HACKETT'S UPSET VICTORY: That's how liberals are spinning Republican Jean Schmidt's narrow defeat yesterday of Democrat Paul Hackett in Ohio's second congressional district. I can understand Democrats' desire to claim any kind of victory anywhere, given their long-term losing streak, but you've got to smile at this kind of chutpah from Kos, here and here:

There is no doubt about it - tonight's results represent a tidal wave in Ohio (and perhaps national) politics. In 2004, the Democrat running in OH-02 lost by 44 points. Tonight, the Democrat, Paul Hackett, lost by a mere 4 points - just 4,000 votes out of over 114,000 cast. That's one-eleventh the prior margin, and that's fighting against one of the most corrupt state Republican parties in the land. ...Indeed, this is probably the only district in Ohio in which Paul would've lost.

Let's see now. Democrat Hackett runs for Congress and assiduously avoids mentioning his party status throughout the campaign. Kerry-like, he supports finishing the mission in Iraq but says we never should have gone in, and says he'll go back if asked to. Hackett runs a TV commercial featuring President Bush. He declares his support for gun ownership rights. He favors tax increases but avoids mentioning it. In short, he runs as a de facto Republican and loses by a close margin in a special election where the turnout dynamics favored Hackett's upstart candidacy (and where the GOP turnout was down compared to the past two elections). This is a "Democrat victory"? The claim would make sense if Hackett had run on the national Democratic platform and had come close to pulling off a victory. Also: the claim that Hackett would have won in any other other district is ludicrous on its face. I was born and raised in Ohio's 4th congressional district, and the day a Republican loses that seat is the day you might as well leave your to-day list at home because the end of times will have begun.