http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11337055/

 

Boy, those Dems are all nice and cozy, just like the Republicans.

 

Seriously, this is why politics just absolutely blow. Here's a guy, by all accounts, was just trying to get his voice out there. And when he did so, he got chopblocked at the knees. It's disgusting.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11337055/

 

Boy, those Dems are all nice and cozy, just like the Republicans.

 

Seriously, this is why politics just absolutely blow.  Here's a guy, by all accounts, was just trying to get his voice out there.  And when he did so, he got chopblocked at the knees.  It's disgusting.

I completely agree with you on this one. Pathetic really.

Umm, I'll disagree. And I like Hackett. I'll tell you why when I'm not late for work anymore.

I like Hackett a lot. Very straight-up guy, as seen in simple statements like, "Gay marriage, who the hell cares?"

 

I'm not so sure I like Rahm Emanuel personality-wise, but I understand this move. There's not much sense in Dems spending millions of dollars on a campaign where two good candidates can beat each other up and in the end split the vot and let a GOP incumbent win the election.

 

Brown looks to have the better chance of beating Senator DeWine.

 

I'd like to see Hackett enter the Rep. race against Jean Schmidt who he only narrowly lost to before she comitted political suicide by taking potshots at John Murtha.

Edited February 14, 200620 yr by FlaSoxxJim

Not gonna happen. This wasn't democrat sabotage. This was party leaders trying to save his career because he was gonna get trounced by Sherrod Brown, he never polled out of the 30s and was underfunded, understaffed and his campaign was kind of a mess. Hackett probably could have won the general against DeWine (they could probably run Jim Traficant against a Republican and win this year) but he stood little chance of getting past May 2.

 

Had he decided to run for that Congressional seat again, he would have won in a walk.

Not gonna happen. This wasn't democrat sabotage. This was party leaders trying to save his career because he was gonna get trounced by Sherrod Brown, he never polled out of the 30s and was underfunded, understaffed and his campaign was kind of a mess. Hackett probably could have won the general against DeWine (they could probably run Jim Traficant against a Republican and win this year) but he stood little chance of getting past May 2.

 

Had he decided to run for that Congressional seat again, he would have won in a walk.

So it's all about money. The point still is the same.

Not money. About winning or losing. He wasn't going to win in the primary. You can still be outspent and win, he didn't have the groundswell of support he needed, or the statewide organization.

 

The Dems saw a rising star falling fast and tried to save him. Period.

Not money. About winning or losing. He wasn't going to win in the primary. You can still be outspent and win, he didn't have the groundswell of support he needed, or the statewide organization.

 

The Dems saw a rising star falling fast and tried to save him. Period.

I don't buy it. He didn't have money, and they told him that he couldn't win, so 'back off'.

DeWine will be re-elected and so too will Schmidt.

DeWine will be re-elected and so too will Schmidt.

You supported your argument with so much detail, so much thought, so much amazingly grand brilliance that I am finding it impossible to challenge your belief, oh wonderous one. Some day you must take an apprentice so as to teach others your masterful skills in this milieu of rhetoric.

I don't buy it.  He didn't have money, and they told him that he couldn't win, so 'back off'.

I think Kap looks like he's more in the right based on what reading I've done. Here is an actual post from Hackett @ TPMCafe. If you look carefully, you'll notice something is missing...any sort of endorsement by Hackett of his opponent, which is usually a sign of some sort of gracious acceptance. Oh, and then there's this:

 

Today I am announcing that I am withdrawing from the race for United States Senate. I made this decision reluctantly, only after repeated requests by party leaders, as well as behind the scenes machinations, that were intended to hurt my campaign.

 

And then there's This

 

"For me, this is a second betrayal," Mr. Hackett said. "First, my government misused and mismanaged the military in Iraq, and now my own party is afraid to support candidates like me."

Here's a more detailed piece looking at some of the Problems Hackett was having, and looking at what will need to be done to bring out more people like Paul in the future.

In a nutshell this is exactly what is wrong with American politics. There is no choice by the voters anymore, at all, in either party. We don't even get to choose canditates early in the process, because we have the parties filtering out canditates behind the scenes. And they can control all of these things because they control the purse strings through our discriminatory campaign finance laws. The party has all of the money because of the hard caps regarding what you can give directly to a canditate so they control what we hear about canditates almost completely.

 

We have zero choice. You might as well have the politburo putting together the party slate, because right now the only difference between us and the communist states of prior days is that there are basically two politburos who have to fight it out, instead of just one. This system is a complete joke and needs to be completely blown up and replaced with something where all canditates stand on equal ground. Dollar vote does not equal free speech. Free speech equals free speech.

I think Kap looks like he's more in the right based on what reading I've done.  Here is an actual post from Hackett @ TPMCafe.  If you look carefully, you'll notice something is missing...any sort of endorsement by Hackett of his opponent, which is usually a sign of some sort of gracious acceptance.  Oh, and then there's this:

And then there's This

Here's a more detailed piece looking at some of the Problems Hackett was having, and looking at what will need to be done to bring out more people like Paul in the future.

 

As I read that last article, and I think about the grassroots campaigns of the Dems, I keep coming to the same conclusion. Some of the necessary elements are there, thanks to Dean and his ideas. And there is some good bottom-up stuff going on. But the engineering of the party needs work. They need management - something between Dean at the top and the grassroots forces at the bottom. They need a machine.

 

They need a Daley machine.

 

Seriously. They need some middle managers who can bring out the vote and the money, and turn the party into a well-oiled machine. Maybe over-oiled, in fact. Gotta grease the wheels, you know. But i seriously think that is what they need (in addition to adding more political figures who are gutsy).

In a nutshell this is exactly what is wrong with American politics.  There is no choice by the voters anymore, at all, in either party.  We don't even get to choose canditates early in the process, because we have the parties filtering out canditates behind the scenes.  And they can control all of these things because they control the purse strings through our discriminatory campaign finance laws.  The party has all of the money because of the hard caps regarding what you can give directly to a canditate so they control what we hear about canditates almost completely.

 

We have zero choice.  You might as well have the politburo putting together the party slate, because right now the only difference between us and the communist states of prior days is that there are basically two politburos who have to fight it out, instead of just one.  This system is a complete joke and needs to be completely blown up and replaced with something where all canditates stand on equal ground.  Dollar vote does not equal free speech.  Free speech equals free speech.

Hear Hear!

Umm, I know you're wrong. I like Hackett. Like him a lot. But I think that this is misplaced anger. I really do. PM me and I'll tell you why.

Umm, I know you're wrong. I like Hackett. Like him a lot. But I think that this is misplaced anger. I really do. PM me and I'll tell you why.

I'm not angry - I'm more about what southsider just posted. Both parties suck.

Not you, I meant Paul Hackett's "stabbing in the back" comment.

Not you, I meant Paul Hackett's "stabbing in the back" comment.

Fine. I'M ANGRY. YOU SUCK.

That's better.

In a nutshell this is exactly what is wrong with American politics.  There is no choice by the voters anymore, at all, in either party.  We don't even get to choose canditates early in the process, because we have the parties filtering out canditates behind the scenes.  And they can control all of these things because they control the purse strings through our discriminatory campaign finance laws.  The party has all of the money because of the hard caps regarding what you can give directly to a canditate so they control what we hear about canditates almost completely.

 

We have zero choice.  You might as well have the politburo putting together the party slate, because right now the only difference between us and the communist states of prior days is that there are basically two politburos who have to fight it out, instead of just one.  This system is a complete joke and needs to be completely blown up and replaced with something where all canditates stand on equal ground.  Dollar vote does not equal free speech.  Free speech equals free speech.

 

Agreed. But when was there a great deal of choice for the voters? For most of our history, career political hacks chose all the candidates for us, didn't they? Smoke-filled rooms, and all that?

 

Here's a link to a film about the good old days.

http://blog.radioleft.com/blog/_archives/2...14/1760958.html

 

I came across this today.

 

To Senator Charles Schumer,

 

To Senator Harry Reid,                                                          February 14, 2006

 

 

 

Having just read where Paul Hackett dropped out of the senate race in Ohio due to pressure placed upon him by the both of you that is one of the many reasons why I resigned my position as committee member for the Democratic Party and left the party itself.  From where I see it, we let the people decide and not the party power brokers.  If this race were to make it to the primary, the people decide and not the party power brokers.  This is after all a government for, of and by the people.  Isn’t it?

 

I completely disagree with lots of her stances, but it was facinating to see her say exactly almost what I said dispite our views.

It looks as if this wasn't over afterall. It looks like there was more than "asking" Hackett to drop out. Supposedly there is a photo that is being attributed to being Paul Hackett committing a war crime.

 

http://motherjones.com/news/update/2006/02..._drops_out.html

i dont agree with much of hacket's statements, but i have to agree that the man was shafted. if he was in another state (MI, for example) i think he would have done alright. the man refused to be a tool of the party, and got run out.

i dont agree with much of hacket's statements, but i have to agree that the man was shafted. if he was in another state (MI, for example) i think he would have done alright. the man refused to be a tool of the party, and got run out.

But if the rumors about there being incriminating Iraq photos wre true (I don't believe it fwiw), or if enough doubt/controversy could thrown his way Swift Boat style then his bid was doomed from the start. This may have been a political necessity.

Sherrod Brown has run a nasty campaign - no doubt about that. BUT, that doesn't mean that the party is actively plotting against Hackett.