Howard Dean has made the Left relevant again

[rhombus]

Relevant to this White House. Progressives have been biting their lips for eight months to 'support' Obama, but time and time again, this White House feels the Left should accept crumbs after compromising themselves to death to appear 'bipartisan'. Where is Olympia Snowe? That tells you a lot.

Not anymore. Thank goodness for Howard Dean. For the first time, you can sense the White House is taking notice of its own base, even hints of fear of pushing supporters to the final brink, the people who worked so hard to elect Barack Obama.

This is a net positive out of this health care debate.

[Progressive_Angel]

1. dean

has messed up the plan

[Oregone]

3. Who cares. The Plan sucked

[polichick]

2. How is the WH taking notice? nt

[rhombus]

9. well for starters, they listened to the strong pushback on insurance caps

Also, Rockefeller-Franken-Sanders all had excellent amendments included in the manager's amendment. Reid feared losing their support.

[karynnj]

54. Those were all there before Dean spoke out

The point is that many liberal Senators got many things improved. Rockefeller and Kerry were two who got some of the biggest, most important changes. I am not sure if Sanders got his money for clinics then or before then. I really didn't much from Franken there. Dodd and Harken were the two who fought the hardest and had the positions to do so.

[ShortnFiery]

4. Dean is NOT "the left" but "the average american" the 99 % of US. eom

[saltpoint]

5. Dean's a good man.

But he ain't on the teeter-totter.

[EFerrari]

6. Very true. Few national voices have spoken out so clearly

on behalf of the party base.

[saltpoint]

8. Which is why Democrats rejected his candidacy in Iowa in 2004.

All that clear speaking, etc.

He finished third after polling showed him in the lead weeks prior to the caucus.

He does not hold elective or appointed office currently.

He's here and there in the media.

That's about it.

[EFerrari]

12. The clarity of his message was not favored among the party leadership

at the time, iirc.

Has anyone ever won in Iowa with the party against them?

I wasn't a Deaniac at the time, btw.

[saltpoint]

15. Dean was the IT boy of the 2004 campaign. The people who show up

at the Iowa caucuses include but are by no means limited to the party leadership. If one is registered one may show up and vote.

Elections are held in primaries all the time in which a party-endorsed candidate does not win. Gary Hart was not the choice of party leadership against Mondale but beat him in New Hampshire just the same. Russ Feingold polled a distant third in his primary campaign and won.

The issue is Dean's marginality as opposed to the claim made by the OP.

[EFerrari]

18. Elections are held all the time where the party endorsed candidate

doesn't win but it's hard to remember the party actively trying to tank a campaign as hard as they did Dean's.

That's fine.

And as for Dean's "marginality", Obama ignores that wide margin at his peril.

[saltpoint]

22. In peril involving what components? Dennis Kucinich?

I'm not seeing Obama quivering in his boots over Howard Dean.

Y'all gonna run Cynthia McKinney again on the Green ticket? That was a huge success.

[EFerrari]

25. Well, that nonquivering sure did generate some interesting statements

last week. :)

[saltpoint]

29. Nothing Dean has said or done matters one damn when he is as far

far

far

removed from influence as he is, and most of that distance is self-positioned.

Dean didn't win in 2004. He continues to lose the public debate now.

[EFerrari]

32. If that were true, my friend, no one would bother to respond to him.

[saltpoint]

35. Possibly, but the bigger picture shows a very small profile for

people on the far margins.

Dean has nothing new to offer that hasn't been soundly rejected already by the Democratic base.

That's not what I would call an effective or strategic bargaining position.

[EFerrari]

41. I sincerely don't know how you get there because

the Democratic base is not in agreement with all these "compromises" that have been made. What you seem to be describing as the "far margins" is actually the opinion of the majority, as we've seen in poll after poll for weeks.

Put another way, if the base was behind this bill, this weekend would be full of popping corks and party hats, not recrimination.

I don't know what to do with that, but there it is.

[saltpoint]

46. I get your point, but the primary election in 2004 spelled Dean's doom.

He did not win the Iowa caucus and was soon out of the race.

He placed a respectable third, but behind two Senators, and only modestly ahead of Dick Gephardt. That's not nearly enough to win. It wasn't nearly enough to sustain his candidacy.

I have read the polling and agree that the majority favors the public option, for example, but the viability of "the Left," as stated in the OP, has not been enhanced by Howard Dean. The chance of including a public option in the final convergence bill has not been enhanced by Howard Dean. Howard Dean is hardly a player in his own party, and is not on any Committee I know of in the 111th Congress. He is a good man but he is politically impotent.

Do I want a Senate closed with Barbara Boxers, Sheldon Whitehouses, Birch Bayhs, and John Kerrys? Sure I do. I'm not expecting that to occur.

We work with what we have and if we are medical clinicians with the public interest in mind we might want to be more collaborative and affirming. I'm not impressed with Dean's media show these past couple of weeks.

[EFerrari]

48. At least he didn't question Obama's mental health.

We live in interesting times, saltpoint.

[karynnj]

59. There is always an effort against the front runner by the others

What Dean faced was not abnormal - except for the intense fight he had with Gephardt. Gephardt felt Dean distorted his record and he retaliated with very tough charges.

[karynnj]

58. You forget that Dean went into Iowa with Gore and Harken endorsing him.

Harken is the best Iowa endorsement to have. He also had the most money. The Clintons were pushing Clark. Kerry had Kennedy, the lion of the Senate and the strongest liberal, but someone not in the centrist mainstream. Of all the major candidates, Kerry was the one with the least positive media coverage - his coverage was mostly on when he should drop out.

The fact is Kerry, his vets, his fireman, and MA supporters, face to face, had a message that resonated. I initially liked Kerry and Dean, but quickly found Kerry more compelling - and with the more liberal record.

[LittleBlue]

16. Which is why we lost in 2004

We chose a guy they pegged as a waffler because he had no clear message, and they nailed us for it.

Dean was at least unequivocal about his views.

[saltpoint]

19. We didn't lose.

Dean didn't have the support of a majority of Democrats, much less the more conservative voting public for a general election.

You're not even close.

See?

[EFerrari]

23. The truth is we didn't lose. It was stolen in Ohio.

That was bigger than Dean, bigger than Kerry and it took months to completely cover up.

[saltpoint]

26. It was also one of my points.

Thanks for endorsing it.

Kenneth Blackwell was the chief coverer-upper.

[EFerrari]

30. And then that SOB went on to give lectures on "Business Ethics".

That's how he's making his living!

lol

[saltpoint]

31. Which son of a bitch do you mean?

[EFerrari]

Blackwell. Can you believe it? He's paying his rent by giving lectures

on ETHICS!

[saltpoint]

37. Yep. Blackwell is a piece of work.

Ohio Dems of our acquaintance have distrusted him pretty much from the git-go.

I don't blame the one bit.

[LittleBlue]

24. We didn't lose? I thought Bush had a second term.

My mistake then, I guess in some people's heads we won and made Bush a one-termer.

Get over 2004: Kerry was a weak candidate who couldn't stand strongly for anything, and ironically enough that's why he lost.

[saltpoint]

27. No, he stole the election, even as he stole it in 2000.

Kerry was not a weak candidate.

It would be worth paying to hear you debate him on the virtues of his candidacy and life-long public service. I would pay plenty to hear you challenge him on any point you chose.

[EFerrari]

36. The torture president was never elected once, you are 100% correct. n/t

[LittleBlue]

Yeah, right. He stole 3 million votes. If that helps you sleep at night, keep believing it.

Meanwhile, they hammered Kerry with his stances on Swift Boaters, war, etc. He lost winning arguments because he had no hard convictions, and voters could tell this.

I could tell this and I voted for him.

[saltpoint]

40. Again, I'm shelling out cash on the barrel to hear you on a public

stage confront Kerry on his integrity, character, and years of public service.

I'm talkin' big bucks.

[LittleBlue]

44. That's not what I'd hammer him on. I'd hammer him on being weak in his convictions

and in his message. And I'd have exit polling to back it up.

Kerry wouldn't dare show up in public to be flogged in this manner; that's the reason he went into virtual seclusion after his loss, he was in disbelief. And I think he knows it.

[saltpoint]

47. You'd have your opportunity to run down your entire grocery list,

and my offer to pay to watch is still good.

[karynnj]

62. Kerry did not go into seclusion EVER

He returned to the Senate when it resumed a few weeks later and he reached out via email. (It was HRC who avoided the Senate for nearly a month when it was in session after her loss.)

I have seen Kerry many times in public and he has never avoided a question or ran from anyone. It was not Kerry who whined rather prissily about not wanting to be a pin cushion.

Exit polls can not measure conviction, which Kerry's long career demonstrates. Polls also can't measure the quality of a message that the media refused to propagate.

[karynnj]

61. he only needed to suppress around 60,000 in Ohio

Had there been enough machines in Ohio he would have pulled off an upset. Kerry has plenty of convictions and the reality is there was little difference on Iraq between them. Did you notice Kerry in the debates was againt permanent bases and occupation? Or that Kerry had a more coherent plan - then and in 2006, when Dean preferred the Korb plan to Kerry/Feingold.

The fact is that the media condoned a character assassination with the SBVT. They had all the official records in April 2004. This is better defense than any candidate in my lifetime had to any charge,

[karynnj]

60. Dean with his"clear" message polled about 20 points behind Bush

Kerry made it close enough that they suppressed the vote. Kerry's message was strong and clear and most of the 2008 candidates used large parts of Kerry's 2004 plan - down to repeating his words.

[Sebastian Doyle]

42. Which is why a state owned by MonSatan should never pick Presidential candidates.

That caucus was bullshit and what happened immediately after even more so. Net result, we ended up with a weak candidate who ran on a pathetic DLC platform, and put the entire election in Ken Blackwell's hands.

[saltpoint]

50. We disagree. Iowans who showed up for that caucus are U.S. voters,

rightly and truly.

They voted. Dean did not win.

[karynnj]

64. The same Montsanto that Dean favored wjile governor of VT

Dean had a major advisor in 2003 who was a former Montsanto VP. Kerry did not run on a DLC platform or Kennedy would not have been there with him. On heath care he had the best planned and had as his key advisor a longtime Kennedy aide. On teh environment and alternative energy, he was endorsed in the PRIMARIES by the League of Conservation Voters because he was a lifetime environmentalist - and by far the best on this issue.

He had a clearer plan for internationalizing the effort and quickly turning Iraq back to the Iraqis. He had a strong clear foreign policy vision.

Dean actually might have had a better chance had he run as the moderate Governor that he was. Kennedy backed the liberal in the race.

[Fridays Child]

21. Also known as the Democratic wing of the Democratic party.

Dr. Dean's description, I believe. He's a hero, in my eyes.

[saltpoint]

39. He may be your hero but he was unfortunately wounded in battle.

I also believe that the Democrats in Iowa counties who voted in their state's Democratic caucus consider themselves to be Democrats.

Dean's suggestion that this was somehow not the case is one of the reasons he fell off the horse.

[EFerrari]

43. He really is and I don't even use that word.

lol

[karynnj]

65. Dean described himself thusly: Kerry got applause calling Kennedy a leader

of the Democratic wing of teh Democratic party.

[onenote]

7. time will tell

Depending on how things play out, Dean may well have simply made Dean irrelevant again.

[saltpoint]

10. I think History is going to favor your interpretation.

+1.

[coti]

56. Sounds like you have more faith in the private insurance industry than Dean.

Well...good luck with that. ;)

[EFerrari]

14. Howard Dean has never been irrelevant, particularly when he was party chair

and came up with the strategy that put us in the majority.

Your memory may vary. :)

[ShortnFiery]

17. No, it's the bullshit SPIN that makes the game. However, when the people have little to lose

their attitude will be less PLIABLE.

Dean is spot on. :thumbsup:

[FrenchieCat]

11. I like Howard Dean a lot. I think he speaks clearly, and says

a lot that needs to be said.

I just don't put him on one side, and the WH on the other though.
I think the WH needs their coattails pulled,
and although I want this Bill to get through,
Dr. Dean, since all is not over,
is saying what needs to be said.

There doesn't need to be villains
and super people on horseback to the rescue....
that's only in the comic books.

[EFerrari]

13. After the WH called him irrational, at that point you pretty much do have to take sides.

The White House did that, not Dean.

[FrenchieCat]

20. I don't have to take sides......

because I firmly believe that each is doing what they believe is their best
in insuring that we come out with the best bill possible.

People say a lot of things,
that doesn't mean I have to react
negatively one way or the other.
I am not a child who is going to automatically react
as though preprogrammed to be simple.

This country is having a debate,
and it is good to hear it out
keeping an open mind.

This ain't, after all about Howard Dean, or even Barack Obama,
it's not about the battle of the various "Cult of Personalities",
or it shouldn't be.....
as it really is about making progress for the American people,
and being as affective as can be considering the limitations
of a Party of NO, a fucked up media, and folks who can't seem to see more than Black & White.

Howard Dean knows this well,
considering how the media took him down.

I'll will keep my ire for the opposition, Thank you.....
because they are the real scumbags.

[EFerrari]

28. That's a fine position, a wise one. And it does overlook

the slams against Dean who arguably did more to get Democrats elected than anyone else since 2006.

If we want quality people working for us, we don't treat them like that.

[FrenchieCat]

38. I think that Howard Dean is a bigger man than many.

I think the personality trait that he shares with Barack Obama,
is that neither are petty vindictive men bent on revenge and
being able to say "I told you so".

Obama is not trifling and neither is Dr. Dean,
although neither is perfect in anyway.

We would be better off if we all could be more that way.

You can get a notebook and track what you consider to be points for or against,
but I would wager that neither Dean nor Obama consider this much of a game,
but rather a challenge that needs to be won, and won as well as possible
for the American people, and against the GOP assholes who long dug our hole.

[EFerrari]

51. Launching an assault on Dean's credibility and mental health is not trifling.

We agree there.

It would be much better for all of us if these people could work together, I agree.

[FrenchieCat]

52. You can do that....what you are doing.

but in the end, it doesn't formulate into a solution
that helps those who need it.

That's why recrimination and keeping score
is exactly how the GOP handles things.
Because they are gigantic assholes.

Like I said, the biggest thing I respect about Dr. Dean,
is exactly what I like about Barack Obama;
that they allow shit to slide off their back,
cause they don't see what they are doing as being about themselves,
and that would be correct.

That's why I don't have to choose between those two;
cause they are both on my side,
regardless of what some might want to say.

[Jackpine Radical]

34. Thanks, Frenchie. Sometimes we forget oud debate is about the means, not the ends.

The problem with the Internets is that people are forever seeking out information and opinion that merely confirms their pre-existing notions. I think we need to fight against that. I don't think this means I have to swim through the muck of FR or hang out on teabagger sites, but surely I should be giving consideration to the discrepant views offered up by others who at least share my fundamental reality-based worldview and humanistic values. The fight is not about underlying principles, but about the means for serving those principles. Certainly also, the current situation is a complex and vexing one. Here is one of the main places where left-of-center debate can happen. Not being a member of any organized political party (to quote Will Rogers)--or at least a regimented one--is a virtue. And I believe that the debates on DU do percolate up to "higher levels" within the party. I respect a lot of people I disagree with here, and I would not want them silenced simply because I disagree with them.

[FrenchieCat]

45. I agree.

I'm trying for reality based observations here.....
and yes, it is about the means much more than the ends.....
because I think that we all share the ends as to what we would like to see.

When I get frustrated,
sometimes taking a deep breath is required.

I want what is best....but I do not claim to know the exact manner in getting it done.
I voted for barack Obama because I do have some faith in him that he can get us there,
but I don't have any illusions that it can be done just right all in one fell swoop.
I still believe that this bill is better than none for a myriad of reasons,
and I will work towards that end, regardless of what others are busy doing.

I didn't come here to DU, those years ago, to find flaws,
as much as to find solutions that would help as many of us as possible.

[jonnyblitz]

33. Dean is ok but i never considered him a leftist. nt

[Jackpine Radical]

57. I think he's a little further left now than in his Governor days.

I was an early Deaniac, but not particularly because I considered him left enough. He has become a very solid Democrat over time.

[saltpoint]

49. In agreement with jonnyblitz.

Dean is a strong mind but he is not a Leftist.

[Vidar]

53. Recommended. Dean, unlike Obam, seems to be for the people.

[DCBob]

55. Actually this public option battle has made the "left"look like a bunch of irrational lunatics..

even to many Democrats.

[suzie]

63. +1