Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

eridani

(51,907 posts)
Thu Jun 12, 2014, 03:23 AM Jun 2014

Charles Pierce: Point The Second: I still miss Howard Dean.


http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/24175-focus-pop-goes-the-weasel-erick-cantor

Remember how Howard Dean put together a 50-state strategy and everybody laughed at him, and then when the wave election hit in 2006, all the credit went to Rahm Emanuel because so many of our elite pundits admire unapologetic dickheads most of all? Anyway, I was thinking of that last night when I realized that Eric Cantor had lost his primary to a religio-Randian economics prof and the Democratic alternative was a place-holder named Jack Trammell, who also works at Randolph-Macon College -- Yellow Jackets represent! Whut-whut! -- who this morning finds himself in a more winnable race than existed at six o'clock last night. Why, I thought, hasn't Trammell, or someone like him -- or a couple of someones like him -- been out there for six months beating more hell out of Cantor than Dave Brat was? Why did his website look like it was designed by Jukt Micronics? The Republicans never shied away from going after Tom Daschle, or Tom Foley before him. Why were national Democrats caught flat-footed by last night's results? It's their job not to be surprised by this kind of thing. The primary benefit of Dean's approach was that it presumed that progressive ideas could sell anywhere, and that it was part of the mandate of a national party not to concede any race anywhere.
7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Charles Pierce: Point The Second: I still miss Howard Dean. (Original Post) eridani Jun 2014 OP
KnR. nt tblue37 Jun 2014 #1
fire debbie wasserman schultz DonCoquixote Jun 2014 #2
Dean seems to be the only national Dem leader in BlueMTexpat Jun 2014 #3
I'm with you Charlie SleeplessinSoCal Jun 2014 #4
me too barbtries Jun 2014 #5
More than the "wise" strategy PATRICK Jun 2014 #6
I miss him too. nt Javaman Jun 2014 #7

BlueMTexpat

(15,368 posts)
3. Dean seems to be the only national Dem leader in
Thu Jun 12, 2014, 04:19 AM
Jun 2014

recent years who truly understands this.

The primary benefit of Dean's approach was that it presumed that progressive ideas could sell anywhere, and that it was part of the mandate of a national party not to concede any race anywhere.

Amen.

SleeplessinSoCal

(9,112 posts)
4. I'm with you Charlie
Thu Jun 12, 2014, 06:01 AM
Jun 2014

Sidelining Dean may have made sense in 2009, but by the day after the 2010 mid-terms he should have been welcomed with open arms & tails firmly between legs.

PATRICK

(12,228 posts)
6. More than the "wise" strategy
Thu Jun 12, 2014, 06:45 AM
Jun 2014

of saving your second best hoard of corporate money for races based on statistics, there is no doubt that the best friend of the GOP outside of maniacal plutocrats is the Democratic Party leadership itself. Also weaker efforts at reversing gerrymandering despite our second best more modest(conflicted?) efforts. Weaker to non resistance to crooked election practices and probably aching to get rid of mass turnout people efforts that involve dependence on the unwashed. Not wanting to grow the party leadership beyond the control of the current power clique.

Even more, it is plainly a governing strategy way beyond that fake, pathetically irrational non-partisanship slop they try to pass as the conventional wisdom of compromise and consensus. Andrew Cuomo, sired by a liberal governor who lost power and was convinced he had no permission to run by such leaders, such rationales, has run the state in a shrewd and competent fashion based on the parity game.

To protect the GOP. To at the same time encourage a monolithic blandness so the current Dems might be kept in check from going majority progressive and thus not really have to represent public desires and expectations for truly major needs. To avoid blame for falling short, to dole out increments to avoid revolt, to dissipate blame. To serve the money that is the undoubted bedrock of the institutions "competed" for AGAINST the main political foe- Them, the People, Forget the fact that the insane, monster recruiting GOP is grabbing for the crown of tyranny on the brink of their own irrelevance to the planet. The Dems continue to help foster the image of some mythical legitimate GOP party even as the sane flee that horror with no sane party to welcome them aboard.

Bi-partisanship helps keep the American people divided as the parties unite mainly for the interest of the crazed monied minority in an economic system equally dysfunctional. It is like watching a never decided tennis match where only one side is a good sport and keeps helping the cheater back on his feet.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Charles Pierce: Point Th...