Is Dean's Anger Inappropriate?

[einsteins stein]

I've heard quite a bit lately of Dean's anger, mostly as if anger were inappropriate.

Well, I'm angry as well. In fact, I'm furious, and I have been furious ever since the 2000 election!

Can any Dem candidate represent the interests of Democrats without giving us some venting space? Do you actually want a candidate that isn't completely fried by the ways things have turned out in this country over the last 3 years?

Well, when Gore ran in 2000, he was often accused of not taking the fight directly to Bush, of not having enough passion to win. Now we have Dean, exhibiting the same tratis that Gore was accused oflacking, and what do i hear?

Dean is too passionate, Dean is too hungry, Dean is too angry, Dean attacks Dems, Dean is a loose canon...tomorrow, there will surely be some other complaint.

Apart from attacking Dems, and being a loose canon (which I think are bogus positions), the "negatives" that people attribute to Dean, I see as "positives."

Dean is hungry-but thats good! I like winners, and winners are hungry.

Dean is angry-but that's good! I'm angry, and every Dem I know is angry, except for a few that want to be President.

Dean is passionate-but that's the best of all! Change requires vision, and turning vision into realities takes passion and committment.

Does Dean attack Dems? Well, the only dems I ever heard being "attacked" by Dean, were Dems that have supported dangerous Republican issues, and many of them are running for a shot to lead our country! Damn good for Dean.

Is Dean a loose canon? Well, Dean is less scripted than some other candidates, lol. IMO, it adds to the charm. I guess, compared to a candidate like Joe Lieberman, a public recitation of the Phone Book might sound like it was delivered by loose canon.

If I had a choice between a heavily scripted liar, and a loose canon-plain speaker, I would choose the loose canon any day of the year.

Well, that's my 2 cents. Add a $1.48, and you still can't afford a good cup of coffee in this economy.

[Toucano]

1. Not necessarily

But it turns people off if it goes too far.

It isn't enough to make them not want to vote for Bush. They have to want to vote for Dean.

[eileen_d]

9. I agree, although I like Dean

Sometimes I wonder: what good will the anger against Bush do once Bush is gone? At some point Dean's message about what can be done RIGHT needs to be louder than what Bush* is doing wrong. I'm not saying that Dean isn't getting out a positive message (we can thank the media for stereotyping him as an angry guy). And I'm still angry too. But anger will ultimately not be a selling point for me in the primaries.

[AP]

16. It galvanizes the right as much as it galvanizes the left.

But the real problem with anger is that it leads to fascism.

I've said this hear a thousand times. FDR fought a battle against fascism abroad and at home. RW'ers in the US, like W's grandfather, tried to bring fascism to America, and they used Hitler to try to do it. Hitler was extremely frightening. Have you ever heard or seen him talk? Yikes! Well, Bush's granddaddy used the fear of Hitler to try to freak people out into accepting fascism American-style at home.

When people are scared they consent to all sorts of bullshit (giving up rights, wealth, political power to whomever asks for it without thinking twice, 'cause, at least, you don't want to die).

To fight this, FDR knew that he had to calm everyone down, and appeal to people's better insticts -- hope, not fear.

That's what the fireside chats were all about.

FDR could have tried to make people angry at Wall St, and you could have tried to use fear of Hitler to get some sort of undemocratic control over people. But he wasn't interested in power. He was interested in making Amercans healthier, wealthier and happier. He was trying to shift power to the people, not take it from them.

Had FDR done that it would have been a Pyrrhic victory for the Democrats. Either Democrats would have been no better than the fascists, or they would have been out-fascized by the Republican party in very short order.

So, yeah, I'm angry as hell. But I don't need to have an angry politician mirroring my anger. I don't need any pattern to follow. I can be angry on my own. I want a politician who'll do what FDR did, because we already know that that's how you successfully defeat fascism at home. I want a politician who appeals to best instincts of my fellow citizens, not to their worst instincts.

[bearfartinthewoods]

62. his anger appeals to those of us who are already angry.

unfortunatly, there are not enough of us to win an election.

i'm in a very repub area of PA and his anger isn't selling with the uncommiteds here. i'm almost ready to say it is having the opposite effect...almost. to win with these people he needs to be appealing
and they are not seeing that in him.

[w13rd0]

11. No, they don't...

...because many of those that will be offended wouldn't vote for a Democrat anyway. Let them want to not vote for Bush...and stay the hell home on election day...

[eileen_d]

15. Pardon me, but that's just not true.

2004 is an extreme situation where anger is certainly justified against Bush. But that doesn't mean that everyone who is angry at Bush wants an angry President. Personally, I think it's very important to get the vote out whether it's primarily "for" or "against" a candidate, but there are plenty of people from ALL parties who aren't motivated to vote unless they are inspired. And while anger inspires admiration in some people, it does not inspire others.

(Edit for badddd grammar)

[AP]

18. The 30s was an extreme situation and FDR was smart enough not to be angry

see my post above.

[not systems]

38. What about...

his attacks on the bankers. I have heard his
1932 speech on this subject and anger barely
begins to describe what his tone was.

If someone gave a speech like that today 3/4 of
the people in the US would curl up and wimper.

FDR was angry in 1932.

Onward America!

[AP]

39. Fireside chats were the OPPOSITE of making people angry.

FDR projected the image of a caring opposite, not the immage of a bitter, angry, hater.

[not systems]

42. agreed

They happened latter after he was elected.

In 1932 anger was part of what fueled the 100 days.

"Finally, in our progress toward a resumption of work we require two safeguards against a return of the evils of the old order; there must be
a strict supervision of all banking and credits and investments; there must be an end to speculation with other people’s money,
and there must be provision for an adequate but sound currency."

Note the words "evils of the old order" that sounds
right past angry to me. But his message was mixed with
lots of optimism and resolve also.

[AP]

49. Inauguration speech: "the only thing we have to fear. . .is fear itself."

I consider Franklin Delano Roosevelt to be our greatest president. Certainly he faced more challenges than any president; he grappled with the Great Depression and World War II. During his presidency he signed many of our fair labor laws, laws which have been critical to extending prosperity to the working people of this nation.

But his greatest contribution is one that cannot be measured by statistics; it is the hope and optimism he gave to the American people. He assured Americans that the nation would prevail through its darkest hours, and his steady leadership earned the belief and trust of the American people.

http://www-tech.mit.edu/V118/N67/rind.67c.html

Across every line of partisanship and ideology, people acknowledge the impact of Roosevelt's spirit on American history. When Newt Gingrich assumed the House speakership in 1995, he laid out the bipartisan case for the man who restored the confidence of a nation shattered by the Great Depression and then helped win a global war against tyranny. "The fact is," Gingrich declared, "that it was Franklin Roosevelt who gave hope to a nation that was in despair and could have slid into dictatorship."

This is the Roosevelt who told us that we had nothing to fear but fear itself, whose cigarette holder at that jaunty angle told the country that the top guy was not worried about a thing.

Rooseveltian optimism, from then on, was the country's most valuable political currency. No one spent it better or treasured it more than Ronald Reagan, who left behind the New Deal commitments of his younger days, but not his affinity for Roosevelt's political psychology.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/longterm/tours/fdr/legacy.htm

In this setting, the 1932 national election was no contest.   Herbert Hoover went into the campaign like a loser.   Franklin D. Roosevelt talked about vast social and economic reforms and Hoover protested that "the very foundations of our American system" would be imperiled if the man got in.   Roosevelt talked about a New Deal for the "forgotten man" and Hoover inveighed against dangerous new philosophies of government.   Roosevelt talked hope and bold action and Hoover was shrouded in despair.   Roosevelt talked about a new prosperity and Hoover looked longingly back on the old, the one that didn't stick.   Roosevelt won in a landslide.   It was a time for a change, and change came with staggering speed.

http://www.paulsann.org/thelawlessdecade/mornafter.html

"I am certain that my fellow Americans expect that on my induction into the Presidency I will address them with a candor and a decision which the present situation of our Nation impels. This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today. This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself-nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days."Franklin Roosevelt's First Inaugural Address," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved (italics and emphasis mine).

We Americans (the vast, vast majority of us) were scared stiff. We didn't know which end was up and had no idea of where we were going and where it would all end! To this day I am amazed that we did not have a revolution.

There was a group of Americans who considered the depression the best time ever in the history of the United States!

These were the government employees, the rich and solid old American families who had so much wealth almost nothing could wipe it out, the basic industries who employed people in the alcohol and tobacco businesses (people smoked and drank more during the depression because of anxiety), those subsidized by the federal and state governments, the high level military (Colonels and above) , the industries built on fear (fire and "life" insurance), the mortuary business where you paid for a funeral in advance, the religions and the media. The professional charities did well, quite well!

And so some people were better off in the worst depression in the known history of the world than they were during periods of prosperity!

The depression was a bonanza to many!

http://www.parida.com/govpolicy.html

[AP]

52. googling "FDR" and "anger" and I'm only coming up with fascists angry at..

FDR.

Can't find anything about FDR using anger to win elections.

[not systems]

54. I've heard the speech...

it was inspiring and at times angry in my opinion.
It would be considered outside of the bounds of the
political spectrum today to launch a direct attack
on the private financial intrests today.

I'm sure that FDR is a great candidate for secular
canonization but to believe that he was not a ruthless
fighter ready to bring hell to his ideological enemies
would be to ignore half of his greatness.

I think FDR was a political fighter, you think he was
more like a saint. If you want we can split the
difference a fighter on the side of the good guys.

Hard Times: An Oral History of the Great Depression
by Studs Terkel is probably where my ideas of FDR
come from. I see that it is online now at:

http://www.studsterkel.org/htimes.php

I think I will refresh my memories of this series.

Peace.

[AP]

69. You're really forcing the square peg into the round hole

FDR and Dean are almost the diametric opposites, in terms of how they campaign (and, even, in what the stand for -- in that last link I gave, check out the table comparing Republican and Democratic policies in the 30s).

[Toucano]

19. You've got it!

Thank you for saying it better than I did.

Remember, those independent voter's are absolutely vital in the general election. I wish it weren't so, but it is.

[Emboldened Chimp]

2. No, it's not

He's tapped into something. People are genuinely pissed off about the direction this country has taken.

[Toucano]

12. I agree.

But will that anger carry them to the polls?

I can't think of a time when it did.

I think people make "To Do" lists rather than "To Don't Lists".

Anger may get their attention, but they need a positive message to motivate them to actually show up, IMHO.

[janekat]

65. Yes - but that's only about 20% of the population - turns off the rest

[dfong63]

3. how can any right-thinking and aware person NOT be angry

... at the destruction of our country. imho if someone isn't angry by now, something's wrong with him. i'm angry and i want an angry candidate. it's not possible to be too angry.

[Demobrat]

4. If Dean's anger is inappropriate, then so is mine

and mine is not, so no.

[XanaDUer]

5. I'm angry; I don't support Dean.

Anger and Dean do not always go hand in hand.

[Pavlovs DiOgie]

8. There is no candidate that is all things to all people

And that's ok! Not everyone is looking for what Dean has to offer, and that's ok too. I wish all the candidates the best of luck, and hope that in the end we are better off because we will have beaten Bush. Like Clinton said, fall in love with a candidate now, but fall in line come November.

[XanaDUer]

10. Right.

To say that only the righteously angry support Dean, is not too helpful. You can be angry and still not support Dean.

[Nicholas_J]

41. Besides

I think its not fire in the belly, but heartburn...

Someone here provided the clue when they said that Dean always
looks like he is going to belch...

Perhaps it should be a Dean/Tums ticket.

[ModerateMiddle]

47. I've been VERY angry, and scared, too

about what this administration has been able to do. But I don't want someone to take over that's angry, I want someone who has a plan to fix it all. A *realistic* plan, that takes all the complexities and subtleties into consideration.

[MuseRider]

6. Yes he is angry

we all are. I worry a bit that he will have to spend too much time explaining something he blows off about without thinking. We all do that, goodness knows I do but for him to appear trustworthy it would do him well to control it a little better. I do like his ability to tell it like it is and to go after Bush*. He must seem trustworthy or he will not get as many votes as he needs.

[Cha]

7. I've never seen Dean angry so I don't know what ya'll are talkin'

about! I guess I just miss all the good parts!

Most People thought Dean handled ol' backstabbin' geppy well in the last debate..but I hear donna brazile said Dean has to get a hold of his anger or something to that effect. donna has an agenda..so she says that on tv and it gets repeated and if it get repeated often enough it becomes fact, no?

To me it is bogus ...but that's just MHO! :)

[SEAburb]

23. you didn't see the last debate / NT

...........

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

35. You mean "The Melt Down!" _________ ?

He's positively unstable!




lol

[stickdog]

13. Appropriate?

It's much more than appropriate. It's the only honest way to respond to the current situation.

[im4edwards]

14. all qualities that good doctors share

however it would be a big negative if he can't keep himself together should some foreign dignitary piss him off. You can bet that they are able to manage their emotions well enough to elicit responses from him.

As head of state, these are bad qualities. Did Clinton react in these ways ? Carter ? JFK ? Take your pick other head of state ? No. You use displays of anger to make points not because you're angry.

Its just not presidential to me.

[jrthin]

17. Dean's anger is appropriate...

but he needs to understand that he can strongly disagree without being strongly disagreeable.

[Dr Fate]

20. All DEM anger against Republicans is appropriate...

...disunity and hostility amongst/towards DEMS is totally inappropriate...And I am talking about ANY DEM that does this- be he a DUer or a national figure...

...All creative anger should be focused on BUSH...

[Starpass]

21. Think of Clinton's campaign against Papa

It's the economy, STUPID!....was the anger. But he was bright enough to make it more than that. He also made it, "I come from a place called Hope". We have a very similar situation now. The people are battered, tired, and becoming dispondent that there is no end in sight to the wars and money spent on wars while things are going to hell here. The candidate who can make them angry at Bush and then give them "hope"---a feeling of sunlight finally coming into a space where the Twin Towers smoldered, so to speak---will win. And, remember, Bush will be in top form trying to convey just such a message as he assures that "prosperity is right around the corner". We have to beat him to it.

[AP]

22. Clinton's campaign had no anger. I think you're really stretching it.

It's the economy, stupid, was FUNNY. They guy in the chicken suit following George around was funny. Playing the sax was funny. Answering the boxer or brief question was funny.

They guy embodied good times ahead. There was no anger at all.

[not systems]

28. Dean was jammin at the Iowa state fair.

Not bad at all on the guitar for the future president.

[im4edwards]

30. thats the beauty of it all

he could give that flash (and he did many times) but it was given for effect at the moment but at the end of the day you felt better.

Unmanaged anger is bad for a leader.

[AP]

34. A politician who sees anger should give people hope.

A politician who sees anger and tries to exploit it with anger should be ashamed.

OK, maybe that's harsh.

But, you know, I can't think of a single politician who won with anger, except Hitler, and he also used fear and the Reichstag fire to win. And none of that is anything to be proud of.

[Mz Pip]

24. It turns me off

but it seems to be working for him, so whatever.

I'm angry too, but I am not interested in living out the rest of my live in some political wasteland of anger. I just don't see it being particularly productive in the long run.

MzPip
:dem:

[Cha]

25. I'm sitting here listening to Mike Malloy and he is ranting

about condaleezavaldez..Mike gets really angry! And I love it!

Dean is fine! I want someone who is not a cold fish! And has a lot of Passion for what he is doing!

Dean said earlier that "when we become President"..he has a way of including his Supporters and making them feel so a part of this campaign! :grouphug:

[cms424]

26. you also couldn't afford

a gallon of gas.

[newyawker99]

58. Hi cms424!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[not systems]

27. Very appropriate...

I thank him for it. In the darkness of last winter
he was the only one giving voice to my frustration
with the Bush war. I also thank Kucinich for his
stand and Gephard for the "misrable failure" line
and Al Gore for his move on speech and any other
Dem who can express with energy the great disgrace
the the Bush has the nation.

Give'em hell Dean they deserve it.

The Bush is not so bad crowd lead us to disaster last
fall and I want them out of the drivers seat for 2004.

Go Dean!!!

[AP]

29. If you're frustrated, why does it help to have an angry candidate?

I don't get it. I'm angry. I want less anger in the world. I don't find it all that productive of an emotion. I'm not going to stop being angry until Bush is gone, and then I'll still be angry after that for other reasons. But, I feel that people like Gandhi, Biko, and all the best leaders, have been motivated more by hope and optimism than by anger.

[not systems]

36. People now more than ever

are motivated by fear and hate. This is dominating
our national agenda. Bush uses dark language to paint
images of fear in the mind of people. An energetic
optimism for a better world mixed with a healthy anger
at the regime is what Dean gives and people like me
respond too.

I agree that pure selfless souls like MLK and Gandhi
are the best that human kind ever produces. But
we don't have one handy I will take sides with an
angry realist who is more than ready to bring the
battle to the other side.

I'm angry and am not going to settle for a rollover.

I like all the Dems this year. Just want Bush
to get what he deserves next fall and Dean is on
the front everyday making statments on the issues
of the day. Like calling for Wolfowitz and Rummy
to resign. Props to Kerry on this also.

[AP]

40. Fear and hatred was worse in 30s, and even during red scare, and Dems

never built on the fear and anger to win. They always win with hope and optimism.

[not systems]

43. What about...

the "Iron Curtain" and the start of the coldwar
that lead to the national security state and
the rise of the MIC.

Truman definitely used fear to maintain permanent
mobilization after WWII.

I wish what you were saying was the whole story
but I think fear and loathing will be the watch
words for 2004.

I guess we are at variance over Deans optimism and
hope level. I find him very positive and uplifting.
I wish he would carry this into debates but giving
speeches he is very motivational in an empowering way.

We can agree to disagree. I like 3 parts anger
and 3 parts hope.

Some people want nothing but hope.

[AP]

50. I just read in the End of the American Era that Truman...

...used the red scare to get people to concentrate on the UN and get engaged in foreign policy, and then McCarthy picked up the flag of anti-communism and ran with it. Truman never meant to do that. He only wanted America to get engaged in international affairs again.

[not systems]

55. Yikes

Sound like he was playing with fire and we got burned bad.

I don't know enough about this to judge if Truman was
pure of motive like you describe. I do know that
anti-communism ran back farther that the post war era.

Truman is a mixed figure having droped the bomb and
governing during the start of the purges that dismantled
the american left.

It sounds like you see him as a neo-wilsonian interestingly
that is a very popular position on the neo-con right these
days. I feel that anti-isolationist zeal over the last 50
years is in part responsible for the mess we are in today.

The left has pushed humanitarian intervention and the
right has pushed neo-colonial intervention and Bush has
brought both together for a big party in Iraq.

I think things are out of balance and Dean is angry about
some of the issues that I am. He is also optimistic about
turning things around and rejoining the world as a partner
and friend not as a unilateralist bully. Which sounds
more than a bit like Truman with the UN and NATO.

[AP]

68. That wasn't my theory. It was Kupchnak (sp?) -- the author of the book

who teaches at Georgetown and worked in the Clinton administration.

[ablbodyed]

61. Yeah, but....

They didn't have to deal with the incredibly biased media, and the almost mindless public that exists now. People may be more 'educated' today but they are MUCH more stupid, and determinedly so.
I was proud of Dean and his anger. Who else expressed it when he did? I believe that the thugs in power are treasonous and should be convicted of treason. And my absolute opposition to the death penalty wavers here, to my regret.

[Guaranteed]

45. It shows there's real integrity behind what he's saying.

It's not just BS politics.
I look at Gephardt and Edwards speaking and it's like baby talk.

[AP]

51. So, you wouldn't have liked FDR, JFK, Carter and Clinton?

And you would have voted for whom? Jerry Brown? McGovern?

Appeals to hope and optimism win elections ESPECIALLY when people are scared.

[Cha]

33. Well said, ezmojason!

:toast:

[quaker bill]

31. It is quite appropriate

and long overdue. If we only had a little more of this in 2000 or 2002, it might have made a difference.

[Cha]

32. Really!

:grr:

[DrFunkenstein]

37. The Problem Is He Seems Unstable

I believe in righteous indignation. Lord knows, under Bush it is the most appropriate response. But Dean seems to lack not only self-control, but a sense of centeredness (is that a word?) that is required of a leader.

Perfect example - the last debates. He knew he was going to get a 30 second rebuttal, but he couldn't keep his shit together long enough for Gep to finish. And when he looks mad, he's looks like a father with a belt in his hand. He looked like he was going to literally kick the shit out of Gephardt. And this is the guy that's going to run the free world?

I'm glad he was anti-resolution, if not quite anti-war. But he certainly doesn't strike me as much of a pacifist, and n fact he tends to take things at a very emotional level. Not good emotional level, but out-of-control emotional level.

And finally, his months of campaigning are going to lend endless ammunition to the $250 million in ads that would be run against him. Here's a sample:

http://www.gop.org/Newsroom/RNCResearch/TLvideo2.htm

Now imagine how they are going to relentlessly pound the image of Dean as an unstable guy for months and months.

[Guaranteed]

44. "Unstable"? LOL

Oh come on man! He's not psychotic!
You are right that he looked like he was going to kick the shit out of Dean. He was frickin' pissed.
But, you know, we need someone who's going to rip Bush a new ass-hole. Bush is playing really, really nasty. So there's no room for civility here. We're going to have to pull out all the stops and fight tooth and nail for this.
We're fighting for our country here. Dean is exactly the person we need to have fighting for us. He's real, courageous, smart, and practical.

[ModerateMiddle]

48. Unstable does not equal psychotic

There are lots of choices in between, even. I don't think Dean looks unstable like he's mentally unstable, anyway. I think he looks like he can't contain his anger, and that is NOT a good thing.

[JackS124]

46. That's a load of bunk!

This "Dean is unstable" garbage is just another 'pubby talking point. You saw it last week after the debate when Peggy "Looney" Noonan and Joe "where's my intern?" Scarborough started calling Gov. Dean "a little teapot that seems ready to burst".

It's just another GOP way to try to deflect the general anger that Gov. Dean so eloquently expresses and in turn tries to marginalize him by raising nonsense points that get picked up by everey RW pundit.

[janekat]

66. Rove & Co. will really make "hay" of it. Will "Goreize" him....

After what I saw what Bush & Co. did to a stable and bland man like Gore I'm really concerned at what they'll say about Dean (and the rest of our candidates).

They'll make stuff up AND exaggerate (like they did with Gore). They'll show him saying things out of context. They'll say he's crazy, dangerous, out of control, has an anger problem. "Do you want a man like that to be President?"

They'll "twist it around" and it will "frighten" middle America.

THAT really worries me, to be honest.

[REP]

53. Why It Is Appropriate

It's appropriate because he's mad about what's been done to us and our country; as though he takes it personally. That's appealing. Lots of people are mad and feel betrayed. Having that acknowledged feels empowering, and it sure feels better than being told yet more lies.

The anger, though, doesn't seem to me to be as big a factor as some in the media make it out to be. It's not pointless, aimless anger; "I want my country back!" is more of a rallying cry than 15 Minutes of Hate. Behind the discontent at the way things are is a plan for how to do things differently, and that plan isn't full of anger; it's full of hope.

A candidate who hates FuckMonkey* as much as I do got my attention; an intelligent candidate with a smart campaign and good ideas kept it. In other words, I came for the anger and stayed for the man.

[einsteins stein]

56. Boom!

This is exactly where I am coming from in regards to Dean!

I came for the anger. Everywhere else I looked, I heard "Get Over It!"

I looked to Dean, and saw someone I understood. I also saw someone who was ready to fight Bush, tooth and nail.

Every demonstration of passion I see from Dean is a warning to Bush. "Look here, Bush, try to play with me like you played with Al Gore, and I'll give back as good as I take!"

But if that were the only thing Dean had, he wouldn't have my vote. He also has compassion. How could he not, with all his medical training?

Dean has a tight wallet, and we are gonna need that bigtime when the Shrub gets through with our economy.

Dean can play the blues, and you can't play the blues unless you've felt the blues, and you can't feel the blues if you've been born with that silver spoon. I know this is silly, but as a musician, it speaks to me :-)

Dean has ideas on all the issues, and they are well thought out ideas, that can be practically applied. Not pie in the sky laundry lists of handouts to special interests.

Dean is anti-war on Iraq, but not a pacifist. I do not want a pacifist! I want a man who knows when fight, and when to wait. There are things worth fighting for, and worth waiting for. I want somone who can do either, and at the appropriate time.

Dean is running a bottom up campaign. All the power and drive comes from the people who support him. And do they ever support him. Right now, It looks like Dean will pass his $15 million mark before Tuesday night.

I'm not saying that Dean is the only candidate that can beat Bush, but I believe that he can beat Bush, and that he can right the wrong of 2000, and that he can take our country in the right direction.

Dean's anger gave me hope for 2004. We are not fighting Roosevelt's fight, Truman's fight, Clinton's fight, or even Al Gore's fight!

We are fighting Bush, a man we all believe to be a criminal cheater, a liar, and a fraud. A man who has stolen office, and will hold office by any means. A man who sits before a country that is asleep with complacency and apathy!

Howard Dean, with all his appropriate anger, can wake up Americans! He has proven he can, and continues to prove it with every donation he receives. Dean's anger and passion are only small part of the total package of this candidate, but they are parts that should not be minimized in importance. Dean's anger and passion can jumpstart America's democratic heart, destroy apathy, and dissolve complaceny.

Those are things worth fighting for.

[noiretextatique]

57. it's ABOUT TIME democrats GET ANGRY!!!!

this "nice" shit has gotten them exactly NOWHERE. this false "civility" BS doesn't work. anger is a TOOL...democrats should USE IT!!!!!!!!!!! and use it wisely.

[ablbodyed]

64. That's right...

because we have ONLY ONE CHANCE LEFT!!!!!!!!!! If the thugs win this election than darkness will truly fall on this country and the world. The only way we will be able to express anger is through a violent rebellion, and that will cost lives. We are surely at a crossroads in world history. Rightous anger may be all we have to save ourselves, or we may have to arm ourselves and go down fighting. Too dismal an evaluation of the future? I FERVENTLY hope so.

[janekat]

67. But it only appeals to about 20% of the population....

[noiretextatique]

70. how do YOU know?

passion...emotion, including anger, is appealing. it's human...and it's about time we had some HUMANS in washington. who wants another mealy-mouthed robot, playing this pathetic "civility" game...the one that enables bush, inc? the one that enable katherine harris and jeb bush? people WERE disenfranchised illegally and unfairly in florida!!! the scotus decision was bogus!!! "i strongly disgree" as a response WAS and IS DISGRACEFUL.

[janekat]

75. What is the "strongly disgree as a response"???

I'm not sure what that is referring to... Is it in this thread?

[einsteins stein]

72. Where do you get those numbers?

not attacking you, just wondering.

[janekat]

74. 20% is the Dem base

The 20% who have "ALWAYS" showed up as "disapproving" Bush. Don't forget that about 80% of the population "approved" of him for MONTHS after 9/11. It dropped down to 70%. The 20% is the Dem base and would have NEVER approved.

Apparently, the 80% lost their anger over 2000. They forgot it - and look at it as if it "ancient history".

WE (the die-hard base) never got over it.

The 80% don't understand why we've "never gotten over it." It's sad but it's true. I hear it every time I bring up the 2000 election to people. If you live a in an area that's 50-50 Dem/Rep it's very apparent.

[Padraig18]

59. The most famous line from the movie "Network":

"I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it any more!"

Sums it up neatly, for me. :)

[einsteins stein]

73. Spoken by another Howard!

Howard Beale! The Madman of the Airwaves! Now we have:
Howard Dean!! The Madman of the Internet!

[Lurking Dem]

60. When I saw the soundless bite

from the debate, I thought it made him more real - more human, if you will.

I would tend to wonder about somebody who didn't get righteously pissed off being compared to Newt Gingrich.

This kind of spin was rampant from the right during Gore's campaign. It gets "mentioned" in a partisan rag. The "mention" gets examined on right wing talking head show. The story on the show gets covered by legit press. And people buy into it.

They do it here on DU everyday with Clark and Dean.

People better wake up.

[janekat]

63. I really liked it at first....

It's starting to wear on me and get a little "old"

My feeling is now that we're not so much the "angry outsiders" who lost in 2000 but are GOING to WIN and be "happy insiders." I guess if things go downhill again for the Dems then I'll revert back to my old angry, bitter self.

[Kanola]

71. I don't see Dean as the "angry" candidate

I see him as passionate, intense (some may see that as angry) and a direct talker. My husband is not a political junkie that I am and sees Dean as refreshing compared to the inside the beltway candidates who sound like the politicians they are. Has anyone ever considered that sounding to smooth and scripted is more of turn off to voters than a candidate who gets a little riled up after another candidate attacks him during a debate?

All in all I will vote for the candidate who wins the nomination, but I am most impressed with Dean.

[janekat]

77. His supporters seem really angry

especially on this board. Don't know if it's just from the cat fight we all had a few days ago or if it's a carry over from the campaign.

There was a change here at some point. I wasn't on the board most of Sunday so I'm not sure exactly what happened. Clark and Kerry supporters are being treated like "pariahs." I've been shocked at some of the adjectives I've seen directed at Clark and Clark supporters. It's like according to some of you - we're not "REAL" Democrats.

It's really a turn-off for me. Used to really like Dean (though I never strongly supported him because I never thought he could win) It's tiresome to see my candidates insulted and raked over the coals here (Clark, Kerry, Gephardt- even sometimes Kuchinich who I also like). It's gotten to the point where I going to have to "force" myself to vote for Dean if he DOES win the nomination.

I had planned to work on the General Election campaign (which I have done for the last few Pres. elections) but in all honesty I'm too angered by some of his actions against the rest of the candidates and the actions of many of his supporters.

I think I'd also feel out of place at one of his events. Kind of like an "Episcopalian" at a "Baptist" revival meeting. I don't really go in for the emotional crowd type thing - makes me uncomfortable. Maybe I'm an old fogey. "Been there done that."

[einsteins stein]

76. WAKE UP AMERICA!

Only 1/2 of eligible voters actually vote! Why the hell is that?

Apathy? Complacency? Boredom?

Is American Democracy unconscious?

We need to WAKE UP the voters, and get them listening.

Once they are listening, we can offer them hope. If they are not listening, hope is nothing but a boring concept.

People are saying "Look at Clinton, did he sell anger?"

No, but Clinton also grabbed a smaller percentage of voters in 1992 than Gore took in 2000. Clinton won primarily because Perot co-opted Bush's base.

Gore sold a little populist anger, and only after doing so did his polls improve, leading him to win the popular vote.

Has anyone here ever sold anything? You need a hook to grab attention, you need to get the product into the customer's hands, you need to overcome objections, and you need to close the deal.

Dean's anger is the hook that get's America listening, his grass roots organization puts democracy into the customer's hands, his fiscal responsibility and his respect for social diversity overcomes objections.

All Dean has to do is close the deal, but the DLC sales managers are questioning his every move. Luckily for Dean, he has already put the product into our hands, and the DLC can yap all it likes.