I’ll have the cheeseburger of doom, with a side of perilous fries, and a small cola of uncertainty.
I should have stated that my results were from Warren County, where I live. I’m hoping the rest of the district got a better turnout than that. The final results for Warren County were:
REGISTERED VOTERS - TOTAL 73,878
BALLOTS CAST - TOTAL 18,320 24.80
REPRESENTATIVE TO CONGRESS 2ND DISTRICT
UNEXPIRED TERM
ONE TO BE ELECTED
PAUL HACKETT DEM 5,420 41.77
JEAN SCHMIDT REP 7,556 58.23
So BillDoor, Hackett lost Warren 41.77% to 58.23%, do you have any insight as to the ratio of Republican to Dem votes in 2004? It would be interesting to see if there was any movement.
Bush beat Kerry by 72% to 28%, a major reversal.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/OH/P/00/county.003.html
This race is 50-50 now, but apparently the only votes not in yet are from Clermont County, which is basically suburban and will probably produce similar numbers as Bill Door’s report from Warren County. So I expect this will go to the Republicans, but by a damn close margin for this district.
The congressional race in Warren County (the part of the county in this district) had about the same margin.
While the shift is notable, it’s probably due to special circumstances, and it probably doesn’t mean much in the long run. I don’t see metropolitan Cincinnati giving up its Republicanism any time soon. The rural counties in this district are also interesting, though. They seem to have gone pretty strongly to Hackett this time; they voted Republican in the last election. Maybe his attack ads against Schmidt worked… he calls her a politician “in the Bob Taft mold”. Taft is not a Republican to associate with right now; he’s the least popular governor in the country.
Boy, that’s right. Here in Ohio all the democrats who will be going after the Governor’s office are essentially planning to say ‘we’re not Taft and Taft is a Republican’.
And the Republican’s are sort of planning the same thing. A complete disassociation with the incumbent even though he’s part of their own party.
Gonna be a weird election cycle next year.
As for this one it’s yet to be seen whether this is just an oddball or an early sign of the typical ‘President lose ground in off year of 2nd term’ thing. Way too early to draw a conclusion.
Yep, Portman (R) over Sanders (D) in Warren County, 78% to 22% .
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004//pages/results/states/OH/H/02/county.000.html
That would be this governor fellow, right?
(Ohio guys, always a bit too fond of ambiguity and nuance…)
Hackett’s doing exceptionally well in the rural districts because of comments like, “I believe that gun control is when you hit what you aim your gun at.” That sort of thing, um, strikes a chord with rural voters. That he’s a veteran sure counts for something in this race, but I’d bet dollars to hollowpoints that his openly gun-friendly politics count for more. And, as PigBoy pointed out, the utter exasperation with Taft is having its effect. I know quite a few Ohioans, and all of them nearly spit whenever they say that man’s name. Of course, the Ohioans I know come from northeast Ohio, which is more Democratic than the rest of the state, but the fact remains that brand Taft is damaged goods, and can only hurt the Republican candidate in this race.
I can’t wait for Ohio’s gubernatorial race next year. Taft will certainly be of no use to the Republican candidate, but what I’m wondering is: will his taint hurt the Republican candidate? I don’t know much about who the candidates might be, but it looks like conditions are pretty good for the Democrats to move back into Columbus next year. Mike DeWine could be in trouble, too, but I have a hunch he’ll keep his job.
Total (88% reporting)
Schmidt 49644 (50%)
Hackett 48751 (50%)
by county
Pike (100% reporting)
H 2659 (63%) (Kerry 48% in 2004)
S 1559 (37%) (Bush 52% in 2004)
Scioto (100%)
H 4925 (65%) (48% Kerry in 2004)
S 2638 (35%) (52% Bush in 2004)
Adams (100%)
H 2101 (52%) (36% Kerry in 2004)
S 1911 (48%) (64% Bush in 2004)
Brown (100%)
H 3950 (56%) (36% Kerry in 2004)
S 3100 (44%) (64% Bush in 2004)
Warren (100%)
S 7556 (58%) (72% Bush in 2004)
H 5420 (42%) (28% Kerry in 2004)
Hamilton (100%)
S 25011 (51%) (53% Bush in 2004)
H 23597 (49%) (47% Kerry in 2004)
Clermont (52% reporting)
S 7869 (56%) (71% Bush in 2004)
H 6099 (44%) (29% Kerry in 2004)
Bush was as strong in Clermont as he was in Warren in 2004. Looks like Hackett loses this one in a squeaker.
I find it curious that Hackett sees an at least 15% increase in every single county except for it’s most heavily Democratic and populous county, Hamilton.
Okay, after reviewing my last post, I’ll admit that I should be wearing a tinfoil hat, but da-amn if there aint a pattern emerging in these close races.
Well, the 2nd District includes only a portion of Hamilton County, and I don’t suppose it’s a particularly Democratic portion. (The Democractic areas are probably mostly central Cincinnati; this part looks like mainly some eastern suburbs.) The Congressional race in this part of the county was 70-30 in favor of the Republican Rob Portman in 2004, although it should be remembered that he had the advantage incumbency.
Remember: always fold the foil parallel to true magnetic north, otherwise, the protection against telepathic rays will be compromised.
I’m moving to Cincinnati in a month. Just what am I walking into politically? Apparently the governor is in a scandal, but I’m from New Jersey so I’m used to that 
.
Daily Kos says its over, Hackett lost by four points.
Offered without comment.
Just be very, very nice to your local Gauleiter and you should be fine.
:dubious:
:eek:
[Blues Brothers]I fuckin’ hate the fuckin’ Nazis.[/BB]
If your analysis above is correct, and given the results… then it would seem absolutely clear…
…that Diebold was somehow involved!! Also, cell phone users probably weren’t polled correctly. And police intimidated African-American voters!
Did I leave any possibility out?
Overestimation of the youth vote?