What do ya'll think of Simon Rosenberg as DNC chair?

[RUDUing2]

http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/people/columns/intelligencer/10624/

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/12/6/112326/490

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/11/192758/09

[JI7]

1. don't know him

never heard or seen him.

mostly just seen his name mentioned on du in regards to dnc chair. but never seen him for myself.

[UdoKier]

2. I think he's not Howard Dean.

Dean's da man. He has EARNED it.

[Tacos al Carbon]

3. What has Dean done to earn it

besides running a spectacularly unsuccessful primary presidential campaign and managing to spend more money per vote than the rest of the field while never coming close to winning a significant primary? How does Dean's national record stack up against those who have been working with and for the Democratic Party nationally for decades?

He couldn't get close to getting himself into the general election in spite of having more money and grass roots support than anyone else and he couldn't mobilize his support to put Kerry over the top. How, exactly, has he earned it any more than Clark or Edwards or Kucinich or anyone else (I still remember all of the lies that Dean told about Kucinich during the primaries while trying to prop up his anti-war credentials).

[UdoKier]

4. The media took him out and you know it.

It was the "Yee-ha!" heard round the world a thousand times. He could have been a real contender had he not been assassinated by the media. And his fundraising was remarkable no matter how you look at it.

And I don't recall him ever lying about Kucinich. I was a Kucinich supporter and donor as well as a Dean donor, and don't recall any such "lies".

And didn't you just get through saying that Dean was a "fringe" candidate? If so, then what the hell was poor "Department of Peace" Dennis?

Nice of you to join us, by the way.

[Tacos al Carbon]

5. First of all

The Scream came AFTER his spectacular loss in Iowa. He was done before the scream. That just removed any lingering doubt. Second, Dean REPEATEDLY claimed to be the only anti-war candidate running (with no qualifier of "major candidate" or "viable candidate" as his supporters later tried to claim) while Kucinich was still in the race. Hell, he did it during a debate while Kucinich was on the same stage. Kucinich supporters and people who valued the truth were justifiably outraged.

And yeah, his fundraising was great but I don't see you pushing Joe Trippi for DNC chair (though he likely deserves it more than Dean ... he did his job well).

[UdoKier]

6. Well, I would characterize that quote as more of an insulting mistake

And Trippi also helped to squander a lot of that money. I like Trippi and Dean both. It was new kind of campaign, but I think in the long run it could have won over a lot more people, especially with Clark for VP.

But enough coulda shoulda wouldas.

This is the second election in a row where liberal and populist democrats WON nationwide and DLC sellouts and whiny moderates like Daschle LOST. I think appointing Dean sends the right message because it says that we will no longer be the "bend over and take it" party.

[Tacos al Carbon]

7. It could have been considered a mistake

If he had only done it once. Sadly, that was not the case.

[eridani]

9. Dunno--maybe turning his volunteers' fundraising prowess--

--loose to help a whole bunch of down-ticket candidates and bring a bunch of new people into the party?

[cire4]

8. I could definitely live with him

Dean is still my first choice, but if not him, then Rosenberg should be the guy. He has pretty much devoted the recent years of his life to making sure the Democrats lock up the latino vote. If we get the latino vote, then the Southwest will be solid blue for the next 20 years and we won't have to worry about some of the southern states.