Hackett Carries the Day... or at least thats what Democrats are saying
US HOUSE Ohio 2nd District753 precincts of 753 reporting
JEAN SCHMIDT 57,974 52%
PAUL HACKETT 54,401 48%
Democrats are declaring a victory here as they competed for a long time heavily Republican favored district. They believe that this will give them a much needed lift for 2006.
"There's no safe Republican district. You can run, but you cannot hide," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
While they are showing great sportsman ship in the loss, I think they are missing the point here. The Democratic Party isn’t going to be saved by the second coming of Wesley Clark or John Kerry. There are some serious flaws with Paul Hackett’s campaign that are reminiscent of the two previously mentioned “War Heroes”.
Paul Hackett was running ads on TV that opened with the President saying “… there is no higher calling than to service in our armed forces…” then with Hackett commenting “… I agreed with that, and that is what lead me to serve and fight with my Marines in Iraq…” The ad continues to say things like “…those young men and women, they get it…”, and “…We are going help these people, we’re all over there because we think America is worth fighting for,” See the entire ad here.
Never once does he make mention of his disagreement with the war, or with Bush. The ad is obviously intended to make the viewer belive that Paul Hackett supports the war, and supports the President.
Now, this would be fine, except that he also is quoted in speeches and debates saying that the President is a Son-of-a-Bitch. In one forum, he was asked what he thought the biggest threat to National Security was, and his reply: “The biggest danger to America is the man living in the White House.”
This shows a fundamental fact. Paul Hackett’s campaign was designed and executed with the intention of fooling some voters. The TV ad was intended to fool conservative voters who may be less informed. It was intended to play off the “patriotic card”. But his speeches were meant rally Liberal base.
This leads to the question: With the tight race in OH-2, does this mean that a modern Democrat can only compete when they are deceptive and hide what they really believe?
JEAN SCHMIDT 57,974 52%
PAUL HACKETT 54,401 48%
Democrats are declaring a victory here as they competed for a long time heavily Republican favored district. They believe that this will give them a much needed lift for 2006.
"There's no safe Republican district. You can run, but you cannot hide," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
While they are showing great sportsman ship in the loss, I think they are missing the point here. The Democratic Party isn’t going to be saved by the second coming of Wesley Clark or John Kerry. There are some serious flaws with Paul Hackett’s campaign that are reminiscent of the two previously mentioned “War Heroes”.
Paul Hackett was running ads on TV that opened with the President saying “… there is no higher calling than to service in our armed forces…” then with Hackett commenting “… I agreed with that, and that is what lead me to serve and fight with my Marines in Iraq…” The ad continues to say things like “…those young men and women, they get it…”, and “…We are going help these people, we’re all over there because we think America is worth fighting for,” See the entire ad here.
Never once does he make mention of his disagreement with the war, or with Bush. The ad is obviously intended to make the viewer belive that Paul Hackett supports the war, and supports the President.
Now, this would be fine, except that he also is quoted in speeches and debates saying that the President is a Son-of-a-Bitch. In one forum, he was asked what he thought the biggest threat to National Security was, and his reply: “The biggest danger to America is the man living in the White House.”
This shows a fundamental fact. Paul Hackett’s campaign was designed and executed with the intention of fooling some voters. The TV ad was intended to fool conservative voters who may be less informed. It was intended to play off the “patriotic card”. But his speeches were meant rally Liberal base.
This leads to the question: With the tight race in OH-2, does this mean that a modern Democrat can only compete when they are deceptive and hide what they really believe?
