OK. I’ve had it with this “that’s politics” argument…along with “get over it”…and the ever-present “Dems unite” calls! Let me say this one more time v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y: You don’t get to use the “Dems unite” line in this situation. That would be for a won primary. NOT for swiftboating (and yes, you did it along with many other underhanded things thus far) your opponent OUT of the primary. I’m not so sure why this is so hard to understand.

I expect oppo research, leaks, and hardball politics to be played against our opponents on the right. I simply don’t expect it to this level among our own. That is my beef. I can handle the “career politician” stuff and the “flip flop on Iraq” stuff. Hell, THAT’S politics. But silencing critics online by using smear tactics, then doing same against your opposing candidate crosses a line that is unacceptable to me in a primary situation. Not to mention the democratic choice that was taken out of the hands of the voters – which is my biggest bone of contention anyway. Why not let us decide? This shit has to change with our party here in Ohio and I am one who is sounding the trumpet of change from the grassroots up. We’re coming – and you continue this charade at your own expense.

Remember the calls for getting ahead of the leak thing and cleaning house? I bet that would have helped Greg Triosi from walking out of your event last night.

Sherrod is whistling in the graveyard when he says this:

“We’re going to unify Democrats. I think we have already done that. These people are with me. Paul last week said ‘Vote for Sherrod Brown.’

“We’re going to have a very united Demoratic Party, more than we’ve had in years.”

I don’t think you have any idea.

Tagged with:
 
  • ?We?re going to unify Democrats. I think we have already done that.”

    Where’s Brown getting his research from?
    The torrent of support in the comment sections of “Groan Ohio”?

    Nice piece, Eric

  • Eric,

    I don’t disagree with you, but I also haven’t seen any proof that Brown or his campaign was actually involved. Basically, we have a he-said/he-said where both men could be telling the truth. Brown’s denial is strong, but not sufficient – he needs to name who he heard the smear from. Failure to do so, despite his strong denial, leaves a storm cloud hanging over his campaign.

    Unfortunately, until someone comes forward and can name someone responsible, we’ll never have any resolution on this.

  • Eric

    You are right Brian. But the only other explanation would be that it was a Republican tactic to take out Hackett who they may have seen as their bigger threat. That would make sense to me, but I also haven’t heard a single murmur about that!

    If I were Republicans, I would want to take Paul out with a quickness. But if you add up all the things we DO know, signs still point to yes as they say in magic 8 ball.

    I’m with you on this in terms of it being time to make some real effort to help us Hackett folks get over this and unite…but I can’t stand that Sherrod would go ahead and assume we are.

  • Eric

    so when i say “yes you did it”, that is my opinion – i don’t have any special knowledge – just my gut feeling. i would beg of any Brown supporter to convincingly and openly prove me wrong.

  • great post eric. his new pulitzer strategist probably told him dems are already united.

  • Drdemocrat

    Brown is tone deaf if he thinks that Dems are going to be united.

    Until he reaches out to Hackett and his supporters there are probably going to be a 3-5% residual voters who will NOT vote for Brown because he doesn’t pass the smell test. That percentage may be what is needed to win the Ohio Senate race for Sherrod. Thus until Brown reaches out to Hackett and his supporters I will predict that DeWine beats Brown by 5%.

    In terms of the dirty tricks. If you think that Democrats were NOT some how involved in the backroom machinations against Hackett, then I have some swamp land to sell you.

  • anomolous

    While there may be not absolute rock-solid proof that Brown’s campaign was behind the whispers about Hackett’s service in Iraq, there is proof it did work to spread misleading stories about Hackett’s party registration. There is proof that it has threatened and intimidated private individuals expressing opinions unfavourable to it or even daring to ask questions it doesn’t like. (Why do you think I’m ? regretably ? anonymous? I’m hiding from the Brown bully squad.) This is not he-said, she-said stuff. And it’s certainly not he-said, she-said that Brown has avoided engagingly Hackett supporters, instead copping an arrogant attitude that has spread to his divisive “get over it” followers.

  • Americain

    ?We?re going to unify Democrats. I think we have already done that.?

    This boggles the mind. Not only has Brown split the Democratic Party, he was expressly warned not to do this five months ago. His campaign has the profound knack of doing the exact opposite it intends to do at every turn. He’s deluded if he thinks the Hackett supporters are going to forget this.

  • Eric, there is another possibility – Sherrod is telling the truth (ie, he told his staff he wanted nothing to do with it), but one of his staffers spread the rumor on his or her own.

    Someone is responsible, and someone might be lying about it. But the only way to get to the truth is to start working your way back up the information path. Unfortunately, I don’t think we are going to get that, and I doubt the rift is going to heal without it.

    If Brown really had nothing to do with this, then it’s unfortunate that he has to address it – but he *does* have to address this, and more rigorously than he has. That’s the reality on the ground.

  • Eric

    Brian, good thought. Very true. But like some said of Paul: He’s still responsible for his staff and their actions. If your scenario is indeed the case, I think I have the perfect suspect. 😉

  • Drdemocrat

    Brian,

    Stop defending Brown. Brown has a NEW campaign manager. That speaks volumes.

  • I’m not defending Brown – at least, that’s not my intent. I want to know the truth. My assumption is that both men are telling the truth unless we have a fact that dictates us to believe otherwise. There is a scenario that allows for that assumption to still hold.

    Eric, I agree that Brown is ultimately responsible for his staff and actions. That’s why he needs to be more aggressive about this, and if it *is* (or was) a rogue staffer, get the truth out there, and fire that staffer’s ass if it hasn’t been done already.

    Responsibility. Somebody needs to take it. I want someone swinging from the gallows for this, not a vague Bush-like shrug and a “wuzzn’t me he-he-he”.

  • Finally saw a name – and frankly I’m not sure how I missed it, as it was mentioned on BSB – Dan Lucas, fingered by Clermont County Chairman David Lane. Has anyone else corroborated the story by Lane? If someone else can say that Lucas said something to them, Lucas should be sacked and Brown should apologize.

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:


Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!