Blogesque covers a breakfast meeting with Sherrod Brown today. Billed as a forum to ease the tension between Brown and Hackett supporters, it ended up being an unfocused venting session according to Len:

All in all, it ended up turning into a somewhat unfocused policy forum. Brown seemed content to let the group do most of the talking, which I suppose works well as a venting exercise, but doesn’t answer many direct questions.

But the most bloggable nugget is this comment when asked whether the Brown campaign called to block donors from funding Hackett:

Brown said that Hackett’s main fundraising sources were ‘New York gays and Hollywood elites’ (I think that was the phrase), and that “of course” his campaign contacted these groups and tried to convince them to give money to him rather than Hackett.


It is for sure worth reading the rest. Some good overall analysis as well. I hope for the best here, but with all I’ve witnessed with the way this campaign has been run I’m certainly not convinced they can pull it off. They need to go on a late first half run here…badly.

Updated: Susan at HowardEmpowered has a take as well. Her best point is illustrated here:

Brown was completely unaware of the other races where the DSCC and DCCC have meddled in the primaries. I told him about Florida, Illinois and Pennsylvania. I explained to him that we were not angry at *him*, but at the DSCC and DCCC. I told him I felt they’d presented us with a Catch-22. If we vote for him it affirms their meddling in state politics. If we don’t vote for him we lose a progressive in office. His response, to paraphrase slightly, was “Well, you live in Ohio and you know what you have to do.”

“what you have to do”…right. What we have to do is not put up with this crap, continue to draw the line and hold those accountable who need it. I’m all about building the party and trying to get Dems elected, but not at the expense of the integrity of the party itself. This entire race has damaged us and like Susan points out, Brown himself has no idea to what extent.

Tagged with:
  • fumble, fumble, fumble, punt, fumble, punt, fumble.

    Too busy playing defense.

  • Drdemocrat

    Both posts were kind of disheartening. Brownie just doesn’t get it. I think throughout his campaign he always acted like he was “entitled” to this office position.

    Eric, If Brown loses, do you think his political career will be over for higher office except for his old Congressional job? I think so. People will always say two things: 1. We would of won with Hackett. 2. Brown can’t win a state wide race.

  • Americain

    Brown is so out of touch he’s now in La La Land. The other alternative is to allow his campaign to go down in flames and to get rid of those functionaries responsible for it. That would be ?what you have to do?.

  • anomolous

    I’m not convinced I want his campaign to “go down in flames” but that’s almost inevitable unless he buys a clue and truly tries to understand why people are so pissed and how necessary it is for him to exhibit some humility and outreach. Connie’s statement last night shows she’s as arrogant and clueless as he is, no matter how much her columns purported to stand up for the “little guy.”

    Meanwhile, I’m seeing a lot of my “voted for Bush in 2000 but was vehemently against him in 2004” friends and acquaintances who were so on fire for Hackett, drifting back toward DeWine. Couldn’t stop it even if I COULD look them in the eye and tell them honestly they should support Brown. And I can’t. Why won’t he reach out and give us some tools to work with?

  • Len

    I appear to have created a bit of a stir with the NY gays and Hollywood elites thing, and that was definitely not my intent. I have posted a clarification to my comments and made a minor edit to the post itself, specifically including the portion quoted above.

    Here’s the section as currently posted, which you can compare with the original above:

    Brown said that Hackett’s main fundraising sources were New York gays and Hollywood elites (I think that was the phrase EDIT: please see clarification), and that “of course” his campaign contacted these groups and tried to convince them to give money to him rather than Hackett.

    Sloppy writing happens to the best of us. I guess it was my turn.

  • Sooz

    Len, I’m less concerned that he said “New York gays” and “Hollywood elites” than the fact that “of course” his campaign was contacting Hackett’s donors and asking them to contribute to him instead of Hackett. What reasons were they giving these donors? That there were things about Hackett that he might not want getting out? I mean, I’m just asking.

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!