Buckeye State Blog - Strickland starting to give Blackwell the Bryan Flannery treatment - Comments

Nevertheless

shaneforamerica — Sun, 08 Oct 2006 18:24:44 -0700

Even though she's not from the fringe, with the anti-Republican climate in Ohio, there's no reason that hasn't yet spilled over to Montgomery, but for the fact that her opponent is relatively unknown. Nationally, I'm sure there's many Republicans that are decent people that are going to lose this year, simply because they have an "R" next to their name. There has been more than enough mismanagement from Montgomery that she should be at risk of losing. Dann's gotta get on TV (if he isn't already...I don't believe he is here in Northeast Ohio). Because he's of no less quality than the candidates for Treasurer and Sec of State...though as you stated, neither of them are running against a powerhouse. I think she's worth going after, and my point was, the payoff would last far beyond 2006 if she can be defeated.

The year was 1994

modernesquire — Sun, 08 Oct 2006 18:18:17 -0700

And Betty Montgomery's opponent for Attorney General was being challenged on his lack of trial experience. Montgomery's ads created the false impression that the AG's office was no different from the county prosecutor's office. And used that framing and played off her self-created misconception of the office to create the impression that the Democrat was unqualified.

The Democrat was Lee Fisher, and he was the Attorney General.

I don't think Montgomery's ad "defined" anything

AmberCat — Sun, 08 Oct 2006 18:03:59 -0700

It's so silly and melodramatic and over-the-top it mostly leaves you going "huh"? I think her name recogition and the war chest to increase it plus the fact that she's not from the wingnut branch of Republicanism like Blackwell and good 'ol "Sandy " O'Brien, are bigger factors. The generic blah-blah-blah about "my opponent is evil incarnate" is just so much noise right now, and I don't think Betty's ads rise to the level of "definition."

Accurate

shaneforamerica — Sun, 08 Oct 2006 17:45:53 -0700

I think this comment is pretty well spot-on. If Blackwell pulls down 40-43% of the vote, he is largely irrelevant.

Strickland starting to give Blackwell the Bryan Flannery treatment

modernesquire — Sun, 08 Oct 2006 15:16:21 -0700

From the March 29th edition of the Youngstown Vindicator:

"Bryan Flannery is not a significant person to me," Strickland said. "One thing Bryan Flannery would like to achieve is significance in this race, and one way to do so would be for me to consider him significant. I don't."

From today's Cleveland Plain Dealer:

"Ken Blackwell is going to say what he is going to say because he is my opponent and wants to diminish my service in the House of Representatives," Strickland said. "He simply doesn't know what he is talking about. I don't think he has any idea how I served the district, so I pretty much ignore what he says, because he is basically irrelevant in terms of the future of Ohio, as far as I am concerned."

Ouch.