There is lots of buzz about Democrat Paul Hackett dropping out of Ohio's Senate race.  In case you've forgotten, Hackett is the Iraq veteran who in last year's special election challenged Republican Jean Schmidt for Ohio's 2nd district seat in the U.S. House.  He received praise from Democrats and the media for his strong showing in the heavily Republican district.  Then he accepted invitations from Washington party officials to challenge the vulnerable Sen. Mike DeWine in 2006.

But Hackett's chances took a dive only two days after he announced his candidacy, when Rep. Sherrod Brown said he, too, would run for the Democratic nomination.  In his political obituary for Hackett, Markos Moulitsas makes clear:

Hackett didn't stand a chance. He had a tenth of Brown's money, and that was before party people allegedly tried to stop Hackett's donors from giving. His field operation in the special election was literally put together and implemented by Dan Lucas. Who is Dan Lucas? Sherrod Brown's campaign manager. Hackett's netroots effort in the special election was put together by Tim Tagaris. And while Tim is now at the DNC, he helped put together Brown's netroots operation.

Daniel Drezner points to today's New York Times article on Hackett and says:

 I bring this up only because Hackett was Exhibit A in the power of the Democratic Party's "netroots." He almost won last year's special election in a district where no one thought Democrats could be competitive...

[So why are you posting about this?--ed.] Because this is a pretty big slap in the face to the argument that the Democratic Party is being held hostage by its netroots base -- although the real test will be to see if Brown faces any backlash.

Steve Clemons also looks at the implications for those he calls the "Dem insurgents":

There aren't many silver bullet solutions to America's political problems broadly or to the problems in either the Democratic or Republican parties. Hackett's war service profile, near win in the last election, and general attitude about policy and politics was refreshing to a progressive grassroots constituency that wants to change the course of the Democratic Party.

Let's presume for a moment that I endorse that impulse.

To accomplish what is essentially a hijacking of the party -- or at least to wrestle away the helm of party control -- the insurgents who were behind Hackett need to have weight in a good 25-30% of other key races that Democrats are wrestling with (if not more). The 25-30% is enough inside the party to play a controlling or significant co-stakeholder role in party decision-making.

Furthermore, to win this battle for control -- some candidates, like Hackett, will have to vigorously run until the end, even if their candidacy looks doomed, or cash-strapped. It is certainly true that a slug-fest between Sherrod Brown and Paul Hackett may have harmed the Democratic Party -- and may even help Mike DeWine -- but to win a seat at the table and to chair the meeting when decisions are being made, the insurgent Dems will have to line up behind a number of candidates willing to go all the way.

One can't change the Democratic Party establishment if one remains dependent on that party's good graces and preferences. In this case, Rahm Emanuel and Co. began to choke Hackett because he wasn't playing ball the way that Rahm wanted or needed him to.

Clemons gives a very interesting analysis, but before we get sentimental about Hackett's "refreshing" campaign, let's remember this statement he made to the Columbus Dispatch:

The Republican Party has been hijacked by religious fanatics that, in my opinion, aren't a whole lot different than Osama bin Laden and a lot of other religious nuts around the world.

Maybe this is the kind of thing Clemons expects from the "Dem insurgents," but it is certainly not the type of Michael Moore rhetoric voters in Ohio are looking for.