Friday, January 14, 2005
No Thank You, Howard
I have to confess my general lack of enthusiasm for Howard Dean as head of the DNC. I frankly don't see why people are enthusiastic about having him there, unless, of course they are former Dean supporters. The record of Dean's candidacy gives one no ground for confidence that he'd manage the party efficiently. While he showed real success in raising funds, he showed real incompetence in managing them - effectively burning through his warchest by the end of the New Hampshire primary. His campaign's innovative use of the internet had a lot more to do with his choice of campaign manager than anything Dean himself did - it was quickly and successfully mimicked by Kerry, who had stellar success in fundraising after winning the nomination.
When he lost, Dean and his supporters chose to think that they'd been the victims of a diabolical conspiracy by the party elite, which allegedly was frightened out of its wits by the upstart Vermonter. This after he had hired a Washington lobbyist to replace Joe Trippi, after he had gained Al Gore's endorsement, and the votes of a majority of Democratic "super-delegates" (by definition a super-delegate represents the party elite). The leadership of the Democratic party is weak and carries little sway with the base; had it been otherwise, Dean never would have got anywhere. Embracing this victimization narrative enabled Dean to avoid asking hard questions about what mistakes he had made while frontrunner.
Dean is currently talking about running Democrats everywhere - going for offices in the red states. That makes perfect sense. Of course, we should remember that, after his own reverses in Iowa and New Hampshire he forswore campaigning in the South and set his hopes on the distant Wisconsin primary. Elsewhere in his much noted December speech at GWU, Dean said:
May really begin . . . you'd think he missed the presidential election we just had. Kerry had ample opportunity to cave on an issue like gay marriage - actually he was urged to do so by some - but he held his ground and made it clear to advisors that this was a bridge he would never cross.
A DNC chair should be expected both to embody the values of the party, but also to be able to reach out to moderates - who the party depends upon. Dean, on the other hand, remarked
Of course he'll tell you that he does want to reach out. In the same speech he talked about running in all 50 states. Which leads me to conclude that if he's the one doing it, its OK by him; if others do it, they're selling out. Elsewhere he spoke of embracing voters who are anti-abortion. My issue with him isn't his own efforts to reach out to the middle or even parts of the right; it's that he has fostered this idiotic notion that faceless leaders of the party (he never names anyone) want to betray party principles.
That kind of rhetoric poisons the debate, but Dean has never had any problems with doing that sort of thing. His self-righteous attacks on Kerry and Gephardt were answered in kind during the campaign, after which he replied that he was tired of being "the pin cushion." You only get what you give. Dean ended his campaign in a self-righteous tailspin, calling Kerry a "Republican." Classy.
Dean has some good ideas and some very bad ones - its his follow-through that's appalling. His past record makes me doubt that he'll be able to act on the former, as does his remarkable capacity for saying stupid things. His conceptualization of outreach in late 2003 was to remark that the Democrats should be reaching out to people flying Confederate flags - a remarkably dumb way to characterize prospective voters. Others in the running for DNC chair have a better chance of acting constructively on these ideas: running a 50 state party without engaging in the rhetoric of self-righteousness. We've seen Dean run and it's time for someone else.
I have to confess my general lack of enthusiasm for Howard Dean as head of the DNC. I frankly don't see why people are enthusiastic about having him there, unless, of course they are former Dean supporters. The record of Dean's candidacy gives one no ground for confidence that he'd manage the party efficiently. While he showed real success in raising funds, he showed real incompetence in managing them - effectively burning through his warchest by the end of the New Hampshire primary. His campaign's innovative use of the internet had a lot more to do with his choice of campaign manager than anything Dean himself did - it was quickly and successfully mimicked by Kerry, who had stellar success in fundraising after winning the nomination.
When he lost, Dean and his supporters chose to think that they'd been the victims of a diabolical conspiracy by the party elite, which allegedly was frightened out of its wits by the upstart Vermonter. This after he had hired a Washington lobbyist to replace Joe Trippi, after he had gained Al Gore's endorsement, and the votes of a majority of Democratic "super-delegates" (by definition a super-delegate represents the party elite). The leadership of the Democratic party is weak and carries little sway with the base; had it been otherwise, Dean never would have got anywhere. Embracing this victimization narrative enabled Dean to avoid asking hard questions about what mistakes he had made while frontrunner.
Dean is currently talking about running Democrats everywhere - going for offices in the red states. That makes perfect sense. Of course, we should remember that, after his own reverses in Iowa and New Hampshire he forswore campaigning in the South and set his hopes on the distant Wisconsin primary. Elsewhere in his much noted December speech at GWU, Dean said:
- Let me tell you something: there's only one thing Republican power brokers want more than for us to lurch to the left -- and that's for us to lurch to the right.
What they fear most is that we may really begin fighting for what we believe -- the fiscally responsible, socially progressive values for which Democrats have always stood and fought.
May really begin . . . you'd think he missed the presidential election we just had. Kerry had ample opportunity to cave on an issue like gay marriage - actually he was urged to do so by some - but he held his ground and made it clear to advisors that this was a bridge he would never cross.
A DNC chair should be expected both to embody the values of the party, but also to be able to reach out to moderates - who the party depends upon. Dean, on the other hand, remarked
- Here in Washington, it seems that after every losing election, there's a consensus reached among decision-makers in the Democratic Party is that the way to win is to be more like Republicans.
Of course he'll tell you that he does want to reach out. In the same speech he talked about running in all 50 states. Which leads me to conclude that if he's the one doing it, its OK by him; if others do it, they're selling out. Elsewhere he spoke of embracing voters who are anti-abortion. My issue with him isn't his own efforts to reach out to the middle or even parts of the right; it's that he has fostered this idiotic notion that faceless leaders of the party (he never names anyone) want to betray party principles.
That kind of rhetoric poisons the debate, but Dean has never had any problems with doing that sort of thing. His self-righteous attacks on Kerry and Gephardt were answered in kind during the campaign, after which he replied that he was tired of being "the pin cushion." You only get what you give. Dean ended his campaign in a self-righteous tailspin, calling Kerry a "Republican." Classy.
Dean has some good ideas and some very bad ones - its his follow-through that's appalling. His past record makes me doubt that he'll be able to act on the former, as does his remarkable capacity for saying stupid things. His conceptualization of outreach in late 2003 was to remark that the Democrats should be reaching out to people flying Confederate flags - a remarkably dumb way to characterize prospective voters. Others in the running for DNC chair have a better chance of acting constructively on these ideas: running a 50 state party without engaging in the rhetoric of self-righteousness. We've seen Dean run and it's time for someone else.
