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
18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

HelenWheels

(2,284 posts)
1. I continue to be a Deaniac
Fri Nov 24, 2017, 09:25 AM
Nov 2017

I believe the Democratic Party was responsible for getting rid of him during his presidential run. Although I love President Obama I regret he did not give him the job as Secretary of HHS. I also believe Howard's 50 State Strategy paid a great part in Pres. Obama's victory.

DFW

(54,379 posts)
6. As well you should!
Fri Nov 24, 2017, 09:57 AM
Nov 2017

Rahm never got over the screaming match with Howard in 2006 over the 50 State strategy. He also apparently never forgave Howard for being right. When Obama selected Rahm as his Chief of Staff, I saw Howard's rightful place as HHS secretary sink below the waves faster than the Titanic did. It was obvious Rahm would never let Howard be any part of the Administration, and in the beginning, Obama was too dependent on Rahm's get-it-done energy to oppose him on this. With Sibelius, we lost out twice--not only NOT having Howard's energy and know-how where they would have done the country some real good, but also vacating the seat of a Democratic governor in Kansas in favor of an incompetent Republican.

karynnj

(59,503 posts)
9. Although I ultimately preferred Kerry, for a long time I wanted either him or Dean
Fri Nov 24, 2017, 10:42 AM
Nov 2017

and worried they would knock each other out,

I think keeping Dean as DNC chair would have been the best move. I saw Dean at as Burlington VT event and while in queue to shake his hand, heard him speak to others who knew him well. My observation based on just this was that getting people elected and caring for the local parties was his passion. He was far more animated speaking of where we could possibly win in 2014 than on whether he would run in 2016 or any issues, local or national.

I think 2006 and 2008 were wave years in our favor and anyone as DNC chair would have looked good, but though I can not prove it, I think his work on the state parties, which in some places were very underfunded and a mess in 2004, likely meant a solid candidate was there and supported as some Republican candidates imploded. That, not an idea that our Presidential nominee could win in all 50 states was what the 50 state strategy meant,

I think 2018 could be like 2006. Many long safe Republican seats could be in play as they were in VA. We need good local and state parties to get the most advantage out of this. Given that the House is affected by gerrymandering and the Senate by the fact that this is a year when we have most of the seats because this is the class that won 2012 and might first have won 2006, we need to get everything we have even a remote chance of getting,

I hope our current head really has the same passion Dean had .

NewJeffCT

(56,828 posts)
17. agree that the 50 state strategy was extremely important
Fri Nov 24, 2017, 11:52 AM
Nov 2017

It was a huge mistake not to at least let him continue was head of the DNC.

DFW

(54,379 posts)
3. Former?
Fri Nov 24, 2017, 09:39 AM
Nov 2017

Howard got in trouble for speaking his mind long before Bush, Jr. and Trump
made it OK to speak without even having a mind.
[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

I had dinner and breakfast with him when he was here in Düsseldorf last month.
I was and remain a Deaniac.

japple

(9,825 posts)
7. Any chance he would consider running? I always thought he was really
Fri Nov 24, 2017, 10:07 AM
Nov 2017

given short shrift by the leaders of the Democratic Party.

DFW

(54,379 posts)
13. None, and that is straight from Howard
Fri Nov 24, 2017, 11:14 AM
Nov 2017

He just turned 69 last week, and besides that, Judy would order a leg shackle if he even thought about it out loud.

As far back as the Obama inauguration, Howard was already musing that Obama was the right age for an incoming president to be. He and Hillary are now both committing to earnest and intense recruitment efforts to get young Democrats involved as potential candidates, and I'm talking about local level, dog catcher on up. This is how we start to recapture state legislatures that can produce governors that can start to undo gerrymandering and voting rights suppression. This will probably be Howard's main focus for as long as he remains a public figure.

japple

(9,825 posts)
18. Thanks for that bit of information. It's good to know that there are folks at that level who
Fri Nov 24, 2017, 12:22 PM
Nov 2017

are working on turning this country around. Some of us, self included, are working at the local level to do the same thing. The Democratic Party in my home county has been in hibernation for several election cycles. For the first time in many, many years, we have a candidate that will be running against Tom Graves in the 14th District of Georgia.

DFW

(54,379 posts)
14. He would have been a FABULOUS president
Fri Nov 24, 2017, 11:16 AM
Nov 2017

Pragmatic, energetic, educated, experienced, level-headed, progressive and SMART.

Not only that, I would have been invited to 12 string guitar jam sessions at the White House.
Talk about regrets!

DFW

(54,379 posts)
16. Ironically, without Bush, Jr., Howard would probably never have gained such national prominence
Fri Nov 24, 2017, 11:33 AM
Nov 2017

Under a president Gore, Howard would have just been another vocal supporter. Howard has never been given much credit for this, but he is a big environmentalist, and would have been very vocal in supporting Gore's initiatives in this direction. Also, since Gore would never have nominated Alito or Roberts to the Supreme Court, there would have been no Citizens United. Thus not only no Iraq invasion, but probably an unbroken chain of competent, benevolent Democrats in the White House since January 20th, 1993. Unless a President Gore had nominated Howard as his VP to replace an increasingly irritating VP Lieberman, or nominated Howard to a cabinet post, I don't see how Howard would have gotten the attention he did as an opposition leader. The two did get to be close for a while, but a lot of that was some of Howard's commiserating with Gore after losing the 2004 nomination. I was at a small fundraiser with both of them in May, 2008, and they both talked openly about it. What a team they made, too! Completely comfortable with each other. Talk about imagining a better world--Gore with Dean as VP during his second term as President, and then two terms of President Howard after that (and then two terms of President Obama after Howard!).

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Former Deaniacs, Howard r...