The Media Still Doesn't Get It About Dean, but the People Do....

[slinkerwink]

Dean gathers steam; others question odds of beating Bush

By Roddie A. Burris
Knight Ridder Newspapers

BEDFORD, N.H. — Near the end of five frenzied days when Howard Dean crisscrossed the country campaigning in five states and three time zones, a New Hampshire radio host asked Dean a bottom-line question: "How do you respond to the criticism (that) you might do well in the primaries, but in the general campaign they'll eat you for lunch?" As the clear poll leader in New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation primary Jan. 27, and locked in a statistical dead heat with Rep. Dick Gephardt, D-Mo., in Iowa, where Democrats vote in caucuses Jan. 19, Dean hears that question increasingly, yet more from the media than from voters. Dean is moving fast to solidify his front-runner status. Enthusiastic crowds greet him at every stop. Both avid supporters and undecided voters are more likely to ask Dean about the war in Iraq, education, health care or the economy than whether he can win.

<snip>

People at Dean rallies voice no doubt. "I never saw anything like this, and it's only the primaries," said Cindy Montgomery, a professor at George Washington University in Washington, D.C. She was speaking of the excitement Dean generates among true believers as she attended a raucous party celebrating Dean's 55th birthday this month at a D.C. restaurant. "He's a decent man who can do a better job" as president, said Chris Foster of Germantown, Md. "That's all we want, and that's what we're going to get. He's not Moses come down from the mountaintop. He's a decent man."

<snip>

While many analysts say that Dean's drive for his party's nomination may be unstoppable if he wins Iowa and New Hampshire in January, Dean says the nominee won't be determined until the March 2 Super Primary, when 10 states vote, including California, New York, Georgia and Ohio. "The critical battleground in this election is going to be the state of Ohio," he said.


link can be found here at:http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001803936_dean30.html

[caledesi]

1. Dean has proven everyone wrong before and he will do it

again next year when he wins the presidency.

[slinkerwink]

3. yep...they also were the same ones that said Dean couldn't get

re-elected after he signed the civil unions bill in Vermont, but he did get reelected anyway.

[KittyWampus]

11. Dean Narrowly Got Reelected

and the Legislature went Republican.

Dean got 50.5% and if it'd been 50% the new Republican Legislature would have settled the matter.

Dean's Republican opponent, Ruth Dwyer, was an obnoxious and unpopular candidate.

[slinkerwink]

12. the legislature didn't go republican....

Dean also ran against an Independent....

[caledesi]

13. And your point? nt

[KittyWampus]

23. Dean's Reeelection Had More To Do With His GOP Opponent

than what Vermonters thought of his actual record.

They didn't have much of an alternative.

If the GOP had the sense to run a moderate or centrist candidate, or at least one that could project such an image, Dean may very well have lost.

[slinkerwink]

26. He had ONE other opponent to run against....

It was an Independent.

[RetroLounge]

60. Careful, you may confuse her with facts...

eom

[slinkerwink]

62. facts? what's a fact?

care to explain? ;-) j/k

[KittyWampus]

68. Who Was Ruth Dwyer? Here Are Links Regarding 2000 In Vermont

Information posted on internet December 2000:

But for Vermont-NEA’s effort and support for Howard Dean, Ruth Dwyer could be governor. Dean won
re-election by a percentage barely more than the critical 50 percent required to avoid the Governor being
selected by the Legislature, with a Republican-dominated House of Representatives.

The Association decided in August to recommend Howard Dean rather than Anthony Pollina in the
Governor’s race. The decision was based both on Governor Dean’s record and on concern that, if he did
not receive an outright majority in November, a majority of legislators might elect Ruth Dwyer in January.
That concern about a legislative election of Ruth Dwyer was shared by a substantial majority of
Association members and their elected representatives on the Vermont-NEA Board of Directors — and it
proved to be well founded.

http://www.vtnea.org/Dec00.htm
...........................................................................................................................................................................
Dean, who at that time could attract
donations more readily than
challengers for his job, said he signed
the law "even though I knew it was
going to be to my own disadvantage."
But when it came time for Dean to run
for reelection in 2000, he rejected
public financing and busted the
spending cap by 300 percent.

The governor cited several reasons for
the turnabout, including a court ruling
that enabled his Republican opponent,
Ruth Dwyer, to take large
contributions from the national party,
as well as his need to offset money
funneled to Dwyer from what he called
an "anti-homosexuality" lobby intent
on unseating him because of his
support for civil unions.

[Dudley_DUright]

24. Dean's ultimate opponent this time,

George W. Bush, is an obnoxious and unpopular candidate. History repeats!

[Rose Siding]

2. The very same pundits

and "experts" that say Dean can't win are the ones saying he couldn't win the nomination a few months ago. No creds there, but the media fingers on our election are consistent.

[slinkerwink]

6. I agree.....

why are they still using old political convention in this election because every time they try to use it, Dean ends up proving them wrong.

[wtmusic]

4. Damn, they're right. I think we should give up on Dean

and listen to the experts at the DLC!!

:eyes:

[slinkerwink]

7. lol, the DLC is so passe now

;-)

[caledesi]

75. SLW - yeah, the DLC is so very "last century." LOL! nt

[JamesA1102]

5. Bush vs. Dean

Bush vs. Dean

Bush was born into a rich northeastern Republican family.
Dean was born into a rich northeastern Republican family.

Bush was a draftdodger during Vietnam.
Dean was a draftdodger during Vietnam.

Bush is a lousy father with no control over his daughters.
Dean is a lousy father with no control over his son.

Bush was a carpetbagger to the state that elected him Governor.
Dean was a carpetbagger to the state that elected him Governor.

While he was Governor, Bush supported cutbacks of entitlement programs while allowing corporate interests free reign in his state.
While he was Governor, Dean supported cutbacks of entitlement programs while allowing corporate interests free reign in his state.

Bush gets an A rating from the NRA.
Dean gets an A rating from the NRA.

Bush repeatedly lied about his accomplishments as Governor.
Dean repeatedly lied about his accomplishments as Governor.

Bush twists and lies about his opponents positions.
Dean twists and lies about his opponents positions.

Bush is a political opportunist who cynically used the war with Iraq to boost his poll ratings.
Dean is a political opportunist who cynically used opposition to the war with Iraq to boost his poll ratings.

Bush refuses public campaign financing limits.
Dean refuses public campaign financing limits.

Bush campaigns pretending to be less to the right than he really is.
Dean campaigns pretending to be less to the right than he really is.

[slinkerwink]

8. boom--boom-booom

1) Dean definitely was born into a rich Republican family, but he turned Democrat when he was 21, and gave up a life at Wall Street to be a doctor.

2)Dean did not dodge the draft---he was called in for a physical, brought his own records, and the army turned him down because of an actual back problem.

3)Dean is not a lousy father---teenagers are teenagers. He let his son face court, and definitely grounded his son. His daughter is now at Yale. Dean was what you'd call a "hockey dad" by attending his children's games. Dean skipped a forum to attend Parent Weekend at Yale.

4)He wasn't elected Governor at first---he was lieutenant governor with his own medical practice until the Governor died of a heart attack. Next you'll be saying Dean caused the heart attack, right? :eyes:

5)Corporate interests did not have free reign in his state---he made them adhere to environmental regulations like there was in the Kyoto treaty that Bush didn't pass. Dean created Dr.Dynosaur, Success by Six, and had health coverage for 96% of children under eighteen, and left Vermont with a ten million surplus when other states were in the red.

6)Dean doesn't have an A from the NRA for his presidential election because he's apparently too liberal for them.

7)So it's unfair for Dean to call Bush out on his lies?

8)At the time they went to war in Iraq, it was political suicide to be against the war. He was against the war consistently, and the others weren't against the war. Times now have changed, and Dean was right in opposing the war---that's why he's got thousands of people on his side.

9)Dean refused campaign financing limits because Bush refused campaign financing limits. If Dean hadn't done so, he'd have ended up being slaughtered by Bush.

10) I was never under the impression that Dean was really a liberal, I along with other supporters know that he's fiscally conservative, and socially liberal---which makes him a centrist.

[JamesA1102]

15. Dean vs. Bush

Gov. Dean and Bush are just two sides of the same coin. As Democrats we should uphold some principles. 'Anyone but Bush' is not good enough if that anyone has the same deficit of character as Bush.
On several occasions and on several issues Gov. Dean has demonstrated that deficit of character.
On campaign finance, Dean said months ago he would attack any Democrat that opted out of the public financing system. http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20030815_1771.html
Now the opportunistic Gov. Dean has decided to opt of the the public financing system himself. We don't need another President who says one thing and does another. The public finance system was put in place in response to the excesses of the Nixon campaign in the Watergate scandal. The GOP have been trying to get rid of it for years. Now Dean has done their bidding for them. And this is not Dean's first attack on campaign finance reform. As Governor of Vermont, he tried to get rid of public financing and open the door to large special interests. http://www.vpirg.org/campaigns/finance Reform/deangutcfr.html
And it is important to note where Dean's money is coming from. Like Bradley and Nader in 2000, much of Dean's funds are coming from Republican donors. This was confirmed in Newsweek's August profile of Dean. One of these pro-Dean Republicans, CK Rairden, in an article entitled "Should Republicans Help Nominate Howard Dean?" in the Washington Dispatch, suggests:
"Republicans are already voting with their wallets for Howard Dean, logging on to Dean’s official Web Site and donating various sums of cash to the left wing candidate’s primary campaign. They want Dean to win the Democrat primary. The real question now emerges. Will rank and file Republicans cross over and vote in the Democrat Primary elections to help get Dean the nomination?
"Rank and file Republicans should crash the Democrats 2004 primary election and help elect the GOP dream opposition candidate, Howard Dean and let the landslide re-election of President George W. Bush begin."
However, campaign finance is not Dean's first flip-flop or first misrepresentation of his record or positions. He has run a negative campaign attacking other Dems and picking up the late Paul Wellstone's line of 'representing the Democratic wing of the Democratic party'. As many that have examined his record as Governor of Vermont have noted, Dean is much further to the right than he presents himself.
http://www.counterpunch.com/colby02222003.html
http://www.uexpress.com/tedrall/?uc_full_date=20030812
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=& contentId=A15326-2003Aug2¬Found=true
He has no appeal to the ethnic minorities needed for a Democratic victory because his views, again, are more in line with Bush and the GOP. On CNN Dean made these comments in a 1995 interview:
GOV. HOWARD DEAN (D), VERMONT: You know, I think we ought to look at affirmative action programs based not on race, but on class, and opportunity to participate.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You sound like Newt Gingrich.
DEAN: People from working class families who have not had the educational opportunities, regardless about whether they're white or black, ought to be given some kind of opportunity. And that may mean doing something for those groups of people.
But I don't think it ought to be done by race.
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0310/29/ip.00.html
Even his big claim to fame, Gay Civil Unions, is a total fake. In 1999, the state Supreme Court unanimously decreed that gay couples were due the same legal rights of marriage as heterosexuals. Instead of taking any initiative, Dean left it to lawmakers to respond, saying loud and clear that he would not sign a bill permitting gay marriage.
The Vermont Legislature, after a prolonged and fractious debate, drafted compromise legislation, creating the "civil union" concept that allows gay partners such benefits as inheritance and hospital-visitation rights, but not the same recognition as heterosexual marriage. At the time, he was going round the state telling folks he was only doing it because the Vermont Supreme Court made him, and, instead of the usual showboating public ceremony, he signed the legislation behind closed doors.
Also, Dean's loudest claim of executive experience is in providing "free" health care to Vermont's 613,000 citizens while simultaneously balancing the state budget. As of 1998, Vermont had the third highest percentage of Medicaid recipients in America. In other words, Vermont's so-called state-provided health care comes primarily from federal taxpayers. Dean is taking credit for state-provided health care when, in fact, most of this is funded by Washington. This kind of supposed health care system has no application on the national level.
Dean is constantly saying in his campaign speeches, "Here's what we did in Vermont." (Reminiscent of Bush in 2000 referring to want he did in Texas.) Why then, on leaving office in 2003, did Howard Dean seal his gubernatorial papers for 10 years -- almost twice as long as his two predecessors did, but considerably less than the 20-year-lock he sought? Why did he determine himself, with his lawyers, what was covered by executive privilege? This is the same kind of anti-democratic scam that Dubya has pulled in sealing his gubernatorial records and his father's presidential records.
And let's not forget that Dean has built his campaign on the anti-war movement. But is Dean really a dove? He has already publicly stated that he wouldn't reduce military spending despite that we now spend more than twice of what Russia & China spend combined not counting costs for Iraq.
In his major foreign policy address to date of February 17 speech at Drake University in Iowa, Dean blasted the Bush administration’s foreign policy regarding Iraq and several other areas, but – when it came to Israel and Palestine – the former Vermont governor declared that, while the United States should become more engaged, he did not have any fundamental objections with President George W. Bush’s policies. Dean called for an end to Palestinian violence against Israeli civilians, but he did not call for a cessation of Israeli violence against Palestinian civilians. Similarly, there was no call for an end of the Israeli occupation, for Israeli compliance with UN Security Council resolutions, or a withdrawal from Israel’s illegal settlements in the occupied territories or even a freeze on the construction of new settlements.
The liberal wing of America’s Jewish community is represented in the views of Americans for Peace Now (APN), which supports negotiations with the Palestinians based upon the principle of land for peace, that is, Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories in exchange for security guarantees. The conservative wing is represented by the America-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which supports the policies of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his government’s ongoing occupation and colonization of Palestinian land seized in the 1967 war, repression of the Palestinian population, and refusal to negotiate with the Palestinian leadership.
When asked by the Jewish newspaper Forward late last year as to whether he supported APN’s perspective, Governor Dean replied "No, my view is closer to AIPAC's view."
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0226-04.htm
Also don't forget that Dean has no loyalty to the Democratic party. In 2000 he endorsed Bill Bradley who only acted as a spoiler. Unlike the other Democratic candidates, long before Al Gore bowed out last December Dean was planning to challenge him which would only serve to split the party divert the rightful nominee's attention away from focusing on attacking Bush.
Dean has been the first Democrat to attack the other Dems and continues to do so. This is not good for whoever is the eventual nominee. And on many occasions he has misstated facts as well as the positions & records of the other Dems and has been forced to apologize. Those are GOP tactics, Dems should be above that. Now he is the only candidate not to agree to back the nominee as soon as enough delegates are secured. He is vowing to fight all the way to the convention. Nothing could be worse for the Democratic party.
And Dean's followers consistently use right wing tactics. They are freepers and shills that troll around sites attacking those who dare criticize or question Dean. I've been recipient of this treatment myself as can be seen by personal attacks on me above. The Bush Republicans have several attack Web sites which put out orchestrated email messages on demand--both offensive and defensive. Dean has a similar attack site connected to his campaign on the Web, called the Dean Defense Forces (DDF).
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2003/07/268984.shtml
After the attacks they then spin and obfuscate to defend Dean from legitimate criticisms. Much like the White House explaining the 'Mission Accomplished' banner.
As Americans we deserve better of our President. As Democrats we should demand better of our nominee. We deserve a man of the character and principles of Al Gore not the moral relativism & political opportunism of George W. Bush or Howard Dean.

[FDRrocks]

35. Welcome to DU...

you're my kinda peeps... the cynical kind! (seriously!)

[Eloriel]

53. Nicholas, is that you?

LOL -- another from the Clarkie Propaganda Corps arrives (or perhaps the Kerry Korps?), all loaded to the gills with lies and distortions, fantastical twistings of the facts.

If you want me to read your scribblings, you'll have to use a few more strategically placed line breaks, which by no means guarantees I will, but it's a start.

I didn't read this one (yuck), but my eyes did catch the reference to DDF. Just so you know, it's entirely volunteer run, has no official relationship to Dean For America, and was intended to write journalists and others when the facts are distorted, incorrect, etc.

Oh -- and if you guys are now comparing Dean to Bush, you might think about whether that strategy will backfire. Dean already is attracting a lot of Independents and fed-up Republicans. You don't probably want to encourage that.

Eloriel

[JamesA1102]

66. "Nicholas, is that you?"

No my name is James not Nicholas. And for the record, I have not made up my mind yet as too which Democrat I'm going to support or vote for. But one thing I do know, I will not vote for Dean. He is just another Bush.
And thanks for proving what I said about Dean supporters having their head buried in the sand and using right wing tactics by refusing to read any of the facts I presented and by personally attacking me rather than the substance of what I said.

[RetroLounge]

61. And your candidate is?

eom

[AWD]

76. Now why would they name their candidate???

When they can just bash and run and bash and run?

[Rose Siding]

9. Actually, AWOL is more accurate of Bush

while Dean had a medical classification that said he could only serve under emergency conditions.

I hope that clears it up for you.

And Dean's position on responsible gun ownership aids in his electiblity.

Welcome to DU- usually it's a good idea try to go after the repubs with the more propagandistic of presentations. :hi:

[slinkerwink]

10. yeah, but Dean and Bush are nothing alike...

the comparisons are ludicruous.

[lastliberalintexas]

16. Oh dear Lord

You've got to be kidding me! Are you really trying to sit there with a straight face and make any kind of comparison b/w Texas and Vermont and the actions of those 2 men in their respective states while they were governor?

Vermont's a freaking Utopia compared to Texas. You can't honestly try to argue that there is *any* similarity in their actions while governing- at least not with any credibility, that is.

[slinkerwink]

20. many anti-deanites try to pull this illogical bullsh*t......

:shrug: beats me how they can tie their shoes on in the morning...

[JamesA1102]

25. Dean vs. Bush

And just like Bush sycophants bury their head in the sand to the truth about their guy, Dean sycophants do the same.

[slinkerwink]

27. oh please.......

I know Dean's record and his policy positions. I'm no sycophant---just a supporter who's not politically apathetic. I'm pretty sure that other supporters of other candidates sure wish as hell we were politically apathetic or else Dean wouldn't be the front-runner now.

[JamesA1102]

31. "oh please......."

No self respecting Democrat would support the lying Doctor unless they're sycophant with their head buried in the sand about what this guy really is. He and Bush are two sides of the same coin. And followers of both engage in the same moral relativism.

[HuckleB]

32. Interesting, JamesA1102.

Sorry, but your level of attack is a bit strange for one so new around here. I don't like to be suspicious, but something doesn't add up. Why do I suspect that you'll be voting for Bush next November?

[JamesA1102]

55. I wouldn't lower myself to vote

for either Bush or Dean.

[wildwww2]

56. Good. That does not help Bu$h. And it does not hurt Dean.

Peace
Wildman
Al Gore is My President

[HuckleB]

63. If you say so...

I have my doubts about that.

[bowens43]

70. These guys are scared to death of Dean.

Keep it up! We love watching you squirm!

[bowens43]

71. posted double - not sure how

[slinkerwink]

73. no big surprise there

;-)

[Northwind]

78. OOgah! OOgah! Alert! Alert!

"And followers of both engage in the same moral relativism."

Rand-oid alert! Rand-oid in GD! Break out the repellent!

[HuckleB]

28. You're funny.

What you really want to do is capture Dean on video singing, "If you've got the money, honey, I've got the time!"

;)

[slinkerwink]

29. lol, but there's a great clip of Dean on Letterman saying

"Caucus, Caucus, Caucus, Caucus" with Biff Henderson ;-)

[ima_sinnic]

59. of all the useless posts . . .

I'm not going to waste my time trying to undistort the drivel you've posted, but "draft dodger"? HOOEY! "lousy father"? BS! let me guess mr 7-poster--you support Kerry? or, more likely, Bush?

[Racenut20]

14. Eugene McCarthy, George McGovern

Both drew large enthusiastic crowds wherever they went. Were fooled by it. Nixon in 60, drew big crowds in North Carolina. Thought he could win the state and spent valuable time and money on repeat trips.

It is all very deceptive. Sometimes even the candidates beleive what they want to believe.

There was only one pollster at this stage, who gave Clinton a chance in 92.

[jsw_81]

19. Crowds

You're absolutely right about large crowds being deceptive. Walter Mondale had GIGANTIC crowds in the days leading up to the 1984 election, but he ended up losing 49 states.

But I think the Dean phenomenon is different. He's not just getting big crowds, he's also raising a ton of money (more than Bill Clinton raised) and attracting people to these "meet up" events from coast to coast, even in some rural areas that aren't exactly Democratic strongholds. And Trippi, Dean's campaign manager, is an absolute genius. There was an article about him in The New Republic a few days ago that was really amazing. We are very lucky to have him on our side, believe me.

[slinkerwink]

21. that's why Dean is different from McGovern.

[Lefty48197]

17. This has turned into the most informative Dean post I've seen yet

thanks to all who have contributed.

[slinkerwink]

18. no problem

:toast:

[OKNancy]

22. Dean's a smart man

and he is right....the nominee won't be known until March 2nd.

Good luck to all who are running!

[Zomby Woof]

30. The Seattle Times

Might as well be citing a right-wing source (against DU rules), that paper endorsed Bush in 2000, and probably will again.

With George Will defending Dean, and now the Seattle Times, I'd be wary of supporting Dean. Wait, I already am!

[slinkerwink]

34. ha

please don't be wary.......*inserts Dean cultist tone* You'll find the grass is greener on the other side of the fence.......and that we don't drink coffee over there, only CHAI........

[Zomby Woof]

33. I am of "the people"

Because I don't support Dean, does that mean I don't "get him" either?

See what I meant last night when I said nothing discourages supporting Dean like his own supporters? They will be his ultimate undoing - not the media, not the other candidates' supporters, not even the Repubs, but his own people! There is an air of elitism when it is implied those who dissent about a candidate just 'don't get it', even if that criticism is levelled at the media (which I will agree, can be obtuse).

Slinkerwink, I KNOW you know better. :-)

[FDRrocks]

36. I agree on every point Zomby..

[HuckleB]

37. Hmm.

May I point out that you're may be acting elitist in your accusation of elitism? I dunno. I always find that argument weird. "I don't like the candidate, because some of his or her supporters are annoying." Hmm. I doubt that there's a candidate that I'd ever be able to vote for, if I followed that law of the land.

[FDRrocks]

38. Did he say that is why he didn't support Dean?

"I don't like the candidate, because some of his or her supporters are annoying."

[HuckleB]

39. Thanks for the semantics.

My point still stands.

----------

On edit, the quote is:

"I said nothing discourages supporting Dean like his own supporters? They will be his ultimate undoing..."

What does that say about current undecided voters? That they will all turn away from Dean because some of his current supporters are annoying? Sorry, I'd like to give folks a bit more credit than that. I'd certainly like to give myself more credit than that. Wouldn't you?

[FDRrocks]

40. Actually...

2/3 of your post focused on that issue (i.e. not Semantics)... I find it completely tears your point to shit. And I get no other point. And I find elitism on all sides, btw.

edit: BTW that is his analysis... which I find true to myself... but not outside of liberals who read DU.

[HuckleB]

41. OK.

Exactly how does it tear my point apart, especially since the semantics are incredibly slight? And what is the point of it all if everyone's elitist, as you say? Why agree with the original post without offering that caveat, if that's really what you think?

[FDRrocks]

43. I didn't say everyone is elitist....

but then... instead of talking about a point, beyond that, why not tell me what it is.

But you would probably just consider this semantics... and if you do... don't bother replying, I won't bother myself to read it.

[HuckleB]

49. Hmm.

I guess it wasn't just semantics (Well, except for you bit about you "not saying everyone is elitist," that is). You're just playing good old-fashioned Internet chat games. Oh well. Best of luck to you.

[FDRrocks]

50. If I find homeless people...

in every city... is everyone homeless? Please, explain to me where I said what you claim.

What games am I playing? Semantics? Ha.

[HuckleB]

51. You're funny.

I noted the semantical difference existed. It didn't really change the content of the conversation. You still find elitism amidst every candidate's supporters. That's the real point, isn't it? Why drag the conversation down by going overboard at every opportunity? It doesn't promote conversation in the least.

Good night.

[FDRrocks]

52. Yea good night to you...

but where did I go overboard? I didn't mean in scale... but in use and implication. Jesus.

[sangh0]

64. Crying "Semantics" is the cheapest shot there is

The word "semantics" refers to the meaning of the words we use. Only the ignorant and/or deceitful could argue that the meaning of the words we use is irrelevant or distracting.

[Zomby Woof]

44. what I really said

I don't like the candidate because of his stands, but his supporters deter many from even looking that far. Who wants to be associated with overbearing evangelical types who shout down any form of questioning??? I don't, and neither do most sensible people.

[FDRrocks]

45. I suspected as much...

and tried to defend that stance, as I find it true to myself. Well said, in the original post, btw.

[HuckleB]

47. That's what you said in this post.

It's not what you said originally, however. But thanks for clarifying your position. Again, I will note that there is no candidate without overbearing supporters who shout others down at every turn. I've been reading here and other places for far too long to not note that much.

[bpilgrim]

57. sounds like you are describing most partisans

i doubt dean has a lock on the market...

if we are looking soely at the issues kucinich is 'my man'

but dean is my second choice and i like how he is harnessing the passions of the people and running a truely populous campaign at the perfect time to do so.

the excitement is certainly overflowing at times but certainly welcome :bounce:

usually i don't participate in canidate nit-pic threads because of the atmosphere we all deplore but to try and pin it on one group is silly and a fine example of the negative atmosphere generated no matter who you support.

:hi:

peace

[Zomby Woof]

42. to clarify

I made up my mind about Dean based on his stands on the issues. But I know that many people on the fence who can, and will, be put off by the antics of some (key word: some) of his supporters. It is unfortunate, but inevitable. We don't all do our homework.

I trust most undecideds will look at Dean for the ISSUES, and not the personality, but don't discount its influence, right or wrong. I do take shots at his persona, because it is part of the package, because we don't just vote for soundbites and policy points either - and I have to ask, "Can we do better to beat Bush?" It is a valid question, and I don't give a goddamn who you support. It's valid.

Many Christians are Christian despite the behavior of some evangelists. They look at the message instead of the messenger. (I am not a Christian, for purposes of disclosure and fair debate). But there's something to be said for a messenger that makes the message more palatable, and many Dean supporters won't win potential new supporters, which could be unfair to Dean, because like all candidates, he should have his message listened to first before one makes up their mind.

[HuckleB]

46. Your point is taken, as far as it goes.

But it's a point that doesn't end with some Dean supporters. No candidate is without the holier-than-thou converts who kill as many votes as they garner at every turn. People get carried away. It's a part of the process, though it's strange how we repeat it every few years.

As far as putting up the candidate with the best shot at beating Bush, I think about that every day. Never said I didn't.

Never said I did. Well, never to you. But I definitely never said I didn't.

Good night.

[paulk]

72. You CAN make the argument that a candidate's supporter's

are a reflection of the candidate. The behavior of a candidate's supporters might make one take a closer look at that candidate, especially if that behavior is percieved negatively.

That was the case with me, at least. There is a large group of Dean supporters on this board whose responses to criticisms of Dean made me go back and investigate him more closely.

That investigation led me to oppose Howard Dean, because I came to understand that I disagreed with him on several fundamental political issues.

[PVnRT]

67. So...ok....

Then, what are supporters supposed to be? Depressed, defeatist, and finding any way possible to discredit their horse? I'm a bit confused, as this accusation seems to be leveled often at Dean supporters, yet I see supporters of other candidates say similar things.

[slinkerwink]

69. also, being called a Dean cultist doesn't help matters much.

:frown: How come when Dean supporters are enthusiastic, and ready to work their butt off for Dean, that we're called cultists?

[Adjoran]

48. What polls gave Clinton a chance in November 1991?

None that I ever saw.

As late as May of '92, he was running a poor third to Perot and Bush I. The media was reporting rumblings of dissatisfaction with the Democratic Party, wondering if they "had made a big mistake" in nominating Clinton (remember most of the heavyweights declined to run against GHWB because of his high approval ratings in early '91).

The polls on the general election are virtually meaningless at this stage.

We do know we have an uphill fight. It was a 50-50 election last time, and Bush now has the advantages of incumbency, and will probably be helped by a recovering economy. This gives him an edge in states he lost narrowly last time, like Wisconsin, Iowa, and New Mexico.

Democrats need to concentrate on holding those states and the Pacific northwest, and trying to win a close state lost in '00, perhaps Florida or Ohio. Missouri might come into play if Gephardt is on the ticket. Louisiana should be in play for any Democrat, given recent statewide elections.

I've seen some speculation that Dean might pick Graham if he wins the nomination, hoping for help in Florida. I think that overestimates Graham's influence. He could have easily been reelected to the Senate, but he wasn't considered Presidential material by many in his own state. A better pick would be Bill Richardson, who would shore up NM and, being Hispanic, could easily tip the balance in Florida. Gephardt would also be a strong pick, for party unity, Washington experience, and Missouri.

Clark would need someone with political experience that could help bring in a key state. Richardson or Gephardt seem to be the best possibilities. While a Clark-Dean (or vice-versa) ticket would be a dream to many, neither has the Capitol Hill connections to help the new Administration succeed, and they would really be appealing to the many of the same voters.

If Gephardt wins, either Dean or Richardson would be his best bet. Dean for party unity, Richardson for NM and a chance at Florida. I know Gephardt's war vote isn't popular around here, but it would take the security issue, which traditionally favors the repubs, off the table and turn the election back to the economy, a Democratic strength.

Richardson would be a natural choice for Kerry, too, if the Senator turns things around.

[cthrumatrix]

54. the media gets it....it's jsut they have been told to "limit Dean"

therefore anybody the media is trying to bring down ...you have to ask why...what are they afraid of?

Dean is not bought and paif for like the others and speaks his mind. Let's see him and the chimp go toe to "paw".

[CWebster]

58. The media doesn't know what to make of it

since it is something they had no part in creating. They just responded to a grassroots movement-whereas they hardly considered him a contender for the primary. Now they claim he can't win the election. What else is new?

[slinkerwink]

65. Dean's Peaked! Dean's Peaked! Dean's Peaked!

At the rate Dean has peaked so far, we should soon have a mountain peak named after Dean ;-)

[mmonk]

74. funny but

I don't see the media against Dean. :shrug:

[slinkerwink]

77. :kick: