OH-SEN: Renacci Wins Weak Plurality

[Rjjr77]

I still think its Tilt D. It would be tilt R with any of the other statewide republicans

Husted maybe, but otherwise, I don't think so. He's beat DeWine before and would do so again, while Taylor and Yost would be even less of a challenge. Kasich, as you've said, would have some trouble making it through his own party's primary. Portman vs Brown would be a bloodbath, but that obviously isn't happening, and Voinovich is dead, bless his soul.

Brown has to be in top form, but Republicans underestimate his campaign prowess at their own peril.

Underestimating him would be foolish yes, and frankly I hope Republicans overestimate him and put more resources than Necessary to beat him. He's a very good possible Presidential Nom and should be nipped in the bud now before he has a chance to run.

The wife beating allegations would probably sink a presidential nod. Which is why i think he'd never actual run

Sherrod's ex-wife is a family friend and those allegations were exaggerations made as part of a very bitter divorce. They're both over it. Larke Recchie and Sherrod do fundraisers together for Pete's sake.

But they were made. They are in legal documents, and they exist. It's not made up, and it's not baseless since the accusations were made. You can argue he was falsely accused by his ex wife or that they've reconciled their issues, but the claims were made and are out there.

What you're doing right now (or rather trying to do) is pretty disgusting and you should really be ashamed of yourself.  Honestly, I thought you were better than this (admittedly a low bar), but I guess not.

Look no, you don't get to talk to me this way. you can't say something is made up. These allegations, whether or true or not were made. Thats a fact. They would absolutely matter in a presidential race. I get it, its tough out there for Ohio D's and Sherrod is your star, but you can't say Mandel made these allegations up or that they were baseless. Theres literally articles about them.

Look, I've done quite a bit of work with actual victims of domestic violence.  If you don't like the way I was talking to you then maybe you should stop trying to smear people you disagree with by peddling false allegations of domestic violence.  That's about as low as it gets and if you keep doing it then I'm gonna keep calling you out on it.  Among other things, incredibly disrespectful to the actual victims of domestic violence who spend their days trapped in a living Hell on earth.  And like Gustaf said, if you were really just mentioning this with no ulterior motive, you'd have provided the context (but of course, that would've made it obvious that this was a baseless smear campaign by Mandel).

Cool you've worked for Domestic violence victims, i commend you for that, but nothing you've said is right here. It isn't a smear, its a legitimate point. Why should I have to provide context? the context is everywhere? no one provides deep context on everything.

Heres the problem with you, Sherrods your god, great, I think hes going to win, I've said it over, but to claim this is made up by mandel or some smear by me is ridiculous. You clearly aren't as smart as you think you are.

Lets look at the facts.
This claim was made (not once but twice in legal documents about browns alleged violent tendencies)
I, nor mandel, didn't make it up.

You can argue over WHETHER it should be used, sure, but to claim it is a fabrication is just outrageous, and shows a complete inability to look at anything objectively. Heck, I'm not the first person to bring it up on Atlas as its been mentioned in the past more than once. It is not my duty to sit there and talk to death and provide context to every single negative about every single candidate, nor is it your duty to personally levy attacks on something that IS a legitimate issue were he to run for president.

The fact that you have done little more than squawk incessantly like a parrot over and over that it's a legit point, Ask! Little troll wants a cracker it's a legit point, makes your point no more Salient than when you started about 30 posts ago. Seriously, either put up with some actual facts Beyond well maybe it happened because it was once accused even though people actually on this forum have spoken with the people involved and to corroborate their public denials, then STFU while the grown-ups talk.

Seriously. This isn't about not wanting here alternative views. This is about wanting to hear an actual coherent point rather than some rain man like repetition of it's a legit point for a full freaking page of the Forum now.

Who on this forum has actually spoken to the accusers specifically? you? JDB? no. they've issued soft denials in the past publicly and said they've reconciled, but no one ever said "I lied in my court documents about Sherrod Brown attacking me"

This has been discussed to death, Sherrod brown has been accused of domestic violence by his ex wife, his ex wife later said "it was a heated divorce and things get said." Sherrod Brown was later alleged to have physically assaulted his ex-wife's husband (back when he was SOS i want to say) this too was not specifically recanted by the victim, however the victim chose not to press charges. I am happy he has reconciled his differences with his ex-wife and her family, but it doesn't mean the allegations just disappear from being relevant to a discussion about a possible presidential run. Yes, here in Ohio, they've been used (and not used) in campaigns against Sherrod Brown, but to the voters in the other 49 states they've never been heard before. Something like that is a potential problem when running a presidential campaign. And mentioning this problem doesnt make me a troll, a liar, a fabricator, or disgusting in anyway. All I'm doing is bringing up actual possible roadblocks to a presidential run by Sherrod Brown, when that was discussed in this thread. I compare it to George Bush's "draft dodging" allegations which were talked to death in 1994, doesn't mean they werent legitimate roadblocks for his run in 2000

[Rjjr77]

I still think its Tilt D. It would be tilt R with any of the other statewide republicans

Husted maybe, but otherwise, I don't think so. He's beat DeWine before and would do so again, while Taylor and Yost would be even less of a challenge. Kasich, as you've said, would have some trouble making it through his own party's primary. Portman vs Brown would be a bloodbath, but that obviously isn't happening, and Voinovich is dead, bless his soul.

Brown has to be in top form, but Republicans underestimate his campaign prowess at their own peril.

Underestimating him would be foolish yes, and frankly I hope Republicans overestimate him and put more resources than Necessary to beat him. He's a very good possible Presidential Nom and should be nipped in the bud now before he has a chance to run.

The wife beating allegations would probably sink a presidential nod. Which is why i think he'd never actual run

Sherrod's ex-wife is a family friend and those allegations were exaggerations made as part of a very bitter divorce. They're both over it. Larke Recchie and Sherrod do fundraisers together for Pete's sake.

But they were made. They are in legal documents, and they exist. It's not made up, and it's not baseless since the accusations were made. You can argue he was falsely accused by his ex wife or that they've reconciled their issues, but the claims were made and are out there.

What you're doing right now (or rather trying to do) is pretty disgusting and you should really be ashamed of yourself.  Honestly, I thought you were better than this (admittedly a low bar), but I guess not.

Look no, you don't get to talk to me this way. you can't say something is made up. These allegations, whether or true or not were made. Thats a fact. They would absolutely matter in a presidential race. I get it, its tough out there for Ohio D's and Sherrod is your star, but you can't say Mandel made these allegations up or that they were baseless. Theres literally articles about them.

Look, I've done quite a bit of work with actual victims of domestic violence.  If you don't like the way I was talking to you then maybe you should stop trying to smear people you disagree with by peddling false allegations of domestic violence.  That's about as low as it gets and if you keep doing it then I'm gonna keep calling you out on it.  Among other things, incredibly disrespectful to the actual victims of domestic violence who spend their days trapped in a living Hell on earth.  And like Gustaf said, if you were really just mentioning this with no ulterior motive, you'd have provided the context (but of course, that would've made it obvious that this was a baseless smear campaign by Mandel).

Cool you've worked for Domestic violence victims, i commend you for that, but nothing you've said is right here. It isn't a smear, its a legitimate point. Why should I have to provide context? the context is everywhere? no one provides deep context on everything.

Heres the problem with you, Sherrods your god, great, I think hes going to win, I've said it over, but to claim this is made up by mandel or some smear by me is ridiculous. You clearly aren't as smart as you think you are.

Lets look at the facts.
This claim was made (not once but twice in legal documents about browns alleged violent tendencies)
I, nor mandel, didn't make it up.

You can argue over WHETHER it should be used, sure, but to claim it is a fabrication is just outrageous, and shows a complete inability to look at anything objectively. Heck, I'm not the first person to bring it up on Atlas as its been mentioned in the past more than once. It is not my duty to sit there and talk to death and provide context to every single negative about every single candidate, nor is it your duty to personally levy attacks on something that IS a legitimate issue were he to run for president.

The fact that you have done little more than squawk incessantly like a parrot over and over that it's a legit point, Ask! Little troll wants a cracker it's a legit point, makes your point no more Salient than when you started about 30 posts ago. Seriously, either put up with some actual facts Beyond well maybe it happened because it was once accused even though people actually on this forum have spoken with the people involved and to corroborate their public denials, then STFU while the grown-ups talk.

Seriously. This isn't about not wanting here alternative views. This is about wanting to hear an actual coherent point rather than some rain man like repetition of it's a legit point for a full freaking page of the Forum now.

Who on this forum has actually spoken to the accusers specifically? you? JDB? no. they've issued soft denials in the past publicly and said they've reconciled, but no one ever said "I lied in my court documents about Sherrod Brown attacking me"

This has been discussed to death, Sherrod brown has been accused of domestic violence by his ex wife, his ex wife later said "it was a heated divorce and things get said." Sherrod Brown was later alleged to have physically assaulted his ex-wife's husband (back when he was SOS i want to say) this too was not specifically recanted by the victim, however the victim chose not to press charges. I am happy he has reconciled his differences with his ex-wife and her family, but it doesn't mean the allegations just disappear from being relevant to a discussion about a possible presidential run. Yes, here in Ohio, they've been used (and not used) in campaigns against Sherrod Brown, but to the voters in the other 49 states they've never been heard before. Something like that is a potential problem when running a presidential campaign. And mentioning this problem doesnt make me a troll, a liar, a fabricator, or disgusting in anyway. All I'm doing is bringing up actual possible roadblocks to a presidential run by Sherrod Brown, when that was discussed in this thread. I compare it to George Bush's "draft dodging" allegations which were talked to death in 1994, doesn't mean they werent legitimate roadblocks for his run in 2000

Actually, all the allegations were made by the ex-wife and have since repeatedly been specifically denied by her in clear and uncertain terms, but thanks for playing  Oh and only one candidate besides Mandel has tried to use this nonsense and that sleezebag was widely criticized for it too.  Anyway, with something like blatantly false allegations of domestic abuse, you kinda do have a duty to provide context when bringing it up.  And this isn't like the Bush draft-dodging allegations; it's more like the whisper campaign in 2000 alleging that McCain's adopted daughter was really a black love child.

Actually no they havent been "clearly denied by her" she has parsed her words pretty professionally about it, but shes never said I lied about this, or the claims I've made were 100% false. In fact articles about it have pointed out that they dont discuss this very openly. Things like the accusations are overstated, or divorce is difficult are not open denials...

Mandel used it.
His 1992 opponent used it
it was brought up by the media in his SOS reelection against Taft, which he lost.


I'd say its nothing like the McCain black child campaign because theres no basis for those allegations, thats a made up rumor, this, like the bush draft dodging stuff, had some actual proof behind it.

[Rjjr77]

The Franklin County GOP endorsed businessman Michael Gibbons over sitting Treasurer Josh Mandel by a vote of 85-16. Quite surprising and a bad look for Mandel. Over the past 40 years or so, only 2 candidates not endorsed by the Franklin County GOP have gone on to win statewide primaries.

I dont think it shows him gaining momentum, it just confirms what many suspect, that he's been a Kasich plant this whole time.

[Rjjr77]

The Franklin County GOP endorsed businessman Michael Gibbons over sitting Treasurer Josh Mandel by a vote of 85-16. Quite surprising and a bad look for Mandel. Over the past 40 years or so, only 2 candidates not endorsed by the Franklin County GOP have gone on to win statewide primaries.

I dont think it shows him gaining momentum, it just confirms what many suspect, that he's been a Kasich plant this whole time.

I think it just further demonstrates how much everyone hates Mandel

Agreed. 85-16 is too big a margin for it to simply be Gibbons is the Kasich surrogate in the race.

If this was Hamilton or Delaware or Summit I'd agree, but you have to remember this is Franklin, the party is run by a close close close Kasich ally.

[Rjjr77]

Wow. His wife must have a really serious illness for him to drop out.

She's just about as ill as FitzGerald's son was when the whole Irish prostitute scandal dropped.

been gone for a bit, and Ohios blown up. My sources confirm Mandel's wife is genuinely ill

[Rjjr77]

The Cincinnati Enquirer has a nice piece on the state of the race.

TL;DR:

Rep. Renacci (OH-16) is essentially waiting for a phone call -- and endorsement -- from Trump.

Vance is being courted by Mitch McConnell, but seems unlikely to jump in.

Rep. Johnson (OH-06) is likely to jump in if he isn't made House Budget Chairman.

Gibbons is desperately trying to keep anyone with name ID and money from entering.

Sources close to Johnson say he is not running, a name to keep an eye on is State Senator Matt Huffman, who came close to pulling the trigger against mandel, and apparently has a bunch of donors lined up for a senate president bid.

[Rjjr77]

The Cincinnati Enquirer has a nice piece on the state of the race.

TL;DR:

Rep. Renacci (OH-16) is essentially waiting for a phone call -- and endorsement -- from Trump.

Vance is being courted by Mitch McConnell, but seems unlikely to jump in.

Rep. Johnson (OH-06) is likely to jump in if he isn't made House Budget Chairman.

Gibbons is desperately trying to keep anyone with name ID and money from entering.

Sources close to Johnson say he is not running, a name to keep an eye on is State Senator Matt Huffman, who came close to pulling the trigger against mandel, and apparently has a bunch of donors lined up for a senate president bid.

But why trade a state-senate president bid for a surefire loss in a Senate race?

Senate president is no gimmie, 2 other very viable names, and it would be huffmans only shot.

Surefire loss? no. but certainly a likely loss.

[Rjjr77]

Ohio posters, how bad (or good) would it be for Republicans if Gibbons actually ends up as the nominee?

Gibbons is a joke. Hes been a pay as he goes candidate with a dismally weak staff and crappy poll numbers. He's a lousy public speaker and has hidden Kasich ties. He could drag down the whole GOP slate.

[Rjjr77]

Wow. His wife must have a really serious illness for him to drop out.

She's just about as ill as FitzGerald's son was when the whole Irish prostitute scandal dropped.

been gone for a bit, and Ohios blown up. My sources confirm Mandel's wife is genuinely ill

That being the case, I genuinely wish him and his family well.

The Cincinnati Enquirer has a nice piece on the state of the race.

TL;DR:

Rep. Renacci (OH-16) is essentially waiting for a phone call -- and endorsement -- from Trump.

Vance is being courted by Mitch McConnell, but seems unlikely to jump in.

Rep. Johnson (OH-06) is likely to jump in if he isn't made House Budget Chairman.

Gibbons is desperately trying to keep anyone with name ID and money from entering.

Sources close to Johnson say he is not running, a name to keep an eye on is State Senator Matt Huffman, who came close to pulling the trigger against mandel, and apparently has a bunch of donors lined up for a senate president bid.

Seems early to say Johnson isn't running, unless they know he's got the Chairmanship.

Tangentially related to Huffman: do you know what happened to Kevin Coughlin?

Coughlin went after Summit GOP chair the late Alex Arshnikof, it cost him his career. He was Stow Clerk of Courts for a brief stay before losing a squeaker in 2015, hes now disappeared.

Johnson is not running, I have it confirmed.

[Rjjr77]

Vance for Senate talk already up in flames due to 1: being anti-Trump, 2: questionable residency.

Also he’s no more of an Ohio than Hillary is an Arkansan.

or a new yorker.

[Rjjr77]

Vance for Senate talk already up in flames due to 1: being anti-Trump, 2: questionable residency.

Also he’s no more of an Ohio than Hillary is an Arkansan.

or a new yorker.

Actually, I'd argue Hillary has a far stronger claim to being a New Yorker than Vance does to being an Ohioan at this point.

How? Vance at least has lived in Ohio, Clinton had not lived in New York 1 minute prior to running for Senate