Dean is slowly taking control of this race......

[virtualobserver]

and clearly has an edge over his Democratic opponents.

Many supporters of the others are promoting the idea that Dean can't beat Bush but their candidate can.

But even when they coordinate attacks against Dean, they are unsuccessful.

If they can't beat Dean, why would they have ANY chance against Bush.

[Romberry]

1. They wouldn't have a chance...

...if they can't even make it out of the primaries. Seems self-proving to me. :)

Seriously though, Dr. Dean is the candidate with the highest reward potential (he says his campaign will target 18-20 congressional seats and seek to take back the house) for really long coattails but also the top tier candidate with the biggest risks. The risks come more from within his own party (think "DLC") than from Dubya. If Democrats of all stripes will get behind him and his VP, this could be BIG.

Short version: Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

[virtualobserver]

3. Take back the house without Delay (Tom)......

I like the idea of a Presidential candidate trying to influence the Congressional races. Like Harry Truman said, "We can't afford another Republican congress"




Truman's Address in Charleston, West Virginia


October 1, 1948

http://www.trumanlibrary.org/publicpapers/index.php?pid=1973

-snip

The Republican bubble burst in 1929, and when it burst:

--There was no minimum wage to cushion the blow.

--There was no unemployment compensation to carry the workingman's family along.

--There was no work relief program to help people through the crisis.

--But the party of privilege was ready to carry big business through the crisis. It created the Reconstruction Finance Corporation for that purpose. The banks, the railways, the insurance companies--they got relief, but not the American people.

-unsnip

[tsipple]

18. Dean is ALREADY Working on Winning Congressional Races

He's starting to offer help downticket, and he already has a strategy to get the job done.

But don't take my word for it. Iowa Congressman Leonard Boswell, for example, is thrilled with Dean's plan and help and said so this past weekend. He wants to take back Congress.

[sangh0]

44. How can Dean help Dems

when he describes them as "Bush*-lite", and "cockroaches"?

[Bandit]

71. I guess he tells it like he sees it as compared to the

Bush-lites and cockroaches.

[sangh0]

76. And how will that help Dems?

.

[Scott Lee]

87. by outting and shedding the establishment dross

I lighter ship travels faster.

[sangh0]

88. And how will that help Dems?

Hint: I doubt a one line explanation will do the question justice.

[Ficus]

61. I've seen Boswell

make that same assertion and events for other candidates. Sorry, Boswell doesn't endorse Dean or anything like that.

[tsipple]

73. Why did Boswell speak at Dean's rally Saturday night?

I was there.

He's a Deaniac.

On edit: And that wasn't his first time by any means: click here.

[jumptheshadow]

25. I'm very skeptical

He wants to win congressional races so he starts by calling his colleagues "cockroaches?" Rest assured, if Dean is the nominee, this quote will be used in every TV ad that is run by one of our congressional opponents.

He wants to win congressional races so he has his followers out in force demonizing other Democrats, including the folks who are allied with some of the biggest Democratic donors?

He wants to win congressional seats but his supporters post on DU and concede Florida to the Republicans?

Clark, not Dean, has the biggest potential coattails in the field. He has more natural constituencies -- pragmatic liberals, Southerners, seniors, military families, and, quite possibly, minority voters. He does well with the young voters. And Clark's campaign is really starting to roll.

[tsipple]

34. No It Won't

Two reasons why it won't. One is that if Dean stands shoulder-to-shoulder with a Democratic incumbent, he'll simply say, "I'm glad the Republicans agree with everything I say. So everyone needs to vote for (Candidate X) who will help to clean up the mess in Washington."

If it's a Republican incumbent, of course they're not going to run the "cockroaches" line. If they do, Dean says, "Yeah, exactly. Republican Y sure is one of the reasons why there are so many problems in Washington."

It was a great line, and it'll help Democrats precisely because they aren't in control of Congress. Frankly it was stupid nobody else thought of doing the same thing, but I guess no one else among the Democratic candidates could.

[ShimokitaJer]

47. Is a RW spin point the best you can do?

Dean did not say "Democratic Senators are cockroaches." He compared their non-strategy against Bush to cockroaches scurrying away from a bright light. It's a condemnation of their ineffectiveness against Bush, not a commentary on their humanity. Your characterization of Dean as demonizing other Democrats is also wrong-headed. I have heard Dean speak strongly about the Democrats' failures and misguided strategy, but it is deceptive to pretend he is attacking them personally. And I certainly have heard nothing from the Dean campaign about conceding Florida (surely you aren't equating what someone on DU says with the official campaign strategy).

Maybe you're perfectly happy with our current batch of Senators' strategy of "pretend we agree with Bush and maybe somebody will vote for us." As for the rest of us, I'd say Dean's doing a pretty good way of appealing to Dems who are disappointed in politics as usual. That's why Dean's coattails include many former non-voters who were disillusioned with the Democratic field but who have found a reason to get involved again. It makes sense, then, for Dean to focus on filling Congressional seats by motivating a new batch of voters to come to the polls.

While I like Clark, the coattails you mention are all traditional voting demographics and I have difficulty seeing how they could translate into more Congressional seats. With the Dean campaign, the goal is getting more Democratic voters to the polls. With Clark's more traditional campaign, not only is his appeal to those who already vote anyway, his popularity won't necessarily translate into populartiy for Congressional Dems. The demographics you mention seem to like Clark personally because he is a Southerner, or because a military man, but they won't necessarily vote for a Congressional candidate on his say-so.

[sangh0]

50. RW spin points is what you're gonna be hearing

and you can be sure there will be no detailed explanation of the "cockroaches" comment in their commercials. I hope you're not counting on the media for an accurate portrayal of what Dean really meant.

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[slinkerwink]

58. we're soooo good at eating our own....

we must taste really tasty to ourselves, hence all this cannibalism of the front-runner...

[sangh0]

59. Huh?

If Dean is the nominee, it won't be Dems who run the ads quoting Dean's "cockroach" statement.

The goal is to help the party succeed, isn't it?

It's my goal, but the question is "Does Dean share that goal?", and his cockroach statement seems to suggest otherwise. So does his "Bush*-lite" remarks and his "spineless Dems" comments.

Maybe sometimes (though rarely) your position that we have to ferret out every Freeper talking point in order to deal with it is valid, but in this case it's completely misguided. We're not talking about Dean appealing to "swing voters" or Dean's electability here. We're talking about Dean motivating Democrats to get to the polls. Do you honestly foresee the GOP focusing their energies on running "cockroach" ads during the election to try to turn Democratic Senators away from the Dean camp?

We most certainly ARE talking about swing voters and Dean's electability as both are relevant to the issue of Dean's "coattails", which is the topic here. And yes, the GOP will use the "cockroach" statement, though they may not "focus their energies" on it. No one said they would "focus their energies" on it. (You're adding that seems tailored to create the impression that I am arguing an extreme position. It's called "argumentum ad absurdum")

Really, sangh0, I sometimes have to question what exactly it is you think you're doing here. I have rarely heard a post from you that didn't tear someone else's candidate down, usually using the right wingers talking points though you always pretend you have the "best interests" of the party at heart. If the best you can offer is a repetition of the Freeper position, why not do it at the Free Republic where people will agree with you?

SJ, now you are full of it. I challenge you to point out any post where I attack a Dem candidate other than Dean, the one candidate who is campaigning against Dems. Your comment that I use Freeper arguments is identical to Dean's "attack the critics, ignore the issue" tactics and makes your post deserving of deletion by the mods.

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jumptheshadow]

66. Dean should never...

have used the word cockroaches in the first place to describe the actions of Democratic candidates.

I have already heard the newspeople pouncing on that word.

It was a horribly impolitic statement and an awful strategic move, no matter how you spin it.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sangh0]

67. What "deceptive tactic"?

Everything I posted is either fact, or my opinion. While you repeatedly accuser me "twisting" Dean's comment, you have yet to point out where I've misportrayed anything. Instead you prefer the disingenous argument that because my statements are factual, I'm somehow using Freeper tactics and creating "division among Democrats". At the same time, you completely ignore the possibility that Dean's cockroach comment might bear some responsibility for Dem division. It's not as if it created a Kumbaya moment amongst the Dems.

But to speak about Dean's responsibility would distract from the goal of "Attack the critics, ignore the issue"

He compared the Senate Dems capitulation to Bush's agenda to cockroaches scurrying away from the light.

And it's Frepperish of me to point out that that statement might cause some Dem division without any comment from me?

He was condemning their cowardice and their motivation by political concerns over the good of the American public, cowardice that I frequently see condemned on this very board.

And Deans saying this helps Dean's "coattails"....how?

[ShimokitaJer]

75. Dean's coattails are former non-voters

His campaign is drawing out voters who did not vote in 2000, who voted Green in 2000, and who voted for Bush in 2000. He also has a large body of energetic volunteers whose activity can be coordinated and directed quickly and effectively via the internet. This makes it possible for Dean to have a significant effect in close races, and in large part it relies on motivating those who have lost their motivation. Dean has done this in part by criticizing the performance of the Democratic party over the last four years and making people believe that their actions really do make a difference. If you think his criticism of the Senate Dems' performance in campaign 2000, IWR, campaign 2002, and the $87 billion is invalid, that's your prerogative, but the majority of Dean's supporters are motivated by a desire to change the way the party works. In fact, it's a strategy that more of the nominees have begun to latch onto, with less success than Dean because of their history of embracing the status quo and caving to Bush's demands.

I apologize for my confrontational tone, and I admit that I wish Dean had chosen his words more carefully, but I continue to think that simply repeating the mantra "Dean called the Dems cockroaches" is deceptive. Dean was calling for the Congressional Dems to fulfill their duty to represent their Democratic constituents, and accusing them of cowardice for failing to do so. This is precisely the issue that has driven so many Dems away from the party, and the issue which motivates so many Dean supporters. It is not designed to appeal to the status quo, but rather to motivate Democratic voters into thinking that their actions can reverse the trend in Congress -- these are Dean's coattails.

Dean is not responsible for creating the divide between Democratic voters and the Democratic leadership. It was present when 20% of Dems voted for Bush and 4% for Nader in 2000. It was present when Congress helped Bush ignore the mass peace protests and authorized Bush to override the sole right of Congress to declare war. It was present in 2002 when Democratic voters were not motivated to go to the polls because of the Democratic strategy of clinging to Bush's issues. And it was present when Senate Dems let $87 billion for Bush's war be approved on a voice vote so they wouldn't have to be held responsible for their votes. This is not a divide between Dean and the other Dems, but between a large number of Democratic voters and the Senators they are disappointed with. Dean has found a way to motivate those voters, and this is why he will have coattails in 2004.

Yes, Dean could have been more circumspect in his choice of words, but none of his supporters thought, "Dean's right! The Dems are cockroaches! Let's vote for a Republican!" Instead, they were moved to reclaim the ideals of the party. The simplistic "Dean calls Dem Senators cockroaches" soundbite approach encourages an entirely different view: that Dean dismisses all Democratic Senators as lost causes. This is how the Republicans will try to use the quote, and this is how you are helping them to do so.

[sangh0]

78. Avoiding the question

Dean is attracting support from those groups you mention, but I don't see why you assume that they will vote Dem down the line, particularly since these are people who, for various reasons, are NOT eager to vote at all, nevermind for incumbent Dems and other career Dem politicians, particularly if they know about how Dean characterized them at various times as "cockroaches", "Bush*-lite", "spineless", etc.

I concede that Dean has awakened a great deal of enthusiasm for his own candidacy amongst people who normally aren't particularly active in politics. However, I see nothing in your response that explains why that enthusiasm will carry over to other Dems.

I continue to think that simply repeating the mantra "Dean called the Dems cockroaches" is deceptive. Dean was calling for the Congressional Dems to fulfill their duty to represent their Democratic constituents, and accusing them of cowardice for failing to do so. This is precisely the issue that has driven so many Dems away from the party, and the issue which motivates so many Dean supporters. It is not designed to appeal to the status quo, but rather to motivate Democratic voters into thinking that their actions can reverse the trend in Congress -- these are Dean's coattails.

I am not merely "repeating a mantra". I've also pointed a few of Dean's other remarks, like "Bush*-lite", etc. Since this is a discussion of Dean's coattails, what Dean has said about other Dems does seem relevant. Also, I really don't see how accusing the Dems of cowardice will lead his supporters to vote for them. Once again, it seems that you just accept the assumption that this enthusiasm for Dean will transfer over to other Dems, but you still haven't explained why these people would vote for Dems.

Dean is not responsible for creating the divide between Democratic voters and the Democratic leadership...

Dean didn't create it, but his remarks do fuel it. So why would these voters vote for Dems who:


a) helped Bush ignore the mass peace protests
b) authorized Bush to override the sole right of Congress to declare war.
c) clung to Bush's issues.
d) let $87 billion for Bush's war be approved on a voice vote so they wouldn't have to be held responsible for their votes

Dean has found a way to motivate those voters, and this is why he will have coattails in 2004.

You are "begging the question". Instead of answering the question, you just assume you are right. FYI, the question is "Why would these enthusiastic and motivated Dean voters (who support Dean because he did NONE of the above things) vote from Dems who did all of the above?"

Instead of explaining why people who will vote for Dean because they are fed up with what the Dems did will also vote for other Dems, you just assume that they will because "they are motivated"

It seems to me these people are obviously motivate to vote for Dean. Beyond that, I don't know of any evidence that suggests these people will vote for other Dems. Can you provide any evidence or reasonable explanation to support the idea that Dean has coattails?

[ShimokitaJer]

83. Okay, let's take this slowly

The practice of gerrymandering means that, in any given election, very few seats are actually up for contention. Generally, each party focuses its energy on taking just those seats, since the rest are considered safe.

The Dems need two take two Senate seats and twelve House seats in order to regain the majority in either house. This means convincing the voters in those tight elections to vote for a Democrat over the Republican who currently holds that seat.

It has been accepted wisdom, and has been borne out in polls, that the voting public is fairly evenly divided into thirds: loyal Dems, loyal Repubs, and swing voters (who vote for the candidate rather than the party, who vote for third parties, who are registered independents). Motivating these people to vote is seen as important to winning elections because the party loyal are fairly evenly divided. Non-voters can also be brought into any of the three categories by a particularly well-liked candidate.

In general, Dean's appeal has been in part to the loyal Dems, in part to the swing voters, and in part to non-voters who lean Dem. The loyal Dems will vote Democratic no matter what (like the ABB crowd), so we can assume they will vote for Dean if he recieves the nomination (if you are suggesting he will so alienate the Democratic party that loyal Democrats will turn against the party, you have gone further into Freeper territory than I imagined). The swing voters may or may not vote for a Democratic Congressperson as well as Dean. The Dem-leaning non-voters will probably vote for a Democratic Congressperson as well as Dean. Do you honestly think that those who are motivated to come to the polls to vote for Dean will be casting their Congressional votes for the Republicans? If so, then there is little I can do to convince you, and I will stop trying.

A more conventional candidate appeals primarily to the party loyal. This is great for maintaining the status quo, since you can assume support from those who have always voted Democrat, but not good for motivating those who distrust the status quo. Some votes may be pulled in from the swing category, but few of those who would not normally vote will be motivated to do so by a candidate who is much like the candidates they haven't voted for in the past.

At the same time that he brings more potential Dem voters to the polls, Dean brings in money and volunteer time that can be directed at these close contests. He has already stated his interest in doing so, which is more than can be said by any of the other candidates. Why do you interpret this as an attack on the Democratic party?

If indeed you think that Dean has so damaged Congress by using the word "cockroach" that the Democratic loyalists will turn against their party and choose not to vote or to vote Republican, then your position might make sense. You seem to assume that Dean is like Nader, forming a third party to siphon votes off the Democratic party, rather than motivating people to work for change within the party. When Nader ran, Democrats insisted he should work for reform within the party rather than joining the Greens, and this is precisely what Dean is doing. Why do you insist on viewing Dean's comments as a condemnation of the Democratic party as a whole rather than as a call for reform?

[sangh0]

84. Thanks for an explanation

and I'm glad you understand that my criticism of your prior responses was not personal, it was a request for an explanation.

The Dem-leaning non-voters will probably vote for a Democratic Congressperson as well as Dean. Do you honestly think that those who are motivated to come to the polls to vote for Dean will be casting their Congressional votes for the Republicans? If so, then there is little I can do to convince you, and I will stop trying.

No, they won't vote Repuke, but there's a strong possibility that they won't vote on those races, or vote for a third party, an idea that would be attractive to someone who thinks the Dems are cowardly. So far, you have not explained why voting Dem would be more appealing to these people than voting third party.

At the same time that he brings more potential Dem voters to the polls, Dean brings in money and volunteer time that can be directed at these close contests. He has already stated his interest in doing so, which is more than can be said by any of the other candidates. Why do you interpret this as an attack on the Democratic party?

What a shame. You could've pointed out how the money and volunteer time could improve Dean's coattails. Instead you disingenously portray me as misinterpreting Dean's appeal to non-voters as an attack on the Democratic Party. FYI, I don't think that's an attack on the Democratic Party. However, I don't see how calling Congressmembers "cockroaches", and Democratic politicians "Bush*-lite" could be considered anything BUT an attack on Democrats. When I spoke of Dean's attacks on Dems, I was referring to those remarks, and not Dean's appeal. Thanks for twisting my words.

The next time you want to misportray my opinion, could you at least quote me so I know exactly which words of mine you're twisting?

And next time, could you explain why those non-voting Dean voters are going to vote for the cowardly Dems they are upset with for the various misdeeds you listed above?

[ShimokitaJer]

93. I give up

When there are fundamental problems with an organization of which you are a member, there are several ways you can react. You can deny there are any problems, like the GOP members who continue to cling to Bush policy that goes against all Republican wisdom. You can cling to the organization and reaffirm your loyalty by attacking those who point out the flaws, reducing the issue to "with us or against us." Or you can work to change those problems.

I view Dean's campaign and his rhetoric as falling firmly in the third category. It seems that you view his comments as attacks not on Democratic strategy or on problems within the party, but on the Democratic party itself. You equate Democratic Senators or Democratic candidates with the Democratic party as a whole and interpret attacks on the actions of individuals as attacks on the whole. You can't imagine that anyone would vote for a man who dares to point these things out, suggesting that those who vote for Dean do so because they secretly despise everything about the Democratic party.

Clearly you've already made up your mind so I'm going to stop trying to convince you. This will be my last post responding to you. Doubtless, you will somehow manage to interpret this as a victory. Fortunately, I won't have to hear your comments, since I am placing you on ignore.

[sangh0]

95. You never started

You still haven't explained why those Dean supporters are going to vote for other Dems instead of for third party candidates who didn't vote for IWR, the $87billion, tax cuts for the rich, the PATRIOT Act, etc.

It seems that you view his comments as attacks not on Democratic strategy or on problems within the party, but on the Democratic party itself.

No, I don't view as an attack on Democratic voters. I view it as an attack on Democratic Congressmembers, the same people you think these people are going to vote for. Why would these Dean supporters vote for the Dem candidates Dean describes as "Bush*-lite", "spineless" and "cockroaches"?

Instead of explaining that, you've just continued your attempts to discredit me by twisting my words. For example:

You can't imagine that anyone would vote for a man who dares to point these things out, suggesting that those who vote for Dean do so because they secretly despise everything about the Democratic party.

And where have I said that?

It's not about whether or not they'll vote for Dean. It's about whether they will vote for other Dems. You claim they will, but whenever I ask you to explain why, you respond by twisting my words.

Clearly you've already made up your mind so I'm going to stop trying to convince you.

In the absence of any explanation from you, I'd say it's you who have the closed mind.

[paulk]

82. I hope all those new voters will be enough to carry Dean

to the presidency.

I also hope they will be enough to replace the Democratic voters Dean's divisive campaign has alienated. Running against your own party as an outsider doesn't seem to me a very smart long term strategy. I know that if Dean wins the nomination my support for him will be lukewarm, at best.

My support will be lukewarm for another reason - issues. You talk about Dean's campaign and his coattails of dissaffected voters. This is not a good enough reason, I feel, to support a candidate. When I run down the list of issues, Howard Dean is to the right of me on almost every single one. Sometimes far to the right.

Why should I, a liberal Democrat, support Howard Dean? Because you think he can beat Bush? There are other candidates whose positions on the issues are far closer to mine who can beat Bush.

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sangh0]

85. more "attack the critics, ignore the issue"

from another Dean supporter.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sangh0]

90. More "Attack the critics, ignore the issue"

that we have come to expect from Dean and his supporters.

[jumptheshadow]

64. RW talking points? LOL

Nobody has ever accused me of that before. Congratulations, this is a first. The use of the word "cockroaches" to describe Democratic officeholders was extremely ill-advised. The Republicans never put statements into context -- why give them an easy lob like the word "cockroaches?" And why use that word to describe the very people you to whom you are professing your erstwhile support, and to whom you will have to turn to for legislative support if you manage to unite the party, win the swing states and get yourself elected?

"Cockroaches" is a polarizing word that will always be spun by the other side. It's not a word used by somebody who has the talent to heal the poisonous damage done by Bushco overseas. It's not a word used by a leader who will help elect Democrats of all ideological stripes and then work with moderate Republicans to get legislation passed.

The constant references by Dean's supporters on here to internal Democratic politics and the demonization of the DLC is just another reason to disbelieve the notion that Dean will marshal a unified Democratic party in the 2004 election. Yes, I will work and vote for him, but will the people who feel personally criticized go the extra yard for him? I don't think so.

[GreenArrow]

2. Tortoise

and Hare.

[Justice]

4. Apples and Oranges

Primary vs. General Election. Winning the General Election is the ONLY race that matters. Who can best win that race?

The country is split 50/50. The person who wins the general election must do so by peeling off some support from the "other side"

Voters will look at the known quantity versus the unknown, personality, who shares their beliefs etc, records, ability to deal with foreign leaders, war in Iraq, the economy.

Howard Dean is a former governor from the Northeast. How is he really different than Bush in 2000 (remember you are talking to a republican voter here, not to someone on DU) He supported civil unions. He has no foreign policy experience. He did not serve in the military.

Can Howard Dean peeling off enough republican voters with his profile? If you believe he can, please explain how.

[virtualobserver]

6. he is a fiscal conservative and Bush is not......

Some Republicans are appalled at the irresponsibility of Bush.

But no Republicans are needed. 52% of the voters voted for someone other than Bush last time, and many of the newly unemployed who voted for Bush will have second thoughts.

Bush and his group are incompetent to handle either the economy or the war in Iraq, and that will become increasingly evident.

Any Democrat will beat Bush.

[Justice]

8. Gonna' Be Splicing Hairs

It will be a very close race. People are being told the economy is getting better. Next year in Iraq fewer soliders will die -- and the press will call that an improvement.

I am not saying I agree with this - but know that is what is going to be scrolling across the TV screens of america. People will believe it.

The votes for the democratic nominee have to come from the "right" states for the electoral votes -- which means that the Dem nominee has to win in moderate to conservative states, in the south and the midwest.

Again, how will Dean appeal to these voters?

[virtualobserver]

17. it won't happen that way.....

Bush's domestic and foriegn policies are fundamentally unsound and it both areas it will blow up in his face.

Dean will appeal to all voters by showing them how unsound the policies are. Bush cannot defend them.....it is just that he has never had to (thanks to the enabler Dems in the Senate).....until now.

[sangh0]

45. It won't happen that way either

Seeing as how Dean's opposition to the invasion of Iraq, and his detailed reasoning for his position, I don't understand why anyone would think that an explanation from Dean is going to change people's minds when he wasn't able to do it for Iraq.

[Ripley]

10. They seem to think you need to get Smirk's base to win.

Which is crazy for any Dem to believe they can do that. And their reasons Dean can't do it (foreign affairs, no military service, civil unions)are off. Is Kerry suddenly going to run as a conservative? Dean is probably more conservative than Kerry, so if we want Bush-voters to vote Dem, why would you want a more liberal opponent?

[virtualobserver]

22. but Kerry is a gun-totin liberal.............

who writes blank checks for Bush wars.

I'm sure the right wing will choose him over Bush.

[sangh0]

46. It's not about Bush*'s base

It's about winning the votes of Independents who previously voted Repuke, but would consider voting Dem.

[slinkerwink]

13. well, he has a VERY strong fiscal conservatism streak, and he has a

good record on guns when it comes to state rights. I suggest that you go to http://atlblogs.com/republicansfordean/

[ozone_man]

26. Clinton had no military or foreign policy experience, FDR, both governors.

Take a look around you and see what the economy is really like. Its going to get much worse.

Republicans will split into the ones that don't like the way Bush is massively deficit spending and the ones that don't care or don't know what's going on. Not all Republicans are big spending war hawks. Some are moderates, libertarians, etc. Dean will pick up these folks.

On the other hand, Dean will also pick up alot more of the left, peacenik, and environmentalists than other Dems in the field. He can draw from both ends better than the others and will have a better chance of defeating Bush.

The DLC is pulling out all stops, launching Lieberman, Kerry, Clark(?), to no avail. They want to maintain their corporate power base and are threatened by a people powered campaign. But a people powered campaign is what will win this time. Time to wake up America.

[Kazak]

54. I'm of the opinion...

that it's the known quantity that fails miserably in this scenario...

[pocoloco]

5. The fat lady ain't

even close to the piano yet!!!

[virtualobserver]

7. true, but she is warming up backstage.

I'm not implying that he has it locked up, just that the "He can't beat Bush" argument is not valid, and that anyone who can't beat Dean can hardly claim that they could beat Bush.

[Justice]

9. Very Valid

How can Dean Beat Bush? In the right leaning states?

I keep asking, no one can answer....

[liberalmuse]

11. Actually...

Several people have posted figures here. Do a search. I've seen posts that hypothesize which states Dean (or the Dem candidate) should be able to win. There are several states that are borderline that could easily cross over to the Dem candidate.

[virtualobserver]

12. "It's the economy, stupid" was the slogan of the Clinton Campaign

Bush is so vulnerable on the Economy, Iraq, the Environment.....

Dean will attack Bush on every level.

[9119495]

14. Good point about how the media will sell Bush but Dean can

pull the dem states, plus a few swing states like AZ, perhaps NV, WV, and possibly NH. That means an electoral vote victory for Dean WITHOUT a southern state or a "rigth-leaning state".

[Ripley]

15. I read an article about Nevada in the paper Sunday.

It was title something like "Nevada anger unharnessed against the Patriot Act." It appears that Ashcroft is using the PA to bust strip clubs and harass homeowner's associations (old ladies). Plus there's his failed promise about Yucca Mt.

Nevada will go Dem I hear from locals.

[Punkingal]

29. Nevada will go Dem if......

the Democrats remind Nevadans about the Yucca Mountain lies told by Bush and Cheney during the 2000 election. There is just no excuse for a Dem losing Nevada this time around. All they have to do is repeat Yucca Mountain like a mantra. (I live in Vegas.)

[tsipple]

35. AND If...

...Democrats don't try to take away Nevadans' guns.

I think we're in very good political shape here.

[Stuckinthebush]

41. Sounds like Dean is up to that task!

Don't you think?

He won't scare people about guns, he will focus the anger towards Bush's failed policies and his lies about Yucca Mt.

Dean can win Nevada without breaking much of a sweat.

[slinkerwink]

43. yep, people in...

Nevada are very receptive to Dean.

[Skwmom]

65. Dean supported Bush on Yucca mountain.

Was he telling the truth then or now?

[Hawkeye-X]

77. OK. Dean is re-evaluating Yucca

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=16059

Q: As governor, you supported a plan to store the nation's waste at Yucca Mountain, Nev. Do you still think this is a good solution?

A: As governor of Vermont, it was a grand idea because it would get the waste out of Vermont. But now that I'm running for president, I've got to reassess it and see what the science looks like.

Another: from a chat session:
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/002152.html
(November 6, 2003)

Kennesaw, Ga.: Would you please tell us your views towards nuclear power? Should we build more nuclear power plants?

Howard Dean: We can not build any new nuclear power plants until we have a satisfactory way of disposing of the waste. at present a significant questions have been raised about the safety of Yucca Mountain, the disposal site in Nevada. Unless those safety questions are resolved Yucca cannot be opened and new plants must not be built.

So basically Dean did a full 180 and opposes Yucca Mountain.

[sangh0]

80. Another Dean flip-flop?

I guess it's safe to say, based on Dean's response to this question, that his entire record in VT is subject to change if his previous position was based on "what's good for VT?" (which is probably his entire record)

[Stuckinthebush]

94. That was his job, you know...

He had Vermont first and foremost in his thoughts.

I don't see that as a problem. Especially now that he says that he has to reevaluate things from a presidential perspective.

Much ado about nothing.

[sangh0]

96. It's Dean's job to flip-flop?

I guess you won't mind if he "reevaluates" his support for Civil Unions.

[59millionmorons]

16. Only if it weren't for that pesky General Clark

Your statement may have been true.

[Ripley]

19. I like your sig line.

Of course I prefer D/C. :toast:

[slinkerwink]

20. lol

:hi: good morning!

[virtualobserver]

21. I like Clark as well.......

If the face-off is between Dean and Clark, I will shed no tears.

I haven't enjoyed the General bashing from Shelton and Schwarzkopf...but it does concern me. Not that I agree with them, but I think that Clark's crediblility is undermined by their criticisms.

Has Clark dealt with this in any way?

[59millionmorons]

23. Sure did

Go read the MTP transcripts.

[Renew Deal]

24. Coordinated attacks?

Who is coordinating? There are many people here that think Dean sucks. There are many here that think that each of the others suck. I am sorry that they haven't renamed this place to Dean Underground yet. I guess he is just going to have to win an election.

[slinkerwink]

27. uh....Dean's never lost an election-----he's been elected FIVE times

and held the governership of Vermont for 11 years.....

[Renew Deal]

38. You know what I mean.

But he won 5 2 year terms. He didn't run for a 6th because there was a good chance that he wouldn't win. Then he sealed his records for more than the customary anout of time (10 years I think). He didn't want anything embarrassing coming out. I wonder what's in there.

[virtualobserver]

31. Some of Dean's opponents met for a strategy meeting

That is what I am referring to.

[Renew Deal]

36. That is pretty obscene.

I am glad that my guy isn't taking part.

[slinkerwink]

37. yeah, that's what's good about Clark so far but...

if it shapes up to be a Clark versus Dean race......I'd expect for both campaigns to pull out all the stops if they want to get the nomination.

[Renew Deal]

39. Probably

It's hard to say, but Clark has been good at not doing it yet. He also has been good at going after Bush*. So he has it in him. I guess we'll see.

[mmonk]

28. Dean....

the only possible problem I see with a Dean nomination is the question of his ability to pull enough independents and dissatisfied republicans. I see our ability to do that as our only chance at winning the presidency due to the closeness of the breakdown of republicans and democrats in America right now. Don't read that as an attack on Dean or a love of the DLC. Read it as "we have a problem getting our message accross".

[slinkerwink]

30. huh?

The latest NH poll showed that independents were strongly in favor of Dean.....

[mmonk]

42. Independents in New Hampshire

where truth (being close to Vermont) can still reach them. Not necessarily true in other areas of the country. We have independents and republicans supporting our candidate as well. Is it enough of them however?

[teevee]

32. sorry, but...

CLARK IS THE ONLY ONE WHO CAN BEAT BUSH.

[slinkerwink]

33. screaming in CAPS

Definitely doesn't help your case for Clark.

[Stuckinthebush]

40. Then I guess we need him on Dean's ticket

;)

[sangh0]

48. And Gephardt is slowly winning Iowa

the Deanies sense of inevitability is not justified by Dean's mid-teen polls.

[slinkerwink]

49. *snickers*

erm....it's seventy days away---too premature to call Gepphy a winner.

[sangh0]

51. "too premature to call Gepphy a winner"?

But not too soon to call it for Dean?

[slinkerwink]

52. mmmm.......it's still too premature in iowa.....

:eyes:

[sangh0]

still too premature in iowa to call for Gephardt

but not to soon to call in nationwide for Dean?

[slinkerwink]

63. Aren't you guys doing the same with Clark?

:shrug:

[sangh0]

69. No

I have no idea what you're talking about (as is often the case with Deanies) but I'm not even sure if I've ever posted to a Clark thread.

[slinkerwink]

70. a lot of Clarkites are prematurely saying that Clark's winning in all of

the national polls when he has a lot of ground to make up in polls from primary states....

[sangh0]

60. still too premature in iowa to call for Gephardt

but not too soon to call it nationwide for Dean?

[slinkerwink]

72. you are doing the effing same thing with Clark....

:eyes:

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AmericanDem]

55. Clark is ready to take over

Clark is ready to take away the free ride dean had since the summer. watch and see.

[slinkerwink]

56. don't be overconfident....

:nopity:

[Speck Tater]

74. You are talking about Clark Kent, right?

I can't think of anyone else named Clark who stands a chance against the big mean Dean machine.

[realFedUp]

57. kick

[AmericanDem]

89. Dean is slowly LOSING control of this race

check out the latest polls.

[slinkerwink]

91. the latest polls don't show any real breakthroughs...

the margin of error is -5/+5 points so, the top tier is basically in a tie with each other.

[sangh0]

92. Really? Then why do you say Dean is going to win?

.