Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    Mar 2002

    Analysis: Hackett Ohio fiasco rocks Dems

    I've said this for some time now. It was true in "00" and "04" and is even more prevalent today. The Dems are so divided they have lost their effectiveness as a party. Howard Dean is compiling dossiers on embattled Senate minority leader Harry Reid and House minority leader Nancy Pelosi. Kerry, Gore and co. pander to the far left, Clinton is trying her best to seem "middle of the road" though her actions prove otherwise. Then there is the recent spectacle where the party has a complete meltdown during the Alito hearings (thank you Ted, have one on me!). No message, no money, no plan. And according to the press, things look bad for the Conservatives?

    Analysis: Hackett Ohio fiasco rocks Dems

    Paul Hackett's angry decision to withdraw from the Senate race in Ohio is a devastating blow for the Democratic Party and may even have profound long-term repercussions on American politics.
    It opens the door to the very real possibility that opposition to the war, and to any possible conflict with Iran, will focus on a new Third Party populist movement that could reach the scale of the H. Ross Perot movement in the 1990s but be far more passionate. And that could cripple the Democrats' hopes, and even expectations of regaining the White House in 2008.
    It must have seemed like business as usual for the liberal national political establishment of the Democratic Party when they relentlessly built up the pressure for Hackett to withdraw from the race to clear the way for their own favorite, Rep. Sherrold Brown of Ohio in the contest to choose a candidate to run against incumbent Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio.
    Brown has been the subject of an increasing number of fawning profiles in the national U.S. press penned by liberal democratic loyalists. And party heavyweights like Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, a close ally of his fellow New York Democratic senator Hillary Clinton, and Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, on Sunday turned on the direct pressure urging Hackett, a political neophyte and a lieutenant colonel in the Marine Reserves, to withdraw for the supposedly "stronger" candidate.
    And in the time-honored tradition of politics as usual Hackett was offered all the usual carrots and sweeteners for falling on his sword. Emmanuel urged him to run again for Schmidt's House seat in the Second District instead.
    But Hackett was no politics as usual kind of guy. He pulled out of the race all right -- but in an angry statement -- that blasted his many opponents within the Democratic national establishment for undermining his candidacy. "At the end of the day, my word is my bond and I will take it to my grave," he said.
    The impact of Hackett's withdrawal is obvious. He may have been a newcomer to the political scene, but he had enormous popularity and potential: He came from nowhere to run Republican Rep. Jean Schmidt a very close second entirely unexpectedly in the race for her House seat. His strong showing confirmed the strength and potential in Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean's strategy of trying to harness popular anger and frustration about the continuing war in Iraq for the Democratic Party by running Iraq War vets like Hackett in House races around the country.
    But far beyond that, Hackett's remarkable strong showing against Schmidt and his evident charisma and popularity in the campaign trail gave the Democratic Party the prospect of getting back on the political map in Ohio, the crucial swing state in the most crucial swing political region in the nation.
    Hackett was clearly the most popular and strongest candidate the Dems had for taking the open Ohio Senate seat in the November 2006 midterm election. Ohio was the vital swing state that decided the 2004 presidential election and remains essential win territory for a Democratic Party now almost totally shut out of the Republican Solid South.
    But Hackett was too successful in breaking the traditional mold of Democratic campaign politics. Despite two humiliating defeats in national presidential elections they had every opportunity to win, and despite six sweeping national defeats in contests for the House of Representatives, the old Democratic liberal establishment showed in its treatment of Hackett that, like the Bourbon kings of France 200 years ago, it had learned nothing and forgotten nothing.
    It appears also that the party's ruling elders once again completely failed to appreciate the strength of popular feeling in Ohio and around the country about the Iraq war and the hunger for them to run fresh blood with new things to say and do.
    Political blogs across the nation are red hot with debate over Hackett's withdrawal.
    "Democrats are shooting their own," Dave Lindorff wrote in International Labor Communications Association Online Tuesday. "... The Democratic Party's killing off of progressive congressional candidate sis something worse than treacherous: suicide."
    Lindorff also noted, "Party leaders, including Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., recently pressured Cindy Sheehan (the anti Iraq War activist whose son was killed serving in the conflict) not to mount a primary campaign against California Sen. Diane Feinstein."
    Lindorff alleged, "For months, the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee chair Sen. Schumer, have been working behind the scenes to undermine Hackett's campaign in favor of Rep. ... Brown."
    And Phil Ewing wrote in the Post Online student newspaper in Athens, Ohio Wednesday, "Not only have Democrats guaranteed another term for incumbent Sen. ... De Wine ... they've extinguished one of the brightest new stars in their party's constellation."
    Hackett came from the traditionally Republican southwest region of Ohio and Ewing concluded that his departure from the race in such contentious circumstances "probably will mean a fatally poor showing in the powerful new suburban metroplex along I-75 between Cincinnati and Dayton "
    The Hackett fiasco may well doom the Democrats to losing the Senate race in Ohio this November. But it also highlights the broader pattern of the party's liberal Old Guard refusing to open its doors to the new generation of angry patriots like Hackett and Sheehan who had offered their services to it. Far from benefiting from anger against the Iraq war and other policies of the Bush administration, the national Democrats may be fated to become targets for it. If that happens, their many critics will certainly say they have no one to blame but themselves.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."

    -The Gipper

  2. #2
    Mar 2003

    Re: Analysis: Hackett Ohio fiasco rocks Dems

    Gimme a break.....the guy was gonna run for senate and the dems want a stronger candidate....the guy didn't even win the congressional race he ran in last year.

    Politics is party is immune from infighting

    Oh, and Washington Times = Murdoch = Republican propoganda

  3. #3
    Nov 2005
    Adirondack Mountains, N.Y.

    Re: Analysis: Hackett Ohio fiasco rocks Dems

    He was a Dem in name only. No loss. Let'em go lawyer huntin w/ Cheney for all I care.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts