Saturday, February 25, 2006

Sherrod Brown Isn't the Problem; The Process Is

A VichyDems reader asked to be removed from our mailing list today, and mentioned his unhappiness with the way some bloggers are dumping on Sherrod Brown. (If you're not on our list and want to be, email us and put "subscribe" in the subject line.)

I readily took his name off the list -- heck, we all get tired of receiving political spam! -- but I also tried to address his concerns about my take on the Brown/Hackett debacle, and thought I'd share my thoughts with the rest of you, too. Here's what I wrote him:

FWIW, I hope I've been clear that my problem isn't with Sherrod Brown (except to the extent he misled Hackett by saying he wouldn't enter the race). Nor do I think Hackett is perfect; far from it. If I lived in Ohio, I might have voted for Brown over Hackett in a primary, and I'll definitely give Brown some support on VichyDems as the general election nears. (In the general election, the only Democrats I'm likely to hold support from are Lieberman and Cuellar; in almost all other cases, I'll take a Blue Dog or DINO over a Republican no matter what -- and Brown is far from being either.)

My main problem has been with the way the Democratic Party handled the whole situation. Brown indicated he wasn't running for Senate; the Party invited Hackett to run; Hackett accepted that invitation; then Brown changed his mind, and the same people who had asked Hackett to run dropped him. That angers me, especially as it reveals an "old boy machine" that I think works against the interests of folks who want to mount legitimate challenges to less-than-progressive incumbents.

I hope that helps redeem me a little in your eyes! Either way, I'll take you off the list, and keep counting you as a friend.



Anonymous said...

Why do you need to apologize for anything?

This whole thing was messed up from the very beginning.

Just think what a unified Ohio Democratic party we would have had if the following was done: Sherrod Brown said yes to the Senate race to begin with (and not been such a chicken-shit), then Hackett would have been persuaded to re-enter the Oh-02 race for a rematch.

I disagree. Sherrod Brown himself was ALSO part of the problem. Sherrod Brown even said that he had various Congressmen call Paul Hackett's donors and told them NOT to donate to Hackett since Brown was the anointed one.

No...Brown screwed up this whole thing from the very beginning.

Anonymous said...

People change their minds. We all do. That's why in real estate, until a contract is signed, there's no deal, even if it's been agreed to.

That's my only input. I would want the person who is most against a totalitarian type government, against NSA spying, against the erosion of civil liberties to be the one who is running.

Who is that? Hackett or Brown?