I followed this from a link at Kos to Steve Gillard's blog. Steve received a comment from a poster regarding his statement that we don't have a litmus test for candidates, and this gentleman replied that he did, and that Paul Hackett (OH-02) met them:
I suggest that we DID have a litmus test, and that Paul Hackett met every important point. It's just not any of the litmus tests that we usually hear about. While I am sure that all of us would have our favorite elements, they would have to include some or all of the following:
Does he 'distance himself' from the party or its leaders, or is he proud to be a Democrat?
Does he talk like a bureaucrat or like a regular person?
Does he make it clear that he opposes Bush and the Republicans?
Does he back down when the corporate press/media or Republican pundits attack him, or does he stand by his words?
Does he respond to the nationwide reaction of the left blogosphere, or does he assign it to a junior staff member?
Does he sleepwalk through the campaign, or does he act like he wants to win?
I don't know all of Paul Hackett's positions and, since I am an old school lefty I am sure I don't agree with all of them. But he passed the litmus test I have set out for Democratic candidate I will support with time and donations.
Imagine if we forced all of our candidates to meet this test! While Paul Hackett lost, he lost by 4% in a district where the Democrat loses by 40%! This is the beginning, and frankly, this is how we need to respond to any Congressional or Senate candidate who asks for our money.
1 comment:
I think Hackett, with his kind of blunt rhetoric, would be an excellent candidate for the Senate. He might not have won in a heavily GOP district, but I bet he could win statewide. If he runs in '06, I'll send him money as well.
Post a Comment