Why Dean Can Not Win the General Election

[VoteClark]

Say what you want about the Dean getting the nomination. I could see it either way, him losing or winning. But let us talk about what the real chances are of Dean really winning the General Election.

First the postives about Dean:

1) He was a governor, yeap, and that is a strong case for being able to tell people you are able to govern.

2) He is a fiscal conservative. This is good, it shows people you are responsible for budgets.

3) He is fisty. Having lots of energy is something that is needed to run in a presidential election, not to mention that you really care.

4) He is a Doctor. That is good, someone that is not of the traditional political mold that understands the white collar professional working class.

5) Health Care. This is good too, it shows he has genuine affection about the health care policies of the country.

6) Pro-guns. This is great, many people in the Western and Southern States are always afraid that Democrats are after their guns.

I know there are more postives here. However, those are main ones that will help him.

But here are the negatives that will keep him down.

1) He is known for his Civil Unions bill. He is tagged permently by the right and media as being someone that is going to give gays equal rights. This is a real fear amoung many conservatives and moderates in the Southern and Western States. He will never be able to shake the pro-gay label and will lose 2 votes for every one he gets in key moderate states. Rove will make no bones about painting Dean as the man that is attacking your marriage. Every Southern Republican Governor and Senator and Representive, and every Christian Televangelist will come out and knock him down as if he was Satan himself. They will say he is for sexual liberaltion and sin. We all know they will do this. This is more of a threat to many people than the remote possiblity of someone taking their gun away, which Bush would not do anyway.

2) Who can Dean choose for VP without looking like a hypocrit that will actually help in either popular votes of electoral votes? He has already attacked the war, so he can't choose any Democrat that has voted for the vote, or publically at any point supported the war. If Dean tried to attack Bush on the war Bush could say, "listen, even you own VP agrees with me" and Dean would be laughed at. Which in essence says that only someone to the left of Dean would be choosen without any real problem. Dean choosing someone to the left of him would result in a field day for Rove and Media as they paint him and his running mate as the Liberal Duo fighting for gay rights and having little to no military experience.

3) Education. Like it or not, Dean's fault or not, Vermont is the most expense state to get you teen daughter or son a college education. Rove will expose this as Dean's fault and it will turn off the swing voter soccor moms that are saving every penny and still can't figure out how to pay for the college education of their children.

4)His looks. Yes, I know, we the Democrats don't care about looks, just the issues. But get real. Dean stands at 5'7 in boots and has a tiny little mouth with a silly smirk on it as he waits for a question to be finished. He might be able to work on the smirk, but he can't do much about the other. He isn't ugly, but most Presidents need to be a little taller and a little better looking.

5) His speaking ability. He tends to laud out things without actually thinking about it. Shooting off your mouth when millions are watching and saying what you didn't really mean is not the best way to win an election. Dean will say something then spend twenty minutes explaining what he really meant by it. You can't do that. You have to be clear and quick. He isn't dumb, but he is not a skilled polished communicator. His off th cuff marks rally people up, but they also do him serious harm.

6) No Military experience. The Democrats have a 35 point lag in the polls when it comes to national security and the military. Hard for Dean to put a dent in that number when he has no foreign experience of any kind. Saying he can win anyway is like saying a well build ship can make it across the ocean even though it has a giant hole in the side of it. People are not going to vote for a man that has no foreign policy when they are freaked out about terrorism. The 35% gap has to be addressed, no if, ands, or buts about it.


Now, the only hope or prayer for Dean to win would be one of three things. 1) The economy goes down to levels of the Depression. 2) He chooses Graham, who's poll numbers are worse then Bush's on the economy. 3) Choose Clark for his VP.

Now, I don't think the chances are good for Dean even with Clark on the ticket. Clark would make Dean look bad and the two are opposites in personality. I don't think Clark would accept. Graham would, but lets' face it, he isn't going to carry Florida. So that is slim hope for the Democrats to win if Dean gets the nod of the Dems.


:kick:
J4Clark

[Egnever]

1. Just curious

Do you ever actually post anything about clark? Or are all of your posts just op-eds on why you dont like dean?

[acerbic]

11. A really REALLY funny coincidence:

Do you ever actually post anything about clark?

Well, yes it does. Check this out:

Clark Favors End to Gay Ban in Military
Tell me this, wonderful, awesome,man is not a Democrat
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=16140&mesg_id=16140

...and compare to:

But here are the negatives that will keep him down.

1) He is known for his Civil Unions bill. He is tagged permently by the right and media as being someone that is going to give gays equal rights. This is a real fear amoung many conservatives and moderates in the Southern and Western States. He will never be able to shake the pro-gay label and will lose 2 votes for every one he gets in key moderate states.

How ridiculous can it still get, I wonder...

[VermontDem2004]

2. Your negatives

1)Civil Unions will make him unpopular with people who wouldn't vote democratic if that is all they care for is civil unions. Also, he hasn't publicly stated that he is for gay marriage.

2)That is why Bob Graham makes him a great VP pick.

3)I believe you are incorrect. If you don't have a 3.0 GPA, 4-year tuitions is $32,000 at the biggest school in Vermont, University of Vermont. Which is pretty low because it costs about 48,000 to enroll at Arizona State University.
http://www.uvm.edu/financialaid/?Page=uvmscholarships.html#SCHOLVT

Also check this out. http://www.dallasnews.com/latestnews/stories/050202dnmetcollegecost.4f184.html
This link shows a trend of tuition costs skyrocketing in Texas(most during Bush's 6 years as Governor. So 3 will absolutely be no problem whatsoever.

4)His looks? You have to be kidding me? Perhaps you forgotten about the chimp who now occupys the White House.

5)I have no problem with his speaking ability but comparing Dean's speaking ability to Bush's slurring, Dean wins in a landslide.

6)Where is Bush's military experience? Where is Reagan's military experience? Where is CLinton's?(Before they became President) If you follow polls, 7% of the people who took the poll said Terrorism was their #1 concern. The Economy and Jobs were #1 and #2 so unless this economy kicks up and Bush puts a handle on to the situation in Iraq, he is toast in '04. The American people(not Freepers) know that starting a pre-emptive war on a third world country that had nothing to do with 9/11 will not make us less safer then more safer will not make someone appear "strong on national defense". Too many DUers act like the Democrat won't be able to present his case on why you should vote for him/her once elected as the nomination for President. He will be able to state his case on why he was against this war and he can state the case that Bush passed a 300+ billion tax cut but is underfunding Homeland Security.

Dean in '04.

[unfrigginreal]

3. I don't think that you know what you're talking about

To begin with, Dean and Clark are VERY similar on all positions. Now I'll take a swipe at the "negatives" that you listed for Dean.

Your #1 - Civil Unions - this will play FOR him not against him. As long as he keeps making the distinction between the hetero's marriage and equal rights for gay partners as civil unions.

Your #2 - VP - This one is hilarious! The best person that he could choose would be Wesley Clark who like Dean opposed the war. Can't believe you even had the gall to list this one.

Your #3 - Education - I'd like more information. Since you are talking about college education, are you suggesting that the state colleges in Vermont are more expensive than they are in the rest of the country?

Your #4 - His Looks - LOL! Like that really makes a difference! By the way MR.(Bush supporter?) he doesn't have a smirk. That honor stays with your hero pRESIDENT. I'll take Deans BIG SMILE anyday over Bush's SMIRK.

Your #5 - His Speaking Ability - He says what's on his mind. He doesn't need a bunch of handlers like YOUR HERO Bush to get his word out. He'll make up his own mind, thank you very much! He'll probably make mistakes but at least he has the balls to own up to them. What about YOUR hero?

Your #6 - Military Experience - If you'll just juxtapose YOUR HERO Bush with Clinton, and if you have any sense at all, you'll realize that military experience does not necessarily mean that you'll make the best decisions in foreign policy for our country. Also "AWOL from the Texas Rangers for a year" doesn't pose much of a threat as a military dude.

Thankfully, you are the only "supposed" Clark supporter that shows this animous to Dean. Most of the Clark supporters that I have come into contact with have respect for Dean. Consider yourself fortunate that the mods haven't been able to see through your REAL intentions.

[unfrigginreal]

4. I don't think that you know what you're talking about

To begin with, Dean and Clark are VERY similar on all positions. Now I'll take a swipe at the "negatives" that you listed for Dean.

Your #1 - Civil Unions - this will play FOR him not against him. As long as he keeps making the distinction between the hetero's marriage and equal rights for gay partners as civil unions.

Your #2 - VP - This one is hilarious! The best person that he could choose would be Wesley Clark who like Dean opposed the war. Can't believe you even had the gall to list this one.

Your #3 - Education - I'd like more information. Since you are talking about college education, are you suggesting that the state colleges in Vermont are more expensive than they are in the rest of the country?

Your #4 - His Looks - LOL! Like that really makes a difference! By the way MR.(Bush supporter?) he doesn't have a smirk. That honor stays with your hero pRESIDENT. I'll take Deans BIG SMILE anyday over Bush's SMIRK.

Your #5 - His Speaking Ability - He says what's on his mind. He doesn't need a bunch of handlers like YOUR HERO Bush to get his word out. He'll make up his own mind, thank you very much! He'll probably make mistakes but at least he has the balls to own up to them. What about YOUR hero?

Your #6 - Military Experience - If you'll just juxtapose YOUR HERO Bush with Clinton, and if you have any sense at all, you'll realize that military experience does not necessarily mean that you'll make the best decisions in foreign policy for our country. Also "AWOL from the Texas Rangers for a year" doesn't pose much of a threat as a military dude.

Thankfully, you are the only "supposed" Clark supporter that shows this animous to Dean. Most of the Clark supporters that I have come into contact with have respect for Dean. Consider yourself fortunate that the mods haven't been able to see through your REAL intentions.

[tedoll78]

5. Check it out: This is how Dean/Clark wins:

1 - Dean can truly claim that his civil unions position is pretty much the same as Cheney's. (find his debate with Lieberman)

2 - Clark.

3 - If this is true, it would be in Dean's best interest to point-out that it's getting more difficult to afford college ANYWHERE. Also pointing-out that the Bush admin is cutting student aid would help.

4 - :eyes:

5 - He speaks fine. In fact, he really knows how to rev-up a crowd to the point where they are screaming back at him. He will have to research his material though.

6 - Again, Clark. Highlighting how Bush's offense overseas isn't the same as building-up defense here at home would be of value also. Highlight the GOP's refusal to fund first responsers, or protect power plants/bridges/water purification facilities/etc. Draw a connection of Bush policy to the point where ordinary Americans see no improvement since September 11th. With an effective messenger, we can accomplish this.

---------------

Take Gore's states - 260EVs. Of these, we most worry about: OR/MN/IA/MI/PA/NM

First, note that George Soros' Americans Coming Together will be funding a GOTV effort in these states, and others. $75 million. This helps us to divert campaign funding to other areas where we would otherwise be blow-away by Bush's spending. And it's perfectly legal:)

Dean can capture a significant portion of the Nader vote, making OR much easier. MN trended GOP in 2002, but one can reasonably assert that this was backlash from the Wellstone rally; again, a collapse of Green support helps there. IA is still trending Dem - and if Dean wins the primary there, his status jumps. MI and PA both have powerful Dem governors who can team-up with Soros and union power to get the vote out. In NM, demographics are helping us, and we control everything - campaigning with the governor should deliver that state.

For pickups, we gun after NH and AR. Clark, combined with a Dem trend, a neutralized NRA, and some Clinton campaigning would deliver those 6EVs. 4 more to go - NH. Dean's regional strength could help there. New Hampshire residents look next-door every day and wonder why their children don't have medical insurance, and why they don't have a nice rainy day fund. Gore lost NH by 22000 votes; Nader's votes could have delivered the state to him several times.

That puts Dean/Clark at exactly 270EVs. Let's go further. We want to draw Bush into fighting for other states so that he has less time and money to campaign in the above states. These are the states that we should target: AZ/NV/LA/FL/WV/MO/OH.

In the states where we mean business, we also need to suppress GOP turnout. Demoralize them. Make them say to themselves, "why bother vote?" Remind them of how "liberal" Bush has been. Remind them of how he praised the USSC ruling upholding Affirmative Action. Remind them of his appointment of openly gay officials and ambassadors. Remind them of how non-military spending has increased by over 20% in these three years - more than Clinton's 8yrs. A number of billboards placed in GOP stronghold territory glaring these voters in the face can shave-off 2 to 3% of their vote - making a Dean victory more likely.

I also advocate infomercials. Bush has his convention bounce after ours, which deeply troubles me. An infomercial in the week right after his convention could curb that bounce. They gave Perot the lead in 1992, so we know they work. With an infomercial, we get to control the message. No pundits spinning the message, telling voters how to think. We can share news stories that have been passed-over for KobeTV, we can share life stories of the candidates, we can share how Bush has let us down and how a Dean/Clark ticket could rectify those letdowns. The infomercial is a very powerful, oft-forgotten tool in a candidate's arsenal.

Another infomercial should be on November 1, 2004 - the night before the election. As many as 7 to 10% of the electorate is undecided at this point, and a carefully-tailored infomercial could be the nudge that tips victory into our corner. As opposed to Bush getting "the last word" with his convention speech, we do. Very helpful.

That is how a Dean/Clark ticket wins the White House.

[Ediacara]

43. hehehehe

VoteClark's head will explode when Dean chooses Gen Clark as his VP.

[ozymandius]

6. Your scenario takes into account that everything is going to hell, right?

Bush now has a proven track record of a feculent King Midas. It appears that just about anyone would stand a good chance at a run. Provided that any candidate has an above-average I.Q. (which, by the way, Bush does not) and the courage of their convictions backed up with a parcel of knowledge and rhetorical savvy to deliver it.

Labor Department records show that there are about 3 million unemployed people who probably will not vote for Bush. But then, I will grant the notion that some will refuse to get his bad taste out of their mouth after all these years. Then there are the people whose lives have been thrown away over senseless wars. Then you have first-responders who were promised huge amounts of money, the sun and the moon in the wake of 9/11 - yet nothing has been done. In fact, New York City has laid-off some first-responders due to the budget crisis precipitated by 9/11. The state of the State of Texas shows the deep footprints of the Bush legacy. It ranks among the top in the country with the poorest air quality, ground and water pollution. The then-Bush administration was the harbinger of Enron and Halliburton.

It is clear that Bush is a photo-op president and a champion of the oligarchs.

How is that going to work for Bush? Pretty damned poorly, I think. How is that going to work for the opposition, any opposition? Pretty damned well.

Proselytizing the DU masses is your priviledge here. However, I have never seen any thread that has yielded any converts to any camp.

[msanger]

7. BORING

your guys is no good for the following reasons.....

why aren't you tearing down bush or building up your own guy. attacking other dems is just doing Rove's work for him.

[liberalnurse]

8. These deluded posts really bring out the best of Dean.

Dean supporters actually support a leading candidate who is really running for the job of President. The poster supports a wet dream. So, I will assist the mission by thanking the poster for bring out campaign issue discussion wherein we can share how terrific Howard Dean is for the job.

[ima_sinnic]

9. your obsession with Dean is getting OLD

The more you tear him down the more I like him.

[bowens43]

10. a monkey could beat bush.

This rant isn't about Dean not being able to win the general election, it's about you wishing Clark was a viable candidate.

[AP]

13. But why run a monkey against Bush? No matter how bad Bush is,

you still want to run the best candidate against him. You want to reduce the margin of error as much as possible. You also want to take the opportunity to elect the person with the perfect message for this time in American history -- you just might get an FDR, rather than a Herbert Hoover.

So,pick the guy who's going to run the best against Bush (ie, the person who offers the starkest contrast), but also look for the guy who's saying all the right things about the moment America is in (ie, that we live in a world which rewards wealth and not work, and that needs to change).

[AP]

12. Two more reasons:

- There are too many states in the South in which he won't be competitive at all. To win, the Dems have to mitigate the Republicans' money advantage by forcing them to spend money in every state. The Democrats have to run someone who's competitive everywhere. Kerry and Dean aren't competitive everywhere, and, sadly, according the the New York Times this past week, the more Floridians realize that Graham isn't the conservative Dem they thought they elected, the less competitive he is against Bush in Florida. So, think about Florida when picking a Dem. It's a big, expensive (media-wise), electoral vote-rich state. If the nominee isn't competitive in that state before any money is even spent on media (i.e., if the canidate will have to spend alot of money to close the inevitable initial gap on Bush), the Republicans will be able to spend all their money on, for example, CA, making those big states winnable for them.

- For Democratic voters who vote on class opportunity issues (which include the huge black base of the Democratic party), Dean's background (unlimited opportunities to change his mind, pick new professions, not work too hard, pick up and move, etc.) will be a big turnoff. In fact, they'll see so little difference between him and Bush that they probably won't bother to vote. Dean is running an Angry White Upper-Middle Class Male campaign, but that can get you almost nowhere as a Democrat. There are a ton of AWUCM in the Republican party, which is why the strategy works for them. But there aren't enough in the Democratic party (and Dean isn't going to out-Bush Bush to get the Republicans to vote Democrat) for Dean to win the general election.

[unfrigginreal]

14. Yeah, and six months ago...

you wouldn't have given Dean a chance in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Too bad, for you, I think he's in it for the long run and he's picking up support even quicker than Clinton did in '91.

[AP]

15. Past winners in IA & NH: Tsongas, Buchanan, Jesse Jackson

(actually, not sure about Jackson), but I am about the other two. NH and IA are a measure of how many Angry (White?) Extreme liberals/conservatives you can get organized. It's no test of how you'll play in the south on election day.

[dsc]

36. flat our wrong on Jackson

In 84 Hart won and in 88 Dukakis did.

[CMT]

52. past winners in Iowa

include Mondale who got the nomination. Carter in '76 and '80--when he had a tough run against Ted Kennedy. Also, Al Gore in '00 won Iowa Caucuses.

NH--Carter again in '76/80
'88--Mike Dukakis who was nominated
'00-Al Gore who was nominated and won the election.

[chimpymustgo]

16. Very good analysis, AP.

We've got to compete in the south. It's good politics and good governance.

[AP]

17. And it's not a bad thing to be competitive in the south

I mean, for a Democrat, that is (for a Republican, it used to mean that you were a racist). Being competitive in the south for a democrat means that you care about class mobility and middle class opportunity, and about creating a fair economy. Everything that made Clinton competitive in the south were things that were just as valuable for a poor kid in Harlem, or South Boston, or Billings, or Reading.

[acerbic]

18. Are you claiming that those things are specific to the south?

Being competitive in the south for a democrat means that you care about class mobility and middle class opportunity, and about creating a fair economy.

The north is not interested in class mobility, middle class opportunity or creating a fair economy...????

Everything that made Clinton competitive in the south were things that were just as valuable for a poor kid in Harlem, or South Boston, or Billings, or Reading.

Uhh... so what the heck is the point with "being competitive in the south" specifically vs. being simply competitive everywhere?

[AP]

22. What I'm saying is a variation of this sentiment:

Being from the south is a proxy for class to which people everywhere relate. If you have a southern accent, you can be a rich guy, but working class people everywhere, regardless of their accents, think you're working class. This is why Bush, an Andover-Yale-Harvard graduate fakes a TX accent. Edwards actually is a rich guy (thanks entireley to hard work, and not to his father's connections at all), and his accent says something very true about his roots and the way he experiences American life. Middle and working class people everywhere relate to that, and it's triggered by hearing that accent. The accent opens the door to the truth.

As for my previous post, I think it was obvious what I was saying, but thanks for the opportunity to introduce the new angle.

[acerbic]

25. Huhh??

If you have a southern accent, you can be a rich guy, but working class people everywhere, regardless of their accents, think you're working class. This is why Bush, an Andover-Yale-Harvard graduate fakes a TX accent. Edwards actually is a rich guy (thanks entireley to hard work, and not to his father's connections at all), and his accent says something very true about his roots and the way he experiences American life. Middle and working class people everywhere relate to that, and it's triggered by hearing that accent. The accent opens the door to the truth.

Amazing contortions...

[AP]

27. huh? back at you.

In the case of Edwards, it opens the door to the truth. Obviously not in every case because I just said that it didn't with Bush's fake accent.

If you don't think this is the case, why don't you make an argument, rather than call it a contortion?

You really don't think the accent is a symbol of something? You don't think it's a proxy for class? Why's it so important to Bush if it isn't?

[VermontDem2004]

29. Fake accent?

Bush has a fake accent? I never knew that. I like Edwards position on education mostly because I am young, I could care less what his background is or what his accent is, I just go by the issues. BTW, I get tired of him talking about growing up in Robbins, North Carolina being the son of a mill worker, etc. everytime I see him on TV. I have the same problem with Gephardt.

[tjdee]

38. Bush is from Connecticut, his brother Jeb and Poppy talk totally different

I've heard some people say they speak differently than their siblings, but in Bush's case I think it's because he desperately *wants* to be a weal big cowboy!

Jeb talks regular "middle American" and so does Poppy. Don't know what Neil sounds like, because he's in hiding somewhere after the S&L scandal.

[unfrigginreal]

19. What makes you think that Dean is different?

Everything that made Clinton competitive in the south were things that were just as valuable for a poor kid in Harlem, or South Boston, or Billings, or Reading.

As someone living in Charlotte,NC, I'd suggest that things are looking pretty good for Doctor Dean down here.

[AP]

24. Charlotte? College town?

I don't doubt that college towns will produce pockets of support for a guy like Dean (as they did for Jesse Jackson, and in the same way that the bible belt helped Pat Robertson) in the occassional oasis of liberalism in seas of conservativisim (like Austin, TX). But don't confuse the exception with the rule. As goes Charlotte, goes the rest of NC, usually?

[tedoll78]

26. Wow..

Class warfare within the Democratic Party. Interesting.

I thought campaigns were about communicating a vision for America to the voters. Dean certainly is showing well in this realm.. this can't be denied. People don't see him on TV and say, "ooooh, that stock broker man!"

[AP]

28. Class Mobility IS the most important issue in America today.

Bush has been dismantling it intentionally. Calling it class warfare is the way to stifle discussion of it. The Democrats will only win if they can figure out a way to talk about it and tap into sentiments about it.

The only reason people don't talk about Dean's biography (which actually does explain a great deal about the things he does and doesn't care about) is because he has been hiding it.

[VermontDem2004]

30. Let's see

I am the son of rich wall street broker, I got into College with basically no tuition help as opposed to... I am the son of a millworker from Robbins, North Carolina. I was the first in my family to go to college, etc. Edwards has a good story but I am sick of hearing it everytime I hear him speak.

[acerbic]

31. Oh yeah, Dean's biography is really well hidden:

The only reason people don't talk about Dean's biography (which actually does explain a great deal about the things he does and doesn't care about) is because he has been hiding it.
:dunce:

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=about_biography

[tedoll78]

32. Let's turn the tables..

It seems like all Edwards does is stick to his "I'm from a mill worker family" schtick. Does it go any deeper? What are his policy proposals, and how do they affect me? I'm betting that voters want to know this.

I talk about Dean's issues because that's what I care about. I don't care if he came from money. I wouldn't care if he came from a union family, and I wouldn't care if his momma was a crack ho. The issues. He's tapping into the issues, standing-up for our issues.. that's why people are responding to him. He doesn't get up onto stage and bore us with tales of his PAST; that doesn't affect us. We want to know about the FUTURE. And, for the record, Dean has been talking about class mobility. He talks about JOBS, healthcare, education funding - all of these key to class mobility. He might not use the preferred buzzphrase "class mobility", but he is relating his policy proposals to voters in a very real way.

"The only reason people don't talk about Dean's biography (which actually does explain a great deal about the things he does and doesn't care about) is because he has been hiding it."

And I'd like to know specifically.. how is Dean hiding his past? That's a pretty lofty claim to make. Show us some proof; it's easy to slather accusations.

[AP]

33. The two most substantial statements of Dean's background

which I've seen came from (1) a Yale Daily News interview with former classmates, and (2) the web site of a former co-worker of Dean's father.

The Yale Daily News article was probably read by about 10,000 people. It was an interview with former class mates who described a happy-go-lucky partier who would rather play cards, drink, and drive off to NYC or NC on the spur of the moment than study.

The web site showed picutres of Dean's father participating in what seemed like a Pan-Am/CIA joint operation Chinese airline.

You never ever hear any details of Dean's life growing up, what Dean's family does for a living, how they made their money, etc. etc. That's all fine, and I accept that a guy like FDR or JFK can become traitors to their class, but with guys like FDR and JFK you knew enough to know they were traitors to their class (and they had other things going for them which mitigated the class problem).

No matter what you say, you're not going to convince me that biography doesn't matter (it has always mattered) and you're not going to convince me that Edwards should stop tying his biography into his policy.

[tedoll78]

34. I'm not claiming that bio matters 0%.

Biography does matter to some, but it should not be pivotal. More than biography, I hope he types Logic into his policy.

And while we supposedly never hear details of Dean's life growing up, there is a difference between failing to offer more details and actively hiding his background. He seems to be focusing more time on policy.. you know - the job we'd be hiring him for? *gasp!*

So again: where is the evidence that he's actively hiding background? I'd like to see you back-up this assertion.

[AP]

35. "actively hiding"

To be honest, that phrasing was inspired by Dean's actively trying to hide his record as governor, which has been argued by others here at DU.

In relation to his biography, it's only an inferrence deduced from the allegations about the way he treats his record as governor, and the fact that they only place I've read anything interesting about his biography were from sources largely outside the purview of the campaign.

[acerbic]

47. In other words: Dean isn't hiding his biography and your claim that he is

...hiding it was simply that substance which we can't mention at DU using the proper and accurate noun lest the post be deleted, which gives quite an advantage to those who have no scruples about using that-which-shall-not-be-named.

[AP]

56. evasive about biography. actively hiding record as governor.

OK? And I wouldn't be surprised if he has taken steps (called people) to make sure nobody tells stories anymore about what he did and didn't do before he went to medical school.

[chaumont58]

20. Your Number 2: the VP choice

Your number 2 is NOT a good reason. Dean could choice any god damn body and it wouldn't matter what was said before the choice for more than a couple of hours. Does anyone remember 1960 and JFK's choice of Lyndon Johnson, or what about 1980, and the speaker of VOODOO economics? Bush(ver 1.0) blasted Raygun hard on his VOODOO economics. That didn't stop him from being selected for the VP slot and, if memory serves me, going on to victory.
You ought to get out of this Alice in Wonderland setting you have placed yourself.

[UrbScotty]

21. 5 more reasons why Dean can win

1) Civil Unions
2) His VP nominee
3) Education
4) His looks
5) His speaking ability



I mean he looks so charming, so... Presidential.

His wife, Dr. Judy Steinberg, has got to be one of the luckiest women alive! (right up there with the Queen!)

[tedoll78]

23. Heck, I'll add some

6) The NRA.
7) Fundraising Prowess: Soros practically bankrolling our GOTV efforts, Dean can put his fundage to other uses.
8) The media seem to like him. Remember Gore being raped on a daily basis in 2000?
9) He's bringing a TON of new people into the process. With just 5% more turnout going straight into the 'D' column, we can steamroll the Chimp.
10) This campaign is really innovative/imaginative/intense!

[janx]

37. There are some who would vehemently disagree with you...

[genius]

39. Dean's wishing-washy position on gay rights

will lose him both sides. HIs opposition to a federal bill (thereby making way for states to discriminate) will eventually erode his gay support (especially when more liberal candidates are stronger on gay rights).

He interested the liberal community with his call for a 60 day delay in the war but has infuriated it with his opposition to civil rights (see earlier positings of articles establishing his desire to remove techicalities to convicion of the innocent) and his failure to oppose the W.T.O. and NAFTA and his preference for a worker's (payroll) tax over an inheritance tax (see the AFL-CIO degate). He has also dissappointed a lot of seniors by trying to mislead them about his position on the Social Security retirement age in said debate.

In the end, he will have Davis's problem. Davis's problem has nothing to do with the budget. Davis (though stronger on civil rights than Dean) has angered the liberals within his own party by failing to be more liberal on civil rights issues. The Republicans want a Republican and so Davis only has limited support. Dean will, in the end, get only the support of the not-so-liberal Democrats.

[janx]

40. Dean is not wishy-washy on gay rights. He is a pragmatist who

knows how to get things done. By separating the civil and religious factors of marriage, we can make way for civil unions and then let the churches decide whom they will "marry."

Dean's a big believer in the separation of church and state. It's about time we got that back into play, because the merging of the two is over half the reason our country is in the shape it's in.

Leaving some decisions to the states does not necessarily mean that those decisions are less important. It simply means, sometimes, that some matters are dealt with more practically that way.

If you are looking for some magic wand that will remove homophobia and bigotry from American society in a flash, it's not going to happen. But we can at least make a good dent by letting states decide and then honoring their decisions in other states. That is precisely what we are going to do.

[genius]

41. States rights means states may discriminate

Eventually the whole gay community will catch on and he'll completely lose all gay support.

[indigo32]

42. umm yeah

tell that to his gay supporters. We're not idiots.

[dsc]

45. We gays can read you know

I realize that some paternialistic heterosexuals like to pretend that we can't bother our pretty little heads with things like issues or reading. You think us too shallow to follow issues and too emotional to care. We are dependent on you to lead us to the promised land.

What a load of horse manuer. I know his position on gay rights (unlike you who mistated it above) and I do follow issues. And yes, Virginia, so do most of the rest of us. Believe it or not, we aren't empty headed party boys who preen and prance.

[Egnever]

49. Complete horse dooky!

More BS from the self proclaimed genius who aparently cant read.

"we have civil unions, and we deliberate chose civil unions, because we didn't think marriage was necessary in order to give equal rights to all people.

Marriage is a religious institution, the way I see it. And we're not in the business of telling churches who they can and cannot marry. But in terms of civil rights and equal rights under the law for all Americans, that is the state's business, and that's why we started civil unions. "

Notice the key issue for him is equal rights for all

Which is exactly what the gay comunity is looking for. If you think its bassed on them wanting the term marriage and nothing else you are sadly mistaken. They want the rights that come with marriage not the title itself. Sure the title would be great for some but the bottom line is they want to be able to support eachother in all the ways that marriage provides for hetero couples. If you offer them those rights without the actual tag I guarentee they will take them happily.

Heres more info for you genius.

In a recent survey of the gay comunity Dean took 32% of the support as oposed to then next closest kerry at 10% I would say the gay comunity is prety solidly in Deans corner and pretending they are duped into believing what deans stands for on quite possibly the most important issue to themselves is beyond laughable

[dsc]

44. any citations to back any of this up

You mistate his position on gay rights. He said on Larry King Live that he would do the following.

a) require the feds to honor any marriage or civil union between homosexuals performed by either a state or another nation.

b) require states to equalize their treatment of different sex and same sex couples.

c) let the states choose how to do b.

It isn't complicated. My TV didn't come with a decoder ring. He was very clear. Either you didn't see this or MTP for that matter and thus don't know his position or you did and chose to type what you did. The first makes you too illinformed to be listened to the second I can't say.

A citation would have been nice but now I do know what you are talking about. First he favors a pay roll tax on high wage earners (those above the current 88k cut off) and second he and every other candidate have already spent the inheritance tax. That is one of the Bush tax cuts which they are calling to repeal. Every candidate has already promised to spend that money (most on health care some on other things) but it can't be spent twice.

[genius]

46. You keep trying to forget his Meet the Press interview

Dean even forgot about that (and oher earlier interviews) when he misstated his position on Social Security at the AFFL-CIO debates. The guy is talking out of both sides of his mouth and I, for one, don't want a guy who can't keep his story straight representing my party. I know you guys like to bait people by not reading and asking questions that have already been answered. But I thought I'd get back to you on this one. My posting overall was very clear as to where he said what. Please take the time to research your candidate. I am certain that if you do so with an open mind, you'll come to the same conclusions about him that I have.

[dsc]

48. I have researched him

and BTW the interview you are refering to referred to the age at which one retires and eliminating the cut off income. The first you didn't adress in your first post the second is exactly what I said he said.

[Egnever]

50. Oh please

You arent reaserching his positions you are trying to find gotchas. Its very clear what your agenda is here. Dean has spoken many times on both issues you address here and overwhelmingly what he says on them is completely different than what you try to present.

[dsc]

51. here are Dean's exact words at theforum

Governor Dean, about those high earners: The non-partisan Center On Budget And Policy Priorities has suggested using revenue from the estate tax as a progressive way to help bolster Social Security. Should wealthy Americans be contributing more to Social Security?

DEAN: What wealthy Americans should be doing is paying their fair share of the payroll tax. The Social Security cannot survive on its present track.
(APPLAUSE)

And the solution to that is simply to make wage earners above $85,000 subject to the payroll tax. And that will cure the Social Security ills if we can change presidents.

Here is the link:

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22205-2003Aug6.html

Note that you once again were totally, baldly and wholly in error. Dean said exactly and precisely what I said he said. Next time you tell me to research my candidate try having done so yourself.

[janx]

53. During the MTP interview, he stated that it was a possiblity he

would entertain, not one that he would support.

That, I think, was what Kucinich was mistakenly referring to in the shouting that took place at the AFL/CIO forum.

What Dennis probably did not know at the time was that in a statement Dean made YEARS ago, he actually did support raising the retirement age--something Dean himself had understandably forgotten.

[MercutioATC]

57. Totally untrue. Dean insists that ALL Americans must have equal rights...

He's simply leaving the METHOD (civil union, gay marriage, etc.) up to the states. The states will be required to come up with their own individual ways of doing this. He also states that all Federal workers will be able to get benefits for same-sex partners.

[Upfront]

54. Work

You put put a lot of effort in to your post, to bad it is total bull.

[Nicholas_J]

55. In the end

No one wins without heavy party support, both DLC and DNC, and Dean cannot now get it.

THe McGovern Syndrome. Dean is not being compared to McGivern becasue of his political stance, but his attacks on the party, which offended the rank and file volunteeers who support the party, its leadership, and the decisions that make. McGovern attacked them, as Dean did, and when the party gave its party, millions of voulnteers decided to not show up. Efforts to get people to register to vote failed miserably, the rank and file volunteers who pounded the pavement handing out flyers and placing them under car windshiled and anwered local party headquarter telephones disappeared.

The party gave a party and no one came.

This is exactly the buzz among people who have volunteered for years.
It is the party volunteer proletariat who in the end, make the final months of the campaign after the nomination active, and viable.

Dean's attack on the DLC and and long time democratic insiders is being considered an affront by many of these people who devote months of long hours of works and have done so for years. They make the elections happen. Already, they do not seem to want to work for Dean.
This is part of what is fueling McAuliff and the DLC's talk of getting behind one candidate whoe appears to be best able to contest Bush, and who has no skeletons in the closet to be brought out by the Bush administration.

Knight Ridders pollsters have labeled this election the worse chance for Democrats in 70 years.

If the party decides that it is best for Dean to pull out and he does not. the election is dead.