Well, I went for Schmidt (insert razzes here). The only serious contenders were Brinkman, DeSwine, Schmidt, and McEwen. Minameyer would have been preferable, but had to minimize the damages.... after all:
DeSwine - had an affair with a lobbyist, then left his wife and kids (no shame parading the kids around for the camera), and at the same time cast a deciding vote for the lobbyist. Family values? my a**.....
McEwen - even if he was cleared from criminal charges, bouncing 166+ checks isn't a good thing...
Brinkman - can't stand what the creep is trying to do to the schools. Enforcing fiscal discipline is one thing - trying to repeal all school tax levies back 10 years (or more) is too much. Especially when you're trying to acheive such results with outright lies... Cutting spending is good, and cutting taxes is good if you can afford to without deficit spending. But assaults on schools based on lies and distortions are highly unethical, IMO. If a district is wasting money, call them on it - but don't claim that they can afford to cut back to the same spending as in 1991 (unadjusted for inflation) on a steady number of students, without serious negative impacts on the children.
I reached the same conclusion, although I'm guessing the likely order of finish is McEwen, DeWine, Schmidt and Brinkman.
Assuming the Democrats actually manage to nominate Hackett, this could sadly become an interesting general election depending on who the Republican nominee turns out to be.