Good or Bad Thing?

So last night I got a new congressperson. Ms. Schmidt (R) narrowly defeated Mr. Hackett (D) in a race that is sure to ping on a couple of radar screens. The vote was close with Ms. Schmidt beating Mr. Hackett by about 3,500 votes out of about 112,000 cast (51.6 - 48.4). In the past 30 years, only one Democrat has ever won an election for the second district of Ohio and Mr. Portman (the previous representative) consistently throttled his token opponents with upwards of 70% of the vote.

So, should Ohio Democrats be encouraged by their good standing? Well, yes and no. Yes it was a good run and I think the Democrats have a very good chance to recapture the governorship in 2006, especially if they nominate Coleman, but with as many circumstances working in the Democrats' favor, they could have won this race.

First, turnout was only about 20%. Low turnout will almost always work in the minority's favor, since it only brings out the die hards and political junkies. To remain with the minority party in a heavy majority district usually means you've got a bit of a fire in the belly for your party.

Second, there were almost no other issues on the ballots. There were three school levies on various ballots in our region, but I'm not sure if all three were in District 2. I know that my ballot only covered the congressional race. So that reduces the normal turnout and you revert back to point one.

Third, the attitude of the candidates. After winning the nomination, Mr. Hackett immediately started going door to door and getting his name out. Ms. Schmidt, on the other hand, flew to Washington to meet with Speaker Hassert and have a few gladhanding sessions. She did come back and campaign, but in a very reserved and impersonal way. I know that turned me off immediately.

Fourth, the DNC did a fairly good job of tying Ms. Schmidt to the Taft administration. Governor Taft is currently under investigation concerning a scam involving speculative coin buying with government employee pension money and its also just been disclosed that he spent upwards of $50,000 for golf trips and a few other frivolities. Put simply, Bob Taft's name is close to mud right now (approval ratings are somewhere between 12-20%).

Fifth, there are still a lot of people around here who would have either refused to vote for Ms. Schmidt simply because she's a woman or only voted for Mr. Hackett because he's an Iraqi War veteran. On the surface it does seem a bit transposed from the usual stereotypes.

Given all these considerations, I think Mr. Hackett could have won. Perhaps he would have if he'd had a little more time to get his message out. Either way, in 2006 I expect Mr. Hackett to get renominated for the office, assuming he doesn't turn his eye towards something more local and powerful. I also expect the Democrats to pour a little more money into this district next time around.