Skip to main content

View Diary: Ohio Primary: Dems Take a Dive, and a Dive, and a Dive, and.... (164 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Coupla things (6+ / 0-)

    First of all, glad you are alive. We were worried. Second, the "contraband" story completely collapsed a long time ago. It was a setup, based on a tissue of lies. Stop spreading it. Third, I agree the turnout was slightly worrisome (especially with Portman getting almost as many votes as Brunner and Fisher COMBINED), but Kasich's campaign is going to g o down in flames, so get prepared for that.

    And no, your candidate was not "swiftboated." He stepped in doodoo.

    •  No you're not complicit (0+ / 0-)

      just clueless, as usual. Check back when you quit the hallucinogens. Things didn't exactly go as you said you were sure they would.

      "Politics: The conduct of public affairs for private advantage." -- Ambrose Bierce

      by Ohiobama on Wed May 05, 2010 at 05:59:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  meh (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SilentBrook

        Maybe if I had read the last 20 volleys, I would understand why you think this comment was appropriate. As it stands, it just strikes me as really tacky.

        •  It's not but it's just Ohiobama (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Ahianne

          When he has no real response, he just goes a little nutsy. And I forgive him because it must be hard for him that his candidate, David Krikorian, shot himself in the foot and lost as a result of it.

          •  after further review... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Ahianne

            I'm shocked, shocked that party regulars would have a little trouble with a candidate who ran as an independent (but endorsed by the Libertarians) as a "more sensible main stream conservative, a Reagan conservative." That's not even getting to what he did this year.

            I'm also amused by this:

            The [survey's] confidence level is 95% with a 4.9% margin of error.

            I think that might qualify as "not even wrong."

            •  Review some more (0+ / 0-)

              and you'll find that David was a life-long Democrat who donated and raised money for Wulsin, the Dem. nominee, in 2006. He worked for Howard Dean in 2004. He ran as an Indy in 2008 because Wulsin has been savaged in the primary and stood zero chance of winning.

              The poll cited was accurate because David went on to capture 18%, the highest tally of any independent in a federal election in 2008. He immediately returned to the Dem. party after the election.

              David had a totally self-supported campaign in 2008, with virtually no assistance. He's not a politician and he made many mistakes. I think he meant to use the label "Reagan Democrat" to position himself between Wulsin and Schmidt, and it came out as "Reagan conservative."  Without editing help, such things happen in threadbare campaigns.

              It's been clear that David is a solid Democrat -- he came out in support of the HCR bill when the neighboring incumbent Democratic congressman was opposing it as part of the Stupak group. Many lies have been told, such as that David is "pro-life" when he has always backed a pro-choice position.

              It's actually the "winner", Yalamanchili, who has never been a registered Democrat, never donated to a Democrat, never voted in a Democratic primary, and entered the 2010 race as an Independent, trashing the Democratic Party. Then the Party muckety-mucks recruited him just to stop Krikorian's insurgency, with no hope of Yalamanchili beating Schmidt.

              Be aware that OH-02 voted 59-40 for McCain.

              Many many lies have been told.

              "Politics: The conduct of public affairs for private advantage." -- Ambrose Bierce

              by Ohiobama on Wed May 05, 2010 at 12:15:56 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  that seems thin (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                DCCyclone, Ahianne

                I have no way of knowing what Krikorian did or didn't say to the veterans, or whatever. But if you tell me that he meant to call himself a "Reagan Democrat" but turned out as a "Reagan conservative" and "Independent main stream conservative" because someone on the campaign got a little confused, well, I'd almost rather vote for the actual Reagan conservative.

                •  Listen to the veterans (0+ / 0-)

                  Three of them at the meeting, which Schmidt did not attend, say no disparaging comment was made.  There is NO evidence of a disparaging comment. None whatsoever. It was a Schmidt invention.

                  It really doesn't matter what you think about labels used in 2008. The question is whether voters should get to choose a candidate based on their preferences, or have the party make up crap about a candidate because they don't trust him.

                  The latter is what happened. It was odious. It pushes the people here far to the right because it shows Democrats to be liars.

                  "Politics: The conduct of public affairs for private advantage." -- Ambrose Bierce

                  by Ohiobama on Wed May 05, 2010 at 01:46:19 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  umm... (0+ / 0-)

                    Burke and Lane said they had heard it from "several sources." So apparently you think they are lying. I have no way of knowing who is right and who is wrong, and as far as I can tell, you don't either.

                    It pushes the people here far to the right because it shows Democrats to be liars.

                    I don't even understand that. In your version, Jean Schmidt came up with these lies about Krikorian, the Democratic leaders climbed on board for their own purposes, and the effect is that people reject the lies, rage at the Democrats, and move toward Schmidt?!

                    •   Um no, yoiu have it wrong (0+ / 0-)

                      Burke and Lane FIRST said that they heard it from "other Democrats," when they told their story to the Cincinnati Enquirer, which printed the story unethically because real journalism requires contact with the actual source, not pure hearsay.

                      So then Burke and Lane were pressed on the matter, including by my diary pointing out the journalistic transgression.

                      At that point they CHANGED their story and said that the "other Democrats" were one other Democrat, namely Lane himself, who was allegedly "reminded" by the Schmidt letter of a private conversation he had with Krikorian more than two months earlier.  This invention was required because they could not produce any "other Democrat" who had heard the ridiculous allegation.

                      If the new version is true, which it ain't, why did Dave Lane take a reminder from Schmidt to convince him that Krikorian's earlier comments were racist?

                      This story was accepted superficially only by self-styled "progressives" far away, eager to believe that a south Ohio maverick would also be a racist.

                      But it was immediately recognized by voters here as a fabrication -- a. because we know Schmidt's and Lane's records of inventing facts, and b. because we've heard David Krikorian speak about the meaning of his grandparents' experience with genocide. The idea that Krikorian is "racist" is tenable only if you don't know Dave Krikorian.

                      And for those reasons, the mass of the electorate here -- including mainly Independents -- is now totally convinced that the ODP is a pack of lying scoundrels.

                      "Politics: The conduct of public affairs for private advantage." -- Ambrose Bierce

                      by Ohiobama on Wed May 05, 2010 at 03:22:53 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  you must be joking (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        DCCyclone

                        Look, I have no opinion about Burke and Lane. But what you're saying about voters' reaction makes very little sense, unless "voters" means something like "me and the folks at the diner."

                        I'm going to go out on a limb here and speculate that the vast majority of voters in the district don't know Dave Krikorian.

                        •  I think you've missed (0+ / 0-)

                          that Krikorian criss-crossed the district twice -- in 2008 and in 2010. He spent the intervening year preparing his 2010 run.

                          Schmidt filed charges against him based on his assertions about the Armenian Genocide, so those issues played out in all district newspapers over a long time period, with Schmidt basically smearing him for being Armenian, and other Democrats mocking his "funny name."

                          So yes, district voters did know that David Krikorian was the last person in the world to mock a candidate's name. It was just ludicrous.

                          And that is precisely why Burke and Lane only acted when they were given that fraudulent letter by Jean Schmidt.

                          It was a set-up. Classic and unbelievably scuzzy. Burke and Lane jumped in bed with Schmidt.

                          Only the smug "progressives" were fooled.

                          "Politics: The conduct of public affairs for private advantage." -- Ambrose Bierce

                          by Ohiobama on Wed May 05, 2010 at 04:25:15 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  problems with your account: (0+ / 0-)

                            (1) It doesn't explain why Krikorian lost.

                            (2) It doesn't explain why voters would hold Burke and Lane accountable, but not Schmidt.

                            (3) It doesn't explain why Burke and Lane, who presumably know a thing or two about politics in their counties, did something that apparently was not only "unbelievably scuzzy," but strikingly stupid and self-destructive.

                            The last one may not need explanation: people do strikingly stupid things fairly often. But, still.

                          •  Read the diary again (0+ / 0-)

                            Turnout was EXTREMELY light. Light turnout affects rural counties much more than urban -- just a rule.

                            In normal primaries, Hamilton County makes up between 25% and 40% of the Dem. vote. In this election it made up about 45%. That is why Krikorian lost. Less than 20,000 people voted for either Yalamanchili or Krikorian -- in a district that has a population of around 700,000.

                            The slander itself was ineffective. What made it effective was that the Cincinnati Enquirer carried it as front-page news. Unfortunately, many people, especially in Hamilton County, only paid enough attention to see that "lots of people" were making accusations against Krikorian. Typical story.

                            The charges were intentionally made only days before the primary. That was done to prevent an effective response, such as from the veterans present at the meeting. Getting the true facts out takes time.

                            OF COURSE people hold Schmidt responsible. We all know she's a pathological liar. But what's the choice now? Yalamanchili is the guy who sent out the slander in hit-mailers. The election choice is now between two co-conspirators. And that's why people will blame the Democratic Party for capitulating.  And by the way, while Krikorian spent his entire time attacking Schmidt, Yalamanchili spent the primary attacking Krikorian.

                            And the 59% who voted for John McCain certainly don't care that Jean Schmidt pulled off some successful sabotage of the Democrats.

                            As to (3): The thing about county Democratic committees under a corrupt regime as we have in Ohio is that they perpetually defend against insurgency as their principal mission. They purge and purge, even as they dwindle to insignificance.

                            You should realize that the Clermont County Democratic Party is miniscule. It's one of the most Republican counties in the state and was the county under most suspicion in the 2004 election-fraud fiasco.

                            "Politics: The conduct of public affairs for private advantage." -- Ambrose Bierce

                            by Ohiobama on Thu May 06, 2010 at 02:40:55 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  so "smug 'progressives'" morphed into (0+ / 0-)

                            the Hamilton Co. Democratic electorate?

                            I have few preconceptions about the right answers here. I just see your answers wobbling all over the place. Maybe we can revisit this subject when you've calmed down.

                          •  No wobble (0+ / 0-)

                            It's hard to convey the geography to someone who really doesn't know the lay of the land here, as you seem not to.

                            This district is extremely bipolar. The urban east end in Cincinnati is cosmopolitan, with small but typical mixes of ethnic groups, a gay community, etc.

                            The entire rest of the district, accounting for maybe 85%, is rural or suburban, conservative, evangelical -- including the Democrats.

                            In an extremely light election year, Yalamanchili won by turning out a sizable fraction of that small 15% in the urban east end, assisted by the lies of Tim Burke, the county chairman. He sent out repeated hit mailers against Krikorian, accusing Krikorian of being "pro-life" (false) and "anti-gay marriage" (true but so is every other Democrat east of Cincinnati, including the governor).

                            Okay, so Yalamanchili inflamed 10,000 progressives, most of them in Hamilton County.  Big deal. That's a microscopic speck when it comes to the general, and even many of those people, who are smug because they look down on Appalachians, will realize their error in the coming weeks, as the truth comes out.

                            The Democratic honchos who did this now have an openly pro-gay marriage, lying, "celebrity" rich-kid to sell to struggling evangelical Appalachians.

                            The party brand is destroyed here. It will be entertaining to watch. It will set back progressivism by decades in this district.

                            "Politics: The conduct of public affairs for private advantage." -- Ambrose Bierce

                            by Ohiobama on Thu May 06, 2010 at 05:59:26 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No wobble (0+ / 0-)

                            It's hard to convey the geography to someone who really doesn't know the lay of the land here, as you seem not to.

                            This district is extremely bipolar. The urban east end in Cincinnati is cosmopolitan, with small but typical mixes of ethnic groups, a gay community, etc.

                            The entire rest of the district, accounting for maybe 85%, is rural or suburban, conservative, evangelical -- including the Democrats.

                            In an extremely light election year, Yalamanchili won by turning out a sizable fraction of that small 15% in the urban east end, assisted by the lies of Tim Burke, the county chairman. He sent out repeated hit mailers against Krikorian, accusing Krikorian of being "pro-life" (false) and "anti-gay marriage" (true but so is every other Democrat east of Cincinnati, including the governor).

                            Okay, so Yalamanchili inflamed 10,000 progressives, most of them in Hamilton County.  Big deal. That's a microscopic speck when it comes to the general, and even many of those people, who are smug because they look down on Appalachians, will realize their error in the coming weeks, as the truth comes out.

                            The Democratic honchos who did this now have an openly pro-gay marriage, lying, "celebrity" rich-kid to sell to struggling evangelical Appalachians.

                            The party brand is destroyed here. It will be entertaining to watch. It will set back progressivism by decades in this district.

                            "Politics: The conduct of public affairs for private advantage." -- Ambrose Bierce

                            by Ohiobama on Thu May 06, 2010 at 06:00:53 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  As an example (0+ / 0-)

                            A very important constituency here is the veterans community. Krikorian had the only vets group endorsement, and he spoke at many vets events including the VFW, where the alleged "incident" occured.

                            Of course, there was no incident. Schmidt lied.

                            What do you think will happen when Yalamanchili approaches the veterans for their support, after having lied about an incident at a VFW meeting that never happened?

                            What do you think those veterans will say?

                            "Politics: The conduct of public affairs for private advantage." -- Ambrose Bierce

                            by Ohiobama on Thu May 06, 2010 at 06:16:53 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And another thing (0+ / 0-)

                            I don't think that Burke and Lane really thought they would beat Krikorian. The goal was to damage him, so that as the nominee, the party would not have to give him money, and he would not actually win in November. Yalamanchili was just a tool for that.

                            I think they are quite surprised by the election result. And the joke on them is that they now own the candidacy of a 28-year old race-baiting enfant terrible who came out supporting gay marriage -- in a district that has one of the highest percentages of evangelicals in the nation.

                            It's pretty funny.

                            "Politics: The conduct of public affairs for private advantage." -- Ambrose Bierce

                            by Ohiobama on Thu May 06, 2010 at 02:48:49 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

      •  How did I "say" things would go? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DCCyclone

        Pretty much every race went exactly as i expected. There were no surprises for me, except I hoped the Tea Party candidates might do a tad better.

    •  And you also said (0+ / 0-)

      there was "no corruption" in Cuyahoga County.

      Yeah yeah we know your line....there's no Democratic corruption in Ohio. Just keep saying it as you tap your ruby slippers together. Maybe you'll land back in Kansas.

      "Politics: The conduct of public affairs for private advantage." -- Ambrose Bierce

      by Ohiobama on Wed May 05, 2010 at 06:03:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I have never at any time (0+ / 0-)

        said there was 'no corruption" in Cuyahoga. Please provide a link or rescind – but we know you won't because you LOVE to lie about what people allegedly said or did.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site