Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder (R) and four colleagues arrested in $ 60 million bribery, racketeering case.

[The Romulan Republic]

https://dispatch.com/news/20200721/ohio ... ibery-case

Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder and four colleagues were arrested by federal officials Tuesday as part of a bribery investigation involving the state’s $1 billion nuclear plant bailout and Householder’s maneuverings to secure support to lead the legislative chamber.

Householder, 61, R-Glenford, is charged in the alleged racketeering conspiracy involving the funneling of energy company funds through Generation Now, a dark money group formed by a longtime associate.

Some of the proceeds allegedly were used to back the campaigns of legislative candidates supportive of Householder’s run for speaker and to personally enrich Householder.

The felony carries a potential sentence of up to 20 years in prison.

U.S. Attorney Dave DeVillers called the case “likely the largest bribery, money-laundering scheme ever perpetrated against the people of Ohio.”

Ohio is a very close state right now. Hopefully the backlash against the Republicans for this in the state will ensure that Biden flips it.

[TimothyC]

Ohio is a very close state right now. Hopefully the backlash against the Republicans for this in the state will ensure that Biden flips it.

TRR, I'm going to state that you don't know shit about Ohio politics. At the state level, the GOP has run the table for over a decade, and the districts are gerrymandered, they are not terribly so (last Dem to win statewide was Sen. Brown, and before that was Obama in '12). Now, what has happened in Ohio over the last four years or so is that the state GOP, having been in charge for as long as they have (The Ohio Senate has been in GOP hands for nearly three decades IIRC, and the House, for all but 2 of the last 24 years) is that the Tea Party / Trumpist wing of the State GOP has tried a hostile takeover of the party (that, and lots of members of the state GOP have gotten really complacent over the last two decades of nearly single party governance). While they have some power, they are still the smallest of the three factions in the General Assembly - after the Dems & the establishment GOP. The Establishment GOP, not wanting to give in to the Trumpist faction, partnered with the Dems to get Householder, the former speaker from the early 2000s (before he was term limited out of office), back in the speakership. The Dems were never going to be able to get one of their own (they may be the largest of the three factions, but they are not bigger than the two GOP factions combined). This really stupid act of taking the bribes on Householder's part does damage to the establishment wing of the GOP without hitting the trumpist faction. It's going to be very easy for the Trumpists to separate themselves from Householder.

That was a bit of a tangent anyway. The point being, if it comes down to Ohio of Biden, he's already lost, as the state has been trending more pro-GOP for the last two decades than it did before.

Edit: Wasn't clear: I think Biden is likely to win, but I don't think it's going to be the state that puts him over the top.

[Ziggy Stardust]

That was a bit of a tangent anyway. The point being, if it comes down to Ohio of Biden, he's already lost, as the state has been trending more pro-GOP for the last two decades than it did before.

Where are you getting that from? Ohio went to Obama. Twice. I don't see how that means it has been trending "more pro_GOP for the last two decades than it did before".

[Alferd Packer]

That was a bit of a tangent anyway. The point being, if it comes down to Ohio of Biden, he's already lost, as the state has been trending more pro-GOP for the last two decades than it did before.

Where are you getting that from? Ohio went to Obama. Twice. I don't see how that means it has been trending "more pro_GOP for the last two decades than it did before".

Look at the margins of victory in the presidential election for the last 20 years. Bush II won by 200,000 and then 100,000 votes. Obama won by 300,000, then 200,000 votes. Trump won by 450,000 votes. In a bellwether or swing state, that is a crushing victory. If Biden can't convince 225,001 of those 2016 Trump voters to break for him, there's no way he's winning back Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, whose margins were comparatively miniscule, and thus he has no viable path to the Presidency.

[The Romulan Republic]

Ohio is a very close state right now. Hopefully the backlash against the Republicans for this in the state will ensure that Biden flips it.

TRR, I'm going to state that you don't know shit about Ohio politics. At the state level, the GOP has run the table for over a decade, and the districts are gerrymandered, they are not terribly so (last Dem to win statewide was Sen. Brown, and before that was Obama in '12). Now, what has happened in Ohio over the last four years or so is that the state GOP, having been in charge for as long as they have (The Ohio Senate has been in GOP hands for nearly three decades IIRC, and the House, for all but 2 of the last 24 years) is that the Tea Party / Trumpist wing of the State GOP has tried a hostile takeover of the party (that, and lots of members of the state GOP have gotten really complacent over the last two decades of nearly single party governance). While they have some power, they are still the smallest of the three factions in the General Assembly - after the Dems & the establishment GOP.

Since my point was about the Presidential race, where it is very much a swing state according to polling and past results, I'm not sure of the relevance of this.

The Establishment GOP, not wanting to give in to the Trumpist faction, partnered with the Dems to get Householder, the former speaker from the early 2000s (before he was term limited out of office), back in the speakership. The Dems were never going to be able to get one of their own (they may be the largest of the three factions, but they are not bigger than the two GOP factions combined). This really stupid act of taking the bribes on Householder's part does damage to the establishment wing of the GOP without hitting the trumpist faction. It's going to be very easy for the Trumpists to separate themselves from Householder.

So is this just some long-winded way of saying "This scandal is really the DEMOCRATS' fault"?

That was a bit of a tangent anyway.

No shit. Why'd you do it?

The point being, if it comes down to Ohio of Biden, he's already lost, as the state has been trending more pro-GOP for the last two decades than it did before.

Edit: Wasn't clear: I think Biden is likely to win, but I don't think it's going to be the state that puts him over the top.

I never said it was. If we win Ohio, we've probably also won Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida, and possibly North Carolina. What I said is that this might help flip Ohio, nothing more or less.

But let's be clear: if it comes down to one state, or two states, the Democrats have ultimately lost. It will be easy for Trump to point to or manufacture "irregularities" and claim that its fraudulent, and he'll only need to bully a few faithless electors, possibly, to pull off a coup. And if its that close, nearly all Republicans will willingly go along with it, if history has been any guide. And even if Trump doesn't manage a coup, a narrow election after everything that's happened, the hundreds of thousands dead and the ruined economy and the concentration camps and secret police, fundamentally means that Trumpism is normalized, that its no big deal.

So winning as many states as possible absolutely matters, regardless of which state "decides it". Its not fair, but just winning the minimum isn't enough. We need to run up the score.

[The Romulan Republic]

That was a bit of a tangent anyway. The point being, if it comes down to Ohio of Biden, he's already lost, as the state has been trending more pro-GOP for the last two decades than it did before.

Where are you getting that from? Ohio went to Obama. Twice. I don't see how that means it has been trending "more pro_GOP for the last two decades than it did before".

Look at the margins of victory in the presidential election for the last 20 years. Bush II won by 200,000 and then 100,000 votes. Obama won by 300,000, then 200,000 votes. Trump won by 450,000 votes. In a bellwether or swing state, that is a crushing victory. If Biden can't convince 225,001 of those 2016 Trump voters to break for him, there's no way he's winning back Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, whose margins were comparatively miniscule, and thus he has no viable path to the Presidency.

I don't follow your logic here. Trump won Ohio by a much wider margin than Michigan/Pennsylvania/Wisconsin, so somehow that means that if Biden can't win Ohio he also can't win Michigan/Pennsylvania/Wisconsin?

Ohio's status as a "bellweather" is one of those things that has historically been true but is inching ever-closer to no longer applying, like Texas being red. Maybe this'll be the year it changes, maybe not. Like Texas being red.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Look at the margins of victory in the presidential election for the last 20 years. Bush II won by 200,000 and then 100,000 votes. Obama won by 300,000, then 200,000 votes. Trump won by 450,000 votes. In a bellwether or swing state, that is a crushing victory. If Biden can't convince 225,001 of those 2016 Trump voters to break for him, there's no way he's winning back Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, whose margins were comparatively miniscule, and thus he has no viable path to the Presidency.

Which has fuck all to do with what I was talking about? I never said anything about Ohio not being important for Biden or anything like that. I don't even know why you are bringing that up.

I'm just pointing out the evidence from previous national elections does NOT demonstrate that Ohio has become "increasingly pro-GOP over the past two decades" as Timothy alleged.

[TimothyC]

Where are you getting that from? Ohio went to Obama. Twice. I don't see how that means it has been trending "more pro_GOP for the last two decades than it did before".

Since 2008, the only two Dems have one state-wide races in Ohio - Obama and Brown. If we go back to 2008, that number doubles by adding Cordray and Boyce in the special elections. That's five races in over a decade (that saw 24 races).

Since my point was about the Presidential race, where it is very much a swing state according to polling and past results, I'm not sure of the relevance of this.

<>Background data</>*

So is this just some long-winded way of saying "This scandal is really the DEMOCRATS' fault"?

...

No shit. Why'd you do it?

No, this was not a "IT IS THE FAULT OF THOSE EBIL DemocRATS" (although, the Trumpists might support said narrative). The point of all of this was to point out that the impacts of this are not going to be as cut and dry as you think. You failed to understand the nuances of this situation which blinded you to the prospect of it helping the Trumpists at the state level.

So winning as many states as possible absolutely matters, regardless of which state "decides it". Its not fair, but just winning the minimum isn't enough. We need to run up the score.

Only need to win the EC, and only by having more than the other guy in enough states to win the EC. Yes, I reject your narrative of Trump trying to stay in office after he left. I do this because he hasn't stacked the offices necessary to pull off such a coup, and it's getting too late to do so.

*This is a good way to communicate that I intend the text inside the to be read in a sing-song tone right? Would just using without the html like structure around it be better?

[TimothyC]

Missed the edit window: 6 Races [not five 'one' {really dumb typo} as stated above] (Obama '08 & '12, Cordray '08*, Boyce '08*, & Brown '12 & '18) out of 24 (three presidential in '08, '12, & '16; four senate in '10, '12, '16, & '18; Governor/Lt. Gov., State Secretary of State, State AG, State Auditor, & State Treasurer in '10, '14, & '18; and special elections for State AG & State Treasurer in '08).

Think about that. With statewide races every two years (either for state office or for national office), Dems have only won six of the 24 possible seats

*The '08 Special Elections these gentlemen ran in were triggered when the State AG resigned, and the State Treasurer ran for the seat, necessitating a special election for the State Treasurer.

[Ralin]

Yes, I reject your narrative of Trump trying to stay in office after he left. I do this because he hasn't stacked the offices necessary to pull off such a coup, and it's getting too late to do so.

I feel like you haven't been paying attention for the past few years, because not having done the groundwork to make something feasible doesn't remotely guarantee Trump won't try to do it.

[Gandalf]

With the apparent delineation between Trump flavour Republicans and Establishment ones, how many of the non-Trump ones will vote for him in November?

[TimothyC]

With the apparent delineation between Trump flavour Republicans and Establishment ones, how many of the non-Trump ones will vote for him in November?

Some, probably most, but not all, and not I.

[Gandalf]

Sorry for the slow reply. Stuff is nuts.

With the apparent delineation between Trump flavour Republicans and Establishment ones, how many of the non-Trump ones will vote for him in November?

Some, probably most, but not all, and not I.

Aside from the oddity of getting theocrat Kasich to speak at the DNC, what's the difference between a Trump Republican and a mainstream one that votes for him anyway?

[Ralin]

Aside from the oddity of getting theocrat Kasich to speak at the DNC, what's the difference between a Trump Republican and a mainstream one that votes for him anyway?

The latter feels varying degrees of uncomfortable.

[TimothyC]

Aside from the oddity of getting theocrat Kasich to speak at the DNC, what's the difference between a Trump Republican and a mainstream one that votes for him anyway?

Seeing as we are talking about state politics, not national, it would include such things as voting for the state gas tax increase, and expansion of public transit funding as well as voting against cuts to social services (although in many cases, it is just controlling the floor so stuff doesn't get put up for a vote).

State politics matter, and have just as large of an impact on the every-day lives of people as federal government.

[Elheru Aran]

Aside from the oddity of getting theocrat Kasich to speak at the DNC, what's the difference between a Trump Republican and a mainstream one that votes for him anyway?

Seeing as we are talking about state politics, not national, it would include such things as voting for the state gas tax increase, and expansion of public transit funding as well as voting against cuts to social services (although in many cases, it is just controlling the floor so stuff doesn't get put up for a vote).

State politics matter, and have just as large of an impact on the every-day lives of people as federal government.

Notably, it is quite possible for someone to vote a straight line Republican ticket for their *state* government, but deliberately choose to not vote for the Republican candidate for President, or vote for the third party, or not vote at all for any candidate for that position. Not all voting apparatuses will let you abstain but there's always enough candidates on the slate that it's possible to simply throw away your vote on one of the pointless third-partiers and effectively abstain.