I've been thinking about Kos' diary on the OH-Sen primary, and I really think his position (supporting Brown) reflects a larger misreading of the public mood.
Sure, the public is fed up with Republican corruption and cronyism, and they're alarmed about Iraq, Katrina and gas prices, but that doesn't mean they're ready to embrace long-time Dem politicians. Public regard for Repugs is down, but regard for Dems is NOT up.
The public perception of our party is still plagued with unfair negatives (anti-religion, soft on crime and terrorism, etc., etc.). If we're going to get back in power, it's going to be with outsiders and new faces, not long-time pols, no matter how excellent their positions on the issues.
Continued after the flip ...
My point is that if we are going to retake seats in Congress, it's going to be with NEW FACES, not the same old, same old.
I think that people immersed in politics, those who read, talk and debate it all the time, are somewhat blinded to this. Since they swim in a sea of political discourse, they can't comprehend that a majority of ordinary Americans are turned off by the policitians of BOTH parties. The only thing that is going to excite them enough to get them to the polls in 2006 are candidates who draw their appeal from experiences outside Washington.
This is why Hackett has the best chance in Ohio. It's not that he's a lock, and it's not that he'd do it by getting more of the people who routinely vote, it's that he can draw people who wouldn't ordinarily vote, people who are disgusted by everything they've seen on both sides of the aisle. He's got non-political people excited because he seems real, unrehearsed, and unafraid. He's a breath of fresh air in a very, very stale place.