ohio 2008

[Padfoot]

Unfortunately Democrats never nominate someone generic.

Yeah, of course Mr. Generic Democrat hasn't been trashed by the media yet. When they're through trying to covince you that he said he invented the Internet, or lied about his Purple Hearts, you don't do as well. 

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here jfern.  Is it that Gore and Kerry are or aren't generic Dems?  I would have to argue that Kerry definitely wasn't.  Gore perhaps more so. 

[Mr.Phips]

it amazes me that bush carried oh-06 in both 2000 and 2004 (in 2000 part of the current 6th district was in the 18th, bush won it too).

ive been in that district.  lots o' poverty.

doesnt appear to be bush country.  maybe the poors were scared two gays might get married or something.

He only won it 51%-49% over Kerry.

yes, but kerry  had no business losing at all in that district.

Kerry should have won OH-18 as well.  Even Michael Dukakis won there.

[Adlai Stevenson]

it amazes me that bush carried oh-06 in both 2000 and 2004 (in 2000 part of the current 6th district was in the 18th, bush won it too).

ive been in that district.  lots o' poverty.

doesnt appear to be bush country.  maybe the poors were scared two gays might get married or something.

He only won it 51%-49% over Kerry.

yes, but kerry  had no business losing at all in that district.

Kerry should have won OH-18 as well.  Even Michael Dukakis won there.

Well it was redistricted by Republicans - the Bush 2000 percentage was raised from 51% to 55%.  Bush carried it 57%-43% in 2004, both Kerry and Gore lost OH-18 by 14% in its current form.  All this is somewhat irrelevant, however, as Zack Space won 62%-38% last year.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

it amazes me that bush carried oh-06 in both 2000 and 2004 (in 2000 part of the current 6th district was in the 18th, bush won it too).

ive been in that district.  lots o' poverty.

doesnt appear to be bush country.  maybe the poors were scared two gays might get married or something.

He only won it 51%-49% over Kerry.

yes, but he had no business losing at all in that district.

Have a read of this: http://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=247

good article.  i like that term 'blue plutocracy'  so true.

by the way al, perhaps you can answer why kerry lost oh-06.  how did he ever hope to win the state without winning that district?  not only are the people poor, but it appears they vote solidly democrat in all of the down-ballot races.  (just look at how well that kook sherrod brown did in hte district this past november)

Kerry lost OH-6 b/c he was only talking about Iraq and how he wasn't Bush.  He didn't have a well formed economic platform either as far as I can tell.  I'm fairly certain that support for the war would still have been positive in OH-6 at the time.  The reason Sherrod Brown did so well here is because he emphasized the economic issues above all else.  The other thing to consider is that Southeast Ohio really is the area that makes us a swing state.  The candidate that wins in the southeast always wins Ohio.  Several southeastern counties could be considered Ohio bellwethers.

Well that has changed.