"Dean can't win," "Dean is like McGovern," etc.... PROVE IT!

I see hardly reason why Dean should be compared to George McGovern, Walter Mondale, or Michael Dukakis.

As I see it, if Dean can't beat Bush, NONE of the Democrats running can beat Bush! And I think we all know that that's not true!

I challenge anyone - ANYONE - to prove to me that Howard Dean can not win the Presidency of the United States. And no, the civil unions issue does not count!

if someone who is pulling together the GRASSROOTS SUPPORT Dean is can't win... we might as well throw in the towel now.

A lot of tourists are around at that this time of year. It should be a lot of fun.

.

...that had any of those 3 won the General election....

...we're having today, right? ;)

Instead of setting up this strawman, tell us why Dean SHOULD be President. That sounds like a more interesting discussion.

...you've not been paying attention. Search "Why I Support Howard Dean" or "Why Howard Dean can win" in the threads... I think I've seen your nick in a few of those threads, surely you weren't in them not reading them, right?

Yes I'm paying attention. And I'm pointing out this thread for what it is - a strawman setup. I'm not going to rise to the bait and mount the attack that the thread poster wants. Instead, I'm asking for a discussion of the issues. Are there issues discussed in other threads? Sure. Is that some reason they should be absent from this one? I don't think so.

But is likely to cause McGovern like effects in the real party workers.


When McGovern was given the nominiation by running as an anti-party candidate, millions of party workers, who's choices were more loyalists to the straight party line candidates, particularly the millions of volunteers, simply walked off of the job, leaving the party without the soft money, donations, and particularly the grunt workers doing all of the work at democratic headquarters all over the nation, puttting flyers out all over the city streets, and going around to poor and black neighborhoods trying to increase voter registration. The result was a travesty. The buzz in the DLC now is that all of the loyal DLC grunt workers DO NOT LIKE DEAN for his attacks on the other candidates, attacks on the party loyalists and so on. Even if every Dean supporter quit their jobs, and paid their own way to go all over the country doing this thankless grunt work, it would not be enough for Dean to compete, get the message out, get new people to register, and so on. Dean says we have to get the 50 percent of Democrats who do not vote out to vote. But has alienated a greaqt number of those who already do vote.

Thats going to be difficulat since he has done such a great job alienating the little old ladies of the League of Women Voters, and all of the other people who ARE not elected officials but have been loyally working for the DLC and DNC for free for many years of their lives.

In 1972, they showed that power they had to change the results of an election and did so. The party does not want to EVER offend the masses of the public who still support DLC candidates, and Dean has destroyed all chances of winning them over by lying about these candidates, and the millions of people who know exactly how hard they have been fighting and opposing and screamining against every Bush plan for the last three years. Dean has lost the loyalty not of the DLC hierarchy, its elected officials, but of its proletariat.

This is why a Dean nomination is a Bush win. Deans people will not have the party machine to work for him. It will largely be Dean and his own campagn apparatus trying to beat the Bush Juggernaut.

As is has been said, History Repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as Farce. The odd part is, that history has shown us evey reason why Dean should not be nominated. But after having given it a great deal of thought, It appears that there is a posibility that Dean could be the nominee. This is simply due to the one powerful trait that can be seen in the American people. The simple inability to learn from the past. The ability to be taken in by simple political talk, and political promises. The average British or French laborer has far greater political sense than the average American, they can be fooled once, but never twice.


To many of those people are going to walk out on Dean. He does not have the same "MAGICAL " appeal to other Americans. Dena has attakched himself to a lot of free floating anger, but most Americans are not angry at the DLC or its candidates, as ALL POLL show.

Many people do not trust Dean or his message, as Many people did not trust McGoverns. Not that because either may be bad men. They many not be. But they used bad methods to project themselves into the national forefront. THey attacked their own. THat was notJUST the DLC leaders, but the little DLC workers who have all their lives been fighting for the party that Dean has attacked. He has attacked them and their loyalty for the last year, and he will be made to pay for it. Dean may get the nomnination, but he will not have the rewsouces of the party machine he needs to win the election. IN order to get the nomination, he has weakened the very party machine he needs to win the election. He is the only cnadidates who has done so. HE is the only candidate who cannot mobize that machiine.

that I could completely turn around. Seriously, what is Dean saying that is so bad that party loyalists would get up and walk out. 1972 was a different time. BTW some of us party loyalists are pushing for Dean... and frankly we feel like we have the right to have our voices heard too. Or is that to much to ask. YES SOME OF US PARTY LOYALISTS SUPPORT DEAN.
BTW the DLC is not the party... it's a group associated with the party. I am NOT part of the DLC. And if the DLC workers don't like Dean is it any wonder... their leadership have basically called his supporters traitors.

Many of who have been working for the party doing grunt work before Dean was out of Diapers. Sorry, this is exactly what happened in 1972 and I am hearing from HUNDREDS of people in my local communities ( I am fairly active in my community's democratic party, that if Dean is the nominess, they are going to sit this one out. They particularly are incenesed about Deans comments on Graham, and the apology did not make differnce) That is Dean is nominated, they can expect no volunteer work locally. An this is in Florida, where is is fairly critical to make a point since the 2000 elections.

This is the EXACT analysis of what happened in 1972. Literally millions of party workers walked out becasue they didpiosed McGoverns attack on the party. I worked McGoverns campaign and sawe it all fall apart because of the walk out on the party. Some of the same people who worked in 1972 are already stating, if its Dean, we go. I have heard them say so myself. ANd I have heardmany others say so. In attacking the party, the DLC, he has attacked them, and that is what the feel and beleive. Sorry, not my opinion, it IS what the party has seen happen. And THIS is the primary reason for the comparison between Dena and McGovern. Dean has attacked the party that a lot of peopl have loyally volunteered to serve. In attackinng it, he has attacked them. They dont like, it, they dont like Dean. Democratic headquaters all over the nation will be virtally empty, understafffed on the night of a Bush / Dean election, with Bush taking the field.

This is Why McAuliff has asked EVERY democratic candidate if they would stand down if the party decide to select the candidates most likely to beat Bush. They know what is going through the halls of all of the little democratic party meetings all over the country, and that message is clear. Deliver a party loyalist, and not a party divider:

4) Dean and the counterculture. It's one thing for Dean to oppose the Iraq war while supporting the use of force against terrorists. It's another thing to convey distrust of the military alongside other icons of American culture. Here's how Dean explained to EMILY's List his objections to Bush's 2001 education bill:

It says that every school has to certify there's constitutionally protected school prayer in your local public school. It says the Boy Scouts have to be able to meet in every school building in this country. It says that the names of rising juniors and seniors go to the higher education establishment and the military. That is law, supported by us as well as the Republicans. If people can't tell the difference between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, why wouldn't they vote for the Republican Party? We have got to stop that kind of thing.

Prayer, the Boy Scouts, and the military. That's way too much to take on at one time, even if you're as clever and confident as Howard Dean. "I don't pay attention to polls, because this campaign is not just about winning; this campaign is about educating and moving America," Dean told the crowd. "If you stand up for the things we believe in, people start to come to you." Maybe so, but a lot of those people will be carrying baseball bats.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2083603/

your personal experience translates everywhere. You are from FL, I'm from MN... and I too am very involved in the party. AND you assume that the DLC is the party. Thats just not true. Again... why is it that we can't ALL have a voice.
Really... I'll get behind your candidate...I'd have alot more respect for you if you could say the same.

What happened in 1972. Look at what happened in 2002 when they tried to run McGovern for the Senate. He still hasnt been forgiven for 1972.

Sorry. You may support Dean and that is why you believethatv EVERYONE who does not support Dean will show up to back him after he has bashed them, although indirectly. Sorry, history has proven you wrong. THis is EXACTLY the historical analysis of why McGovern lost in 1972, and why the Party beleives that Dean will lose in 2004.

For every new person that Dean has goten engaged in politics, he has attacked six and a half who have been engaged for years. And those who are loyal enough to participate in helping the party and being loyal to its stance and position regardless what it is, the "GOOD SOLDIERS" are the Democratic Party's "Fedayeen Saddam" The reason that our own soldiers who "LIBERATED IRAQ" are being killed every day.

Dean has come to "LIBERATE THE PARTY" so his followers say. Well they can expect to be shot at and sabotaged by the party loyalists. TO make an analogy. Dean may win the War, but Lose the Peace.

you go right on assuming this is some kind of take over from outside, you want to know who's insulting, you are. You've implied over and over that we're not Dems, we're infiltrators. Whatever. Guess nothing I've done for the Dems counts at all, I should just shut up and not support the candidate I prefer. You've also given no real support for your contention about how all these party people today are gonna walk.

Wanna talk party loyalty? What the hell are you gonna do if Dean does get nominated. You've talked so much trash, of course you personally can't support him. You're projectiing I think. And frankly NOT BEING VERY LOYAL to the party you claim to work so hard for.

I'm done with this conversation.

Like tens of thousands of other people who have done party work for 30 odd years, enough feel like me abour Denas incessant lying attacks on the DLC and party to simply walk out and let the party know once more, not to incur our wrath by supporting somone who attack his own.

Dean supporters seem to beleive that their presence on DU is representative of the public thoughts about Dean. If this is true, those who hate Dean enough to not vote also represent enough of a group of people on DU to indicate that Dean will loose anywhere from a half million to one and a half million votes by those who will either sit this one out, or those who will not vote for Dean becasue he is fiscally conservative and socially liberal, the opposite profile of the Southern Democratic Voter, who is Socially Conservative and Fiscally Liberal.

so you plan on punishing the democratic party by not voting if Dean is the nominee. Your inscrutable high standards leave you no choice but to support Bush. Noble indeed.

Those who hate Dena enough to not vote have had their wrath incurred because Dean has attacked his own. Your response to this is to attack your own party. I guess that's simple enough, but please don't try to convince people that you will be letting the party know about your dissatisfaction by simply walking out, everyone here has had the pleasure of following your own breadcrumb trail of incessant attack links designed to lead us all out of the Dean supporting forest.

Well you sure are going to show them. Woe unto them who incur your non-voting rage. How will the politicians know that you are a protesting non-voter as opposed to all those other non-voters that just don't give a shit? Non-voters are a dime a dozen and don't seem to have much of a voice at the end of the day, but if anyone can lead them into a non-voting frenzy, you seem to be up to it. Good luck in your endeavors.

No one wanted McGovern to run in 2002. The South Dakotan Democratic party was quite happy to support Tim Johnson in his tight Senate race for reelection. Please stop making stuff up.

Just another one of Nicholas_J's many inaccuracies.

Have you spent every day at the democrtatic camopign headquaters, picking up flyers, going out to pick up democrats to register to vote, and so on. Millions of these people are angry at Dean for his disloyalty to the party, as they were at McGovern, for using the same attack tactics. It gave Nixon one of the biggest landslides in U.S. history.

are you questioning my loyalty? And you've got ABSOLUTELY no facts to back up your "millions of these people are angry at Dean" statement. Finally WHY is it so hard for you to acknowledge that the DLC is not the party. I REPEAT... it is NOT THE PARTY.

while I am new to political activism, having first voted in 2000, and having actively worked for campaigns in 2002, all I can say is I will vote for Howard Dean should he be our nominee. I personally rank him fourth in my list of who I'll vote for in the primary, currently, but I realize that no matter how much he may be "attacking" the Democratic party itself, he will be better than GWB ANY day.

I don't see how any "loyal" Democrat cannot vote for whoever gets the nomination. We simply cannot afford another four years of Bush. This kind of "politicing" is what makes me sick! This will be my first time to vote in a primary, and simply from my experience on DU, I can say it is bitter and nasty and leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

When the Texas primary rolls around, if the contest has been weeded down to Kerry and Dean, I will probably vote for Kerry at that point. However, should Dean go on to win the Democratic nomination -- he's automatically got my vote, and probably $25 -- all this poor college kid can probably spare. To me it is just ridiculous to not support the Democrat! If you are the party establishment, shouldn't you vote for whomever is the nominee, thus ensuring the survival of your party? Why let Bush win in a landslide and make him think he's got a mandate to push this country farther to the right, and it's our destruction? I'd like that explained to me.......

Matthew

Yes Dean has attacked the DLC... but he HASN'T attacked the party. The DLC is not the party. BTW I appreciate your sentiments regarding supporting the nominee. I've voted in every primary and General Election since Dukakis, made numerous phone calls and door knocked and everything else. I have always supported and will continue to support the Nominee.

When the Party chose McGovern...

Many many of the workers for the party simply walked out and the campaign virtually came to a standstill. I hve been involved in such things for year, and Denas attack on the DLC and the "INSIDERS' is already viewed as an attack on the people whos have worked for and supported the party for decades. The little people, the grunt-workers.
That is what McGovern did in 1972, and it is exactly what Dean is doing right now. It will not cost him every worker, but in 1972 it cost McGovern just enough to give Nixon a landslide. All it takes is alienating a few percent of people in the party to translate into ten to twenty percent of the people who just dont vote, but do ALL of the ral work in getting people to register democrat, and stump for candidates, and go door todoor, to kill any possible chance for a democratic win. This has happened MORE thn once, as it also happend with McCarthy.

Dean will not win as he absolutely must have the COMPLETE and TOTAL support of every DLC member and EVERY democratic party worker when it comes down to the campaighn between Bush and Whoever the Democrats nominate, and no matter how much YOU love Dean, there are just enough who do not who will walk out on MR ATTACK THE REST OF THE PARTY, and lose to Bush. As a mater of fact, Bush is counting on Dean getting the nomination, and this is why. Dean has alienated MORE people than he has energized, and he WILL lose if nominated.

You must remember, if you look at all of the candidates, Those who ARE ELECTED WASHINGTON INSIDERS, DLC MEMBERS, account to 65 percent of all polled voters. Dean has what, 15 percent at best. All that is needed is a small percentage of the people who support the DLC and are pissed at Deans attacks to sit the election out, and Bush wins.

I am one of those who will not vote for Dean if nominated. I personally know several hundred who think EXACTLY the same way.

They all view Bush as the lesser of two evils.

"I am one of those who will not vote for Dean if nominated. I personally know several hundred who think EXACTLY the same way. They all view Bush as the lesser of two evils."

I personally do not know several hundred who think EXACTLY the same way. That is quite a feat, does that include cousins or what?

Dean will not win as he absolutely must have the COMPLETE and TOTAL support of every DLC member and EVERY democratic party worker when it comes down to the campaighn between Bush and Whoever the Democrats nominate, and no matter how much YOU love Dean, there are just enough who do not who will walk out on MR ATTACK THE REST OF THE PARTY, and lose to Bush. As a mater of fact, Bush is counting on Dean getting the nomination, and this is why. Dean has alienated MORE people than he has energized, and he WILL lose if nominated.


Are you serious about this view of the presidential election? Please explain more about bush being the lesser of the two evils. I am beginning to think that you are part of some performance art project.

"...all view Bush as the lesser of two evils?"



Who are you hanging out with?

I've got a guess....

On edit: Your Freudian Slip is showing.

Explanation:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=9385&mesg_id=9385

Dean Is the New McCain … And the new Carter, and Goldwater, and McGovern, and Reagan …

Brown may be the new black, but Howard Dean is the new Brown. Jerry Brown, that is: a former governor who seems impervious to the tempering influence of focus groups. Or maybe Dean's the new George McGovern: an anti-war candidate destined to destroy his party. Or perhaps he's the new John McCain: a tightly wound straight-shooter known for his (usually) winning candor.

Dean, the once-obscure Democratic presidential candidate who doubled up on the covers of Newsweek and Time this week, has officially gone mainstream. But it's not like Dean came out of nowhere, campaign-watchers agree. He came straight out of the history books—they just can't decide which one.

So, here's Slate's brief guide to the many faces of Dean.
...
http://slate.msn.com/id/2086718/
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=16753&mesg_id=16753

know he's a newbie. Once again... here's another person that thinks the world began the day they noticed there was something called politics.

Were you around in '72 or '88 to see what happened, you wouldn't be asking to prove to you something you don't have a clue about or what happened and why.

some people's kids... <exasperation>

some of us were around (OK I was a little young in 72 but I was here...and I was definitely around in 88, Dean is NO Dukakis)

I have some photos of it, but I don't know how to download them. But I can tell you that Dean lost not because of the civil unions issue (which doesn't count).

It turns out that Dean couldn't beat Bush, but neither could any of the Democrats. Apparently, Bush captured Osama Bin Laden after the terrorist hijacked Air Force One. Osama demanded ONE BILLION DOLLARS from the UN Security Council, at least until Bush wrestled him to the floor with some moves his personal trainer taught him. Who would have thought it?

Does Bush still have chicken legs in the future?

People don't want to vote for him. If Sharpton and Lieberman are leading Dean in polls in some states, what hope does he have? Further, people think he can't win, so why spend 3 hours in line to vote. And if you are going to do that, then why not vote for Nader, if you don't think Dean is going to win, give Nader the votes for the Green Party has federal dollars and standing to raise issues about the environment and corperate welfare. My vote will count toward the 5% national vote count, it will not carry Dean into the White House. Dean has about 1 million supporters. That isn't enough, you need about 50 million to make. Not many people have not heard of Dean by now. I know you are really excited about him. But I am not, and most are not.

:kick:
J4Clark

...just a question...

Of course, he is leading or tied for the lead in recent polls in New Hampshire, Iowa, and Michigan.

As he is in statistical Dean heats in every poll, even those in which he is a few ponts ahead of Kerry.

However, Kerry statistically is ahead of Dean in ONE NEWHAMPSHIRE POLL, with the lowest Margen of error of all of the polls, thew Latest American Research poll.

If Kerry has 12 point and Dean 15, in a poll with a 6 point marging of error, Dean and Kerry are dead even in that poll.

Dean won the MoveOn primary with about 44% of the vote.

So it still stands. Dean is not in the lead of ANY poll in which his ability to BEAT Bush is the question...

Or are you saying that BUSH was one of the candidates who was slated to be given MoveONs endorsement if he won it?

And the SOLE purpose of the Move on Primary was to select a democratic candidates to give the endosement to. Dean lost the Move on Primary.

Once more than 40% of americans actually know who Dean is, you'll see an even huger jump in the polls. His name recognition is actually right around Edwards', but his poll numbers are much higher everywhere except SC.

Here's a link to drive home my point, though I was wrong, his name recognition just went over 40%. But the thing is, his name recognition went up 9% in this poll, and the percentage of people who said they "would vote for or consider voting for" him also went up 9%. Check the second box on the right side of the page.
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=190

but I dont like being the same about my man DK.

Mondale or Dukakis I'd vote for him no questions asked. Those men had real records of progressive values that they FOUGHT FOR their entire careers, not just campaign year conversions to the left. I don't believe any of them ever attacked liberal icons to delight their GOP allies and assert their centrism.

McGovern attacked the party and its leaders itself, as Dean is doing, and that cost him tenso of thousands of democratic party volunteers, and a enough votes to give Nixon a landslide.

Same thing will happen if Dean is nominated, Which is why the party can and will prevent Dean from being nominated. Remember, even if Dean does not participate, the DLC can have all of its members turn over their delegates to ONE candidate who they beleive can win, iin such a scenario, Dean looses in all possible variation that can be calculated.

The party is already talking about selecting ONE candidate and having others stand down...

If Dean does not, he will lose his credibility with many of those who currently support him and only retain a modest percentage of those who support him now, if he is seen placing his personal ambition over the party decision to place someone who it considers has the best chance against Bush. Which means Dean will lose at least 30 percent of thos who currently support him, perhaps more.

If the party did that they'd lose hundreds of thousands of independent votes from people who would resent the party orthodoxie's monkey business. By the way, where has all that "hard work" from the rank and file led the Democratic Party, hmm? What does the Democratic party control? Not the White House, neither house of congress, hell, they even lost the Mass. and Maryland governorships. The Democratic Party needs shaken up and the insiders need to accept that time and energy is useless if it doesn't net practical results.

After the landslide came the resignation. In the long-run maybe the McGovern campaign had a part in focusing the nation on the real problems in party politics at the time.

Do you recall what happened before the landslide at the 1968 Democratic convention? That was the real reason that the Democratic party was ripe for "attack". If RFK had not been assasinated the Democrats wouldn't have had the divisions that occured in '68.

Remember that 1972 was the year that the voting age was lowered to 18 which introduced a large segment of new activists to the party. They were the most motivated group due to the fact that they were the ones that were the fodder for the Vietnam war, the number one issue of the election. Can't really blame them for taking on the party at that point, too bad their parents didn't see things the same way.

In this way I guess Dean is like McGovern, he is bringing in many new activists to the party, of course that will make waves for the status quo the DLC/beltway types will surely bristle.

The difference between now and '72 is that the cultural and generational gaps have been broken down. At this point in time the cultural gap is between idealogues which seem to cancel each other out in these days of 50/50 or 30/30/30 polls. The winner in 2004 will be the person who can generate the support of the the 50% plus the ones that haven't been voting for some reason or another.

I believe that Dean is the only candidate in this race who will bring those previous non-voters to the polls as well as motivating many of the party loyalists who are hungering for inspiration.

As we all know: you can't manufacture inspirato.
on edit: extra bonus points for those who can identify the bolded reference.

Interesting look-back at a well intentioned idea that has become
extremely costly and has given us lotsa losers.

IMH&EO:think:

interesting that you interpret this as a losing strategy since that is the very thing that has allowed the right-wing to gain a foothold.

From school board elections to the Starr investigation, they seem to have learned a thing or two from this "New Politics" movement.

More about the McGovern-Frazier Commission here:
http://www.wwnorton.com/lowi6/instructors/resource/Lecture%207.htm

"To engage this strategy, the New Politics movement created a political weapon that has influenced our politics and society more than most military weapons have over the past twenty years. That weapon works in three stages, and can be called the RIP Bomb. The R-I-P stands for Revelation, Investigation, and Prosecution. Revelation refers to the use of the media for revealing errors, wrongdoing, and mismanagements in governmental projects. Investigation refers to launching congressional investigations—in particular Senate hearings—to inquire into the revelations made by the media. Finally, prosecution refers to pursuing the wrongdoers through judicial action. This prosecutorial phase was institutionalized during the mid-1970s with the creation of the Office of the Special Counsel. The Special Counsel is an investigatory lawyer appointed by the courts at the request of the attorney general when wrongdoing has been disclosed and a highly skilled and thorough investigation is needed by the Senate.

This RIP weapon was first used against Richard Nixon. Nixon had resoundingly defeated McGovern in 1972 and seemed solidly in power until Watergate raised its ugly head. Without apologizing for Nixon, it is important to understand the attack on Nixon in institutional terms. Forces opposed to Nixon—in particular, the New Politics movement—found a weapon to use against him. His wrongdoings were disclosed by the media, he was investigated by the Congress, and finally, judicial proceedings were begun that ultimately forced his resignation—for if he had refused to resign, he would almost certainly have been impeached.

I need the bonus points.

but what you really need is:

1. clogging lessons
2. a spine piercing

but what am I?

And what has happened before, is likely to recur.

The problem is, as rthe campaign moves forward, the complette disconnect between Dean's record as governor, and the fact that he is pretty much all talk, whihc has resulted in numerous changes in stance on the war in Iraq, on Social Security, On the Death penalty, and on and on. The more the campaign moves forward, the more obvious it is becoming to many that Dean HAS NOT PLATFORM, and has simply been running on the anger of one sector of the electorate.

An electorate who for the most part seem to have no idea themselves what their political stance is, or change it everytime Dean is caught changing his.
For the most port, mmost Dean supporters are shollowly supporting a candidate who simply SAYS what they want to hear, but has NO past record of EVER having behaved or supported the plat form that these supporters seem to desparately wish to hear.

If anything, Dean has tapped into the political delusions of the young and disaffected.

In the end, you may be very, very shocked when you find that I, and people like me, represent a large enough group of people to deny Dean the presidency, if he gets the nomination based on a slick campign that is all style, and no substance.

There are many people, on the far left off the party, who see this in Dean clearly, and simply see Bush a the lesser of two evils.

We ALL know exactly what Bush will do. But Deans reputation for making campaigning on platforms and issues that he abandons as soon as he is in office is so well known that he could patent it.

I and many of my friends are of the same opinion on Dr. Dean.

He waffles too much on issues, and his record is fairly conservative on many issues.

(If Dean gets the Dem nomination.)

as being too liberal. Obviously the mid-term election of 2002 did not teach the Dem leadership one single thing. Other than the war and gay rights (civil unions), Dean is a very moderate/centrist Dem.

Dean's NRA rating, budget balancing and health care plan will appeal to many crossover voters. And if Gephardt gets bumped out Dean will pick up many of the Labor endorsements. Dean was tied with Geppy for a few.

Also, I love Dean for his foreign policy as well as stating that if American companies ship out labor to third world countries, that unions should also go to help organize workers.

This whole McGovern Mondale comparison is a wet dream drummed up by the DLC (From and Reed), based on half-truths and inuendos.

The comparison is anachronistic and idiotic which provides the clue for its proper retranslation. Bush is Nixon in search of a McGovern. THAT is it. The Rad Right is anachronistic and idiotic by its nature.
If Rove can't find a McGovern, unfortunately they have lot more dirty money and tricks in their arsenal.

Yes, Dean could win in a fair election. However right now EVERYONE except Bush is a Mondale or McGovern. Them's the new rules you have to break.

__Bush Re-Elect Drops to 42%-47% - Tied with Unnamed Dem

"A Zogby poll released today shows that when asked if George Bush deserves re-election, only 46% of Americans said yes and a narrow majority, 47%, said it is time for someone new. The poll, with a margin of error of +/- 3%, on a generic 2004 ballot between Bush and a Democratic candidate, Bush received 47% of support, and a Democratic candidate received 44%, putting the Bush and a Democratic candidate in a statistical dead heat still a year before the Democratic candidate is selected. The second poll, released yesterday by Fox News/Opinion Dynamics and published in National Journal's Hotline showed should the 2004 election be held today, those planning to reelect Bush had dropped to 42%."

http://www.zogby.com/Soundbites/ReadClips.dbm?ID=5528

a slick pol who believes in "strategy over principle, for anything it takes to win".

Of course I voted for Clinton in the general elections, and I will for Dean if he makes it that far. But in the primaries? No.