Issue 1 Turnout and the Abortion Issue on the Ballot Will Impact the Cincinnati Council Elections, But How?

Issue 1 went down in flames, but that was not the only development in local Politics here in Cincinnati.  City Council Elections are coming up and turnout is going to drive who get's elected, partially. Turnout was higher than expected within Cincinnati for the single issue special August election. Traditionally, you can't get anyone to vote in August. The August 8th election instead had higher turnout than the last council election in 2021. City voters would now be expected to come out to vote in numbers as least as high in November and that will impact the race for City Council.

At this point, there are only 11 candidates currently set to make the ballot with the August 24th deadline FAST approaching. Nine endorsed Democrats, one presumedly endorsed Republican, and one Independent candidate. There is only one other name amongst those who have taken out petitions that could compete and her act blue fundraising website states it is inactive and not accepting contributions. I am counting her out.

That means unless there is some hidden candidates or one comes out at the last minute in the next two weeks, we can be sure that the Democratic Party will retain a supermajority on council by doing nothing but voting for themselves.

That does leave two seats in play, but with the abortion issue coming this fall, not to mention multiple other issues (Weed legalization, Sale of the Cincinnati Railroad, and an odd Issue that could raise the income tax later) it looks like Democrats could win all nine seats on council. You will have to go to way back to find that type of single party rule.  I honestly don't like the concept, but I see it as the most likely thing to happen.  The Abortion, Weed, and RailRoad sale issues will suck all of the air out of election season and that means the expected larger number of voters, more than the 32% turnout rate the City had for the August 8th Special Election, will push the nine Dems ahead.

It is possible that through strategic voting by Conservatives and Moderates along with Progressive/Leftists campaigning for a long shot leftist candidate playing spoiler couldget Republican Liz Keating elected.

Eastside Moderates vote and Eastside Moderates like Liz Keating.  An organized target voting campaign could make the difference.  Most people do not vote for nine candidates, but most vote for at least six. If moderates, who usually pick more than six, instead vote for one or two candidates, that MIGHT shake things up enough to make one of the two unelected candidates fall from get the nineth spot.

I am not advocating for a short ticket strategy. I believe in voting for best candidates, not just the one or two who might agree with me the most.  I voted for seven last time. I would say I may be a the same number this time.  Maybe eight or nine, it depends.

If the Democratic voters don't turn out in similar numbers not only will the Abortion rights issue faulter, Liz Keating will likely get on council.

By the end of the month we should be set on the ballot and know if anyone else will even get on the ballot.  If there are more than 15 I would be very surprised. I can only find ten candidates who are fundraising so far. If you don't have your own money, then you are just not going to get elected without some fundraising.

I will update the candidate listing late this month as soon as the deadline passes to submit petitions. This is going to be a big general election, but I think the 2023 City Council Election will be by far the most uneventful and predictable one of the 20+ years I have been blogging about them.

Ohio Issue 1 Goes Down in Flames

Ohio Democracy dodged another bullet. Republicans were humiliated less than a hour after the polls closed when every major election specialist called the race for the No on Issue 1 Campaign.

Urban Counties and Cites, Cincinnati being one, were the key effort in winning.  Here are Hamilton County's unofficial results:

Good, for the City, turnout along with an overwhelming No vote on Issue 1 that was repeated in the 3C cities, led the charge. The suburban vote held up the brace with the Cites and pushed back the fascist hoard. Yeah, that's a dramatic description, but honestly, it is true.  This was an effort to create a fascist Ohio. One gerrymandered minority party in party that can rule without any challenge. Ohio is a Republic, where power is derived from the people, not a ruling class of Republican theocratic fascists. We held them off, for now.  This effort needs to be doubled in November if women are to be considered full citizens in Ohio. The vote will be much closer, but the vote in Cites like Cincinnati is crucial if the basic bodily autonomy for women is to be established again in Ohio.

Ohio Issue 1 Predictions: A Mix of Numbers and Gut

 I don't know if Issue 1 will pass tomorrow or not. I have no statewide data or secret polling data. The election hinges on two things: 1) Convincing people on the merits and 2) Voter turnout.

These topics are not equal. Convincing people on the merit is far less impactful than what voters turn out. What I think might happen includes the following.

1. Issue 1 Fails 60+%: Democrats, Liberals, Progressives and even the Leftists come out in strong numbers and vote. This along with Moderates and some Conservatives (Libertarian leaning) and defeat Issue 1 with 60%+ of the vote.
2. Issue 1 Passes 50.1-53%: Republicans manage to exceed the so far strong turn out in Cites using fear and insane scare tactics and manage to eek out narrow win with no more than the low 50s portion of the vote.
3. Issue 1 Fails 51 to 55%: This could happen I think if election day voting under performs in comparison to the early vote, but the Republicans make up some ground due to the older voters still voting, but don't make up for ground.

Each of the three possibilities could easily vary on the numbers to a degree.  My only feel for actual numbers on this is with Hamilton County.  Early voting has been amazing for an August election and actually way better than an off-year local election. The City of Cincinnati has a 71% increase in early voting over 2021's City Election.  Turnout in the City should vastly exceed 2021's pitiful 24.93%.  It should be way over 30%.  The rest of Hamilton County I would expect to at least match that rate, but that is part of the question for this election.  Which areas will turn out and which way will they vote.  In HamCo suburbs, who they will vote for is more up for grabs than a rural county.

My gut tells me Issue 1 will fail, but the may be a rare instance of optimism I have based on the online churn I see and the early voting turnout so far. There was only 1 known poll on Issue 1 I am aware was made public and then a 2nd poll that was not on Issue 1 directly, but asked a question on a portion of the change proposed in Issue 1.  The actual poll indicates defeat and the other poll lists an even race, with a bunch of undecideds. With the lack of additional data, this is one that any prognosticator would find difficult in calling, but logically, all of the tea leaves so far indicate it will fail.  One never knows. I am voting tomorrow morning.  For the handful of readers out there, you should too, and should vote NO!

Cincinnati City Council Election July 2023 Update

Are there going to be more than ten candidates for Cincinnati City Council? There is barely anyone outside of the nine endorsed Democrats and the one Republican who has any online campaign presence. Simple social media content is the cheapest and quickest way to actually have a campaign and I can find few with any presence. That lack of any online footprint means they have limited their ability to raise any funds. It is difficult to raise money and wage any type of campaign at this late stage without a political party or other PAC endorsements.

The deadline to turn in signatures to get on the ballot is just over a month away, August 24, and at this point any serious candidate would be raising money. I only see 10-11 serious candidates currently and Jamie Castle is the 11th who at this point would be on the ballot, but after she did not get the Democratic Party endorsement, she made a comment to the media that she may not run.  So far she has not withdrawn her petitions.

The only variables in the race that could shake things up as if now is the outcome of the August 9th special election and if the Reproductive Rights ballot issue that is in process to be approved for the General Election in November.  The outcomes of those items will GREATLY alter the turnout in November.

If the Issue 1 No vote wins in August and Reproductive rights are on the ballot in November, turnout will be much higher in the City and that should be highest amongst voters who favor Reproductive Rights.  That turnout would play havoc with a City Council Race with only a smaller number of candidates on the ballot.

If there were only 12 to 15 candidates on the ballot and only really 12 candidates with a viable chance, that could mean that the last 2 seats would really be in play.  That assumes that seven Democrats, all of the elected incumbents, would be safe.  That is not a done deal, but there would need to be a very big shift from the last election to alter the results this year.  I don't see that happening.

The Demographics of Cincinnati have not changed significantly since 2021.  The only big variable would be for turnout to change the demo of those who vote.  That is possible, but with a small number of credible candidates, voters are not going to just vote for other without a reason.

The open window, which always exists in Council Races, is for a well known candidate to enter the race late.  As far as any person who has taken out petitions thus far, 12 is the max who anyone would consider a credible candidate.  The only bait and switch that could occur would be that one or more of the individuals who have taken out petitions are actually doing it on behalf of another candidate.  An unusual and unlikely occurrence, but not impossible.

The inclusion of local tax levies and the Railroad Sale to the ballot will also drive out turnout, even if the Reproductive Rights issue is not on the ballot, so that also can make things interesting, but in the City the type of voter those issues tend to get out to vote are conservatives, which is not a large demographic for Council elections.

My prediction is that less than 20 people will be on the ballot and 15 would be the number I would bet on at the point.  Candidates who wait until the last minute and don't have any campaign actually going are going to be long shots, so if no campaigns show any sense of life in the next few weeks, I would say no one new is coming out of the wood work.

What is so funny, is that Republicans and Charterites were largely responsible for the return to two year terms for members of council. They feared the Dems would maintain majorities with 4 year terms and lock in support.  It appears, with neither group showing any sign of supporting candidates, that Dems got the same thing with two year terms.  That is jumping the gun, but we are on track for Dems winning a majority on council before a single vote is cast.

Incumbents
Jan-Michele Lemon Kearney *(D)
Reggie Harris *(D)
Meeka Owens *(D)
Victoria Parks *(D)
Jeff Cramerding *(D)
Mark Jeffreys *(D)
Scotty Johnson *(D)
Liz Keating *(R,C)
Seth Walsh *(D)

Taken Out Petitions
Anna Albi (D)
Jamie Castle (I)
LaKeisha Cook (I)
Michelle Dillingham (D)
James Jenkins (C)
Linda Matthews (R)
Catherine Botos (I)
Rufus Bowman III (I)
Audricia Brooks (I)
Lawrence Brzezinski II (I)
Kaitlin Estill (I)
Richardo Hayward (I)
Ned Measel (I)
Boyd Miller (R)
William Moore (I)
Stephan Pryor (I)
Quentin Taylor (I)
Kelley Cowdrey (R)
Gwendolyn Edogun (I)

Taken Out Petitions, But Do Not Appear to Live in the City
Sharetha Collier (I)
Andrew Kennedy (I)

Candidate Twitter List: I have created a list of candidates on Twitter. Here is the actual list Twitter handles for the candidates. This list may not last as Twitter turns into a chaotic mess and not a valued website. A future update to the Blog may be a either a separate page with additional links to social media of the candidates or an update to the listing above. Stay tuned for that.

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.

Cincinnati City Council Election June 2023 Update

After a long delay, the Cincinnati Democratic Committee finally made its endorsements for Cincinnati City Council race. All eight sitting members were endorsed, along with first time candidate Anna Albi. Minor grumblings were present from a significant portion of precinct executives present at the media.  Those grumblings were both enhanced and amplified by the local media in attendance at the meeting. It never ceases to amaze me how "drama" can be whipped up into fodder for the local media. I was especially dismayed at the display of bias from the Cincinnati Enquirer's "reporter" Sharon Coolidge who embarrassed herself with her Opinion article about the meeting. The following exaggeration was built to stroke Suburban Republicans egos with a talk radio narrative their prejudice embraces.

Instead, the Cincinnati Democratic Committee meeting Tuesday night in an Evanston union hall went down like a reality show that could rival any 'Housewives' reunion on Bravo.

 Add that to a remarkable lack of understanding of Roberts Rules of Order by multiple reporters and participants in the meeting. I would hate to think what a reporting attending a nine member council meeting would do, when four members vote in favor of an ordinance, three vote against, and two abstain. The ordinance would pass. It is a fairly common function of most voting situations in all legislatures and or voting bodies within organizations. It made me think of a scene from All the Presidents Men (1976)

WOODWARD: Who's Charles Colson?

ROSENFELD: Sit Down. You know I’m glad you asked me that question. The reason I’m glad you asked me is because if you asked Simons or Bradley they would’ve said you know we’re going to have to fire this schmuck at once because he’s so dumb.

There are few would would get that reference, but that small group is my core audience!

The Democrats had ten possible candidates for the nine council spots.  They did not endorse Jamie Castle. News reports indicates she was considering not continuing her run.  I think the mere mention of this in multiple news articles would drastically hurt any campaign.

The lack of viable candidates in the race this year makes the possible outcomes of the last couple of seats open.  At this point there are at most 12 or 13 candidates who can muster the level of votes to win. The logical thing for non-Democrats and non-Republicans to do is get behind Jamie Castle and see how far they could take it. She has the signatures to be on the ballot. Someone like Michelle Dillingham should be running her campaign and to pull in the progressive/leftist support she has and see what moderate support she can pick up.  Instead of that, Michelle Dillingham took out petitions to run and teased via Tweet that she is thinking about running.  She didn't announce she was running, she teased that she might run.  I didn't see a big response to her Tweet. At this late date in the world of campaign fundraising, it is a foolish move to attempt it. Dillingham might better spend her time working to defeat Issue 1 this August, than wasting her time running for City Council. Ego is tough for an activist to look past.

Charter Committee seems to be thinking about the Rail Road, but not fielding any candidates for Council. They will certainly allow Liz Keating to slap a Charter label on her campaign, but we won't see much of them otherwise.

Republicans are just doing nothing. They have all but given up on fielding any candidates beyond Liz Keating who is running as a RINO, literally as a Republican in Name Only.  Keating will take GOP money, but is not run away from any Republican who would piss off Hyde Park Moderates. Saylor Park can just go fuck off for being Trumpistan. California (the neighborhood) can do the same with a small pond full of staunch Republican votes, but they are it, in the City. The rest of the County is drying up on knuckle dragging Troglodytes, but the County Party lives and dies on a weak Trumpist brand fascism, heaving on hollow red meat, to keep the foaming mouths from splitting the party.

The hot summer is upon us and I see little new to tilt the campaign beyond conventional wisdom. No candidates are making waves with any new ideas and no scandals seem to be breaking through, No matter how desperately the Enquirer and Suburban Republicans are to make it happen out of thing air.

The bet for the summer is OVER/UNDER on 15 as the number of candidates who are on the ballot for City Council in November.  As far as viable candidates, UNDER without any doubt. As far as total candidates, I would say OVER, but barely over 15.  What would it take it get sports betting to include political races in Ohio?  Would that increase turnout? Someone would call it corrupt and someone else would say it wouldn't make it any more corrupt than it already is, but odds are neither of those complainers would vote for City Council anyway.

Incumbents
Jan-Michele Lemon Kearney *(D)
Reggie Harris *(D)
Meeka Owens *(D)
Victoria Parks *(D)
Jeff Cramerding *(D)
Mark Jeffreys *(D)
Scotty Johnson *(D)
Liz Keating *(R,C)
Seth Walsh *(D)

Taken Out Petitions
Anna Albi (D)
Jamie Castle (I)
LaKeisha Cook (I)
Michelle Dillingham (D)
James Jenkins (C)
Linda Matthews (R)
Catherine Botos (I)
Rufus Bowman III (I)
Audricia Brooks (I)
Lawrence Brzezinski II (I)
Kaitlin Estill (I)
Richardo Hayward (I)
Ned Measel (I)
Boyd Miller (R)
William Moore (I)
Stephan Pryor (I)
Quentin Taylor (I)
Kelley Cowdrey (R)

Taken Out Petitions, But Do Not Appear to Live in the City
Sharetha Collier (I)
Andrew Kennedy (I)

Candidate Twitter List: I have created a list of candidates on Twitter. Here is the actual list Twitter handles for the candidates. This list may not last as Twitter turns into a chaotic mess and not a valued website. A future update to the Blog may be a either a separate page with additional links to social media of the candidates or an update to the listing above. Stay tuned for that.

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.

Let's See Action, Let's See People, Let's See Freedom, Let's See Who Cares

 A big news Friday for the Cincinnati City Council Election. There is controversy that will stir up a little bit of coverage for an otherwise uneventful and unnervingly quiet election year. Council Member Seth Walsh is the subject of an Ethics Investigation by the City's Office of Ethics and Good Government. The issue is that Walsh's campaign manager, now reportedly former campaign manager, was allegedly directing Walsh city staffer on what to do.

On the surface, that really does not seem like a big deal. Every Republican and Leftist crank will be filled with self righteous ire with my dismissal of this allegation. I am not going to lose sleep over it and I am not even sure this is "unethical." So far there is no allegation of any illegality, a detail that is not at the forefront of some of the news reports.

Unless other allegations or information not already reported comes to light, this is at best going to be a minor political story and fodder for snide Twitter comments from at least one rejected applicant for the appointment to council Walsh received. I won't mention their name, but I continue to see why they were not considered for the appointment. 

Something to remember: There is not a "church and state" type of communication line in a council member's office.  Creating a good image and getting media coverage is part of the job.  Yes, that makes them look good and that helps the campaign and is what the campaign wants. Making phone calls to raise money or helping plan a campaign fund raiser while on the clock is not allowed. If that type of action was alleged, I would have expected that to be in the letter. Instead, communication by the person making the allegation indicates that Walsh never made any requests to do campaign work while on the job.

There will be those claiming purity on the actions of the campaign staffer, but they would be grasping at straws and that is such a waste of time. This can at most be a judgement on Walsh's ability to vet and manage his own staff. If this story gets much more coverage than when the ethics office reports on the investigation, then I for one will cry fowl on any journalist doing that.  If there is more to this, then publish new credible allegations, but trying to just make this into a bigger story based on the facts known now will look so insanely biased. We can be thankful that Jason Williams is no longer writing a political column.  I am sure he would attempt to make this into a federal case as a further try out for his conservative talk radio career. I have fingers crossed for Jason's fledging radio career, hoping he can move out of journalism altogether.

More from the Enquirer and the Business Courier.

Cincinnati City Council Election May 2023 Update

In 2017 we knew by the end of April who was endorsed as a Democratic Candidate for City Council. Prior to that they endorsed 10 candidates in 2013 and it was a mess. In 2021 there was pointless drama when the progressive wing wanted to endorse a candidate that attacked the party in favor of extremist policies. I don't have any foolish expectations that this year will be any different. With seven elected incumbents (and one appointed incumbent) the process should logically be different. The Hamilton County Democratic Party just this week published a notice that the Cincinnati Democratic Committee will be holding a meeting on May 25th to vote on the party endorsements. I've heard little chatter about this year's endorsement round, but there not many active non-incumbent candidates making much noise, so this election cycle everything has been near silence in public.    Last month the party published the notice of the endorsement processes and it included a key provision on candidate interviews, something I don't recall seeing before:

Candidates must have petition signatures submitted and reported as “Sufficient” by the Hamilton County Board of Elections staff before their endorsement interview.

 As of Friday evening there are only eight candidates with their petitions reported as sufficient. That includes only six incumbents of eight.  I don't know if the previously elected incumbents are required to be interviewed again. The notice was not specific on that point. The only appointed member of City Council, Seth Walsh, has turned his signatures in to the BOE.  There are only two non-incumbents with signatures submitted, Anna Albi and Jamie Caslte. Both are approved for the ballot.  That leaves two questions for the process: 1) Will all incumbents get endorsed and 2) Which of the two non-incumbents will get endorsed.  Of course it is possible that the answer to #1 is no and that makes the presumption that both non-incumbents would be endorsed. There is no indication that the Democratic Party has any intention to upend the process.  There are not any candidates that have any public negatives that would mean squandering the advantages of incumbency to the election. That leaves the endorsement choice between Castle and Albi. 

The Hamilton County Republican Party just updated their website this week to show the new chairman that was elected months ago.  They don't seem to want to bother with much promotion of their City Council candidate(s).  The local elections they are successful in Hamilton County are small monolithic areas that rarely have any actual competition. At this point if they had any candidates other than Liz Keating for Cincinnati City Council, that candidate would be campaigning in the City (at least online.)  I see no one other Republican candidates with a serious chance of getting elected in the City.

Charter Committee appears to be adrift.  There is no evidence of any candidates that will be on the ballot, except a likely cross endorsement of Republican Liz Keating. 2021 was terrible election for Charter. It was nothing short of a blood bath. I don't know what it will take for Charter to get back on its feet.  There is at least one person on the Charter Board who is not going to help bring them back from the brink. If anything this person is going to drive them off the deep end into permanent oblivion.

Here are the 26 candidates who have taken out petitions so far. I would be surprised if any other credible candidates take out petitions and I would not be surprised that only 15-18 candidates actually make the ballot.

Incumbents
Jan-Michele Lemon Kearney (D)
Reggie Harris (D)
Meeka Owens (D)
Victoria Parks (D)
Jeff Cramerding (D)
Mark Jeffreys (D)
Scotty Johnson (D)
Liz Keating (R,C)
Seth Walsh (D)

Taken Out Petitions
Anna Albi (D)
Jamie Castle (I)
LaKeisha Cook (I)
James Jenkins (C)
Andrew Kennedy (I)
Linda Matthews (R)
Catherine Botos (D)
Rufus Bowman III (I)
Audricia Brooks (D)
Lawrence Brzezinski II (I)
Sharetha Collier (D)
Kaitlin Estill (I)
Ned Measel (I)
Boyd Miller (R)
William Moore (I)
Stephan Pryor (D)
Quentin Taylor (I)

Candidate Twitter List: I have created a list of candidates on Twitter. Here is the actual list Twitter handles for the candidates. This list may not last as Twitter turns into a chaotic mess and not a valued website. A future update to the Blog may be a either a separate page with additional links to social media of the candidates or an update to the listing above. Stay tuned for that.

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.