BLOG: Murray Vs. Krabill

Bryan Dubois
Aug 9, 2010

Curious about where the public stands on the individuals in this election...

If the election were held today, who would you vote for?

Does it matter to you where their campaign money is coming from?

Comments

columbus avenue

Easy answer:

MURRAY!

whitlanabrock

Jeff Krabill !!!!

Bryan Dubois

Murray because you like him - or Murray because you don't like Krabill?

Why do you prefer Murray?

Bryan Dubois

Whitlanbrock, same goes for you.  What do you like about Krabill?

hussein membrane

 

 

 It would appear most of Mr. Krabill's big contributions come from doctors or their spouses who work at North Coast Cancer Care. 

That's fine, doctors tend toward being Republican for a variety of reasons, but how is having a few rich people give to you as a block (or do they have a full-on PAC) substantially better than having an organization that represents lots of middle class people give to you?

 Here is a link on Bettcher's political donations.

 

 

Bryan Dubois

I guess there's no difference other than one person recieved more smaller donations from individuals while the other received large donations from unions.

Hussein, you assume that Murray's donations are less politically desireable than Krabill's.  Why do you assume that?

hussein membrane

 I guess there's no difference other than one person recieved more smaller donations from a group of wealthy doctors who all work in the same building while the other received large donations from the anti-business socialist menace.

Semantics, sigh.

Krabill's donations don't just come from any private individuals. They aren't random citizens motivated by the purity of Krabill's cause. His donors are just as suscpect as Union money, maybe even more perfidious in that he and they are attempting to pass themselves off as some sort of grass roots movement. 

Do his wife and daughter work for these doctors? What are the connections there?

Why his funding sources matters is because of how he is attempting to portray them. If he had come out and said, "my donations come from my wife's business associates and family friends," that would be one thing. Saying "i get my donations from private individuals," is another. 

Will he do better than Enderle? Maybe by a point or two.

 

 

Bryan Dubois

My point was that you're assuming that Murray taking from special interests is a PR problem. 

You believe that taking money from unions is a bad thing?

brutus smith

 If we had more income equality we wouldn't need special interests and unions. 

Bryan Dubois

Brutus, who do you favor?  Krabill or Murray?

brutus smith

 Murray, because he has the interests of the people 1st. 

Bryan Dubois

Mr. Oliver,

And your opinion of Mr. Murray's involvment with the Marina District?

Captain Gutz

None of the above.

AJ Oliver

     Mr. Krabill exhibited extremely poor judgement in supporting the Marina District project's "developer" without being sure that he was properly vetted.  Mr. Krabill was not bothered by the fact that Mr. Eymann refused to produce a resume or identify his equity partners.  Eymann, as we eventually learned, had never developed anything.  Mr. Krabill also pressured the city commission to disregard the city charter and ram through the Marina District as emergency legislation.  While I like Mr. Krabill personally, until he can show that he has learned from these mistakes, I cannot support him for a position of public trust. 

Duped Again

I have to agree with AJ Oliver's post.  However, that does not diminish Mr. Murray's culpability in the Marina Disctrict debacle.  A non-binding advisory vote, an in-house ethics opinion, the last minute release of a project favorable study,  a blocked referendum and a whole lot more took place.  If both Mr. Krabil and Mr. Murray were not involved in the various aspects, you can bet one or the other was.

SamAdams

Bryan, while I appreciate you asking people not only who they support and why, but who they DON'T support and why, there are some answers that are frankly so predictable they're not worth getting.  A.J. Oliver will never vote for other than a Democrat unless, of course, there's a bona fide socialist on the ticket. And Brutus? I strongly suspect that Jesus Christ could return and, if he ran as a Republican, wouldn't get a vote from Brutus.

I personally try very hard to educate myself sufficiently prior to every election so that I don't depend on a letter following a name. In fact, if I'm not sure of a given race, I won't vote for EITHER candidate rather than ignorantly voting for the WRONG candidate.

Frankly, if I could wave a magic wand, we'd see Libertarians elected to office. Fiscal conservatism and social liberalism. In other words, complete feedom within the realm of personal responsibility and not infringing the rights of others. I don't find either major political party too palatable in that regard these days. Both insist they've got my best interests at heart, but both seem to betray the Constitution -- and my liberty -- at the first available opportunity following their election.

If either Murray or Krabill is willing to sign a binding agreement to the effect that, should they in any instance fail to uphold the Bill of Rights, they'll resign; if one would sign a contract saying he won't ever vote to raise taxes but will instead  limit government growth and spending and actively work to shrink all three,  not only would I VOTE for that candidate, I'd CAMPAIGN for that candidate. I'm not holding my breath...

 

Bryan Dubois

I know what you're sayin' Sam.

I was about to point out that while Krabill pushing the Marina District was "poor judgement"  (extremely poor judgement?  Kinda strong wording, wouldn't ya say?) Oliver chooses to say nothing about what Murray did while serving in an official capacity on the city commission. 

Oliver's response suggests what you're saying about him is true.  It's okay for Murray to do certain things because of the (D) behind his name - while it's "extremely poor judgement" for Krabill (R) to merely support the project in a private capacity?

SamAdams

It suddenly struck me: Those politicians who are elected DO take a binding oath when they take office. They swear to uphold the Constitution. Given that I can think of a grand total of maybe TWO in the entire Congress who've actually done so, perhaps binding agreements aren't quite what they used to be.

Salvatore

I vote no to either one. Dumpster Don would be a better candidate than these two combined. How about a third candidate that doesn't have a D or R behind their name? Over 140 years ago, we had a civil war between the North and the South. Today we still have a civil war between the Democrats and the Republicans and nothing gets done except for the fighting. Get rid of both parties and only have independents. That way, voters choose a person and not a party.

Bryan Dubois

Salvatore, how do you propose to "get rid" of the existing political parties?

AJ Oliver

     Several of you raise valid points.  We should not support candidates just because they have a D or R (or L) by their names.  I do not do that, and never have.  Mr. Murray was wrong to back the Marina District as long as he did.  He should have known better.  But in the end, his position was to "let the political process take its course", so when the citizens gathered signatures to put the MD on the ballot, he did not intervene.  It was Mr. Krabill and Sandusky Now that advocated throwing the city charter under the bus by re-passing that turkey of a deal as an emergency and squashing a public vote. 

   I also have to say that, while I still disagree with Mr. Murray in a number of areas (education policy, for example), I have to admit that he has worked hard, and has become extremely well informed on issues affecting this district - especially environmental issues. 

   Mr. Murray has also taken a stand against the Yacht Club water rights give away.  He went out of his way to do that, securing an opinion from the Ohio Ethics Commission to the effect that he has no conflict of interest on that issue, and can speak out publicly.  Mr. Murray has paid a price for taking on the local oligarchy in this matter, and I respect him for that.   Where does Mr. Krabill stand on this issue?   All I hear from him so far is Tea Party rhetoric. 

   Folks, the nature of politics, and the human condition, is that you are never going to agree with your elected reps one hundred percent of the time - just like you don't always agree with your husband and/or wife all the time.  While demanding honesty and open government, we still have to work with what we have. 

EZOB

    I wish I knew more about Krabill, he could possibly be worse than Murray but I think I'll take the chance.  The Murrays paid absolutely nothing for their place on Shoreline Dr.  "Supposedly" they didn't pay the Toledo Co. for the huge oak doors because they didn't match the trim.  We all know the lawsuits over the Marina breakwall.  He has failed to represent a Veterans group in Columbus.  It looks like he wasted little time in becoming one of the "Good Ole Boys".  He represented a Toledo man against a Sandusky company.  I personally talked to one of the jurors and she said they weren't able to figure why he even took the case.  Murray and his client "LOST" but the Sandusky companies insurance had to pay thousands for representation.   If it benefits you and any one of the Murrays, then Dennis is your man but if you need a guy to represent you, look elsewhere.  I didn't mean in one of our local kangaroo courts.

Pete

Here is a question for the die-hard party backers:

You are in South Carolina and walk into the polls on election day. For Senator, you have two choices

Alvin Greene-D

Jim Demint-R

Your job as a voter is to pick to the best person to represent your state. So tell us who you would vote for and please explain why you chose who you chose

brutus smith

 sam a, what freedoms have you lost and who took them?

brutus smith

 pete, they are both losers. I would right in a candidate.

brutus smith

 pete, now one for you, Golf pro Boehner or West Point Grad Justin Coussoule?

Pete

Bonehead

The reason being is that the R's have to take back control of one of the Chambers. I don't relish the thought of him becoming Speaker if they do. But we cannot have one party in control. Things get shifted too far one direction.

Truth or Dare

Hey SamAdams;  Thank you for that post!  It would serve  the D's and R's  well too start LISTENING to the people/taxpayer/voters!    I for one do just what you said, learn about the candidates and  their objectives.    On that note,  I'm looking forward to hearing what Judy Kayden from Wakemen is all about, cause I already know where Murray and Krabill stand, and have seen the effects it''s had on this community!!    Will the SR cover this women prior to voting day, helping to inform the public as to her ideologies?  I certainly hope so!   They shouldn't dismiss an unknown Libertarian, as I'm hoping more people are becoming independent  in how they vote., I know I have.    

Bryan Dubois

Truth or Dare and all commenters:

We'll be better served if we keep these threads on topic.  Truth or Dare, you say that you "know" where Murray and Krabill stand.  Perhaps you could share your knowledge with the rest of us?  (Because that's what this thread is supposed to be about.)  I'm interested in hearing your take on both of them....

EZOB

Bryan Dubois:

   I read Truth or Dare's Blog.  I could be "WRONG" but I interpreted his post to mean that he isn't happy or satisfied with either candidate.  I tend to agree after reading what many are saying about Krabil.  I don't live in Sandusky and to be honest, I forgot about past dealings and actions.

Pages