Strickland's LT. Governor

fiddle · Post by **fiddle** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 12:19 am

If you really want to get to Strickland's view on guns.
Check out his LT Governor pick. This guy is anti guns period. This guy should be making all gun owners shiver.

Fiddle[/b]

Dr. Winston · Post by **Dr. Winston** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 10:22 am

Agreed! Most people listen to the TV adds and listen to one clip on their gun views and make their choice from there, WRONG!

Post by **SeanC** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 12:07 pm

How does the Lou's views on guns in any way reflect on Strickland? Generally, it's appropriate for candidates to select running mates whose views are opposites of their own, that way they have some appeal to both sides of several issues. Given the option between a lieutenant governor who is anti-guns and a governor who is anti-guns, I always prefer the lou.

In any event, nothing will be as bad as Blackwell taking over, and we'll all have to go to <hope for - OMT> windfalls in the budget.

DWCol · Post by **DWCol** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 12:11 pm

The big problem with Strickland's running mate is that he's the one we're left with if Ted goes off to run for national office with Hillary in 2008. That is not a risk I'm willing to take; Blackwell gets my vote.

LSC · Post by **LSC** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 12:13 pm

Everybody I know is griping about how *all* of the ads are stupid and can't believe anybody would actually be swayed. Actually, the one for Shamansky is funny. It shows him walking like he has something stuck up his *ahem*.

Post by **SeanC** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 12:16 pm

I seriously doubt Hillary will be running. I think it's a virtual impossibility that if Hillary runs she would take Strickland with her as a running mate. There are just so many more options (Obama, eg.).

Anyhow - I respect your opinion DW. I didn't mean to get fired up in my previous post . . . I'm just really anti-Blackwell; mostly because of his affiliation <some - OMT> groups. I consider myself a really conservative guy, but I just can't get behind the religious craze.

Dr. Winston · Post by **Dr. Winston** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 1:25 pm

If Hilliary doesn't run, the democrats will have no one who can possibly carry enough votes to win an election! She's already started raising funds, for 2008, where've you been?

"I shall not call out the rules and use the Notify feature ONLY to call attention to posts - OMT"

Post by **OldManTod** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 7:18 pm

Moving back to the forum after Moderator discussion - carry on (with edits).

- T

mauser · Post by **mauser** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:59 am

SeanC wrote:... Given the option between a lieutenant governor who is anti-guns and a governor who is anti-guns, I always prefer the lou.

The problem in this case is given a democratic victory in the White House in 2008, whoever it is, Ted is well thought of by dems enough to get a cabinet post or other appointment leaving Leon Trotsky as our govenor. I'm voting against Fisher more than voting for Blackwell though in this case it is fortunate that I do like Blackwell.

GWC · Post by **GWC** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:40 am

Lee Fisher is BY FAR the most dangerous anti-gun politition in the state of Ohio. He is (or was) on the board of HCI. In other words, he is Sarah Brady's left hand man.

His political career was over after his last defeat for statewide office, that is, until it was resurrected by Strickland's pick for Lt. Governor.

That alone is enough reason to vote against Strickland.

We are going to be stuck with Sherrod Brown for many years, probably multiple terms. Fisher will either run for Voinovich's Senate seat or inherit the Governor's office when Strickland moves on to bigger and better things.

Strickland has already been put on the short list for VP regardless the Democrat nominee for President, because he knows how to win in Ohio, long the bellweather in Presidential elections. He could run for the Senate or join a democratic cabinet. Each of these scenarios leave Fisher Governor of Ohio.

Anyone who thinks Hillary Clinton is not running for president in 2008 is just not paying attention. She has been raising multiple millions of dollars in a race with only token opposition. She has moderated her rhetoric to appeal to "centrist" voters. She has campaigned and fund raised millions for other Democrats to gain their support for her run. She frequently gives speeches in Iowa, New Hampshire and other states important to the nomination process. After her landslide re-election to the Senate she will be very well positioned to win the nomination.

These are not the actions of someone that is content to be the junior Senator from New York.

TBD · Post by **TBD** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:53 am

My only thought ( on this subject) is that you can generally tell alot about a person by their friends. Fisher is definately bad for gun rights, and why would Mr. Strickland pick him, knowing Fisher's views and past actions if he doesn't at least partially agree with them?

Brian D. · Post by **Brian D.** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:55 pm

The little I understand about politics and picking a running mate is that the party attempts to address geographic/ideological (and nowadays maybe ethnic/gender) balance with the Lt. Gov/Vice Prez, etc. Maybe that's old fashioned strategy in this era but it's still being done.

GWC · Post by **GWC** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:40 pm

Brian D. wrote:The little I understand about politics and picking a running mate is that the party attempts to address geographic/ideological (and nowadays maybe ethnic/gender) balance with the Lt. Gov/Vice Prez, etc. Maybe that's old fashioned strategy in this era but it's still being done.

There is some truth to this, but its mostly at the Presidential level these days and often not at all (Clinton /Gore, both from the south, both alleged "moderates"). Usually a the state level you look for someone with the same philosophy but from a different geographical area. Lee fisher is one of the farthest to the left of any Ohio Democrats. Strickland, except for his position on guns, is also far left of center. He is not a "centrist", whatever that is. If he went with a gun control position in his congressional district you never would have heard of him, because he could not get elected. I'm not saying he is not sincere on gun rights, he just may be. But on everything else he agrees with far left of his party.

deanimator · Post by **deanimator** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:48 pm

Let's suspend our disbelief and assume for a moment that Strickland is as pro-2nd as he claims to be.

If that's the case, then his running with Lee Fisher is the equivalent of an Ann Coulter - Cindy Sheehan ticket.

Something smells.

kcclark · Post by **kcclark** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:37 pm

One of the main stories on 610 WTVN news today was about Strickland being the VP on the Democrat ticket. Strickland's spokesman said Strickland was staying put but I wouldn't expect the spokesman to say anything else at this early juncture.

I believe Governor Fisher would be a total disaster for us. I can just see a flood of anti-gun executive orders coming out of his office.