First, there was some confusion over whether Brunner was or was not at the President’s visit to Strongsville yesterday. It turns out she was there but President Obama apparently snubbed her! As I noted on Twitter, Obama snubs a women but praises the men? Good thing the president doesn’t have a history of belittling women …

We do know that Lee Fisher was definitely not at the rally. Why? Well, he said he had to attend the meeting with the Plain Dealer. But obviously Secretary of State Brunner was able to attend both while the former jobs czar used it as an excuse to miss it. Interesting. What is Lee up to?

But then Fisher was supposed to be on WFIN in Findley to discuss the health care debate. But it turns out he was a no-show. Let’s go to the transcript:

Not sure exactly what happened to Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher.  Of course we mentioned not only the current Lieutenant Governor and candidate for US Senate seat now being held by Sen. George Voinovich was scheduled to be with us on the program in this half hour. [HE] scheduled to be with us to talk about his campaign hand the key issues he saw in terms of the important stuff for Ohio moving forward especially in this period of economic recovery .

We were planning on talking to him about that in this half hour but nothing, not sure what happened. We did confirm yesterday that he was supposed to be with us and then this morning nothing.

So not sure exactly what’s going on there. Hopefully we can reschedule and maybe get the Lieutenant Governor on the program yet this week because one of the things I wanted to ask him about was this health care vote in Washington. He wants to go to the Senate so wanted to ask where he stood on this whole healthcare debate that seems to be coming to a head this week.

Wow, that’s embarrassing!

So Brunner looks to take advantage of this sending out an email yesterday with the subject line “A Time for Courage”

Yesterday I was at the rally in Strongsville where President Obama eloquently and passionately exhorted Congress to pass health care reform. He pointed to the hand-wringing going on among Democrats in Congress over the political consequences to them of voting for health care reform. A woman in the audience shouted out, “We need courage!” The President paused and flashed one of his fierce smiles. “That’s what we need,” he agreed, as the crowd roared its approval. “That’s why I came here today. We need more courage.”

Of course, I am not sure I would call supporting a piece of legislation that a majority of Ohioans oppose as courageous but these emails tend to be over-the-top.

But if Brunner is courageous to support the health care bill and show up to support President Obama on the issue (even if she isn’t recognized for doing it at the time) then what does that make Lee Fisher’s duck and cover routine on the issue?

To adopt a famous turn of phrase: A Profile in Cowardice?

The ODP rolled out some nonsensical attack quotes that missed the whole point. Portman has been saying since the beginning that a bill that raises costs and hurts business is the last thing we need right now. He has been calling for reform that reduces costs and allows for greater access. But Democrats insist on ramming their plan down our throats even if they have to ignore the constitution to do it.

Anyone who knows him knows that Portman is no raging populist – nor is he in the pocket of big insurance companies like the Democrats insist – but he is an intelligent politician and he knows his public policy. So he knows the public doesn’t want a government take over of health care that leads to higher costs and more bureaucracy. And he knows that the proposal the Democrats are pushing will lead to just that. So he opposes it.

This is neither trolling for campaign donations nor mere campaign rhetoric. It is common sense.  And you know what? He is right.

Heritage’s The Foundry blog spells it out succinctly:

Obamacare Increases Unemployment, Insurance Premiums, Deficit, and Debt

President Barack Obama and congressional leaders claim that the Senate health bill, which will likely face a vote in the House by the end of the week, will decrease the deficit and bend the cost curve related to health care spending. However, recent analysis by The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis (CDA) shows that this is far from true. Instead, the bill’s mandates and numerous new taxes will have tumultuous effects. Passing Obamacare will come at the expense of the American people as it would grow the federal debt, increase premiums, and stifle economic growth.

Here is the section on premiums in particular:

• Increases insurance premiums. Mandates in the Senate bill would require health plans to offer more generous coverage, increasing the cost of insurance. Increased spending on premiums, accompanied by increased medical spending, would create upward pressure on prices. This would further increase government spending, since offering the current levels of care covered by Medicaid and the proposed subsidies would cost significantly more. Another choice would be to ration provider payments even more severely.

Another issue Portman has been focused on is the reckless spending and its impact on the future. Not surprisingly this is a big problem with the health care bill as well.

Chart? Chart:

As with every issue, the Democrats want to demagogue this issue and ignore the facts. We simply can’t let them get away with it.The stakes are too high.

Just another reason to support Rob Portman.

Click here to view the embedded video.

On a day that brought President Barack Obama to Ohio to make a final appeal for congressional approval of his health care overhaul plan, Republican U.S. Senate candidate Rob Portman had a different message.

“I pray that it will not pass,” Portman said on Monday, March 15. His comments came in a meeting with members of the Dayton Daily News editorial board.

Portman said the plan that Obama is trying to get the Democratic-controlled Congress to approve would increase costs.

“It’s unbelievable,” said Portman. “…We’re going to have higher, not lower costs.”

[emphasis mine - KH]

Now, for those of you slow on the uptake Rob Portman is saying he is opposed to the current health care proposal because it will lead to the opposite of what is needed: higher not lower costs. With me so far? Good.

Enter Seth Bringman and the Ohio Democratic Party who apprently struggle with these basic concepts:

Seth Bringman, spokesman for the Ohio Democratic Party, lashed back at Portman in an e-mail.

“While Rob Portman is praying for the status quo on health care, we will be praying for the millions of Americans without health insurance and the millions more middle class families who can’t afford rising health care costs,” said Bringman.

Um, except that isn’t what he said at all. He isn’t praying for the “status quo” – whatever that is at this point – but for the current proposal to be stopped.

Notice too, how Bringman tries his typical rhetorical Jedi mind trick asserting that Portman is opposed to helping middle class families who can’t afford “rising health care costs.”

One small problem: Portman is arguing that the bill will in fact raise costs and therefor is bad for American families and businesses – which is the obvious point of his comments.

In fact, Portman has been consistently making this point for months as the health care debate has played out and has said that what is needed is not Bringman’s big bad bogeyman of the “status quo” but reform that lowers costs and provides greater access. Anyone with a elementary school ability to read and process basic logic would understand this.

But it again appears that Seth Bringman and the ODP lack these basic skills. Sad isn’t it?  But education reform is the topic of a whole ‘nother post.

The latest example of this strategy is some bad jokes at a fundraising event. Yes, the jokes were in poor taste and not even funny. Yes, that is a headline if there ever was one: politicians are not funny!  Anyone who has ever attended any of these events could tell you that. Most politicians are just not funny and they don’t have a history of timely humor either.

As an aside, let me just say to any and all political activists, Tea Party organizers, and others involved in campaign events:

Please just shut up about the birth certificate! LET IT GO!

I don’t think these type of things matter a great deal but why waste everyone’s time and energy on this. Focus on what is important.

But in the end all these little controversies are just distractions. The fundamental issue of this election is jobs, jobs and jobs. Out of control federal spending and big government solutions that will only further hamper the economy are undercurrents that reinforce the jobs issue.  Any candidate who doesn’t get that is in trouble.

Rob Portman gets it. And he has focused his campaign like a laser on the issue.  And that is why he is leading in the polls despite running against two experienced candidates holding state wide office.

And this is why the left wants to attack him anytime anyone in his general vicinity says anything remotely controversial. This despite the fact that the left – both elected officials and activists – has smeared an entire populist movement of active citizens by making vulgar sexualized and derisive comments. Despite the history of poor taste and outrageous accusations that liter the history of the left and Democrats in this country.

Heck, most leftist blogs are unreadable thanks to their angry vulgarity and mouth frothing style. And yet Democrats stumbled over themselves to praise them when they need their money. And no one required denunciations. The hypocrisy here is staggering. The GOP is the only party who is required to distance themselves from any possible scandal or comment in poor tastes. Democrats compare President Bush to Hitler: perfectly fine. Republicans make a joke about Obama’s birth certificate: outrage!

But in the larger picture these gotcha attempts and fake scandals are just media moments and they won’t sway any votes or impact the campaign in any real way.

So on second thought, Democrats keep focusing on them while Republicans focus on the issues that matter. We will let the voters decide what is important.

Speaking of Lee Fisher and Jennifer Brunner is this the most boring primary evah? I mean this is supposed to be a battle royale for a crucial Senate seat. Democrats fighting for their political lives. Progressives showing their might, etc. This race is pretty important in Ohio and even nationally. And yet … nothing.

I will confess I have not trolled the lefty blogs for the latest talking points or arguments but it seems to me this primary is producing absolutely nothing of interest. Not debates between candidates no juicy arguments about the direction of the party or why either candidate is clearly superior.  The media seems bored by it as well.

Are the Dems afraid of taking shots at each other? Is Fisher just going to assume his money and his establishment support makes him the winner? I she afraid if he attacks Brunner he will lose the leftist base?

Is Brunner counting on support from the base and from women putting her over the top? Is she afraid to take shots at Fisher? Has she done any polling? Can she afford to?

I find it interesting that sixty days out we have a critical primary but one which is about as exciting as watching paint dry.

Read this article and weep at the Democrats conception of economic development:

Fisher said he is the only candidate who has been on the ground creating and saving jobs under the leadership of Gov. Ted Strickland. He said he is part of the team that helped convince V&M Star Steel to build an expansion on the border of Girard and Youngstown and helped secure the Chevrolet Cruze for the General Motors plant in Lordstown.

Fisher said he has championed for health care reform and a patient bill of rights.

“I believe I can take my experience with job creation and retention in Ohio to Washington, D.C., where I can help move Ohio into the field of green technology and help take advantage of the state’s strong manufacturing base,” Fisher said.

Seriously? Did “Job Czar” Lee Fisher actually say that outloud?  And people didn’t laugh him off the stage?

Just a reminder, folks. Ohio unemployment stands at 10.8% worse than the national average. How many jobs do you think V&M Star and Lordstown plants involved. Well, Ohio has lost something on the order of half a million jobs since Fisher was elected. Created or saved indeed.

But wait, Jennifer Brunner might be worse:

Brunner said Ohio needs to move away from manufacturing and into the fields of clean energy and biomedical technology. She also said the nation needs to solve its health care “crisis” to ease the strain on small businesses.

“There is no silver bullet to create jobs. It will take cooperation among many levels of business, government and advocacy groups to grow Ohio’s economy again,” Brunner said.

Ah, the brilliant insight! Move away from a manufacturing into clean energy. Sure, that will fix the economy. Oh, by the way, the manufacturing of medical devices is a potentially strong field for Ohio so moving away from manufacturing isn’t so simple. High technology manufacturing is different than traditional manufacturing.

Second, notice how create jobs requires cooperation from government and advocacy groups! That’s right. Advocacy groups create jobs. Only a leftist could say that kind of crap with a straight face. No, businesses create jobs. Proftis create jobs. I know that is a dirty words these days but it is true.

Government can get out of the way and help create the climate that is attractive to innovators and entreprenuers but it doesn’t cooperate with advocacy groups to “create jobs.” Government is a drag on growth. Sometimes a necessary one but a drag all the same.

Also this push for government created/mandated green jobs ignores the fact that these programs will kill more actual jobs than are created with taxpayer funded boondoggles. But the left continues to spout this mantra as if its magic will work if they just say it enough or in the right way. Thousands of jobs in energy not to mention manufacturing, service and other fields are destroyed so we can create these new “green” jobs. Basic math fail is involved.

Lastly, she insists on spouting this nonsense that the Democrats health care “reform” is about helping business. The problem with health care on the business side is cost. The current health care proposals will not lower costs for businesses. In fact, it increases mandates and punishes businesses that don’t comply with heavy handed government regulations. Can someone please offer an example of government lowering costs for anything? Why do we keep pretending this will happen?

Brunner and Fisher are so seeped in their statist mindset that they can’t even recognize that this model has failed.  Billions of stimulus dollars for what? Another $15 billion “jobs bill” that will do nothing (this is to say nothing of the never ending stream of corporate welfare that comes from the Department of Development and US Department of Commerce, etc.). The answer is always more hair of the dog that bit you. If government programs fail we haven’t spent enough!

And of course a Democratic gathering isn’t complete without a blame Bush comment:

“Despite the hard work we have done the past three years in Ohio, much of it has been undermined by federal policies created by the Bush administration that helped create the current recession,” Fisher said.

Part of me laughs at this mindset because I think Dems are going to wake up on election day and find that there precious anti-Bush strategy has failed.

But another part of me wants to cry because this mindset is still far too prevalent in the population at large (even amongst Republican office holders).

We are not going to spend our way out of this problem. We have to elect some candidates who will swear off on the first rule of holes:

STOP DIGGING!

I am realistic enough to realize we are not suddenly going to elect a landslide of libertarian public officials who will roll back government and allow the private sector to grow and flourish.

But we can start by soundly defeating the leftist hacks like Brunner and Fisher who spout this nonsense in the face of government failure after government failure.

This is not based on deep study of the polls or a county-by-county analysis or anything of that sort. It is more of a gut feeling based on how I see the campaign playing out. Now, of course, a great deal could change in the intervening months: scandals, gaffes, the political environment, etc. But right now I don’t see any of that happening in such a way to change the underlying landscape.

I have begun to think that elections are determined in many ways by some pretty basic elements. What is the mood, what is the central issue or issues, how the candidates are perceived and what are their one sentence arguments for running.

On these basics Kasich is simply better situated to win than Strickland.

Details – such as they are – below.

For those of you who don’t have time for long-winded posts allow me to summarize:

Strickland: Economy sucks + lack of clear message or record + credible challenger = lose

Kasich: meets fundraising & qualifications threshold + favorable environment + strong message = win

First off, you don’t have to be a political science professor to understand that a sitting governor with double digit unemployment for the foreseeable future is in trouble. Strickland may be an experienced campaigner and proven fundraiser but the economic situation is trouble with a capital T. Remember how unpopular Bob Taft got with much better economic numbers?

In this situation the challenger must do a couple of things: pass the threshold voters have for candidates and get his message out. No matter how bad things are most voters won’t vote for a completely unknown, inexperienced or crazy candidate (state of Minnesota perhaps excepted). The challenger has to convince voters that they are serious and not a threat to make matters worse.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The challenge for credible candidates can then be name recognition. And this is true of Kasich. Most voters know who Governor Strickland is but many still are unclear about Kasich. This then falls to money and communication. Will he have the money to get his message out and can he do that effectively?

The answers are yes and yes. Kasich is a credible candidate and has the money and talent to get his message out to voters. He has already done a nice job with social media to get the base on board and with using events to build momentum and get favorable news coverage. I have seen nothing to indicate this won’t continue.

Let’s review: incumbent in trouble because the economy is in the tank and unemployment is in double digits. Challenger is a credible, media savvy politician without the baggage of being strongly tied to current state legislative or party leadership (he is not part of the group that put the state in this position). He has proven that he can raise money and do the work necessary to win.

This puts Kasich in a position to run on a pretty simple platform: “things suck, let’s change”. Right? “The system is broken we need someone to come in and fix things.” Not hard to see the big picture message here.

So what is Ted Strickland going to run on? “Things could have been a lot worse” is about all he has. The strategy here is twofold: we survived the worst economic downturn in a generation & John Kasich is a scary guy who will destroy all you hold dear.

I think both of these will end up being weak tea. The fundamental problem is that Strickland can’t run as what I call a “conviction politician;”a candidate who cares about a few key issues and has the drive to accomplish something. Think the opposite of Bob Taft who was office manger from head to toe.

Now, Ted Strickland is going to try and be this candidate. He is going to boast about education reform, cutting government, lowering taxes (homestead exemption) and balancing the budget. The problem for Strickland is that he can’t run as a conviction politician because he has stepped all over his lines on so many issues. He has become the politician stuck awkwardly in the middle.

His education reform is a sop to the education unions – with a few good ideas mixed in – but the funding is not there. He ruined his cutting taxes plank by raising taxes to balance the budget (yes, removing tax cuts that were on the books is a tax increase). He managed to look like a flip-flopping hypocrite by trying to sneak through gambling as a way to solve the budget. And sure he has been forced to trim state government some but he can’t very well run on slashing state government because 1) no one believes him and 2) to do so risks further irritating state unions and other leftist groups who want him to raise taxes and expand government.

The bottom line is no one really believes Strickland is a conviction politician. He was elected because voters were ticked at Taft and the GOP and didn’t trust Ken Blackwell. Strickland at the time seemed like the type who wouldn’t do too much damage – experienced, moderate, not crazy.

But when the economy tanked he seemed like a dear in headlights. He simply does not exude leadership. He is afraid acting like the liberal he really is would mean defeat so he tries to tack to the middle without fully aggravating the leftist base. Throw in a seemingly never ending series of mini-scandals and examples of poor vetting/incompetent management and you have a messaging problem.

If you ask the average voter what Ted Strickland really stands for what do you think they would say. Many might see him as a nice guy, but he has precious little political capital. Name an issue where Strickland has really shown leadership. Begging for more stimulus dollars? Pushing an unpopular rail project?

This brings us back to Kasich. You see, he can run as a conviction politician; because he is one and because the environment calls for it.

The signature issue that highlights this is his call to roll back Ohio’s income tax. It is an example of thinking boldly and brashly about what Ohio needs to do to compete. And it excites the conservative base.

The media of course hates it. Because like the green eye-shade wearers they are, they demand detailed budget scenarios and explanations of how everything will work. They simply can’t fathom how something this big might be accomplished and so they seek to nit-pick it to death.

Government is slashed to the bone! Think of the children! The Democrats and their media enablers bang the drumbeat on and on but the voters aren’t listening. If you think government is too small you are already going to vote for Strickland.

And all the while the message that is communicated is John Kasich thinks taxes are too high and is willing to take a lot of heat for it. Voters are not into the inside baseball of technical budget numbers or economic development policy. They only have time for and the ability to deal with big picture stuff.

Secondly, Kasich can and is running against both parties in a sense; against both Ted Strickland and Bob Taft. He is making the case that Ohio has been thinking to small and too narrowly for far too long. The fact that a huge chunk of the political and governmental establishment screams when the idea of eliminating the income tax is raised just shows how tied they are to the status-quo.

During normal times this would be a risky platform. Ken Blackwell ran an awkward an often off-message campaign but in many ways he had similar elements. He too was arguing for large scale changes and blaming both parties for failing to act. The problem for Blackwell – outside of the left’s constant demonization – was that the electorate wasn’t ready for big time change.

But the economic downturn, and inability of government to do anything about it in the near to medium term, means this anti-status-quo message is much more attractive. And Kasich with his history of balancing the budget and serving during economic good times is perfectly situated to campaign on this message effectively.

All of this is a longwinded way to saying: what is the election going to come down to? It is going to come down to jobs and to Ohio’s future.

John Kasich is going to campaign as a fresh face and new attitude. He is going to argue that the status-quo isn’t good enough; that is hasn’t been good enough for some time but that politicians of both parties lack the conviction and imagination to do anything about it but that he does and he will.

Ted Strickland is going to try and argue that he made the hard choices during the worst economy since the great depression and that he has the experience to lead the rapidly approaching recovery. And that John Kasich is a reckless conservative who used to work at Lehman Brothers.

Voters are going to see double digit unemployment, mounting budget deficits, stimulus dollars wasted and taxes going up – not to mention cabinet members resigning and staffers in court.

Can you honestly tell me that voters will then choose to give Ted Strickland four more years to try again?

Me neither.

In the 10 states where leading political prognosticators deem the Senate seat a “tossup” (Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio and Pennsylvania) an analysis of social media tools being employed by the various candidates from Jan. 29-Feb. 6, 2010, revealed some striking results.

Here is the section on Ohio:

Ohio provides yet another example where both candidates could be doing more to launch the social campaign strategies. The presumptive GOP nominee, former Congressman Rob Portman, is only utilizing some bare-bones social media tools; while Portman’s campaign is showing strong Facebook (4,018 fans) and Twitter (1,210 followers) numbers, he has thus far failed to incorporate YouTube, SMS/text, MySpace, LinkedIn, Digg or Widgets. To his credit, all the following are also being used by his campaign: a blog, Flickr, email sign-up and grassroots/action center.

Fortunately for Portman, his two rivals in the Democratic primary—Jennifer Brunner and Lee Fisher—appear similarly situated with their weak social media strategies. Brunner has 2,208 Facebook fans, compared to Fisher’s 2,817 fans; Brunner has 1,286 Twitter followers compared to Fisher’s 806 followers; and both have nearly the same number of YouTube channel views (585 vs. 518, respectively). While Brunner is using SMS/text and a campaign blog, Fisher is a rarity in that he’s using Digg—but neither Brunner nor Fisher has embraced MySpace, LinkedIn or Widgets.

What do you think? Will social media play an important role in Ohio campaigns? Will it be a difference maker or just another component? Who do you think is best utilizing these tools right now?

Veronique de Rugy:

In 2010, Medicare and Medicaid cost 5.0 percent of GDP and Social Security cost 4.8 percent of GDP. Combined, that’s less than 10 percent of GDP. By 2020, the combined cost of these three programs is already projected to grow to 11.4 percent of GDP; extrapolating forward at constant growth rates, their cost will be at about 14.4 percent of GDP by 2030.