Poll; Where do you stand on the Hackett/Brown matter?

[Armstead]

What is your opinion of the fact that Democratic leadership pressured Hackett to leave the Ohio Senate primary to allow Congressman Brown to make an unobstructed run against Mike Dewine?

[Punkingal]

1. Ha!

I'm your first voter, and I'm okay with Brown, but annoyed at the leadership.

[dmallind]

3. Is the idea still that he runs for the House seat?

If so I am for it. Hackett can beat Schmidt then is set up for a Senate run against Voinovich in two years wjhich would give OH two Dems in the Senate.

[mcscajun]

5. Hackett won't run against Schmidt

His e-mail today:

Tuesday, February 14, 2006

Today I am announcing that I am withdrawing from the race for United States Senate. I made this decision reluctantly, only after repeated requests by party leaders, as well as behind the scenes machinations, that were intended to hurt my campaign.

But there was no quid pro quo. I will not be running in the Second Congressional District nor for any other elective office. This decision is final, and not subject to reconsideration.

I told the voters from the beginning that I am not a career politician and never aspired to be--that I was about leadership, service and commitment.

Similarly, I told party officials that I had given my word to other good Democrats, who will take the fight to the Second District, that I would not run. In reliance on my word they entered the race. I said it. I meant it. I stand by it. At the end of the day, my word is my bond and I will take it to my grave.

Thus ends my 11 month political career. Although it is an overused political cliché, I really will be spending more time with my family, something I wasn't able to do because my service to country in the political realm continued after my return from Iraq. Perhaps my wonderful wife Suzi said it best after we made this decision when she said "Honey, welcome home." I really did marry up.

To my friends and supporters, I pledge that I will continue to fight and to speak out on the issues I believe in. As long as I have the microphone, I will serve as your voice.

It is with my deepest respect and humility that I thank each and every one of you for the support you extended to our campaign to take back America, and personally to me and my family. Together we made a difference. We changed the debate on the Iraq War, we inspired countless veterans to continue their service by running for office as Democrats and we made people believe again. We must continue to believe.

Remember, we must retool our party. We must do more than simply aspire to deliver greatness; we must have the commitment and will to fight for what is great about our party and our country; Peace, prosperity and the freedoms that define our democracy.

Rock on.



Paul Hackett

[Punkingal]

10. No, he's not going to run for that seat...

He said he gave his word to other Dems in that district that he would not run.

[LeftNYC]

2. Not sure how to vote

Brown seems to be a great candidate, but I always have a problem with Dem leadership...

[Armstead]

8. Not a simple one I realize

It's be a lot more clearcut if the Denmocratic leadership were pushing some DLC style wimp.

But as a guy on the liberal/progressive end of the spectrum, my own opinion is that it was crummy but necessary -- and I am heartened to see the Dems pushing a clear and unapologetic progressive like Brown. IMO it means they may finally be getting the message.

[LeftNYC]

11. I dont necessarily disagree with the decision

but if they did call Hackett's donors that is truly slimy and a Repug trick. But I disagree with Reid on most things. Schumer is my senator and usually a straight talker. There are two sides to every story, however Reid is refusing comment, so who knows?

[Armstead]

16. Life would be a lot easier if we could all just be mad at the GOP I guess

Sometimes being a progressive who supports the Democrats feels like batting off arrows coming from all directions. I sure wish it could be a matter of everyone on our side sending all of the volleys in the direction of the GOP. :crazy:

[More Than A Feeling]

4. Other: There are no winners here.

Reid/Schumer were ham-handed, if they were going to favor Brown, they didn't handle it very gracefully.

Hackett's parting shot served no purpose.

Brown should have got in the race first, rather than waiting until Hackett was in.

The people of Ohio are denied the chance to select the best candidate.

This issue is causing more hard feelings among the netroots, both against the party, and against each other.

[Catrina]

6. For the third time, I could not vote in a Hackett thread ~ 'error'

message after voting. For the record, I would have voted #2 ~

[Armstead]

12. May be a cookie problem

Try signing out and signing in again. And/or closing and reopening yourb browser. Sometimes that helps.

[Catrina]

24. Thanks, I'll try that. It just happened again, 'you've already voted' etc.

which is not possible since the thread had zero recommendations. Again, it was a Hackett thread! I'll try your suggestion ~ :-)

[EFerrari]

7. Where is the "primaries decide the runner, not DLC committies"

choice?

It's possible to like both Hackett and Brown and not like being cheated out of a choice. :)

[Armstead]

28. That would be choice Number 2

[RufusEarl]

9. All politics are local, so I'll wait for the folks here at DU from Ohio

That know more about both candidates then i do, tell me what they think. I like Hackett, like what he has to say about Limpbutt. But I've seen Brown's voting record here on DU, and it's a very progressive record. So all you Ohio DUer, let us know witch candidate you support and why.

[donheld]

13. I'm staying out of it

We have enough work to do here in Colorado to keep us busy. The people in Ohio are going to have to make these decisions for themselves. It's not that I don't care about Ohio politics, but there's only so much I can do.

[jobycom]

14. Other: I admire Hackett, but feel like he betrayed us.

He didn't have to quit over this. He looks like he threw a hissy fit, took his ball and went home. That smacks too much to me of all the other "I'm leaving the Democratic Party" quitters who want everything their way and quit when they don't get it. It disappoints me greatly that Hackett did this, rather than either fighting, or running for a the House seat against Jean Schmidt--someone I would think Hackett would love to see defeated.

I can see why he's angry. He feels like the Party betrayed him. He's a strong, moral person with a sense of duty and integrity, and that's the type of person most easily hurt by politics. The Party no doubt feels that they could not talk to him, that his popularity had gone to his head and he couldn't see reason. Or that he was too inexperienced to understand the big picture. Frankly, there's probably some truth to that. So they went around him rather than to him. I hate that politics works that way (I've been burned by it, at a much lower level than Hackett), but it does.

My first thoughts on reading the story were that he was a quitter, and good riddance. I was angry at him. The more I've thought about it, the less angry I am, and the more I blame the party and feel sorry for Hackett. But I still feel he quit, and that the pressure applied to him was no worse than that applied in any statewide race. He would have had a lot more pressure, and betrayal, if he made it to the general election. Maybe he's not cut out for elected office. Maybe he should be a spokesperson or commentator instead. He's got the fire and the insight of a talk show host, rather than the demeanor of a US Senator.

And I don't want leaders I feel sorry for.

[Armstead]

29. Heat and kitchens

IMO if one is going to run an insurgent campaign, one better be prepared for what that means, which is that you have to fight back against the power structure. "If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen" as they say. One can't go off in a huff whenever things don't go exactly your way.

[Rosco T.]

15. Opinion Follows....

From everything I can see, the situation shakes out like this...

1. Hackett had some name recognition after a VERY close race (that he probably actually won) and decided to go for the Senate seat, Shummer/Reid concurred.

2. Brown comes in the race also, and (appears) to have BETTER STATE-WIDE recognition than Hackett.

3. (apparently) Both Hackett/Brown poll well agains their 'pug opponent, Brown (apparently) a hair better.

4. Some real STRATEGY devlops. Common sense says that Brown can take the Senate seat, Hackett has more than enough chops to take the House seat overwhelmingly this time (ie. bigger margin than Diebold can steal) and Hackett is approached to drop out and make it a ONE-TWO punch for the party.

5. Hackett gets a case of the ass, digs in his heels.

6. TPTB have to get others to convince Hackett that a ONE-TWO is better than a ONE.

7. Hackett takes a shoot at all concerned, takes his ball and goes home.

Sorry folks, I can't side with Hackett on this one.. he had a SOLID chance to take TWO seats back and walked away cause he couldn't have it ALL his way.

[MrBenchley]

17. I'm laughing my ass off...

How many threads have we had over the past few months DEMANDING that the Democratic party purge just about every Democrat you ever heard of because they fail to meet the lofty "progressive" ideal (whatever the fuck it is)....

And here moderate-to-right-wing Hackett quits his losing campaign, leaving the field open for progressive Sherrod Brown (endorsed by the PDA)...and people here are flying into a foaming rage because they imagine that the sort of purge that's been advocated has taken place.

And let's not forget the people desperately trying to blame the DLC, for whatever the fuck reason....

[Armstead]

20. I gotta admit there's some irony here

I often disagree with you, obviously, but for once, I must admit you have a point.

As a liberal/progressive, I believe Brown is exactly the kind of politician we need more of on the national level. Brown has been working on actual issues from a very liberal/progressive standpoint for years, and he's not a shrinking violet when it comes to speaking out on the issues.

Hackett's great at calling out the GOP on an emotional level, but he's kind of like Chance the Gardner in "Being There." In terms of issues, he's a blank slate who people read what they want into. They think he's great because he calls Bush an SOB.


I think sometimes we get too hung up on style over substance at DU.

[MrBenchley]

21. It appears what some people want is a Democratic version of Alan Simpson

An uninformed blowhard who makes headlines but is otherwise ineffectual....

[Webster Green]

22. "Hackett's great at calling out the GOP on an emotional level"...

Yep!

He lost me a long time ago when I heard him interviewed (I think it was on Ed Schultz's show).

He was trashing the chimp for his handling of the Iraq war, but he seemed to support the invasion, and was blabbering about staying the course, and winning. What a bunch of crap!

[Blue_In_AK]

27. I felt that way, too...

I've only seen Hackett a few times on TV and didn't really follow his campaign closely, so I probably don't know what I'm talking about, but to me he seemed to be more show than substance and I found him just a little too glib for my tastes. :shrug:

[Cleita]

18. So maybe Hackett should run for the Green Party.

Not allowing him to run in the primaries smells of fixed election to me.

[VolcanoJen]

25. He should consider running as an Independent.

I'll have no problem stepping outside the party and voting for him.

Thing is, you need $$$ to run outside the system.

[Javaman]

19. DailyKos has a great time line of events, it points out that,

While I do support Hackett, he waited until long after Labor day (official day for announcing ones candidacy) to make a decision. Brown on the other hand would have gladly let Paul run, but because Paul couldn't make up his mind, Brown threw in his hat, it was only then that Paul decided to run. Being first out of the gate is basic politics. So the Dem party got behind Brown for two reasons, he's a seasoned vet and his ability to raise funds out strips Hackett by a huge margin. Plus, Paul's numbers aren't what Browns are. So the decision was made, not because Paul was not the one to back per say, but because Brown has the advantages. Hackett had all sorts of support prior to him announcing, but because he waited so long to say something, his support by the movers and shakes began to waver.

The bottom line is: granted many at the DLC are DINO's, wanna-be progressives, etc, blah blah blah, but they have to put their money behind someone that is showing numbers. I have always thought that Hackett running for senate was biting off more than he could chew. He should have another go at mean jean and kick her ass this time around. I still think he should, him not wanting to play politics any longer serves no one any good. Just shows sour grapes.

Politics is a game, period. As much as Hackett wants to take his ball and go home, the reality is: he never had the ball to begin with. He can still be the tough talking no bullshit guy, but he has to realize that there are much bigger things at stake here.

Flame me all you want, but I'm still a Hackett supporter, but a Democrat first.

[Kukesa]

26. Umm . . . Javaman, according to Wikipedia, that's not quite true.

Brown announced during the summer that he would NOT run:

"In the summer of 2005, Brown announced he would not run for the United States Senate seat held by Republican Mike DeWine. <1> That fall, however, Brown reconsidered his decision to enter the ring. <2> This announcement came shortly after Democrat Paul Hackett also stated that he would soon announce his candidacy. Within Ohio, Brown's decades of involvement in Ohio politics, including his years in statewide office, have given him high name recognition amongst Ohioans and a considerable fundraising advantage. In addition to his Senate campaign, Brown also helped to support Reform Ohio Now to promote several state jurisdictional changes on the ballot in November 2005."


Link and more here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherrod_Brown

[Javaman]

30. Ummmm....Kukesa I stand by what I say....

"In the summer of 2005, Brown announced he would not run for the United States Senate seat held by Republican Mike DeWine. <1> That fall, however, Brown reconsidered his decision to enter the ring. <2> This announcement came shortly after Democrat Paul Hackett also stated that he would soon announce his candidacy."

Stating that you are going to announce and announcing it are two very different things.
Brown announced first.

[Kukesa]

31. So, if you announce that you're NOT going to run

and then announce that you ARE going to run -- are those two different things?

Never mind, Javaman, never mind. I'm devastated and deserted and it doesn't really matter anymore.

You can be right/correct/on the money. I was wrong.

[Javaman]

32. It's not about being right or wrong or even being correct...

Paul Hackett is a great Candidate, however, personally, I think his second run was doomed from the start.

He had a great message but his fund raising strength was mostly web based donation. Nothing wrong with that but it's not the big money, sad to say.

Although Hackett is a no bull type of guy, he pretty much was a moderate leaning conservative democrat.

Brown is a progressive and given his resume and ability to raise funds, he would have beat out Hackett in the long run.

Granted the whole mess could have been handled better, but given the situation, the Democratic party really needs to have a united front now.

If we were to start splitting in our primaries for our own candidates where would that leave us?
right back where we started.

Personally, Hackett needs to take on mean jean again, I honestly think he will destroy her next time. But given Hackett's latest statement, blaming the Dem party and not his ability to really gain traction on the issues, I am sad to think that he won't challenge schmitt again.

That is the loss.

bottom line: some people make better reps then senators.

:shrug:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

23. So, who thought the "Democratic Party" was democratic?

But, "our" bosses are "not as bad" as the Republican bosses. At least that's what they want everyone to believe.

[Armstead]

33. Ya havta deal with the cards you're dealt, I guess

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

34. Even when they're from the bottom of the Deck?

Think I'll pass on that hand.