Dumping Hackett cost us the '06 elections

[Hippo_Tron]

Fairness and what not aside, I want to start a discussion about the politics involved in this. Personally, I think that dumping Hackett was about the dumbest thing that the DSCC could have possibly done.

IF ANYTHING, the smart thing to do would have been to tell Brown to get out and throw their support entirely behind Hackett. It's not that Hackett's more deserving or that Brown is a bad person or anything like that, it's that Hackett can be sold and more importantly he can be sold to a national audience. He is a man that has the rockstar quality that Barack Obama had in '04 and he would have been a perfect person to nationalize the 2006 elections with, along with the 12 other Iraq war veterans that are running for congress.

The bottom line is that people don't listen when regular democrats call Bush a liar and a chickenhawk. When veterans who just came back from serving their country in Iraq come back and call Bush a liar and a chickenhawk you damn well bet that people listen, ESPECIALLY when the veternas are effective charismatic spokespeople like Paul Hackett.

Just as the GOP had their contract with America in 1994, the Democrats would have their Contract With America. Hackett and the other 12 dems would be the figureheads for the slogan "The troops don't support Bush because bush does not support the troops". Then the democrats would have their Contract With America if they take back the House and Senate which would include things like...

1) We will never allow the President to send our troops into harm's way without proper equipment

2) We will never send troops into harm's way on false intelligence

etc....

The Democrats had a perfectly good chance to nationalize this election. They had a perfectly good chance to tell the nation what they stood for and to pick effective spokespeople to carry that message. They blew it. Not just one race, they blew the entire '06 elections. They blew it because they were thinking inside the beltway, they were thinking that Brown has more money and a better organization therefore they just HAD to go with him because it makes the most sense politically. These idiots can't see a perfectly good gift when it is right under their noses.

[Mythsaje]

1. Great points...

I'm afraid you just may be right. I just wish we could convince certain stubborn others of this fact.

I'm really hoping it doesn't cost us the mid-terms, because, if we lose the mid-terms, we are most likely completely screwed and America is down the toilet for good.

[Hippo_Tron]

3. I think that I made the mistake of starting this thread too late at night

I'm glad to see that I already have two recs but I think that I would be on the front page of DU if I had started this around prime hours. Honestly the thought just came to me so I had to post it.

[Mythsaje]

5. I've actually found this is a better time...

Earlier in the day the threads move to fast and people miss a lot. Needing five votes for Greatest rather than three kinda makes it even more difficult, but hey, thems the rules. <snort>

[ugarte]

2. Absolutely right

There are so many Democrats who do not represent me, and the few who do are usually marginalized by the media and even their own party. I'm pretty disgusted right now.

[ClayZ]

6. I feel like a Seahawk at the Superbowl!

Paul Hackett is just what this country needed!

[greenohio]

96. What really is sad is this opinion appears to be supported by

the polls. Brown DROPPED in the polls as a result of this move:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/February%202006/Ohio%20Senate%20February.htm

[neuvocat]

4. Yeah I agree.

The dems should must let the people decide who should hold office. That's what the primaries are for.

[brentspeak]

7. I didn't want to see a primary run-off between Hackett and Brown

It would have been far better for Hackett to be the sole Democratic candidate for Senate, and for Brown to run for House reelection. That's the situation both Brown and the Powers That Be originally arranged, and they should have stuck with it instead of jerking the chains of both Paul Hackett and the Democratic rank-and-file.

I really hope the OP's prediction turns out to be false.

[FrenchieCat]

8. Of course, "they" fucking blew it.....

But then, what's new? :eyes:

I mean, these guys ain't very bright, considering that we ain't got control of shit!

[Hippo_Tron]

11. They know the inter-working of politics very well

But they don't have any fucking ideas. They are very good at thinking inside the beltway. If they would step outside of the beltway for just two fucking seconds, we might actually win an election or two considering that 99.9% of America lives outside of the beltway.

[wiley]

40. This isn't exactly what the Dems needed?

to step on the Cheney affair, the NO disaster, the FEMA corruption and incompetence, the release of new Abu Ghrab pictures, the hacking of lives through criminal Medicaid and Medicare cuts. Maybe this was what that article about the Dems not being in a better position article I read last week. Maybe some knew this was going down.

It all makes sense. This must just be a NEW stupid suicidal strategy. Save your powder to shoot down Democrats. Very clever.

[nofurylike]

9. not fixing the voting machine disaster cost us the 06 election, and mr

hackett walked away from that fight after his last election was stolen.

just like kerry did and people won't forgive.


peace

[Cocoa]

10. on the contrary, I think the dems are showing they stand for something

Sherrod Brown is substance.

That's what will win in 2006, not "selling power."

[Mythsaje]

13. Business as usual...

Business in the beltway.

Political insiders.

The money machine.

That's not what they SHOULD stand for, but it looks as though it's what they DO stand for.

Yippee.

[Cocoa]

16. Progressive Caucus

Out of Iraq Caucus.

Led the fight in the House against CAFTA.

Sherrod Brown, soon to be the most progressive senator except for Bernie Sanders. :bounce:

[Mythsaje]

20. If he WINS, yes...

But being a major player from a left perspective isn't going to bring anyone other than the lefties to the polls.

Hackett would've gotten a lot of Repug votes as well.

[Cocoa]

21. and yet the dem establishment is backing him

this is PROGRESS. :bounce:

[Mythsaje]

26. They backed Kerry too...

And who's sitting in the high seat?

Progress is only progress if it moves us forward.

[FreedomAngel82]

79. The DLC backed Kerry?

LOL.

[roseBudd]

97. In SW OH right wing rag Cinti Enquirer an LTTE from a republican stated

he planned to vote for Hackett because he can't stand Dewine but he will not be voting for Brown.

[Pachamama]

54. Sorry Cocoa, got to disagree w/ you here...Sherrod Brown, soon to be the

most "Progressive" Dem to NOT be a Senator....

Brown may be a progressive and the greatest Dem to walk the face of the Congress, but he won't win Ohio and beat Dewine....In order to win (assuming the election isn't rigged) one needs a majority of Ohioans... that includes Republican voters...Moderate Republicans fed up w/ the direction of the country, economy, war in Iraq etc would have voted in Nov for a MARINE named Hackett...those same people will not for Brown...

This was a clear case of the politicos wanting their club members to win and thinking Hackett might not be able to raise the $$$...this ofcourse was a completely wrong calculation on their part...people like me were going to donate to Hackett and just hadn't done it...i'm willing to bet Hackett could raise this money real fast now...

[Hippo_Tron]

22. Nobody outside of Ohio will have a clue who Sherrod Brown is

You're right, Sherrod Brown is substance and I can easily see an argument for why he would be the better senator than Hackett, although frankly I think another maverick and I think that Hackett plays that role better than Brown. But all of that is not the issue here. The issue is that the dems have always had far more substance than the GOP but lately we have sucked at getting our message out. Hackett was part of a vehicle that we could have used to get our message out to America and we passed that opportunity up.

BTW, the DSCC could care less about how progressive Sherrod Brown is. They are looking at Ohio just like every other race and they are seeing that he has the most money and thus they should support him. This strategy except for the fact that everybody in that organization is so focused on finding the candidates with the most resources that NOBODY is stopping to look at the big picture.

[eridani]

32. And in order to get elected in Ohio, nobody needs to

I see your point about promoting someone with national appeal, but WTF does Hackett use for an on the ground in Ohio organization if his existing special election organization was staffed by employees of Sherrod Brown? The net can't do everything.

[Hippo_Tron]

36. Sherrod Brown should have given his organization to Hackett

Look, I realize that Brown has served his state, his country, and his party well and I realize that he has definately paid his dues and that Hackett has not. But just as some are saying that Hackett needs to take one for the team because it's Brown's turn, I am saying that Brown needs to take one for the team because Hackett can be a key part of our victory in '06. And come 2010 when Voinovich is up for re-election I bet that Senator Hackett would not have forgotten how much help Sherrod Brown gave him and would certainly have been willing to return the favor.

[Cocoa]

42. Brown's staffers worked for Hackett in his campaign against Schmidt

[Hippo_Tron]

60. I'm aware of that, I'm suggesting that they should've done it again

[karynnj]

65. Nobody outside of Ohio gets to vote here - so it's up to

the Ohian (or what ever thy're called). Personally, I wish they let them continue to a normal primary, simply getting them to keep the negative campaigning down. But this was not a nation wide campaign.

[FreedomAngel82]

80. And who knows who Paul Hackett is?

If I ask my dad if he knows Paul Hackett he will say no. (I live in Tennessee)

[WCGreen]

91. He also has a great organization...

A good relationship with Labor...

An outstanding voting record...

And a strong proven base on which to build....

[Kukesa]

92. And most people INSIDE SW Ohio don't have a clue. nt

[Douglas Carpenter]

23. you're right -- Sherrod Brown is substance:

Brown Tops DeWine in New Poll
An Opinion Consultants poll finds Ohio voters favor Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) for the U.S. Senate over incumbent Sen. Mike DeWine (R-OH), 43% to 38%

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/01/26/brown_tops_dewine_in_new_poll.html

Sherrod Brown is endorsed by PDA (Progressive Democrats of America) and is an outspoken member of the Progressive Caucus.

Representative Brown is at least as liberal as Sen. Kennedy or Sen. Feingold

courtesy of vote smart - link:

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=H3141103&type=category&category=Foreign%2BAid%2Band%2BPolicy%2BIssues&go.x=12&go.y=8


2006 In 2006 Citizens for Global Solutions gave Representative Brown a rating of A.

2005 In 2005 Citizens for Global Solutions gave Representative Brown a rating of A.

2005 Representative Brown supported the interests of the Council on American-Islamic Relations 100 percent in 2005.

2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA) 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the Peace Action 100 percent in 2004.

2003-2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the American Civil Liberties Union 84 percent in 2003-2004.

2005 Representative Brown supported the interests of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People 96 percent in 2005.

2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the Arab American Institute 50 percent in 2004.

2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the National Council of La Raza 100 percent in 2004.

2003-2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the Human Rights Campaign 77 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People 90 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights 100 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the National Education Association 89 percent in 2003-2004.

2005 Representative Brown supported the interests of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers 100 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Brown supported the interests of the Service Employees International Union 100 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Brown supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 93 percent in 2005.

2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the American Postal Workers Union 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 93 percent in 2004.

2004 On the votes that the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers considered to be the most important in 2004, Representative Brown voted their preferred position 88 percent of the time.

2004 On the votes that the Service Employees International Union considered to be the most important in 2004, Representative Brown voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.

2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the Communications Workers of America 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the United Electrical Radio and Machine Workers 100 percent in 2004.

2003-2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees 100 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 On the votes that the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers considered to be the most important in 2003-2004, Representative Brown voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.

2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 95 percent in 2004.

2005 Representative Brown supported the interests of the American Wilderness Coalition 100 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Brown supported the interests of the Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund 100 percent in 2005.

2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the American Wilderness Coalition 100 percent in 2004.

2004 On the votes that the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance considered to be the most important in 2004, Representative Brown voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.

2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund 100 percent in 2004.

2003-2004 Representative Brown supported the interests of the League of Conservation Voters 94 percent in 2003-2004.

2004 In 2004 National Organization for Women endorsed Representative Brown.

2005 Representative Brown supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 100 percent in 2005.

[KnaveRupe]

52. Wrong.

This is the Same DSCC that cleared the field for anti-abortion, pro-Alito Democrat Bobby Casey in PA to take on Santorum.

Brown's "Liberal Chops" aren't the issue, his war chest and organization are. Schumer, reid, et al are playing a numbers game, and they think that Brown has a better chance of winning based on his tangibles. Hackett is an amateur and could have blown it.

Whether you think that Brown is the right guy, or Hackett was the right guy, the fact remains that the decisions aren't being made by the voters - they are being made by the party bigwigs.

That, for me, is a problem.

[IndianaGreen]

53. Party bigwigs and their corporate masters are the problem

They will do this same shit to anyone that frightens them, anyone that threatens the status quo.

Bush didn't get to be dictator by himself, he had plenty of "Democratic" help.

[formernaderite]

62. Brown is a GREAT democrat

I think primaries are terrific, because they allow the people to choose. Hackett dropped out...no one forced him to do so. The more the merrier, as it furthers OUR discussion on the issues. Hacket is acting like a whiner, and we can be thankful he did drop out.

[TomInTib]

12. Do we need the seat or the exposure worse? I am all for Hackett,

but you have to suss out the factors and the probabilities.

Hackett has one tenth the funds of his opponent ($273000 vs $2700000- those extra 2 zeros will kill you).
The RNC will go huge on this.
Hackett gets beat, Dems will be painted as "lovable losers". "Oh, they are cute all right, but they can't win".

Or we take the Senate seat and take the House position with Brown's(?) endorsement.

Try to convince Hackett to work on the behalf of the veterans running nation-wide.

Fight to win, do not fight for the sake of fighting.

[brentspeak]

14. Hacket would have gotten the dough

It's only Febuary. During the special election against Jean Schmidt, Democrats from all around the nation donated over a million bucks to Hackett in just a few weeks. A lot of those same out-of-state Democrats, like myself, would have donated again.

[TomInTib]

17. I appreciate what you are saying but...

he could have waited for the House or lost the Senate race.
That would have been devastating for the Party.
There is no way we could give Paul better odds than Brown.
I wish conditions were different but they're not.
Paul would have a better chance running for President than Senate.

We have to have that Senate seat.

I wish Paul would run for either Governor or House and then go for the Senate.

He has time.

[Hippo_Tron]

29. See that is exactly what I am talking about

"Paul would have a better chance running for President than Senate" you just summed up what I am saying right there. He has national appeal and that is EXACTLY what we need.

BTW, I don't see why you are so discouraged about his chances in Ohio. He is ALREADY polling ahead of or even with DeWine in Ohio and he has virtually no name recognition outside of the district that he ran in. Give him the proper money needed for advertising and stick him on national television and he will be a household name all over America in no time at all, just like Barack Obama was. Ohio watches national television too so it's not like his celebrity appeal won't work in the state he is running in either.

DeWine is vulnerable and with the proper resources, Hackett beat him. Granted now Hackett's out I do wish Brown the best of luck on his race.

[TomInTib]

38. So we bank on his "national appeal"- designated hitter...

We still get the Ohio seats and use Hackett to beat the crap out of the 'pukes.

Maybe use him as a foil to Dean (who gives the other side way too much ammo ).

Just beat them.

I am with you all the way.
The hand dealt is just what it is. No looking back- push forward.

We must take that Senate seat.

Keep the home fires burning.

[FreedomAngel82]

81. He has national appeal?

WTF are you on? How many people outside of Ohio who aren't political junkies know who the hell Paul Hackett is? Nobody knows who he is either. Only people who know him are democratic political junkies like myself. If I didn't read DU or watch Bill Maher I would have no freakin clue who Paul Hackett is. Hackett knew he wasn't going to win the primary and used this as an out. If he was so confident he was going to win the primary he wouldn't have backed down. He did this to himself.

[Hippo_Tron]

15. Brown was much more connected than Hackett in terms of fundraising...

And plus Hackett was expecting party backing and that Brown wouldn't be in the race so he didn't have time to get together the grassroots base.

I recognize that Brown is a better fundraiser and has a better organization than Hackett. A lot of people say that because of this, Hackett rightfully took one for the team because of this and also because Brown deserved it. I say that Brown should have taken one for the team and dropped out and handed over his money and organization to Hackett. It's not that Hackett was more deserving than Brown, it's that Hackett can help us win nationally.

And whether we get painted as "lovable losers" or not doesn't make one damn bit of difference, losing is still losing. To not take a risk that could pay off big because we are worried what the GOP might call us when we lose is the dumbest idea ever.

[autorank]

18. Why the Hell isn't Brown running for Governor. The Ohio party

needs to go in receivership right after the national party.

NEW LEADERS FOR A NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY

[Hippo_Tron]

27. Ohio Dems are already on that, Ted Strickland is running for Governor

Strickland is a congressman with a very populist economic record, pro gun record, and voted against the war. His district, The Ohio 6th, went to Bush in '04 so clearly he knows how to win moderate-conservative voters. Right now I believe that he is polling by a comfortable margin against anybody except Ken Blackwell. The problem with this race is that it definately has to be outside the margin of Diebold.

[TomInTib]

24. Hackett can do more good nationally if he's not running....

In my opinion, Paul is one of the best- if not THE best- thing we have.

If he were to go national while running statewide, something has to give.

I say we benefit from his national exposure and still take the House and Senate seats.

Paul will still be there and unencumbered by the burdens of office.

We must start playing smart and not with our hearts.

Think about who we are up against.

Win where you can win.

Just win.

This ain't YMCA Ball.

[FreedomAngel82]

82. Hackett is the best thing we have?

So Al Gore, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Russ Feingold, Cynthia McKinney, Dennis Kucinich etc are nothing compared to Hackett? Boy talk about an ego.

[Pithy Cherub]

25. Hackett's fundraising was recent. Comparing apples

to apples over the same period of time was Brown receiving money at the same or better clip? My understanding is Brown has a cookie jar of ready cash.

The exceedingly twisted part of this is Brown is now affiliated with how this went down amongst the *establishment leadership*. The *establishment leadership* misfired on how badly their actions have played. They leave Brown with serious repair work to do and he has to ask the highly inspirational Iraq war vet Hackett for a public endorsement. The politics of this were done ham handedly and with a thought to a very short term & short sighted outlook.

[Kukesa]

93. Brown had a $2 million war chest,

but he's been in politics for a long time -- the mid 1980s.

Hackett raised a ton of money in less than a year.

[greenohio]

77. If Brown was a shoe-in then he would have won in a PRIMARY.

Now Ohioans are reading about financial black balling and rumor-milling.

Did we chose Kerry because he had the "best chance to win?"

[Mr_Spock]

19. lol - ya, ok buster

We hear these same machinations constantly here - day after day, the world is coming to an end.

I'm sorry Hackett bowed out, BUT I'm going to move forward. It's not the end of the world :eyes:

[Hippo_Tron]

35. It's not all about Hackett, it's that the party is missing the big picture

Yes, Hackett is a very key piece to this puzzle. If you've listened to him, you know that he has a rockstar quality just like Bill Clinton does and just like Barack Obama does. Furthermore, as I said above, people LISTEN to him when he talks about Iraq because he was there.

Not only are the democrats ditching Hackett, but they aren't capitalizing on what they have to effectively nationalize the election as I suggested in the OP. Hackett was an incredibly key piece to this puzzle and also their tossing him out of the race shows that they are only thinking in terms of numbers and not in terms of ideas.

Tonight is the first time that I feel that our chances this year are less than even and it is because I am seeing that the same people that lost the 2004 elections and the 2002 elections and made the 2000 elections close enough to steal are the same people that are still running the show.

[FreedomAngel82]

83. LOL

Hackett doesn't compare to Bill Clinton. NOBODY can compare to Bill Clinton. He's in a leage of his own. So please don't compare Hackett to Bill Clinton, okay? Hackett bowed down to peer pressure just like he did when people urged him to have a recount and fight election fraud, but he didn't do it did he? All bark and no bite. Bill Clinton actually fights! Sorry but I don't back pussies. Hackett did this to himself when he didn't stand up and fight when it was needed and he had the test. If he can't handle people within the party he can't handle republican senators like Frist, Specter, Hatch etc.

[David Van Os]

28. Only Paul can make himself drop out.

Only Paul Hackett could decide that Paul Hackett wouldn't make this run. Only Paul Hackett could decide to let himself be intimidated by the DSCC and their cynical politics of money. By throwing in the towel in the face of the DSCC, Paul Hackett legitimizes the DSCC's elitist tactics. If Paul believes he is making the right fight, then he should stay in and make the damn fight. Nobody can make him drop out but himself. To give up makes a lot of the things he said sound -- well, hypocritical. Hope he'll realize that before it's too late.

David Van Os
Democratic Candidate for Texas Attorney General
www.vanosfortexasag.com

[Hippo_Tron]

30. Again, not the issue here

There are plenty of threads that are talking about intimidation, about the DSCC being unfair, about Hackett being hypocritical for dropping out, etc. etc.

This thread is about politics...

The issue is that the national party leaders are being idiots by not capitalizing on Hackett's appeal. I'm not saying that Hackett is the ONLY thing that we need to win in '06, I'm saying that he's a very key peace to a much larger idea that the national party is too stupid to pick on.

[yowzayowzayowza]

31. 2nd that. n/t

[FreedomAngel82]

84. Thank you!

That is what I've been saying all a long. Now I do like Hackett and agree with him on a lot of issues but Hackett CAN NOT FIGHT. He can bark all he wants but when he comes to the test HE FAILED. He failed when fighting electon fraud (he went on vacation!) and he failed to peer pressure. He should have told them to fuck off (maybe not in those words) but he did this to himself and now he's whining like a baby.

[pat_k]

33. Draft him BACK into the race. . .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2460839&mesg_id=2460839

[threadkillaz]

34. Dean is not happy.

Dean blames party's "skullduggery" for withdrawal of popular Ohio Senate candidate

Democratic party chair Howard Dean says he's not happy that Iraqi war veteran Paul Hackett is dropping out of the race for U-S Senate in Ohio.

Dean told a student audience in Miami that "some skulduggery in Washington" improperly led to Hackett's decision to end his bid. And he said Democrats will have a tough time winning if similar things happen to others.


http://www.ktre.com/Global/story.asp?S=4503849&nav=2FH5

[Hippo_Tron]

37. Dean is a beltway outsider, he knows a good idea when he sees one

Well I mean, he's not an outsider anymore, but he's spent most of his life outside of Washington.

[FreedomAngel82]

85. So why did Hackett back out?

Why did HE back out? Please, Hackett did this too. I love how nobody is blaming Hackett for backing down and going home like a baby. Please! "Oh they were so mean to Hackett!" If he can't handle it than get out of the game.

[Kukesa]

94. We've been debating that over in the Ohio forum.

Try VolcanoJen's post about "Backroom Battles."

Link here:

http://tinyurl.com/9h9ws

[The Magistrate]

39. A Little Early To Say That, Sir

You seem to have been expecting a great deal from a man whose sole political experience is a single unsuccessful run for a Congressional seat. Pinning an entire national campaign on so inexperienced and amatuer a person does not strike me as wise, or offering much prospect for success.

[Hippo_Tron]

55. It's not all about Hackett

It is that by duming him, the beltway insiders have shown that they have their heads too far up their asses to come up with any of the ideas that I have suggested in the OP. The Democrats have been doing the exact same thing for the last three election cycles and it hasn't worked. Dumping Hackett is a sign to me that they intend to do the exact same thing this time around and that once again it won't work.

[rg302200]

69. One of the greatest presidents in our nations history...

served only one term in congress! Know who I am talking about? Guess!

It doesn't matter whether he is a career politician or a new comer, he registers with voters from both parties and that is what matters!

[guidod]

41. We're sounding like a bunch

of defeatists here. I heard hackett on the Ed Schultz show today and he made it very clear that he would not be coming back. I heard Brown is a great progressive so let's put our little crying tissues back in our pockets and move on. There's a lot of work to do.

[henslee]

43. I mean, how can you bench the crowd pleasing rookie who had a double

double his first game in the league? Bad business.

[MrBenchley]

56. Hackett struck out after a loud foul

He lost the only race he ran...and to a crazy woman, no less.

[henslee]

57. Thats one way of looking at it. I am not extremely familiar with the

particulars but I was under the impression that as a neophyte in a ver red area, he overachieved in that race.

[MrBenchley]

59. That's the actual result....

[roseBudd]

98. he didn't lose so-called "moist ballots" in Clermont county flipped the

vote margin after tabulation was delayed until after Hamilton County's African American precincts had reported.

[wakeme2008]

44. This Vet feels the same way

Between the Iraq War loving DLCers and the Swiftboaters Waxmans forcing their picks on us, I do not see the Dems picking up enough seats in the House and Senate to make a difference. :cry:

[Leilani]

45. Could you explain " Swiftboaters Waxmans" for me?

Did he trash Hackett?

[wakeme2008]

46. Yes he was part of a group

that was going to question Hacketts Iraq War service. :grr:

[Leilani]

47. Thanks for your response...

That is disgusting!

For a Dem to do that to another Dem, is downright horrible!

BTW, I didn't know Waxman was a military hero.

Do you know who else was involved?

[Donna Zen]

70. There was a curious swiftboat in the Hill last week

The Hill quoted a Democratic campaign staffer who dissed the Fighting Dems in general and General Clark specifically. No, I don't have the link at the ready, but I'm looking for it. Who knows who this was or who they work for. It's a safe bet it's someone without National Security credentials.

If I come across the link, I'll be back. It definately happened.

[Leilani]

76. Thanks for the info, Donna

Always knew there were some working against Clark...another outsider.

[FreedomAngel82]

88. I believe I saw that

They said "some democratic aids say" and than the only person they quoted was a republican. Gee, real reliable dontcha think?!

[The Magistrate]

48. Rep. Waxman, Sir, Is One Of The Best Damned Democrats In Washington

If he thought Rep. Brown more suitable than Maj. Hackett, and was willing to take extreme steps to back that view, there can remain little question the course that has been taken is the proper one.

[wakeme2008]

49. Maybe you should also question Dr. Dean

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2110125

I used to like Waxman but once he lowered himself to Swiftboating a vet........

[The Magistrate]

50. He Is As Entitled To His Opinion As Anyone Else, Sir

Often he is right; this time he is wrong.

[wakeme2008]

51. It is NOT his opinion I have a problem with

It is lowering himself to Repug Swiftboating of a Vet where he loses me.

[saracat]

64. Wow! The ends justify the means?

Waxman can take extreme measures to destroy a fellow Dem, and you don't have a problem with it? That sounds more like the Neocon's than Dem thinking. I used to respect Waxman and I don't dislike Brown, but this is awful. If true , I will have another once respected Dem fall in my estimation. I guess my standards may be too high!

[MrBenchley]

66. Don't you think you ought to wait for the link you requested

before you start parroting the absurdist claim that was made?

Guess not.

[saracat]

68. I said "if" It was true , My respect would drop, but

Iam still amazed that "if" it was true, the poster to whom I replied seemed to justify Waxman's alleged actions. I am not parroting anything.Denigrating the militart career of any Dem BY any Dem is NOT justified , ever, IMHO. And that is still my opinion whether Henry Waxman said anything or not about Hackett. I still would like to see a link!

[MrBenchley]

72. And yet you repeated the slur as if it were true

although there's no sign of a link (don't hold your breath, by the way).

[saracat]

63. Do you have a link to that ? I would like to know more. This is disgusting

[FreedomAngel82]

87. Please cite where you read this

[FreedomAngel82]

86. Oh please!

That's such bullshit. You think we're not going to win House seats because of one person? Wow, what an ego! Does the world revolve around Paul Hackett? HELL NO! There are lots of great democratic veterans running for office this term. Support real fighers! If you want a fighter check out Terry Stulce- http://www.terry2006.com

[Dr Fate]

58. Who cares what you active donors & volunteers think?!?!

Since when do you get to have INPUT? YOU give the money & volunteer time, then THE BOSSES who lost the last 3 election cycles decide what to do with it.

GOT IT?

Now, about that check...

[melissaf]

61. The '06 elections

haven't happened yet, and you're calling them already? You're calling the NATIONAL elections based on one pullout in one state?

Yes, this _is_ what's wrong with the Democratic party. If one thing happens to piss us off, we throw up our hands and give up.

ETA: No, worse than that: one disagreement happens, and we try to tear the party apart just to get what we want. And if we don't get what we want, well, at least we destroyed the Democratic party.

[iconoclastNYC]

67. Chicken Little much?

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!!!

[zulchzulu]

71. OK...so we should wave the white flag before we even began?

C'mon.

Get to work. Hackett has admitted that he wasn't raising the money for THIS race. He can run again...and I hope he does. And besides, Brown is a damn good candidate.

Let's move on. Turn the page. Get to work.

[high density]

73. Most people don't care about who is a senator from Ohio

So you don't really need somebody with "rockstar" quality, in my opinion. My "moderate" right-wing senators, Snowe and Collins, are as far from rockstar as you can get and they pull in 70%+ approval ratings in a state that went for Kerry.

The only people who care about who is senator in Ohio are liberals like us who want a change in leadership and the people of Ohio who are going to vote for this person. Everybody else doesn't give a crap and many people probably couldn't even name their own senators, let alone candiates for senator in another state.

[Stockholm]

74. In a race in Ohio

Who is more likely to win, Hackett or Brown?

That should be the sole concern of the DSCC.

[snowbear]

75. There's an article out today that said one main reason that....

Paul Hackett decided to pull out, were the results of an Ohio poll they took last week that had Brown over him by a huge margin.

I guess seeing those polls... plus whatever pressure he was getting from that guy in Ohio, from Schumer in NY and reportedly from Rahm Emanuel and Harry Reid.. it was all too much.

Does anyone in Ohio know what the deadline is for filing for the seat he ran for before? That old hag bitch HAS TO GO.

We all know Paul is feeling down and out now. But he knows how much support he has... Anyone know the deadline for filing in District 2 is it? :shrug:

[FreedomAngel82]

78. So because of one person

you think we're not going to have successes in 2006 midterms? Wow, what an ego.

[agincourt]

89. The impression I've gotten,

is that the honchos in the party like being neutered barnyard animals. They don't mind if the party is a minority. They didn't defend Kerry. They rolled on the credit card heist. They went ballistic on Durbin. They wimped out on cat killer's nukuluar option. They hate Michael Moore. Reed apoligized for being critical about the Abramhoff scandal. They're trying to be macho on Iran. They made a poor attempt to filibuster Alito. I really think they like being in the minority because they are scared of the heat they get if they opposed big business, which is what really runs this country. Look at the example they made out of Clinton for opposing the GOP big business machine MODERATELY. They probably got dirt on all these guy and they won't fight like Bill, scandal or not. Neutered critters for sure.

[saltpoint]

90. If blue message speaks strong and clear in November 06 the GOP is

set to lose a dozen House seats and maybe 3 in the Senate.

Not enough to reverse the specific math, but more than enough to indicate to Dubya that his political capital account is overdrawn.

His poll numbers will never be very high again, maybe not even at 50% approval again. Ever.

When he's not a seditious monster, Cheney is a joke. I've described him on DU as a dangerous lovechild of Leonid Breshnev and the Michelin Man. And now he's gone and shot somebody in the face. He's a practiced liar who drinks, shoots, and resigns.

Reid is not pure and perfect (who is?) but I don't miss the passivity of Tom Daschle.

Rick Santorum is done for in American politics early on election night in November.

It's still early. I like our chances better than the party-in-power, which is presiding over a string of spectacular failures.

[greenohio]

95. You know, at first I didn't agree with this concept.

The more I engage the conversation on this issue on other threads, the more I wonder if you are right.