and fails.http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... ansas.html

freeman3 wrote:and fails.http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... ansas.html

Out of interest, how did Kasich succeed in Ohio? Different policies or a different situation?

I'd assume that Ohio is not a one-party state like the other two, so he'd have to be more moderate and win over different interest groups.

danivon

Out of interest, how did Kasich succeed in Ohio? Different policies or a different situation?

Did he succeed? Ohio's rebound was about the same as the national average....Thats better than the craters in Kansas or Louisiana... But its not a runaway success. (And maybe runaway success wasn't possible, but the recovery in Ohio hasn't been broadly felt) . The story following is in depth and I think fair review. excerpt follows

Kasich touts Ohio’s comeback story on the campaign trail, saying he brought this Rust Belt state back from the economic brink, creating jobs, slashing tax rates and cutting government spending.
The problem is that vision is unrecognizable to many Ohioans, especially those struggling to make it in the state’s gritty urban centers, such as Cleveland, Cincinnati and Toledo — all ranked among the nation’s most economically distressed big cities. Cleveland, host of this summer’s Republican convention, is the No. 1 most economically distressed large city in America, with 53 percent of adults not working, according to an analysis by The Economic Innovation Group, a nonprofit research group.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/o ... z43ZOUqiZW

Or California...

California is doing fine, Brad...
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-m ... story.html

And for an explanation of why California continues to do well and why blue states out-perform red states...
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/7611694

As for Kasich, at least he took Medicaid and made sure his tax cuts were paid for. But Ohio is not doing that well in job creation and his cuts to schools, higher education and local government in return for tax cuts represent the typical failure of Republicans to fail to invest in people. it's extremely doubtful that the trade-off will be better for Ohio in the long run.

But at least he does not do silly things like reject essentially paid for Medicaid expansion. He's the best you can hope for in a Republican nominee--there is some practicality and sense there, not adherence to ideology come what may.

freeman3 wrote:California is doing fine, Brad...
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-m ... story.html

I guess this is why I thought CA was doing poorly.


Glad to see CA is doing better than I remember.

bbauska wrote:

freeman3 wrote:California is doing fine, Brad...
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-m ... story.html

I guess this is why I thought CA was doing poorly.


Glad to see CA is doing better than I remember.

Oh brother.

California is not doing well. More poverty, more welfare, higher energy prices, unfunded pensions that will crash the entire State if something is not done. Furthermore, the "green" mandates that have been passed and are a few years down the road will drive energy costs higher still.

California is a functioning train wreck. It's going to come to a halt in the next 5 to 10 years and the wreckage is going to be vast.

freeman3 wrote:And for an explanation of why California continues to do well and why blue states out-perform red states...
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/7611694

This is a crock. Have a look at this map: http://taxfoundation.org/sites/taxfound ... ita-01.png

It's not a simple red/blue thing.

Further, California has really jacked up its water situation--and is building high-speed rail instead of more reservoirs (none built in the last 50 years, despite a doubling of the population in a desert!).

These maps Indicate how states that lean progressive are better on just about any societal metric you want to use. https://theprogressivecynic.com/2014/08 ... ifference/

California will be just fine. Conservatives were trying to write California off after the 2008 Financial Crisid hit us particularly hard but it came back roaring. The pensions issue is a problem but will be manageable with adjustments. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editoria ... story.html

freeman3 wrote:These maps Indicate how states that lean progressive are better on just about any societal metric you want to use. https://theprogressivecynic.com/2014/08 ... ifference/

Lies, damn lies, and statistics. Anyone writing for "the progressive cynic" is going to be able to cherry-pick stats that "prove" the superiority of liberal policies.

Every State has its own challenges and advantages, including natural resources.

California will be just fine. Conservatives were trying to write California off after the 2008 Financial Crisid hit us particularly hard but it came back roaring. The pensions issue is a problem but will be manageable with adjustments. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editoria ... story.html

Sure it will. That's why they are trying (just withdrew this with an eye toward returning it the next election cycle) an initiative to try and force their way into semi-private retirement funds (like mine).

You like Brown's policies. That's fine. The chickens will come home to roost. They always do. You can't fight gravity or the laws of finance.

How about these state rankings? http://www.businessinsider.com/state-ec ... 015-2016-1

I have not seen any pension reform plan that would affect existing pensions (only going forward). Prior commitments should and will be honored.

And we taxed the highest earning Californians through Prop 30 so that adequate money would be spend on k-12 education. That's progressive.

So, DF, what is your opinion of the original point - that Louisiana and Kansas are also screwed, but not by liberals?