If Dean doesn't win on 2/3 is it over for him?

[_Jumper_]

Will the money completely dry up if this happens?

[isbister]

1. Yup, its over

The money's almost dry now anyway, Trippi's got it.

[jsw_81]

2. Yes

Regardless of what the True Believers may say ("Dean will never give up! He'll fight to the end!"), the fact is that most of Dean's money has already dried up, and unless he wins somewhere on February 3, he'll be 0-9. There is no way he could ever recover from that, period.

[Cascadian]

3. It ain't over til it's over!

I won't count him out yet! I am certain he will bounce back.


John

[jsw_81]

8. It's over

[Feanorcurufinwe]

4. If?

[ibegurpard]

5. Realistically? Yes.

But this Dean supporter isn't backing Kerry. No fucking way.

[Cascadian]

7. I will continue to support Dean.

If Dean does not get the nomination and Kerry does, I will support Kerry but I am not so sure Kerry can beat Bush. I really don't. Edwards stands a better chance but Dean's chances would be a hell of a lot better. I just cannot be enthusiastic about a man who is an insider, who voted for the Patriot Act, who voted for the Iraq invasion, and failed to oppose the AARP/drug company giveaway bill.
I just can't! I will not give money to Kerry's campaign if he gets the nomination, but I will vote for him.


John

[_Jumper_]

9. Clark?

Clark is anti-war, an outsider, and a grassroots candidate.

[Cascadian]

13. I am still a little suspicious of Clark

That's just how I feel. Sorry!


John

[_Jumper_]

14. Your choices

Kerry, Clark, and Edwards are the only contenders left if Dean is eliminated. Will you go with Edwards?

[Cascadian]

I am sticking with Dean for the long run.

Until he drops out and if Edwards is still in the race, I may go with Edwards and whoever is the nominee, then I will back them but my enthusiasm will be lacking if it isn't Dean.


John

[OhioStateProgressive]

24. funny

i laugh when Generals are called anti-war

yeah, thatw as anti-warfare Clark practiced in Europe

yeah, that was a book on "Waging Modern Anti War"

please spare me

[_Jumper_]

30. He is as "anti-war" as Dean

;)

[jsw_81]

10. So you want to give Bush/Cheney four more years?

Just because your favorite candidate couldn't cut it in the primaries?

[Cascadian]

15. This is what I am talking about.

There is going to be a lot of sour grapes to go around as soon as the primaries and caucuses are over. I can just feel it in my bones. There are going to be a lot bitter people around. Unity is going to be very hard to pull off.


John

[jsw_81]

18. But your guy is losing fair and square

Just look at his campaign! It's falling apart, mostly because of poor decisions that they made. It's not like there's some huge Democratic conspiracy out there trying to keep Dean down.

[Cascadian]

19. There's plenty of blame to go around.

There's the mainstream media and I am certain Karl Rove had his hands in the situation as well. Dean by far is the best candidate to beat Bush. I honestly don't think Kerry will have a chance to win. If he is the nominee I will reluctantly vote for him.

John

[quinnox]

6. Yep

I read that congressional backers of Dean made it clear that if Dean doesn't win somewhere (second place doesn't count) then they will jump ship.

All that said, I have an idea that Dean is gonna try to stay in the race in an attempt to have some type of clout at the convention, kind of like how Kucinich and Sharpton are doing. He won't care anymore if he keeps placing third or fourth the rest of the way.

[krkaufman]

11. Nope... he's bypassing Feb3 and shooting for M I C H I G A N on Feb7

Sounds like he may be bypassing the Feb3 primaries and putting his efforts into winning in Michigan on Feb7.

[_Jumper_]

12. That is his best option IMO

If he contests the 2/3 states and emerges 0-9 the money will dry up. With his limited resources he needs to gamble on winning in the hopes that it will allow him to raise money.

[Leilani]

16. But he's already on the ballot

And will participate in the debate Thurs nite in S.Carolina.

So it seems whether or not he contests on 2/3, he's still in it.

[_Jumper_]

17. So are Kucinich, Sharpton, and Lieberman

Without spending serious money in a state a candidate cannot compete on 2/3. If I were him I would make only token efforts on 2/3 and gamble everything on 2/7.

[sventvkg]

20. yea it's over for me and ALL OF US cause we are going to loose..

The Fix is in...Bush is going to get re-elected..Instead of being in denial of this, I would suggest you all get your affairs in order. I'm going off the Grid..We are going to have a tough next 4years..If you think this term was bad, you have seen NOTHING~~~ I do not meet the requirements to move to Canada but I'm going to go anyway when the shit goes down..I'll find someone to marry me If I have to...This country is through..I'm really pissed we let this happen but I believe we deserve it as we did it to ourselves...

[Indiana Democrat]

21. It's already over.

[Frederic Bastiat]

22. Stick a fork in him

He's done. Back the General!

[OKNancy]

27. I know you mean well

or maybe you don't, but I really hope Clark supporters can be above that kind of talk like our candidate.

Dean supporters have been hit between the eyes with this Trippi stuff and being out of money. Now is not the time to act nasty.

I think Clark would be a good option for Dean supporters IF HE DROPS OUT......but then and only then. For now Dean is in the race and he is still a formidable opponent.

[Frederic Bastiat]

32. I was turned off by Dean supporters early

I had no confidence in their candidate and it seems like the people in IA and NH feel the same way too.

[ibegurpard]

33. Funny I feel the same about supporters of the General

eom

[newsjunkie]

23. Dean is the only true choice

to change America the way it needs changed and improved. I'm sticking with Dean as long as he wants to keep fighting. Just sent him more money this week. I do not have faith in J Kerry (he is one that gave Bush a blank check to attack Iraq based on lies right before a campaign..has no vision or integrity to make hard choices),he has a bad voting record.. nor do I believe he can win against the evil Bush machine. Bushs reverse psycology has worked on the masses and has people believing Howard is somehow 'unelectable'. Hogwash! John Kerry is the liberal that's unelectable...besides that he's a snore and uninspiring. Bush will tear him to shreds,and it's a shame the voters still havent smartened up even after what we have all seen happen to our country. We need Howard Dean's passion and integrity and proven record to beat the shrub.

http://www.channel17.org/deanvideo.html

[FubarFly]

25. Nope.

He can stay in as longs as he wants to. If he wants to be a gadfly and make a lot of noise at the convention, he will do it. His hardcore supporters are too invested to turn back now. I'd watch out for that Dean guy, last week the media told me he was crazy 673 times.

[DannyRed]

26. I would say

Realistically speaking, based on the article that I posted and linked to in another thread, that Dean cannot really be declared done for until after Wisconsin.

If, after Wisconsin, there has been no victory, no movement, no recovery...then I think it would be fair to say that Dean stands little or not chance of winning the nomination outright...

However, he will STILL have a significant number of delegates....

So, it may be that he will nickle and dime his way into the convention, and then stick a long sharp knife in whoever amongst the top two (probably Edwards and Kerry) he thinks shafted him.

I predict that no one knows.

[quaker bill]

28. Not necessarily

But likely.

Were he to place a strong second in each and the victories were split between several other candidates, there is the theoretical possibility that he could end up with the most net delegates.

However, that sort of a result would play so heavily into the "unelectable" meme that it would probably make it very difficult to continue regardless. I think he realistically needs to take at least two states and finish strong second in most of the rest. Even this scenario would only work if the remaining victories were more or less evenly divided between Kerry, Clark, and Edwards.

In short, winning some states and coming out with the most net delegates would probably be enough.

[Lexingtonian]

29. I'd say Feb 7

Maybe the last stand will be Michigan. But I wouldn't be surprised if Washington State proves a lot better for him, though perhaps not enough.

I thought all this time that he had the money to get to Super Tuesday, that burn rate in those two states has really surprised me. (As a (ha, ha) silver lining I guess I'm feeling less concerned about what Dubya's $220m are going to end up buying him, though! :D )

[jamesinca]

31. Answer me this somebody

Clinton finished third in Iowa, second in New Hampshire and still won the nomination. Only two people that have ever taken the Iowa caucus have ever won the presidency if I remember right. History is against John Kerry and shows that Dean is not dead. All the Edwards people that think they are in the White House think of this, he has not finished better than second. He picked up one delegate more than Dean in Iowa and lost that difference in New Hampshire. Dean still has the delegate lead because of the super delegate count. Kerry is the only one that has any bragging rights because of the life his campaign has suddenly shown. People talk of the mistakes that Dean has made in the past few weeks and months, mostly on here from some Clark supporters. The best that Clark has done is finish third and he was not considered viable in Iowa. I know that he did not run in Iowa, but he did run in New Hampshire and only managed a third. Kerry has made the comment that a Dem could win with out taking the south. Will that come back to haunt him in the 11 southern states? Clark skipped South Carolina and went to Oklahoma. Will that come back to haunt him? Al Sharpton is running strong with the African American vote in South Carolina, that is figured to be 50% of the vote there. How many of you will suddenly jump on the Al Sharpton band wagon if he takes South Carolina? How many of you people that are attacking Dean now were upset because his people were marking territory as theirs before the voting even began? How many of you people are marking territory before the vote and are being hypocrites today?

Kerry is the only one with bragging rights right now and Dean is smart, don't count him out! When you count up the delegates, the rest of your candidates are way behind those two.

[jsw_81]

34. This isn't 1992, and Howard Dean isn't Bill Clinton

In 1992, Iowa wasn't even contested because favorite-son Tom Harkin was running, and he won easily (as expected). But when the New Hampshire primary rolled around, Bill Clinton -- an obscure Arkansas governor who had been pounded for weeks over draft-dodging allegations, the Jennifer Flowers mess, and the fact that his wife Hillary was ambitious and brilliant -- managed to come in second behind former Senator Paul Tsongas, a favorite-son. This was really amazing because unlike Dean, Clinton was never the front-runner and many people thought his campaign was dead; there was even a front-page story in one of the major magazines entitled: "Why Clinton Can't Win." The rest is history.

"Only two people that have ever taken the Iowa caucus have ever won the presidency if I remember right."

Unfortunately, you don't remember right. Three presidents -- Carter, Reagan and G.W. Bush* -- won Iowa on their way to getting elected (selected, in Bush's case). The first President Bush also won Iowa, but he didn't get elected until eight years later; I don't know if that counts.

"History is against John Kerry and shows that Dean is not dead."

Wrong. Since 1976, every single candidate who has won both Iowa and New Hampshire has gone on to win their party's presidential nomination. As for Dean, he's finished unless he wins a state or two on February 3. He's running out of money and you just can't lose nine early primaries and caucuses and then expect to be your party's nominee. Trippi knows this, and I think that's why he left early.

* G.W. Bush isn't really an elected president, but he currently holds the office.

[jamesinca]

35. Maybe

They may have won the party nod, but did not win the White House, that was the question. Dean has not lost nine early primaries, there has only been two contested. Now you are going around and doing the things that the Dean people have been criticized for, declaring themselves the winners. I still hold to the point that history is not on Kerry's side, he won Iowa, New Hampshire, will go on to win the Dem nod, and if history runs its usual course, will get wiped out by Bush. History says he will. Two states have been contested, that means 90% are still out there. So before people start peeing on themselves with joy, maybe they should wait till Feb. 3rd. As I stated in my post, Kerry has bragging rights at this point, but at this point only. If he should sink in the south because of his comment that a Dem can win without the south, will you still have the opinions that you do? If Dean picks up the African American vote in SC like he did in the D.C. vote he will beat all of the other candidates. Does that mean Edwards is finished? No wins, 3 states done. Does that mean that Clark is finished, no wins and 3 states done. Today Kerry has bragging rights, tomorrow he has to earn them again. He then again has to earn them in November.

As you stated, Clinton was pounded because of the Flowers and draft dodging thing. Dean has been pounded for things all along, or at least since the summer. But he was the front runner because he raised more money and had a voice. Kerry finally got his lips off of the butt of Bush and look what happened, he won two states. If Kerry should get second or third in a state does that mean his campaign is over? If Dean should win a state, does that mean his campaign is suddenly alive again? No it does not and anybody here would be a fool to think that at least this early on. But there are a lot of people on here that are doing just that. There are Edwards and Clark people that seem to think their man is already in the WH, they are running third and forth in the delegate count at best. Mostly I have issue with people that attack other candidates, not because of their issues, but because of how they are polling. George Bush is in the WH, does that make him a better man than Al Gore? Adolf Hitler had a nice job title, did that make his ideas the best? Kucinich is not polling well, does that mean he does not have any thoughts in his head? Kerry is polling very well, but he has voted pro Bush on things like IWR and patriot act. Bill Clinton, if allowed, could pick up a third term and Hillary has done better in polls than all the current Dem candidates. The point being, the best person is not always the one winning, be humble and be a good winner or loser.

Trippi was asked to step aside and declined a different position so he left the campaign.

The pundits are saying that Dean is dead, so will that make a win by him just as remarkable as Clinton's?

[MercutioATC]

36. It's "over" if he withdraws. Until then, we're in for the long haul.

We're not a bunch of overly-enthusiastic political newbies. We're motivated by DEAN. Sure, we'll vote for whomever's the nominee, but we're not leaving Dean at the first sign of difficulty.