Is the Obama phenomenon like the Paul Hackett craze?

[OzarkDem]

While its true Obama has more history as a Democrat and experience in politics in general, there has been something about his campaign lately that reminds me of Paul Hackett's race against Sen. Sherrod Brown in the Ohio primary of 2006.

What's similar is the "bandwagon effect" of people newly interested in Democratic candidates who wanted to abandon one of the Democratic parties most respected, hard working and reliable liberals in Congress all because they wanted "change".

Newly minted Dems and suddenly converted independents were clamoring for a "personality" who was "new" and represented "change" and who had "charisma". They focused, wrongly, on a candidate who wasn't experienced and didn't have the qualities they thought he did. And later, when the candidate they though was "conservative" and "dull" and a DC insider turned out to be a great choice, I'm sure many who didn't vote for him in the primary were glad he won.

Just a little something to think about when considering the merits of the "bandwagon effect" in choosing candidates. Sometimes its easy to get caught up in the excitement of the moment.

Edit for spelling.

[AX10]

1. K & R!

[DJ13]

2. Gee, dont you wish Hillary was a "phenomenon" with momentum like Obama?

Wont happen, she doesnt have the personality to pull it off.

[OzarkDem]

4. No, I don't usually go for those types

It has nothing really to do with personality, but more with presentation - putting on a show.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

17. another Obama Cicada

[Straight Shooter]

28. "Wont happen, she doesnt have the personality to pull it off."

I see. You're voting based on personality.

That's okay. You're likable enough.

[Jane Austin]

3. No.

Besides, it's not a craze. It's a very well-crafted campaign.

[incapsulated]

5. Interesting observation

And this is coming from someone who was taken by Hackett myself.

[Straight Shooter]

29. I donated to him, too.

Maybe we've learned our lesson, eh?

[Blue State Bandit]

6. The only parallel between Obama and Paul Hackett...

is that DLC'ers are going to try to pressure the popular candidate to drop out so that an "establishment candidate" can take the seat.

By the way, I credit Hackett (experienced lawyer and veteran) with helping to give national attention and legitimacy to the anti-Iraq war movement that took back congress

[OzarkDem]

8. Sherrod Brown was and is not DLC

another silly myth that still persists over that race.

Sometimes celebrity/glamour candidates create their own mythology, rooted, I suppose in the mass hysteria that is generated when voters are upset with the status quo. It really can become a mob mentality that takes on a life all its own.

[Blue State Bandit]

11. DLC applied the pressure (Rahm Emanuel)

Sherrod Brown (I still respect) was the establishment choice.

[OzarkDem]

21. No he didn't, it was a Senate seat

Amazing how these urban legends still persist.

Same kind of mass hysteria, rumors, and craziness surround the Obama campaign.

[MADem]

9. He's backing a primary challenger to Kucinich, FWIW.

http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2008/01/rosemary_palmer_enlists_paul_h.html

Rosemary Palmer enlists Paul Hackett for campaign HQ opening
Posted by Sabrina Eaton January 17, 2008 14:33PM
Rosemary Palmer, one of four Democrats challenging incumbent congressmen Dennis Kucinich in Ohio's Democratic primaries, will open her new campaign headquarters tomorrow at 15732 Lorain Avenue, in the West Park/Kamm's Corners neighborhood.

She'll be joined at the 7 PM event by former U.S. Senate candidate Paul Hackett, a U.S. Marine who served in Iraq. The next day, Hackett will join Palmer for campaign stops around the district, including a 9 a.m. house party in North Olmsted, and a noon meeting with voters at Cleveland's West Side Market.

[RuleOfNah]

12. Former Republican Hackett supports threat to Kucinich?

How shocking. :sarcasm:

[MADem]

22. The irony is, that Rosemary Palmer used to be a STRONG Kucinich supporter

She was reliably in his corner. She's not GOP lite by any stretch.

She's a Gold Star mother, that's probably the convergence point with Hackett.

She thinks Kucinich spends too much time prancing off on his Quixotic Presidential attempts, and insufficient time dealing with the real problems of his district.

I think she has a point, actually. Of course, it's not my concern, I don't live there. I just find the race interesting.

She isn't "the contender" though--some other guy got the CPD endorsement, not her.

[MADem]

7. It feels like that, doesn't it?

No real meat, but it sure looks good from a distance.

Add to that a bunch of teenagers oohing and aaahing over him like he's the latest boy band.

Problem with that kind of frenzied "top forty" popularity, is that when they go out of fashion, the buyer's remorse and rejection is profound. It's like trying to sell MONKEES or PARTRIDGE FAMILY records after the show has gone off the air! No one wants to know them, or admit they ever enjoyed their music!

:rofl:

[OzarkDem]

10. Good point!

Paul Hackett is the "In Sync" of 2006. No offense to Hackett, perhaps candidates don't want to generate that kind of mass hysteria, but they get stuck with it anyway.

[LiberalHeart]

13. Nah, it's more like a flu epidemic.

But I got my flu shot this year, so I'm okay.

[Arugula Latte]

14. I've been hearing for years that Hillary would be our nominee.

It made me angry that pundits acted as if it would be a done deal that she would be nominated. I remember being angry that they were acting like we wouldn't have another choice. I've wanted a different candidate for years, as I think she is a very poor candidate for us and would likely dash our chances in the general. I never, ever wanted Hillary, even though I'm a woman who'd love to have a woman prez.

[beachmom]

15. No. Hackett made some missteps, like using the term "chickenhawk"

That's a nice blogger term but not how one would want their public officials to talk.

[BeyondGeography]

16. Hillary's having a hard time beating Paul Hackett?

I say we nominate her then.

[frazzled]

18. Um, no. Let me count the ways.

Obama has a record in elective office (8 years Ill. Legislator; elected in populous state to US Senate). Hackett had none. He lost a House race and then tried to take on a popular liberal candidate for US Senate.

Obama has been winning votes and contests and delegates across the nation: with real people voting and caucusing, not on an Internet poll. Hackett didn't win his only race.

Obama has the backing of a large chunk of the Democratic establishment (senators, governors, etc.), as does Clinton. Hackett did not have any establishment support.

Sorry, but how can you even compare these phenomena?

[OzarkDem]

23. Not comparing the candidates, but the mob mentality of the supporters

Are people getting so caught up in the near-religious fervor of the campaign that they are falling victim to right wing style attacks on the Dem opponent?

In 2006, people were so caught up in the mania surrounding Hackett's campaign they were willing to unfairly trash the reputation of his Dem opponent.

I think we are seeing a similar kind of "mob mentality" here in this campaign. People aren't thinking straight.

[frazzled]

24. What Hackett supporters? He had no supporters...

Except on the Internet. He had no support in Ohio. He couldn't even win against that crazy woman in his own district.

By contrast, Obama has actually won real contests on the ground: a lot of them, and millions of votes. Your analogy is just dead wrong.

[Freetospeak]

19. No

[VotesForWomen]

20. looks like a fad to me. adults prefer hillary. nt

[lastliberalintexas]

25. There were some behind the scenes happenings

going on in that race. Brown had said he wasn't running, Hackett threw his hat in when it looked like the race was a certain defeat for the Dem, and only when it looked like a Dem pickup was possible did Brown decide to go for it. Hackett had a great deal of support for the way he was submarined by the party, not necessarily on the basis of his persona. I'm glad Brown has turned out to be ok, but there was also plenty of evidence that Hackett would have been good too.

[OzarkDem]

26. More mythology that still persists

Someone did do some behind the scenes work on that campaign, but it wasn't a Democrat and it wasn't in support of Sherrod Brown.

I think we're seeing the same thing now with the Obama campaign on a larger scale. 2006 must have been a test run.

[lastliberalintexas]

27. Well, I don't mean that there were necessarily

bad things happening, just that the race was more than met the eye. I supported Hackett just because he had the nerve to put his rear on the line even when it looked like he was going to lose. Brown did what so many have done over the years and acted like an opportunist. Not the worst thing in the world, but he had already said he was not running. I just personally don't like it when candidates pull that.


I'm not a fan of the Obama candidacy, since I do perceive a bit of hero worship, but I didn't really get that from the Hackett campaign. I think Obama has a great many positives, but it worries me that many of his supporters can't seem to handle the relatively mild criticisms of him thus far. And some seem to think that if they ignore an issue (whether real of RNC garbage email created) that it will simply go away.