Rep. Brown choosing to ignore Hackett

"Paul who?"
That essentially is the message from U.S. Rep. Sherrod Brown about Paul Hackett. Brown and Hackett are the two leading Democratic candidates running in their party's 2006 primary for the U.S. Senate.
Brown, a seven-term U.S. House member and former Ohio secretary of state, spent the last week traveling around the state to "officially" announce his candidacy for the U.S. Senate seat currently held by Republican Mike DeWine.
[As a sidenote, "officially" announcing plans to run for an elected position by someone who is already in the race and raising money to win that spot is one of the more stupid traditions in politics. I'm not just singling out Brown. There are so many cases of politicians running for seats and about a month or two later making an official announcement.]
During Brown's visit earlier this week to The Vindicator, the well-seasoned politician talked about the key issues of the campaign. They include health care and Medicare, trade, stopping the loss of manufacturing jobs in the state and promoting high-tech companies, and energy problems.
He also talked about the failures of his opponent to resolve these issues.
Brown wasn't talking about Hackett; he was referring to DeWine.
Brown gave no indication that there even was a Democratic primary. It was as if he believed it was his birthright to get the party's nomination for the Senate post.
The congressman said he wasn't sure if Hackett would stay in the Senate race.
Brown only mentioned Hackett when he was specifically asked about his Democratic primary opponent.
Brown's comments about Hackett were essentially that his opponent is a nice guy who is in way over his head.
Hackett, a major in the Marine Corps Reserves who served in Iraq, nearly pulled off a huge upset capturing 48 percent of the vote in an Aug. 2 special election for the vacant 2nd Congressional District seat. The district is heavily Republican and Hackett's strong showing gives moderate Democrats hope that they can win statewide.
When more well-known politicians, including Brown, couldn't commit to running against DeWine in August, Hackett stepped up. In September, Brown changed his mind and also got in the race.
If Brown didn't get in the race, he said Hackett would not have won the Democratic primary.
Brown said U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich or someone else would have run and defeated Hackett.
Brown said Kucinich speaks to the state's Democratic base that is anti-Iraq war and pro-labor.
Is this the same Democratic base that came out in full force in November 2004 to deliver Ohio and the presidency to U.S. Sen. John Kerry?
Is this the same Democratic base that has kept its party in power in Columbus for the past 15 years?
Brown better come to the realization that Hackett, considered a moderate, is a legitimate challenger in next year's primary.
Some Ohio Republican insiders see Hackett as the most legitimate Democratic threat to DeWine.
Brown is going to raise more money and has better name recognition than Hackett. But Hackett, an in-your-face candidate, may be the ideal choice for Democrats who are turned off by Brown's liberal voting record.
"It's been a long time since [Brown] lost a statewide election," said Karl Frisch, Hackett's campaign spokesman, who added it will happen again next year.
As the incumbent, Brown lost the 1990 secretary of state race to Republican Bob Taft, now the state's governor.
Brown is 100 percent correct when he says 2006 could be a huge year for Ohio Democrats.
Taft's approval rating is in the single digits, a messy three-way Republican gubernatorial primary could damage the party's nominee in the general election, and there are a number of scandals in the GOP-controlled state government. If Democrats can't win next year, it would be a tremendous disappointment for the party.
Brown predicts that a victory next year for him for the Senate seat and for U.S. Rep. Ted Strickland in the gubernatorial race would have national implications.
Again Brown is correct. Having a Democratic governor and U.S. senator in Ohio, a key presidential battleground state, would greatly benefit the party's 2008 nominee for the top political office in the country.
But this is a classic case of counting your chickens. Perhaps Brown should focus more on taking care of business in the May 2006 Democratic primary instead of talking about how he'll beat DeWine in the general election.