Cincinnati City Council Election August 2023 Update

There are 11 candidates for the 2023 Cincinnati City Council election. The August 24th deadline to turn in petitions came and went this week and no additional candidates turned any in.  That is the smallest number of candidates in decades, at least since 1989 and likely longer ago. There are nine Democrats, one Republican, and one Independent candidate running. Charter has yet to officially announce any cross endorsements they may be doing this year, but they would logically repeat the one candidate in this race who was cross endorsed in 2021, Republican Liz Keating.

One candidate, Richardo Hayward, turned in petitions, but had an insufficient number of valid signatures to qualify. He could still appeal this decision if he was close to the 500 signatures needed, but he likely was not close enough to find any variance to make up the difference.

This will be an election with both a foregone conclusion for a Democratic victory and a real race for the last two seats on council.  The race should come down to Republican Liz Keating, Seth Walsh, and Ann Albi.  Audricia Brooks is a new candidate and no indication of any support, but with the lack of names on the ballot, she has a chance to win, depending on who votes and how they vote. There are multiple scenarios that have more than a minimal possibility to occur.  I've yet to game all of them out, but those variables are the only element of the City Council Race that are in question.  The ballot issues pending are a very different story.  I expect those races, especially the Railroad issue, to have more contention and questions on the outcome.

Candidates

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)*‡
Anna Albi (D)‡
Audricia Brooks (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 Democrats Win Super Majority on City Council in 2023 Before a Single Vote is Cast

Without a single vote cast, I can project that the Cincinnati Democratic Party will retain AT LEAST seven seats and a super majority on Cincinnati City Council. For those skeptical of my basic math skills, please note that the Democrats have endorsed nine candidates for City Council and there are two other candidates on the ballot. So, the Democratic candidates just need to vote for themselves at a minimum and they are going to get seven on council.

Not withstanding the angst from the local City Hall Report from the Enquirer in Thursdays "commentary", it is not the fault of the Democrats that only two other candidates are on the ballot. The Democrats are operating in the same system as every other person and party in the City. This may make the race boring as there are no fire breathers in the race to make for good copy. This means that all the more time to devote to policy and the City Issues on the ballot. Plus, there are two non-Democratic endorsed candidates with a chance to win.

The failure for the low number of candidates falls on the other political parties/groups in the City. They gave up. They could not muster up the organization to get behind candidates and make a run. Trying to push that blame on the success of Democrats is bias from the Enquirer, envy from the Republican Party, and from at least one former council candidate, Michelle Dillingham, who's own hubris led to not being part of the leadership of the part she has routinely attacked for not giving her power. 

Republicans have gone insane, so they can't field any type of slate other than one single candidate, who has gone OUT OF HER WAY to be as moderate as she can possibly be. Their party has become so Trumpist, they can't get any other palatable Republicans to run.  They will have to rely on moderates to back Liz Keating for her to have a chance to win.  With the expected surge in Democratic Turnout in November's election for the Abortion rights Issue, that may not be enough.

Charter seems to have fully retreated. There would see like there is a place for the Charter Committee to retain some minor influence on council, but their power base has faded out.  The group may be more suited to working on City specific ballot issues and avoid trying to get candidates elected.

Leftists seem to have blown their wad in the 2021 election year and failed so miserably that they were scared off of running out any other candidates. As is so often the case, leftists divide themselves, because the activists each want personal power more than anything else.  If a group of activists had worked together and picked a single candidate to get behind, they could actually make a showing.  However, if they are full on leftists, they also must realize that their views are not popular.  There is no silent hoard waiting to rise up for the revolutionary cause or even get them close to getting on council.

The last two years have been quiet, relaxed years.  The Enquirer, Republicans, and Leftists have tried to manufacture controversy and scandal to fulfil their self-interests.  They are to blame for not wanting elected officials to govern, they want them to play their games, each to own ends.  I myself like sane, quiet governance.  Ask questions, but don't assume a 5th column of conspirators are around every corner because that potion is what gets you more likes on social media. Getting attention is not politics, it is marketing. Policy is politics. Focus on that and less on drama. Drama is for the stage, not for City Hall.

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.

Cincinnati City Council Election April 2023 Update

Not sure about you, but if I didn't know better, I would think we are still a year or more away from the next Cincinnati City Council Election. In reality, the deadline to turn in petitions to get on the ballot for the election is a mere four and a half months away.

That means campaigns, any serious campaign, should be in high gear. At this point, I don't see any campaign in high gear. Sure, the incumbents are in the news, but campaigning seems to be quiet.  The main reason for this is likely the overwhelming victory of the Democratic Party in the last election (2021.)  Nothing seems to be happening from any other group to challenge them. The Republicans seem to be settling for a single seat, which they are only hanging on to because Republican Liz Keating has taken very moderate stances while in office and campaigning.  

The Charter Committee seems to be either dead or has gone into indefinite hibernation.  They have no coherent message message to offer, other than being the party that will cross endorse candidates and the only value there is that a few more donors will contribute to a moderated Republican candidate (like Keating).

That leaves only two questions at this point for the November election. 1) Who will get the 9th Democratic Party Endorsement and 2) Will Michelle Dillingham run for office?

The answer to #1 seems to be lining up for Jamie Castle.  At this point, there are no other experienced and credible Democrats who have taken out petitions to get on the ballot.  Those nominations should be made very soon.

The answer to #2 on the surface seems like no, Michelle Dillingham is not running for City Council.  Her campaign website is gone and since she and her supporters really poorly handled the process to appoint a replacement for Greg Landsman's seat late last year, her electability has not improved. If she still wants to get on council it might be a good idea to sit out a cycle or two and wait for some term limits to come into play or other churn on council to open up more seats and gamble that people will forget how her history of needlessly confrontational campaigning and social media discourse would be a sign that she would not be good at governing and is more of just an activist, with the goal of gaining attention for a cause.

Does that leave us with a race only for ninth place?  Is this a Liz Keating v Jamie Castle race?  OR will Liz climb higher in the results as the only Republican candidate?  Republicans are just fading away in both the City and Hamilton County, but low voter turnout has traditionally been beneficial to Republican candidates. At this point there is nothing point to anything other than a conventional wisdom election.

I am sure leftists will ache and moan about something, while they continue to fail to create a viable governing strategy. Instead they will continue to push a puritanical socialist agenda that has so far produced nothing but losing campaigns.

Incumbents
Jan-Michele Lemon Kearney * (D)
Meeka Owens *(D)
Victoria Parks *(D)
Liz Keating *(R,C)

Jeff Cramerding *(D)
Reggie Harris *(D)

Mark Jeffreys *(D)

Scotty Johnson *(D)

Seth Walsh *(D)

Taken Out Petitions
Jamie Castle (D)

Andrew Kennedy (I?)

Boyd Miller (R)

Stephan Pryor (?)

LaKeisha N. Cook (D) 

James K. Jenkins (I?)

Catherine Botos (?)
Rufus Bowman (?)
Audricia Brooks (?)
Lawrence Brzezinski (?)
Linda Matthews (R)
Boyd Miller (?)
Quentin Taylor (?)

Maybe Could Still Run?
Michelle Dillingham (D)
Jackie Frondorf (D,C)
Alyson Steele Beridon (D)
Brian Garry (D)

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 Elections are Less Than One Year Away

November 7, 2023 is Election Day in the City of Cincinnati and all nine seats on City Council are up for election.  In case you forgot, City Council terms are two years, again, so we are back at it again in less than 12 months.  What, you are not excited?  You don't want to follow along with the fringe candidates that have chance to win, but scream the loudest about what ever odd causes they push?

2021's election established that the Democratic Party has a lot of support in the City and that earned them eight of nine of the seats.  Anyone looking to get elected will have to find a way to counter the overwhelming dominance of the Dems. The logical conclusion is that few strong candidates will make a run.  There could still be some movement at the lower ranks, including the lone Republican on Council, but with the power of the Democratic Party at this point, no one would be betting against the Dems keep a veto proof majority on council.

With Greg Landsman leaving soon for Washington as the next Congressman for the Ohio First District, another person will fill one of those eight.  The process to pick the replacement candidate will be run by Council Member Reggie Harris, with an application for those interested in the appointment on his council webpage, which are due by end of day Sunday 11/27/2022.

At this point little is definitely known about who is actually going to run. It is reasonable that all incumbents will be running, along with who ever is appointed to fill Landsman's seat. WVXU's Becca Costello reported on Twitter that two current members of council have pulled petitions to run for Council, Keating and Owens.  Four others also have already pulled petitions to get on the ballot (see below.)

With that in mind, here is a list of the incumbents, those with petitions out, those who have been speculated to be possible appointees, and my list of prior candidates who might run again.

Incumbents
Jan-Michele Lemon Kearney * (D)
Meeka Owens *(D)
Victoria Parks *(D)
Liz Keating *(R,C)

Jeff Cramerding *(D)
Reggie Harris *(D)

Mark Jeffreys *(D)

Scotty Johnson *(D)

Taken Out Petitions
Andrew Kennedy (I?)
Seth Walsh (D)

Boyd Miller (R)

Stephan Pryor (?)

Getting Attention for Appointment to Greg Landsman's Seat
Jamie Castle (D)
Michelle Dillingham (D)
Jackie Frondorf (D,C)
Alyson Steele Beridon (D)
(Also Seth Walsh)

Maybe Will Run Again?

Bill Frost (C)
Brian Garry (D)
LaKeisha N. Cook (D) 

Galen Gordon (C)
Rob Harris (D)
K. Heard (G)
Evan Holt (DSA)
Nick Jabin (I)
John Maher (I)
Phillip O'Neal (D)
Logan-Peter Simmering (G)
John Williams (D)
Robert Adler (I)
Jalen Alford (D)
James K. Jenkins (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.

Hamilton County Voter Turnout by Generation in the 2022 General Election

Turnout in the Hamilton County Overall was down from 2018.  Here is the generational breakdown of the turnout by generation in the County, the City, and the non-City portion of the county in the 2022 General Election.

These numbers are up a bit from the final election night totals.  I pulled them from the Voter registration lists which have been updated with references to those who have voted. These are not official totals.  I presume the increase is due to additional mail in vote arriving and with the provisional votes.  The increase in the number of votes was 8,025 for the full county.  The data I am using is not "official" yet.  The Hamilton County BOE meets today to approve the provisional ballots and certify the results.

2018 overall turnout in Hamilton County was 57.52%.  I unfortunately do not have the same voter file data from 2018 saved to get a full comparison. I do have a comparison of 2020, 2021 and 2022.  This data is more difficult to compare year to year, as turnout has the variation between Presidential, Local, and MidTerm elections. To make up for that I added a measurement of Share of votes to the Share of Registered voters.  This is a totally made up ratio I created, but there are a couple interesting things:

The key takeaways: Gen Z (Zoomers) continues to underperform.  Their share of Registered voters Increased over 2020, which is just based natural aging (turning 18).  The rest of the generations either decreased or remained relatively even (Milliennials had a slight increase.)  Gen Z's share of votes dropped.  Their share of registered voters increased more than any other Generation, but they could not increase their share of votes.  This is insane because that means brand new Gen Z kids took the time to register, but didn't bother to vote.

This failure to vote by Gen Z in HamCo stands out from other reports in other states.  Many are attempting to praise younger voters for participating.  Well, I'm going to dismiss that participation trophy, because they didn't show up. No better can you see where the apathy, ignorance, and misinformation have taken the toll are on the Newly Registered Voters.  In 2022 here are the stats by generation of those with a Registration date in 2022:

5,461 members of Gen Z registered to vote in 2022, but failed to show up and vote in the general election.  That is 56.89% who took time to register to vote this year, but didn't bother to vote.  That is pathetic.  Millennials were on their heals in numbers, but managed to beat out Gen-X on the rate.  No Generation was great on this stat, which demonstrates that outreach to new registrations is something that needs to happen to get people to the polls.

We need to improve voter turnout and you can't just blame it on other people, those who get registered and don't vote are the ONLY people I am referencing in all of the stats I have put forth here.  Targeting that group is the key to change.  There is not a single way to improve it.  Many steps can be taken:  A national holiday on election day, improved education, improved outreach, better information and less disinformation.  More early voting, easier ways to update your registration and easier ways to update your address on your State ID or Driver's License also will help. None of those alone will do more than individuals getting off their assesses and going to vote EVERY election.

How Greg Landsman Defeated Steve Chabot in the Ohio 1st Congressional District

I am sure there are political journalists who will have a few thousands words describing how Greg Landsman defeated Steve Chabot in the Ohio 1st Congressional District.  I can sum it up much quicker. First with a chart:

My take on these numbers is broken down into four reasons why Landsman won:

1. In the City Landsman was able to increase the Democratic result compared to both 2018 and 2020. This blunted the 9.5% drop in turnout compared to 2018.
2. The Eastern Hamilton County suburb's Democratic support grew significantly. The chart above shows a narrow loss, but in 2020 and 2018, the Republican candidate got 56% and 55% respectively.  Chabot being a new candidate to most of this portion of the county was one cause for the loss of support for the Republican.  The likely bigger factor is the Republican brand is more and more that of extremism and anti-women. Chabot did nothing to defuse that image. Turnout here matched to Warren County.
3. Warren County turnout dropped ~5% from 2018 and the Democrats picked up a point or two on the results. Warren County has pockets of variation, but is largely a monolith.
4. Not having a Third Party Candidate made the choice clear and gave the anti-Chabot vote a place to go. This vote could account for the increases is the spread for Landsman in the City and Warren county.  It would be less apparent in the Eastern Suburbs, when as part of OH-2 those areas did not have third party competition.

The above numbers are unofficial.  As of this morning there are still thousands of outstanding absentee ballots that could come in and be counted.  Also there over 8K provisional ballots in Hamilton County and 1,800 in Warren County that will be reviewed.  These additional votes will not affect the final result, just maybe the spread.

 .

Local Cincinnati Area Races to Follow on Election Night

Beyond turnout in Hamilton County, there are several local elections to follow this Tuesday on Election Night that I will be intently watching.  Not all of these will be nail biting cliffhangers, but they will have elements and details that can give evidence on how 21st century politics are working here in Hamilton County, Ohio.

1. OH-1 Landsman (D) vs. Chabot (R): This is of course the most interesting race in the area.  This Republican gerrymandered district is in violation of the Ohio Constitution, but in the effort to hide their power grab they made this district very close to a Toss-up.  Republicans claim this is a Dem+2 district, but that is just not true.  This is at best maybe a Dem+.05 based on historical results.  The strong Conservative Western HamCo was replaced with the more moderated Eastern HamCo and ALL of the City.  This gives an advantage to the Dem, but that advantages assumes people vote in reasonable numbers.  If turnout is strong, close to that of 2018, this should be a narrow win for the Dem.  However, since this is such a closely divided district, a small shift in turnout could make it an even narrower win for the Republican.  This race could go late into night without a declared winner, but the writing could be on the wall as the suburbs should report earlier than the city proper.
2. Hamilton County Commissioner Dumas (D) vs Smitherman vs O'Neill (R):  This race is going to be very interesting, but not because there is much doubt as to who will win.  With a Three-Way race, the Democratic candidate should be able to win.  The interesting part will be how the two Republican candidates, Smitherman and O'Neill perform.  Only one will be marked as a Republican and that is what makes this case interesting.  Will Party ID be enough for O'Neill to get 2nd place or will Smitherman's targeted marketing work to get a large number of Republican voters for him to get 2nd place.  Also, the other situation to watch, will it be a close 1-2 race and distant 3rd or will the 2nd and 3rd each get larger chunks.  There will have to be a complete disaster in HamCo for Dems to lose this race, that is not impossible, however there is no local evidence to suggests that Dems turnout has cratered.  The Dem candidate likely won't get over 50%, but it would be somewhat surprising for either Republican to break 40%. Also, I will be watching this race since I am hoping Smitherman loses big time and this becomes the last we see of him in local politics.
3. Hamilton County Auditor: Brigid Kelly (D) vs. Tom Brinkman (R):  Tom Brinkman is someone everyone should find it easy to root against.  He's a hardcore right wing fascist and has been way longer than the Trumpists were even a glint in Steve Bannon's eye.  Brinkman does not appear to have much of a ground campaign going.  Like his failed campaign for Cincinnati City Council last year, he appears to be phoning it in.  I'd surmise he ran just in case there was some 100 year flood of a Republican wave in Hamilton County.  He's not likely to see that this Tuesday and is running against a very organized and solid Dem candidate.  In this race I'm interested in how much it goes with the partisan breakdown like other races or does it stand out.
4. Hamilton County Clerk of Courts: Pavan Parikh (D) vs. Steven Goodin (R):Among the county wide offices on the ballot in 2022, this one could be the most competitive, at least on paper.  Goodin has a broader appeal and name recognition in the City and amongst moderates. Parikh has the incumbency advantage, but as an appointee, having not been elected before.  Goodin ran for Cincinnati City Council last fall and did not place well (14th). Steve Goodin is capable of running a centrist race, but he's gone instead with a confrontational race, picking Social Media fights and going negative suggesting controversies. Parikh is running with the Democratic slate and as a team, that unit did amazingly well in the City in 2021.  If it carries into the county as well, he should do well.

I have strong feeling, "vibes" as the term has been used this cycle among the political junkie crowd, about this year's election.  I can't tell you anything valuable about the statewide races or how the Congressional races will add up.  Locally, however, I feel like there is NOT going to be a big "Republican Wave."  Locally that would mean Republican turnout surges and Democratic Turnout reduces.  I would easily bet a $100 that it won't happen.  Without that Red Wave, Republicans only have a couple of seats in the county that are close enough and divided up enough to win, assuming turnout "vibes."

On election night, the thing to watch is what I call the "Flop."  That's the first output by the Board of Elections that shows the votes from Absentee/Early voting.  By that point, real-time Turnout should be published as well, so we'll be able to judge if Early Absentee/Early voting is going to be an indicator of the races or will it be segmented, like 2020, which means we'll have to see how vote starts to come in from election day to get the first writing on the wall moment to give an indication of how the night will go.  I'll be covering turnout all day on Tuesday, so look for a Blog post and social media posts with updates. Good luck to the candidates and be sure to vote!

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.