Great Guardian/Observer article on Dean

[Eloriel]

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,992208,00.html

Democrats put smart money on Howard's way

Former Vermont governor takes establishment rivals by surprise with $7m presidential war chest

Dean insists he has greater staying power than McCain. 'We're ahead of where we thought we'd be. We thought it would be very difficult to get name recognition until the primary season began,' he said. 'We need to convince Democrats there's no need to compromise with the most radical and right-wing President of my lifetime.'

In stark contrast to this optimism, the campaigns of establishment candidates such as Al Gore's 2000 running mate Joe Lieberman, and Richard Gephardt, once the most powerful Democrat in Congress, are floundering, both in terms of raising money and generating enthusiasm among party supporters.

Polls in Iowa and New Hampshire, the two small but influential states that open the primary season, have predicted that the former Vermont governor could win the Democratic nomination in both, prompting the mainstream media to devote time and space to Dean's sudden transformation from fringe candidate to serious player, and his opponents to heighten their attacks on him.

Massachusetts Senator John Kerry has raised more money than the other eight candidates and remains the favourite of the party establishment, but his camp has clearly been rattled by Dean's rise. 'He's tapped into an angry, motivated constituency who, for three months at least, have pulled out their chequebooks,' said Jim Jordan, Kerry's campaign manager.

------

So how 'bout it, folks? Is your "anger" likely to go away by the end of the next quarter?

Eloriel

[Cha]

1. I hope Dean keeps surprising us and puts those lies to rest ...

that are being written all over the place about him now...cause they are all panicking!

They always have to compare our candidates to someone....in the past...some loser who didn't make it...

they are going to be comparing bush to his pappy,,,real soon.

[tedoll78]

2. Yup!

One key thing he needs this quarter: more donations. I gave $25 last quarter, and I'm trying my best to scrounge-up another $100. If we can do $15 million for Dean in this quarter (as has been suggested in several places), last week's increased media attention will seem like a mere blip. There will be a true shitstorm if we pull-in $15 million.

[caledesi]

10. Yes, I am going to try to give more this quarter. 15 Million? Oh yeah!

[leftwingnut]

21. same here...

I'll still be angry at the end of this quarter....and I am planning to contribute money more this quarter as well...'For America'!!!

[Terwilliger]

3. Kerry has raised more yet never taken any corporate PAC donations?

thats interesting

So, should you Dean folks be mad at Kerry for his "get over it" comment? Or, is that a "losing issue" :shrug:

[Classical_Liberal]

7. I think he should apologize if he intends to have all those voters

in the general election.

[TLM]

14. How we Dean folks feel about Kerry's "get over it" comment is moot

the important thing is how Kerry's people feel about it. I think Kerry knocked a lot of folks off his bandwagon with that one.

[Terwilliger]

20. nice deflection

If I put that question to Howard Dean, what would he say? "Get over it"?

[TLM]

45. What question? How dean folks feel about Kerry's comment?

I'm sure he'd say that the comment was out of line and Kerry shouldn't have put it in those words, at least.

[phishhead]

4. My "anger" will not subside

Howard Dean '04

[caledesi]

11. My anger will not subside...keep saying it.

[bowler_4_columbine]

5. No, my anger isn't going anywhere...

I've been pissed since the shrub got selected. The Democrats that I know are as feb up with the Democratic party as with the Republicans. Dean is the main critic of the losers we have running our party. This gives him a lot of appeal for me.

I'M MAD AS HELL AND IM NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!

We need a party that will stand together when necessary, stay on message and close ranks over keys issues - such as the devastating tax cut that just went through. I wish the DNC would finance opposition to the Blue Dog Democrats. Get them out of the party. They suck. They're just Republicans anyway, why should we have to put up with them. "Elephants in Donkey jackets!" as Al Sharpton would say. And he's right. I'm not saying that all Democrats should vote as a block on EVERY isssue, but party unity on some things is very important. That is if you're as sick of our party being a laughingstock as I am.

Dean isn't going away. He's tapped into the growing disgust many of us have for our own party!

:mad:

[caledesi]

12. Welcome to DU B4C!

[newyawker99]

15. Hi bowler_4_Columbine!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Larkspur]

6. Anger? I'm psyched!

The test now will be how Dean handles the spotlight.

[wtmusic]

8. Don't see a problem with the spotlight

Dean's been a big fish in a little pond and the attention has probably caught him a little off guard.

The honesty factor withers all the other criticism.

[janx]

36. Same here! This is going to be historic!

Heck, it already is! Bye-bye, Chimpy! WE WANT OUR COUNTRY BACK!

[RevolutionStartsNow]

9. Great article

I've been angry since 2000, but Dean's campaign gives me a place to focus that anger and channel it into something hopeful. That's not going to change.

[Eloriel]

13. Good point, about the hopefulness

Not only is he able to give voice to our anger, but his message is one of hope and empowerment as well.

I LOVE the part of his Announcement speech where he talked about his vision of a Restoration of the American Community. Heck, I just loved the whole speech. And every speech.

Eloriel

[Voltaire]

16. I have always believed this would be a war with 2 enemies

The Bush Crime Family and his enablers at the DLC.  Dean is
the candidate that to date has taken them both on.  Every
negative I hear from both those enemies about him makes me
more determined to do the best I can to see that he is put in
office.   And I am already looking at what tuxedo I will wear
for the inaugural ball on January 20, 2005 when Dr. Howard
Dean is sworn in as the 44th President of the United States. 
Taking our party and our country back!

[morstyranni]

19. Don't be so melodramatic.

Dean sucks... Kerry '04.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

23. Well thought out post.

And very convincing. College debate team, perhaps?

[haymaker]

26. Doubt it.

Sounds more like his craft was honed online. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.

[northernsoul]

30. well, that's a persuasive argument

you're really not going to win too many people over to your guy with posts like that. Remember the old wisdom about it being easier to catch flies with honey than vinegar?

[T_i_B]

17. Hello all

I've posted this article in LBN yesterday (now lost) and in this forum today (now quite rightly locked as a dupe) so I thought I had better reappear here. Dean has started to attect attention from the UK press, but all too often they try to depict him as McGovern extra strengh, which seems like cobblers to me. I've had a quick butchers at his website and he is not as liberal as some make him out to be.

Personally I think that Dean looks like a very good candidate indeed, but what about all the rest of them? Please tell me about ALL of the candidates! My knowlege of the rest of the field is not too good at times but I would like to know as much as possible about the various candidates on offer. I have already been invited to a Howard Dean meetup in London (which is a good thing I assure you) but I would like to know as much as possible about all the candidates before taking the plunge.

[TheBigGuy]

22. Heres my take on candidates, for the Brits.

I posted this at the Billy Bragg forum..there is a thread for discussion of the US primary, so I posted my take on the candidates.


John Edwards
US Senator from North Carolina. The son of a textile millhand, he is a former trial lawyer, and is running what appears to be a fairly populist campaign. He is considered perhaps too inexperienced to be running for president. Possibly the most Clitonesque of the candidates.
http://www.johnedwards2004.com/index.asp

Howard Dean, MD
Governor of Vermont. The heir to a small investment banking fortune, Dean is a doctor, and was a sucessfull small state governor with a generally moderate & fiscal conservative policies who faced down the religous right in a battle over gay domestic parnternship. Dean cemented his credentials with the left by opposing the war in Iraq, and is generating enthusiasm amoung progressives and the more liberal party activists with his slogan that he represents the "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party".


Dennis Kucinich.
Member, US House of Representatives, from the east side of Cleveland, Ohio and famously the ex 'boy mayor of Cleveland'. Kucinich was from a poor working class backround and has been in Cleveland poltiics since the late 1960s. Kucinch is probably the most liberal or progressive Democrat in the race, and probably, next to Edwards and Al Sharpton, the most impassioned orator. The ony candidate advocating national health care on the Canadian or British model. His past anti-abortion voting record has hurt him with progressives, and he is considered too "left" and too strident to be 'electable. Yet his "Department of Peace" is a novel proposal. (personal aiside..I'm supporting Kucinch & have contributed to his campaign).
http://www.kucinich.net/

Rev. Al Sharpton.
Well, the Rev might be more liberal than Dennis Kucinich. Rev Sharpton was a longtime civil rights and community activist in New York City, and has been an excellent speaker in the televised debates and forums that I've seen him at. However, as the US still has "issues" with race (let alone with liberal politics in general) its unlikely he will get much support outside the African American community. His views mirror Kucinches alot, it seems.

Carol Mosley-Braun
Former US Senator from Illinois, Mosley-Braun made political history as he first African-American senator since Reconstruction,the first African -American woman senator ever, and the first African American senator from a northern state. Carols dad was a cop and ma a med-tech, so she comes from a fairly working class backround too...since she lost her senate seat she was ambassador to New Zealand and then a teacher. From what I've seen on TV she is quite well spoken, a bit of a policy wonk, and also a solid liberal (also supports single payer health care). The thought is that she and Sharpton are going to split the black vote. She is also considered unelectable due to being a black and a woman, and she was defeated for the senate re-election due to some sort of ethics issue.
http://www.carolforpresident.com/

Dick Gephart.
US Represenative from the south side of St Louis, Missouri.
"Gep" has been around for a LONG time (in the House of Representaives since the mid 70s)... got his start in urban politics like Kunich, and he is also from a blue collar union household, like Kucinch. Gephart is failry liberal in his views on economic issues, but his long stint in the House (as the House Democratic leader)made him pretty much a practioner of legisliative realpolitik. Gep was pretty passionate last night at the Iowa candidates forum,probably the best Ive seen him, but can he keep it up, does he have it in him to take on Bush..pretty much a personality thing there, i think. The best thing Gep is doing is putting health care back on the political agenda. Gep also has very strong labor union backing, which will help him
http://www.dickgephardt2004.com/

Bob Graham
Former Governor of Florida, US Senator from Florida.
Bob Graham. The good old boy southern politician in the race. Seasoned mature politician and former governor of one of the largest states in the US, also former chairman and ranking memer of the Senate Intelligence Committee...eminently reasonable, classic southern moderate...so why is he saying that GW Bush and his gang have covered up stuff in re 9-11 and the war on terrorism? Wow! Graham is actually being thought of as potentially a good "ticke balancing" vice presidential candidate...and that he might actually be running for vice president. Considered a minor candidate, he had a great comeback to Howard Dean..."Im Bob Graham and im from the electable wing of the Democratic Party". We'll see.
http://www.grahamforpresident.com/

Joe Lieberman
US Senator from Connecticut.
Nicknamed "Holy Joe" (becuase he is an observant orthodox Jew who won't campaign on the Sabbath, I guess), Lieberman was Al Gores vice presidential running mate. Conidered 'Bush Lite" becuase of his support of the Iraq War, Lieberman actually has a fairly liberal voting record in the Senate, even compared to moderate Republicans. Lieberman is considered the favorite of some of thE DLC leadership.
He is also considered, at this time, to be the front runner in the field. He is not liked by the progressive antiwar activits. I dont like him because of his lethargic "sad sack" campaigning style. But I'd vote for him.
http://www.joe2004.com/index.jsp

finally (whew), John Kerry
US Senator from Massachusetts.
Kerry is a Vietnam Vet, which is a plus, and is married to the Heinz Foods heiiress, which is even better (when it comes to campaign $$$$). Politically he is a "Massachusetts Liberal", which is a big negative. He also has some sort of connection to the Kennedy family by marriage or something...so the distant glow of "Camelot" & "The New Frontier" is out there on the horizon behind him. Kerry is also considered a front runner, along w. Lieberman.
http://www.johnkerry.com/site/PageServer


...so theres a Dean meetup in LONDON? For expat Americans, I guess?

[T_i_B]

37. Thanks TheBigGuy! Just what the doctor ordered!

I'm just had a look on Edward's site and he does not seem to be offering much special in the policy department IMHO. Mind you, if any Edwards supporters wish to expound his policies they should feel free to do so.

See my reply to Armstead about Kucinich. Mind you, I do think that there does look to be too many candidates from the left of the party. Kucinich, Sharpton & Moseley-Braun perhaps should look at combining forces behind the strongest of the three!

Joe Lieberman I do not like the look of at all. I cannot see what he is offering as much of an alternative to Bush, but if any Lieberman supporters want to argue the toss here they should feel free to do so.

I did like the look of Kerry after he started to change his mind over Iraq when the WMD thing burst but having seen his site, his policies on National Service look like a bit of a no-no to me. Still, he might well be the best of the candidates who voted for the war (as big a minus mark for me as for most people on this board.) And also I would add that there seems to be too many DLC candidates as well as too many left-wing candidates. Both sides appear to need to consolidate behind the strongest candidate.

I'm not sure about Dick Gephart at all. If he could has repeatedly failing to win the House for the Democrats then what on earth will be be like running for President? Mind you, if any Gephart supporters want to argue the toss about that please do so.

Having seen Bob Graham's site, I must admit I was quite impressed with his stance on the issues. At the moment it looks like my 2 favourite candidates are Dean & Graham. Both seem to have very good platforms. Dean, like I have said, does not seem as liberal as some make him out to be, but he still looks like a great candidate with a great platform and a strategy that is music to the ears of a great many people.

In summary, from what I have seen the two candidates with the best platforms are Dean & Graham. I can't decide which is the better though! Make of that what you will.

[Armstead]

25. Kucinich

Kucinich is the real "liberal" Democrat in the race. And the most interesting, in terms of policies and ideas.

His policies are basically those of a liberal Democrat from the early 60's (and elements of FDR). But because the US is so mentally ill with this disease of "Conservophrenia" Kucinioch is painted as a far left whacko.

You might not like him, as he is adamantly against WTO/NAFTA style globalization. Rather he is for "fair trade" and agreements negotiated more between nations, with labor and environmental considerations as a priotrity.

[T_i_B]

32. I've seen Kucinich's platform before

As Kucinich supporters are very fond of debating his platform and I have asked this question before. (Mind you, that is a very good trait indeed of Kucinich supporters.)

As you suspect, his idea of pulling out of NAFTA & the WTO is a big, big turn off for me, plus many of his schemes, whilst being very worthy, don't appear to have been costed out! I hate to say this but he does seem like a bit of a Micheal Foot (who ran against Margret Thatcher in 1983 and lost by a landslide on a platform of nuclear disarmerment, withdrawal from the EU etc)

Nonetheless I can see that he is right up the greenies street, and if I were that way inclined I would be forgetting about the Greens for the moment and trying to campaign for Kucinich instead.

[TLM]

47. I agree, I do not want to see us pull out of NAFTA or WTO...

which is why I like Dean. He does not want to pull out, but he is willing to do so if they do not attach some labor and pollution standards to NAFTA and WTO.

Some folks on the far left are just as bad as folks on the far right when it comes to blind ideology based behavior... just cut first and ask questions later is not sound policy.

[morstyranni]

18. How to ensure a democratic loss?..

Back Dean.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

24. Last quarter there were 7 million reasons why you might possibly

be mistaken.

[haymaker]

27. Another beauty!

Keep up the good work.

[T Roosevelt]

28. Please spare us these quips

unless you can back them up with something...anything...

[conservdem]

29. I doubt Dean can beat Bush even if the economy is in the toilet.

( I hope the economy is soaring by then) Dean's position against the war I think will be a problem with people who viewed it as a legitimate action. Also I read on a DU post that he has since taken different positions on the Iraq war and whether UN approval was required. Do any of you Dean supporter know if he has stated differing positons about the war?

I think national security is still going to be a paramount issue in the next election. I feel more secure now than I did on the afternoon of 911.

please forgive any spelling and gramar errors.

[Terwilliger]

31. finally! someone who admits it!

btw, you feel better now than you did on the afternoon of 9/11 because you're less afraid...not because anything has changed with respect to the security of the US

[conservdem]

33. Are you asking me that or telling me that?

If you are telling me I have a question for you: Do honestly believe that nothing has changed with the security of the US since the afternoon of 9/11?

IMO it has improved, but alot more needs to be done.

[Terwilliger]

35. Improved by what...by the policies that drive the terrorism?

or the moat around "the castle" using the Constitution for digging?

It has not improved. Most experts say that anyone with even the slightest inclination and wherewithall could wreak havoc. The only ONLY ONLY ONLY solution is to change American foreign policy so that no one in the world could ever conceiv of ewanting to do harm to the US.

Also, I know you're a conservative, and I respect your right to think the way you want to, but I am NOT convinced that there was no collusion with members of our government in the attack on 9/11. FAR too many unanswered questions remain, and FAR too many in our government don't seem to give a damn that these answers are not forthcoming.

[northernsoul]

34. I understand your concerns, but I have to disagree

Dean has taken what I believe to be a very statesman-like stand on the Iraq Invasion, stating that the situation simply did not pass muster for endangering the lives of our brave men and women in uniform (looks like he was right on that count, as the "evidence" for WMDs is looking thinner than Calista Flockhart), and that this sort of action should be adopted multi-laterally with the support of our key allies rather than launched at the whim of just one man. If he has waffled from this position at all, I'm certainly unaware of it.

I don't think that kissing Bush's ring on War / Security issues in order to get that issue off the table is going to be a winner. Do you remember what those SOBs did to Max Cleeland in Georgia last year? They took a man who lost 3 limbs serving his country and they had the termity to question his patriotism! They're not going to go easy on us no matter what we say or do, so I say we stick to our principles and fight a good fight - that's something lots of people can admire. Going along to get along doesn't work against these guys.

It's a cliche around here but it's true: Give the people a choice between Bush and Bush-Lite and they're going to take the "real" thing.

America wants a two party system again.

[conservdem]

38. I agee that Dean may be right about the WMD's, but I also supported the

war for humanitarina reasons. IMO other nations will also be less likely to allow and/or support terrorists in their counties in light of Iraq and Afghanastan. BTW we did have some allies with us and it was IMO multi-lateral.

IMO the Dem candidates should not kiss Bush's ring re war/security in an attempt to take the issues off the table. But they should have a strong comprehesive security plan that is better than his. We should be the leaders in this and every issue.

I tried, but was not able to find the reply I read yesterday regarding Dean waffling on the war. I recall that it was not directly chanllanged, but it was viewed skeptically because it was from a conservative source.

[northernsoul]

39. I agree we should have a better plan

We should point out that port and harbor security is still about nil, and that many of the homeland security mandates being placed on local governments are totally unfunded. We do need to have some kind of litmus test for where and when we're going to put our troops in harm's way. We simply don't have the resources to invade and occupy every single tinhorn dictatorship on earth, so we need to have solid, intelligent foreign policy to guide us through these treacherous times.

By the way, welcome to DU. As you've probably already discovered, you should be prepared to take some flack from certain quarters around here, but I certainly appreciate and enjoy hearing from a wide variety of opinions and outlooks from fellow Dems.

:hi:

[conservdem]

43. Thank you for the welcoming. You are the first to welcome me.

I think you raise very good points and your writing far better than mine.

I totally agree that we can not invade every tinhorn dictatoship. I think we must wisley pick and choose our battles. And I recognize that reasonable minds could differ on the Iraq war.

BTW could you please tell me what "n/t" means. I see it alot on the posts but I have not yet figured out what it means.

[ProfessorPlum]

40. supporting the war for humanitarian reasons

sounds like a good thing, sort of, but you must be pretty short-sighted as to the men who would be running the post-war occupation in that case. Anyone who knew anything about the key players in this cabal must surely have known that they would botch it, that they couldn't care a fig about the Iraqi people, that they wouldn't have the attention span or the patience or the subtlety to actually help the Iraqis create a working society there.

Anyone who trusts Junior Bush to do a good job at occupation/rebuilding has not been paying attention. This is a difficult thing, and everything W. has ever touched has turned to crap.

There are many people in Iraq who apparently feel that they'd rather have Saddam back (quotes from many articles back this up) and the US out.

Even your good intentions have not be rewarded with a positive war for the US, even in humanitarian terms.

THIS is why Dean should never apologize for being against this aggressive, empire-building war. This war and its aftermath is an ill-conceived, poorly planned disaster, in which America could easily lose its soul.

[conservdem]

44. I agree that Bush admin is botching the post war occupation. They should

have had it better planned out and been more prepared. But, I do think it will get better and that most Iraqi people will be better off in the long run (this is why I think my view is not short sighted). Perhaps it will take a Dem president to complete the job, but it will get better. (I am an optomist--I thought most Dems are too).

I think you are right about it being a tough job to create a good working society there.

I agree that Dean should not applogize about his position because it would not be credible or sincere. Reasonable minds could differ on the whether we should have gone to war. But Deans position will work against him with many that supported the war and the majority of people supported it.

[stickdog]

42. How can it be viewed as legitimate?

Because it helped Israel's long term security?

[CWebster]

41. Says it all:

Make no mistake about it. It is not the medium -- radio, TV or the Internet -- which enlists and converts voters to a cause. It is the message -- what the candidate stands for and communicates -- that touches and moves voters.

At a time when a large chunk of the Democratic Party membership was strongly opposed to President George W. Bush and his advocacy of a pre-emptive U.S. war against Iraq, the leadership of the Democratic Party -- especially "first-tier" presidential candidates Sens. John Kerry of Massachusetts, Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and John Edwards of North Carolina, along with Rep. Richard Gephardt of Missouri -- stood shoulder-to-shoulder with the Republican president. Howard Dean spoke to -- and for -- the millions of Democrats who were against that war.

That is message! Now, when the most recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll asks, "All in all, do you think the situation in Iraq was worth going to war over or not?" and a growing 42 percent of Americans answer, "No," it is understandable why, to more than a few Democrats, Dean looks to be wise, as well as brave...

... "There are two things that are important in politics," said the maker of Republican presidents, Mark Hanna. "The first is money, and I can't remember what the second one is."

Still, as recently as 1996, Texas Sen. Phil Gramm, a prodigious fund-raiser, collected more than $20 million, yet never even made it to the first-in-the-nation New Hampshire primary.

His early success at fund raising is no guarantee that Howard Dean will be a serious candidate in New Hampshire next January. But Dean used no tricks nor gimmicks to collect those contributions. His opponents better understand: It was his message

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/07/column.shields.opinion.dean/

[Egnever]

46. My anger has found a focus

And it is being channeled into so many positive things with deans empowerment of the people. I have never in my life put the energy i have already put into getting deans name out there. Will it go away?

As an old teacher of mine used to say.

Not just no, HELL NO!

[T_i_B]

48. Kick

:kick: