Early and Absentee Voting Trends for Hamilton County Slightly Up on 2018 Rates, SO FAR...

Through Friday October 28, 2022 Hamilton County data, Early and Absentee Voting totals combined are up in comparison to 2018.  The increase, however, is small at .69% (less than 1%).  Early in person voting continues to be much higher 66.24% up, but mail in (drop off) absentee numbers are -11.8% down.

By political party all in person early voting rates are up, but surprisingly the rate increase for Republicans is by far the highest.  By Total number count, Republicans are still the lowest group of in person early voting.

With numbers fairly close to being flat to 2018, that is a concern for what total turnout will be in 2022.  The reason for that concern is that the portion of the early/absentee voters of ALL voters likely will NOT be the same to 2018.  After COVID the portion of people voting by mail increased.  That number is down.  In person early voting is way up.  That increase may be affected by COVID on a small level, but more likely the increase relates to the convenience factor or those who have a 2020 holdover fear of making sure their votes counts. I don't think the making sure you vote count factor is a big deal, by any stretch.  I don't think it ever was.  I believe the reason early in person voting is up is because those with cars find it easy to vote early.  Those without cars and who use the bus lines and are dedicated to voting can make it happen.  The question is are those voting early those who wouldn't have voted otherwise? 

The only hard data I have to answer that question is: 16.2% of the votes cast thus far are by people who didn't vote in 2018, at least not here.  Only 5.5% of votes cast thus far are from people who did not vote in 2020.  Can we draw any conclusions from that?  I think the main take away so far is that the new registrations and new voters have not yet turned out in comparable numbers to the regular and highly consistent voters. A second take away is that overall Democratic party turnout is up, Republican and Non-Party turnout is down on the Early/Abs voting overall.  There are two reasons I can see making this true: 1) More Republicans being against mail voting or 2) Are deaths of older people reduced demographically the number of Republican voters who voted in 2018 via absentee mail?

Today (Saturday 10/29/2022) is the first day of weekend in person voting and will be one of days that is key for early turnout.  The expectation is that the volume would greatly exceed both the average daily number of in person voters, 1,029 and the correspond 1,708 voters on the first day of early voting in 2018. I think for turnout to be higher this year, we need to see a big day of something approaching 3,000 in person early voters.  We would then need more next weekend, which has Saturday voting and Sunday Afternoon voting during the final weekend before the election.

HamCo Early and Absentee Vote Totals by Generation as of 10-21-2022

 Early and Absentee votes are starting to come in for the November Election.  Numbers are significantly up in comparison to the last MidTerm election in 2018, but those numbers are pre-COVID so making any predictions about turnout being up for 2022 is not something I believe the data supports.  A simple logical presumption is that since the 2020 election, Early and Absentee voting has become a more popular option for Democrats.  Looking at Party ID in the early numbers, there is an uptick for Democrats vs Republicans, so that could explain some or even most of the increase in voting.

That being said, one reasonable conclusion to make is that there is no evidence of a drop off of the Turnout level from 2018.  That year was a high MidTerm turnout, with Democrats generally exceeding Republicans that year.  In 2020 turnout of course shifted for the Presidential year, so what if any affects that election brings with it for turnout is unknown.

Generationally the votes so far seem typical. There have only been 8 days of early voting so far, so these are only preliminary numbers, but for all votes so far, here's how they break down:

The Silent Generation would be expected to be a large portion of the Absentee voters as the older voters rely on mail in voting much more regularly than younger voters.  The poor showing for Millennials and Zoomers (Gen-Z) is still very troubling. 

 For comparison, if we look at only in person early votes, the numbers look like this:

The in person early voting does show a tilt for the younger voters, but the Boomer voters still dominate.  The number of registered Millennials is the largest segment of all voters in the county, but they continue to not vote.  They should be numbers be much higher.  The generation covers everyone in their 30's right now and they registered to vote, but can't find a way to vote.  Look at the voter registration in HamCo for this election:

The single biggest voting block in the county without question and they can't muster up 150 votes per day of in person voting to exceed GenX early voting.  Is the Millennials so uninformed on the election process that they just don't get how to vote?  How and why did they even get registered to vote in the first place?  GenX's turnout sucks too.  I won't deny that, especially as a member of GenX, but the Silent Generation still edged out Millennials with in person voting.  That is embarrassing.  More people aged 77 to 93 were able to get to Norwood and vote during the first 8 days of early voting than those 26 to 41.  There is plenty of time to voting, but Millennials really need to get off their duffs and vote.

The Smitherman Gambit - Don't Bet on it Winning in November

Christopher Smitherman has a plan to win a seat on the Hamilton County Commission.   The former member of Cincinnati City Council has gambled that a perfect storm will occur that if he takes the right steps could lead him into a win. His wager is one that requires many moving parts to align perfectly. Call this the Smitherman Gambit, his path to "victory", at least if all of it happened, without a hitch.  Here's my interpretation of the list of steps needed for the Smitherman Gambit to work.

1. Obfuscate: Smitherman's first step is to pretend to be many things to many people. 
2. Subtlety and not so subtlety align with Conservatives and Republicans: This includes voting in the Republican Party Primary, gaining the support of right wing extremists like COAST and publicly supporting Republicans just short of Trump. This is easy for a Conservative like Smitherman to do and why he is a Republican in all but name only.
3. Attack the Democratic Party and anyone not directly aligned with John Canley: This was highlighted by Smitherman's participation the promotion of the text messaging scandal manufactured by Republican lawyers and the cooperation from a sympatric Republican judge.
4. Give up on being the Mayor of Cincinnati: This one hurt.  The ego of Smitherman so desired the title of Mayor. His overuse of the unearned title of "Vice Mayor" is case in point.
5. Rebuff invitations to declare himself a Republican: Being labeled a Republican will hurt his standing amongst a segment of African-American voters that don't know he's aligned with the extreme Conservative Republicans.
6. Bank on a Republican Wave Election in  2022: The politics 101 conventional wisdom states that the1st term midterm election will be a significant win for the party out of power.
7. Target a Democratic Woman Opponent: Stephanie Dumas fits a type the typical Conservative Republican campaign would target.  The logic presumes Republicans would pick a man over a woman 9/10 times. There is truth to that logic, as Republicans seek to have power over women’s bodies. What also would appeal to Smitherman is trying to gain the support of Conservative black male voters. He may gain that support, but Smitherman may have over estimated how many Conservative black men there are in Hamilton County.
8. Attempt to finesse the Hamilton County Republican Party into not fielding a candidate for County Commissioner: Smitherman needs to face any Democrat one on one.  This is a must have to ride any Republican wave.
9. Beg and plead for Republican Support: Even without a Republican running against him, Smitherman would run like a Republican and would depend on the campaign contributions from big GOP donors.

So, now that we are just about a month away from the election, how well are things going for the Smitherman Gambit? 

The clear answer is not so good.  

He has done pretty well on steps 1 through 5. Alas, those were the easy ones.  They didn't require him getting help from anyone else outside his own supporters.  

Steps 6 and 7 are not working out so well.  The Republican wave is not going to happen in Hamilton County.  The SCOTUS abortion decision has vastly reduced any GOP wave.  That wave would have needed to be strong in Hamilton County for Smitherman to do well in a one on one race against a Democratic candidate.  A black woman candidate is the type of candidate that many Republicans want to run against, but that pushes a niche tactic that just turns off voters from a campaign that even hints at pushing those buttons.

The pipe dream in the Smitherman Gambit was from the beginning focused on step 8.  He couldn't stop anyone from running in the Republican Primary.  That by itself is what makes his chance of winning VERY low.  He has to convince Republican voters to vote for him over a candidate with the word "Republican" next to his name. Matthew O'Neill is the Republican candidate and got a formal Hamilton County Republican Party endorsement.  If O'Neill get's 5% of the vote, that alone would likely be enough to doom Smitherman’s campaign.  Depending on how well Democratic turn out occurs, it may not even matter, as Dumas could win an full 50%+ 1 majority.  It is going to take a massive campaign to convince the average Republican voter to go against their party and for Smitherman.  I could imagine O'Neill getting 20% or more of the vote based on party ID alone, even without the Republican donor money Smitherman is getting.

Smitherman’s chance relied on the full support of the Republican Party and he would have to cross over and get some of the past voters going to the Dems. That along with a less than stellar Democratic turnout, where elements of the perfect storm that has failed to materialize for Smitherman. His miscalculation has been epic. The rest of his campaign will be one for him to demonstrate if he has any sense of grace or if he will go down in a fire pit of dirty politics, clawing at his opponents in vain. His reputation is not as a graceful person, so I fear the display of pettiness and animosity he and his campaign team displays towards the rest of the county will be grotesque. I hope I am wrong about that, but hope is wasted on Conservatives too scared to publicly declare they are a Republican.

Last Day to Register to Vote in Ohio is October 11th

On the outside chance someone reading this blog is actually not registered to vote for this year’s general election, the last day to do so is October 11, 2022. Go here for information on how to register.

There are Signs of Hamilton County Turnout Being Strong in 2022

There is no easy way to estimate voter turnout.  It varies by election and by location.  One factor that can be an indicator is voter registration.  I've done a simple analysis for Hamilton County of the voter registrations on the current listing and have compared the 2018 voter registrations to the 2022 voter registrations YTD though July.

This data has some limitations.  The first seven months of the year is not the height of registration, that happens in September and very early October. My reason for limiting the analysis to the first seven months of year is largely due to is where we are so far.  Additional problems come from the current registration listing.  This does not include those who are no longer listed as registered in Hamilton County.  It also does not include all of the rejected registrations as the time. Also, these registrations may not be new, they could be re-registrations. I chose 2018 to compare as it was the last Midterm election and as one that was very strong for Democrats. That time frame makes 2018 a skewed year as well, but the last Midterm election before that, 2014, was even more skewed as that year was nationally some of the lowest turnout ever, but locally it was influenced by a county wide ballot issue. With all of these flaws in mind, I still see two key inferences to make about this data.

First is the obvious: the registration totals are down in 2022 as compared to 2018.  This is important because 2018 was an increase turnout year for a Midterm and for Democrats.  A lower number of registrations would be a consideration of lower voter enthusiasm.  The part of the year is not the peak registration period, so the numbers could still raise, but the numbers were high in August through early October of 2018.  Registration increases is also a very limited indication of voter enthusiasm, especially since in 2020 voter registration was very high and those registrations are still valid.  More people have moved, so that also is a consideration on these numbers.  All in all, I would discount the comparison to 2018.  2018 brought in many new voters and there registration would have stay around, especially if they voted in 2020.  While there is no definitive data to support it, I would say the 2022 registrations only being down YTD by 6% and the surge in June and July are a good signs for higher turnout and voter enthusiasm.

The second issue requires more digging into the numbers.  Voter enthusiasm is often driven by issues and 2022 has Abortion as that issue.  The Dobbs Decision was announced on June 24, 2022. Additionally, a leak of that decision was widely reported in early May.  The registration numbers in 2022 started to spike in May and continued to be even higher higher in June and July than in 2018. That is a sign that the YTD differences in registrations may change and that 2022 will exceed or at least match 2018.  Add to that the fact that registration and turnout increased with the 2020 election, new voters are still increasing, pointing to 2022 having similarities with 2018 here in Hamilton County.

The next level of digging looks at the generational swing starting immediately after the June 24th announcement of the Dobbs decision.

There is a clear shift in the generational breakdown after the Dobbs discussion was announced. The increase in Millennials and Zoomers logically ties to polling on abortion rights, where younger aged people are even great supporters of reproductive rights than older generations. This is evidence that supports the reports of increases in women registering to vote in Ohio since Dobbs.  The data I have does not include sex, so I can't directly confirm this conclusion, but logically, the Dobbs motivation would be a key driver to both younger generations and women in general.

Taken together, these are signs that voter enthusiasm has increased and that should translate to stronger turnout.  This does not answer to what level or how consistent turnout will be in all demographic groups, but for anyone expecting low turnout, there are few signs of that in Hamilton County. If turnout in Hamilton County and especially in the City of Cincinnati reach the level of 2018, that would favor Democratic candidates in the County.  Additionally, it would give the Dems strong support in the 1st Congressional district.  That district includes only part of Hamilton County and but all of Warren County, which I have not analyzed.  This data supports Dems being confident in a district being reported as a toss up, but with a slight tilt of Biden support.  The campaign to get the vote out will be the factor in the 1st district above all else.

Still Doing This Blog and I Am Sure I Will Piss Someone Off

This is where you might expect me to insert a large microphone graphic and ask a trite question.  I'm not going to do that.  It has been months since I posted anything.  Well, there's not been much I've wanted to post about. I have been plenty angry about things going on in the world, in the United States, in Ohio and right here in Cincinnati.  I've used my Twitter account (@cincyblog) to vent most of my indignation.  Twitter is find for doing that, just posting angry rants is not what I ever wanted this blog to be about.

This blog is not one thing, but most importantly is for my views and the information that I believe is important.  I am not a professional journalist, just in case anyone was foolish enough ask, but I've been doing this for over 20 years.  Yeah, I let my 20th anniversary go unnoticed over the last few months.  That's not a big deal, even for me.  If it were a big deal, I'd have done something.  I would have remembered it, for one thing, so other than pointing that out, I am not dwelling on the past.

One of the reasons I started this blog was for me to express myself.  I've enjoyed having my own small soapbox.  I never did much to cultivate an audience. I am not going to change that much now. I honestly don't do this to get people to like me. You can't express vies that are critical of others and expect for them to like you. I do want to say thank you to those who do read it.  There are few of you still around and I thank you for reading.

What brings me to blogging again today is that I need a better means to express myself. My attempts on Twitter just don't cut it.  That site is good for somethings, but it is not good for expressing yourself.  A couple of sentences is just not how I write.  I have this blog as a platform and I need to use it.  I can ramble on for thousands of words with no realistic limit and be myself.  Twitter is limiting.  Don't get me wrong, I am still going to use Twitter (unless Musk mucks it up.)  It is still the only real-time social media tool that delivers news. It only works well, however, when it's used to deliver links from other sources with real content, like this blog.

With that in mind, I'm going to deliver from here more often.  I will try to link my blog posts out to my various social media accounts, but am not going to go overboard on that. I want to spend more time with ideas.  Those ideas may take this blog beyond Cincinnati more often than before.  It may also be the case were Cincinnati becomes the template for those ideas. I am going to explore a bit.  I will still have political coverage.  I will take out the knives on occasion, but won't make that my emphasis. 

I won't be holding my punches, but I will do my best to hit the ideas, not someone's nose.  I will, however not hold back on my critique of the actions and inactions of people who venture out into the public sphere. I've been attacked for daring to question the motives of people.  I am not going to stop questioning people's motives.  Feigning righteousness is not a defense and the ends do not justify the means. No-one's views are beyond reproach, but their right to exist is.

Time to have some fun.

The Best and Worst in Cincinnati Politics for 2021

It is time once again to look back over the past year and pick out the highs and lows of Cincinnati politics. 2021 gave a reason to directly deal with Cincinnati Politics that has been missing with the advent of 4 year council terms, something that has thankfully ended.

With that jolly thought in mind, I need to remind the few readers that this listing is a HIGHLY scientific process based on a combination of high level mathematics, caffeine, and the desire to illustrate the good, bleak, and pointlessness of the many varied political undertakings of the past year.

The Best

1. Democrats Elect Eight to City Council: A new beginning with a good team. 
2. Aftab Wins Mayor's Race by Large Margin: Positive leadership for the City and the region.
3. Smart Move: Democrats refusing to allow cross party endorsements of candidates. They were attacked for doing this, but it was a wise choice and most importantly, it worked.
4. Liz Keating Sneaking on Council: Her appointment to City Council in late 2020 was dubious at best, but her tenure on council was as a very moderate candidate, at least in appearances.  Getting the Charter endorsement was the kicker that got her enough votes to get the last spot on Council.
5. Defeating Both Issue 3 Ballot initiatives:
• In May during the Primary Election far left wing activists tried a massive power grab for a group of unelected social service leaders and their advocates.
• In November everyone saw through Tom Brinkman fronting for an ill conceived Republican Donor backed effort to cripple the city.

The Worst

1. The Republican Party: Anyone with any amount of experience following politics would be able to identify the set of positive circumstances for Republicans heading into the 2021 election: a) A corruption scandal, expanded by the GOP fishing expedition enabled by a Republican Judge, b) an increase in shootings (though not an overall increase in crime), and c) Three sitting Republicans on council as incumbents.  Throw in tons of suburban Republican money and they were poised to win some power on council. They still couldn't field enough candidates for a five person majority, let alone anything close to a full slate of candidates.  They ended up with one member elected in the last position.  That candidate ran publically as a very moderate candidate that likely connected well with moderate women..  The more conservative candidates lost far more significantly.  A complete failure.  Any other political party would fire people over this. 
2. Tom Brinkman: The guy is a right wing extremist who is against the the existence of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. He thought somehow he could find a way to waste a ton of money on a fruitless campaign. He didn't even bother creating a website for his council campaign.  He knew he was going to lose. He also essentially lost twice.  He got his ass kicked in the council race and his Ballot Issue lost big time as well.  He wasted a ton of Republican money and that would be a redeeming quality if he did it on purpose, which he did not. He may try to run for something county wide. He may find he won't fair much better, no matter how much GOP money the fat cats are willing to waste on him.
3. Issue 3 for a $50 Million power grab: This was a terrible ballot issue that appears to have been crafted to either intentionally fail or to force the City to gut the funding of the Police Department. I list those too extremes because it was a horribly written issue that put all of the big issues onto City Council to figure out and then clean up with no direction. I don't know how any honest group could put if forward as it did they thought it was good policy. It also gave unelected left wing activists power with no checks or balances or the ability of the public to have oversight certain portions of unelected board given this power. I person did not vote for anyone who publicly supported the Ballot Issue.  What is sad and likely shows the cynical intent of its originators is that a large group of people felt they had to support this because they support creating more affordable house.  This Ballot issue was a really bad way to do that.
4. Supporters of Issue 3: Beyond the badly written ballot issue, there were so many puritanical supporters of this issue who viewed getting it passed as a litmus test.  Those who did not have absolute support for the issue were vilified and often ostracized by its most vocal supporters.  Hell of a way to run a railroad or social movement....
5. Independent Progressives: Adding to the Issue 3 fiasco, they lost BIGTIME in the City Council Election.  If you are going to run against the Democratic Party, then you better learn to be a unified party with viable candidates that might build up a credible following.  Instead, they support 'Socialists' with no viable ways to govern a city. Leftist activists are not good political leaders, they are just attention seekers.  Organize a team with common viable goals, not a bunch of crackpots who have a bunch of bad political views that not only are bad policies, they are policies that can't win outside of leftist clubs on college campuses. 
6. Michelle Dillingham's Campaign: A simple rule to follow when you want the endorsement of a political party, don't work against and criticize that same political party. The Democratic Party in Cincinnati had a clear goal for its candidates, unity.  Dillingham did not want to be unified with anyone.  Her campaign was about being aggressive and working against certain groups. She did not demonstrate that she wanted to work with other who frankly are not far off on policies. Her crusade against SORTA and the bus service was incomprehensible. Sure, it riled up some parents that may have turned into voters, but attacking public transit is not a winning position for any left of center political candidate.
7. Brian Garry Campaign: From passing out intentionally misleading and dishonest campaign literature at the polls to alienating a campaign manager, Brian Garry demonstrated why he would not be a good member of council or any elected office.  I hope this is end of him running again.  He needs to move on from politics.
8. The Charter Committee: They had several solid candidates, but they did not have a wide reaching organization to get support. The de facto political party lacks the infrastructure of the two major parties and it shows.  They need to reassess what they are doing and how they approach Cincinnati Elections if they are going to ever have an impact, again.
9. Anyone Who Believed That City Council Poll: A political 'poll' made the rounds amongst political circles and many people believed it, especially the Enquirer's Jason Williams and perennial Republican candidate Charlie Winburn. I don't know who conducted or paid for the polls, but the one I saw only included four endorsed Democrats in the top nine. Williams looked like a fool when he had a column that included most of this poll's top nine as his prediction. He is not good political analyst and is a hack columnist.  The poll was at best a favorability or name recognition survey, not a true poll, something very difficult to do with an at-large nine-seat race. Here's hoping that people who follow politics take more time to understand the evolving electorate, instead of thinking the election of 15 or 20 years ago is the same as today.

Moving on from the Best/Worst, here are couple more tidbits that I either learned this year:

1. If you think Democrats are going to do this well in Council Elections every year, you are mistaken. They will have an advantage for the next couple elections, but the electorate will change again. I don't see it getting any more Republican, but moderate candidates have a very doable path to get on council next time around.
2. Price Hill and Westwood are no longer Republican Strongholds in City politics. There are a few pockets, but conservative white flight has continued.

That's all I got. Happy New Year!

Cincinnati Neighborhood Populations From the 2020 Census

 Understanding Cincinnati's neighborhoods is a complex undertaking.  Knowing the boundaries of each neighborhood is a contested concept before any other considerations are made.  The population of each neighborhood is therefore going to have criticism. I've taken a leap and come up with an updated population summary based on my determination, down to the block level. I used a 2010 set of maps from the City of Cincinnati's website with census data breakdowns that included Tract and BlockGroup details per neighborhood.  I compared that information and made adjustments based on changes to the 2020 census that included changes to the Tract, BlockGroup and Blocks designations.

That was annoying.  Why the United States Census Bureau would change tract numbers within an old city like Cincinnati is beyond my knowledge. I'd surmise it would beyond any reasonable logic available. If you know why, don't tell, but still let me know, my hairline could use an additional reduction.  Anyway, I made my determination.  Here's what I have in alphabetical order for the population of each Cincinnati neighborhood based on the 2020 Census:

 

So, there are some obvious notations to point out: 1) My chart only shows 51 of the 52 Neighborhoods.  That is what they City did after the 2010 census, so I followed that pattern.  The missing neighborhood is the Heights, which is basically the University of Cincinnati Campus, but what it includes beyond that is more debated.  It is included with CUF in the chart above. 2) The block level variation comes down from two sources within the census data, the voting precinct data provided and the municipalities that split some BlockGroups.

If anyone has a variation and would like to compare data, I would be more than happy to exchange information.  Leave a comment, email me, or reach out on Twitter. 

Bonus chart: Here is the same data set, sorted in descending order by Total Population.

Update: I found a few errors and have corrected them in both charts.  Additionally, here is a comparison to the 2010 data I have.  There still could be some additional changes caused by variation in the Tract and detailed groupings.

2021 Cincinnati City Election Generation Turnout

Democrats won a Mega Majority on City Council this year and nearly as many Boomer's voted than GenXers and Millennials combined.

I just don't know what to say about this. The classic notion is if you don't participate, then you have zero credibility if you complain. I will be sure to find a way to point that out to annoying young leftists on Twitter that bug me.

For comparison here is the turnout in 2020 for the same set of registered voters from 2021.

A comparison of the two looks like this:

The younger generations are refusing to participate in elections in remotely similar ratios to older generations.  This is not a new occurrence, but I would speculate the Millennials are staying uninvolved longer than prior generations. We in GenX are nothing to crow about either, just to be fair.

What truly I don't get: Why bother to registered to vote if you are not going to vote? There are Tens of Thousands of people who don't bother to vote, but for some reason felt the need to register to vote.

What was Turnout Like in the 2021 City of Cincinnati Elections?

The simple truth about the 2021 City of Cincinnati Election turnout is that it was historically low. There is no question that a large majority of registered voters did not want to vote in this election. Why it is low is not easy to answer with out more data.  People will make lots of claims about why, but they will be either anecdotal or speculation.  What I have below are some statistics based on turnout data from the BOE's live turnout tracker.  I have created these based on two data points that are derived on other data I have compiled.  

The first data point is on the race demographics of each precinct.  I used the 2020 census data that provided population by race within each precinct.  I made a determination of which race was a clear majority of each precinct.  Where there was not a clear majority or the numbers were close, I considered that precinct a mix.

The second data point is neighborhood.  I have assigned a single neighborhood identification to each precinct.  This assignment is very much an approximation.  Four neighborhoods are not represented as I determined they are a minority portion of another precinct.  This was done by reviewing varied maps provided by the City and by the County's CAGIS map software.  These assignments could certainly be debated and if someone sees an error, please let me know.

The first chart I have looks at turnout grouped by the majority race of each precinct for 2021 compared to the turnout of 2017.  Please note the numbers listed are NOT a total of people who are of a particular race. The numbers are the registered voters and those who voted in precincts that have a majority of a particular race. I am sure most people get this, but unfortunately some people don't like to read the details and will just point to parts of labels and extrapolate bad data.  I hope that does not happen.

The biggest take away I see here is that the reduction in turnout compared to 2017 was overall fairly equivalent through these segments.  There is a larger decrease in turnout in black majority precincts, than white majority precincts, but oddly enough the mixed precincts changed nearly the same as white majority precincts. There could have been an effect on the election if the turnout was more closely aligned, but at best that could have affected the ninth spot in the race. The lower turnout in black majority precincts is in line with the 2020 election where each of the segments had turnout of 56.35%, 57.64%, and 68.81% respectively, so there are no factors that would be variant with other recent elections.

The next chart dives into a comparison of the neighborhood and ward turnouts.  I included a comparison to 2017 turnout rates and a vote total retention number as well. As I stated before, these neighborhoods are approximate and they are broken out by ward, as several neighborhoods are split between more than one ward.  In this detail you can see many neighborhoods and wards did not drop in turnout, as compared to 2017, as much as others.  It's difficult to see big patterns, but you can see that certain neighborhoods had a bigger impact on the election.  Hyde Park is regularly an important neighborhood for elections and this year that continued.  I will be examining the success of each candidate in the neighborhoods as I compile more data from yesterday's election.

Where are the Election Night Parties?

 It have been four long years since a local election in Cincinnati and the best part of any election is celebrating with the winners and commiserating with the losers at election night parties.

Here is the list of announced parties I have found:

Aftab Pureval - Lucious Q in Pendleton
Jeff Cramerding - Taste of Belgium at the Banks
Charter Committee - Esoteric Brewing in Walnut Hills
Jackie Frondorf - West Side Brewing in Westwood

I'll add more as I they are made public.

Historical Data from Cincinnati Council Elections from 1991 through 2017

 Historical data from the Cincinnati Council Elections from 1991 through 2017.

The turnout has been at extremely low levels in 2013 and 2017.  The 2017 number is somewhat misleading with the increase in registered voters coming from the 2016 Presidential Election. We see a turnout in direct numbers increasing by 7.4% from 2013 to 2017.

Early reports from BOE indicates that turnout will be in the 30% to 35% range for the county.  That likely puts it on the lower end of that for the City, so it would be in line with recent elections.  One known point, the number of registered voters in 2021 is about 216,186, so less than 2017, but fairly comparable.

The most interesting facts:

1. The average number of votes cast per ballot have historically been relatively consistent around 6.
2. The top winning nine candidates have received at least 57% of all votes.

2021 Cincinnati City Council Election Non-Prediction Predictions

 I have no definitive knowledge of who will be the top nine vote getters on November 2nd.  I have no polling data.  I not aware of any polls having been conducted on the council race.  In conclusion, no one knows who is going to win and if you clicked on this article in the hopes of knowing that, well you are a fool. (Kidding, on the square)

That being said...I've done some analysis.  I compiled lots of data.  I've got the results of 2017 council and mayoral election.  I have the 2020 election results.  I have the 2020 census data compiled by voting precinct. I have a ton of information about the 35 candidates on the ballot.  I've reviewed all of that I have some thoughts on who likely will get elected to the Cincinnati City Council.

Before I get to that, I want to outline the core elements of the Cincinnati electorate, from perspective. I also will describe some of the key variables that will determine the winners and what are likely scenarios for who gets on council.

Cincinnati Voting Blocks
First off, what are the voting blocks in Cincinnati?  Oh, what do I mean by a voting block, you ask?  Well, I define a voting block as a group or classification of voters that have common characteristics that provide a referential means to identify political philosophy, Party, race, identity, or other views that would indicate how they would vote.  This is absolutely a generalization about people.  Without polling data that includes self assigned characteristics, there is no other way than to generalize.  I am trying to do that based on the data I have, the voting history of the City by precinct, and my experience in covering/observing Cincinnati elections. 

These groups are not monolithic. In a council race, some Republicans can and will vote for a Democrat and some Democrats will vote for a Republican.  For parties with more options, that is less common than parties with a short ticket. All in all this is kind of messy, but there is a means to judge who each group will support.

What that leaves are the following general voting blocks of voters. 

1. Black Democrats - They will support the Democratic ticket. Is there evidence they support black candidates more than white candidates? Yes, some. 
2. White Democrats - They will also support the Democratic ticket. Is there evidence they support white candidates more than black candidates? Yes, some.
3. Moderates - To poorly use a Ghostbusters reference: this group likes to cross the streams. They will support some Democrats, some in Charter, some Republicans, and even Independents. They tend to support those who are bit more supportive of business and the police, but don’t like the extremes.
4. Republicans - I've segmented out the Trumpists from this block as a significant number of Republicans in the City did not vote for Trump. The lines between some in this group and the Trumpists are blurry on most policy.
5. Trumpists - This is a new block that is not large, but I've made distinct from Republicans because of what I see a degree of a split in the Republican Party, but also because of their voting variation.  These are the hard right Republicans.
6. Black Conservatives - For much of the 21st Century I would call this the Winburn/Smitherman vote. They are going to support some Democrats and Charterites too.
7. Progressives - This group has two components: Those to the left in the Democratic Parry and Leftists outside the Democratic Party. This group will vote for some Democrats and progressive Independents.

I assign no totals to these blocks, but on some levels they can be derived.  There are way more Democrats in the City of Cincinnati than Republicans.  There are not as many Progressives than some Progressives think there are.  Most candidates need support in more than one of these blocks to break into the top nine.  Sometimes they need three blocks to win.  It all depends on who votes.

Variables
So many things can change an election.  There can be one thing and there can be many things.  They can be conflicting and cancel each other out.  Some of them can be appear to be insignificant, but can make or break a candidates.  Some of these variables happen on election day and some are part of the campaign. These are not all of the possible variables, but they are what I think we can observe and evaluate.

1. Overall Turnout - Candidates generally can't do much about this.  This relies on three things: 1) how easy it is to vote, 2) how well the Parties or other significant GOTV efforts worked, and 3) the weather.
2. Voting Block Turnout - This is something candidates can have an impact on.  Consider this getting our your base, but in this type of an at large election other attributes can help.  Issues and topics can drive out one block and keep another at home.  If there are blocks tied to certain neighborhoods or parts of the City, those groups could see a serge in turnout if something that year matters.  
3. Party Endorsement - This year may be a test for this idea, but getting a major party endorsement has nearly been a requirement to get elected to Cincinnati City Council  The value of the endorsement has structural advantages to the campaign in terms of resources, but this is as good as any signal for a majority of voters to understand a candidate's political views and their seriousness.
4. Name Recognition - Incumbency is one version, being a prior elected official is another. Being well known helps as well. Having a well known last name does not hurt either.
5. Fund Raising- Money matters. 
6. Campaign Communications - This has several parts, but the core types are mailers, TV/radio ads, web ads, phone banking, and personal canvassing.  These largely rely on fundraising, but the messages used are also very  important. Negative campaigning is not very effective for one candidate to attack another. This hasn’t been seen so far in the council race. Getting outside groups to do it, that is more common, but how effective it is not a proven concept.
7. Positions on policy or political philosophy - This can matter in some elections, but in reality, not as much as people think. Just because a candidate is for or against an policy is not enough, if that they can effectively communicate those ideas, they will get no where.

These variables at this point are mostly played out. You can get some turnout changes at this point, but most of the rest of these have occurred.

Turnout
The only measurement of Turnout we can see is with early and absentee voting.  As of the end of last week, turnout is up significantly in comparison to turnout in 2017 at the last City Election.  With COVID-19's impact on early/absentee voting, this increase may be far less of a indication of higher turnout and instead part of the shift of votes that would have been cast on Election Day in person.  In comparison to the terrible turnout in 2017, I would predict that 2021 will exceed the 29% by a few percentage points at least. Not all of the increase is COVID related.

Scenarios
Who is going to have power on council?  That is the question that really matters.  That is also a question that could change depending on who gets electected.  Party affiliation is not a guarantee of unity.  Here are the likely possible combinations of who gets power.

1. Democrats in Strong Control with 6 or 7 seats, 2-3 seats split between GOP/Charter - This would be considered a conventional wisdom outcome.  Many see this as the likely situation (some may call it inevitable.) A related version of this scenario would have 1 of GOP/Charter group go to an Independent Progressive Candidate. This is an example where the variable voting block turnout would come into play on the election.
2. Democrats in Control with 5 seats - here you could see Dems with control, but the other 4 seats in all sort of combinations.  Turnout would drive the power of the rest, a surge for the GOP/Charter or a mix in of Charter/Independents could fill in numbers.  Dems would control and on many issue would have as much power as a 6 or 7 seat majority since most of the Charter or Independent candidates are Democrats.
3. Charter/GOP in Control - This is the hope of the GOP.  They would need to get at least three to make this happen, and hope pro-business Charterites want to work together.
4. No Dominant Party in Control -  This split could be amongst the three parties.  This could also be a mix of non-party endorsed.  This is also not that likely, but many candidates and their follows love to dream about it.

Candidate Groupings
I don’t know who is going to win, but I believe I have grouped together all of the candidates into a group that represents my opinion on their chances to win the 2021 City Council Election. I don’t know vote counts, so I really can’t rank the order of finish. With the number of candidates and a lower than normal sense of incumbency, the spread of votes could be tighter, making the race closer to get into the top nine. 

Likely to Win-They should win.

Jan-Michele Lemon Kearney
Greg Landsman

Strong Chance - The other 7 slots should come from this group, but it is not guaranteed.

Jeff Cramerding
Kevin Flynn
Steve Goodin
Reggie Harris
Mark Jeffreys

Scotty Johnson
Liz Keating
Meeka Owens
Victoria Parks
Jim Tarbell

Possible - Depending turnout and the mood of the voter, someone in this group could win, but likely no more than one or two could slip into the top 9 and bump 1 or 2 of those with a strong chance out. Some of those in this group could also fall even lower.

Michelle Dillingham
Jackie Frondorf
Galen G. Gordon
Phillip O'Neal
Betsy Sundermann
John Williams
Tom Brinkman
Jamie Castle
Bill Frost
Brian Garry
Kurt Grossman
Evan C. Holt

Not Going to Win  - The hurdles are just too high to overcome the groups above.

Jalen Alford
LaKeisha Cook
Rob Harris
K. A. Heard
Nick Jabin
Andrew Kennedy
John Maher
Peterson W. Mingo
TeAirea R. Powell
Logan-Peter Simmering
Stacey Smith

I look forward to following turnout during the day on Election Day and will be on Twitter @cincyblog on election night.

Great Cincinnati City Council 2021 Candidates Guide From WVXU

If you are looking for a great guide on all of the candidates for Cincinnati City Council, then look no further than the guide from WVXU Cincinnati's local NPR radio station.

Will Cincinnati Republicans Endorse for Cincinnati Council?

 It is the end of June and local Republicans still appear to be living in a Trumpist haze.  The HamCoGOP Twitter account is a step away from spouting Qanon dogma or MyPillow religious proclamations.  Alex Triantafilou, Chairperson of the Hamilton County Republican Party, has long wanted to mount a take over of the City.  The rest of his party leadership prefers to take actions that hurt the City of Cincinnati and see its demise. None of them seem to be doing much to support enough candidates to actually to do much on council.

For the the last few years their efforts have, not surprisingly, been to undemocratically seize control of City Council through the courts. This effort to use the courts by Republican hack lawyers to sue their way back onto council came to halt recently when a commission appointed by the Ohio Supreme Court refused to Suspend Wendell Young. They were able to swing one additional council for a Republican, but couldn't get another one.

That failure appears to have taken the wind out of the sails of the Republicans. They were running a campaign against "corruption" which Republicans have done far more in the state than any Democrat could ever do (see Larry Householder.) None-the-less their presumptive candidates and allies have pushed charter amendments and are pushing more to tie the hands of any elected council member who is not rich or a practicing lawyer from being able to serve.  Call it yet another anti-democracy effort by Republicans to limit the rights of the masses and empower the Republicans.

All of this still leaves a Cincinnati City Council election ahead and time is running out.  At this point there are only three candidates the GOP likely will endorse, Sundermann, Keating, and Goodin.  None of them have been elected before, but are serving as council members.  That means they are vulnerable.  We've not had a city election since 2017 and Democrats elected six members to Council. The City has become more Democratic since then.  The manufactured scandals are the only thing working in the Republicans favor and unless they get more candidates, they are not going to have a governing majority to make it worth anything.

The Charter Committee stands to have more influence on City Council than the Republican Party after this election.  Two Charter endorsees, Goodin and Keating, are Republicans and presumed to get cross endorsements.  Their tenure so far has been very much as Charter Republicans, which would be considered a Moderate Republican.  Moderates in the GOP are an endangered species.  On the other hand, Sundermann has acted like a typical Conservative and even though she's not pushed the envelope of right wing nuttiness that has taken over her party.  She tows the GOP line, but has kept the Trump worship under wraps.

I would propose the best thing the Republicans could do for Goodin and Keating would be to refuse to endorse them for Council and only endorse Sundermann.  That would give them attention and make them independent from the GOP and allow them to be Charterites.  At the same time, both would have no problem getting the 4th Street business community to donate to them, which in the City is the ONLY reason a candidate would want the Republican endorsement.

There is still time for other candidates to get in the race and there are other candidates who have taken out petitions and declared themselves as candidates who are Republicans.  Those out there now, like Linda Matthews don't have much of a campaign going and at this point that means they are not raising any money to hire staff.  That means they are not viable and likely not going to get an endorsement, unless the GOP wants to try and save face.

There are a few names that could get in the race at this late point, but they are smart enough to know that the GOP brand in the City is about as damaged as it could be and this year it is not going to get any better. There is not much money up for grabs from the Suburbs to change the city.  The Hamilton County Suburbs are not as fertile ground as they were for the GOP.  The exurbs outside the County are where they have to go and the Exurban GOP donor appears to be stuck in Trumpism. A good Trumpist wants cities to be destroyed, so that leads them into a bit of conundrum.

I would expect something from Republicans in the form of an endorsement slate soon, so the candidates can get some fundraiser mailings out to GOP lists.  The GOP announcement then gives the Cincinnati FOP the ability to endorse, as they don't make endorsements without knowing who the GOP is pushing.  These groups work together on City Politics 98% of the time.  The rest of the GOP leaning groups will following along too, but there may be less this year, as they all are so far down the Trump rabbit hole that if you are not 100% loyal to Trump, you can't be a Republican.  I hope they keep this idea going.  Purity is the downfall of a political effort and the Republican Party needs to go the way of the Dodo.

June Cincinnati City Council Candidate Update

The Cincinnati City Council election race is starting to make noise. Some of that noise is a personification of the X-Brood (Cicadas.)  There are 90 people who on paper at least are still in the race, but just over half of those appear to be like an empty carcass.  By my count there are 43 campaigns still with an indication of life.

The Charter Committee and the Democratic Party have issued their endorsements.  The manufactured drama the process has spawned has been mostly a waste of time. Conservatives/Moderates baulked over the idea of the Dems determining they would not cross endorse candidates. The hot air created on that front would have been useful if a large balloon was available. The nerve of Democrats wanting to run an organized campaign that will try to win as many seats for their party. Who would want to do such a thing?

As for the so called 'Progressives' in(and circling outside) the Democratic Party, the angst was thick like a beef stew that none of them would eat. They publicly complained about the process, the first sign that they don't want the Democratic Party to win a majority of seats on council, instead they want their 'faction' to gain power in the local party.  It is almost like none of them pay attention to actual politics and instead just read columns from Huff Post, Nation, and the Intercept.  There are far too many so called 'Progressives' who seem to want to wage a war of purity instead of winning elections.  If you are not in 100% agreement with their policy issue of the day, they will seek to destroy you and run you out of town on a Twitter rail. Losing the Issue 3 election appears to have not provided them with a wake up call to reality.  We don't live in New York's 14th district.  Most of the world is not like the NY-14 and most certainly most of Cincinnati is not like it.  Those who didn't learn back in May will learn it in November.

As for the Republicans, they are/were either working on some big plan or their party is in far more internal turmoil locally than I thought. I guess when the national leader of your party orchestrates an Insurrection, you can't get yourself as motivated as your should. It is almost the end of June and they have not announced their endorsements yet. That is not a good sign.  I've listed people below with the Republican "R" after their name,  but that is the affiliation from their voter registration, nothing more.  I can only speculate that the Party's plan was to get Wendell Young suspended from council and have faithful Ted Winkler appoint another loyal Republican to council.  That effort appears to have fallen flat on its face. I guess that fizzled like attempted fascist coup on January 6th.

Other than the three Republicans currently serving on council there are not any candidates with a campaign in motion.  There are a few placeholders with Facebook pages, but for a Republican, they need to be credible and raising money.  Credibility for a Republican is not from an amature hour Facebook page with a link to a donation page.  The GOP can't field a true fire breather for office in the City.  Sundermann is as close as they can get, it would appear, and she is by far the most vulnerable sitting member of council.  There just may not be anyone else willing to run without the perception of incumbency. None of the three were elected to office, so calling them an incumbent requires a set of rosey glasses.  That leaves the Republicans in the same place they have been most of the City elections this Century, a minority party.  Hell, it is possible that they are the third party or not have anyone on council at all. Their last hurrah in the city could have been a feeble attempt to abuse power by appointing their way to a majority.  That fits the GOP motif.

For the Council Candidate Update, I should  have more groups listed with their endorsements.  I also plan to start arranging candidates into tiers.   Each tier would indicate my opinion on their chances.  There will be no polling data for me to use. I'll just be looking at various factors to judge their candidacy and campaign and viability.  This will lean towards art over science, but won't be void of history or logic. I am sure I'll piss off someone, but that is not new.

Incumbents
Greg Landsman * (D)
Jan-Michele Lemon Kearney * (D)
Betsy Sundermann * (R)

Temporary Replacements to Council
Steve Goodin (R,C)
Liz Keating (R,C)

Announced Candidates
Robert Adler (I)
Jalen Alford (D)
Key Beck (I)
Derrick Blassingame (R)
Jamie Castle (D)
LaKeisha Cook (I)
Jeff Cramerding (D)
Michelle Dillingham (D)
Kevin Flynn (I)
Jackie Frondorf (C)
Bill Frost (C)
Brian Garry (D)
Galen Gordon (C)
Terence Gragston (I)
Kurt Grossman (D)
Cam Hardy (C)
Reggie Harris (D)
Rob Harris (D)
K. Heard (G)
Chris Hikel (I)
Evan Holt (DSA)
Nick Jabin (I)
Mark Jeffreys (D)
Scotty Johnson (D)
Andrew Kennedy (I)
Rayshon Mack (R)
John Maher (I)
Linda Matthews (R)
Natasha Mitchell (R)
J. Nickels (I)
Phillip O'Neal (D)
Meeka Owens (D)
Victoria Parks (D)
Logan-Peter Simmering (G)
Stacey Smith (D)
James Tarbell (C)
Dadrien Washington (I)
John Williams (D)

Inactive Announced Candidates
Britton Carter (D)
Gary Favors (R)
Nora Hartsock (I)
Dale Mallory (D)
Nicole McWhorter (D)
Victor Phillips (I)
Gregory Schill (R)
McKinzie Wright (I)

Individuals Who Have Taken Out Petitions to Run, but Appear to Be Inactive
Bilal Ahmad (I)
William Andrews (I)
Aaryn Barnes (I)
David Booker (I)
Melinda Brown (I)
Darius Clay (I)
John Clifton (I)
Ali Coulibaly (I)
Zacheriah Davis (I)
Sean Fausto (R)
Robert Foster (I)
Randy Freking (I)
Martha Good (I)
Brent Gray (I)
Michael Haithcoat (R)
Bem Itiavkase (I)
Aprina Johnson (I)
Eric Knapp (I)
Joe McCloud (I)
Deborah Metz (I)
Robert Moore (I)
William Moore (I)
Jim Neil (I)
TeAirea Powell (I)
Thomas Price (R)
Stephan Pryor (I)
Isaiah Robinson (I)
Morleen Rouse (I)
Martin Rutland (I)
Antonio Sanders (I)
Larry Showes (I)
Demetrius Stanton (I)
Andrew Sweeny (R)
Edith Thrower (R)
David Walker (I)
Damon Watkins (I)
Laura Ann Weaver (D)
Brandie Woods (I)
Nathaniyah Yisrael (I)

Candidate Twitter List: I have created a list of candidates on Twitter. Here is the actual list Twitter handles for the candidates.

As always:  If anyone has any other names please send them my way (editor@cincyblog.com) or if anyone named above wants to confirm they are not running, I'll remove them future postings of this list. If there are other social media or full websites I don't list, send them along as well.

The party designations at this time are what I've seen reported or what I've determined based on my observations. These notations do not mean the candidate is endorsed by any political party or group. Once official endorsements are made, these references will be updated to reflect the endorsements. 

Key
* = Incumbent
‡ = On Ballot
D= Democratic Party
R= Republican Party
C= Charter Committee (aka Charter Party)
G= Green Party

DSA= Democratic Socialists of America
I= Independent
?= I am speculating based on my reading of the information and observations available to me or unsure.

Democrats Not Endorsing Michelle Dillingham Should Not Be a Shock to Anyone

The Cincinnati Democratic Committee has announced their preliminary slate of endorsements for Cincinnati City Council.  One name was "snubbed." This list is not final and could be changed by the committee as a whole, but they shouldn't do that and no one should be shocked. Dillingham has demonstrated she is not inclined to be a team player. Her political positions have become increasingly leftist, only appealing to a smaller and uncompromising group. She would be a risk to hurt the rest of team more than help them. The only upside is past performance.

The angst voiced by some leftist Cincinnati Twitter users is expected, but any objective observer could see this play coming.  There is some risk to it.  There could be a revolt, but pissing off a bunch of leftists who were not going to vote for the full Democratic slate of nine candidates is not going to affect their election chances.

Leftist activists have been mostly pushing either a short ticket voting strategy or just voting for a list of long shots and Dillingham.  What I think is driving the angst is that many thought she would win with an endorsement. She would be the leftist "voice" on council. I think with a Dem endorsement she would likely win.  Without the Dem endorsement, it will be much more difficult.  If she starts running against the Democratic Party or other candidates, she won't help her chances much. If she runs as the Leftist candidate, she won't help herself much, either.

If Leftists did not grasp how the Issue 3 vote went or how the 2020 election went for leftist views, then I don't see how they can be anything other than a loud fringe group, bent on destruction as much has their right wing opposites, willing to bring down everyone for a fantasy.

What is the State of the Cincinnati Mayoral Race?

May 4th is the date of the 2021 Mayoral Primary Election and we are less than one month away. I have no idea who is going to win or come in second, so don't expect any big predictions.  The top two vote getters make it to the General Election in November.  Six candidates are on the ballot for the primary and three of them are experienced elected officials.  The other three are not. That sums things up, pretty much.  This has been a damn quiet campaign thus far.  Still time for tricks, but with no Cranley in the race, I don't expect too much dirty campaigning.

This is the 20th anniversary, of sorts, of the first Mayoral Primary enacted after a City Charter Amendment re-establishing the direct election for the Mayor of Cincinnati. Back in 2001 the primary was held in September, unlike 2021.  The primary in 2001 was in fact held on 09/11/2001.  For some that date may ring a bell.  I lived in Mt. Washington at the time and my voting location was at the Mt. Washington United Methodist Church.  I left work early that day, around 4:45 or so.  I wasn't getting anything done, so I figured I would go vote.  I figure few others would do the same as many had other things on their mind. After driving from Downtown, I got there a little past 5 PM.  There was no line and the poll workers were quiet.  I asked how many had voted and they told me about 25 that day so far.  I nodded in appreciate for information, took my ballot and voted.  Not that many people voted that day, but I really don't blame anyone, it was 9/11.

Jump forward to May of 2017 and we are in the 4th year of John Cranley's terrible reign as Mayor, the man who has the vision of a suburbanite and vindictiveness of a spoiled brat whose parents didn't get him a purple pony.  The Mayoral Primary that year was in May, as another Charter Amendment moved it  to fit with the normal primary timing in Ohio.  May of 2017 was a normal day, nothing else to drive turnout way down or way up.  What we got was a smaller turnout than on 9/11. Our City's attention was clear to focus on the primary, but the turnout tanked.

A 4.25% LOWER turnout than on 9/11. Our City is that apathetic that we could not match 9/11.  Some I am sure will claim that patriotic fervor caught some, including myself, but no that's not valid.  Voting in the City has dropped massively over the last 20 years and even more so on these Mayoral Primary days.  We are choosing not to vote in massive numbers and it is a shame.  The numbers were better in the General Elections both years, but still not good.  Tens of thousands of Registered Voters who vote in Presidential Elections don't bother to vote in local elections, even in the local General Elections.  I know some apologists will point to voter suppression, but these are people who can and do vote, just not for local races.  They are choose not to vote.  This is not one party, this is a problem in every precinct. Calling this a primary may contribute to problem, as those who refuse to participate in the full on partisan primaries, but that is not much of an excuse.  People just feed on their ignorance.  They don't bother knowing details about national politics, but so many are even more foolish when they don't have a clue about local elections which they could have a much more direct impact on their lives.

People moan and complain about the voting system we have and think if we just had magic beans in the form of another voting system things would improve.  What those folks don't tell you is that their goals are more about getting other candidates or other political parties into office, not for getting higher turnout.  What we need now is for people to vote and for people to be less cynical and more pragmatic.  The problem is so many who voice opinions today do so in a method that is either at the extremes or one based on "Total Politics" a concept where purity is a requirement and any derivation from their dogma means you are the enemy and part of the problem. The ideas comes from "Total War" which was a concept used during WWII that had nations 100% at war with other nations, making anything and everything as part of the war effort and far game to the conflict and anything short of full destruction of the enemy is seen as failure.

I am not sure which, if any, of the candidates on the primary ballot think like that, even slightly.  I've not seen them do so yet.  I've seen some Council Candidates do that on Social Media in what seemed like a bad AOC or Bernie imitation/homage skip at the Cincy chapter DSA talent show. 

The Mayor's race has been very tame thus far.  The only item that has gotten notice is the very bad Issue 3 Charter Amendment on the ballot at the same time as the Primary.  That Issue may drive turnout.  Whether it drives it out significantly or just marginally is the question. Significant turnout has two directions that could affect things. If No voters come out, that could benefit some candidates, like David Mann, as Republicans would be considered more likely No on Issue 3 voters and would take Mann as the least worst candidate of those with a better than average change to get the top two positions.  Thomas and Pureval could get a boost from a No surge, as both are against the Issue.

The other possible turnout increase would be for Yes voters, which might help some of the other three candidates who have a mix of support and/or sympathy to the issue, which if high enough could put them in the number two spot.  While an increase for Yes voters could help the Issue pass, it would in my view need to be significant to help the three new candidates win.

Reports indicates that Aftab Pureval has the lead in the limited polling done so far.  It would be a big surprise not to see him in the top two.  The other spot is likely to be either David Mann or Cecil Thomas, but low turnout elections are wild cards. Getting your base to the polls is the key and that takes an organization.  I don't know who has that working on all cylinders right now and there is no time to start from scratch, so we'll who makes the cut.

For your review: The Candidates with links to their campaign websites:

Gavi Begtrup
David Mann
Herman J. Najoli
Raffel Prophett
Aftab Pureval
Cecil Thomas

20 Years Later, Peter Bronson is Still Terrible.

 It is 20 years after a Cincinnati police officer killed an unarmed man, Timothy Thomas. The Enquirer solicited a wide set of opinions from people who dealt with much of the events in the days, months and years after that tragic night. 

The choice was made by the Enquirer to include Peter Bronson, former Enquirer columnist and Editorial Page editor, in this project. On the surface, it makes sense. He was part of the newspaper’s coverage back then and it is logical to think he would have a perspective that would have insights that add context from a conservative point of view. For all of Bronson’s right wing drivel he out out during his career,  he had a one on reputation to be a reasonable person, especially compared to the Republican media of today. Plus he’s prose and one might think he has learned something in retirement.

Well, instead of insight or reflection or evolved wisdom we got a pissant FOXNews type column (not going to link to it) filled with cheap shots, mistruths, and wannabe Tucker Carlson blather that appears to have written for the Dusty Rhodes cabal of Old Cincinnati. 

That cabal  filled with the crusty old men, mostly men, who are now mostly near death or retired from public life, as the new phrase goes, and held Cincinnati back from being a growing vibrant city 30-40 years ago. These are men that pushed self righteous hate on everyone they could.

That type of old mindset kept our country from learning from our mistakes and just repeated them, often out of spite. That Old Cincinnati is done and needs to not be heard from again.

Peter Bronson should retire from public life. He is not a good person. A good person does not write that column. A good person can gain some perspective. Bronson, like Rhodes is a bitter old man who has no value to society. 

I think puzzles and shuffleboard are the most we can expect from Peter. I expect he cheats at both as he has demonstrated he has no class.

The Enquirer should never print another word from him ever.

January City Council Candidates Update

It is officially election year in Cincinnati, Ohio and partisan politics is ripe with the rank Republican spectacle that is Probate Judge Ralph Winkler. The suburbanite judge saw it as his duty to make a partisan pick of Republican Liz Keating to temporarily replace P.G. Sittenfeld who agreed to a suspension while he faces criminal charges. 

A Republican gives a rich kid a leg up in the council race.  Wannabe aristocratic families don't need help from the cheap seats, but if anyone is going to help them out, they can count on a Republican.

The next month or so will be taken up with the 3D chess match taking place with the laundry list of Mayoral Candidates.  This post will stay away from that log jam waiting to happen.

Instead this is the the time starting figuring out how many real candidates are running?  I say "real" with no trepidation.  There are too many candidates and we only need serious candidates who are willing to act like leaders who understand that role of Council members is to govern.  I fear we have an abundance of crackpots and flake candidates who are looking for attention.  I really hope they get out of the race quickly.  I don't have time to bother following those who are less than sane or just out to make a few pithy twitter posts.

The next half of a year is when serious candidates are raising contributions and building up a network of people that give them a conceivable chance of winning.  Going viral is not going to get you elected, so setting up a website that can take campaign contributions is the first sign that people are real candidates.  Just getting on the ballot does not make what I would call a real candidate.

Another rule for candidates: Don't make unforced errors. Council Member Betsy Sundermann had worst timing ever.  You are not going to get elected to Cincinnati Council by enabling Donald Trumps lies, ever with an abstention.

  
Incumbents
Greg Landsman (D)
Jan-Michele Lemon Kearney (D-Appointed)
Jeff Pastor (R Suspended from Office with criminal charges pending)
Betsy Sundermann (R-Appointed)

Temporary Replacement to Council
Steve Goodin (R) (for Pastor's Seat)

Liz Keating (R) (for Sittenfeld's Seat)

Announced Candidates
Jalen Alford (?)
Derek Bauman (D,C)
Key Beck (?)
Derrick Blassingame (R)
Michael Cappel (D)
Britton Carter (D)
Jeff Cramerding (D)
Michelle Dillingham (D)
Ryan DuPree (D)
Christine Fisher (D)
Manuel Foggie (D)
Kevin Flynn (I)
Bill Frost (C)
Brian Garry (D)
Cam Hardy (D,C)
Reggie Harris (D)
Evan Holt (I)
Dani Isaacsohn (D)
James Jenkins (I)
Scotty Johnson (D)
Rayshon Mack (R)
Dale Mallory (D)
Linda Matthews (R)
Meeka Owens (D)
Victoria Parks (D)
Stacey Smith (D)
Dadrien Washington (D)
McKinzie Wright (I)

Prior Candidates Who Might Run
Henry Frondorf (I?)
Kelli Prather (I)
Laure Quinlivan (D)

Rumored Or Speculated Candidates
Becky Finnigan (D)
Jim Neil (?)
Matt Woods (C)

Candidate Twitter List: I have created a list of candidates on Twitter. Here is the actual list Twitter handles for the candidates.

As always:  If anyone has any other names please send them my way (editor@cincyblog.com) or if anyone named above wants to confirm they are not running, I'll remove them future postings of this list. If there are other social media or full websites I don't list, send them along as well.

The party designations at this time are what I've seen reported or what I've determined based on my observations. These notations do not mean the candidate is endorsed by any political party or group. Once official endorsements are made, these references will be updated to reflect the endorsements. 

Key
* = Incumbent
‡ = On Ballot (signatures turned in)
D= Democratic Party
R= Republican Party
C= Charter Committee (aka Charter Party)
G= Green Party
I= Independent
?= I am speculating based on my reading of the information and observations available to me or unsure.