I thought I'd throw together a little timeline that outlined the events on the whole Paul Hackett/Sherrod Brown Senate race dispute, just to provide an objective framework for further discussion of kos' claim that "Brown announced his candidacy before Hackett did". It is by no means complete, so feel free to add to it in the comments, I just wanted to throw something together to get this out there.
Aug 2, 2005 - Jean Schmidt
narrowly defeats Paul Hackett in the OH-2 special election for congress. The cw sees Hackett as a winner despite his electoral defeat.
Aug 18, 2005 - Sherrod Brown opts not to battle DeWine in OH Senate race.
During this time, Hackett is getting pressured by party officials to get into the race.
Democratic leaders in Washington are aggressively courting Iraq war veteran Paul Hackett to challenge Sen. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio) next year.
Democratic National Committee leaders were expected to meet with Hackett yesterday in Washington. So, too, was Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), has called Hackett more than once in the past few weeks to sound him out about a run in 2006.
Members of Ohio's congressional delegation also have urged Hackett to run or, at least, spoken with him about the race.
...
"Senator Hackett, it's got a nice ring to it," Hackett said in a recent interview.
Sep 26, 2005 - Paul Hackett, at the Brown County Democratic Dinner, Hackett announced, "I will run again." (via Swing State Project)
Oct 3, 2006 - Brown leaks that he may reconsider a Senate Run. Hackett, one ups Brown by announcing he will make his official announcement on Oct 24th (I believe the delay was due to his obligation to be drilling with his Marine unit).
Oct 4, 2005 - Though nothing is Official™, the Toldeo Blade reports that:
An Iraq war veteran has decided to join the race for U.S. Senate next year, just as a popular northeast Ohio congressman is rethinking his decision not to run.
Paul Hackett, a Democrat, will seek the seat currently held by Republican Sen. Mike DeWine.
...
Mr. Hackett, of Cincinnati, was flying back from Washington last night after meeting with Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada, Mr. Woodruff said.
...
"He found overwhelming support from the leaders of the Democratic Party, campaign organizations, and staff," Mr. Woodruff said.
Meanwhile at Camp Brown:
Mr. Brown's press secretary, Joanna Kuebler, said yesterday that he is reconsidering.
"Considerations that needed to be made in the summer have evolved, and he is being asked to run by state and national supporters - in growing number," Ms. Kuebler said. "And he and his family are considering where he can be most effective as an elected official."
She promised a decision "in a matter of weeks."
Oct 6, 2005 - Brown confirms he will challenge DeWine for Senate seat.
Oct 24, 200 - Hackett makes his Official™ announcement that he will run for Senate.
Dec 3, 2005 - Sherrod Brown makes candidacy for Senate Official™.
---------------
So why am I wasting all of my time, and your time with this timeline? Here's why: Last night in a fit of DoubleThink, Markos used his platform to rewrite history.
To be further clear, Brown announced his candidacy before Hackett did. Yes, Reid and Schumer were urging Hackett to run, but he wouldn't commit to running. Labor Day, the traditional announcement day for most candidates, came and went with Hackett refusing to say what his plans were. So after waiting and waiting and waiting, Brown essentially said "fuck it" and got in. It was only after news of Brown's impending announcement were leaked that Hackett decided to commit to the race.
Bottom line? Hackett didn't stand a chance, he wasn't backstabbed by his party since Brown's candidacy was announced before his was (if he'd only committed sooner, Brown might've stayed out), and the party wasn't out to screw him, they were out to get him to run in the House.
I guess if you say it enough to a big enough audience, it must be true!
Am I splitting hairs though? I don't think so. In both Official™ and unofficial announcements, Hackett was first. Furthermore, it was practically common knowledge that Hackett was going to run a week before his first announcement. Kos tells us "Labor Day, the traditional announcement day for most candidates, came and went with Hackett refusing to say what his plans were". The same however, is not true of Brown, though? (Actually, it isn't because Brown had told us on August 18, a full 19 days before Labor day, that he would not run)
Bottom line, Hackett declare his candidacy first, which was reflected by the facts, as well as the conventional wisdom at the time. It is a fabrication to say otherwise.
To be clear, the actual politics of this do not surprise me because it's nothing new--this is machine politics at its best. I believe Hackett was smart to bow out as he did in this case, and I believe he will be back. From this point on I fully completely support Brown in his Candidacy for Ohio Senate, and I will put $25 where my mouth is. Brown is a candidate that I would be proud to vote for in my homestate.
So the issue here is not politics, or betrayal, it is kos's revisionism. Here we have this community site, that creates great value through the diverse activities of the many commenters, diarists, front pagers, and yes, Markos himself. However, if the community creates most of the value, then who gets the rent? Markos gets it. Markos collects most of the rent. Yes, i is his site. Yes, it is his trademark. His venture. He created the forum that allowed all of us to come here and compound its value. So that is fine, really. But every ounce of energy we put into the community adds to Markos' rent, and he abused that yesterday with his rewriting of history to suit whatever his needs happened to be. (What were they, Markos?)
People here are always asking "Why doesn't kos say something about topic x", and my response is always "Who the f&%k cares what kos thinks"? He's just another part of the community, why does anyone need him so sanction their pet issue/candidate/outrage/etc. But the problem is, people do care. Mistakenly many people, especially non-active participants think kos is the site, and the site is kos. Markos will concede the former point, "I am not leader" he protests. And he's not, but he gets to abuse the implicit effect of his status by pontificating on the front page, as if to say "This is the official opinion, now move on". At that point, does it matter whether or not he says he is a "leader"? Nope.
We are all here voluntarily, so Markos doesn't owe us anything, but he does the community a great disservice when he acts this way.
(Further disclosure, yes I was a Hackett supporter, Hackett inspired me, I donate time, effort, and money. I tend to prefer his more libertarian straight-talking ways (as clumsy as they may be) to Brown's more measured "goo-goo" progressivism, but that is neither here nor there. Brown is in, Brown will take down DesWine.)
And now having said that, I took way to much time writing, and have to step away from the computer to ease my carpel tunnel.
[update]
kos himself said in this front page post:
Hackett was taking his time making an official decision, but all indications were that it was a "go".
...
with all apologies to Brown, who is one of the greats in the House, but this isn't cool. He bows out, waits for Hackett to gear up, and then floats a trial balloon about getting back in? Brown must've known about Hackett's decision to run, hence this trial balloon is sabotage.
he was right, it was a trial balloon, not an announcement, we all knew hackett was going to announce, but the Brown re-entrance was completely out of the blue.
But that's not even the point... it was a confusing mess, everyone scrambling, so why write it out on the front page as if it were undeniable that Brown had announced first? Makes no sense.