Posted on 08/04/2005 9:43:18 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
On Tuesday night a Democrat running in a Republican district nearly became the first Iraq-war veteran elected to Congress. The two traded leads throughout the evening in a surprisingly close finish. In the end, heavily favored Republican Jean Schmidt edged out Democrat Paul Hackett by a narrow margin of 52 to 48 percent. Schmidt finally pulled away as the votes were tabulated by hand in her home county after severe humidity prevented them from being counted by machine.
Liberal activists, particularly bloggers, did the heavy lifting for their candidate who only last week referred to President Bush as a "son-of-a-bitch." And though Jean Schmidt will be representing Ohio's 2nd district in Washington, it didn't stop the Left from declaring victory.
Daily Kos founder and moderator Markos Moulitsas was early out of the gates calling Hackett's electoral loss a political gain:
The post-mortems will come in the coming days, but for now, I'm happy with what everyone accomplished in Ohio. It's a new day for the Democratic party, one in which no Republican district is safe.
A post on the Huffington Post followed suit:
It would be easy to write off these statements as emotional reactions coming from the fringe of Democrat politics. However, on Wednesday evening Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean sent a fundraising letter to supporters that used Hackett's story at the top of his pitch:
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Rahm Emanuel followed Dean's lead in praising Hackett's effort as a prelude to improved liberal fortunes in 2006.
But was Ohio's special election really a barometer forecasting a great Democrat resurgence in next year's elections? Or was it simply an interesting anecdote to the summer doldrums of Washington politics?
National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) spokesman Ed Patru tells NRO that the facts of the story have been exaggerated, "The Republican won. Despite the national media attention and Democrat focus on increased turnout, it was still a 29 percent turnout. The history of special elections tends to be closer than regular year contests."
As Patru explained, recent special elections in Louisiana's 1st District, Pennsylvania's 9th District, Virginia's 4th District, Oklahoma's 1st District, and Texas's 19th District have ended with similar results: Both candidates battle to a near draw. But in the following year's regular election cycle, the districts returns to being heavily Republican.
And as it turns out, many of those same Democrats singing Hackett's tune weren't there when he needed them most. "If Nancy Pelosi and Rahm Emanuel think last night's race was a referendum on President Bush's Iraq policy, ask them why neither contributed money to Paul Hackett," Patru said.
What's more, Jean Schmidt was not exactly the dream candidate of the conservative base that makes up Ohio's 2nd district. During her June primary against ten other Republican candidates, Schmidt was the recipient of an attack ad from the Club for Growth, who criticized Schmidt for supporting tax increases. Even after Schmidt's victory over Hackett, Club for Growth President and former House Republican Pat Toomey told NRO, "This is a conservative district so I'm disappointed the race was as close as it was. I hope Jean will represent the district in the same conservative, pro-growth fashion that Rob Portman did. We will see."
There were other factors contributing to Schmidt's lukewarm performance. Widespread speculation is that Schmidt failed to coordinate her efforts with the NRCC, refusing to return campaign phone calls or even providing basic information about her campaign staff. She also took unusual steps in the public arena, attaching herself to unpopular governor Bob Taft and delivering speeches on ethanol to suburban voters. There are also reports that some of Schmidt's primary foes encouraged voters to sit out the election in hopes that Schmidt would lose allowing them to challenge Hackett in 2006.
Despite all this, Schmidt won her race and is headed to Congress. In fact, Schmidt placed better than 7 of Ohio's other 17 House members fared in their initial runs for Congress. Still, what about those dominating victories by Rob Portman over the last half decade? As it turns out, Portman's victories in 1998-2004 all came against the same unheralded candidate, Charles Sanders. The fact that Portman's margin of victory over Sanders increased with each cycle only makes sense.
In 2002, Sanders received 47,618 votes. In comparison, Paul Hackett brought home 54,401 votes Tuesday night. Jean Schmidt may have found much less enthusiasm than Rob Portman, but for all their efforts and money, Democrats gained a grand total of 6,783 votes.
Paul Hackett ran a strong campaign. He is an Iraq-war veteran, a proud member of the NRA, featured President Bush prominently and positively in his two major campaign ads, and criticized Schmidt for supporting tax increases. These are not exactly the foundations of the Democrat-party platform. And while liberals are entitled to feel good about Hackett's effort, they will have to start winning actual elections before it can be said the political winds have shifted against President Bush and the war in Iraq. In the meantime, another Republican is going to Congress.
Liberalism IS a mental disorder.
I think this is the best thing that could've happened in this race. The GOP wins, and the Dems walk away thinking that their outmoded thinking is still viable rhetoric. We can only hope all Dems run a similar campaign in 2006.
With "victories" like this, I hope they just keep on winning.
Yeah? Check out democrat Hackett's ad... you simply will not believe your eyes. The rat pundits are lying through their teeth.
The ad stars.... George Bush!!. I kid you not!
Hackett would sooner be labeled a child molester than a democrat. The ad praised patriotism and the War on Terror, the two things democrats hate the most! The ads stars Hackett's sworn enemt, Bush... and the ad fails to mention that Hackett is a democrat, a liberal, anti-War on Terror, a sleezy trial lawyer, etc.
http://mfile.akamai.com/5020/wmv/rushlimb.download.akamai.com/5020/clips/05/08/080205_hackett_ad.asx
That is the exact same mantra that Carson ran on here in Oklahoma in 2004 against Dr. Tom and got handed his head. BTW, did I say that Clintonites ran his campaign. He lied, pretended to be a conservative, supported the President's agenda, etc. until right before the election when he thought he had already roped in enough conservatives to win. Carson got clobbered even if his phoney poll touted by the Tulsa World a week before the election said he was going to win.
That has to be their playbook.
I used to think they could not be that STUPID...I used to...
I have no doubt that they will do just that. The other evening I ran across a "shrieking head" segment, where the 'Rat kept saying that "the people" don't know what they want, and it's up to the 'Rats to do what they (the 'Rats) "know" is best for them. With arrogance like that, it's going to be hard for the 'Rats to win.
I've noticed that in an election, if a candidate doesn't have his/her political party emblazoned on their campaign material, it's almost always a 'Rat. Next thing you'll know, they'll show up at debates wearing paper bags over their heads like fans used to do at Saints games when I lived in New Orleans.
A narrow margin of 4%? These people are beyond desperate. I've seen many 100,000 vote cast elections be decided by a few dozen to a few hundred votes, but 4000ish votes is narrow?
I guess by that standard Bush's winning by the largest vote margin in US HISTORY was just "Narrowly" beat Kerry...
I'm sick of the press, they just don't get it. Liberal lies and they just parrot them. Dems through EVERYTHING and the kitchen sink, in an URBAN district and LOSE by a good margin, and then claim it a victory....
Insanity.
The present-day Democrat Party makes the 1970's and 80's Saints look like an absolute juggernaut...
The Republican candidate has voted for ALL RINO Governor Taft's tax increases and is, herself, a RINO.
DeWhine and Voinovich in the senate speaks volumes about the state of conservatism in Ohio. Surely another 'conservative' candidate could be raked up somehow.
It's nice that the Democrats have so realistically reduced their expectations that they congratulate themselves on coming in second out of two. I guess the 2000 and 2004 elections have had their proper effect.
Didn't Hackett call GWB a SOB in the USA Today paper ?
I'm sure whoever runs against him next time will pull that out. Thanks Paul....
BTW there's a good editorial on Hackett in the local paper Enquirer that pretty much brings it home..
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050804/COL05/508040325/1009/edit
If the Dems start running candidates who support lower taxes and a robust interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, ala Mr. Hackett, I will change my registration. Also, the woods will be free of ursine feces, the Holy Father will convert to Lutheranism, and Lucifer will be strapping on his ice skates.
You would think by the ad that he was Pro Bush if you knew nothing more about the guy. It is quite sleazy.
Indeed. This is like the Wehrmacht claiming Stalingrad was a "victory" because the Germans "only" lost one entire army, and not five.
How many blue states did Kerry win by 4% or less?
The thing I find absolutely hilarious is that over 70% of the voters stayed home and the Democrats STILL LOST!
This article makes Schmidt sound like such a poor candidate, it is surprising she won at all. So by our standards this was a smashing victory. ;)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.