Don't Misread OH-02 and Think MA-05

In an article called "For Republicans, A Ray of Hope" by Reid Wilson about Jim Ogonowski's campaign for Congress is an analysis of the OH-02 Schmidt vs. Hackett race that is a total miss.

An Ogonowski victory, or even a close race, could do for Republicans what Paul Hackett's narrow loss in a heavily Republican district in Ohio did for Democrats in 2005.
...
Clinton's and Pelosi's visits are timed to head off what could be a major embarrassment, and it shows Democrats have learned from previous Republican mistakes. In 2005, Ohio Congressman Rob Portman resigned to serve as United States Trade Representative, and the race to succeed him was thought to be merely a formality after the Republican primary. Still, when former State Representative Jean Schmidt won a contested and bitter GOP nomination fight, and with the support of bloggers and the netroots, Iraq war veteran Paul Hackett, a Democrat, came within four thousand votes of scoring the surprise upset.

The election was perhaps the first indication that the Republican Party was in some serious trouble, and presaged, a little over a year later, Democrats' reclamation of Congress.

The conventional wisdom about that race is that Hackett made it close because President Bush and the Iraq war were unpopular here. To hold this view of the race means you have to forget that Hackett ran as an Iraq war vet who ran ads that sounded as if he and the President were best buddies. You have to forget that Hackett shunned the word "Democrat" in his ads. He was running as a stealth candidate appearing to be as conservative as the district.

And he still lost.

Now, I'd love for Ogonowski to do well, but if he wins it will not spell impending doom for the Democrats any more than it will show growing support for the Iraq war. These things are not related in any manner.

You want to know why the Schmidt vs. Hackett race was so close? I'll tell you why: Jean Schmidt is not a very good campaigner. End of story.