In other words, a good loss
I'm pleased and surprised that the vote was so close. 48% of voters right here in Republican country voted for a guy who called Bush a SOB!
The good news is Hackett lost. The bad news is Schmidt won. I cast a write-in vote for Tom Brinkman. I hope that both Schmidt and Hackett are defeated in 2006.
Yeah Anon, a good loss. Can't you just feel the ground starting to shift under your feet? A fairly liberal Democrat getting that close to winning in this GOP dominated area is good news. Even with a losing candidate, I'm still gloating!
If the left had ran a Iraqi War Vetern who didn't support gay rights and abortion, it would have been another outcome.
They didn't, it wasn't. Simple as that
You will see both sides spin this vote from every angle. Bottom line Bush won again.
Go figure.
Good night... it's only the beginning.
Thanks Paul. Though you weren't the progressive that all of us wanted nominated, you carried the mantle of the party with honor. This campaign has left Dems in the SW Ohio area with a clear voice. Whether you run for House, Senate, or Attorney General next, we will be there behind you.
The reason Hackett lost the race was because the DCCC was too stupid to target the race early on. Instead they waited until the very end of the race to come in, and in typical DCCC style they sent in the most incompetent assholes they could find to fuck it up. Fuck the DCCC!
Louisms, fairly liberal? Did you watch his campaign ads?
Sorrry this was not some change of a shift or anything like that. If this election had been in November 2006 it would have been at least 60-40, had it been a stronger GOP candidate we would have seen portmanesque margins of victory.
Hackett ran a pretty good campaign against a somewhat weak opponent, yet still lost in an election that revolved completely around turnout. He couldn't even win somewhat moderate eastern (and the least religious rightish) hamilton county.
and let me get this right, the anti-woman vote voted for a woman? Now I know what you are trying to say but that is just plain stupid...
Its also not like I am some sort of Schmidt fan, I am hoping for a contested primary and would have been a write in voter as well.
I agree with Anon, a loss is a loss. As far as Pelosi's quote:
"Republicans are on notice -- Americans are demanding a change."
Really? I would love to be able to agree with her but until the public gets more educated and interested, we're still going to get sound-bite, Rove-like politics where the truth doesn't really matter as long as you say something enough times.
Hackett was not "fairly liberal" - shesh we have some right wings thumpers floating around here.
HACKETT was "PRO GUN", hardly liberal...
the fairly liberal comment came from a left-winger...
Did Hackett say if he has any other political aspirations? County commissioner, state office, Congress again next year,...?
If a district that was "the most crimson of red" went 48% for a pro-choice, etc Democrat then I have to agree - Republicans should be on notice.
Paul Hackett received about 40% less votes than Charles Sanders received in 2004 and the 2nd dist dems were given a viable candidate for the first time, had tons of money spent on the race, and were running against a candidate that many R's did not like, you can't make sweeping judgements about the 2nd district based on that.
Nathan,
Thanks for bringing up the point about Sanders 89,000+ votes in 2004. I am encouraging my friend Charles Sanders to run for a future political office and hope others concur. Sanders won Pike County in 2002 vs. Rob Portman although Pike County went to Bush over Gore in the general election.
Sanders in his 4 congressional campaign losses to Portman had the vision that the 2nd district was always in play and had the vision of a sweep of Brown, Adams, Pike, Scioto Counties. Hackett essentially completed this vision by winning these counties because he received full party backing, had requisite campaign volunteers, had support of unions and PACs, and had money in campaign coffers.
I hope Hackett's 48% showing in the 2nd district allows voters to see that Sanders always had a game plan and since Hackett had the volunteer base and money he was able to compete.
By the way, I give Hackett an A grade and his campaign manager an A+ for a strong run in the 2nd district. If Hackett ran the perfect race (A+), Hackett would have been victorious. I am not just talking about theory, but this was a race Hackett could have won since voter turnout was the key. If Hackett would have received anywhere near the actual vote totals Sanders did in 2004, then Hackett would have been the clear winner in the election. If Hackett had received 30% less votes than Sanders as opposed to 40% less votes than Sanders as Nathan indicates, then Hackett would have won.
Voter turnout decided this election. Hackett had the votes and the support; unfortunately for Hackett a lot of his supporters didn't bother to show up to vote and Schmidt received the W. In fairness to Hackett supporters, most of his supporters showed up and race was competitive. Receiving 30% less vote than Sanders received in 2004 would have given Hackett the win and in my opinion Hackett should have won the election if these folks showed up at the polls.
Sanjay (Friend of Mr. Sanders)
I'm as perplexed as Brian on the breakdown of the vote. I did not expect him to play so well in the rural counties.
I have to agree with Nathan though, I don't know if this was as much a referendum on Bush and the Repubs as much as it was a statement against Schmidt; we'll have to see in Nov '06 what the true effect is.
Having said that (and I'm not trying to sound like an apologist), it is somewhat of a victory for the Dems in that they pushed the right to the brink. Let's be honest, the Repubs could have run an amoeba and it would have gotten 48% based on party alone. The results speak to a combination of Schmidt incompetence and a strong campaign by Hackett. Which is what galls me about the front-page Enquirer pic of slowfoot pruneface celebrating like she just won the Publisher's Clearing House sweepstakes. It's like if Florida State played Rutgers in football; FSU is supposed to win big, so if they squeak by they shouldn't go celebrating like it was a big accomplishment. I mean she should be happy about winning...I dunno, I guess even looking at her just pisses me off.
Late reporting Clermont County gave Schmidt the victory. Review the following link, a recount is indicated. http://www.house.gov/
judiciary_d...tusrept1505.pdf
A strong Democratic candidate, which Paul was, against a weak Republican candidate is not necessarily an indication that Republicans should be on notice.
Just as a point of consideration. He seemed to put a great deal of emphasis on his Iraq service, which I admire. I wonder how the outcome would have been different if he had focused more on the issues. I don't live in the 2nd District, but did follow the campaigns. His stand on the issues seemed to get swallowed up by his pro-military, pro-gun rhetoric.
I'm a registered Republican and likely would have voted for Jean. However, Paul definitely gave me enough pause to consider if she really is the right person.
Schmidt is a scumfuck. How can anyone support an old hag who ties a ponytail in a red, white, and blue ribbon. Ugh!
Brett,
You don't go from a race of a 70-30 win to 52-48 win and not be scared to death. It will not happen over night, but if Dems keep contesting elections in the state with fresh new candidates, they will win more seats.
Rewarding hacks with nominations will not do them much good.
You can't compare the two wins, I thought you were more politically astute than that Brian. Its apples and oranges...maybe even apples and green beens.
The Hack-Pack will be back 'attem. I spoke with Paul this afternoon and he knows he can lead. He and a lot of people who support him just want to figure out what the best fit is for him.
schmidt will never have to generate her own votes again (something she was not good at). in 2006 blackwell will be at the top of the ticket pulling her along and a presidential race in 2008.
she is congresswoman for life
unless there is a club for growth sponsored candidate in the primary?
I was one of those "fools" who thought Schmidt would get many moren more votes than enough to win. I believe one reason Hackett did well was his great commercial - in it he acted like he was a Republican supporting President Bush. So, for all you lefty leaning Democrats out there who want to win the next time, suggest you run looking like a Republican with their platform. Hillary likes that approach, too!
" unless there is a club for growth sponsored candidate in the primary?"
I wish nathan but having been a brinkman backer in the primary we see what club for growth accomplished
I am sure she will have a challenge but with bush's policy of always supporting the incumbent i dont think you can generate enough money to beat her
I heard Schmidt also braids her graying public hairs into a pony tail. Anyone know whether she then slips those split-ended pubes into a red, white, and blue ribbon?
to be what seems to be the only halfway republican viewpoint on this blog, i must defend the rights of all of those you democrats proudly trash, i dont support oil in irag, yet i do support freedom for the entire planet, while bush's alterier motives may be oil, hopefully the ultimate outcome is freedom for all humans. One thing i can say about bush is at least he is more worried about other parts of this world instead of being worried about smoking pot and getting his dick sucked. As long as our history books have been keeping score we as an american population due to specific nameless prior presidents actions have always tried to control this globe, although it is sort of an attila the hun post roman control thing going on, the ultimate goal has been to make this world a better place and if george bush is the only one willing to fight for lower gas prices and save me some money....seeing how my taxes are lower with him in office, then so be it i will say hell mother fucking yeah i hope there is a candidate the is half the man that bush is when he leaves office cause if not this nation will riot before we ever put a concieded, self-centered, lying sack of shit like kerry in the position of authority in our great nation
whoa.
you like that...........WHOS YOUR DADDY NOW?
damn i must of done a good job this silence is deafening
Don't you know:
You've done a good job in making a ignorant post littered with filth. Lower gas prices? Oil is at record highs, and if you actually benefit from the tax cuts (say more than $300) then congratulations you are among the wealthiest 1% of all income earners. I seriously doubt that is the case given how your represent yourself.
Commenting by HaloScan
