Who emerges as the Anti-Dean?

[tsipple]

Today's Washington Post has a fascinating article in which the various Democratic campaigns openly talk about their "Anti-Dean" strategies. (For purposes of this poll, "Anti-Dean" is defined as a candidate who emerges as the strongest rival to Dean with a substantial chance of derailing his progress.) Here's a key excerpt from the Washington Post story:

Strategists for several candidates said the campaign is going to get even nastier and more personal in the weeks ahead. Their plan is to try to drive a wedge between Dean and his liberal base by hammering his past or present support for gun rights and for changes in the Social Security and Medicare programs. "The more liberals find out about his record as governor of Vermont, the more they're going to be uncomfortable with him," said Jim Jordan, campaign manager for Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.).

Question: Who emerges as the "Anti-Dean"?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

1. Maybe a better question...

Which other candidate(s) are "Pro-themselves?"

Lately, it's looking like only Braun and Clark.





Ed-punc

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. I think that Dean bashing will backfire

We've already seen Kerry asked by a reporter to talk about Kerry's stands instead of bashing Dean. Bashing the Dem frontrunner, whoever it is, is counterproductive to other candidates. It smacks of despiration on their part, and a derth of their own ideas of how to get this country back on track.

I think that liberals are more pragmatic than their right-wing conservative counterparts. I'm sure there are some who won't vote for anyone who merely supports current gun legislation and doesn't intend on introducing Federal gun bans, but I think the majority of liberals see the importance of winning, and if winning means going to the center on some issues, so be it.

[ima_sinnic]

3. they just don't "get it" & are squawking into the wind

--more important than Dean's specific stands on the issues is the fact that he is leading a revolution. Those who are running traditional campaigns will be left behind.

[La_Serpiente]

4. Dean

will be assailed from the left. I mean, look at Kucinich's newest effort:



Here is the website for it as well.

http://kucinich.us/i-switched.php

You can add Sharpton onto that list. I have no doubt in my mind that Sharpton will come down hard on Dean.

I think they are going to go after him hard.

No candidate, especially Kerry, will win this nomination without getting some of Dean's supporters.

I predict that Kerry and Gephardt will go after Dean. However, I do not think they know how to go after Dean. They obviously need to change their tactics.

Will Gephardt's attacks be valid? I do not think so because most Deanistas do not like him already. Kerry is also someone that could compete with Dean. Kerry is a lot more liberal than Dean on some issues. However, his war vote really, really hurt him with Dean people.

I have this feeling as to why Kerry really hasn't explained his war vote. I somewhat know the logic behind it -- but I still have no clue. I mean, he didn't mention why he voted for the resolution on his website nor has he even mentioned it in depth in his new book. Even Joe Liberman is proud to say why he voted for the Iraqui War Resolution on his website.

Why isn't Kerry explaining it? Is it because he doesn't want to be perceived as weak on defense? I read somewhere that if you didn't believe in the mantra of the time -- voting for the war resolution -- then you wouldn't win the presidency. I refuse to believe that Kerry voted for the resolution based on this. However, by him not explaining it, that is the only rationale I am left with.

Is it unfair to decide who you will vote for based on the Iraq vote? I think for me, it bears quite a big of significance for me. However, I won't hold it against him. I will judge him based on his entire record.

But it is unnerving for me. It tells me that Kerry could never be truthful with me. I am just confused about him right now.

Edwards? I do not know about him. I have no clue what his strategy is.

Who will be the biggest winner out of this gang pack? It could either be Clark or Dean. Clark because he seems like the kind of guy that everyone just loves. This is how he can be the breakaway candidate. He could be seen as a refreshing voice to the intra-party battles. This is the same for Edwards as well. I say Dean could come out the winner out of this because it seems like when other candidates criticize him, he gets more money. I have no clue why it happens, but it just does. Money doesn't translate into votes, but it does expand your resources.

Meanwhile, Liberman will go after Clark in the end. Will it bring down Clark? It just might.

By the way, I am undecided as of now.

[dofus]

5. And if all the other candidates

manage to demonize Dean sufficiently, it really won't matter who gets the nomination, because only those most dedicated of that person's supporters will turn out to vote next November, and guess who'll still be in the White House come January 21, 2005?

[Dogmudgeon]

6. The Jolly Dogfight

The big problem is how the Democratic contenders can skirmish and still present a unified vision against Bush and Neo-Conservatism.

I think they're doing as well as they can under the circumstances. But in the past few weeks, I've come to believe that the differences and the "battles" have been inflated and blown out of proportion by the press.

They want pitched battles with lots of blood. They want whisker-thin margins of victory. They want cheap irony and will bust chops over nothing so offensive as a misplaced punctuation mark.

And the so-called issues? Who really believes that Dean hates blacks and rural whites? That Clark sat back in HQ quietly reveling over the bombing of Kosovo? That Kucinich is in secret communication with the Pope?

Oh, yes, it will get much nastier. There are papers to sell, blocks of time on CNN and Fox to be booked, journalistic careers to launch.

Well, the same damn thing happened in 2000, and the result was that Gore was gleefully defamed and, oops!, Bush just happened to "win" the election.

The Chattering Class wants ugly and torturous dogfights. Who else, other than the losing dogs, suffers? Not the barking heads -- it's the public, which doesn't even get a shot of anesthetic before being "put down."

--bkl

[LeftPeopleFinishFirst]

7. There is no "anti-Dean"

nt

[last1standing]

8. Bush* is the Anti-Dean.

And any Democrat that even wants to be an "Anti" anyone Democratic is working against our interests.

[Jacobin]

9. Beat me to it!!

Answer is clear.