Medina County Dem News

(Medina County Democratic Action Committee)

Tom Wolfe to Retire from Elections Board, Party Scheduled

Tom Wolfe, former County Chair and longtime member of the Board of Elections, is retiring from the Board. A retirement party for Tom is being held Friday, November 30th, from 4:30 to 7 at the Eagles Hall in Medina. Stop in and pay tribute to Tom for his years of outstanding service on behalf of the Democratic Party.

Governor Ted Strickland Coming to Medina County on December 8, 2007

Special Announcement: Mark your calendar now!
Governor Strickland will join Medina County Democrats for a fundraiser on Saturday, December 8th, 11:00 AM, at Rustic Hills Country Club, Medina. Donation: $50 per person; Chairman's Circle Donation: $150 per person.
All proceeds go to the Medina County Democratic Party.
Reservation deadline is December 4th. Send checks to Medina County Democratic Party, P.O. Box 583, Medina, OH 44258.

Medina County Democratic Party Holiday Brunch

DEMOCRATS…LET'S GET TOGETHER!
PRE-HOLIDAY BRUNCH
SATURDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2007
10:00 AM
COPPERTOP, AT CHEROKEE HILLS GOLF COURSE
5740 CENTER RD. (RT. 303), VALLEY CITY
$16 PER PERSON; CHILDREN 3-12, $8; 3 AND UNDER FREE
FEATURED SPEAKER:
CONGRESSWOMAN BETTY SUTTON
IN KEEPING WITH THE SPIRIT OF HOLIDAY GIVING, PLEASE BRING NON-PERISHABLE FOOD ITEMS OR HOUSEHOLD SUPPLIES TO BE DONATED TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES CENTER IN MEDINA.
RESERVATIONS DUE BY NOVEMBER 27TH
CALL 330-722-6655 OR SIGN UP AT WWW.MEDINADEMS.ORG OR CONTACT PAM MILLER AT 330-725-7487 OR PAM450@BRIGHT.NET
PAY AT THE DOOR OR SEND CHECKS TO:
MEDINA COUNTY DEMOCRATIC PARTY
P.O. BOX 583
MEDINA, OH 44258

VOLUNTEER FOR ROBIN WEIRAUCH – ELECT ANOTHER DEMOCRAT TO CONGRESS
Who: Robin Weirauch, Democratic Congressional Candidate (http://www.robinweirauch.com/)
What: We don't have to wait until '08 to help elect another Democrat to the U.S. Congress!
When: Three Week Countdown to Tuesday, December 11, 2007 – Special Election Day!
Where: U.S. Congress, District 5 (Ashland, Crawford, Defiance, Fulton, Henry, Huron, Lucas, Mercer, Paulding, Putnam, Sandusky, Seneca, Van Wert, Williams, Wood, Wyandot)
Why: For our communities, our state, our nation!

Hi Friends,
We are 21 days from victory! We have lot left to do to elect Robin Weirauch to Congress. Here are a few ways to help elect Robin and improve The Democratic Party's strength in Congress.

1. December 1st – We are having a HUGE canvass in the district on the first Saturday of December. The canvasses start at 10 AM. We will direct you to a canvass near your county. Want to walk and talk the entire weekend? We'll find a home for you to stay!

2. More Canvass Opportunities! – December 2nd, 8th and 9th – we need volunteers to talk to voters about Robin whenever possible. Bring friends!

3. Get Out the Vote – GOTV twice in two months! Can politics be any more exciting?! Volunteer Election Day Weekend (December 8 – 9) and/or Election Day (December 11). We have a lot of voters to talk to, and the most effective way we can achieve this goal is by talking to them face-to-face and over the phone!

We appreciate everything that you do. Now, let's ELECT Robin WEIRAUCH to CONGRESS!!

If you can help this special election cycle, please contact any of the following:

Megan Joyce (NE Ohio Field Director)
614-207-1714 (c)
megan@ohiodems.org

Michell Domkee (NW Ohio Field Director)
614-207-5702 (c)
michell@ohiodems.org

Courtney Foley (Weirauch Field Director)
202-276-5305 (cell)
419-352-1787 (office)
Courtney.foley@gmail.com

Medina County Off-Year Voting Statistics

According to the Medina County Board of Elections website 37,414 voters voted in the 2007 general election. The BOE also shows the county as having 124,107 voters. Based on those two figures, the turnout was 30.1%. The figure for the total number of voters is misleading, however.

There are 23,040 registered voters in Medina County who didn't vote in either the 2004 or 2006 general elections. There are also 74,247 who voted in either of those two elections. Assuming that voters who have missed voting in both a presidential and gubernatorial elections aren't going to vote in an off-year election, it makes sense to take them out of the equation when figuring the turn-out for 2007.

If you remove the 23,040 "missing" voters from the equation, you get a voter universe of 101,067. Using that figure, the turn-out increases to 37.1%. If you calculate the turn-out based on the voters who actually voted in either the 2004 or 2006 general elections, the turn-out increases to 50.3%.

What's interesting about off-year elections is that both political parties aren't seeing a very large percentage of their voters voting in them, if 2005 is any guide. In 2004 Democratic voters in Medina County numbered 16,195 while Republican voters numbered 16,416. In 2006 Democratic voters numbered 15,207 and Republican voters numbered 15,555.

In 2005, however, the turn-out for Democratic voters dropped to 4019 and the turn-out for Republican voters dropped to 3258. If either or both political parties had turned out their voters anywhere close the 2004 or 2006 general elections, the results would probably have been dramatically different.

Republican, Democrat Tied in Seville Council Race After Official Count

James Lovejoy, a Democrat, and Leslie Miller, a Republican, were tied after the official count in their race for Seville, Ohio Village Council. Each of them has 291 votes. There will now be a recount by hand, and if they are still tied after the hand recount, a coin flip will determine the winner.

Lovejoy ran a very aggressive campaign for Village Council while Miller, an incumbent council member, was not nearly as visible. There were three people running to fill two spots on the Council.

This is the only race in the county in which a recount will be conducted. You can read the story about it in the Medina County Gazette.

NLRB Gives Workers the Shaft

Harold Myerson, who has a column that appears in the Washington Post, wrote on November 21, 2007 about some recent rulings by the NLRB. The NLRB was established during the Franklin Roosevelt administration to protect the rights of workers to organize unions. Unfortunately, since Bush as been president and controlled the appointment process, it has become, to use Myerson's phrase, "The National Labor Ruination Board."

As Myerson points out, there are two recent rulings that show just how far the Board will bend logic and reasoning to arrive at employer friendly decisions. In one case the Board ruled that even if 51% of employees sign union cards saying they want representation, the employer must post a notice informing the employees that if 30% of them sign a petition saying they don't want a union, the wishes of the 51% will be ignored and an election will take place. The Board reasoned that the cards might have been the result of "group pressure."

In another case, however, the Broad ruled that if there is a union in place, and 51% of the workers sign cards saying they don't want the union to represent them any longer, that is fine, and no election has to be held. In other words, cards that help unions are bad, but cards that help employers are good.

Most social liberals deplore the conservative attempts to pack the courts because of what it will do to the Roe v. Wade decision. Roe, however, is not the real reason why conservatives are trying to pack the courts. The real reasons are to help corporations avoid laws that hamper their freedom of action and to help the Federal government increase its ability to monitor and control people. Roe is just the excuse that conservatives give to the religious right to get their help.

2008 Primary & Caucus Schedule

A blogger named "Connecticut Bob" has taken the time to put together the primary and caucus schedule for both the Democratic and Republican Parties. It is an interesting document. The caucuses apparently start on January 3rd with Iowa, but might be the 14th, and the primaries apparently start on January 15th with Michigan, but might actually start on January 22nd with New Hampshire.

UPDATE: There are now reports out that New Hampshire's primary will be on January 8, 2008.

New Poll on Character Traits of 2008 Presidential Candidates

The AP and Yahoo have a new poll out in which respondents were asked to rate presidential candidates from each party in terms of character traits such being decisive, honest, experienced, ethical, and strong. In each of these traits, Clinton and Giuliani lead their respective parties. What is interesting about this poll is that the two leading candidates for their parties in terms of being likeable are Obama and Giuliani. Between those two, Obama was viewed as more likeable than Giuliani by a 54% to 46% spread.

The article about the poll points out, though, that likeability, if there is such a word, ranks relatively low on a list of character traits that voters consider important for a presidential candidate. Interestingly in this election year, according to the article, Democrats are concentrating more on personal characteristics and Republicans more on policy.

Back in 2000 we were told by a lot of supposedly knowlegeable people in the media that Bush would beat Gore because people liked him better than Gore. According to this article, and this poll, that is just one more example of how wrong the media can be when it comes to analyzing politics. Too often, what is supposedly objective reporting is nothing more than the reporter's own biases disguised as the opinion of others.

Republican Praise for Democratic Medina County Auditor Kovack

Mike Morse, former president of Medina City Council, and a Republican, wrote a letter to the editor of the Medina County Gazette praising Mike Kovack, the Democratic Auditor of Medina County. You can view the letter here.

How Iraq War Has Hurt U.S. Diplomatically

Anne Applebaum of the Washington Post is a columnist who seems to be somewhat sympathetic to the Bush Administration. Therefore, we were struck by a column that appears in the Post dated Tuesday, November 20, 2007, in which she points out the ways in which the Iraq War has damaged the diplomatic efforts of the U.S. She starts off by noting that militarily things seem better in Iraq, but she then goes on to state that most Americans don't realize what this war has done to our standing in the world. This is a quote from her column:

Though I don't especially want to perpetuate any stereotypes about the mainstream media, I have to say that this optimism is totally unwarranted. Not because things aren't improving in Iraq -- it seems they are, at least for the moment -- but because the collateral damage inflicted by the war on America's relationships with the rest of the world is a lot deeper and broader than most Americans have realized. It isn't just that the Iraq war invigorated the anti-Americanism that has always been latent pretty much everywhere. What's worse is the fact that -- however it all comes out in the end, however successful Iraqi democracy is a decade from now -- our conduct of the war has disillusioned our natural friends and supporters and thrown a lasting shadow over our military and political competence. However it all comes out, the price we've paid is too high.

When America was first formed and for about a hundred years thereafter we pretty much tried to influence the rest of the world by example, not by military force. Even after we began to emerge as a world power, and fought the war against the Spanish in the 1890s, we were usually reluctant to throw our weight around. We only got into WWI when a ship was attacked and Americans were killed. Then, after that war, we ignored the League of Nations and concentrated on ourselves. We only got into WWII after Pearl Harbor, and might not have even declared war on Germany and Italy except they declared war on us.

After WWII, though, we became convinced that we had to be involved with the rest of the world. So we took the lead in establishing the United Nations, helped rebuild Europe with the Marshall Plan, conducted on the most benign occupations by a conquering power in world history in Japan, and helped form N.A.T.O. to counteract Soviet expansionism. In most of those efforts, however, we worked in concert with others and didn't try to go it alone.

Bush decided on a different approach. Unlike his own father in the first Gulf War, and unlike Clinton in Kosovo. he decided, along with Tony Blair, to pretty much go it alone in fighting the Iraqis. He pressured the U.N. and Congress to support him and invaded a country that had done nothing to the U.S.

His approach has been a disaster. We have alienated our natural allies. We have appeared hypocritical to the rest of the world. We have violated our own ideals. We have sacrificed priceless lives and over half a trillion dollars in the sands of Iraq. We find ourselves in a situation which has no easy way out, and in which no matter what we do, our own self-interest will be jeopardized.

Meanwhile Bush and his supporters will see columns like Applebaum's as weak and her arguments as meritless. They will continue to see what Bush has done as being both right and necessary. They will continue to enable him to drag down America's standing in the world.

Will Clinton be Electable in Ohio?

That's the title of a column that appeared in the Sunday, November 18, 2007 edition of the Columbus Dispatch. The column appears to have its impetus from a poll that was released by A Quinnipiac University poll of Ohio voters. The poll showed that 44% of Ohioans had a favorable view of Clinton and 44% had an unfavorable view of her. The poll also showed that 56% would either definitely vote for her or might vote for her, while 41% said they would never vote for her.

There were significant differences between Democrats and Republicans, as might be expected, and some differences between men and women, which might also be expected. What is somewhat unexpected is that 35% of independents polled said that they would never vote for her. The reason that this is unexpected is that in most national polls independents are expressing attitudes much closer to Democatic ideals than to Republican ideals.

Another unexpected result, this one more pleasing to Clinton, is that only 52% of white, born-again evangelicals say that they would never vote for her while 45% of the same group would either definitely vote for her, (24%) or might vote for her, (21%). The reason why this is unexpected is that in 2004 CNN Exit poll this group favored Bush over Kerry by 78% to 21% and constitued 23% of the poll sample. If Clinton can improve on Kerry's percentage with this group by 24% points or anything close to it, then she will win Ohio, and win it comfortably.

Here's something else to consider when analyzing this whole favorable-unfavorable view thing about Clinton. In 2004, again according to the CNN exit poll, Bush, who carried the state had 47% of the electorate viewing him unfavorably. Again, if Clinton keeps her unfavorable rating in the low 40s, she will do just fine.

More Medina County Voter Stats

Yesterday, November 17, we posted an article that gave some numbers on Medina County primary voting for both the Democratic and Republican parties. In three categories: Increase in party identification among voters registering in the four years between the 2002 and the 2006 primaries; switch in party identification between the two parties in that same period; and party identification among 18-30 year old voters who registered between the two primaries and then voted in the 2006 primary, Democrats did better than Republicans:

Increase in party identification: Democrats had 1467 while Republicans had 1405;
voters who switched parties: Democrats had 866, while Republicans had 167; and
18-30 year old voters who registered after the 2002 primary and then voted in the 2006 primary: Democrats had 404 while Republicans had 366.

The Democratic Party has more female than male voters, 8743 to 7155, while the Republicans are just the reverse. Medina County Republicans are made up of 8398 men to 7945 women. These figures mean that women make up 55% of the Democratic Party in Medina County while men make up 51% of the Republican Party in Medina County. Thus women voters are slightly more important to Democratic candidates in primaries than male voters are to Republican candidates in primaries.

It will be interesting to see if Clinton being on the 2006 ballot increases the number of women who take Democratic ballots just as it will be interesting to see if McCain and Giuliani being on the Republican ballot increases the number of men. There was a poll out recently that showed that while Clinton as a candidate took women voters from the Republicans, Giuliani took male voters from the Democrats.

Clinton, Obama, Edwards Fighting Door to Door in Iowa

The New York Times has an articleout dated Sunday, November 18, 2007, about Hillary Clinton increasing the time she is spending in Iowa. Although she has a huge lead in national polls, she doesn't have such a lead in Iowa. There the campaign is a lot closer. According to the article, a large share of Clinton's support comes from Democrats who have never participated in the caucus process. This is from the article:

More than 60 percent of those who have identified themselves as Clinton supporters, senior strategists say, have never participated in the Iowa caucuses. It is a far higher share than the campaign had been anticipating, which suggests that many of the reliable rank-and-file Democrats have chosen another candidate. So the Clinton campaign is working to expand its universe of supporters to women who have never participated.

This is what the major campaigns are doing to counteract the fact that her opponents are doing well in Iowa:

In the final seven weeks of the race, all campaigns are increasing their efforts here, placing new advertisements and investing more resources. To fight the new push by the Clinton campaign, rivals are also planning to spend nearly all their time in Iowa in December, hoping to raise doubts about her candidacy. While the Obama and Edwards campaigns have been gradually building for months toward this moment, the Clinton campaign has bolstered its activity here in recent weeks, hiring 100 new workers to concentrate on a person-to-person drive to explain the quirky process of the caucuses, with a goal of having 50,000 in-home visits by Christmas.

The article has a graphic up which shows the favorability rating for each Party's top five candidates and, where they exist, the favorability rating for the same candidates nationwide. What is interesting about this is that Clinton's favorability ratings for Iowa are less than for the nation as a whole while both Obama and Edwards have favorability ratings for Iowa that are ahead of their favorability ratings nationwide. Below are the names of each of the top three Dem candidates with the first number being their national favorability rating, the second number being their Iowa favorability rating, and the third being the percentage of Democrats who say they will vote for that candidate in the caucuses:

Clinton: 79%, 52% and 25%
Edwards: 44%, 73%, and 23%
Obama: 56%, 72%, and 22%.

You can see that Clinton's and Edwards' favorability ratings in Iowa are both the reverse of what they are in the United States as a whole. This suggests that Clinton's name recognition and generally positive national publicity are not nearly as effective for her in Iowa as they are in the U.S. as a whole. It also suggests that once people actually hear Edwards' and Obama's message, they like them better.

If Clinton was the lose both the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary, the race for the Democratic nomination would get a lot more interesting. On the other hand, if she wins both of these early contests, with all the publicity that she would gain from those wins, then the nomination race may be over.

Medina County Primary Voting 1998-2006

Here are the numbers for the voters voting in primaries from 1998-2006 in Medina County with the first column being the year, the second column being the number of Republican primary voters and the third column being the number of Democratic voters:

1998/ 10144/ 6856

2000/ 18814/ 8641

2002/ 11464/ 6341

2004/ 12231/ 14033

2006/ 12191/ 11675

There are several interesting things about these numbers. First, the Republican Party since 1998 has only picked up 2,147 in gubernatorial primaries while the Democratic Party has picked up 4,819 voters.

Second, both parties had their highest turnouts during presidential election years, the Republicans in 2000 and the Democrats in 2004.

Third, while the difference between the Republicans and Democrats in the 1998 primary was 3288 by 2006 that difference was 516. That figure is even more significant when you remember that while the Democratic primary for governor was a lopsided contest between Strickland and Flannery, the Republican primary for governor was a hotly contested one between Blackwell and Petro.

Fourth, the combination of Bob Taft as governor and George Bush as president could be driving down the Republican primary turnout.

Fifth, having a Democrat from a "red" area of Ohio, Strickland, being the leading candidate for Governor in 2006 helped the voter turnout in Medina County for the Democratic Primary. Between 2002 and 2006 the voter turnout in the Democratic Primary increased by 5,334 votes. Compare that to the decrease of 515 from the 1998 to the 2002 primary when we had two Cuyahoga County candidates, Fisher and Hagan as the leading candidates for Governor.

It will be fascinating to see what happens in the March 2008 presidential primary in Medina County since both parties should have contested primaries for president. Since the highest turnout for a primary was in 2000 when McCain was running against Bush, and since McCain will be on the ballot in 2008 there could be a big Republican turnout. On the other hand, since Clinton is the first woman to have a realistic opportunity to win the nomination of a major political party there could be a big Democratic turnout. Of course, it is not an either-or situation since voters who occasionally vote in party primaries come from ranks of independents and not the other party.

This is shown by the fact that from 2002 to 2006 only 886 voters went from voting Republican to voting Democratic in primaries even though the number of Democratic voters increased by over 5,000. Clearly most of the increase came from previously non-affliated voters voting in the Democratic primary since only 1467 voters who registered after the primary election of May, 2002 but before the May, 2006 primary took a Democratic ballot in that primary. Those figures mean that 27.5% of the increase turnout for the two Democratic primaries of 2002 and 2006 came from new Medina County voters while 72.5% came from voters who were registered before the 2002 primary. No matter what, though, the numbers from the March 2008 primary will be interesting to analyze.

Why Can't Our Harvard MBA President Pay for His War With 500 Billion Dollars?

What many Americans don't realize is the huge increase in defense spending that has taken place over the last decade, and especially during the term of the Bush Administration. In 1996 military spending by the United States, according to information provided by the Congressional Budget Office, was 266 billion dollars. For fiscal year 2008, even without funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the defense budget will be over $500 billion dollars.

Most of this increase has come since September 11, 2001. From fiscal year 1996 to fiscal year 2001, the defense budget went up by 40 billion dollars. From fiscal year 2001 to the present, it has gone up almost 300 billion dollars. No matter how you look at it, that's a lot of money.

What has to be kept in mind is how much money we spend compared to the rest of the world. The following is from the website called Global Issues and concerns 2005:

The US military spending was almost two-fifths of the total.
The US military spending was almost 7 times larger than the Chinese budget, the second largest spender.
The US military budget was almost 29 times as large as the combined spending of the six "rogue" states (Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Sudan and Syria) who spent $14.65 billion.
It was more than the combined spending of the next 14 nations.
The United States and its close allies accounted for some two thirds to three-quarters of all military spending, depending on who you count as close allies (typically NATO countries, Australia, Canada, Israel, Japan and South Korea)
The six potential "enemies," Russia, and China together spent $139 billion, 30% of the U.S. military budget.

Now, Bush is telling the Congress and the American public that he needs an additional 140 billion to pay for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Why? Why does he need the additional money on top of the 500 billion or so that Congress has given him for defense for fiscal year 2008?

One of the reasons that was given for electing Bush president in 2000 was that he would be America's "First MBA President." Well, here's our suggestion: take that ballyhooed Harvard MBA and come up with a way to pay for his war out of the 500 billion dollars that the Democratic Congress has already given him.

Newsletter prepared by:
Medina County Democratic Action Committee
Joyce Kimbler, Treasurer
P.O. Box 1213
Medina, OH 44258
MCDAC Website