Anyone else get sad watching Paul Hackett on TDS?

[Maven]

Sure, it was hilarious. But, yeah, it made me sad.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

1. What happened?

[Maven]

3. They did a skit

where they "instructed" Paul on how to make the perfect Democratic campaign ad, by not being too compelling or expressing strong beliefs. It was ultimately hilarious, and showed what a good guy Hackett really is. Made me sad all over again that he got the boot.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

4. Thanks.

I'll have to check that out later. Maybe Crooks and Liars will have the video.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JI7]

9. in a Primary ?

[rusty charly]

2. the truth these days IS sad

did you see the outro at the end of the show?

[Maven]

5. Yeah, just saw it.

:(

[FightingIrish]

6. The Democratic consultant explaining why Hackett

couldn't run was just disgusting. After the gutless fuckers in the Senate walked away from Feingold's resolution it makes the Hackett fiasco all the more galling. Democrats who speak up are called the fringe. Good Democrats just bend over and take it.

[WindRavenX]

8. it was sickening.

I felt sad to call myself a Democrat :(

At least Hackett is fighting back with humor.

[Maven]

12. I know.

All I could do was yell "RETIRE!" at the screen.

[oasis]

10. It's a good way for him to keep his name out there and take another run at

the congressional seat.

[turbo_satan]

11. It's maddening on the surface of it, but...

There's a good piece in The Nation explaining why Brown is a better candidate. It's available at http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060313/nichols if you have a subscription (and you should have a subscription). I'll quote a bit of the piece.

(snip) the Ohio story is more complicated than Hackett and his adherents would have it.

Hackett was not the strongest candidate in the Democratic primary race, and he certainly wasn't the strongest progressive. With the filing deadline for the May Democratic primary rapidly approaching, Hackett was confronted with new numbers from his own pollster that showed Brown ahead among likely voters by an almost 2-to-1 margin--46 percent for the Congressman to 24 percent for Hackett. The poll revealed that despite Hackett's full-time campaigning since last fall while Brown was tied up in Washington leading the fight against the Central American Free Trade Agreement and other Administration follies, Hackett had made few inroads among Democrats outside his southern Ohio base. Hackett has had a hard time convincing most Ohio Democrats--particularly liberal voters in the northern Ohio counties, where the party is strongest--that he would be a bolder or better candidate than Brown, who's a passionate critic of the Administration's rush to war and one of Congress's ablest critics of corporate excess.

going to be the party's Senate nominee this year not because he was imposed on Ohio Democrats by outsiders but because for all the national media attention that Hackett has garnered, Brown is the favorite of the grassroots labor, civil rights and antiwar voters whose votes are definitional in a primary and whose energy will be essential in November.

I'm inclined to believe that Hackett was a strong candidate for the House but would have had a difficult time winning Senate.

[carpe diem]

13. people seem to keep overlooking the obvious....

the Democratic base who vote in primaries will vote for whoever the D is in the general election, the concern is getting the Independent and Republican votes that will be necessary to win statewide in Ohio come November...a lot of people felt and still feel that Hackett had a betterr shot at those votes, because as we well know, if it's close, they WILL STEAL IT!!