Skip to comments.Go, Dean, Go!!! - Music to the ears of the Bush team
Posted on 08/17/2003 8:46:54 AM PDT by NutmegGuy
Who could have thought that a 54-year old doctor and ex-governor of sleepy Vermont could send all of the Democratic presidential contenders scrambling for cover? There are lots of reasons for Republicans to wish Howard Dean all the best of luck in his quest to become George Bush's opponent in 2004. It makes a true Republican want to send a campaign donation his way.
Howard Dean is such a thorn in everyone's side because he disrupts the delicate balance of power that has been so cultivated by the "front-runners." It was expected that Dick Gephardt would easily sweep the Iowa caucus since he is from nearby Missouri and because of his close ties to labor groups who helped him sweep Iowa in 1988. Instead, Dean is giving Gephardt his biggest challenge in the corn state and could pull off an upset.
Conventional wisdom also had it that John Kerry would easily sweep New Hampshire, given that his home state of Massachusetts is just to the south. It is here that Howard Dean could pull off the biggest upset. Voters in New Hampshire are just as familiar with the ex-governor of Vermont as they are with the junior senator from their neighbor to the south. John Kerry MUST win New Hampshire to keep himself viewed as the leading Northeast liberal candidate. It is his niche and a failure in New Hampshire could jeopardize his chances in New York, New Jersey and other states that Kerry has expected to form his base. Right now, there is an unexpected dead heat where Kerry cannot afford it.
Dean has also been surprisingly strong in South Carolina, the third contest in sequential order. This threatens John Edwards, who otherwise would benefit by being seen as a moderate southerner from neighboring North Carolina. South Carolina is Edwards' must-win state. It is where he has to start his counter-attack in the south. The question-mark here is where the state's large black voting base will turn. The liberal, maverick message of Dean is only just starting to be heard and could tip the scales to the renegade candidate.
But where Dean has an ace in the hole is with his fund-raising machine. In the most recent quarter, he picked up $7.6 million, almost $2 million more than runner-up John Kerry and almost twice that of the labor-backed Gephardt.
(Excerpt) Read more at dondodd.com ...
I have mixed emotions about him running. I hope he wins the nomination and gets his ass handed to him but it ticks me off to hear his BS given wide coverage by the media who makes him look like Robin Hood.
One of his Vermont media suck-ups, Sam Hemingway, has gone on the Dean Trail and I was pleasantly surprised to read one of Hemingway's pieces in the local Gannett Gazette today. See below and pass it on to your farm communities:
Dean adjusts stance on farms to center
By Sam Hemingway
Free Press Staff Writer
Howard Dean's stance on farm and rural issues, released in a speech in Iowa last week, developed the same way his campaign has: It started out leaning left, then shifted to the middle.
According to Vermont Farm Bureau President Clark Hinsdale III, a draft of the speech only a week ago included language more radical than he believed most farmers could stomach.
Dean's presidential campaign staff in South Burlington said Hinsdale was one of those given drafts of the speech to review during its formulation because of his longtime friendship with Dean.
"I told them then that this was a bad speech, that it was essentially peppered with mantras from the far left," Hinsdale said. "I said this was not the Howard Dean I knew when he was governor of Vermont."
Hinsdale said he ultimately called Dean at home to register his complaint and later wrote Dean a lengthy memo with his objections. Hinsdale has been president of the Vermont Farm Bureau chapter since 1993.
"I know we worked a number of (Hinsdale's) suggestions into the speech," Andrew Baumann, Dean's policy researcher on agriculture issues, acknowledged late last week.
Areas where Dean moderated his stances, according to Hinsdale, were ones involving Dean's call for a fair-trade policy, his discussion on the dangers of corporate farming and his proposal to help farmers expand their business through market diversification, rather than bail-outs.
"We need to take aggressive action to protect our family farmers," Dean said in his speech, delivered Wednesday in Grundy County in northeast Iowa. "Farmers want to make their living from the market, not from farm programs."
Hinsdale said earlier versions of the speech called for saving the family farm, but lacked the market diversification reference. Dean's speech also supported development of renewable energy projects in rural areas, a country-of-origin labeling bill and a ban on meatpackers owning the farms that produce the livestock they process.
Hinsdale said the speech Dean delivered Wednesday sounded much more like the Dean he "knows and loves."
NOTE: Hinsdale is a millionaire and more of a land owner than farmer.
He said Dean deserves credit for his work on behalf of Vermont farmers, and cited Dean's support of the Northeast dairy compact and land preservation as examples. The compact, now defunct, provided payments to farmers when the federally set price for milk dropped below a certain level.
"My experience was that Howard Dean was a good, solid governor for agricultural interests," Hinsdale said. "The door was always open when you needed to see him on a farm issue."
Ron Allbee, agriculture commissioner for former Democratic Gov. Madeleine Kunin between 1987-1991 and now an agriculture business consultant in Burlington, was less effusive in praising Dean.
"Howard focused on two things," Allbee said, referring to the compact and land conservation. "In terms of diversification and a couple of other issues, he wasn't as strong."
Allbee described the amount of agricultural marketing money Dean put in his budgets as "minuscule."
State Rep. Ruth Towne, R-Berlin, chairwoman of the House Agriculture Committee, described Dean's attitude toward agriculture as "benign neglect."
"But that's not all bad," she said. "Sometimes you get too many non-farm people trying to influence agricultural policy that's not always in the best interests of farmers."
Contact Sam Hemingway at 660-1850 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
Could they control their own party while mounting a bid for the White House.
There is a fundermental theorem of cybernetics which states that the controlling system has to have at least the same complexity/intelligence as the system being controlled. ....I just don't see that the dems could handle it.
Looks like addiing shrillary to the mix of nine will cause the rats to go critical (in the nuclear sense) and split apart.
Right now they are having a tough time controlling their own water; and don't look like they are going to ever get anything under control.
Could they control their own party while mounting a bid for the White House.
All polls of likely Dem voters show Hitlery in the lead IF she was in the race.....they would 'fall in line' to beat Bush....remember how they closed ranks to save Bubba's A$$?
Rats want political power....they hate Bush...they will unite behind the party nominee....her admirers are like a cult...those who have freeped her book signings report that they 'cry & faint' at her sight....some women will go gaga over the thought of her as prez.
The good news is that the VRWC will go throught fire & walk on broken glass to get out the vote against her!
She has the lesbian and angry white male vote locked up ....but the others........sounds like a recipie for disaster.
I guess the war chest of Dubbya/GOP going into the elections will double to $350M if shrillary throws her pointy hat in the ring.
Should guarentee a fairly big "coat-tail" effect for the GOP
Only one time in the last 100 years has a politcal party failed to hold the White House for at least 2 terms. In up times and down times only once have the people changed parties after just 4 years in office. It happened to Jimmy Carter in 1980. It took 20 percent inflation, 12 percent unemployment, 18 percent interest rates, and Iran holding our hostages for Ronald Reagan to manage to get 50.75 percent of the votes to defeat incumbent Jimmy Carter. Think about how good a candidate Reagan was. Think about what a bad president Carter was... Yet the democrats had only held the presidency for 4 years. It is measure of how good Reagan is, that he won over Carter.
But far more times than not, a party in power for 8 years does not get 12 years in power. Gore did not win to make it 12. In the last half of the last century only Reagan started a 12 year run.
Hillary knows that her best shot is for 2008. The office will be open. There will be no incumbent advantage. She can announce in 2006 and have two years of media exposure where all that she need do is be a critic of Dubya. She and Bill can spend 2006 and 2007 raising 400 million dollars so that when other candidates try to challenge her in 2007 and 2008 they will find the money well dry. They can dole out money to state candidates who will be party official delegates to the 2008 convention. She can start the primary season with 20 percent of the Delegates in her hip pocket. Dick Gephardt has the party officials sewed up for 2004. The media is all going for dean but Gephardt is the only one with committed delegates before a single primary is taken.
All Hillary and Bill need to do is insure a loser gets the Democratic nomination in 2004. It is hard to imagine a loser not getting the 2004 nomination.
But by 2008 the Democrats will have tried Gore and one more.. and they both lost. It will be time for the Democrats to return to the mainstream after its disasterous shift to the left with the 9 dwarfs. Yes Hillary the centrist will run for the presidency in 2008. By 2008 the public will have forgotten she is a leftist. Dean will be the quentessential leftist with a mcGovern type legacy. Hillary intends to be the Democrats Richard Nixon returning from the successful past to regain the glory years of Bill and Hill.
She will only hop in the 2004 race if it looks like Bush is a sure loser. The odds of that being the case are slim and none.
But 2008... that is different matter.
If Hilary! is going to get in, she has to get in at the start of the primary season. She has to win primaries; she has to go to the convention with delegates to retain any power. But does she dare? Does she dare campaign publicly in uncontrolled settings? Does she dare to participate in the inevitable debates? Or, equally, does she dare to run a remote control, New-York-senate-race campaign, avoiding any contact with real voters? Her opponents could then level devastating and very possibly decisive criticism at her for 'ducking the voters'.
She must decide, because if Dean (or another) goes to the convention with a majority of the primary delegates, the nomination is his and the Clintons are bystanders with no way to get in. They must be sweating bullets.
I can just see them sucking up to Bustamente (or the reverse).
Arnie may be a Rino but he is a Kennedy Rino....I bet the ashtrays are flying thick and fast as we speak.
In any case hill has to get through '06....with a strong contender in NY the rats will loose out big.
That statement ought to kill him with farmers.
Most farmers want that ol' gummint handout more than anything else.
Never known one to turn down a subsidy.
Dean has already threatened to "clean out the DNC". Which, since McAuliffe & Co. are all Clintonoids, was viewed (properly) as a direct assault on the Clintons.
Consequently, if they believe Dean can win, the Clintons will do everything they can to destroy him. If they believe he will lose, badly, they will let him go -- clearing the field for Queen Hillary to ride to the party's rescue in '08.
Don't know many farmers, do you?
In 2008 I will be 71. But I don't think I would worry. Hillary does not have what it takes to win. Go back five years. Back to 1998. Fox news was 2 years old and was not a pimple on CNN's rump. The major media could lie and CNN would swear to it. Those days are gone. FR was just beginning to be a force. And Matt Drudge had a fraction of the hits per day he has now. Hannity was no where to be found. Except for Rush, conservative talk radio was not much.
Who knows what will be the case in 2008. But the media won't be the same. When I was first getting into the Radio and TV news business, every broadcast reporter wanted to be Cronkite or Edward R. Murrow..They all were as liberal as Cronkite and Murrow. Today no one wants to be Brokaw, Jennings, or Rather. That is not where the action is. The girl reporters don't want to be Katie Couric either. Today the kids aspire to be Rush or O'Reily, Cavuto, Bret Hume or a news babe on Fox. Some even want to be Greta or the Cosby Gal.
How would a young person get on Fox. Well it would not be by making Hillary look good. Those working at local radio and TV stations will make a name for themselves by nailing Hillary to the wall. They will let Paula Zahn or who ever replaces her failed rump, try to suck up to Hillary. But the boys and girls in the small market with asperations for the big bucks and big fame will emulate Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, and Mike Reagan. They will try to make Hillary blow her stack or catch her in alie or anything that will make negative news for Hillary.
It will not be 1998. For the first time Hillary will face what every Republican has faced for decades. She will face a large segment of the media that is hostile to her. It will be a segment with access to a huge voting audience.
Hillary can't ignore then or they will destroy her and she can't handle them. She is toast. She will likely get the nomination and then implode.
I watched Hillary perform in Cleveland on Wednesday. She is an amateur trying to play pro. Bubba was a good pro player. He has talent and he knows how to garner votes. Hillary is a spoiled brat amateur with next to no talent. If she had not been Billie boys wife she could not get elected to city council. She knows that is true. That is why she married the flawed SOB.
Quite frankley I think Monica would be a better candidate than Hillary. Hillary is a mean obnoxious person. She will not be able to hide that in a presidential campaign.
The "McGovern" is KUCINICH. Kerry is the one I want to face. He's Dukakis.
Gen Wes Clark will be her VP pick to give her military gravitas.
Sends chills up & down my spine when I think of the possibility of her as prez (again).....UGH....she already had 8 years as prez while Bill chased the interns & played golf!
Do you really feel Hillary will win the nomination and chose Clark as VP? Would you explain WHY you feel this? I've heard her state that she wouldn't run for pres., however, I don't believe anyone has asked her if she was "drafted" if she would or not? Does anyone have any insight into this question? Also, don't forget that she was Republican many moons ago..Wasn't she a Goldwater girl?
Interesting. Dean's most powerful supporter is Steve Grossman,who was chairman of the DNC before McAuliffe. Grossman was in charge in 1998 when Republicans almost lost the House. Those upsets shocked everyone. I thought we would gain 20 seats--at least. Dean and Grossman should not be underestimated.
I don't have a clue why the Bushbots want Dean. Anyone who will arouse passions, create interest, wake up clueless non-voters, and be able to differentiate him/her self from GWB is the biggest threat. Kerry, Lieberman, Edwards...what do they have to offer? Nothing new....no reason for change. "Safer" choices don't provide a reason for change.
I keep stating Dean's dangerous. If he were to choose a VP who was accepted by either labor or the Greens, watch out!
ROTFL...if the Hildebeast lurks here, you have just made her seriously ill!!
Honestly, I can't figure out why the Pres didn't just leave the thing for Monica.
Welcome back. I thought you had been banned for good but it seems you only got a couple of days.