Originally published at NationalJournal.com
By K. Daniel Glover
Every Tuesday, Daily Kos and The Majority Report at Air America Radio profile a new congressional candidate. They also steer readers and listeners to the ActBlue Web site to contribute to the upstart campaigns.
All of the chosen candidates have two traits in common: They are veterans, and they are Democrats. Some call them the “fighting Dems,” and these days the candidates rally under the Band of Brothers banner. Their ranks currently number 53 political soldiers from 51 districts in 23 states.
Every campaign has its engaging story lines, and the Band of Brothers is the first prominent one of 2006. In addition to Daily Kos, blogs like Blue Force and MyDD have helped push the story into major media outlets. At least one blogger is on the board of the Band of Brothers political action committee, and two other PACs — Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, and Vet PAC — also are behind the effort.
But weeks before the nation’s first primary (in Illinois on March 21), the band already has been broken: Three fighting Dems have laid down their arms. The only question now is how much staying power their comrades will have.
The most significant blow came this month when a bitter Paul Hackett withdrew from the Ohio Senate race. He blamed the Democratic establishment in Washington for undermining his candidacy in favor of fellow Democrat Sherrod Brown, currently a member of the House.
Also this month, David Ashe ended his congressional quest in Virginia’s 2nd District, opting instead for a job in the new administration of Democratic Gov. Tim Kaine. And Bryan Lentz halted his campaign in Pennsylvania’s 7th District when another veteran, Vice Adm. Joseph Sestak, decided to run.
In New York’s 29th District, meanwhile, state party leaders only recently rallied behind veteran Eric Massa, one of the organizers of the fighting Dems. They had tried to recruit businessman David Nachbar instead, but he decided not to run when concerns emerged about his party affiliation.
The Band of Brothers faced an uphill campaign climb even before such setbacks. Voters traditionally trust Republicans more when it comes to security, the battlefield where Democrats are trying to compete by touting ex-soldiers. And on paper, most of the fighting Dems are long shots for election.
Three of the incumbent Republicans they are challenging had no competitors in 2004. Seven more won 80 percent or more of the vote, and the average tally of the relevant GOP candidates that year was 67.5 percent.
In addition, four members of the Band of Brothers are repeat candidates. None of them won more than 36 percent of the vote in 2004, and one, Al Weed in Virginia’s 5th District, has to outlast fellow fighting Dem Bern Ewert just to win the right for a rematch against Rep. Virgil Goode. Democratic veterans Pete Duffy and Peter Sullivan also will compete in a primary in New Hampshire’s 1st District.
Now the loss of three candidates in days — and particularly of Hackett, a hero to Democratic bloggers and the inspiration behind the current movement — has raised new doubts about the prospects of the remaining candidates. One diarist at Daily Kos wondered: “Who is next among the remaining [53] fighting Dems to be ‘redeployed’ or shunted aside? … Hopefully, Hackett, Lentz and Ashe are the exception.”
The Band of Brothers strategy is not necessarily a bad one. “A movement is more powerful than a bunch of political campaigns,” said Erick Mullen, who has been involved since the start and now works with Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. “Being part of a movement gives voters something beyond themselves to contribute to the nation this Election Day.”
NationalJournal.com contributing editor Charlie Cook offered another good reason for the political game plan: “In the absence of a compelling, experienced elected official, going with a combat veteran is sound, helping to inoculate Democrats from damage on a historically weak spot,” he said.
But Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia added that “it only works if it is part of a much broader strategy. The party as a whole needs to be aggressive on a wide range of national security issues” and act upon missteps by President Bush. Sabato said last week’s united attack against the administration for giving a government-run company in the United Arab Emirates oversight of security at six U.S. ports was “a solid start.”
For now, most of the focus is on one fighting Dem, Tammy Duckworth in Illinois’ 6th District. She is running for the seat being vacated by GOP Rep. Henry Hyde and actually was recruited even though Christine Cegelis, who held Hyde to 56 percent of the vote in 2004, already was running.
To gain the same kind of traction, the rest of the candidates will have to hit “success metrics like cash on hand,” Mullen said. “Success breeds success. Those who make the mistake of believing that door-to-door lit drops and lawn signs alone can carry the day will be very disappointed.”
Bloggers may well be the key. They proved their fundraising prowess for Hackett in 2005 and the “Kos Dozen” in 2004, and lately, they have made a concerted effort to fill the war chest of non-vet Ciro Rodriguez in Texas.
The fighting Dems who win the bulk of their attention may be the ones in the best position to score upsets this fall. “No one knows for sure whether there will even be a Democratic wave in November, or if there is one, the size of that wave,” Sabato said. “Yet in the event, however unlikely, of a sizeable wave or tsunami, the bloggers could potentially help to position a larger number of Democratic challengers to take advantage of the circumstance.”
K. Daniel Glover 