Why Dean will Win the Nomination

[dkf]

From Dan Conley who is not Dean's biggest fan:

The Clincher

I think yesterday's Medicare vote essentially ended the fight for the 2004 Democratic Party Presidential nomination -- Dean now has it won. The Congressional Wing of the Democratic Party has been so thoroughly humiliated by the White House that there's no saving it.

The Democratic base was angry before, they will be furious once they find out exactly what has passed. And just like the No Child Left Behind Act, it happened because Ted Kennedy got played. How well does that reflect on John Kerry?

Dean's nomination is, first and foremost, about changing the culture of the Democratic Party and slapping our Washington leaders in the face. Apparently the Iraq War and the Dean threat wasn't enough to wake them up. Now it's too late.

More comments:
I have mixed feelings. I think Dean's internal Democratic message is absolutely right, the party's culture needs to be changed. I don't think he's the right person to do it. But he deserves credit for identifying the need to do this early.

The litany of failure of Washington Democrats in the Bush years is staggering. It includes:

* Bumbling the Florida recall
* Allowing tax cut one to pass
* Allowing "no child left behind" to pass
* Getting snookered on the Homeland Security Department
* Letting the GOP get away with no serious repercussions for Enron or WorldCom
* Allowing Cheney to get away with his secret Energy dealings
* Getting snookered on the Iraq War vote
* Allowing tax cut two to pass
* Allowing the administration to get away with shoveling Iraq reconstruction money to political cronies
* Handing over the $87 billion without further spending accountability
* Letting the GOP steal the prescription drugs issue

Nice going Tom Daschle. And really nice job, John Kerry, for not even voting on the Prescription Drugs bill. That was a true profile in courage.

-His argument is all the rest are insiders except for Clark who has not said a single thing about changing the party. Indeed Clark seems to not really BE a part of the Democratic party. If you ask me, he is more of an independent.

While some may think that is a good thing, the fact is that Republicans are beyond ruthless nowadays and if Clark is not going to motivate Dems to stand up and BE FOR SOMETHING it will be impossible to govern.

Dean and Trippi already have plans on how they are going to help fund key congressional races and add Deany manpower to take back the House. Yep it will be hard, but conceding never won anybody anything.

The Dean campaign is basically a huge effort to organize people, to motivate newbies into politics and to hopefully find some energetic smart and talented people to run for office as Democrats.

This is the only way for Dems to win back America and this is why Gerald McEntee of AFSCME was so blown away by the Dean campaign.

Dean is not content to merely win the Presidency, he is changing the rules of how politics is done. Indeed, Dean makes his own rules and that is what Clark has never shown me he can do. Clark had to ask his wife for permission to run. Dean says he doesn't intend to drag his wife into politics and that is ok with him.

Clark plays within the system. Dean goes outside the system. That is a big difference between the two.

Folks, if you want innovation and new ways of thinking, Dean is the way to go.

[coralrf]

1. Let me ask...

Clark had to ask his wife for permission to run. Dean says he doesn't intend to drag his wife into politics and that is ok with him.

Ever heard of family values?

How did Clark 'drag his wife into politics'?

You make Dean look like a big asshole. I have grown so sick of spin and bullshit. I think Dean has as well. You might ask the man if he wants you to speak for him. I think you might be surprised at his answer.

[dkf]

13. Dean's own words on his family and politics

In an interview last month, before his brother's remains were located in central Laos by U.S. military officials, Dean said he had no intention of unnecessarily drawing his family into his campaign. While other candidates often travel with their young children or rely on their adult children to serve as surrogates, Dean's have largely been kept out of sight.

"They are who they are. They have to have a chance to be who they are," he said. "They cannot be props for me. They didn't sign up for this."

[CTLawGuy]

2. this hits the nail on the head!

The reason Dean is doing so well is the Democratic constituency is so angry with its un-leadership for caving constantly to Bush and not standing for anything, that they are seeking someone who will remake the party.

Dean is bringing new people into the process and if nominated will break down the party and rebuild it into an entity that is worth supporting, something that will give a coherent unified message to the masses that is opposed to the Bush* regime's. Only by doing this can we defeat Bush.

The current power structure in our party knows this and will stop at nothing to retain their power and status. That is why they savage Dean at every turn.

Dean's campaign is not about anger, it is about making people realize that they live in a DEMOCRACY where they govern themselves. He tells people they have the power to take their country back, and he is right. Only by being active and spreading the word can we defeat Bush. Dean will win becuase he can raise 200 million dollars from 2 million people giving 100 dollars. Voters will see that Dean is beholden only to the poeple, and values their opinion. They will like the decentralized nature of his campaign, and they will respond favorably.

the veils of cynicism have been yanked from the eyes of many a person already with much more to come.

[Skwmom]

5. What you fail to realize is that a lot of people are going to turn

away from Dean after they get an up close view (courtesy of Republicans and all their millions).

[CTLawGuy]

8. hahahaha

thats all I have to say to that

[mikehiggins]

3. Dan, wishing doesn't make it so

Certainly Dean may very well get the nomination. Just as certainly he may lose the general election. As to changing how politics is done, appealing to large masses of voters and challenging the established liturgy in the Democratic Party? Well, I remember hordes of kids out there being "clean for Gene" and other populist based campaigns from Goldwater to Anderson to Perot. They all lost, sometimes disastrously.

Bush has gone to Iraq, to the awe and amazement of millions. It was a lightning strike and, as phony and contrived as it was, it changes the whole complexion of the campaign. The Democrats have to unite behind one candidate who can step up to the challenge of a popular president who is making the war on terror the centerpiece of his campaign. The only candidate with anything near sufficient credentials to do that is Clark.

If he is not our candidate we will lose the election.

Even if he IS our candidate we may still lose the election.

As it stands right now it is simply our best shot at getting Bush out and saving this nation.

There will be NO rebuilding and restructuring of the Democratic Party after another four years of George Bush, and then possibly Jeb.

If we lose next November, we lose forever. There will be no reality in any claims to being a Democratic Party. This is a make or break situation and I am afraid the idealists and ideologues would rather go down in flames than compromise the purity of their visions.

We've done it before but we may not ever get a chance to do it again.

That's what is at stake.

[lancdem]

7. I wouldn't say a president with an approval rating

of 50 percent is popular, but I agree with your assertion that we need a candidate who can go toe-to-toe with Bush on the terrorism issue. And I'm afraid you're right about the Dem Party needing to win in '04 or face irrelevancy.

[Dimsdale]

12. So, the Bush "vision" will prevail?

Great! If the majority in this country want this type of neo-fascism to continue and vote this douche bag in for four more, then fuck them. They deserve what they'll get.

[shanti]

15. yes, but the problem is...

everyone else will too!

[Dimsdale]

21. They deserve it..

we don't. So, if the dimwit is elected, it's a don't-say-we-didn't-warn-you situation.

[thebigidea]

22. bwhahahah

"Bush has gone to Iraq, to the awe and amazement of millions."

I suppose you personally polled these millions for their awe and/or amazement?

[dfong63]

24. talk about wishful thinking

The Democrats have to unite behind one candidate who can step up to the challenge of a popular president who is making the war on terror the centerpiece of his campaign. The only candidate with anything near sufficient credentials to do that is Clark.

Clark has never before run for nor been elected to public office. he is no more qualified to be president than Al Sharpton. as much as Bush would like to make the race about terrorism, there are a lot more issues than that. Clark's strong suit is also Bush's strong suit. but it would make more sense to attack Bush where he's weakest, not where he's strongest. Bush is weakest on domestic issues, primarily jobs and the economy.

we need an experienced and proven electable candidate. certainly not Clark.

[Skwmom]

4. So we change the Democratic party by trying to elect a

Rockefeller Republican?

[KittyWampus]

6. I Think That's Called Irony

I'd like to point out that Clark didn't "work within the system" in Kosovo and that's why the Neo-Cons fired him.

Why won't Dean cut the Pentagon Budget? Clark would.

And if we did we could keep those middle class tax cuts that Dean wants to repeal.

[Skwmom]

9. There is so much that Clark could do for this country and the

Democratic party. He could advance progressive causes more than any other democratic candidate because of the image he projects (and the man he is). Instead, we seem hell bent on nominating a "Rockefeller Republican" who has the weakest chance of ousting Bush.

The more I see of Dean the more I see how he truly is the Democratic version of George Bush. The stupidity of the Democratic party never ceases to amaze me.

[shanti]

16. please explain

....

[MercutioATC]

18. Hehe..."Rockefeller Republican" might be a nice mantra, but it doesn't

make it true, regardless of how many times you shriek it.

Yes, we've established that Dean's not left of Kucinich...can we move on?

[SheilaT]

10. Several thoughts:

No matter who gets the nomination, this will be the dirtiest, nastiest, campaign ever. The Republicans will stop at NOTHING to retain power.

I can't be the only person so disgusted with the Democratic representatives and senators that I wonder if it really matters if any of them are re-elected next fall.

So long as we have the Electoral College system, my one vote really doesn't count, especially since I live in a state (Kansas) that is highly unlikely to give the popular vote to a Democrat in the first place.

And I'm tired of all the petty sniping at the various candidates and why they're unelectable, or the only candidate who is electable. See first point above.

[Bombtrack]

11. democrats are not responsible for tax cut 2 passing

the only one of them to vote for it was Zell Miller, dem leadership got McCain, Chafee, and collins to vote against it.

Of course half of everything else that was said were barely true talking points and wishful thinking

If Dean gets the nomination, republicans will have a garenteed hold on the whitehouse for another 4 years, and congress probably for another 12, before our convention is even held

[virtualobserver]

14. of course they are.

They should have had the courage to filibuster.

[Bombtrack]

17. all that would have done is delay it

more republicans voted against it than dems voted for it, 3 times as many. By your insane logic a minority is responsible for everything a majority does

[virtualobserver]

20. no, the democrats should not have voted for it.

I'm saying that Democrats should have stood against Bush.

Any "insane logic" to be found would be in the minds of Democrats who have enabled Bush's destructive policies.

[OHdem10]

19. 3 Democrats voted for Taxcut #2 giving cover--

to the Republicans who refused to vote for it. Senator Bay,INd. Zell Miller Ga and Senator Nelson Nebraska. I do not expect anything different from Miller but there should be some principes as a guide when supporting the party. In this case all principles were flung out the door. All polls showed the public did not want the taxcut. Everyone knows it baloons the deficit and will eventually lead to having to cut programs such as Medicare, SS etc. Without these three Democrats, the bil would not have passed.

[FrenchieCat]

23. Just call this

Why Dean will lose the election.....

Cause that's all you are going to get.....

[Clark Can WIN]

25. *

:puke: