Schmidt Beats Hackett, AP Declares

ChannelCincinnati.com ^ | 8/2/05 | ChannelCincinnati.com

[Paleo Conservative]

Ron, Ron, you misunderstand! A 4-point margin is a "narrow defeat" only for a dem. Any Repub win is narrow, doesn't matter if its 4 points or 20, still a narrow victory.

I remember after Reagan won big in 1984 how the media ran stories about how Reagan didn't really have much of a mandate.

[nopardons]

Absolutely!

[Graybeard58]

I don't know. It's a little troubling that Bush won this district by twenty points in 2000, and this pro-gun, anti-Bush Democrat nearly took it away from us in 2005. If the district has a 20% Republican margin, what's the deal???????

Just read that at DU. Almost word for word. Did you post in both places?

[Dane]

I wonder if Hackett will run again for the regular election in '06. That would be typical and the Dems hardly have anyone else waiting in the wings for this district. Could be interesting if he does, although I doubt the ultimate outcome would be much different. This is the most Republican seat in Ohio from what I've heard.

He probably will, but it will be a regualr election and Schnidt will have 15 months as the incumbant, I think the result will be different.

The demos did use the short time frame well, to put on the charade that hackett was not a "pelosi democrat" when in actuality he is(pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, hike taxes, etc.etc.). He said he is pro-gun, but only got a concealed carry permit this year I believe.

[Jewels1091]

true..

[goldstategop]

They said the same thing after 2000. yawn>

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[Leofl]

Now can we get a bounty on their hides and start hunting liberals for real?

[Paleo Conservative]

But not in 1992.

[goldstategop]

Its all a charade. The Democrats think the electorate is stupid, that will readily accept atmospherics and slick marketing over substance. Dr. Lakoff couldn't help them here. If this election demonstrated anything, its not about "framing" the issues. Especially when Democrats can't come out and say they're big government socialists. DUH.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[goldstategop]

Or in 1976. Then liberals did a good job of hiding their true beliefs from the public. Circumstances like Watergate and the fallout from the first President Bush's broken "no new taxes" pledge also helped the opposition. Plus, the MSM both in 76 and 92 still had a monopoly on the news. That's gone now.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[AntiGuv]

I would tend to agree with you. Even if Hackett had won today I think he would've been extremely hard-pressed to hold the district next year. In fact, the most plausible way he could win next year (which isn't saying much) would be for Schmidt to do something in Congress that turns the district against her, but that's quite unlikely to say the least. My guess off the top of my head would be 56-44% for a regular election.

That being said, it may still be interesting and you never know. Mainly I just mentioned that because rematches are so common after special elections. I've never heard of a different outcome though unless the candidate who won the special was the one who doesn't fit the district's typical partisan lean.

[Texas Songwriter]

The democrats analysis has, for the longest time, relied upon their perception that the electorate is fundamentally stupid, and that they can prevaricate and enough gullible people will put them into office. That is what Hackett was counting on. They lost.

The very people who they try to appeal to are the least motivated, least informed, and least interested in the political process. Think of their halloween coalition which they have tried to cobble together to get 50% + 1. They will promote any ideology, vacuuous though it may be, for succession to power. The people see this and are insulted. Kennedy, Boxer, Lehey,....all of them are people who are motivated to seize power, but they have no centralizing core belief around which people inately seek to be drawn. Abortion,homosexuality,radical feminism, condom distribution, atheism,...these are the tenents of these men. People are aware of this and are not falling for it any more.

[goldstategop]

Exactly. These people can't be who they are. Hackett could have run as a liberal in that GOP district but then again he would have been squashed like a rotten melon. The Democrats don't even have a positive reason to get people to come out to vote FOR them. What they have is an anti-Bush vote and that's it. They haven't expanded their base in OH beyond the hard-core Bush haters since the November 2004 election. That's a party in deep trouble.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[AZLiberty]

Corsairs: since Aug. 3, 2005. Newbie du jour.

[George Stupidnopolis]

Schimdt should be thanking Rush. When he began playing Hackett's phony ads, and pointing out the deception, I've no doubt he swayed a number of mid to late day voters. Thank God for Rush!

[mdittmar]

Just like Jean Francois Cheri. You can strut around with a chestful of medals and brag about your wartime service and people will still see right through you as a phony.

Guess they don't realize there are hundreds of thousands of wives,children,brothers,sisters,who honor their family members service every day.

These heroes don't need to brag.

[Graybeard58]

Ex newbie - Dead troll now