Who's more electable- Hackett or Brown?

[Guaranteed]

Electability certainly isn't a new term on this board, and most everyone realizes how important it is that we get DeWine's seat in November. He's so weak, and it would be a shame if we screwed it up and ran someone against him that the people of all of Ohio aren't willing to vote for.

Now, according to many here, Sherrod Brown is a Kucinich-style Democrat. My guess is he would probably be one of the most liberal Senators we had, if he won the seat from DeWine.

However, a lot of people here would be pretty happy- more than happy- with Paul Hackett in the seat. People like his leadership style.

More than that, Hackett got 48% of the vote in one of the strongest Republican districts in our nation.

Who do you think would have a better chance of actually winning the seat? I mean, if the decision hadn't already been made about who's going to run. Would you be alright with the person you think is more electable?

[mikehiggins]

1. We'll never know now, will we? n/t

[karlrschneider]

2. Well, since Hackett has dropped out, I'd say he's probably unelectable

at this point...
:eyes:

[Guaranteed]

4. Right, I said if the decision hadn't already been made that he

can't run.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

3. Personally, I think that's up to the voters in Ohio

Too bad they won't have a chance to express their opinion in a primary.

[wakeme2008]

6. A primary does not answer the question

IMHO, Hackett would draw more non-Democratic voters than Brown and if enough to over come the voting machines in Ohio would win Ohio.

[Guaranteed]

8. Well, we certainly know that primaries don't determine

electability.

[Justitia]

11. zing! and correctomundo, my friend. -eom

[MercutioATC]

5. Hackett. Here's why:

Ohio is a red state. Not by much, but "they" outnumber "us".

For any Dem to win, they can't just get Dem votes. They need crossover votes. Now is a great time in Ohio to get crossover votes...people in Ohio are pissed with our current Republican leaders. If Ohio Repubs are going to vote Dem, now's when they're going to do it.


Hackett has great cross-party numbers compared to Brown. Brown might be more progressive than Hackett, but he's disliked in southern Ohio for that. Hackett has been received well by both Dems and Repubs.

I have doubts that Brown has the cross-party appeal to pull off a statewide election in Ohio. I don't think Hackett would have had any problem against DeWine.

[dsc]

9. The man won statewide office once

and his old district, before they put every Democrat they could eliminate from LaTourette's district into his, was close to evenly divided. The notion that Brown can't get independents to vote for him is beyond absurd.

[wakeme2008]

10. Brown LOST a state wide election

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

Brown lost when trying for a third term as secretary of state to Republican Bob Taft.

[dsc]

14. Yes but notice he was running for a third term

in case you are wondering that means he won two of them. He lost in a close race in a horrible year for Democrats in Ohio. We lost his seat and the governor's seat and narrowly kept the auditor and treasurers seats. Incidently, the Republicans evidently find him threatening:

Brown, relatively young and telegenic, is considered one the stars of the Ohio Democratic Party. In 2001, when the Republican-controlled legislature threatened to gerrymander him out of office, Brown threatened to run for governor in 2002. The Republicans backed down, preserving Brown's majority Democratic district, and Brown stayed in the U.S. House of Representatives.

They got rid of Trafficant instead which was a major giveback on their part since Trafficant was all but a Republican by that point.

[MercutioATC]

13. Yes, in 1992.

That's quite a while ago.

Ohio, like the rest of the nation, has become redder since then.

[dsc]

15. actually he won in the eighties

while Ohio was voting for Reagan.

[MercutioATC]

24. Let's get in the "way-back machine" then...

...and we'll let him run in the 80's again.

Sorry, I'm not buying a 20-year-old win as compelling...

[dsc]

26. In the meantime he has consistently won in a fairly even district

His current district is very Democratic but his old one which was Lorain and Geauga Counties was not nearly as Democratic.

[MercutioATC]

28. Ohio, as a state, is red, though. It's nothing like Brown's district.

Additionally, southern Ohio and northeast Ohio are like different planets. Brown isn't even popular with a lot of DEMS in southern Ohio.

I don't think you can compare Brown's home district to the rest of the state.

[dsc]

32. His current district no

but his old district yes. I lived in LaTorette's district when I lived in Ohio and that district is similar to what Brown's used to be. Admittedly LaTorettes has become more Republican and Brown's more Democratic in the latest redistricting but in the 1990 redistricting they both were fairly even districts. I will admit they aren't the suburbs of Cincy but they aren't Kucinich's or Ryan's either.

[Douglas Carpenter]

7. a centrist strategy has not been working very well-why not try something

different for a change and run a real progressive/liberal like Sherrod Brown?

Sorry, but I just don't buy the DLC/"new" Dem approach. Besides it keeps driving the range of discussion farther and farther to the right.


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

[bullimiami]

16. you dont know much about brown apparently.

he has nothing to do with the DLC. He is a real liberal. Take a minute to learn about him.

if you are talking centrist i think hackett is a lot closer to it than brown.

[Douglas Carpenter]

19. sorry, I think you misunderstood. I agree with you 1000000000000%

[bullimiami]

36. i see i really did misunderstand as we do agree 100000000000000000%

:)

[DancingBear]

18. Because it is O-H-I-O

Would you run a progressive/liberal in Alabama? Mississippi? Indiana?

Of course not. You would run a progressive candidate who carried an air of authenticity with him that rang true with the voters of said states who are so used to right wing reactionary candidates.

You would run someone who does not scare them, that can't be be "boxed in" label-wise, and who could BEGIN the process of helping them "unlearn" all the right wing crap they have been fed for so many years.

If you could find someone who had been part and parcel of the George Bush war, and who could refute the lies in plain and simple terms, that would be good, too.

Heaven knows we need progressives, but we need to be able to get moderate voters to accept them. We preach to the choir here.

There must be some candidate like that out there...

[Guaranteed]

20. A candidate who could do that, as well as be more than

acceptable to the people at DU. :)

Good post.

[Douglas Carpenter]

23. Howard Metzembaum was branded a liberal and he managed somehow

Senate Years of Service: 1974-1974; 1976-1995

I think there are real political advantages to running someone with a clearly defined progressive message. I fear progressives have gotten too timed. Many of the great liberal Senators of the 60's and 70's (Birch Baye, Frank Church, George McGovern and many more) came from otherwise Republican states. This is a legacy that needs to be reclaimed. I see no reason why it is not possible. And if we don't we will never develope a progressive majority.

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

[DancingBear]

30. I don't disagree with that premise,

but if Howard ran in the present political climate of Ohio he'd get clobbered.

Sadly, we need to reclaim the progressive legacy in states like Ohio by degrees. The right-wing mindset is pervasive - I know I keep hammering on this but unless you've experienced southern Ohio you have no idea what it is like down there.

That is what made Hackett's showing so incredible. I can almost guarantee you that if Paul Hackett said what he said about George Bush, and WAS NOT an Iraq vet, he would have gotten 35% of the vote.

If it was a clear day.

And sunny.

And if he was giving out free food.

[dsc]

34. Assuming a young Metzenbalm he wouldn't have gotten clobbered

the aged one maybe, but he cleaned Voinovich's clock in his last race and it was a thing of beauty. Admittedly Metzenbalm couldn't have gone after Bush in the same way as Hacket but he surely would have been effective.

[meisje]

12. Whoever is on the ballot

[librechik]

17. Which one does Diebold like best?

that's which one.

[tom_paine]

21. This was, sadly, about so much more than just comparing Brown vs. Hackett

It was about the Dems desperately needing new blood. It was about Dems DESPERATELY NEEDING someone with COJONES to STAND UP!

Say what you will about the issue of Hackett vs. Brown...I honestly don't know enogh about either to weigh in. But Hackett was the kind of Dem we NEEDED (and who gives a rat's ass if he was a Repub a few years ago...hell, don't we WANT moderate Repubs to wake up and see the Busheviks are no conservative and that the Dems offer all of us better?) especially because he stood tall behind his words.

I am not talking about issues at all, here, not progressive vs. centrist, money or fund-raising abilities.

This sent anther message to all of us out here just PRAYING for someone, male or female, with the COJONES to tell it like it is and who won't back down if Bill O'Reilly shakes a fist at them. It delivers again a message to all of us out here that we don't matter, that the Dems won't fight for us no matter how bad things get.

Brown may well be a fine progressive, but damnit, will he be able to call the Fundamentalist Busheviks to the carpet then stand behind his words when the Bushevik Party Loyal Sub-Media and Lie Laundry starts howling?

In the end, the Democratic Leadership handled things badly, almost as badly as humanly possible. Why the fuck did they start Hackett down the Senatorial path in the first place, if they didn't mean it? Why not direct him to run for House and win, which he almost certainly would have.

For the record: I will be out for the Democrats again in November and in '08. I will work and I will donate. I am not giving up. But the Democratic Party of America 2006 so reminds me of the German Social Democratic party of 1932, it is to despair.

[Guaranteed]

22. You said it all.

That's what this was about.

[MercutioATC]

25. That's exactly it.

Thanks for stating it so well.

[Generator]

29. I love that word Busheviks!

Anyway, nobody listens to me because I'm a nobody so I'm free to rant. Yeah-that was my point in the other thread-that after reading all these posts from people in Ohio it sounded like Hackett was the best chance to actually win.

But exactly how many Iraq war vets that are former Republicans and tell it like it is do we have? How many that want to be in politics? Not many more on our side I can see in the future.

[DancingBear]

31. Bingo

Thanks, tom_paine.

[lastknowngood]

27. Let's just accept the reallity that a Lib Dem stands NO chance in

strongly repug Ohio. My guess is that Dewhiner will win by 15% and help sweep Mean Jean back into office. Thanks Dem Leadership.

[Cleita]

33. Who cares. It seems the electability questions has

been taken out of the hands of the unwashed masses.

[insane_cratic_gal]

35. The Polls say Hackett but the point is mute now

Ohio has only two choices atm.. (if another republican jumps in there.. you can kiss the seat goodbye.)

Brown or DeWine

The choice was taken out of the hands of the masses for whatever reason.

for the rest of you saying that Hackett was a progressive Candidate, you haven't been following his campaign.

Hackett’s scorching rhetoric earned him notoriety and cash on the campaign trail. He declared that people who opposed gay marriage were “un-American.” He said the Republican party had been hijacked by religious extremists who he said “aren’t a whole lot different than Osama bin Laden.” Bloggers loved him, donors ponied up, while Democratic Party insiders grumbled that he wasn't’t "senatorial."


lets do away with another talking point i've seen several times today:

Hackett wanted to fight to the finish. He raised nearly a half-million dollars in the last quarter of 2005, matching Brown’s ffund-raising. But Brown entered the Senate race with $2 million in the bank, a strategic cushion. Early polls show both Brown and Hackett running in a dead heat against DeWine. An internal poll done in February for the Hackett campaign that was obtained by the Cleveland Plain Dealer showed Brown leading Hackett by 20 points, but Hackett took the lead if voters simply heard both candidate’s bios. The analysis concluded, “If Paul Hackett can raise the funds necessary to communicate his message to the voters of Ohio, he will present Sherrod Brown with a formidable challenge in May


With the very real prospect of a smear against him going public late in the campaign—a la the Swift Boating of John Kerry—Hackett knew that dollars would be especially important for him. “If I don’t have the $2 million or $3 million it would take to respond in the final weeks, to influence the battlefield with my message, then I would just be reacting and I’ll get trounced,” said Hackett.

Hackett had demonstrated his ability to shake money from donors during a January fundraising roadshow in California and New York. But he soon discovered that top Democrats were attempting to cut off his money. The hosts of a Beverly Hills fundraiser received an e-mail from the political action committee of Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) that concluded, “I hope you will re-consider your efforts on behalf of Hackett and give your support to Sherrod.” Waxman’s chief of staff, Phil Schiliro, said the e-mail was only sent to a handful of people and that “it probably came from a suggestion from the Sherrod Brown campaign.”



http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/2006/02/hackett_drops_out.html

[Guaranteed]

37. kick nt