OH-2 Special Election Coverage and Prediction thread...

[Ben.]

Unless the Dems run someone like Kennedy, Boxer, Ect. I will be voteing agianst DeWine in 2006.

This result has to be seen to bode well for the Democrats in 2006.

At the moment strong candidates in both the primaries for the Senate nomination and the Governorship seem be emerging on the Democratic side.

In the gubernatorial race populist congressman Ted Strickland is emerging as the likely Democratic nominee. While in the more open race for the nomination to face DeWine moderate congressman Tim Ryan looks likely to scoop it.

[The Duke]

Nick,   

I served four years in the Air Force. Which branch of the military are you in, or planning to join?

I dont remember calling you a ChickenHawk.  When I typed "NeCons" you were not one of the posters I had in mind. 

Thank you for your service, sir.

And who exactly did you have in mind?

[Sam Spade]

Maybe Atlantis will suddenly rise again in Texarkana. Doubtful though.

I'd prefer the Democrats rise again in East Texas.

But, that's probably not in the cards either.

Heh.  I remember the times when there used to be voters in East Texas who would rather die than vote Republican.  Times have obviously changed.

Yeah, those voters are dead.

That's what changed.

Actually a good number of them aren't dead, they're still voting (fellow family members). 

The first Republican they ever voted for was Kay Bailey Hutchinson. 

And a few of them haven't voted Democrat since (of course the Texas Democratic Party has sort of helped that process along).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Suprising result really; much closer than I'd guessed likely.

[socaldem]

A number of thoughts:

Wow.  Paul Hacket did suprisingly well.  Obviously, much of that had to do with his excellent campaign skills, the resources he received, disunity on the Republican side, and a bad Republican candidate.  Still, I think the fact that it was so close definitely bodes well for democrats...why?

1. Paul Hackett was a wonderful candidate, but he stood by Democratic Party positions that were unpopular and still did well.  For example, he was pro-choice (or at least not as pro-life as I would expect one would have to be to do so well...), did not support the President's tax cuts, and was critical of the war in Iraq.  In fact, the only things I can see that he went to the right from the mainstream democratic party on are guns, his pro-military stance (though most electable democrats are similarly pro-military, though not necessairly pro-war), and his generally folksy style...  Certainly, he cleverly used Bush in the ad and the DCCC took some shots at Schmidt but the RNCC had some pretty tough ads up, too...and he got slammed for his unwise comments calling bush a chickenhawk and the worst threat to the U.S.  This shows that Democrats don't have to give in on every issue to perform well, though, they probably need to fit their districts a little better than Hacket fitted OH-02...

2.  The blogs are really helping Dems in special elections.  This is not the first time blog fundraising has been a big help to special election candidates.  In 2003, Ben Chandler in KY and Stephanie Herseth both raised over 100,000 on blogs.  They both won elections in very Republican districts and Hackett almost did as well... so, here's hoping for another couple special elections.... could Democrats possibly have a chance in the OC, CA seat that Cox is vacating?!?

3.  Democrats can win in rural areas!  Democrats need to spend more effort devoting resources to and competing in rural districts.  With good candidates and a pragmatic message, I tend to think rural voters are less partisan than Republican suburbanites...

4.  This race could help Democrats recruit candidates in Ohio and elsewhere... in particular, Dems seem to be trying to get a challenger to scandal-plagued Rep. Ney... if Dems can perform as well in the other rural south ohio counties, he might be toast.  I'd also like to see top notch recruits against Chabot, LaTourrette, and Pryce... 

5. Hackett definitely could run again and probably win a congressional seat that is unites the portion of hamilton county in oh-02 with the rest of cincinatti...  Perhaps he'll run for Hamilton county commissioner or the state house when he comes back from iraq...

[minionofmidas]

Kudos to Casey. Nice prediction man

Thanks!

Ahem.

Schmidt 52.1%

[minionofmidas]

Although the final result is actually Schmidt 51.6%, so my prediction isn't as good as I first thought (taking the 52% I saw somewhere as 52.0%)...but it's still the best.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

They both won elections in very Republican districts

Not really; Chandler's district is the key swing area in KY politics

You must be logged in to read this quote.

True. Small town somewhat industrial (usually post-industrial) areas have had a very bad few years, especially in Ohio. Which makes Kerry's utter failure in them all the more irritating.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If it was the old 18th he'd be toast already. It isn't (and was more-or-less drawn for him) but with a good candidate he might be in trouble.
Bearing in mind the economic situation in the 18th I don't think that his constituents are especially pleased with some of the stuff he's been getting up to...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Especially LaTourette; he should have been vunerable in 2004 (he can stand in the shadow of a corkscrew) but the Democrats managed to pick a candidate with even more "ethics issues" than him... 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He could always try OH-1

[socaldem]

They both won elections in very Republican districts

Not really; Chandler's district is the key swing area in KY politics

True...as you've emphasized those areas of KY used to go for populist Democrats...  however, Chandler's margin was rather significant and he did receive some fundraising help from blogs, though, of course, he didn't exactly start as a nobody like Hackett...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

True. Small town somewhat industrial (usually post-industrial) areas have had a very bad few years, especially in Ohio. Which makes Kerry's utter failure in them all the more irritating.
[/quote]

Some additional rural/semi-rural races Democrats could compete in:

IN-08/09, IA-01, NC-12, NC-08

and long-shots...

CO-04-I hope Musgrave, a favorite target of lefty bloggers is challenged by Wes Watkins, a rural Democratic state rep.  Competing in the rural areas combined with Dem strength in Fort Collins could make this interesting...

NE-01 Fortenberry is really quite the loon.  I think Dems should have invested a lot more in the open seat race with Matt Conneally...he may run again and with Nelson replacing Bush at the top of the ticket, maybe something different can happen...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If it was the old 18th he'd be toast already. It isn't (and was more-or-less drawn for him) but with a good candidate he might be in trouble.
Bearing in mind the economic situation in the 18th I don't think that his constituents are especially pleased with some of the stuff he's been getting up to...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Especially LaTourette; he should have been vunerable in 2004 (he can stand in the shadow of a corkscrew) but the Democrats managed to pick a candidate with even more "ethics issues" than him... 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He could always try OH-1
[/quote]

I wonder how far from the border of OH-01 Hackett lives.... seriously...

BTW, excuse the embarrassing typos in my earlier post...its late here

[Democratic Hawk]

It's always disappointing when the better candidate, Hackett, loses out but, in the grand scheme of things, I think it's not bad news for Democrats considering the mountain Hackett had to climb

No one could deny that OH-2 is a solid Republican district which usually produces formidable GOP majorities. For Hackett to transform a 44% GOP majority (2004; it was 72-28) to a 4% GOP majority is quite an achievement

Hackett was a good candidate and I don't think it will be the last we see of him. Come 2006, lets see Democrats pull out all the stops in Ohio (and elsewhere) by selecting candidates who have the potential to win GOP districts or, at least, be competitive and give them a run for their money but since it all boils down to the big 'M', they need to be selective in which districts they target their resources. No seat should go uncontested (in the interests of democracy, if nothing else) - you contest them but you spend only the bare minimum that's absolutely necessary to contest them

Democrats have no reason to be downbeat about the result (however, frustrating that a tantalisingly close result can be).  Hackett did well, but sadly, on this occasion not quite well enough to win - he might not have scaled the peak of the mountain but he got a good 90% of the way up

So, keep fighting the good fight because with the right candidates you're going to get there

Dave

[Filuwaúrdjan]

True...as you've emphasized those areas of KY used to go for populist Democrats...  however, Chandler's margin was rather significant and he did receive some fundraising help from blogs, though, of course, he didn't exactly start as a nobody like Hackett...

True. It's probable that the extra money he got contributed to the size of his win (which *was* pretty suprising).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There's a load of marginal districts along that stretch of the Ohio Valley isn't there?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You mean NC-11?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Both could get interesting... CO-4 more than NE-1

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Don't know. Hmm...

[jimrtex]

Yup. What jumps out at me most is how badly she got walloped in those eatern counties that I guess the one before her (a bit tired, so I'm starting to draw blanks on names) won with 70% or so.

There is a very strong Republican to Democrat trend across the district.  Bush carried Clermont and Warren counties (Cincinnatti suburbs) by 70%+; Brown and Adams in the mid 60s (Brown appears to have a bit of Cincinnati fringe growth); and Scioto and Pike in the 50s.   Pike is a small county that has had a little bit of growth (perhaps recreation or retirement), while Scioto (Portsmouth) has had up and down population since the 1930s, but down about 10% since 1980.  Hamilton (Cincinnati) was in the low 50s also, but the 2nd district is the more suburban part so was probably stronger for Bush.

Turnout may have been relatively higher in the eastern area the further you get from Cincinnati.  The media is going to concentrate less on a race that is of interest to only part of their audience; there are more non-political distractions; and it is more effort to vote if you are commuting.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Pike has (last time I checked) a big nuclear power station

[Platypus]

Pike has (last time I checked) a big nuclear power station

somehow, the idea that Ohiovians have nuclear technology frightens me.

[Gabu]

Pike has (last time I checked) a big nuclear power station

somehow, the idea that Ohiovians have nuclear technology frightens me.

Oh god, it's Kim Jong-Taft.

[Moooooo]

Do you guys think Hackett should run against DeWine for Senate in 2006?  How do you think he would fair?

[AuH2O]

Last night was the closest Hackett is ever going to get to being a US Congressman. He certainly won't so much as sniff the Senate.

He's a nobody. All the stars were aligned and the best he could do was lose by less than previous Democrats. Great. You know a party is in trouble when they venerate their 'best loser.'

[TheresNoMoney]

Hackett should run for statewide office, like Secretary of State or Attorney General.

[Democratic Hawk]

Last night was the closest Hackett is ever going to get to being a US Congressman. He certainly won't so much as sniff the Senate.

He's a nobody. All the stars were aligned and the best he could do was lose by less than previous Democrats. Great. You know a party is in trouble when they venerate their 'best loser.'

I think Hackett did well. Granted he didn't win - but I think reducing the GOP majority from 44% to 4% and that is not bad going in what seems to be an overwhelmingly GOP district. In other words, he lost by one hell of a lot less, though you wouldn't think it from your tone. Schmidt ought to have won by a bigger margin than that

You can scorn as much as you want but I don't think Democrats have any reason to be downbeat, as much as you'd like them to be

Dave

[Moooooo]

He's a nobody. All the stars were aligned and the best he could do was lose by less than previous Democrats. Great. You know a party is in trouble when they venerate their 'best loser.'

LOL, spin away.  If anything this shows how much trouble the Ohio GOP is in.  You know, a "nobody" comming within 4% in race that shouldnt have been close.

[AuH2O]

Democrats aren't downbeat, so it doesn't matter what I think about their emotions.

My point is, if this is a major accomplishment, that's pretty sad.

Maybe you all should start working on how to spin Kaine's impending defeat as some kind of moral victory as well.


The Ohio GOP does have some problems. Good thing it's 2005... plenty of time to clean things up a bit, Taft isn't running again obviously. Kasich might come back. In any case, I'm hardly concerned. No one cares about this stupid special election except for people in that district and the small number of politics-addicts on the internet.

Then, my party hasn't been getting pasted for a decade, so maybe this really will swell Democrat hearts with joy and lead them to a 435- seat majority in the House and 100-seat majority in the Senate.

[King]

Nothing like sitting back and watching AuH2O turn a 4% victory into a 40% victory.

[Democratic Hawk]

Nothing like sitting back and watching AuH2O turn a 4% victory into a 40% victory.

Exactly, when a GOP majority plummets from 44% (72-28) to 4% (52-48) in a solid GOP seat, it's them - not the Democrats - who ought to be concerned. That said unless Hackett were to run against Schmidt again, I dare say it will return to safe GOP status but I'd like to think it has become a genuinely competitive district (there aren't enough of them)

Dave

[Defarge]

I think one can definitely say that OH-2 was the only district in Ohio that Hackett could not win.  "Stars were aligned" indeed, stars were stacked against him.  What this shows more than anything, is that Democrats are bitter about 2004 and will turnout to the polls.  Once the midterms roll around, this, more than anything, will increase the Democratic presence on the hill.

[AuH2O]

I just have a problem with factual error.

The voters in the district did not change. They are still Republicans.

It was close because:

- it was actually contested

- only 25% turnout

- Ohio GOP problems

- Hackett misrepresented himself on TV ads

OK, there we have it. Not that interesting. In fact, there are many, many races that could be considered more "encouraging" for one side or the other that never amount to anything. Look, for instance, at the 2000 House race in Virginia Beach. Then, a no-name liberal Democratic lawyer almost beat a veteran who was Republican in a year Bush trounced Gore in the district and Allen beat Robb handily.

When Schrock resigned because it turns out he's gay, there was an open seat. Democrats ran a very moderate, Iraq War veteran (Hackett was NOT the first). Ashe was smoked by Thelma Drake.

Democrats can be excited for all I care. They'll just make even stupider decisions.