SeleucusNicator said:
Dean is an intriguing figure.
As governor of Vermont, he was extremely centrist, almost conservative. He was a budget hawk, opposed gun control, etc. Pretty much the only liberal thing he did was sign the Vermont civil unions bill into law; but did not really instigate it, the bill literally just found its way to his desk.
I'm quite aware of that he was pretty centrist. He sided with Newt Gingrich and the Republicans on Medicare. He did oppose gun control. He was and is not far-left.
Then, suddenly, when he decided to run for President, he was the darling of the far left; he was seen as some sort of progressive savior. Both sides saw him as such.
No, he didn't 'suddenly' decide to run for President. Suddenly, President Bush decided to invade Iraq. This is what transformed Dean in other peoples' eyes. Most life-long Democrats opposed the war from the get-go. Imagine their surprise with most of the Democrats in Congress gave President Bush the go-ahead to attack Iraq. This is what made Dean different form the pack. He had always opposed of the war. Kerry - well, he voted for the war, but then he said he gave the President the authority to take the issue to the UN, but then... Kerry didn't make any sense, and that is exactly why he lost to President Bush.
He is not the 'darling' of the far-left. Most of his supports are quite aware of his record as Governor of Vermont. In fact, that is one of the reasons he has so many supporters. His supporters realize that he isn't to the left, he is to the center. I'm not to the far-left. I'm not even left-wing. I totally consider myself a Centrist. I oppose abortion, except for special cases, but I'm for gun control. I opposed the War on Iraq, but I also oppose gay marrige and am for civil unions.
That has led to his main strength: fundraising. Dean can use his magic powers to make individual members of the far left send in small amounts of money to the party, but they do so in such large numbers that it turns into a very significant source of campaign funds. He claims to be able to create local organizations, but this I doubt. His "local organization" in Iowa consisted of him flying in college students from the coasts and from liberal campuses elsewhere and flooding neighborhoods with them, sending them door-to-door to talk to voters. It was highly ineffective; people don't really care what somebody 6 states away thinks. Kerry largely stole these strategies and lost. Meanwhile, Bush's local organizations in the election consisted of people who are actually locals going out and talking to their neighbors; Bush won Iowa, Ohio, and other states where this was heavily used.
The far-left? The far-left has no one else to support. Do you expect them to support President Bush? Do you not consider some of the big money donors to DNC in 2004, 'far-left?' The far-left is going to be there. But Dean isn't far-left, nor are the majority of his supporters. His supporters are reformers. We're tired of having a party based on Washington consultants. We want a party that pursues a 50-state strategy.
As for the future of the Democratic party, they must win local elections, and by that I mean the state legislatures. In 2006, they will get wiped out in Senate elections, simply due to the fact that elections will be held in Republican states with Democratic incumbants. If they win state legislatures, however, and hold them until 2012, they can then gerrymander House seats and perhaps win the House majority after 2012.
They can win the Presidency in 2008, I believe, but it will take very very large amounts of work before the Democrats can even think about controlling even a single house of Congress.
One of Chairman Dean's major goals is to 'show up' in red states and talk about issues that appeal to them. Honestly, do you think he is stupid?
Do you think he is going to go to Louisiania and declare his support homosexuals? No, he's not. He's going to go to Louisiana and talk to them about things every human being has the right to talk about. He can talk to them about God. The Republicans in no way whatsoever have a monopoly on morals. Democrats can be as religious as any Republican. The thing is, the Republicans have successfully portrayed themselves as, 'moral.' They consider it moral to support a President who's invasion of Iraq has killed more than 100,000 innocent Iraqis. But I think we'll leave that for another thread, no?
The southern states are among the poorest in the nation. Howard Dean and the Democrats are going to show up. They're going to talk to them about issues that have affected the average person's life. Jobs, health care, social security. Things that matter to a family that needs to survive.
My point is, Dean is a smart person.
He isn't dumb.
He is quite aware of what the general public thinks of him. He is quite aware of the expectations the Republicans have. Newt Gingrich had said Dean would be the perfect leader for Democrats if they have a "death wish,'' Dean said: ``I'm looking forward to the opportunity to prove Newt wrong.''
...and I think he has every reason and every intention to do just that.
