According to this map, Bush carried everything south of Cincinnati, with the exception of the 14th district. By the way, what does everyone think of Strickland's chances statewide?
Posted on 05/07/2005 5:41:22 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
As word of Strickland's decision spread through political circles, possible contenders for his spot in Congress began to emerge. Among them are State Reps. Chuck Blasdel, an East Liverpool Republican, and John Boccieri, a Mahoning County Democrat.
(Excerpt) Read more at cleveland.com ...
PING!!!
Sounds great. More food for Blackwell.
Can we take this guy's seat, or is it hopeless?
Man, maybe I should read all the headline first. Sorry
Quite all right. Republicans have a very real chance of winning this seat, though it'll be competitive.
What would you give our chances?
It's too soon to say. The district is a mixture of communities with various socio-economic and political leanings.
If the Mahoning Democrat gets the nomination, I would think that the GOP candidate would be favored. Most votes are further down the river.
An East Liverpool Republican legislator sounds like a perfect candidate. Getting elected in such a heavily Democrat are (East Liverpool is probably the most Democratic town in the county) probably means that he's popular with the blue-collar Democrat voters that a Republican needs to attract to win in that district.
50/50, with possibly the slightest of Republican leanings.
The map you provided, which comes from Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections, shows the 2004 electoral results by Ohio CD. Strickland's 6th CD looked a lot different back in the 1990s (it included the eastern end of the current 3rd CD and the SW tentacle of the current 18th, but only the SW part of the current 6th), and was a heck of a lot more Republican. In 2000, Bush got 56% within the then-current lines of the 6th CD, but only 49% under the 6th CD as redrawn. Bush got like 50% or 51% in the redrawn 6th in 2004.
I think Strickland would be a good statewide candidate for the Democrats, and if an anti-gun RINO gets the GOP nomination I think Strickland will carry many rural counties that normally vote Republican. However, I think that if the GOP nominates Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, who is from Cincinnati and remarkably popular among black voters, Strickland will not be able to get much more than 45%.
Well, I admit I was wrong about Kris Kobach winning, but I don't know how much was due to him being "too extreme" and how much was due to sour grapes from Kansas RINOs who would rather vote for a liberal Democrat like Dennis Moore than for the man who beat their pro-abortion darling in the GOP primary.
BTW, George W. Bush got over 55% and defeated John Kerry by close to 12% in the 3rd congressional district of Kansas, so I fail to see why it was necessary to nominate a pro-abortion Republican in order to win the House race. Kris Kobach was a heck of a lot closer to George W. Bush ideologically than Adam Taff, and if Bush could get 55% while Kobach was held to 43% means that 12% of the electorate had no problem voting for a pro-life, pro-traditional marriage Republican but childishly voted against Kobach so as not to prove the RINOs wrong.
Kobach was closer ideologically to Bush than Taff? Not even close!
Taff supported Bush's education plan, immigration plan, and medicare reform bill --- Kobach did not
Taff supported the FMA, but felt it was unnecessary. Taff - like Bush - felt states should be allowed to have civil unions if they want. Bush supports the same thing. Kobach did not!
Taff was pro choice, but supported lots of restrictions (PBA,Unborn Victims, Parental Consent). Bush is pro life with exceptions, but also doesn't think the country is ready for a ban on abortion AND doesn't have a litmus test for judges. On the other hand, Kobach was pro-life with no exceptions. Who is closer to who?
Beating Dennis Moore in the 3rd is much harder than beating John Kerry in the 3rd. Moore has been around for a long time over here. A more moderate candidate like Taff would have been better than Kris-lose by 12 points-Kobach.
Don't blame me I voted for Taff!
Saying that Taff was closer ideologically to President Bush doesn't make it so. And it is risible for you to say that someone like Taff who is in favor of murdering the unborn, yet supports parental notification of the pending murder and opposes a certain overly gruesome form of abortion, is "closer" to President Bush's opposition to abortion (with exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother) than is someone like Kris Kobach who opposes abortion (except to save the life of the mother).
I'm not surprised that you voted for the pro-abort Taff in the GOP primary. My question is, for whom did you vote in the general election?
I always vote straight Republican during General Elections. Do you? My guess is probably not. You are too hung up on one issue. If good Republicans like Rudy Guiliani or Kay Bailey Hutchinson run for office, you probably vote for the fringe third party candidate.
Bush is pro-life (so am I), but he also:
Does not apply a litmus test for his judges
His wife is pro-choice
Supports pro-choice candidates over pro-life ones (Specter over Toomey)
Does not want a constitutional amendment banning abortion during his term
Supports (in your words, not mine) murdering the unborn babies of rape and incest vicitms.
Abortion is not a big issue to President Bush. Keep drinking the kool-aid H20. Taff was the better chance for defeating Moore.
Republicans can take back District -06. No doubt. It will be one of the top tier races in the entire country. Repubs would kill to have the chance at a Dem. Open seat. Liverpool Republican gives a great opportunity. He's been on in the major media markets there for the last five years. We'll get this seat back.
Sorry I never got aroun dto answering this, although it seems petty on your part to call me a "coward" for not having replied.
I have never voted for a fringe third-party candidate, and have never supported a Democrat over a Republican. In 2000, I supported pro-abortion Republican Lincoln Chafee over pro-life Dem Bob Weygand because control of the Senate was on the line, and I acknowledged that in a Senate controlled by Daschle and the Democrats a bill that would limit abortion would never get to the floor, so Weygand would never get to cast a pro-life vote. However, had a pro-life Democrat such as Tim Holden run against Arlen Specter in PA in 2004, I would have supported Holden, since control of the Senate was not in doubt (as was clear several weeks before Election Day) and, in particular, because it would allow Senator Kyl to become Chairman of Judiciary while Holden would be one more pro-life, pro-gun vote on the floor.
As for your claim that Taff's pro-abortion position is closer to President Bush's position on abortion than is Kris Kobach's position, that is pretty silly. Adam Taff would allow 99.9% of abortions in the U.S. to take place, and would only prohibit partial-birth abortions. President Bush would *prohibit* 99% of abortions, and would only allow abortions in cases of rape, incest and to save the life of the mother. Kris Kobach would prohibit 99.9% of abortions, and would only allow them to save the life of the mother. So Bush and Kobach disagree on less than 1% of abortions, and Bush and Taff agree on only 1% of abortions.
As for Taff being a better candidate for defeating Moore than Kobach, that really cannot be determined, since "moderate" Republicans decided to punish Kobach at the polls and voted for the liberal Moore. In 2002, Taff lost to Moore in spite of the fact that probably no conservative voted for Moore, although obviously Taff wasn't able to generate a very high conservative turnout.I don't know if Taff would have beaten Moore in 2004, but I do know that 57% of GOP primary voters in KA-03 voted for one of the two pro-life candidates (Kobach and Lightner). Hindsight being 20/20, perhaps Lightner, a pro-life woman who was more moderate than Kobach on most issues, would have been a better general election candidate against Moore, and hopefully she'll be the nominee in 2006. But I should be able to support a conservative in a primary without being accused months later of treason to the conservative cause.
Knowing Kris Kobach personally, I would support him again in a New York minute; hopefully, his defeat in the polls won't make him quit his aspirations of public service and perhaps he will run statewide next time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.