RSS
Using PayPal
Paul Hackett Out of Ohio Senate Race: Implications for Dem Insurgents
Share / Recommend - Comment - Print - Tuesday, Feb 14 2006, 8:15AM
Paul Hackett had a Howard Dean-like organically grown following out there that saw his type of candidacy as the sort that would transform the sclerotic Democratic Party into something more real and relevant to progressives.
Unfortunately, he's announced that he's out of the race.
This is the sort of time when angry supporters tend to call for the scalps of those responsible.
Markos at DailyKos has a quite informed, balanced take on the Hackett - Sherrod Brown - Rahm Emanuel -- Mike DeWine mess.
I'm not going to wade far into this story. But I do want to share a few thoughts with the progressive blogging/activist community.
There aren't many silver bullet solutions to America's political problems broadly or to the problems in either the Democratic or Republican parties. Hackett's war service profile, near win in the last election, and general attitude about policy and politics was refreshing to a progressive grassroots constituency that wants to change the course of the Democratic Party.
Let's presume for a moment that I endorse that impulse.
To accomplish what is essentially a hijacking of the party -- or at least to wrestle away the helm of party control -- the insurgents who were behind Hackett need to have weight in a good 25-30% of other key races that Democrats are wresling with (if not more). The 25-30% is enough inside the party to play a controlling or significant co-stakeholder role in party decision-making.
Furthermore, to win this battle for control -- some candidates, like Hackett, will have to vigorously run until the end, even if their candidacy looks doomed, or cash-strapped. It is certainly true that a slug-fest between Sherrod Brown and Paul Hackett may have harmed the Democratic Party -- and may even help Mike DeWine -- but to win a seat at the table and to chair the meeting when decisions are being made, the insurgent Dems will have to line up behind a number of candidates willing to go all the way.
One can't change the Democratic Party establishment if one remains dependent on that party's good graces and preferences. In this case, Rahm Emanuel and Co. began to choke Hackett because he wasn't playing ball the way that Rahm wanted or needed him to.
A successful insurgency won't care what Emanuel does. The insurgents will see victory behind both short-term defeats and short-term wins. Hackett needed to go all of the way -- win or lose -- to give the insurgents validation and strength in the Democratic Party.
Dem insurgents also over-invested in Hackett without lining up the rest of the insurgent candidacies. There are some out there, of course, but not enough. Hackett became the face of their overall campaign which I believe was a mistake.
I'm not endorsing this strategy of insurgency -- but I think that the characteristics of a successful attack on the Democratic Party establishment need to be articulated. I do think that the Democratic Party needs to have a few civil wars over policy and strategy.
Dem insurgents are vital if the Democratic Party is going to get itself out of a rut of political irrelevance and incompetence.
Hackett dropping out may help Dems win a Senate seat in Ohio; I'm not sure. I think that there are a number of problems with Sherrod Brown.
But in the long run, Hackett's departure has undermined some of the clout of the Dem insurgent movement.
And that's not a good thing.
-- Steve Clemons
« Previous Article - TWN HATES the Cheney Hunting Story» Next Article - Nir Rosen: Iraq's Spreading Civil War
Now watch those same democrats who knifed Paul Hackett turn around and expect him to help Sherrod Brown get elected.
You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
Once again, it is the mewling sack of excrement Reid spearheading the efforts to push Hackett out. Look Steve, Reid is a God damned turncoat, and as long as he is the so called "minority leader" the dems are going to continue to sell us out and kow-tow to the interests and agendas of the right.These asses are well on their way to losing the mid-terms despite Bush's low numbers, and the myriad of RW scandals that the Dems are failing to exploit. Reid ought to be tar and feathered out of his position, and sent to live the rest of his life clearing brush for Bush in Crawford.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/14/politics/14ohio.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
An excerpt......
"This is an extremely disappointing decision that I feel has been forced on me," said Mr. Hackett, whose announcement comes two days before the state's filing deadline for candidates. He said he was outraged to learn that party leaders were calling his donors and asking them to stop giving and said he would not enter the Second District Congressional race.
"For me, this is a second betrayal," Mr. Hackett said. "First, my government misused and mismanaged the military in Iraq, and now my own party is afraid to support candidates like me."
Mr. Hackett was the first Iraq war veteran to seek national office, and the decision to steer him away from the Senate race has surprised those who see him as a symbol for Democrats who oppose the war but want to appear strong on national security.
"Alienating Hackett is not just a bad idea for the party, but it also sends a chill through the rest of the 56 or so veterans that we've worked to run for Congress," said Mike Lyon, executive director for the Band of Brothers, a group dedicated to electing Democratic veterans to national office. "Now is a time for Democrats to be courting, not blocking, veterans who want to run."
One must NEVER think outside the box. One must NEVER do more than capitulate. Appease, suck up, grovel, and concede. The Democrats are locked in a snivelling attempt to become Republicans. Why, the Democrats are becoming more Republican than the Republicans. However, the Republicans are chasing that elusive Fascist dream and the real loser in all of this, the American people. Both parties are so grossly enamored with special interest lobbying money and "earmarks", they can both together wear out three pair of knee-pads in a single session of Congress. Resistance to the status quo may be futile, however it is one hell of a lot more dignified.
I live in the OH 02 and I have to agree with you. This is a conservative area and we regularly see conservatives run insurgent campaigns after being bypassed by local republican party.
I gave money to Hackett and yet had hoped he would have returned to rid us of Jean Schmidt instead of going for the senate seat. Either way, taking your ball and going home only makes those who thought he was too combustible for the race feel justified and maybe rightly so. Insurgencies only have a chance if the early leaders run on principle despite knowing the odds are stacked against them. He narrowly missed in '05 fighting that way. The prospect of a bloody primary was not hard to imagine given his newness to the political arena and the already evident vitriol of some of his supporters - many of which don't live in the 02 or even Ohio.
I KNEW IT! I don't even know whether you (MR C) read my E mail But I knew that you would see the potential ramifications of this horror. The unwillinness of the "Party" to realize that they had been sitting on the potentially greatest power that this country has seen in over thirty years is beyond comprehension. I have absolutely no doubt that the result of this stupidity will be translated in not only losing any chance that they might have had of regaining some control of at least a part of congress,but I can just about guarantee that there will be additional losses in the Nov elections. The kids will stay home. The Deaniacs will go back home. what will be left will be an emasculated, castrated party, incapable of drawing new voters, old voters,- any voters. I realize that there are alot of voters that will show up But there is zero chance that they can even make a dent. Just watch the media in the coming days. In a week that they(dem party) should be openly celebrating, the whole focus has now being switched from- Oh lets see- The cheney shooting; the goper report on the catrina fiasco; the continuig Iraqi horror; the horror budget; the health care abortion(ha!)-
Oh! what the hell. The Party Is Dead!
billjpa@aol.com
Let's hear it for the DEMS...dems being "NOT US" DEMS being the Deanies and the DLC and the "leaders" of the Democratic Party...not US. DEMS are leading us into Pete Seegers "Big Muddy" and DEMS is telling us to push on. First DEMS gets rid of viables like Wes Clark, then they get rid of viables like Hackett. DEMS need a new name...how about "Republicans"?
We need to overthrow DEMS, else we get Jeb on 2008...Hey DEMS-you're losing the election again! And losing control of the nation and your own constituents, and I have to ask, "WHY?!"
"We need to overthrow DEMS, else we get Jeb on 2008...Hey DEMS-you're losing the election again! And losing control of the nation and your own constituents, and I have to ask, "WHY?!""
Because these scumbags like Reid, Hillary, Leiberman, Biden, and Kerry serve the same masters that that the right does. They are all feeding at the same trough.
And people like Steve, branding the true patriots in our midst as "insurgents", while he periodically lauds the cowards and turncoats like Reid, is not helping. If "insurgency" is the effort to undermine the wealth, security, and welfare of a democratic society, than it is the bastards like Reid and his master Bush that are the true "insurgents". Hackett stands for what we are supposed to be. Reid has sold out. So, who's the "insurgent"?
It's too bad Hackett didn't take the whispers and turn them back on Brown and the Democratic campaign/congressional establishment ("Why are *they* telling you not to support me?"), though I suppose that's probably borderline suicidal, and so it's a slick play by Emanuel to force Hackett into that position.
On the other hand, wouldn't it be funny if Hackett went and ran in the Republican primary?
For years (three)a friend and a very loyal Republican, has been bragging that the Democratic Party is about to go the way of the Whigs. Harry Reid just brought us that much closer, how will we be remembered? Perhaps just a big dumb rock could serve as both monument and metaphor. Let us hope that your "insurgents" can form a new Party based on something other than Harry Reid's dirty laundry. bstr
Haven't heard from Howard Dean on any of this. I would have thought that he could have intervened and handled this sensibly.
It might be exciting to run these insurgents and have these "fighting dems," but aren't most of these folks really just Republicans? What are they going to do when Bush is gone? What are they going to do when Iraq is over (or at least over for us?)? Is Marcinkowski or Webb going to suppoert a single-payer health care plan? You can't even find the word "Democrat" on Marcinkowski's website!
It would be nice to win an election, but what's the point if the Democratic party is so full of Crypto-republican carpet-baggers that they are not able to wield any real power?
This is a skirmish in the war over the soul of the Democratic Party. The handwriting has been on the wall for some time about the establishment. Five years of the Beltway Dems' conduct during the Bush regime shows the establishment to be gutless and too closely tied to corporate money. It's obvious to anyone who can take a step back and look rationally at the situation; the mainsteam Democrats in Washington have decided their own survival matters more than either the party or the country. And while, of course they'd like to control Congress and the White House again, they're not putting their necks on the line to try to do it. So they've decided it's better to be in office with Republicans running the country than not be in office with Republicans running the country. I don't agree that this is the logical outcome, but I think that's how they see things. And they also know if they get too uppity, the money will stop flowing. Unfortunately, they're letting the Democratic Party die a slow death.
The only question is whether the insurgents can save the party from itself, become a viable opposition party again, and in time take back the country -- or whether the United States of America essentially becomes a one-party country like Mexico under the PRI, with the Republicans ruling indefinitely.
This is what I know today. I'm tired of living under the Rep thumb of fear. This is what I learned today. Just because Paul Hackett offered great potential for the Dem party doesn't mean one candidate and a small grass roots movement are enough to bend the ears of the strategists who are a fearful band of yesterday's policies. Just finished James Carville & Paul Begala's TAKE IT BACK. Conclusion: we can put up the greatest candidates in the world but if the strategists don't get their shit together, we will not only lose the opportunity for these great candidates to participate but we will lose the country. UNSEAT THE STRATEGISTS!
Axe: When Bush is gone, the Republican and right-wing machine will still be around, with its bought media and "think-tanks" and hate-promoting, precinct-organizing preachers.
Don't know yet if James Webb will support a single-payer health plan, but until we learn more, this passage describing one of the four main themes of his campaign gives me a bit of optimism:
Reinstituting notions of true fairness in American society, including issues of race, class, and economic advantage
I can count on the fingers of one hand the times I've heard Democratic politicians use the term "class" in any context except "middle-class". Surgery prevented Webb from appearing at the Virginia Dems' big winter dinner, but he chose to read his letter Del. Viola Baskerville, a prominent African-American pol who was a primary candidate for Lt. Governor in 2005.
None of this means he's Mr. Progressive, but it takes the Republican chill off nicely enough for me and many Dems to hear his policy ideas with an open mind.
The Dems are dead in the water. Its 1850 and the Dems are the Whig Party. Suffering from a complete inability to confront the slaveholders. Let us hope history repeats itself. Absent that is, another civil war.
Much of what you say is true, Steve.
But this is incontrovertible evidence that Reid -- and Schumer -- would prefer to lose elections than do what's in the best interest of the country.
What's more, you have to PROVE that one firebrand upstart can win, before you can field an entire brigade of like-minded candidates. So your point is taken, but you too have to be realistic about how this kind of thing happens.
Does Reid some sort of problem with the democratic process playing out in a democratic contest? What part of "primary election" is so objectionable? If Reid's tactics and approach are so sacred/effective -- let him prove it.
There's no fight in Reid. Worse, the allegedly "responsible" middle way has borne no fruit -- not for the country, and certainly not for the democratic party.
In Reid & Schumer's case... Compromise is for the Compromised.
You simply do NOT ask your brightest rising star to step aside, not even for a party veteran. Let Sherrod Brown PROVE he's the better candidate.
Brown may be hot in Ohio -- but then, so is DeWine.
What part about "losing the support of your base" don't you understand. Let's see if a DLC Preznit nominee gets much support from active Dems.
Betrayal of the country from Bush/Cheney is one thing. But betrayal of the country from a "Democratic' nominee is something we CAN stop.
You can't tell me it wouldn't be worth doing.
Steve:
Also, Cheney's language to Leahy on the floor of the Senate merits barely a whimper of outrage....
But Hackett's straight talk is somehow a liability? BS! He gains political ground because he offers honest talk precisely where Democrats/DLC-ers LOSE ground by equivocating.
Democracy comes to an end not with a bang -- but with a whimper.
And Harry Reid and Chuckie Schumer put the wimp in that whimper. May their names be live in infamy.
Give me a break. Paul Hackett's chances of winning the primary were tiny, and when this was pointed out to him he stamped his little foot and took his ball and went home. Don't get me wrong, I liked Hackett and his straight-talking ways, hell I gave him money a couple of times. But this incident made it clear to me that he's not ready to play with the big boys. He should have either said "let the voters decide" and stayed in the primary or backed out gracefully. It's not all about Paul, it's about what's best for Ohio and the Democratic party.
A lesson the Dems need to learn comes from the GOP SOP:when frontal assaults don't work, don't quit. Approach the problem from a different direction. Know your values and goals and stick to them and if sublety works, use it.
Quite the opposite.
The childishness -- and abuse of power -- with which the Dem Party reacted to Hackett's presence in the race show they are both unable and unwilling to stomach or withstand a fair and democratic contest that tests their preferred electoral "strategy." A fair contest could well have exposed it, and them, as bankrupt and ineffective.
Can't have that, now.
The notion that the Democratic Party has acted on behalf of what's best for Ohio is laughable. Same as far as acting in its own interest.
Their strategy has been NOt to fight, not to call a spade a spade, NOT to offend, and NOT to speak Truth to Power. NO ONE RESPECTS THAT. And no one sees leadership qualities in such a "stance." It's what loses Democratic candidates votes -- from Humphrey to Dukakis to Kerry.
Best not to fight back; best not to offend; best not to get angry, nor to attack.
The worst part is that at this decades-late date, they still don't get it. I think they're still under the delusion that a Lieberman /Clinton style candidate will have any residual pull or credibility with the base.
At this point, the unbelievable stupidity in undermining Hackett should clarify the Dem/DLC game of intentionally throwing legislative battles and electoral contests for the sham and loser's game that it is.
They just saw Hackett come within a hair of beating Jean Schmidt. And they couldn't even watch the vote counts in that contest. Not even after Ohio. Or after Florida. They just let him go down.
Sherrod Brown may be a decent guy. But what's he done for the country with King George V "in charge"? Jack.
Exactly Jack.
If Sherrod is such hot stuff, let him be a man, an honorable man -- there are dictionaries to help him out with the definition -- and stand up in a fair contest.
Instead Ohio is saddled with another gutless, childish pol who feels entitled to his next promotion. Let him earn it. Unless you like the advent of aristocracy.
Steve, couldn't we choose another word to describe the Democrats who wish to change their party? "Insurgents?!" At a time when most of the country associates the word with people who are murdering American Service personnel in Iraq, it is NOT a word with which ANY Democrat wants to be associated. How about "Revolutionaries"? Anything, please, but insurgents.
The Democratic Party is giving off an odor like that of moulded bread. These Washington city slickers, pommaded and so knowable in the ways of "compromise," are digging all our graves.
We'll have a Republican President over seventy, so perhaps the big question now is just who will be his Vice-President, or who knows, Jeb Bush.
The Democratic Party ruling class will be able to write a few books about how they almost won an election, then they will be sending sirup soaked letters to milk the web and talking about the next battle on the Sunday talk shows. The next one is always the one they are going to fight.
I was about to write directly to all of those who have commented and then decided that it is not worth the energy. Simply put-- the democratic party is dead. Simple. No Hope. OVER.
billjpa@aol.com
His leaving makes NO sense. How many GOP insurgencies have we seen in the past 10, 20 years? Hackett should have told them to go to hell.
The biggest issue here is that it was done in public. Circular firing squad, cat-herding, call it what you like: the GOP hardly ever has this kind of problem, unless it's deliberate -- the PA primary in 2004, the RI primary this year.
Brown comes across as a wonk. And I'm sorry, but a strategy based on detailed policy proposals is bullshit if you're in opposition, especially at this time, with this GOP.
I saw the Erskine Bowles campaign in NC and it broke my heart: the man was suffocated by his campaign staff and handlers, and we now have the empty vessel that is Richard Burr as John Edwards' successor.
Could it be that Hackett was not pro-Israeli enough?
Anyone?
I am a lifelong Democrat and I'm really steamed about this event! Paul Hackett is what we need! Our party is a joke to a lot of people because they can't get some spinal action going. We need new blood in our government and this guy was going to be a shining star for us. I'm trying to find email addresses to the people that did this and let them know how a Californian Democrat was going to do a little donating to Paul Hackett, even though he's in Ohio. What the party did to him is wrong and I object!
Hackett became the face of their overall campaign which I believe was a mistake.
Ciro Rodriguez? Deval Patrick? Ned Lamont?
Most major liberal bloggers have stayed out of the Hackett-Brown primary.
I agree with Matt. Hackett emerged from under the radar and could challenge for an open House seat. The relative ease that Hackett was forced out of the primary race demonstrate that he was not ready to take on a statewide election. Unseating an incumbant in a statewide race is daunting for someone without more experience. The re-emergence of the Democratic Party will only come as the Party begins to rebuild its structure precinct by precinct.
I think Hackett is his own worst enemy. He couldn't deal with reality and got squeezed out. Who's fault is that? He's blaming others and yelling betrayal like an immature child.
The elections this year are not about any one person. There's far more at stake. We're faced with an American Stalin and he's making this all about himself.
I'm all for the political insurgency but this guy is a soldier. He should know about leadership and should not go down the pathetic road of self indulgence.
Those outside the blogsphere are looking at this guy and wondering what kind of jerk he is. I'm wondering...
Actually, Tom, Dem insiders made it all about their own (mis)perceived self-interest, all about their own power (and abuse of it), and all about their own failed strategies (and the protection of them).
Hackett merely made their selfishness and self-destructiveness publicly known.
If the Dem leadership has no interest in democracy or in proving the validity of their ideas and strategies in an open, fair contest -- they should bow out of public life, and cease bring down the entire party once and for all.
Hackett showed he could win in a very conservative district.
But where was the national party's support for candidates who increase turnout, inspire enthusiastic support, and are capable of turning Red states into Blue states?
Uh, NOwhere, Tom.
Instead, the core Dem leadership is eagerly and actively doing the dirty work for the very guy, Bush, that you term a Stalin.
All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing. Textbook case.
We're faced with a Stalin, Tom, because the DLC and Dem leadership equivocate, won't stand up for core American principles, and won't bring the fight to the Repubs by making the case for America in loud, clear, ringing tones. Bush gets away with this crap cuz no one calls him on it.
And they're even willling to undercut their own allies and rising stars in the process. Self-destructive, Tom.
So who's selfish? Who's too selfish to give even minimal support to Dem rising stars?
For you to say it's Hackett, Tom, is nothing short of Orwellian.
We all know appeasement doesn't work. Reid and Daschle are walking on eggshells -- and they still get vilified with McCarthyite smear-jobs.
You only beat a bully by standing up to him -- and that goes triple for Bush's repression.
Tom, it's easy to disrespect the little guy. But you don't have the guts to address Hackett's point.
Dems will always be losers if they do Bush's dirty work by committing fratricide.
Milquetoast capitulation in the defense of losers' moderation is no virtue.
......"Dems will always be losers if they do Bush's dirty work by committing fratricide.
Milquetoast capitulation in the defense of losers' moderation is no virtue."
Posted by RichF
Good post. I used to think those such as Reid were poor strategists. But it has become painfully obvious that in fact they are working against their own party in a purposeful and planned manner. It was Kaine's selection to do the SOTU rebuttal that really cinched my suspicions. We are going to lose the midterms, by design, from within our own ranks.
Say goodbye to democracy.
Steve, just a thought.
You are far too articulate to use the word "insurgent" accidentally in this context.
Correct usage in the prosaic sense, but these are extraordinary times.
It's crystal clear to me that these insurgents are MUCH much closer to the core beliefs of the Democratic Party, and much closer to the core beliefs of the nation, than are the Democratic "centrists."
Hackett and others like him actually believe in those values. Centrists, to my mind at least, seem all too eager to throw over those values for a smidgen of political expedience.
It doesn't look good from the Heartland.
So let's pick a different word. I'm sure it wasn't intentional.
Hackett can't be termed extremist or hugely partisan, simply because he resorted to straight talk. He no doubt made some pragmatists uncomfortable. But that by no means puts him far from the center. The guy is no radical.
Steve, part of the problem for Hackett is that the a key part of the insurgency abandoned him as well. People like Kos, who I think you wrongly point to as as "reasoned" dumped Hackett like an ugly date at the dance. An insurgency certainly has no hope if key constitutents within the insurgency are bought off in one way or another. And that's what happened.
Hackett had no political experience and is somewhat of a loose cannon, and needs time to mature and gain some applicable experience. I commend him for his service, but he needs to learn diplomacy. The Ohio Democractic party wants him to run again for the congressional seat that he barely lost last summer. He could beat Schmidt right now, especially with her anti-veteran comments on the house floor a couple weeks ago.
A few points to bear in mind:
Hackett waited a bit to see if Sherrod Brown would announce a senate run. When Brown didn't, Hackett went ahead and now that he's out, has honorably kept his word to the current Dem challenger not to pursue the House seat as proposed by the Dem-powers-that-be (unlike Brown, who I believe initially signified no interest in the 06 senate race, but choose to run only after Bush's popularity dropped to an all-time low and after Hackett declared).
If the Dems were smart, they would have backed Hackett in this race over Brown, and encouraged Brown to run for Voinovich's seat in 08.
But NO, once again The Party makes a gross miscalculation.
Yes, Brown is a beloved Dem and would surely win over Hackett in the primary because of that. Trouble is, for precisely the same reason (that he such a beloved Dem), he'll lose to DeWine.
Hackett has broad appeal, a necessary element to win in conservative Republican Ohio. And yeah, while he is inexperienced (and seems a tad petulant announcing his abandonment of politics), Hackett's previous good showing proves he has that cross-over ability. Plus, he's an Iraqi war vet -- a marine!! -- going up against a Republican party basing its election strategy on its ability to better defend America (yes, it's pathetic, but many folks still buy into that, even after Katrina).
So the Dem party leaders will win the skirmish and sacrifice the battle. And so goes the war... (deep, heavy, long sigh...)
democrats are dumb donkies and always will be george bush is god and always will be.. the kennedys suck the bushs rule republicans are superior demos or inferior.. history never changes bottom line left wing liberals wont cut it in america hence hacket is gone..he isnt a true american anyways he probably helped the insurgency in iraq that traitor.. god bless america hail bush.. peace out yall
Reader Comments (38) - post a comment