It's always disappointing when the better candidate, Hackett, loses out but, in the grand scheme of things, I think it's not bad news for Democrats considering the mountain Hackett had to climb
No one could deny that OH-2 is a solid Republican district which usually produces formidable GOP majorities. For Hackett to transform a 44% GOP majority (2004; it was 72-28) to a 4% GOP majority is quite an achievement
Hackett was a good candidate and I don't think it will be the last we see of him. Come 2006, lets see Democrats pull out all the stops in Ohio (and elsewhere) by selecting candidates who have the potential to win GOP districts or, at least, be competitive and give them a run for their money but since it all boils down to the big 'M', they need to be selective in which districts they target their resources. No seat should go uncontested (in the interests of democracy, if nothing else) - you contest them but you spend only the bare minimum that's absolutely necessary to contest them
Democrats have no reason to be downbeat about the result (however, frustrating that a tantalisingly close result can be). Hackett did well, but sadly, on this occasion not quite well enough to win - he might not have scaled the peak of the mountain but he got a good 90%
of the way up
So, keep fighting the good fight because with the right candidates you're going to get there
Dave
