Several of my points about the "Valentine's Day Massacre" have been stated in insightful and articulate terms elsewhere, so excuse the somewhat redunant quality of this post. Nevertheless, here it goes...The party's decision to oust Hackett was obviously disgraceful, incompetent, and disillusioning. Like many, this debacle has given me a whole new understanding of the corrupt machinations behind politics. To quote Mrs. Editor"I feel like Ive now seen how the sausage is made and I can never eat it again."
I suppose that I could excuse the immorality of the whole proceeding had the ends justified the means in a substantial way. But the division and weakness which the party's actions have reaped upon Democratic primary voters is downright suicidal. The decision has simultaneously created the irreparable wounds characteristic of a full-out nasty primary without any of the positive aspects of the primary process (candidate competition, voter excitement, the campaigns polishing their themes and presentation). A total lose-lose move. Sherrod Brown, who behaved like a spoiled, petulant child from the very beginning of this mess, ultimately suffers from this in the general. Then again there wouldn't be a Brown vs. DeWine matchup had Brown not pulled this stunt. From Brown and Schumer's point of view: better to suffer and lose in the general than to have lost in the primary and never have had a chance.
Meanwhile, I encourage everyone to check out the interview that Hackett did with OH-02. Even worn down, publicly humiliated, and betrayed by the party he loves, Paul Hackett manages to inspire. I would say that he's the next best thing to Clinton, but I think Hackett is actually a better, more genuine human being than Clinton. NixGuy, a conservative blogger, even makes that comparison in an all-around brilliant and chilling post. I will excerpt it here.
"Occasionally lightning strikes and a politician comes along that can do two things, excite the activist base while not arousing intense feelings of loathing among the moderate and conservative public. This kind of politician gives the base what they want and talks a good game to the rest of us. Bill Clinton was this kind of gifted politician. I think Paul Hackett was shaping up exactly the same way. The Ohio Democratic party just goofed big time.
Mixed feelings for me, on one hand it's good that the Democrats are that much further away from doing anything in Ohio, on the other hand, it is definitely NOT good to have nothing to run against. The Republicans will become fat lazy and stupid if they are not there already."
Isn't it amazing how Republicans view Brown? As literally nothing...
In terms of looking forward to the future, there has got to be a way that the grassroots can exert its presence and power. I haven't figured out how just yet, but I know that the answer cannot lie in simply boycotting Sherrod Brown and the Ohio Democratic Party. That solution does not make sense to me logically, even though it appeals to me emotionally. There has to be a way, and we must find out what that way is.