Idiotic, hapless, dimwitted, clueless Democrats.  Is it too much to ask that party elders like Schumer and Reid should have understood that this needed to be handled carefully and privately, given that Ohio is crucial and we might have a shot at winning both of those seats?  Where was Dean in all of this?   I would have thought that he was smart enough to do it right.

Jeezus, we need a housecleaning.

And down the drain goes any hope of cooperation and party unity.

But then again, when are we gonna fight for the soul of the party if not now?

First Schumer forces a Theocon on Pennsylvania and now he fucks up the second battleground state? What a disgrace. Total fucking disgrace.

If anyone bumps into Schumer, tell him to buy a conical hat and follow the wall until he finds a corner.

Absolutely inexcusable. A disgraceful failure on the part of the Democratic leadership. This is a stain on Dean, Schumer, Emmanuel, and everyone else in the leadership. What a disgusting display of ineptitude, classlessness, and downright idiocy. I wasn't a Hackett supporter or a Brown supporter, I saw it as win-win for Ohio Democrats and the national party. Now, we have blown it.

If this is where it is, the Democrats have just kissed their asses good bye.

And I got news for the new Chair Mr. Redfern.  If this is your idea of bringing in the grassroots, you just poured weed killer all over them.

You all have just made the ultimate, serious mistake.

Oh my dear God, what a horrible way for things to wind up for Hackett. I have a few immediate thoughts about this.

1. Kos is right: "Sherrod Brown better win this."

2. What a crappy way for the establishment to be treating talent they really ought to be nurturing.

3. Hackett ought to realize that, in leaving politics, he's selling out a whole lot of folks around the country who believe in him and what he represents.

4. From the start, the whole Ohio Senate race has been a mess. I'd say that things like this only happen to Democrats, but... Jeanine Pirro isn't a Democrat.

5. I hope Hackett's supporters realize this means they need to get more engaged in Democratic Party politics, not less. There are ample opportunities to take over the party, and they really ought to be taken advantage of.

Not only is this totally fucked up, but I'm loving the patronizing "get over it" comments being made on that Kos thread. Consider all obligatory Who quotes as made.

THIS should get interesting, though: Hackett's the Weekly Guest Blogger at TPMCafe's Table for One this week. Ooosp.

http://tableforone.tpmcafe.com/

I sure hope that the free-for-all to kiss Sherrod Brown's behind was worth it to the national Democrats who have just taken a rising star Dem and threw him down the drain.  The GOP is smarter than that.  They would have embraced him instead.

Btw, for Emmanuel and Schumer to coax the man into the race when they had no one running, only to DUMP him once God, er, Sherrod Brown entered the race.  Wow, that is disgraceful.  Talk about doublecrossing.

Brown will not and CANNOT beat DeWine.  There goes our shot at the Senate.  Brown will NOT be getting a dime from me (and I am one of the few around here that actually gives money) because he has no courage.  This isn't about issues or Brown not being ideologically pure.  It's about decency.

He waited until the perfect scenario to "risk" his current House seat to run for the Senate.  And who the hell is he to expect a red carpet roll out when he decides to get off his ass, screwing over Hackett in the process.

1) Paul Hackett is only finished as a Democrat in Ohio if Hackett wants to be finished. He'll have supporters in the Democratic Party waiting on him when he decides to return. I hope he returns. His post today over at TPM Cafe was typical straight talk that more of America needs to hear. I hope he stays involved and stays in the party.

2) Sherrod Brown is infinitely better than Mike DeWine and will be a more progressive Senator than many Democrats currently in office. We as Democrats all need to make sure he is elected.

Will Jerome, Schumer, Reid and Redfern all apologize?

I'm not hoping for it (well, maybe for a minute after I read the news). But Brown has an uphill climb.

Isn't the point of avoiding a primary avoiding allientating part of the base?

Didn't the Dem insiders just accomplish that in a single stroke?

As pointed out at/by kos, Hackett's campaign was put together by Brown's people who are back working for Brown, Hackett was way behind in money before the supposed sabatoge, and Brown actually entered the race before Hackett. I'm not gonna get too upset about this except for the recognition that half the networld is about to pitch an incredible fit over the terrible injustice of it all.

What are Schumer, Emmanuel and Reid afraid of in a primary? Why not let these guys compete and see who has more support?

These types of backroom political machinations led by the Dems loser consultants is why the Dems are a minority party and at this rate will be a permanent minority. The Dems leadership spend way too much time on triangulation and process and way to little time standing up with courage and fighting the Repubs.

So what's next force Ned Lamont to withdraw against Loserman?

Calm down, take a step back and think about the purpose of politics: as Paul Wellstone said, the improvement of people's lives.

Paul Hackett's obviously an admirable guy, and he ran a heckuva campaign in OH-02. He nearly won that race in part because the netroots swooned over him, but also because Sherrod Brown's people ran his ground game.

Brown stands to the left of Hackett on probably everything, he's a genuine progressive who actually has experience legislating, and he's apparently the core of the Ohio progressive network, what there is of it.

Brown was our best chance to win this seat in every poll, from what I saw, when we thought we had a contested primary. Hackett has far less name rec among people who don't read political blogs, and less access to the Ohio ground game machine, and less experience (does he have any?) working with communities of color, who need to turn out in an off-year election for Dems to win a close race, than Brown.

If I had been working for the Ohio Dem party, or for any other organization that tries to get Republicans out of power, I would have tried to convince Hackett to drop out of the Senate race and run for OH-02.

He could, and should, run for state or local office if he wants to stay in politics. And I hope he does.

But for him to pick up his marbles and go home because the folks who actually see the numbers rightly think our best chance of winning the seat is to avoid giving Brown a primary... well, I'll just say I now have doubts about Hackett's ability to pass legislation, should he ever find himself elected to a legislative body.

And yes, Brown better win it.

Now is not the time to fight. The netroots are the reason that Paul Hackett came so close last summer and the netroots can get him into the Ohio Second race. I think that everyone should contact Hackett as ask for him to enter the race. Also, contact the candidates who are currently in the race and ask them to tell Hackett that they would step aside for him. The candidates in that race are not part of the party establishment and they probably understand how  important it is for Hackett to reach Congress so they may defer to him. We only have two days; fighting and cursing about Hackett's Senate decision will not do anything productive. The Hotline, a non-partisan political newsletter gives him a better than fifty percent chance to win this race, and with the help of the grassroots, he will win it. An overwhelming show of support is what is needed so everyone should stop yelling online and start emailing and making phone calls.  

I was initially outraged at the party "establishment".

But kos' explanation makes me think that he really should consider running for OH-2. I think he'd be an asset to have around.

In any event, the calling donors part was disgraceful (if true; it probably is).

I have no opinion on the Ohio race. What I do know is that no one candidate matters more than the PARTY taking back Congress. For executive offices the individual matters but in a legislative body it is which party controls the levers of power (and investigation) that matters. Perhaps Hackett would have been the better candidate; if so, I'm sorry he dropped out. But anyone who decides to walk away because Hackett isn't running has a seriously skewed set of priorities. Personally, I'd vote for a cup of slime mold if it would wrest control of Congress from the GOP.

Some food for thought:

Brown had a huge money lead over Hackett.
Recent polls showed Brown crushing Hackett in the primary, and both of them doing equally well against DeWine.
I hear people bitching about how our leaders abandon true progressives in favor of the safe candidate.  Well, I challenge anyone to find a more dedicated progressive than Brown.  He ain't exactly Joe Lieberman.  People like to say Hackett is a fighter- they should watch Brown fight against things like CAFTA, the Iraq War, and the Medicare prescription drug debacle.

The choice rightfully belongs to us, the voters of Ohio.  It does not belong to Schumer and Reid.  I do not want candidates who are annointed and appointed by the Democratic leadership.  My vote was never intended to be a rubberstamp of the Democratic leadership, but an expression of my own choice.

And I guess I have skewed priorities.  Because everytime we go along and vote for a candidate just because he/she is a Democrat we affirm and sanction just the kind of action we saw against Paul Hackett and against Cegelis.

Paul Hackett is a great and honorable man, with enormous contributions to the country and to Ohio.

But in my first post on MyDD, allow me to go against the grain: His departure from the OH SEN primary is a good thing and his failure to run in OH 02 is the true betrayal here.

We have a chance at two OH pickups, if he runs against Mean Jean in OH 02. With fresh evidence of just how Mean she is given her outburst against Congressman Murtha, Hackett is uniquely positioned to kick her out. But he refuses? And for this refusal, he gets our sympathies?

Regardless of the timeline of events that got Brown into the race, Hackett was the only Dem who can run in OH 02 and make it a race.  He should have done so.

I am sad for his departure from politics, if it holds true. I wish he would run as a Dem in OH 02 and win that seat. But it doesn't look like he will.  And now Paul Hackett has hurt the very party for which he claimed to be fighting.

This is sick. We should start a bring Hackett back blog?

Anyone up for it?

Then you might as well join the republicans. Because this is exactly what they want. They want all social justice to be in the form of private charity. Because that way, they know very little actually ever changes. If you want real social justice, then you have to work through the only entity that can marshall 2 TRILLION dollars a YEAR.

Ain't no soup kitchen that's got that much power.

I'll promise Hackett my home savings if he runs as a Independent.  Right here right now.  Paul, you'll get flooded with donations if you run as an Inde'.

Because as of today, my husband and I are no longer Democrats.

This sin was wrought by the anti-Christ, crypto-Cristian, neocon worshipers of the God of Riches. The evil barons (the Democratic wing, in this case) made damn sure that Brown had the money. So their God was on his side. Pure and simple.

American Heritage® Dictionary

NOUN:    1. Bible Riches, avarice, and worldly gain personified as a false god in the New Testament. 2. often mammon Material wealth regarded as having an evil influence.

ETYMOLOGY:    Middle English, from Late Latin mammon, from Greek mamns, from Aramaic mmon, riches, probably from Mishnaic Hebrew mmôn. See mn in Appendix II.

It ALL begins and ends with the God of Mammon. Anti-Christ. CRYPTO-CHRISTIANS.

Nothing to say here other than I'm honestly shocked.  In the old days, this stuff would have been confined to the state.  This is not the old days anymore, the world has changed.  

Democrats in Ohio were surprised that Brown entered the race because the congressman had earlier indicated he was unlikely to run, said Brian Rothenberg, communications director for the Ohio Democratic Party.

Among those caught off-guard was Paul Hackett (D), the Iraq war veteran who had formally announced his own Senate bid two days earlier.

Hackett's campaign manager, David Woodruff, said Hackett entered the race with the expectation that he would not face a primary.

Woodruff noted that leading Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) and Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), had urged Hackett to run.

"Their wives called Mrs. Hackett," Woodruff said.

Woodruff hinted that Democratic leaders in Washington should encourage Brown to exit the race.

"What they told me was they did not seek Sherrod Brown to run for U.S. Senate," Woodruff said, referring to unnamed Democratic Party officials. "[Brown] came to them. [With] Paul, they came to Paul.

For the idiots from dK's

Does anyone notice the incongruity of the situation?

People rightly flame the party for being disorganized and lacking in strategic smarts.

Then the party wants a proven candidate to run for statewide office while the newcomer goes for a dictrict, making a coordinated, strategic choice, and gets hammered for it.

You can't have it both ways.  The criticism here of the Hacket situation comes from two sources:

1.  Some people resent the decision and thinks it's stupid strategically.  To me, that's a fair, if arguable point.  I like Steve Gilliard's take on the matter, myself, even if I understand the plan from the party.

2.  Other people resent any party coordination and control.  I call bullshit on those people.  You can't have it both ways.  If you want a coordinated strategy, you have to accept when the structure does not exactly go with what you like.  And in this case, Brown is a super progressive candidate and proven winner, and it's not as if the party was not recruiting Hackett for another race.

I reiterate my point above, made well (albeit less sharply) by Scott and Matt as well:  Hackett is going out on this like a punk.  Dean got treated worse and made new opportunites for himself, because he is more about making a difference than about pushing his own stardom.  If these are Hackett's true colors, then it's better he go now than later.  I say that as one who has sent him money and still hopes he will run against Schmidt.

I'm inclined to disagree with the "whiny" crap and regard the "best shot at beating Dewine" as not relevant. If Brown has all the money (as Kos says), I don't see why anyone should have worried about forcing Hackett from the race. That would have taken care of itself. I don't much believe in the idea that "chosen" Democrats should be free to run in primaries unopposed when they are not the incumbent. PauL Hackett was a breath of fresh air. He was a plain talker. If he's gone for good, I think it's a loss for the party and for us.

As far as "cult of personality" and "putting your faith in one man instead of yourself and participation in the system", isn't that what the leaders who forced Hackett to withdraw are guilty of doing? Perhaps if they really believed in the "system", they'd have kept their noses out and let the "system" and those who believe in it work it all out.

The primary is the time to fight over our differences, show strength or weaknesses in ideology, and hopefully influence the future of the party.  The general election is the time to unite and fight like hell.  The inside the beltway types don't like contested primaries because they  are riskier and have the potential to erode their own centralized power and are more difficult to predict.  From where we stand, historically, this party needs to have these internal primary fights in Ohio, Maryland, Conn., and elsewhere even if it means losing in 2006.  Change won't come with out internal struggles.  They were wrong to pressure him to quit.

I am some what releived that Hackett dropped out of the Ohio Senate Race. Ohio Democrats can now focus their attention on defeating Mike DeWine. instead of worrying about a primary between Brown and Hackett. Hackett should follow Patty Wetterling's lead and run for US Congress against Mean Sh!+

Politics shouldn't be about cults of personality, and you shouldn't put your faith in one man instead of yourself and participation in the system.

This isn't a cult of personality.  It's about letting the voters decide between Hackett and Brown.  And the fact that someone people took it upon themselves to decide who the voters in Ohio should support.

We're supposed to be all about the Democratic process and part of that process is "the system." How can anyone put their faith in "the system" when "the system" put pressure on a candidate to drop out?

It's Kerry and the "electability" argument all over again.

So are you going to tell me next that "We the people" now just an empty phrase?

This is precisely why I refuse to consider myself a Democrat, and refuse to give to the party.

I call bullshit on tops-down beltway corporate Democrats who refuse to get in line behind a grass-roots candidate who is a proven cross-over progressive, and it'll be a cold day in hell before any democrat of any stripe gets any of my money.

Waiting for a real progressive movement, and willing to wait a long time...

John Redmond

I have to agree that Chuck and Rahm and Harry screwed this up royally.  What was the harm in letting Hackett stay in the primary?  He'd run a clean positive campaign against Brown, get Democrats excited, and do all around good things for the Party.  

If Kos and Matt are right that he had no chance of winning the primary, then, really, the insistence that he drop out really makes no sense because he wasn't even threatening Brown.  If they were right...

...and once again the Democrats snatch Defeat from the jaws of Victory.

When you have these kind of moronic decisions being made, it is time for the Democratic Party to either change or die. Or, simply put, if they don't change, they will die.

As an Ohioan, I can tell you that Hackett was Ohio's best chance for US Senate. Now they'll just have to contend with the weak sacrificial-lamb candidates they always send up to lose the election.

And the chances of an Ohio pickup go flushing down the toilet...

"We don't need people who "are waiting" for a progressive movement. What, are you waiting for it to fall in your f*ing lap? "

What the f*ck?

Hackett falls into our lap, and look at the shabby treatment he gets.

F*ck 'em all, they're either rhetorically incompetent (witness Teddy Kennedy in the Alito hearings - this is all you got?), strategically incompetent (Kerry calling for a filibuster from Davos without moving opinion before-hand, huh? you think we're idiots?), and now this. Brilliant.

You don't need me? Fine. But I think that I owe it to myself to throw my hands up in disgust, as I have volunteered, I've given money both to the national party and locally, and I've been precinct chair in my caucuses for the past three elections, all while the corporate beltway schmucks with no balls have lost elections after election.

 To be clear, I agree with Kos. I'd even go further. This is not some 'betrayal' by party leaders. Someone announcing they are out of politics because they don't get what they want is babyish, unprofessional behavior.  

well, it took how long.....two years?....before Kos, Stoller, Jerome and the rest of the "netroots" leaders sold their souls.

Because that's what this is really about -- sucking up to Party Leaders at the expense of NET ROOTS candidates.  

"Crashing the Gates" my ass..... yeah, you "rebels" crashed the gates, but only so you could belly up to the trough full of Dom Perignon....

What precisely was the harm in having an open Democratic primary in Ohio?   Was there any indication that Hackett planned on hiring Karl Rove to smear Brown?  

You people make me sick

1. Hackett was encouraged to run for senate by the Democratic leadership.
2. At some point afterward, Sherrod Brown decides he wants to run.
3. Both candidates poll well against DeWine
4. Brown outpolls Hackett
5. Same Democratic leaders who asked Hackett to run, now ask him to step aside.

Why is it assumed that all bad behavior is Hackett's? It seems to me that either the Democrats should have let the primary run its course OR the Democrats should have pressured Brown not to run against Hackett before it became a public issue.

I say this because it seems Hackett had made a name for himself, his polling against DeWine was good, and this result would have everyone looking good. Why should Brown suddenly decide there's an opportunity to move up after Hackett did the groundwork?

Saying Hackett was being recruited by Rahn Emanuel is nothing but a formulaic red herring.

Applying some principles and standing by them would be a really refreshing outcome for the Democrats.

BTW - Steve Clemons has an interesting post on this issue.

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.

So, maybe Hackett should have told the Dems to go to hell and continued running.

And unprofessional.

He's a whiner - won't take on those who he says are making politics worse - if that's the case, why on Earth should anybody miss him? I mean if he won't even take on old school Democrats what kind of fight would he give the Republicans.

If he's going to just fold his tent, take his football and go home or whatever metaphor you want to use - good riddance. We need someone who'll really fight for progressive values. Not somebody who just complains and is unwilling to take a chance to secure a better country.

Hackett is a loss.  The latest Pew Poll shows Dems have a real chance in the midterms and are already probably throwing it away.  

I've checked out of the Democratic Party, stopped all contributions except to specific progressive candidates, am part of what I see as a vital and growing group of reform progressives.  I'm glad to be free of supporting a party which has moved well to the right of center and lost its moral standing.  Meanwhile, it looks as though both parties are fragmenting, each in its own way.  We live in interesting times...

The whole point of not having a primary is to avoid the divisiveness and bad-blood that a primary contest can generate.

It seems to me that these behind-the-scenes moves to avoid a primary have created more bad feelings than a primary would have, at least amongst the netroots and other activists.

But the negative feelings might only have an impact on the netroots -- it might not affect the average voter, especially come Nov. I guess that's what Brown's campaign is counting on.

Hackett was either going to become a Cuellar-like rep or a Ben Nelson-like senator.

He'd have done less damage as the first.

Is that Steve Elmendorf on Sherrod Brown's campaign staff?

You guys sure like talking him up as a progressive, but I ain't biting. Elmendorf being on a campaign gives off a a steamy scent of Vichy spas to me, I'm afraid.

And the fool is going to lose on top of it.

Hackett is ALWAYS THE WINNER

January 19, 2006

Hackett Crushing DeWine

The new Zogby/WSJ poll out today has Paul Hackett crushing Mike DeWine 41.9%-35%. Ahead of the incumbent by 7 points before the campaign starts is impressive.

Sherrod Brown is beating DeWine 41.3%-37%.

Anyone notice PAUL HACKETT PULLS SEATS FROM DEWINE?

Putz's the lot of them.

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/d ocuments/info-flash05a.html?project=elec tions06-ft&h=495&w=778&hasAd =1&mod=blogs

Gee, even the Jan Rasmussen showed Paul pulled more seats from DeWine

DeWine  43%  Hackett 39%
DeWine  45%  Brown 40%

Everyone really should stop trying to spin.  The Insiders have them out in FULL FORCE don't they?

Hackett is ALWAYS THE WINNER

January 19, 2006

Hackett Crushing DeWine

The new Zogby/WSJ poll out today has Paul Hackett crushing Mike DeWine 41.9%-35%. Ahead of the incumbent by 7 points before the campaign starts is impressive.

Sherrod Brown is beating DeWine 41.3%-37%.

Anyone notice PAUL HACKETT PULLS SEATS FROM DEWINE?

Putz's the lot of them.

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/d ocuments/info-flash05a.html?project=elec tions06-ft&h=495&w=778&hasAd =1&mod=blogs

Gee, even the Jan Rasmussen showed Paul pulled more seats from DeWine

DeWine  43%  Hackett 39%
DeWine  45%  Brown 40%

Everyone really should stop trying to spin.  The Insiders have them out in FULL FORCE don't they?

This is one of the most outrageously stupid turn of events I could imagine happening this year.  What a momentum-killer.  The only thing that keeps me from crying is that it happened in Ohio where things are already a hopeless zoo.

Whew.  It seems like a really good move to get Hackett out now if he is capable of this kind of blow-up. It's embarrassing.  I have no use for a whining crybaby and that's exactly how he sounds.

Hey Paul!  No one's forcing you out of anything!  If you want to run in the primary, GO AHEAD.  No one can stop you.  But you may have to raise a lot of money and run against a Progressive Democrat with a record as a Congressman and a lot of support--in Ohio and nationally.

It's politics.  If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen but please don't try to muck it up on your way out.  We're trying to retake the Senate, ya self-servin' egomaniac!  

This seems like a hotheaded move on Hackett's part. My impressions:

(a) Hackett was completely outclassed by Brown's organization, which is probably the best org to be found in Ohio.

(b) Hackett was simply less predictable. He may or may not have been a better candidate -- I certainly liked his fire, and would've had no qualms whatsoever voting for him. But I can understand that from the party's POV he was much more of a gamble. He was potentially vulnerable to all sorts of things: wrong moves, rookie mistakes, hidden skeletons in the closet that come out at just the wrong time. If you think both men have a roughly equal shot at unseating DeWine, then it makes more sense to go with Brown -- he is a known quantity. Any good soldier would tell you that it's far better to control all the variables you can.

(c) Hackett is clearly pissed off right now. He needs time to cool off. Pulling a Cartman screw-you-guys-I'm-going-home isn't exactly indicative of leadership. Politics unfortunately involves deals like that sometimes, and you just take stock, regroup, and make your move later. How he handles himself over the next few weeks will tell you a lot about his character.

It would've been great to see Hackett and Brown in the primary together. I think that was a mistake on the part of the OH party -- a primary battle would have seasoned him and given him additional experience in organizing and running. But maybe they were afraid of Brown (who was likely to win because he had the better org) getting friendly fire from Hackett.

This is political suicide for Hackett. He's a good candidate for the House. Not for Senate, not yet.

What sucks is that he decided to be a suicide bomber and hurt the other fighting Dems. We can turn this into a positive by sticking to the message that These Fighting Dems are a New Breed of Democrats. Say nothing of Brown. This is a story about how great the Fighting Dems are.