Thursday, May 26, 2011

Latest poll: Kasich would lose by 25 pts!

THE LATEST poll numbers indicate that buyer's remorse has locked on Gov. Kasich. The survey by national pollster PPP (Public Policy Polling) are so dismal for the governor that it would require a turnaround Federal bailout to rescue his effectiveness as the state's chief executive, bombastic sheriff and scowler. Life, I'm sure, was so much simpler for him in the shadows of his Wall Street days.

Now for the numbers: The pollster said that if Kasich were to run against former Gov. Ted Strickland, he would lose by 25 points - 59 pct. to 34 pct.. Of course, he won't be running against anybody but himself for another three and a half years so all of us will be forced to share the burden of having him around to witness his behavior. But Kasich's instant meltdown could have serious effects on other Republicans in the state who choose politics as a means to make a living.

Faced with a rising tide of dissent among Independents and Democrats (and even those disenchanted Republicans who are suffering in silence these days), Kasich is unlikely to change course and refine his blustery style. May I remind you that he's the guy who called a cop an idiot and threatened to run the bus over anybody who disagreed with him?

I will now await any charge from a Republican who believes that I've just wrongly thrown Kasich under the bus. C'mon, you helped put him in office. Shouldn't you now circle the wagons?


JLM said...

As pleasing as the poll numbers are, Mr. Peabody and his Wayback Machine was, alas, only a cartoon and we can't go back and undo what was done last November. We are stuck with this arrogant, destructive bastard. What frustrates the living hell out of me can be referenced with another old comic strip, Jimmy Hatlo's "They'll Do It Every Time!" Why do voters put the same party (the members of which MUST walk in lockstep with the party's current ideas or risk expulsion) that caused the problems in the first place back in office? Are voters memorys that short? In my youth I used to consider myself an independent. Over the years I simply watched what happened and as a result of what I saw am now pretty much a Yellow Dog Democrat.

On a different note,according to a Gallup Poll I saw today, Sarah Palin is running second to Mitt Romney as a presidential candidate in 2012.


In the words of Lil' Dubya.....

"Bring em' on."

PJJinOregon said...

With poll numbers like that, where's the recall petition? The world must have more than one Gray Davis.

JLM said...

Ohio constitution does not provide for recall.....


Mencken said...

Impulse buys usually result in buyer's remorse.

JLM said...

To rub salt in the wound, read the Plunderbund/Repository story of how Diebold weaseled it's way into the sweetheart deal that Wall Street Johnny handed them with a big smile and a sloppy kiss.

But those damn old fogeys in the nursing homes are taking advantage of the state's generosity.

PaulRyanFan84 said...

I voted for John Kasich and I think he is doing an outstanding job as governor. You have to remember that he inherited a projected $8 billion deficit. Unlike Ted Strickland, who papered over that deficit with one time federal stimulus funds, Kasich couldn't simply kick the can down the road. Instead, he acted like a leader and made the difficult but necessary decisions to balance the state's budget. No matter which way he did it (tax increases or spending cuts) a large segment of the population was going to end up unhappy. You don't close an $8 billion deficit without some pain.

PaulRyanFan84 said...


Would you have preferred that Kasich have taken the Ted Strickland route with Diebold: do nothing and watch as yet another Ohio business leaves the state for greener pastures? I guess Dayton didn't really need those 1,300 NCR jobs, huh?

You are a simpleton.

Mencken said...

Egregious would have you believe that on hand there's too much government intrusion on the free market, but at the same time, companies like Diebold and NCR can't survive unless they are subsidized and coddled by the state and local governments.

Egregious suggests that Strickland and the city of Dayton, facing their own budgets to balance, should have just showered NCR with taxpayer money to get them to stay in Ohio. NCR's move to Atlanta and New York was much more complicated than Egregious would have us believe. A little effort on anyone's part would reveal that NCR's CEO preferred living in the Hamptons to living in Dayton, hence the move of NCR's corporate HQ to NYC. NCR also felt moving to Atlanta would give them more cachet in the world market. So let's cut the bullshit narrative that Strickland could have just written NCR a corporate welfare check and everything would have just been hunky dory.

Who's the simpleton here?

JLM said...

Dear PaulRyanLover,
As I said, read the Repository story. Diebold wasn't going anywhere. Neither was Bob Evans.

I wouldn't be so quick to call someone a simpleton after making a statement like-

"I voted for John Kasich and think he is doing an outstanding job as governor."

PaulRyanFan84 said...


As usual, you are distorting what conservatives believe. No one is saying that companies like Diebold and NCR can't survive without tax breaks. What we do say is that businesses look to operate in the most favorable business climate available. Unfortunately, left wingers such as yourself have helped make Ohio an extremely inhospitable place for business. Not suprisingly, our state has been hemorrhaging jobs the past 40 years or so.

Also, the fact that you think NCR would base its decision on where to locate its operations on proximity to someone's vacation home or the abstract idea of cachet is mind numbingly inane. Did you just pull those claims out of your backside? We are talking about a global, billion dollar corporation for God's sake. Georgia simply offered a better financial package than Ohio was willing to provide.

Now you can say that the state of Ohio and city of Dayton couldn't afford to offer tax breaks because of a budget crunch. But what do you think the loss of a billion dollar company and 1,300 jobs did for state and local tax revenues? Do you not see why it is hard to take anything that you say seriously, Mencken????

Mencken said...

Egregious, let me put it terms you might understand.

I own a modest 90 year old 5,000 sq. ft. building that houses my business and two rental apartments. My tax bill for that property is over $4,000 a year. Down the road is a Home Depot that is approximately 130,000 sq.ft. Want to guess what their property tax bill is.... zero, as in no dollars. Why, because they're supposedly blessing my town with $9 an hour jobs and a bottomless bin of drywall screws.

Great, but the problem is, in order to make up for the HD revenue loss, the shortfall has to be made up on the backs of business owners like myself as well as the home owners who don't have lobbyists at their disposal. To use a popular phrase-Taxed Enough Already.

So I'm still not clear why guys like myself are making it difficult for the Home Depots of the world. After all, we're subsidizing their share of their tax bill. All we want is equal justice under the law.

You state that no one is saying that these companies can't survive without tax breaks. Not true. This is exactly what these companies say time and time again. What other justification could there be?

"A more favorable business climate" is a euphemism and the same exact excuse businesses use to move their companies to China and Mexico.

And finally back in the day when you were playing with your Power Rangers, A local Fortune 500 moved its corporate HQ due west. It was widely known that the CEO was having an affair with one of his staff members. Mama CEO told him to get his ass back home or she'd see him in divorce court.

More recently another local F500 CEO was caught doing basically the same thing. If you doubt me, all I can do is say I was in the lobby of the company right after his daughter found out and came to confront him. Ugly. It wasn't long before this company moved south. If you don't think these types of things help to shape history you're very naive. "A more favorable business climate" sometimes means not running into your ex at the country club's tennis courts.

Yes history is sometimes inane. Very inane. Even petty.