“And we all know what matters first and foremost in announcements like this is the media coverage.”

— Kasich blogger Jon Keeling on the announcement of the Kasich-Taylor ticket. (Before the ticket was “officially” announced.)

Well, let see how that panned out…

ABJ Columnist Dennis Willard (selected excerpts):

[Kasich] offered recycled promises and vague answers regarding what he would do as governor.

The problem for the Kasich candidacy that will become more apparent as the campaign goes on is that he is going to keep running into his own past and his own party.

But when Kasich later criticized recent Ohio leaders for not doing enough for the state, he was talking about [ORP Chairman Kevin]DeWine.

Kasich was asked whether the tax reform of 2004 and personal-injury lawsuit reform passed by the Ohio legislature went far enough. He answered no.

Husted was speaker during Strickland’s first two years in office, during the same period Republicans accuse the governor of losing more than 300,000 jobs in Ohio. Husted is now a state senator running for secretary of state.

Taylor was in the legislature in 2004, too, and she was immediately asked her thoughts, which made for an awkward moment.

Only the historically challenged would have a problem recognizing the contradictions in Kasich’s message when he talks about his days as U.S. House budget chairman in 1995.

Kasich was a managing director for Lehman Brothers ? the Lehman Brothers ? and there are plenty of people who believe that Wall Street firms like Lehman played a much larger role over the past decade than Strickland in the past three years creating the economic mess facing Ohio.

He and Taylor enjoy denouncing Strickland for taking federal bailout money, but neither has explained what they would have done to balance the state budget without the aid.

Kasich used humor to not answer the question…

Funny, maybe, but he didn’t answer the question because he doesn’t have an answer. No one, not even John Kasich, could have turned down the federal dollars without making massive cuts in government services or raising those job-killing taxes he so deplores.

On Thursday, Kasich outlined the problems he would address.

Ohio companies are taxed too much, our workers are undertrained and our legal system needs reform, which means too many personal-injury lawsuits, he said.

He added that state government needs to be restructured, our regulatory system is onerous, school funding needs to be fixed and the Bureau of Workers’ Compensation is strangling small businesses.

These are the same issues George Voinovich cited in 1990, Bob Taft in 1998 and J. Kenneth Blackwell in 2006.

It is early in the campaign, but Kasich must make a compelling case for replacing Strickland, and criticizing the governor is not going to be enough.

So, it’s really John Kasich=George Voinovich + Bob Taft + Ken Blackwell. I’ve apparently been too generous.? My bad.

In both the Columbus Dispatch and the Plain Dealer today, Thomas Suddes also had some harsh words for the Kasich-Taylor tax plan.? He concludes that it cannot be done with a massive hike in taxes elsewhere (sound familiar?)

Actually, Kasich is just what virtually all Ohio politicians are: opportunistic. Logic and facts have little to do with what Kasich says he aims to do.

Ouch! Yeah, I couldn’t find a single editorial or column that actually praised the performance of Kasich-Taylor in its rollout.? Even the conservative blogs all admit that the ticket dodged questions as they gave lukewarm?praise for the performance.? (The best Matt Hurley could say at WMD was that Kasich and Taylor did a “pretty good” job answering questions.)

And that’s just what’s been written over the weekend.? Let’s not forget the negative coverage earlier in the week.

And you know who suddenly stopped talking about the importance of John Kasich’s press coverage?

Tagged with:
 
  • Adrienne

    Hey guys,
    I don't understand why Kasich can't win with this strategy. GOP has been doing it for years: sell the land of Oz and deliver Kansas.

    I thought that Blackwell didn't win because he had a connection to the state corruption scandal at the time and screwed the people of NE Ohio in the 2004 election.

    I missed the Voinovich and Taft administrations; so I don't know what they did or didn't do other than watch the continued exodus of business and jobs.

    I think the fortunate or unfortunate job as senior management at LEH might be used to bring him down.

    Am I wrong?

    thanks A

  • modernesquire

    Blackwell wasn't connected to any of the major financial scandals plaguing the Taft Administration by much other than he had been on numerous tickets of the Republicans who were.

    You're right about the Kansas-Oz analogy, but I think voters are incredibly skeptical of such wild-eyed promises now.

    Blackwell lost, in large part, because he was perceived as incredibly out of touch and extreme. Blackwell ran on a platform that would have privitized everything. Blackwell's extremism was demonstrated by how much the Ohio GOP establishment readily admitted how extreme his policies were. As I wrote yesterday, even John Kaisch (ironically now) got in on the action:
    http://www.plunderbund.com/2010/01/16/flashback
    blackwells-fiscal-proposals-were-irresponsible

    Debating Blackwell on the merits and ramnifications did help Strickland. Most say that the bipartisan unpopularity of Blackwell's TEL amendment, which was strategically intended to get economic conservatives to turn out for Blackwell like the gay marriage amendment was intended to get social conservatives out for Bush, backfired much in the same way you're seeing Kasich's tax plan implode.

    Eventually, the Ohio GOP establishment convinced Blackwell to drop his amendment issue off the ballot and accept a more diluted statute addressing the same issue as it became clear that the spending cuts the amendment would likely cause was poll box poison.

  • Adrienne

    Hey Modern,
    Thanks, for the info. I was a distant observer and was very busy in 2004/2006 so I didn't pay that close attention to the Ohio local/state action.

    So Kasich was against Blackwell's tax reform before he was for it?

    Any guess how to reconcile the budget hole created by this “new tax scheme”? I assume they want to get rid of public schools and medicaid for a start? Sales tax increases won't help because people aren't spending money.

    Also, what's the deal with Kasich picking Taylor? Shooting the ORP in the foot or someplace more vital? I imagined her conservative ties would make her very appealing as the only GOP statewide placeholder?? Why not have her run for re-election?

  • modernesquire

    Yeah, but Blackwell only ran on flattening the income tax rate, Kasich is talking about an eventual REPEAL.

    You're asking the $20 billion dollar question. See Suddes column, he discussing that the State cannot legally not pay for Medicaid so what's left? The State would have to close some of its already overcrowded prisons, universities and libraries, roads and schools would suffer.

    We're all waiting for Kasich to explain how he could possible make this painfree taxfree free-market utopia he keeps talking about with no plan.

    Kasich really had few attractive choices. I mean who were the alternatives? Taylor is the only GOP name left in the brand absent picking off a retired out of office Republican. Anyone else would have, at best, been a 'meh' pick.

    So Kasich went bold, and now his party has a harder time defending a seat they need to hold. Both Kasich and Taylor are being pillored over how selfish it was. But it is what it is.

  • Abe

    By the way, keep an eye on Kasich's comments regarding Worker's Comp and group rating (last part of press conference about 30 seconds in and lasts a minute or so). This is sure to pi** off some usual GOP Doaners who make a lot of money off of group rating

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:


Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!