably goes back even further than that; thus, its played by both sides. Emanuel is bright and effective; but, Begala, a friend, called him a cross between a hemroid and a tooth ache and those who don’t like him so well said he is the Democratic version of Tom Delay. I would note that for the last eight years, the Democrats and their supporters have be the one’s complaining and carping against the Bush Administration. Once the honeymoon is over, its the Republican’s turn.

By TRS

November 7, 2008 8:36 PM | Link to this

Joanie - The final, official report from the Government Accounting Office was released on June 11, 2002. The 220 page document says there was damage, although not as much as some of the early reports had suggested. The GAO says the damage included 62 missing computer keyboards, 26 cell phones, two cameras, ten antique doorknobs and several presidential medallions and office signs. The damage estimate was about $20,000.

By Joanie

November 7, 2008 3:08 PM | Link to this

TRRS-Can you prove that?

By Mike

November 7, 2008 3:08 PM | Link to this

Well I am sure there are “some people” who are nervous. But, TRS, are you saying that the Ohio Republican Party is doing what Rob cited because they “just don’t know him so they are trying to read him through his appointments” and as a result they have be so reflexively partisan and attack with what amounts to simple political smears? I would find that quite implausible myself.

By TRS

November 7, 2008 2:20 PM | Link to this

Rob - don’t disagree with your concept but there are alot of folks real nervous about Obama because they just don’t know him so they are trying to read him through his appointments. Emanuel is a mixed bag, very partisan yet at the same time a somewhat middle of the road voting record.

By Rob

November 7, 2008 2:14 PM | Link to this

Here’s a prime example in my mind. Yesterday the Obama transition office released that Rahm Emanuel was named as White House Chief of Staff. I happened to be looking at the Ohio GOP website (actually trying to find contact detail for Kevin DeWine) like 15 minutes later, and there were pages filled with commentary blasting the selection of Rep. Emanuel and hyperlinks and urls to fifty different sites with fifty different miserable opinions about the guy. Now I don’t know, he may indeed be Satan reincarnate. But all I do know is that the guy had yet to schedule a single meeting, suggest the first legislative workout session, make a solitary appointment, or make a single comment to the press. But nobody at GOP HQ let this get in the way of a complete and total castigation. Look - the guy might earn it, he might wind up being the worst choice ever - but the GOP response is all wrong on lots of levels. First - guys, lets worry about our policy positions. For example, a good portion of the voting population based on exit polls are concerned about funding college educations for their children. Why shouldn’t ISSUES be front and center of the Ohio Republican website. If you want to find anything out about Republican positions on funding secondary education - you have to navigate the site to the .pdf of the party platform. Then you dig through to page 56 to find some particularly uninspiring language that doesn’t tell you what their position is. But boy howdy you can find out why they hate a guy. Second, how smart is this, really? You might hate the fact that this guy is Chief of Staff, but he is Chief of Staff. And you’re going to have to work with him. It’s already bad enough the Republican minority leader is on the public record as calling the President-elect “chicken s**t” and his Chief of Staff “the worst partisan EVER”. I don’t know about you, but with large employers in Rep. Boehners district announcing record losses and layoffs in the middle of a recession - I’d kind of think he’d be thinking about his ability to get a meeting with the Exeecutive branch. The Republicans, in short, need to start giving reasons to vote FOR them.

By TRS

November 7, 2008 2:12 PM | Link to this

Joannie - the Democrats themselves admitted to removing “W” keys from keyboards and leaving graffeti. Not exactly the actions of adults.

By Patty

November 7, 2008 1:40 PM | Link to this

David Letterman wrote this; it’s the David we don’t often see…. ‘As most of you know I am not a President Bush fan, nor have I ever been, but this is not about Bush, it is about us, as Americans, and it seems to hit the mark.’ ‘The other day I was reading Newsweek magazine and came across some Poll data I found rather hard to believe. It must be true given the source, right? The Newsweek poll alleges that 67 percent of Americans are unhappy with the direction the country is headed and 69 percent of the country is unhappy with the performance of the President.. In essence 2/3 of the citizenry just ain’t happy and want a change. So being the knuckle dragger I am, I started thinking, ‘What are we so unhappy about?’ A. Is it that we have electricity and running water 24 hours a day, 7 Days a week? B. Is our unhappiness the result of having air conditioning in the summer and heating in the winter? C. Could it be that 95.4 percent of these unhappy folks have a job? D. Maybe it is the ability to walk into a grocery store at any time and see more food in moments than Darfur has seen in the last year? E. Maybe it is the ability to drive our cars and trucks from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean without having to present identification papers as we move through each state. F. Or possibly the hundreds of clean and safe motels we would find along the way that can provide temporary shelter? G. I guess having thousands of restaurants with varying cuisine from around the world is just not good enough either. H. Or could it be that when we wreck our car, emergency workers show up and provide services to help all and even send a helicopter to take you to the hospital. I. Perhaps you are one of the 70 percent of Americans who own a home. J. You may be upset with knowing that in the unfortunate case of a fire, a group of trained firefighters will appear in moments and use top notch equipment to extinguish the flames thus saving you, your family, and your belongings. K. Or if, while at home watching one of your many flat screen TVs, a burglar or prowler intrudes, an officer equipped with a gun and a bullet-proof vest will come to defend you and your family against attack or loss. L. This all in the backdrop of a neighborhood free of bombs or militias raping and pillaging the residents. Neighborhoods where 90% of teenagers own cell phones and computers. M. How about the complete religious, social and political freedoms we enjoy that are the envy of everyone in the world? Maybe that is what has 67% of you folks unhappy. Fact is, we are the largest group of ungrateful, spoiled brats the world has ever seen. No wonder the world loves the U.S. , yet has a great disdain for its citizens. They see us for what we are. The most blessed people in the world who do nothing but complain about what we don’t have, and what we hate about the country instead of thanking the good Lord we live here. I know, I know. What about the president who took us into war and has no plan to get us out? The president who has a measly 31 percent approval rating? Is this the same president who guided the nation in the dark days after 9/11? The president that cut taxes to bring an economy out of recession? Could this be the same guy who has been called every name in the book for succeeding in keeping all the spoiled ungrateful brats safe from terrorist attacks? The commander in chief of an all-volunteer army that is out there defending you and me? Did you hear how bad the President is on the news or talk show? Did this news affect you so much, make you so unhappy you couldn’t take a look around for yourself and see all the good things and be glad? Think about it……are you upset at the President because he actually caused you personal pain OR is it because the ‘Media’ told you he was failing to kiss your sorry ungrateful behind every day. Make no mistake about it. The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have volunteered to serve, and in many cases may have died for your freedom. There is currently no draft in this country. They didn’t have to go. They are able to refuse to go and end up with either a ”general” discharge, an ‘other than honorable” discharge or, worst case scenario, a ”dishonorable’ discharge after a few days in the brig. So why then the flat-out discontentment in the minds of 69 percent of Americans? Say what you want, but I blame it on the media. If it bleeds it leads and they specialize in bad news. Everybody will watch a car crash with blood and guts. How many will watch kids selling lemonade at the corner? The media knows this and media outlets are for-profit corporations. They offer what sells, and when criticized, try to defend their actions by ‘justifying’ them in one way or another. Just ask why they tried to allow a murderer like O.J. Simpson to write a book about how he didn’t kill his wife, but if he did he would have done it this way……Insane! Turn off the TV, burn Newsweek, and use the New York Times for the bottom of your bird cage. Then start being grateful for all we have as a country. There is exponentially more good than bad. We are among the most blessed people on Earth and should thank God several times a day, or at least be thankful and appreciative.’ ‘With hurricanes, tornados, fires out of control, mud slides, flooding, severe thunderstorms tearing up the country from one end to another, and with the threat of bird flu and terrorist attacks, ‘Are we sure this is a good time to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance?’ -David Letterman

By Joanie

November 7, 2008 12:31 PM | Link to this

TRS-according to the General Services Administration, the Clintons and their staff did not trash the White House, did not destroy computers or steal furniture. This is a lie perpetuated by Faux. You need to find a resourse that actually reports news and facts.

By Mike

November 7, 2008 11:45 AM | Link to this

TRS, your points are well taken. And I agree, for the most part, with what you have laid out. Interestingly, there is an article in the Washington Post by John Boehner entitled “Republicans’ Road Back “. In it he talks about the core Republican principles of “freedom, opportunity, security and individual liberty,”. He rails against higher taxes, labor bosses, trial lawyers, and government run health care. But he has absolutely nothing to say about abortion, gays, guns, God, or immigration. Could this be an indication that the culture wars will no longer be one of the signature issues for Republicans going forward? Is this a sign that the leadership is considering a return to the Rockefeller Republican model? If so, I will be really curious how the evangelical wing of the party takes this radical change of course. I wonder if the party is truly on the cusp of change or if this is just a testing of the waters to see how party faithful would stomach a change of direction? It will be interesting to see.

By TRS

November 7, 2008 11:22 AM | Link to this

I agree with alot of what is said with alot of caveats. Much of the housing market mess dates back to the Clinton era. Thats not a parisan comment - if we are to know what went wrong, it must be seen honestly. Its been discussed on this blog before so no need to get into detail; but, the much of the subprime policy was developed then and became impossible to change because of the political component. It feed the fires of Wall Street and while I don’t defend their actions, things such as the derivitive swaps and such were proposed by Republicans and signed by Clinton in 2000 budget. Evangelicals will always see abortion as wrong; but, have redirected their efforts into convincing others of that fact. If we’re so wrong on gay marriage, why did the ban pass in California as well as many other places? It seems that some want Evangelicals to quietly sit there and allow government and the courts to find “neutral” positions. Well, there is no such thing. We all have world views and it is those world views that sets the tone of representative government both socially and fiscally. To regain power, the Dems have co-opted the faith issues and now have something like 100 “Blue Dogs” in their ranks. The social issues haven’t gone away. I believe Republicans agree with the “right size” issue and will also propose some real alternatives tax policy among other things that will be appealing, ie voluntary flat tax. There are alot of ideas out there but they got so busy trying to maintain power, they lost their way. While Obama’s ideas may be new to this generation, there is nothing new in them. If I am proven wrong -great because I want the country to succeed; but, the Democrats now face the same issues as Republicans. Moveon already posted saying we raised a chunk of change for Obama and now want their dues. Unions as well. What they advocate is not popular. If Obama cannot resist them and they overreach, then the Dems will suffer the same fate.

By Rob

November 7, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this

Mike - agree with a lot of your points. The basic problem the Republican party has is that it has used its power until 2008 to benefit the “have mores”. However, being as this demographic is only about 1% of the populus, they hitched another wagon to conservative social issues to garner enough votes to win popular elections. This social issues leverage has really turned out to be (pardon the expression) a dance with devil for Republicans. It took that camel about a decade to get in the tent and run everything else out. Unhitching the wagon from both of these constituencies will be difficult and painful. I would guess it is a complete rebuilding from the states up, subscribing to the Reagan political philosophy of “You win, then you see”.

By Rob

November 7, 2008 10:26 AM | Link to this

I think an equivalent challenge for Republican “re-invention” will be to resist the pull of artificial nostalgia and say “we ought to go back to the good ‘ole days”. Like sticking to “low taxes” as an issue. That works well in 1979, when the top marginal tax rate is 70%. We won’t see those rates again in our lifetime. A modern Republican party should acknowledge that there is an appropriate taxation scheme which supports fiscal responsibility. Republicans should be the first to acknowledge there is an appropriate size for federal governement. It might be too big, but in some respects it might be too small. The Republican party should champion right sizing of the government to make sure it responsive and effective. Just yelling cut taxes and shrink government can be just as irresponsible as going the other way.

By Mike

November 7, 2008 10:08 AM | Link to this

The big question right now for the Republican Party is deciding exactly what it wants to be and who they want to be the face of their party. On the national level they are poised for a nasty fight to the death between the traditional fiscal conservative, small government branch of the party, many of whom have openly disowned the party during this election cycle; and the evangelical base who were momentarily appeased by the Palin pick for VP. The battle for leadership within the party is going to be long and bloody. And this internal rancor is very likely to spill over into the state levels of GOP politics and this will greatly portend who might be chosen as the party’s standard-bearer in Ohio come 2010. It is not a coincidence that Kenneth Blackwell was the prominent GOP face here in Ohio when the evangelical base was at their peak within the Republican Party. He was closely tied to the evangelical leadership here in the state. And they were, in large part, driving the GOP bus in Ohio at that time. I don’t think it is really a fait accompli that the GOP will be able to successfully hammer the Dems in 2010, should the state of the economy continue its downward momentum, as most expect it will. If this election proved anything, it is that voters have finally come to terms that, in general, the current dire state of our country is the result of the implementation of Republican policies by a Republican administration. And there is just no running away from that for the GOP. And the fact has not been lost on people that it is going to take a long, long time and a lot of additional pain for everyone before this mess can be cleaned up. The Democrats will, in the end, have to sink or swim based on the results of the policies they choose to implement to address the crap sandwich the Republicans have left on their dinner plate. But for now, the Republicans are going to have to decide who they are as a party before anyone in Ohio will be able to step forward to pick up and carry the mantle against Strickland.

By Barney

November 7, 2008 7:49 AM | Link to this

I didn’t vote for Obama because he portrays Socialist views. Unfortunately, McCain wouldn’t have done much to help this country anymore than Bush did. But Obama’s in now & I’ll agree he’s gotta be given a chance. Hell, he may just surprise us. Just don’t be surprised if Pelosi, Reid, & the rest of those left wing clowns do the same thing to him as they did to Clinton.

By Barney

November 7, 2008 7:40 AM | Link to this

The 1st time I heard Bush speak when he ran for President the 1st time, I thought, “What a F**g buffoon!” I don’t believe that ever changed. MWM, you make many valid points. Yet, you can’t totally blame everything on him. When Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, et al, got their seats several years ago, they screwed him every way from Sunday. & as a reminder, the Dems did the same exact thing to Slick Willy. He wanted to govern toward the middle & his own friggin’ party slapped him down. So everyone keep in mind that the sitting President may either reap the rewards or feel the burn up the backside because of the previous President’s actions. Should the economy pick up in the next year or so, Obama’s gonna look like a genious & everyone in the liberal media’s gonna be singin’ his praises. It’s not gonna be all of his doin’.

By mwm

November 7, 2008 5:04 AM | Link to this

Until there is valid physical evidence of a component, assembly or, complete weapons system that existed in Iraq prior to the war, your theory about “bad intel” does not hold water. The reasons for this war were lies and propaganda perpetrated by the bush administration. nothing more. It is not being “bitter” it is stating facts. It is important to remember the past so we don’t repeat it. We finally have a new direction for our country and, Obama will be a great leader. He will provide true leadership and diplomacy. I have been looking towards the future since Obama announced his candidacy some 21 months ago. And, I knew back then he would be our next president. The republican party lost their way. Perhaps they were drunk with power, perhaps they lost sight of american values. In any regard, they alone are currently standing in the “wilderness”

By TRS

November 7, 2008 12:17 AM | Link to this

History cannot objectively be written until some years have past so what is said now has little accuracy or consequence. Truman was thought to have been a failure and was very unpopular which is why he didn’t seek reelection; yet, as years have passed, history has been much kinder to him. I don’t see G.W as being near the top of the list but he won’t come out as bad as some would have it. 1st, all of MWM’s “lies” theories which cannot be proven, will fall on the dung heap of partisan history. It was bad intel then, bad intel now and always will be bad intel. The historians will most likely see the war as unfortunate because of that, but at the end of the day our troops will havee succeeded in their mission. Bush came into office and was hit with the dot.com recession some to be followed by 9/11. I was reminded today at how childish the Dems were at the time. In the White House they destroyed computer equipment and even took some furniture. Because they were ticked about the ‘00 Election results, they did all they could to drag their feet in approving Administration appointments - in essence trying to it as difficult as they could. The Bush team is doing everything possible to make the transition for Obama as smooth as possible. Thats an example of “Country First”. Through all of that the economy managed to do pretty well until the recent events for which the blame is shared with the Dems, Greenspan and Wall Street. Under Bush, the investment in AIDS research dramatically increased and the Medicare drug plan passed. The Homeland Security Dept came into being and the beginning of breaking down all the artificial barriers between agencies began - the Gerelich wall was torn down. Perhaps the most important thing is that there have been no more attacks since 9/11 and a number of them twarted. Those are all things for history to judge. MWM - you can try to keep all your negative energy alive about the Republicans, but you’ll just sound like a bitter guy standing in the wilderness. Americans look forward - not backward.

By Jim

November 6, 2008 10:07 PM | Link to this

I actually like a lot of the conservative ideals that has helped shape the Republican party over the years. Smaller Government, less tax, strict interpretation of the constitution, less regulation, etc, are all good concepts. But this time around, Obama was clearly the guy who has the intellect to put things back together. IMO, the Republicans spend too much time and energy on social issues and religion that don’t really fly in mainstream America anymore. The face of the country has changed, but the GOP has reacted quickly enough to stay ahead of the curve. The selection of Palin is a good example of backward thinking.

By Jim

November 6, 2008 9:57 PM | Link to this

Rick, Bush was a disaster in many ways and I really don’t see a defense for the guy. Name one area where this guy did a great job: Health Care? Energy? Conservation? The war? The Economy? Education? Foreign Policy? They all come up zeros as far as I’m concerned. The big question is how did he get re-elected? I guess I shouldn’t be surprised when over 50 million voted for a ticket where the VP candidate thought Africa was a country and not a continent. The GOP has to throw Palin to the curb if they expect to be taken seriously.

By mwm

November 6, 2008 7:28 PM | Link to this

Anyway, getting back to the subject. When and if the republicans can reach out to the people and not consider themselves somehow above the common man, they may be able to run again. However, Bush did a great deal of damage to the reputation of republicans and, that will take a long time to forget. It is the republicans that have some soul searching to do. They failed us.

By mwm

November 6, 2008 7:23 PM | Link to this

And I call Bush a right wing fascist. He fits the definition. Also, a war based upon lies, a failed economy and a failed foreign policy are the signs of poor leadership.

By rick

November 6, 2008 7:19 PM | Link to this

Our country has had a outstanding leader for the past eight years. President George Bush. For the next four a leftist pinko Obama will be running things. The only time I will support him is when our enemies attack the U.S.A. again, and they will.

By mwm

November 6, 2008 6:59 PM | Link to this

Our country has not had “true leadership” for the last eight years. The comparisons between Nixon and today are not valid. Nixon was guilty of a crime and Ford pardoned him. Nixon was, for a time a good leader. Bush was never a good leader. And did our country an injustice. As stated, historians are already judging him as incompetent. The one thing you republicans in elected office have to learn is that you work for us, the american people. We do not work for you. We expect and demand a high level of performance. Bush and the neocons are a failure. And, McCain was a Bushy. So, don’t expect a quick return. Your legacy is a war based upon lies, a failed economy and a failed foreign policy. Add to it the hate that you republicans created against your own candidates. Blame yourselves and not the democrats.

By Ethel S.

November 6, 2008 6:48 PM | Link to this

I remember the last time the mood of the country was to throw the bums out, right after Watergate when President Ford pardoned Pres. Nixon. Then we got Jimmy Carter, Mr. Malaise himself. That Dem run lasted exactly four years. Dems should not be too cocky now. It could happen again and maybe sooner than you think. There is a lot of work to be done and that will require true leadership. Stay tuned!

By Jim

November 6, 2008 6:48 PM | Link to this

TRS, Good post. I think the the point you make that Americans have short memories, is a good one. I also agree that Strickland will probably be re-elected. What about DeWine? He’s been out of the loop for awhile and was pretty well liked.

By mwm

November 6, 2008 6:43 PM | Link to this

Oh, and by the way TRS, using lies to start a war did not set well with the american people. Some historians have already labeled Bush as being incompetent.

By mwm

November 6, 2008 5:38 PM | Link to this

Well, we will just have to continue reminders of the damage the republican party has caused. It has been known for a long time that we needed a new beginning. The torch has been passed. And, your losses were great. How does it feel to be humiliated? That happened tuesday night. And, it is your own fault, republican party.

By TRS

November 6, 2008 5:31 PM | Link to this

Won’t take as long as you think MWM. The electorite has proven itself to have a short memory. When the Clintons left, “Clinton fatigue” abounded and no one would have thought she could be a viable candidate in ‘08 - but she was. With total control comes total responsibility. Our problems are many and people will only look backward but a short time. A year from now, all will be a distant memory and the focus will be on the Dems. People will have patience, but expect results - not excuses such as blaming it on Bush. That reasoning will last only a short time. History tells us that with this election the Dems have gained about as much as they will gain. Mid terms historically reflect losses to the incumbent party and if the Dems overreach and the Republicans develop and can communicate a good alternative message, then the path back will begin. No telling how long it will take - that depends on how good the Republican message is and how the Dems are able to address the various issues out there. Frankly, if they raise taxes in the middle of a recession on anyone - including those nasty rich guys, the economy will get much worse before it gets better. All that being said, who should run for Govenor? Who cares!! Its hard enough to deal with a two year Presidential cycle - we certainly don’t want a state wide office to last that long! So far, Strickland has done a creditable job and unless he really screws up, history tells us he’ll be reelected.

By mwm

November 6, 2008 4:42 PM | Link to this

In washington state, the republican candidate for governor changed his party affiliation from “republican” to “GOP” party on the ballot. The reason was because the term republican is so toxic and evil sounding, he did not have a chance being listed as a republican. As it turns out, he lost by a large margin anyway. It will take years for a republican to have any respect after the damage they have done to our country. Probably the only thing Bush did right was to destroy confidence in the republican party.

By Rob

November 6, 2008 4:28 PM | Link to this

I think Joe the Plumber is available - if he’s done cutting his country record. Maybe they better check with his publicist.

By glus

November 6, 2008 4:17 PM | Link to this

I would vote for Jack Bauer

By Rich

November 6, 2008 4:09 PM | Link to this

I’d choose Ken Blackwell (again). He’d be the easiest person for Strickland to beat (again). So please, GOP, pick Ken (AGAIN!). Hey, that would make a great bumper sticker: KEN AGAIN!!!

By John F

November 6, 2008 3:52 PM | Link to this

Who cares? I will never vote for a republican ever again until they purge the jesus freaks from the party.

By Barney

November 6, 2008 3:41 PM | Link to this

Wow, DeWine’s throwing Bush under the bus for Ohio’s problems? It ain’t all Bush’s doing. Anyone remember the previous Governor, Bob Taft? That felon totally hosed this state & left it in a shambles. Many lost jobs come to mind. & now John Boner is whining about trying to get his GOP leader job back in the next Congress? That spineless crud spoke out loudly about how F-d up the mortgage bailout package was, too much pork in it, blah, blah, blah…. & then voted for it! If he was any kind of a leader, he & other congressional GOPs would’ve stuck by their guns & voted it down. There’s a laundry list of things the Ohio GOP has publically tripped over their wieners in the recent past. Got news for them….. all of you, along w/ other GOP members throughout the country, have made your own bed & are now lying it. Your constituents are PO’d & had enough of your acting like the Liberal party. Until you go back to the conservative ways that the party employed in the past, you’re going to continue to be voted out of office.

By Barry

November 6, 2008 3:41 PM | Link to this

Mike DeWine would be a good choice, I have supported him for 20+ years and he has always been a good guy even when I disagree with him on something. John Husted would be my number two pick. some of the others have a little to much “baggage” to be easily electable.