yourout
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-25-06 12:13 AM
Original message |
Possible theory about the "Hackett job". |
|
If Rove's slimey fingerprints are on the whisper campain about Hackett here is one possible reason.
With the mechanisms in place Rove can easily offset a large turnout of African-American votes for Sherrod Brown. Shortages of machines, poll challenges, Voter ID, all will take a substantail bite out of Brown's support.
If Hackett had been the nominee then the potential centrist vote(middle class white) could have swung the election and there would have been little Rover could have done short of machine tampering. It will be very easy for Rove and company to paint Brown as a bleeding heart liberal to the potential crossover voters thereby eliminating the one variable he could not control if Hackett was on the ballot.
|
Bluestar
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-25-06 12:16 AM
Response to Original message |
|
You're not subscribing to Rush Limbaugh's mistaken announcement on the radio the other day that Sherrod Brown is African American, are you?
|
yourout
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-25-06 12:18 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. No................ I know he is white. |
|
Just saying Brown will probably generate more interest with African Americans than Hackett.
|
havocmom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-25-06 12:16 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Skinner had an interesting post about it last week |
|
He showed how Hackett just didn't have the numbers, both in fundraising and actual voters.
|
babylonsister
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-25-06 12:22 AM
Response to Original message |
4. Nah, the primaries are in motion. The one who is more electable |
|
will be supported. End of story. I don't like conspiracy theories, unless they apply! :evilgrin:
|
On the Road
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-25-06 12:46 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Hackett was doing a pretty good job of eliminating the "potential centrist vote" all by himself.
I think what happened was that a lot of the DC party leadership thought they were getting a young, strong, appealing moderate candidate with impeccable military credentials who would play well across the board. Then Hackett began talking like an activist, equating evangelicals with Al Qaida and freaking out the people who gave him his ticket. They decided he had made himself unelectable.
I would rather have had the voters decide on whether Hackett should have been the nominee. He was treated shabbily. The leadership may have been wrong. But that seems to be the chain of events.
|
liberal43110
(687 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-25-06 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
|
The state Democratic party simply wanted to save money by avoiding a primary. Period. End of story.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sat May 04th 2024, 09:44 AM
Response to Original message |