The "Iraq didn't work for Dean" meme has been playing heavily in the media the past two weeks. It was the basis for his appeal, and yet voters shunned him on it, they say. Therefore, his constituency has deserted him.
There are a few gaping problems with that logic:
First, the Dean phenom never had much to do with Iraq. That was a part of the appeal for sure, but a small part. The media seized on that early, because that was the only explanation they could come up with--at least one they could spit out in a single sentence. How the rest of the country went along with this, I'll never know. Oh, because the media always wins when they start their chants.
(The funny part is, Dean's main appeal COULD be summed up in a single word: McCain. He had the same appeal of candor/honesty/integrity that voters found so refreshing in McCain four years earlier. But McCain was able to shoot that down with the ludicrous argument that he didn't like Dean, that he thought Dean's views were alarming. BFD. The comparison had nothing to do with their policy stances. Why the press should give McCain the right to veto that label was preposterous, but that's the press.)
The fact that Iraq did not work for Dean is easily explained by the exit polling. It wasn't a major issue for people. It was way, way down the list of concerns. The newsmodels have taken glee in pointing to exit polling showing that voters opposed to the war voted more for Kerry. But when Iraq is fourth or fifth on your list of concerns, it's not a deciding factor in who you voted for.
But here is the crucial point: Just because Iraq didn't play a role in January, does not mean it won't play a role in November. And just because the issue did not work against another Dem who merely went along grudginly for the ride, does not mean it won't work against the president who planned the whole scheme and lied to us about his rationale.
We are in something of a lull in Iraq right now, at least in media coverage, since Saddam was captured. Unfortunately for Howard Dean, the primaries came at the wrong time for that to be an issue.
But it was red hot last fall, and it likely will be again next fall. We will have been occupiers for well over a year, the body count will likely continue unabated, and there will be no military exit in site. Worse, there will be a civilian exit completed or in progress. We will face the twin horrors of turning it over to a presumably enemy Shiite government, and still mired in a military occupation. It could get very ugly.
There is no way to know for sure what Bush's biggest weakness will be for the Dems to attack, but I will lay money it will be Iraq.
And Dean and Clark are the only ones in a position to fully exploit that weakness.
If primary voters are concerned about electability--and they appear obsessed with it--they need to look past the current lull in Iraqi coverage and take their best guess at how the situation will deteriorate in nine months.
And then they will see one inevitable conclusion: Nominate Howard Dean.
Rants from the hinterland. A Denver writer and pretend anthropologist rips into artistic treason and random acts of ethical violence.
