Dean's third party candidacy

[jeter]

I have to say that I have all but given up on i) the 2004 election and ii) the Democratic Party. I know will jump all over me for this - but I don't care. I don't care if Dean even wins the nomination anymore. The Democratic Party and their rabid froth mouth supporters here have disillusioned me.

People will say, that this is normal. This is normally the way front runners are treated. Oh really?

I have followed politics actively since 1984 and I have never seen anything like it. The way the Democratic establishment has just turned their guns on Dean - why? Because he is leading and he isn't one of them.

That's it. That's the only reason. Because the whole "he can't win" argument is the biggest crock I have ever heard. He does just as well as anyone else. The only one who does marginally better is Clark. But only by 1 or 2%. Hardly anything to crow about.

The Washington pundits: he can't win. He's mean. He's this and that.

I mean the reason the Republicans are laughing is because they see us tearing ourselves apart. Christ, all Dean has done was get a little traction. He opposed a war and that gave him some support. He came out with a Health Care plan. An economic plan, etc. People agreed with him. For this, he gets attacked. Relentlessly. Unmercilessly.

He was right about Saddam's capture not making us safer. 22 people died in Iraq yesterday alone. The attacks continue. We have elevated our alert status to HIGH. Yet, Dean was criticized. For what? For being Dean. Nothing more. I am told, that even though I have supported the Democratic Party since childhood (my Dad was a union organizer) I am a "snot nose" or "crazy" by friggen James Carville.

Folks, I have this feeling in my stomach. A pit really. An anger that is suppressing itself but I know is there. The babies and sucks are in charge of the Democratic Party. They gave us Clinton and Gore. They even gave us Dukakis, even though they disavow it now. Mondale - he was part of the Democratic establishment. I supported Gary Hart. He was the Dean of that race. He was the one the party turned against after winning New Hampshire. I supported Teddy Kennedy vs. Jimmy Carter (I was too young to vote then), but was told that he couldn't beat the Republicans. So Carter lost to them instead. I supported Cruz Bustamante over Grey Davis. But again, the party wanted Davis. Cruz never got the support he needed and what was the result: Governor Swarzenegger. We always do what the party wants: we go with what is safe. Then we usually lose. Okay Clinton won. So what? We lost in 1994. We lost in 2000. We lost in 2002. Listening to the same people - THE VERY SAME PEOPLE - who say that we should nominate someone safe and attack Dean.

Screw them. I hope Dean bolts the Dems right now. Screw the 2004 elections. Screw the primaries. Because either way he loses. The party will find a way to dump him. Or they won't support him in November and he'll lose to Bush. Where the Clintonians and DNCers will say "see, we told you." Then we'll nominate Zell Miller or somebody in 2008.

I say screw the Democratic Party. What have you done for me lately?

[mdmc]

1. Dean: "Endorse me and I will nominate Kucinich Veep!"

That might sway some big Greens! :kick:

[whirlygigspin]

2. Relax

it's just the old power freaks running scared, they don't get it, and they never will. Trust in the people, they know the difference and they're sick of this shit. Just wait and see.

[janx]

8. You are right, and this is so very refreshing.

Thanks so much for your post.

This is some democracy in action that our country isn't used to. It's bound to give some whiplash to the regular operatives. But it's the way the system is supposed to work, after all.

The people will speak through their electoral system. And it's going to be great.

[mkultra]

3. Bash bush instead

If they spent half as much time bashing bush as they do dean they wouldnt be behind. Seriously, everytime i here lieberman talk his busting on Dean. Now i dont know what he stands for and im not even sure hes a democrat.

[mdmc]

5. Welcome to DU, mkultra

Today I hear much talk of "horse race" primary reporting. News will be the third teir response to the frontunner. Our parties challenge is to bring Bush down in OUR primary, not Howard Dean, or any other Democrat.

[stickdog]

4. I'd love to see a fair three way battle between Bush, Dean &

some Bush-enabling establishment Dem.

Maybe when the DLC's candidate needed to send George Soros to the poorhouse just to crack 20%, establishment Dem insiders would realize just how long ago history passed their milquetoast repuke/corporate codependence by.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

6. Very pessimistic

and disruptive too. I don't think this post will remain unlocked.

BTW: Dean turned his guns on the frontrunners early on. Also, in point of fact, Carville said that Dean is calling the anti-Deans "snot nosed", so you are reacting to something that didn't happen.
In fact, you are overreacting period.

[YNGW]

7. No doubt...

...someone's going to get a rude awaking. The question is who, and once it happens, will they acknowledge they were wrong all along or will they continue to live life with their collective heads up their a**.

From what I've read here on DU the last few months, I'm guessing that denial of the obvious will be in order.

[mc6809e]

9. At some point they'll wake up

The only thing that will force the party to change is continuing losses.

I think the problem is that much of the party leadership is used to having an easy time of it in elections.

Consider this: Democrats controlled all of congress for something like 40 years before Reagan. Even when Reagan came along, they only lost the Senate for 2 years during his administration, despite the fact that Reagan was a hugely popular president. It wasn't until the 90's that the Republicans started gaining real strength -- even then we had Clinton in the Whitehouse.

The leadership got used to easy successes. Well, it isn't as easy as it used to be, but the leadership hasn't made the necessary adjustments.

Only after huge losses will they wake up.

That's why Dean as a third party candidate is needed. If he runs as an independent, the huge margin of victory for Bush will finally force the needed changes.

I really think Dean represents the New spirit of the Democrat Party and the leadership is afraid of him.

[eileen from OH]

10. Deep breath, jeter

It's early yet. Really. Things are nastier than usual, but look at it this way - if Dean is the nominee he will have already run a formidable gauntlet that can only make him stronger when facing the meat grinder of Rove & Co.

I hate it too, but it's been the baptism of fire that Dean needed before the REALLY big guns are turned on him.

And, lemme tell you this, in all friendliness, as a fellow Dean supporter. Both our candidate and his supporters need to develop a thicker skin and learn that sometimes it's better to let the attacks bounce or answer them with humor and a lighter touch. Facts, yes. Reasoned arguments, yes. Passion, yes. Rage and despair, no. (Dean has teflon, dammit, and he needs to rely on it more!)

And, finally, again in all friendliness, please don't perpetuate or even advocate a third party run for Dean. He's a great guy, but (as been said ad nauseum) all our guys are better than Bush. Dean has said repeatedly that he would never consider it and we supporters have to back him on that.

Let it goooooooo.

eileen from OH

[stopbush]

11. Take a deep breath.

They can try all they want to tear him down, but Dean is probably going to be the nominee. And if he's the nominee, the DNC and the other hopefuls will get behind him. Why? Because for all their bitching, moaning and pissing, they know that having a little power is better than having no power, and if they don't support Dean and he wins, they're all out of power and, therefore, screwed.

Most Americans aren't even paying attention to the Dem nomination process right now. Lieberman only scores as high as he does on name recognition left over from 2000. Once Dean - or whoever - is nominated, the country will focus on that single candidate. All of the crap being floated now will be as distant a memory to the public as Enron, the Plame scandal...and no WMD. If Dean gets it, the focus will be on the longshot who came from nowhere to beat the odds and his record in Vt vs the bush record. All of this will be distorted, of course, but it will be more easily deflected and answered once the party is united behind the candidate.

This is nothing new for those of us with a longterm memory. Do you recall the 92 campaign when Dems were at each other, with Bob Kerry opining that if Clinton were the nominee he'd be "opened up like a boiled peanut" by repugs over his purported sexcapades?

Yep, Clinton was just as unelectable as Dean back then. The smart money was on the Dem Washington insiders. But when is the last time a sitting Congressman got the Dem nomination, let alone won the presidency? If you said JFK, you're correct. That was 44 years ago. Since Nixon's win, the US public has voted for outsiders in the guise of "former governors." Carter, Reagan, Clinton and bush 2. And who is this year's Dem outsider and former governor? Why, Howard Dean.

Look, the beltway media WANTS a DC insider to get the nominee because those are their guys! They cover them all the time, they're comfortable with their positions and don't have to do any research on them...and they already have established avenues to get insider info and easy-to-pen stories. The last thing they want is an outsider like Dean to come along - it means more work and less fun, especially when a Howard Dean lacks any interest in the lives and thoughts of the beltway pundits.

So take a chill pill, stop worrying about the bitching from the Dem candidates who felt entitled to the '04 nomination (ie: Lieberman, Kerry and Gephardt) and get ready to let the dust settle and the smoke clear. There's work to be done, and the hard work begins after the convention.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

12. Clinton went on national TV and lied about Gennifer Flowers

he would have been nowhere if he hadn't have done that. And I don't recall a fight about sealed governor's records in Arkansas. Now quit comparing Dean to Clinton.

[WillyT]

14. Really, So By Your Reasoning, Dean Hasn't Lied Effectively Enough...

and Therefore he's no Clinton???

:wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf:

[polpilot]

15. ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????

[Raya]

13. Too Bad I have Seen This Spin as part of Dean Campaign Tactics

So funny to see campaign tactics show up as concrete posts like
this one.

[paulk]

16. Dean has run his campaign as a third party insurgency from the start

the reason the Democratic Party establishment has "turned their guns" on Dean is because Dean has been "gunning" for them from day one. Dean's campaign has been as much against the Democratic party as much as it's been against Bush. How in hell do you expect the party to react? Love and kisses?

Also - how in hell do you expect to get support from Democrats when you refer to them as "rabid froth mouth supporters"?

[aldian159]

17. Wow.

I consider myself more establishment than Dean, but not much.

Maybe if we get brained in 2004, a new stronger party will emerge and lead us into the future for many years to come.

Hopefully.