WP: As Primary Approaches, Questions Cling to Dean's Gains

I thought this was a very good assessment of the current situation for Dean and the democratic party. Its by Dan Balz


snip...
Dean has prospered in the season known as the invisible primary, when fundraising totals, organizational and institutional support and polls substitute for the decisions of voters. His campaign, particularly in contrast to others, has money and energy, built on his opposition to the Iraq war and his challenge to party leaders in Washington. He has growing support within the party, symbolized by the endorsement Dean received from former vice president Al Gore.

snip...
"Democratic Party activists, whatever their ideological perspective, have a view that their leaders have been completely ineffective in combating President Bush," one Democratic strategist said. "The leaders have a view that either they're doing the best they can or that more clever centrism is better or they need someone with a military background at the head of the party."

Al From, who heads the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, credited Dean with running a successful campaign but questioned whether he can effectively lead the party as nominee. "We need to lay out a reason to replace Bush," From said. "We can't just depend on the fact that the activists in our party are angry at him and like Dean. There aren't enough of them."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35153-2003Dec27.html

The story is too good. Too much money at stake for
them to give up on the Howard Dean "Story," without a fight.

They will keep the un-Dean coverage fragmented and continue to
snipe at candidates who could seriously challenge GW. In all likelihood, Dean supporters will given their wish and we will pay the price in November and for the next 4 years.

I believe this is a real coup that's going on. Something along the lines of the Russian or Chinese revolution, or even Hitler's take-over. I am very, very afraid.

You can say what you want about military leadership, but making it through medical school, internship , and residency is much better preparation for the rigors of campaigning.

Where the military is physically numbing, the physician training process creates someone who is sharp mentally for long durations. Just wait till October and November, when Dumbya is practically a drooling zombie, and Dean is still focused and sharp.
It's one of the biggest pluses on Dean's side.

There is no other possible explanation.

"But another centrist leader, Simon B. Rosenberg of the New Democratic Network, said party leaders here should recognize what Dean has done. "The Washington party is a failed party, and Dean's criticism of the Washington party is incredibly accurate," he said. "We're completely out of power and heading for permanent minority status if we don't start modernizing the party. Dean has been a modernizer and innovator, and should be embraced for it. Instead he's being attacked for doing it differently."

This from the same group that gave away Congress in 2002. Screw Al From, screw the DLC, and screw the pink tutu Deomcrats.

Wes Clark is our best hope for reinstating the sky where it belongs.

I'll never vote for Clark - not ever.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

It takes a whole lot to get throgh West Point 1st in the class. Clark is not a big guy. The physical aspects of the training im sure woere tougher on him, and he overcame that and still finished at the top of his class.

"Our primary voters are dialed into electability like I've never seen before, and it is the argument against Dean," said a strategist working for another candidate. "But what the other candidates lack is a piece of evidence they can lay on the table to say, this is why I get the electability card over Dean. If somebody could come up with that, that could make a big difference in this race."
-------------------------------------------

The above paragraph from the article is interesting.

Intuitively, I think that Wesley Clark and John Edwards are each more electable than Howard Dean in the general.

But in polls, none of the candidates do much better than Howard Dean when people are asked, "Would you vote for ________ or Bush?"

Intuitively, I think that Wesley Clark and John Edwards are each more electable than Howard Dean in the general.

Clark, certainly. Edwards? He polls below Al Sharpton in the primary elections.

...and Ashton Kutcher!

Wes Clark and Howard Dean are tied as the "most electable" Democrats, with a seven point deficit each against Bush. That's a great place to start and a testament to the campaigns both those men are running.

Now if only Clark will relent and take the VP slot when Dean takes the nomination, things would be much better for the party (and bad for the Republicans). That said, I think ANY of the candidates running could win.

Then again, this election is about more than just winning this election -- we need major change in the party and in the country.

nt

Never mind.

n/t

:kick: