Hackett vs. Brown

[JohnnyCougar]

I really like Hackett. I don't know much about Brown. But I think everybody is making this out to be something far more dramatic than it should be.

The blogosphere is divided over this, and it's not surprising. There are two types of candidates who the blogosphere attracts: Democrats who stand up for themselves and tell it like it is, and candidates with strong, progressive values. Hackett tells it like it is, and Brown has strong, progressive values. I see a lot of mischaracterization going on here. Brown is far from a DLC centrist. I'd rather vote for Hackett myself, but I don't even live in Ohio. But I don't think Sherrod Brown is a bad candidate, either. Brown clearly has more experience, and running a statewide race for part of the federal government is a big task. Even though I like Hackett, I still have this feeling that he is out of his league running for Senate.

I am sure this situation could have been handled far more professionally by the Democratic leadership. It's a tragedy the way it all went down. But in the end, they are always going to go for the surest bet. As much as I like Hackett, I believe Brown is the surest bet. DeWine has a lot of money in the bank, and despite being down in the polls, he will be a tough opponent. A Democratic win in Ohio is far from guaranteed.

Hackett is a military man. He should understand that you have to do your time before you get promoted through the ranks. The Democratic establishment will support whoever the strongest, most experienced candidate is at the time. Brown, despite how he entered the race, is the more established candidate. Hackett could really help out his party by running again in Ohio-02. Schmidt is beatable by one man: Paul Hackett. And the House is probably more important to retake than the Senate (and more probable, too). Hackett could be the difference maker. He narrowly lost when Bush and the Republicans were seen as far more favorable than they are seen right now. And Schmidt made those "coward" comments about Murtha. I think Hackett could capitalize on that and the looming Republican scandals.

Instead of running against each other, Democrats should run against Republicans. That is why this whole episode bothers me. Now Democrats are divided over this when they shouldn't be. Everyone shares the blame for this: the Democratic establishment handled it poorly, Sherrod Brown flip-flopped over entering the race, and Hackett is making angry statements about being "betrayed". It would better serve Democrats if Hackett looked at this realistically. The establishment should apologize to Hackett privately, but tell him his help is still needed. It's not the end of the world. It was a little f'ed up, but that happens in politics. Paul is needed on the House of Representatives front. And yes, he does have the establishment's support in that race. Because there is no better man for it than Paul Hackett.

[dkf]

1. If only they hadn't asked Hackett's donors to stop giving.

I find that pretty repulsive.

[TrueAmerican]

2. Nobody is getting my money

I gave to Paul Hackett in his last bid for congress. I'm not giving a dime to him or any other Ohio democrat.

[wakeme2008]

3. What does

Hackett is a military man. He should understand that you have to do your time before you get promoted through the ranks

Have to do with wining in Ohio especially Southern Ohio.

How many votes in the House will the Repugs use against Brown????

[Zensea]

4. You don't believe in primaries???

"Instead of running against each other, Democrats should run against Republicans."

If you are going to have a primary, then at some point people in the same party run against each other.
Period.
The idea is that the voters decide, instead of dealmakers in "smoke filled" rooms.

Since when is that such a strange concept?

[xchrom]

5. the only point here is that the democratic party people

in ohio didn't get to choose.

[JohnnyCougar]

6. Hackett didn't have to drop out.

I dunno. I find the whole circumstance pretty shitty. But there's no reason to get divided over it now.

[OzarkDem]

10. They were already deciding

Hackett was 20 points behind in the polls.

[Connie_Corleone]

7. All I know is that Brown will have a tough time winning SW Ohio.

With Hackett, there was a chance to win down here because we've heard of him and he's from here.

[OzarkDem]

9. Then get busy educating voters down there

If the idiots in SW Ohio continue to insist on voting against their own best interests, then that's their problem. SW Ohio Dems need to stop whining and start educating voters in SW about the issues.

[Connie_Corleone]

11. Who the hell is whining?

I'm giving the facts on SW Ohio from someone who lives here. How the hell do you think we got Taft, Blackwell and DeWine? They come from here and SW Ohio is mostly republican.

All I said is that it would be difficult for someone who isn't from here to win this part of Ohio.

[OzarkDem]

8. Agree

One thing outsiders don't understand about Ohio is that senate races are very difficult to win here. Most candidates don't win a senate seat until the second or third time they run. A new candidate who had never held office would not win and the polls were already showing that.

I admire Hackett, but he was in the wrong race. He should run for Congress in OH-2 where he stands a much better chance of winning.

He wasn't going to win the primary because Ohio doesn't elect newbies to the Senate. Period.