Stickybuffalo.com

I still need to put the ballot envelope in the mailing envelope and seal it, then add postage (one of those 65¢ stamps which, um, don’t actually exist) but otherwise I’m done with my primary ballot. As I am participating in the Democratic primary rather than the Republican, of course, I miss out on the “big ticket” contest, for the presidency; if Obama is facing any primary challengers they didn’t make it onto the ballot here in Ohio.

All in all, I might well have just skipped this primary entirely if not for a by-product of Buckeye Republicans’ exercise in broad-daylight gerrymandering. As it is, one of the many ridiculous districts which make up their new map-to-disenfranchisement now snakes along Lake Erie all the way from western Cleveland to Toledo. And, as a (possibly not-unintentional) result, two long-time Democratic incumbents Dennis Kucinich and Marcy Kaptur now find themselves fighting over one congressional seat. A third candidate, 20-something “entrepreneur” Graham Veysey has also gotten his name on the ballot. As far as I know the oddsmakers give the latter zero prospect of winning the nomination, while the larger portion of her old “base” preserved in the new district is expected to give Kaptur a slight advantage, though no one is quite ready to write off a veteran pol like Kucinich until it actually happens.

Personally, I’m pretty familiar with Kucinich already, and I tried to give Kaptur a fair look, and after considering the pair of them and their challenger, I voted for the challenger.

(more…)

I’m working on a really long post, but I feel obligated to note this item here; it’s important and, in a way, will even tie in to the upcoming phonebook-length essay.

Browsing Cleveland.com today, I decided to see just what exactly Brent Larkin had written under the headline “Drawing the line on Democrat griping.” Had this been a work of, say, reactionary automaton Kevin O’Brien, I wouldn’t have even bothered, but I’ve found Larkin occasionally makes a fair point or two.

He does so, here. Said point is made in his usual crusty, crabby, how-distasteful-this-all-is way, but aside from the fact that I’m hardly one to talk, he does make a significant point all the same: Ohio’s Democratic Party seems to have invited the partisan redistricting heist of which they, and I, have been complaining so volubly.

Old man Larkin notes something I apparently missed in my normal indifference to Ohio politics, that “Last year, Democrats had a chance to take politics out of drawing new congressional boundaries and replace it with a plan that reeked of fairness.”

The plan would have amended the Ohio Constitution to create a seven-member panel to redraw those boundaries every 10 years. Republican and Democratic members of the Ohio House and Senate would have shared equally in the appointment of four members. Those four would have appointed the other three members. The support of five members would have been required for approval.

[The] proposal would have taken effect for this year’s drawing of new boundaries. It required voter approval, which would have been a near-certainty.

The Ohio Senate voted to put the plan on last November’s ballot, but it died in the Democrat-controlled House.

The hectoring editor emeritus goes on to list various reasons why the Democrats did such a silly thing. I would like to think they might offer up at least a token defense of their rejecting this reform, but having few illusions about the nature of politics even in parties I view relatively favorably, I expect that defense would be pretty thin. For what it’s worth, I’m not aware of anyone else even raising this point; presumably Democrats don’t want to talk about it because it makes them look bad, and presumably Republicans aren’t mentioning it because they don’t want to acknowledge the possibility that the current system which they’re exploiting is not the acme of fairness.

So, thank you, grumpy old newspaperman, for informing me of what everyone else finds inconvenient to recall. What can I say; this was an awful choice even if it hadn’t quickly rebounded to Democrats’ and democracy’s disadvantage. (more…)

Per my increasingly-ludicrous vanity, I shall reply to Peter King’s MMQB column of this morning here, rather than joining the e-mail queue with the hoi-polloi.

In point 8 of his “things I think I think,” today, King muses “I think I wonder this about Cleveland: Will the city’s sports fans be happier if Colt McCoy wins a playoff game this year than it was when LeBron James lost a championship series last night?” I think, myself excepted, it would not even come close.

Frankly, it might still be tight if the Browns won the fucking Super Bowl in 2012. Even in Cleveland, football and the Browns are still of interest to only a subset of the population. The herd mentality of LeBron James as mortal enemy seems to have swept up the entire city, however. (Again, myself excepted.)

The roads still suck, the economy is in a 50-year coma, the city is a perpetual national laughingstock; population, youth and far more talent than is represented by one man, no matter how good he is with a ball, continues to drain away. But 99% of Cleveland is bursting with pride this morning because a Dallas team defeated a Miami team in a professional basketball tournament. “America, fuck yeah.”

I also have a few comments on the subsequent two points. (more…)