Dean is popular yet Demo bigwigs don't like him.

[Cascadian]

Here is my biggest concern.

I believe that Howard Dean is right man to take on Bush. He has the support of many people yet I honestly think that there are Democrats, mainly the DLC and DNC that simply don't want him as the nominee. I fear that they are going to go to great lengths to ensure he does not get the nomination. I think that they really want Wesley Clark and the reason he got on board is because the Democratic leadership wanted him as a gap stop against Dean. I also think that there is some regionalism in play. They simply don't want a Northeasterner to get the nomination. The South is now the dominant force in the U.S. in terms of politics, economy, and even culture.


I truly hope that Dean will buck the trend. I also hope that Dean gets Bob Graham on board his campaign and hopefully as a VP running mate.


John

[IrateCitizen]

1. I think it's more than that

I think that the DNC insiders, and particularly the DLCers, are most leery of Dean because of the way that he's been able to energize the grassroots. I wouldn't even say that he founded the movement, it just sorta found him.

While the bigwigs DO want to beat Bush, they want to beat him THEMSELVES. The LAST thing they want is for an energized grassroots to eat into their power base. The LAST thing they want is for the "proles" to think that they have any real say in the way things are run.

And personally, it really wouldn't surprise me if there are a few people in the party "apparatus" who would be willing to sabotage a Dean candidacy for this very reason. Just look at some of the attacks made by Lieberman in particular, they are the kind of stuff that will be taken and run with by the Bush campaign. It's almost as if they'd rather throw a "people-driven" effort in 2004 in order to get back to doing things "their way" in 2008 -- no matter how many people are screwed in the process.

At least that's my take on it, being the Chomskyite consumed with studying things from the perspective of power relationships that I am.

[pansypoo53219]

28. they know

that Dean WOULD rock the boat and they wouldn't have their cozy inside the beltway comfort zone anymore. the top dems are afraid of a bit of democracy.

[caledesi]

41. They know that Dean wants to "clean house" & that's why they

don't want him. They don't want to lose their jobs....I say, clean away and tell them to take their pink tutus w/ them.

[kodi]

42. & why gore in 2001was cut off at the knees, he was planning what dean did

the moderate and conservative dems were too cute by half and while successful in undermining gore, they wound up with dean.

better the devil you know than the one you dont.

i bet a lot of the dlc types are banging their heads against the wall thinking that with gore they would at least be able to maintain some control over the party apparatus, but if dean wins he might be the spark that turns the party into a political party beholden to the rank and file and not the party big wigs.

i think that all the powers of the dlc types are focused on prevebnting dean from getting the nomination.

they will support gephardt and clark and whoever falls first picks up the other's support.

it appears likely that if no one gets the requisite delegates, the wheeling and dealing starts and i expect a compromise candidate at the convention, who will not be dean, might be clark, but probably will be gore or edwards.

[dkf]

2. I don't think we should accuse Clark of being the choice of the DNC/DLC

I think that the anybody but Dean has yet to be established.

Luckily for Dean, the Dem Party probably won't be able to settle on someone. That is the only good thing to come out of the complete ineffectiveness of the party leadership.

[Guaranteed]

58. Why not?

He was practically hand-picked by Bill and Hillary.

[CMT]

3. he came out of nowhere and challenged the party leadership

and they don't like it. But it isn't new. In 1976 Jimmy Carter was equally unpopular or even more so with party bigwigs. How dare this one term Southern Governor peanut farmer come out of nowhere and have the gall to beat such party leaders as Scoop Jackson, Birch Bayh, Hubert Humphrey (who was toying with running in '76), Mo Udall, Sarge Shriver, Fred Harris, Frank Church, ect.

So the Anybody but Dean movement by the party structure isn't new as it always happens with outsiders who take on the party. But if Dean is nominated they will come around and support the ticket just like they did in '76.

[KittyWampus]

21. He Didn't "Come Out Of Nowhere"

Although many Dean supporters seem to relish this myth.

He was a LEADING PART of the very DLC that pulled the Democratic Party to the right.

The NRA was very aware of Howard Dean's Governership as was the CATO Institute

Frankly a good solid case can be made the DEAN is the DLC "plant".

He's a guy who in many ways did a 180 from his record as Governor.
He's a guy who didn't have to vote on the Iraq Resolution and could bullshit all he wanted.

[paulsbc]

4. IMNSHO

in my not so humble opinion, Clark may or may not have been the plan, but he is too little, too late. Unless he does something massively wrong, Dean has this nomination wrapped up.

Dean versus Bush in 04, mark it down. :)

[IrateCitizen]

6. But given the overtures made by Dean toward Clark...

I would say that a Dean/Clark ticket is far from out of the question -- and quite formidable, IMHO.

[AP]

Calling a guy a Republican is an overature?

[IrateCitizen]

26. With thanks from DoveTurnedHawk...

Two Great Howard Dean Quotes

"It is a good thing for us to have Wes Clark. I have four people beating up on me for being against the war. Now, I have a four-star general saying the same thing I've been saying." -- Howard Dean

"But I think Wes Clark, he is somebody I keep in close touch with. He's a terrific person, very bright, very capable, very thoughtful. Our views coincide on a number of matters, and he is a -- I certainly can't say enough good things about him. It'd be tough to run against him." -- Howard Dean

[Eloriel]

31. Your quotes

The first one expesses the ONLY reason I'm sorta glad Clark is in the race: he provides cover for Dean (on this and other issues), in precisely the same way Dean provided cover for all the other candidates to FINALLY start having something critical to say about Bush and his war.

Re your second quote: Yeah, that's what Dean said all right. And that was before we all learned that he wasn't even a Democrat, and had spoken admiringly about the Bush cabal to a REPUBLICAN FUNDRAISER, fer chrissake, and other not-so-flattering things.

You haven't heard him say much (if anything) positive about Clark since. I imagine Dean was a tad embarrassed by his earlier praise of Clark when these things became known. I know I was.

Eloriel

[charlie]

33. One more

"His thinking has helped me enormously. Our views are strikingly similar on a lot of issues, including Iraq."

[JNelson6563]

34. Ok, here's what I'm talkin' about

I just posted to another anti-Deanie about DU's relativity to RL politics. Here is another suberb illustration of my point.

See, in RL politics, this sort of thing is not only acceptable, it's expected. I'd wager anything that the things folks here (in the totally unrealistic world of DU) just harp on and obsess over are completely insignificant in the minds of the candidates.

It's all part of the game. I lament so many here are oblivious to the rules, other than those they've made up themselves.

Dont' take my word for it thought friend, sit back and watch it all play out.

Julie

[CWebster]

54. Believe it or not

I also think they would be a formidable combo for strategic reasons. Between them they have all bases covered to ideally unite the party - region, domestic and foreign expertise, conservative to liberal, non-abrasive personality conflict, and it combines the Grassroots with the Establishment.

However, I would prefer that the Establishment(and the military) take the subordinate spot and allow for some changes in the status quo.

Simple musing, perhaps, so for now I have to focus on Dean exclusively.

[Cogito]

5. winning

The concern of the DLC and DNC center on the ability of Dean to beat Bush and the concern that a Dean candidacy will spell disaster for Democratic congressional chances around the country. Many of the DLC types are centrists ideologically but I don't think that explains their concerns with Dean. After all, Dean was a member of the DLC and as centrist as any of them in the mid-ninties. Rather, it was Dean's decision to fight the election from the left that concerns the big wigs.

Really, the key to this election is NOT to jettison the DLC and centrists. The key is getting MORE of them to vote for our nominee.

[newyawker99]

52. Hi Cogito!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[quinnox]

7. not only Dem bigwigs

I'm a Democrat, and I don't like Dean either. I have seen many, many others on DU express the same sentiments.

[JNelson6563]

29. I have come to learn that DU

in no way resembles real world politics.

I used to see DUers as so informed etc. After hanging out with some folks who are well connected in RL political world I now realize DU is saturated with ignorance, close mindedness and much cluelessness as to how to take back some power.

Thankfully DU truly is an obscure little speck in the political world.

Julie

[QC]

8. Calling them cockroaches probably didn't help.

I like Dean just fine and will proudly vote for him if he is nominated, but honestly, can you really run against the party establishment and then cry foul when that establishment doesn't like you? Dean made the conscious decision to run against his own party's leadership, and so far it has been a smart decision, but no one could possibly have imagined that it would make him popular among those he is running against.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

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

[Hep]

14. Ouch!

Hey, fella, get it right and we won't have to have lessons. You were wrong. Now you're wrong and pissed. I don't see that as an improvement.

But by all means, test your new knowledge of literary devices and give me a simile where you compare me to a pompous ass. That will be your quiz.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

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

[Donna Zen]

19. Figures of speech...oh please

Tell that to the Dem congress when the bushistas use the sound bite in a negative ad....like a stink bomb in an elevator heading down. Zell Miller uses similes to boost himself too.

[Hep]

22. I'll be happy

to educate conservatives on the use of literary devices as well.

Are you guys really ready and willing to allow the political discourse in this country to be dumbed down to the point where campaign reform = not being allowed to use polysyllabic words?

If you claim Dean called congress cockroaches, you are wrong. Stop defending it.

[QC]

43. Let's try this again.

I will respond in such a genteel and decorous way that even those of the most delicate sensibilities will, I pray, find my remarks edifying. ;-)

First off, I object to the unnecessarily personal tone of your response. If you feel that I misinterpreted Dean's remark, then you can certainly point it out in the kind of civil manner that almost always guarantees a civil response. There is no need for nastiness. The real world has enough of that. We don't really need to come here and seek it out.

I am well aware of what a simile is, and I recognize the dictinction that you are drawing. However, I consider it to be of little practical importance. Calling a person a filthy pig and comparing a person's actions to those of a filthy pig is bound to draw the same response. Those who have been insulted seldom stop to make fine distinctions between literary devices.

My larger point, which you chose not to address, is that a candidate who runs against the party establishment cannot be too surprised when the party establishment takes offense. Given Dean's polling and fundraising, his choice to take on the DNC seems to have been a wise one, and a man as intelligent as Dean must surely know the likely reaction. Indeed, Dean has very shrewdly used that reaction to further his reputation as an outsider. He knows what he is doing, perhaps far better than some of his defenders here.

I am,

Your most humble and obedient servant,
QC

[Hep]

47. Let's not, nothing is different

First off, I object to the unnecessarily personal tone of your response. If you feel that I misinterpreted Dean's remark, then you can certainly point it out in the kind of civil manner that almost always guarantees a civil response. There is no need for nastiness. The real world has enough of that. We don't really need to come here and seek it out.

The post I was responding to was uncivil. I don' tfeel you misrepresented Dean's remark, you DID misrepresent Dean's remark and I showed you exactly how. You did the same thing that people have done since he MADE the statement, you got it wrong.It's been a long time, and people who continue to misrepresent him do wo WITH the knowledge that they are wrong.

If you want to ask me not to be nasty, don't be nasty. Amend your statement. Admit you are wrong when you say Dean called congress cockroaches. Then the nastiness will have ended.

You look terribly hypocritical when you claim I'm the one being nasty after the mean spirited comment you made.

I am well aware of what a simile is, and I recognize the dictinction that you are drawing. However, I consider it to be of little practical importance. Calling a person a filthy pig and comparing a person's actions to those of a filthy pig is bound to draw the same response. Those who have been insulted seldom stop to make fine distinctions between literary devices.

You're still getting it wrong. No one would claim Dean was insluting himself if he said, "If I win the presidency, I'm going to wallow in it like a pig in slop". You keep getting it wrong because you don't seem to understand that Dean had no intention of calling congress cockroaches. It's absurd, cynical, and unfair to think that he did have that intent. And it's dishonest to KNOW he didn't but still claim he did. Thoise who have been insulted need thicker skin.

My larger point, which you chose not to address, is that a candidate who runs against the party establishment cannot be too surprised when the party establishment takes offense. Given Dean's polling and fundraising, his choice to take on the DNC seems to have been a wise one, and a man as intelligent as Dean must surely know the likely reaction. Indeed, Dean has very shrewdly used that reaction to further his reputation as an outsider. He knows what he is doing, perhaps far better than some of his defenders here.

The party establishment hasn't gotten it right YET, so why do we give half a rats ass about whether or not they're offended? They still call Dean LIBERAL, which we all know he isn't. I'm not worried about offending them. To quote Bertrand Russell which applies perfectly to the DLC:

"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand."

The DLC speaks STUPID. They're irrelevant until they get it right.

[Bertrand]

44. This post doesnt warrant getting deleted?

what kind of moderation does this place have? i could care less for the rules, but if this isnt a personal attack (condescendingly calling names <"silly">), then this board doesnt even know how to follow its own rules.

[Hep]

48. There is a forum

for you to take problems with the mods. Feel free to alert my post.

[QC]

57. Thanks for the support.

Moderation is always going to draw complaints, which is why I seldom gripe about it--they have a hard job and catch flack from all directions--but it really has been particularly arbitrary and capricious lately.

[Hep]

59. I haven't seen

anyone call someone else a pompous ass and a prick and not have their post deleted. Care to show me I'm wrong?

[Bertrand]

45. As for your point,

he was inferring that members of congress were cockroaches, since they scattered like them. He specifically used that word since it gives the impression that Dean is strong and that they are weak, once again playing into the cult of personality he has crafted.


an example would be if Kerry were to say "Dean likes business like Nazis do." He wouldnt be calling Dean a nazi, but he sure would be implying it by what he's comparing him with.

[Hep]

50. Remember this is about language

I don't think Infer is the right word. I think you mean to use the word IMPLY. And he didn't use the past tense. Congress has never scattered like cockroaches because Dean has never won the presidency, so your understanding of the comment in the first place is all wrong.

Either way, he IMPLIED nothing. YOU inferred what he meant, and you are mistaken if you think he meant to refer to congress as cockroaches. It's ABSURD to think that he would do that. Either you think he is stupid, or that he really doesn't want to work with congress, neither of which you will ever be able to demonstrate here.

For some reason, you can't just let it go.

And that's the problem with SILLY claims like this. They lead to people being all confused about what really happened. This is why this comment should have never been brought up. SIMILE. Seriously, try using it sometime.


an example would be if Kerry were to say "Dean likes business like Nazis do." He wouldnt be calling Dean a nazi, but he sure would be implying it by what he's comparing him with.

Except it doesn't make any sense at all. The analogy is terrible because it doesn't make any sense. How do nazi's like business? There's no implication there, just confusion.

Where the hell is godwyn when you need him? Why does everyone think that if they illustrate their problem with something by conjuring up inane nazi analogies, they'll get away with it? Sheesh.

[mandyky]

17. The party machinery was nasty before the cockroach

comment. The DLC (From and Reed) accused him of being too far left, I guess because of his stance on the war, and so did many in Congress.

Now that Iraq isn't going so well some have mellowed, the the machinery is still republican lite who don't want to give up the pork from corporations. The Dems who get money from lobbyists are just as scared of dean as the GOP.

And the maddening thing is that Dean is not anti-business, he just can't be bought and sold. He's too independent and too much of a maverick.

[Hep]

10. I hope like you hope

But I think the party will get on board when this primary season is over.

[AP]

11. DNC and DLC picked Clinton, and they weren't wrong about him.

Clinton picked Gore as VP, which was a brilliant VP chocie, but DNC, DLC and Clinton didn't have the courage to encourage a real primary challenge to get a better candidate (could you imagine if Kerry could have run in 2000, without having Gore as the de facto inside favorite?).

Unlike the RNC, the DNC in 92 picked a candidate they thought could win, and not a candidate who had inside connections.

Do you think in 2004 they don't like Dean because he's not an insider (even thought he's a former DLC'er who's very business friendly)? Or do you think they're applying their '92 criteria, which is, essentially, will this guy win?

[Hep]

16. When did they pick clinton, exactly?

He declared in October of 1991, when did the DLC endorse him?

[charlie]

25. They didn't have to

Clinton was DLC chairman right up until he ran for the presidency.

[CWebster]

56. They rode in on Clinton's wave

and have been the undertow ever since.

It is telling that Dean's hugh base of support comes from his defiance to the current party identity. Talk about a disconnect between what voters want and the leaders want. They cannot hold the voters hostage with Dean running interference to their agenda and it riles them so.

[charlie]

60. Yeah, they'll never admit how much plain old luck

factored into their 1992 success. They picked a rare natural-born pol and Bush was taking potshots from two flanks, Clinton and Perot. Imagine running 1992 over again, exact same platform, same third-way messages -- mend it, don'd end it; more beat cops; support for the death penalty; etc -- but this time the candidate is... Michael Dukakis. Can anyone believe that he wouldn't have been flayed by Bush and Baker?

[AP]

32. In All Too Human, Stephanopolus describes how Clinton spent the

summer of 90 or 91 (can't remember which) going around to all the big wigs in the Dem party winning them over. He didn't take his campaign to the people until after he got all the insiders on his side. This is from memory. Could have been another book. Pretty sure it was All Too Human.

[Hep]

53. It's cool

I'm just trying to understand the timeline.

[DemNoir]

13. Demo bigwigs? Let's hope they are not onboard

Are these the same "bigwigs" that have lead us to one electoral disaster after another?

[KittyWampus]

15. A. It's NOT JUST "BIGWIGS" That Don't Like Dean

B. Dean is not a good choice to go up against Rove's puppet (gay marriage, repeal Middle Class Tax Breaks)
C. Dean IS a DLC'er although his supporters apparently in denial about his REAL record as opposed to his rhetorc
D. Your thesis is as divisive and misleading as Dean's campaign has been from its inception
E. Your thesis is not clearly thought out. You present NO evidence to support your claim

[Hep]

20. break it down

B. Dean is not a good choice to go up against Rove's puppet (gay marriage, repeal Middle Class Tax Breaks)

Can you give more detail as to how these will be a problem. Dean skeptics here seem to forget that rove will MAKE SHIT UP against other candidates. We're talking about a guy who put a bug in his own office. He has no scruples. Rove doesn't need gay marriage or MCTB, he'll conjure demons out of thin air.

C. Dean IS a DLC'er although his supporters apparently in denial about his REAL record as opposed to his rhetorc

We remain in "denial" because those of you who constantly make the claim never demonstrate it. We're still waiting.

D. Your thesis is as divisive and misleading as Dean's campaign has been from its inception

Make your own thread.

E. Your thesis is not clearly thought out. You present NO evidence to support your claim

And apparently you invented irony.

[AP]

18. Having 14% of the support in a ten candidate field is NOT popular...

...by the way.

60:40 in a two candidate field is popular. Having 40% in a 5 candidate field might be popular. But getting 14% in a ten candidate field, when your entire campaign is run on the principle that none of the other candidates is anything like you does not bode well for even being able to reach 40% in a two candidate field.

[Forkboy]

24. Yep

None of the candidates are popular.

[AP]

30. By next July one of them will be very popular.

And chances are it won't be the guy with 14% today.

[Forkboy]

38. would it be the guys with less?

?

[AP]

39. If the candidates who drop out have their supporters go to that person

Think of it this way: how many MORE people are there who don't know about dean who would love him the way his current supporters like him? Probably not many.

Now take the remaining 7 and cut that down to, say, three, where do you think their supporters will go? Not Dean, I say.

And think of all the undecideds, Where will they go? Propbably to anyone but dean,

[Forkboy]

40. Why not Dean?

you seem awfully sure that they wont....how did you reach this conclusion?

[haymaker]

46. I await the reply too.

Probably something like "He has no neck".

[AP]

61. I think I already explained why.

The way I see the field is one liberterian, one progressive, lieberman in the middle and the rest falling to the left of lieberman and to the right of kucinich. When those candidates start dropping out, who are they going to go for. Not the libertarian, I say. I think even lieberman's supporters will fall to the left rather than to Dean.

Say Dean has a solid 16-20% now. If it were Dean and Kerry, Edwards, Gep or Clark, I say dean would be lucky if he went up to 30%.

[Jacobin]

23. Because he's not dependent on big money

so he can't be controlled by the corporatists who have taken over the Dem party and turned it into the PNAC sympathizer and enabler party of Holy Joe, et al.

[Cocoa]

36. I'm sick of the spin

I'm sick of the persecution complex.

If the DLC doesn't like him who cares? Vote for Dean, not the DLC.

[Hep]

37. Amen

That's exactly what I'm going to do.

[sandnsea]

49. I'm not a bigwig and I don't like him

I don't like him because he doesn't believe in anything I believe are Democratic values. He's more in line with the DLC position than any other candidate. Problem is, he isn't running on the positions he's always held and the Republicans will just kill him in 2004 because of it. There's no way to rehabilitate him if he's the nominee. He did it to himself.

[Hep]

51. Absolute language is my very favorite

because it is so EASY!

I don't like him because he doesn't believe in anything I believe are Democratic values.

Yeah, health care for all? Not democratic. Affirmative Action? Not democratic. Equal rights? Not democratic. Public education? Not democratic.

What kind of values are those if not Democratic? Could you elaborate on what IS a democratic value?

He's more in line with the DLC position than any other candidate.

Which is funny. Funny because not only does the Dean machine disagree with you, but so does the DLC. But hey, we're all brainwashed idiots, and you are the Holder of Truth! Pretty amulet!

Problem is, he isn't running on the positions he's always held and the Republicans will just kill him in 2004 because of it.

OH NO! I used to be pretty conservative when I was 15. I guess I can never run for office as a D because I wouldn't be running on positions that I've always held! Damn.

[aquart]

55. Remember how they felt about Clinton?

And how much support they gave him?