Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Seth

Ohio's 1st Congressional District

Recommended Posts

From Cincinnati.com:

 

"The commission last week voted to investigate the spending. Pureval – after the poll was obtained by The Enquirer – pledged to remedy any issues if they're found, though his campaign insists it has followed all campaign finance rules.

 

Driehaus said those issues must be determined by the Ohio Elections Commission.

 

"I equally question all the spending by Chabot," Driehaus said.

 

Among the issues Driehaus cited; Chabot's visits to 79 countries, which Driehaus called "junkets"; and $45,000 in bonus money Chabot paid staffers and his campaign manager out of federal tax dollars after Chabot lost election in 2008."

 

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2018/09/27/steve-driehaus-urges-voters-look-past-dirty-politics/1441671002/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I don't think I did anything against the rules but I'll fix it if I did" is the right stance for Aftab to take here.  Especially considering that the amount of money in question is paltry compared to what he has on hand, AFAIK, so if he needs to reimburse/reallocate some money to put things back into the right boxes, he probably can.  (Going by what the newspapers say about his campaign war chest, anyway, not any personal review of official filings.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I don't think I did anything against the rules but I'll fix it if I did" is the right stance for Aftab to take here.  Especially considering that the amount of money in question is paltry compared to what he has on hand, AFAIK, so if he needs to reimburse/reallocate some money to put things back into the right boxes, he probably can.  (Going by what the newspapers say about his campaign war chest, anyway, not any personal review of official filings.)

 

As of June 30th he had $1.35 million cash on hand for his federal campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank God he's on the case

 

Is there an inside-Cincinnati joke here?  Does this guy have a reputation of some less-than-sterling variety?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank God he's on the case

 

Is there an inside-Cincinnati joke here?  Does this guy have a reputation of some less-than-sterling variety?

 

He's the Enquirer's resident click-bait writer who attacks the streetcar and makes outlandish statements on Cincinnati politics.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CLF’s recent attack on Ohio Democrat Aftab Pureval, for example, accuses the Indian-Tibetan, first-generation American of aiding his former employer in making “millions” by “helping Libyans reduce payments owed to families of Americans killed by Libyan terrorism.”

 

But Pureval wasn’t working for the Washington law firm that reached the restitution agreement when it was initially struck. When he did join the firm, Pureval worked on anti-trust litigation, not payments to the families of victims of the 1988 Lockerbie terrorist attack.

Not mentioned in the ad was the fact that former President George W. Bush backed the settlement negotiation with Libya — and that Rep. Steve Chabot, Pureval’s GOP opponent, did not object when it was approved in the House.

 

Local media called the attack "misleading." And members of one American family who lost their father in the Libyan attack were so outraged by the video that they reached out to donate to Pureval’s campaign.

 

“My response to the CLF ad involved words that are best not repeated here,” Scott Rosen wrote in a letter to Pureval’s campaign. He was 5 years old when his father, Saul Mark Rosen, was killed in the Lockerbie bombing, leaving his mom to raise two children. “The attempt to connect you to the murder of my father was utterly beyond the pale."

 

CLF says the ad has helped Chabot stretch his lead over Pureval, according to its internal polling.



https://www.politico.com/story/2018/10/09/republican-attack-ads-midterms-876287

Edited by DEPACincy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is impressive what Aftab has done by making the race semi-competitive, however, given the district is a +10 R from the start, unless there was a major scandal surrounding Chabot it is really never realistic for him to take the seat.  I think ultimately he is hoping for a strong enough showing lose by 3-4 points to help catapult his political star to higher state office or county office. He was rumored to be running for AG the moment he won the Clerk position, but he set his sights on the Congress instead.


I can see him using the exposure he has received from his Congressional run by making a run for County Commission in 2020.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is kind of disappointing is that one of the reasons the SORTA tax and budget gap tax were pulled is because they feared it would bring out too many republicans and thus guarantee Aftab loses.  It's looking like Aftab will lose and there are no increases to cover those budget shortfalls... COAST wins again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Former Republican county commissioner blasts Chabot as he endorses Democrat Pureval

 

philheimlich*750xx1632-921-0-231.jpg

 

Phil Heimlich, the former longtime Republican officeholder, launched a scathing attack on Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Westwood, on Thursday as he endorsed Democrat Aftab Pureval in the 1st Congressional District race.

 

Heimlich, an attorney who served on the Cincinnati City Council from 1993 to 2001 and served on the Hamilton County Commission from 2003 to 2006, said his breaking point was when Chabot criticized Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Chabot sided with Vladimir Putin, Heimlich said. 

 

“As a former prosecutor, this makes me sick,” Heimlich told reporters outside the Hamilton County Republican headquarters. “I want to be on the right side of history. We are living under the most dishonest president in history.

 

“What is Steve Chabot’s position on that? Nothing. He refuses to speak out against this mountain of dishonesty. Steve is a good man, but he does nothing.”

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/10/11/former-republican-county-commissioner-blasts.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pureval rips Chabot for Trump’s comments on Robert E. Lee

 

aftabfront*750xx2100-1181-0-0.jpg

 

Hamilton County Clerk of Courts Aftab Pureval criticized Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Westwood, on Sunday for not rebuking President Donald Trump for comments the president made about Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee at a Friday rally. 

 

Pureval and Chabot are running for the 1st Congressional District seat, which contains most of Hamilton County and all of Warren County.

 

“Donald Trump came to our community, came to our city, came to our neighborhoods and praised Robert E. Lee, a Confederate general,” Pureval told the crowd at an Avondale church. “Our representative, Steve Chabot, did he call him out? Did he criticize the president for celebrating a man like Lee? No. He praised him. He said a vote for Chabot is a vote for Trump. That’s exactly right. A vote for Chabot is a vote for Trump.”

 

At the Friday rally in Lebanon, Chabot appeared on stage with Trump before the president made his comments about Lee, which was a segue to commentary the president made on U.S. presidents from Ohio, including Ulysses S. Grant and William McKinley.

 

“So Robert E. Lee was a great general and Abraham Lincoln developed a phobia,” Trump said. “He couldn’t beat Robert E. Lee.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/10/14/pureval-rips-chabot-for-trump-s-comments-on-robert.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Aftab's getting desperate. NBC originally tried this angle, before retracting it:

 

NBC issues correction after Trump’s Robert E. Lee comment

https://nypost.com/2018/10/14/trump-says-robert-e-lee-comment-was-actually-a-grant-shoutout/

 

The gall it takes to take Trump out of context and claim he was praising Lee is pretty shocking. I had watched this speech live and Trump was clearly praising Grant, an Ohio native. He did so by pointing out that Lee was a "great general" which is an objective, historical fact. His tactics and strategies had a significant influence on military strategy. Saying someone was a "great general" in no way makes a judgement upon the cause they fought for. Find me a historian that would be willing to argue that Rommel wasn't a great general.

 

I suppose when you're trailing in the polls by 10 points, attacking your opponent by using an out of context, misleading quote uttered by a third party seems like a road that must be taken.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/15/2018 at 7:10 PM, Ram23 said:

^ Aftab's getting desperate. NBC originally tried this angle, before retracting it:

 

NBC issues correction after Trump’s Robert E. Lee comment

https://nypost.com/2018/10/14/trump-says-robert-e-lee-comment-was-actually-a-grant-shoutout/

 

The gall it takes to take Trump out of context and claim he was praising Lee is pretty shocking. I had watched this speech live and Trump was clearly praising Grant, an Ohio native. He did so by pointing out that Lee was a "great general" which is an objective, historical fact. His tactics and strategies had a significant influence on military strategy. Saying someone was a "great general" in no way makes a judgement upon the cause they fought for. Find me a historian that would be willing to argue that Rommel wasn't a great general.

 

I suppose when you're trailing in the polls by 10 points, attacking your opponent by using an out of context, misleading quote uttered by a third party seems like a road that must be taken.

 

 

Lee lost in spectacular fashion. I like generals that win. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2017/05/19/the-truth-about-confederate-gen-robert-e-lee-he-wasnt-very-good-at-his-job/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.c9a23385fe4b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a pretty pathetic argument on Aftab's part. Politics is what it is though. That was such an easy one to put into context though that it would have been better to leave it alone. It is a minor rookie move by Aftab.

 

This election will be about gaining experience for him. He knows he is unlikely to win, and will be hoping to lose by a smaller margin than expected. It will position him as someone with a future in the party. Similar to what Cranley did when he lost to Chabot in 2000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×