Dean wants to see speech regulated in caucuses:

[AP]

NEW CASTLE, N.H., Jan. 24 — Five days after his damaging third-place finish in the Iowa caucuses, Howard Dean said Saturday that the state should regulate discussion inside caucus rooms or lose its premier status in the presidential nomination process.

He doesn't like that you can spend a million dollars to convince people how to vote, but then, when they get in a conversation with their neighbor minutes before they vote, simple truths shared for free can change minds?

Does he think the only people to whom voters should talk is a Dean campaign worker on the phone or at their doors days before?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/25/politics/campaign/25DEAN.html

[arewethereyet]

1. so, hes against freedom of speech then ? thats nice

n/t

[Guaranteed]

50. You're not allowed to stump in the voting places. nt

[DuctapeFatwa]

2. Dean is shrewd and in touch with popular voting class trends

Restrictions on speech are popular. The voting class likes the idea of authoritarian rules that tell them what is permitted and what is forbidden. They perceive it as a new kind of freedom for this different era, this very different war. Even on this message board, participants overwhelmingly rejected free speech when it was offered. Twice.

Dean's best bet to get his plan implemented is to get it voted on.

[Tinoire]

16. Stop it DTF. You kill me

Even on this message board, participants overwhelmingly rejected free speech when it was offered. Twice.

Dean's best bet to get his plan implemented is to get it voted on.

[HFishbine]

3. The flip side

is the democratic principle of a secret ballot.

[Ruti]

4. Here he is talking about it:

http://www.yeamanconsulting.com/yeaaaaarghhhh.mp3

[Feanorcurufinwe]

5. Dean never ceases to amaze.

The insufferable arrogance and self-centered hypocrisy he constantly displays makes me sick.

[adadem]

9. Thanks for saying that

you are totally correct.

That I got swept up by all that never ceases to amaze me...guess I just loved the bush bashing.

[bearfartinthewoods]

23. you were supposed to love the bush bashing...it was the bait.

don't feel bad. especially since you have realized what is happening.

[lurk_no_more]

38. Nicely said

Wasn't Harkins endorsement hinged on dean's promise not to change Iowa's caucus standing? Keep the caucus but regulate it according to emperor dean?

Ah yes, it would be so much better to replace * with *II

And the gaffs go on.......


And then there were none!
” JAFO”

[bearfartinthewoods]

54. if what you say about harkin is true, this isn't a gaffe it's a betrayal

nice...

[curse10]

6. **sigh**

why am I not surprised?

[creativelcro]

8. He's right. And said this process sucks well before last week.

Many others have expressed similar thoughts over the years...

[adadem]

12. But, when he was in Iowa

he intimated he really didn't mean what he said in Canada. He was cheering on the caucus system. He should make up his mind.

[AP]

19. He would have had fewer votes WITHOUT this process.

[SheilaT]

7. Aside from the fact that this has been posted several times already,

the article and the characterization of what Dean said is rather misleading. He doesn't "demand" changes in the caucus system. He brings up very real problems with the caucus system.

Caucuses are inherently anti-democratic. If you can't spare a few hours to go to one, forget it. It's not like going to a polling place some tine in the twelve hours they're open and casting a vote and then going to work or home. It's sitting around for at least an hour, often more, before it's all over. And if the candidate you support doesn't have a minimum level of support, too bad.

But it's what Iowa does.

The bigger problem is the inordinant amount of attention that's paid to these first two events, Iowa and New Hampshire.

[creativelcro]

13. I agree with Dean, but I disagree with the anti-democratic charge...

If "having to spare a few hrs" is what makes it anti-democratic because some people cannot spare a few hrs on a holiday to go to them... It's not a serious argument.

[SheilaT]

42. What if you're working that day?

What if your kid has a basketball game, or your the coach? What if you're going to be out of town that day?

The essential problem is that there's no absentee ballot provision, which absolutely shuts out everyone who cannot get there in person at that specific time on that specific day.

For all my criticism, there's a lot I like about a caucus system from the one time I experienced it in Colorado in 1988. This year my state of Kansas is going to do a caucus, and I'm quite looking forward to it. And it's the same day as my husband's company's big employee awards banquet. If necessary, we'll be late, although I believe the Kansas caucus starts in early afternoon and the banquet doesn't commence until about 7pm with an hour or so of cocktails before, so we'll be there.

[leyton]

47. If you can't go...

If you can't devote a couple hours every four years to a party that does its best to represent you, then why on earth should you have a say in the nomination process?

I live in North Carolina, which gets no candidates during the primary season because our primary is so late, and no candidates during the general election because it's a sure bet for the GOP. The last time I saw someone other than John Edwards in North Carolina was when Clark, Sharpton, and Kucinich came for the South Carolina NAACP convention, which was boycotting South Carolina.

If I was lucky enough to live in a state with a caucus (which I would love), I would block off that evening on my calendar far in advance. They're lucky to have a caucus, not unfortunate.

[PVnRT]

48. Things come up

that surely prevent some people from getting there. Why do you assume that everyone can block that time off on a Monday or a Tuesday night?

[leyton]

56. Because of two things.

One, it's so far in advance - caucus dates are known way ahead of time.

And two, it's a statewide thing. Everyone knows about them. And in towns where factory shifts get out a bit late, those caucuses are allowed to wait up until the shift gets out and people can get to the caucus location.

I'm not judging those who don't make it or anything. I'm just saying, other states would give a lot for the opportunity that Iowa and its residents get.

[Southsideirish]

10. Edwards had to dis-avow a booklet put out by his people on how to

push people around at the caucuses.

[beaconess]

15. Not true -

The book had talking points, not instructions on pushing people around.

[Southsideirish]

21. If it was so innocent why did he have to publically disavow it (n/t)

[AP]

20. In the caucus I watched, Edwards was giving people away to Kucinich.

And voters were talking about the Great Depression in explaining their support for him.

[bearfartinthewoods]

27. your characterization of the booklet is over the top

it was strategy and talking points.

maybe if dean had taught same to his people the caucuses might have ended differently but you can't teach what you don't understand.

[sistersofmercy]

51. got a link for that story? I've read some other accusations you have

made in regard to Kerry supporters in Iowa and not once have you had any positive remark about any other candidates or their supporters. So do you have a unbiased link for the information you are sharing?

[patricia92243]

11. Secret ballot voting is best, so noone is intimidated into voting against

their beliefs but are afraid to go against their boss, spouse, or whatever.

[creativelcro]

14. this IS a good point. Your boss may be there. Stuff like that....

[Southsideirish]

22. Absolutely - the caucuses may sound nice on paper but the reality

can be quite ugly. I would never vote if my state had them.

[AP]

29. This is a case of hate the player, not the game.

Everybody knew the rules of the game. Dean didn't win, so he's complainging about the game.

What the caucuses allow is for the media NOT to have the last workd, and for the Campaigns NOT to have the last word.

Your neighbors are allowed to have the last word, and unlike the media and the candidates, you can look into the eyes of someon from your community and judge their sincerity and their conviction, and you can ask questions if you aren't satisfied, and you can, and you can give them your arguments.

It wouldn't work on a national scale, but, from what I saw on CSPAN, it seemed like a pretty good way to cut through the shit, and allow the candidates with the best ideas and message to rise to the top, so long as there's high levels of participation (which there was).

[beaconess]

33. "If we win in Iowa, it will be difficult to stop us"

But what Dean really meant was, "If we win in Iowa, it will be difficult to stop us, but, of course, that would be wrong because the Iowa Caucuses are so screwed up that my victory here wouldn't mean anything."

[PVnRT]

49. In other words

The system allowed your candidate to have a surprisingly good finish. Something tells me that if Edwards had finished in the single digits, you and others wouldn't be defending the system as much.

[AP]

52. I saw Edwards send a supporter over to Kucinich.

The people who lost were really Ku and Gep.

Dean didn't lose from the system. He lost because of the message.

Edwards benefited from the system, as Dean did, but he benefitted more than Dean becuase of the message.

[HereSince1628]

17. I believe his comments were about intimidation and coercion...

saying it was about free-speech is an easy spin.

I am not sure this is really a problem, but...

There was a thread a couple of days back about High School-aged kids who served as Dean precinct captain one of whom seemed to think she had somehow been the target of an effort to interfere with her working people who were undecideds or whose candidates were under the limit. I suspect she was probably too polite for that game.

[AP]

18. Dean can hate the game, but he's crazy. Had it been a secret ballot he....

...would have had fewer votes.

In the caucus I watched, they caucused without discussion, and he didn't even have enough to meet the threshold. It was only BECAUSE he could persuade a couple people and BECAUSE Gep and Kucinich didn't get enough people that he was able to pick up a few more to reach 15%.

He's wrong to complain about this.

[John_H]

24. And there are still people who believe the "power to the people"

campaign rhetoric?

[isbister]

25. misleader

"If you have a caucus and you go in and sit down with your neighbors," he said, "and they are being coached by opposing campaigns — which I think The Associated Press reported was the case in John Edwards' case and maybe Senator Kerry's — I don't know about that. That is not the kind of neighborly, friendly arrangement that one is led to believe goes on in the Iowa caucuses."

He makes statement about Senator Kerry and then tries to cover his tracks by saying "I don't know about that". In fact, isn't it correct that Dean had to let go two of his people because of their shenanigans involving one of Kerry's offices before the election?

He is a misleader and we don't need another misleader in the White House.

[AP]

28. He used same tactic to say Bush knew about 9/11 in advance, but claim he

didn't say it.

That's Dean the straight-talker you hear.

[AP]

26. Dean also says he won't participate in IA again until rules are changed

Later, speaking after a packed forum at a picturesque coastal hotel here, Dr. Dean said he would not participate again unless the rules were changed to prohibit negative campaigning during the caucuses.

More interesting parts of article:

"If you have a caucus and you go in and sit down with your neighbors," he said, "and they are being coached by opposing campaigns — which I think The Associated Press reported was the case in John Edwards' case and maybe Senator Kerry's — I don't know about that. That is not the kind of neighborly, friendly arrangement that one is led to believe goes on in the Iowa caucuses."

It's funny where he draws the line. He was bragging that they were going to have the biggest organization in IA to reach voters. What he's complaining about is what he bragged that he would do: reaching out to voters and arming them with the arguments for comparing, contrasting and selecting candidates. So, does he want to get rid of campaigning alltogether?


"The kind of stuff that's going on with the phone calls and all that under the table is not particularly good for democracy, and I didn't know it went on inside the caucuses. And if it does it should not be permitted."

Again, what the hell are volutneers saying to voters when they call? Dean phonebanked, didn't he? To characterize it all as "under the table" is absurd. This isn't his first election.

Furthermore, someone should let Dean know that CSPAN broadcast what goes on in the caucuses and it didn't look anything like what he's describing. The only under the table thing I saw on CSPAN was the Dean organizer who promised a Kucinich supporter that they'd elect him delegate (which she claimed she could deliver) and that he could vote for K at the county level. Every other supporter was trying to attract voters to their candidates based on their ideas.

[arewethereyet]

39. sounds like an idle threat

I don't see him needing to go back to Iowa.

[beaconess]

30. When all else fails, Dean goes negative

Dean Criticizes Kerry's Stance on '91 War
Washington Post, January 25, 2004

Howard Dean on Saturday questioned John F. Kerry's judgment, asking how the Massachusetts senator could have opposed the 1991 effort to expel Iraq from Kuwait and then supported last year's preemptive war against Saddam Hussein, marking the end of a brief cease-fire among the Democratic candidates three days before Tuesday's New Hampshire primary . . .

Dean also criticized Sen. John Edwards (N.C.) for his campaign tactics in last Monday's Iowa caucuses, where Edwards finished second to Kerry and shoved Dean into third place. Dean said he was disturbed by reports that Edwards campaign officials had "coached" Iowa precinct captains to distribute negative information about Dean during the caucuses. Dean also said the Edwards campaign, as well as other unspecified campaigns, "had their folks really beating up on the people who went in, trying to get them to change their minds in caucus. I don't think that's healthy for the democratic process." . . .

After hoping that Clark or Lieberman would take the offensive, Dean apparently decided he had to do it himself and returned to the subject of Iraq, but with a backward look to the Persian Gulf War.

[isbister]

40. He may feel that going negative is his only hope

to get enough votes to get him back into the game.

[Jerseycoa]

31. I thought

In exchange for Harkin's endorsement he promised to keep the Iowa caucuses as they are, didn't he?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

32. It's interesting that you don't see either Kucinich or Gephardt

complaining about the caucus system, since both of them were undoubtedly hurt by the 15% rule. Both of them would have gotten more delegates if the allocation had been strictly proportional with no minimum threshold.

They aren't complaining, but the candidate who's new to national politics, who expected to win just because he was so enthusiastic and well-funded, is acting like--dare I say it?--a sore loser.

[AP]

34. Exactly. They're the two candidates who were victims of the system.

The other three benefited from they system because they persuaded those supporters to come to them.

What failed for Dean was all the stuff that happened up to the minute his voters walked in the door of the caucuses. They lost it out there. They didn't win it inside becuase they didn't have the message, but they picked up voters inside.

[bicentennial_baby]

35. Gephardt=Victim?

Please, the only thing he was a victim of was his own negtive campaign. :eyes:

[AP]

37. If Kucinich could have kept supporters together, the could have gotten

Gep people. Had Gep held out, they might have been able to pick up Ku suppters.

The people who couldn't "bully" supporters into hanging tough inside the caucus were the victims. They walked in with supporters, and walked out with none. Edwards, Kerry and Dean walked in with fewer supporters than they walked out with. They benefitted from the system.

If Dean were Gep or Ku, he'd have something to complain about.

[beaconess]

46. Gephardt lost because he deserved to lose but Dean lost because the

system was unfair?

Ok . . .

[lurk_no_more]

36. Maybe he can include this in the parts of the Patriot Act

he thinks need to be kept in place. Freedom of speech is so over rated as to be important.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.


And then there were none!
” JAFO”

[nancyharris]

41. Iowa is not the only state that prefers caucuses

over direct primary elections. New Mexico, North Dakota, Michigan, Maine, Hawaii, Idaho, Minnesota, Kansas, Alaska, Wyoming and Colorado all will hold Democratic caucuses.

Will Governor Dean abstain from these caucuses?

[adamrsilva]

43. The caucus system sucks

That fact that Dean is against this system when it means he would have gotten fewer votes shows he holds principle above all else.

[AP]

45. Dean says that it cost him votes. He says Kerry and Edwards did under

the table things that cost him votes. He's making excuses for losing.

He had MORE votes when he walked out the door, after the, uhm "beating up" of voters, than he had when he walked in the door, when the Dean supporters were the only people "beating up" on them.


He needs to get his facts straight and start making sense.

[kstewart33]

44. Gaffe #323

But who's counting?

[sistersofmercy]

53. Milk spills....

:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:


x(

[genius]

55. Anti-free speech. Now who's backing this guy?

The ability to discuss the candidates is what's good about the Iowa caucusses. It's the 15% that should be eliminated.