Sunday, August 07, 2005

Republicans Are In Serious Trouble.

If the special election in Ohio’s 2nd Congressional District is a sign of things to come, then the Republican Party is in serious trouble.

The Senate approved Republican Congressman Rob Portman as US trade representative in April, leaving Portman’s seat open for a special election. Portman had served 7 terms in the 2nd Congressional District of Ohio, in a heavily solid Republican stronghold. Portman had won each election, never winning less than 72% of the vote. In fact, the 2nd Congressional District of Ohio hasn’t sent a Democrat to Washington in the last 40 years, and in 2000 and 2004 went heavily for Bush.

That was nearly undone by Democrat Paul Hackett last week. Hackett, a Iraq War veteran, heavily criticized Bush’s handling of the Iraq War. He was attacked relentlessly by right-wing pundits like Rush Limbaugh, and his opponent Jean Schmidt spent $300,000 on an attack ad. Hackett only had $500,000 to campaign with, but still he kept hammering on Bush, saying his opponent would only be a “rubber stamp” to Bush’s war policy.

The result is that on election day, in an extremely strong Republican district, that had not sent a Democrat to Washington in 40 years, Paul Hackett was barely defeated by 4,000 votes. Schmidt was able the squeeze by with only 52% of the vote, and not all are convinced that the vote was won without some tampering.

This should serve as a wake up call, not to Republicans, but to Democrats. If the Democrats are to be successful in 2006, they must be on the attack, be unrelenting, and grill the Republicans non-stop for their mishandling of our nation’s affairs.

4 Comments:

Blogger MiamiMiami said...

Paul Hacket was trying to win by playing the old "I was a soldier" routine. In fact he has repeatedly said how much he hated Bush and the fact that we are in Iraq. People aren't stupid. They saw the same tactic when Kerry tried it. The only difference is that Hackett actually went to Iraq and didn't try to lie about where else he went. This election only proved that people aren't impressed with a guy just because he went to war. They still remembered how he treated a sitting President during war time and I guess they didn't like it.
Here's a bit of advice. Democrats need to actually not look like weasels when trying to win votes. People aren't as easily fooled as you might think.

5:52 AM  
Blogger SGarcia said...

I agree. Democrats need to be unrelentless when it comes to attacking Republicans. John Kerry lost the election because he didn't attack hard. He let Swift Boat Veterans for Truth destroy him. He tried and tested a different message each day while Bush stuck to labeling him a "flip flopper" for months.
What Hackett did in Ohio, despite his loss, was amazing. He came very close to defeating a Republican in a solid Republican district. He did this by having a coherent and clear message to voters. He attacked Bush's policies and mistakes. I have never understood why Democrats are so afraid to attack Republicans and label them liars. Negative attack ads are more effective then the positive ones. I'm sick of seeing good Democrats loose because they have an inability to stand up for themselves and attack. Paul Hackett may have lost but at least he lost fighting to the injustice that the Ohio and national GOP call "people-friendly policies."
Whoever the Dem nominee for president is in 2008, I hope they attack the GOP like hell, day in and day out, until they burn into everyone's mind that Republicans are corrupt and incapable at governing.

7:42 AM  
Blogger MiamiMiami said...

I agree. Democrats need to be unrelentless when it comes to attacking Republicans. John Kerry lost the election because he didn't attack hard.
====>He lost the election because when you align yourself with wackos like Moveon.org and Michael Moore your credibility with the public goes down hill quickly. Believe it or not if John Kerry had ignored those wackos he probably would have won. He can't help who he is. He is one of them and is at home with the "Blame America first" crowd. People just couldn't handle the thought of him being in charge. Truth is with that kind of support he had, he would have lost the election to a turnip.

He let Swift Boat Veterans for Truth destroy him. He tried and tested a different message each day while Bush stuck to labeling him a "flip flopper" for months.

====>So why didn't the act of calling or associating Bush to Hitler work? Because regardless of what you would like to believe the majority of Americans see Kerry and his ilk for what they are, the "intellectual" minority. He was the small dog barking at the fence when you passed by a house. You see him there and know he is there but outside of that you know he is pretty much not worth more than just being a noisemaker with no threat.

What Hackett did in Ohio, despite his loss, was amazing. He came very close to defeating a Republican in a solid Republican district. He did this by having a coherent and clear message to voters.

===>He lost because he sent the same kind of mixed up message Kerry tried. Ity doesn't work. Case in point, twice already. Here's a neat trick. Be straight with people about who you are and what you stand for. I happen to think that had he just come out and say that he was against Bush, wanted to raise taxes, and was in Iraq but not in direct combat he may have won the election.

He attacked Bush's policies and mistakes. I have never understood why Democrats are so afraid to attack Republicans and label them liars.

===>Because no one will believe it. Because it isn't true. Most Americans know this. But then if I were wrong you wouldn't be complaining would you?

Negative attack ads are more effective then the positive ones.

====>Yeah it's worked so far hasn't it....

I'm sick of seeing good Democrats loose because they have an inability to stand up for themselves and attack. Paul Hackett may have lost but at least he lost fighting to the injustice that the Ohio and national GOP call "people-friendly policies."

====>Yeah and the people must be so torn up about it. They voted for the "evil" Republican, a woman no less. I thought you Dems would be proud to have a minority win! Aren't you Dems all about fairness and equality? Or is it only for liberals? I would think that when minorities like Condoleeza Rice were put in positions of power you would be cheering. Guess we can see your true colors. The fact the Bush has put more minorities in power than any other president in history should been a success for what the Dems have been crying about this whole time but I guess it only counts if you are NOT a Republican. Duplicious, duplicious duplicious!

Whoever the Dem nominee for president is in 2008, I hope they attack the GOP like hell, day in and day out, until they burn into everyone's mind that Republicans are corrupt and incapable at governing.

====>Yeah I hope so too because that tactic keeps Dems out of office so far. Attack! Please!!!!

12:33 PM  
Blogger jb_ken said...

No sgarcia; Kerry-Heinz lost the election because Americans new he was a fraud. The SBVT were telling the truth; thats why Kerry-Heinz couldn't reply to them.

This is so funny. Democrats have stooped to the level of claiming victory even when they lose; which they do a lot of.

9:34 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home