The debate starts at 7:00PM on your local NBC affiliate.

Debating Issue 2 will be State Senator Keith Faber, of “Building a Better Ohio,” who will be defending Issue 2, and former Ohio Congressman Dennis Eckart, of “We Are Ohio,” which opposes Issue 2.

Live Feed:

Chat:

 
  • Fotogirlcb2002

    Faber  makes me ill —  what stupid questions

  • As long as Faber, Kasich, and the rest of the Republicans continue to act like arrogant jerks, people will reject whatever they offer.  I just hope at the next election people remember how the Republicans treated them.

  • Anonymous

    Faber is a liar. He is evil but is good at memorizing the three lying talking points.

    We deserve better; they get worse.

    NO ON all 3 issues, PERIOD.

  • progressive dem

    Why are we voting no on Issue 1? I voted yes because current law is ageist and discriminates against senior citizens.  Ideally, there should be no age limits for Supreme Court Justices. (See Stevens, John Paul) Yes, we have a Republican judiciary, but this issue won’t do anything more to continue that beyond lack of support for strong progressive candidates already has. Yes on1!! NO on 2! NO on 3!

  • progressive dem

    Correction on my prior comment: beyond WHAT lack of support for strong progressive candidates already has.

  • Anonymous

     We are voting no because it entrenches judges in positions that it’s currently almost impossible to get an incumbent out of because of our lousy system of electing judges. It isn’t “ageist” because a capable judge can work as a visiting judge — very much in demand — until they are 120 if they are able. But with the current system of electing judges, unfortunately an older judge who is suffering from dementia or who is just plain out of touch with the modern world can keep getting re-elected if he makes reliably business-friendly decisions that keep the corporate dollars rolling in. Issue 1 is atrocious and cynical. Please vote NO.

  • Anonymous

    What did he definitely win?

    *****crickets*****

  • progressive dem

    “Visiting judge” is a second class position when compared to a regular position. It is  “separate but equal” so to speak (a standard, of course, that does not actually exist). We should abolish ALL age limits on judges in Ohio. This is the next best thing. This passed the legislature on a bipartisan basis.  The progressive position is a YES vote one Issue 1. (and of course no on two and three.)

  • Fotogirlcb2002

    you are so very right !!  my mom got dementia at a early age —

    lets see — state employees according to sb5 should have their senority taken from them
    and the young folks are soooo much smarter –what did Faber say  –to step aside and let youth take over—
     but OLD judges can stay  forever and the new ones can just sit and wait —
    Whats wrong with this ?  could it be the ol republican double standard

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!