In a startling turn of events, Ohio Democratic candidate for Attorney General, Elliot Forhan, has come under intense criticism for his contentious statements on social media regarding the recent assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The controversy erupted when Forhan, known for his outspoken nature, posted a blunt message on his social media account that read, “F*** Charlie Kirk,” merely days after Kirk was shot dead during a speaking event at a Utah university.
The immediate backlash was not limited to political adversaries; the public and leaders across the political spectrum condemned the remarks. Forhan, unyielded by the criticism, further asserted his stance in subsequent posts, stating, “If you cannot call a bigot a bigot in America, then we do not have the free speech that he pretended to care about.” He provided no substantiation for his accusations of bigotry and failed to extend condolences to the bereaved family of Kirk.
Social media users swiftly responded with outrage. Comments ranged from questioning Forhan's suitability for the position of Attorney General to outright denunciation of his remarks as glorifying violence. The controversy has raised serious questions about the role of an Attorney General and the expectations of conduct for public officials.
In the wake of the furor, Forhan shared opinion pieces from reputable sources like The New York Times and The Nation, which criticized Kirk's ideologies, branding him as a promoter of “tyranny” and various forms of discrimination. While some echoed Forhan's sentiments, others, such as California State Senator Scott Wiener, balanced their criticism of Kirk's views with a clear statement that he did not deserve to die.
Republican officials have been particularly vocal in their censure. Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost described Forhan's behavior as “petulant and undisciplined,” and Secretary of State Frank LaRose labeled the posts “attention-seeking.” Both suggested that such rhetoric is becoming worryingly commonplace among Democratic candidates. RNC surrogate Mehek Cooke took to Fox News to demand Forhan's withdrawal from the race, stating, “Ohio’s top law enforcement officer must act as a guardian of justice, not a cheerleader for violence.”
Forhan defended his right to free speech and criticized Kirk's legacy, which he perceives as harmful. Despite the heavy criticism and receiving thousands of hostile messages, he expressed condolences to Kirk's family and portrayed himself as an ally to those targeted by Kirk and the Trump administration.
This is not Forhan's first brush with controversy. During his tenure in the Ohio House, he was accused by House Minority Leader Allison Russo of creating a hostile work environment, which led to the loss of his committee assignments and office privileges. While he was never charged, Forhan is currently involved in a defamation lawsuit against Yost and other officials.
As Forhan continues his campaign, he positions himself as a reform-focused candidate, advocating for the equal application of state laws, including to the "rich and powerful." His stance, while resonating with some, has undoubtedly cast a shadow over his candidacy and raised questions about the nature of political discourse and the responsibilities of those seeking public office.
