Dave Cullen: Howard Dean

NOTICE: See you on the weekends

Mon, 26 Sep 2005 17:17:40 GMT

Hey. You might have noticed I'm rarely here during the week these days.

Yes, by design. Trying to keep my focus entirely on my book during the week. Hence the big one-day bursts on Saturdays and Sundays. So look for me then. (Or on Mondays when you get back to trolling the web at the office, while your boss is away. heeheehee.)

OK, better try that bigger:

LOOK FOR ME MOSTLY ON THE WEEKENDS UNTIL THIS BOOK IS DONE!

Occasionally I may stop by in an evening, if I've had a great day and deserve an indulgence, or maybe once in awhile for a quickie. (Like just now. I figured since I was here to let you know this, I could pound out a quick reaction to the Housewives.)

But hopefully you'll see a lot of self-control.

See you Saturday.

Stepford Dean

Thu, 29 Jul 2004 06:00:33 GMT

OK, I'm a bit behind here, but just watched Howard Dean from last night.

Has the guy been medicated? Wooden was the word that kept coming to mind, but then he ended with his trademark "You have the power, You have the power, You have the power" rant, except that it wasn't a rant. He just recited it, as if he were reading lines in a foreign language where the meaning meant nothing to him.

Interesting to look back on how he brought such life to those words, because he was caught up in the frenzy where he really seemed to believe it. It felt like a revolution, and he was leading it, and possibilities were electric. Now they were just sad words that must have stung: You didn't have the power after all. Or did you?--but used it to reject me.

Every ounce of fire has gone out of that man. I'm sure he'll get it back one day, but he was terribly sad to watch tonight. Last night, for the rest of you.

Why did he do it, I wonder. Couldn't he just have politely refused -- I'm sure they could have used the airtime. No, I guess not. That would have looked like a snub. But this. This was like watching a dead man walking.

Huh. I just realized, I normally despise political conventions, this is the first I ever recall enjoying. But this was the first truly sad note of the proceedings. I feel just awful for the guy.

Update: Larry King's first reaction, "A rousing speach from Howard Dean." Is he on drugs? How deep is his head buried up his ass?

Still running wild at Dean For America -- Now Democracy For America

Thu, 15 Apr 2004 16:40:52 GMT

I was thinking it might be time to remove my link to Howard Dean's blog, Dean for America, now named Democracy for America, but his own private lobbying/PAC organization.

So I went there for a peek, and #1, the old url still works. And number two, the bloggers are still running wild. Still posting half a dozen entries a day, still getting several hundred comments per entry. Early this morning, they started an open thread, and by 7 a.m. it was so filled they started a second one devoted to health specifically to healthcare.

I'm not sure who these people are, or what they hope to accomplish, but through the blog and other venues I have access to, there is still a hardcore tribe of true believers going at it. At something.

Interesting.

And on the sixth day, He made the dancefloor . . .

Sun, 07 Mar 2004 11:17:37 GMT

Hey. I'm breaking my no drinking rule. (No drinking, then posting.) I don't care. I'm really happy. My favorite Denver dj was playing at Amsterdam (the local afterhours club). Kostas. He had been dark, dark, dark for awhile, but he was ever so sweet tonight.

He has amazing control. He extends the pretty parts. You know: those pauses, between the thumper music, when everybody stops dancing and rests for a minute. I don't get that. That's the best part. Don't get me wrong, I love the frenetic music, when it builds and builds, harder and rougher and frantic and you're just pounding, pouding, pounding it out . . .

But then it climaxes, and the sweet, soft, pretty part eases in, and that's all the better. Like sex. I like the holding afterward even better than the sex. Really. It's a close call, I love them both intensely, but the holding . . . That's the sweetest part of life there is. Just to hold another person, a sweet boy, a man you care about, feel some affection for, hold him in your arms, just nestled together, two distant islands nuzzling together and sharing the universe together for a few sweet moments. I like that.

I like dancing, too. Especially the sweet parts. Same thing.

There were nice guys there tonight. They appreciated it. A whole bunch of them.

It started out slowly, it was an off-night at the main danceclub, the one that peaks around midnight, the one that sells alcohol, stays open till 2. They had an out of town dj last week, so apparently it was packed then--I was in Seattle--and this was the inevitable down weekend after.

Amsterdam gets going around 2, though, and it fills up with a lot of the hardcore dancers from the other club who haven't wrenched it all out of their veins yet, but it has its own private crowd, too. It was so, so slow at the start, lots of people on the sidelines, nobody filling the dancefloor, hardly anybody taking their shirt off.

But then it changed. I'm not sure why, maybe it was Kostas lifting the mood skyward with his pitch-perfect inflections. But it happened, it was magical tonight, that's the feeling I live for.

I didn't have to go home with anybody tonight, just a few friends I drove home, it wasn't about that. It was sharing the joy and the ecstasy of life on the dancefloor.

I believe in God. I believe in God because I feel him on the dancefloor. On the sixth day, just before He rested, He looked around, saw something was missed, paused a moment and created the dancefloor.

He'll never top that one. Ever. And I'll be eternally grateful.

Great news -- Edwards lives

Wed, 18 Feb 2004 03:17:35 GMT

So Edwards pulls a surprising threat in Wisconsin.

Of course Kerry is right that a win is a win, but luckily the press goofballs can be counted on to count Edwards' loss as a ressurection.

At best--in the wildest of dreams--we can still dump this stiff. I heard a few moments of Kerry's victory speech and he seems to be regressing. Every sentence still delivered as if he were composing the Declaration of Independence. I may vote for him, but I'll grit my teeth having to listen to the blowhard for four years.

More likely, though, this will just extend the race a bit, giving the goofball more great publicity in the big states next week and possibly even beyond. That will help him beat the far more despicable currently in the white house.

---

But will somebody please talk to my man Dean? Does he have an ounce of self-respect. Or good sense? Why is he so intent on destroying every lick of goodwill or admiration he worked so hard to create? How do you explain this sort of behavior? Why would he want to destroy any possible future by making such a jackass of himself?

Finally, it's over

Wed, 11 Feb 2004 02:43:26 GMT

So the Democrats have a candidate.

Congratulations John Kerry. I'm actually starting to get used to the idea of you leading the unrepulsive party. Tonight I was discussing possibilities with a friend, actually looking forward to how you might take George Bush on.

If the two southerners can't even beat this Yankee in the south--or even come within a country mile of him in the south--then where the hell are they going to win? How many places does the guy need to beat them, and by how much? One smallish state each for the other guys?

Time to declare this race over. The rest is just silliness.

But luckily the silliness will continue for awhile--I'm all for it. Great for John Kerry to show up as the powerful victor week after week. Hopefully it can stay alive for the superest of the many super Tuesdays this year, when all those big states get to vote on March 2, including key battleground states like Ohio.

Learning from The Dean Experience

Sat, 07 Feb 2004 19:06:52 GMT

God, what to say?

I have been struggling with this conflict ever since New Hampshire. I knew I was going to get into trouble blurring the lines between participant and observer on Dean.

Here's the deal. My first priority here is the truth, best I can call it at any given moment. Obviously I'm going to be wrong about a lot of things, most especially the future, but I'm at least committed to giving you my best shot.

But the Dean thing, that was a movement. It was all about excitement, momentum and energy. Proselytizing? Scary, scary word, but that's what movements are all about right?

So I got on board as a discliple, because I really believed in the cause. And God knows, those despicable media whores were eye-rolling Dean needed all the help he could get on the electability front. (I had no idea just how much damage they were doing at the time, or how badly it would cost him in the end. Fucking bastards.)

It was fun, it was exciting, and most of all it seemed like the right thing to do.

But it was always one foot in, one foot out until Christmas week, because I didn't ever want to run the risk of losing credibility. I posted much more good news than bad news--partly because it was nearly all good news in those days, except for the nauseating harping of the media. And partly because I enjoyed being a cheerleader. Why not? When anything really bothered me--like a couple early flipflops--I ripped him a new one for it, both here and on his own blog. And I definitely tried to stay objective on the poll reports, telling the good news along with the bad.

Just before Christmas, I took the full plunge, coming all the way out to "endorse" him, kind of a ridiculous term for a nobody like me, but such as it was, that's what I did.

Still, I was committed to reporting on the race objectively when called for--no way I was going to spin for him or act like a mindless mouthpiece.

It didn't present much of a dilemma for me when things were first going badly. The trouble arose as the campaign approached the fuzzy territory of "hopeless." This is the moment the Dean troops needed to keep morale up--worst thing in the world would be inside defections: supporters suddenly tossing their arms up and suggesting--explixitly or implicitly--that supporters scurry fast to find their #2.

I was kind of pissed when Kos did it, a bit prematurely in my mind, though he retracted a bit the next morning. But I understood his position. His first responsibility was to his readers--all of them--secondarily to other Dean supporters. Writer came ahead of Advocate.

I felt the same way, but I just didn't have the heart--or inclination--to through sand in the faces of all those amazing diehard supporters still out there plugging away for Dean. I wasn't about to lie about my feelings, but I didn't necessarily have to comment on it.

So I decided for awhile just to mainly keep my mouth shut.

Still haven't decided whether I regret that, but I do think it's time for it to end. There are a gazillion other places to get your dose of political news and commentary, so it's not like anyone out there needs any more of it from me . . . but still, it's what I do, it's why some people come here, so . . .

I'm sorry guys. But "hopeless" is just about the word for it. I never give up hope completely--and who knows, Kerry may self-destruct tomorrow and Dean, Clark and especially Edwards may be right back in the middle of it. You may win the lottery tonight also.

Here's the deal: It was looking really bad for Howard Dean right after New Hampshire, though he was fighting back, did have a certain amount of momentum, and a few other big things going for him, like a continuing stream of cash coming in, an unflinching band of hardcore supporters, and, in my opinion, the best record to run on, ironically the best argument for the crucial electability issue if he could just figure out how to make it. (And if he couldn't then he and/or the team he assembled obviously did not have what it would take to make the case against Bush in the fall.)

That was the moment of truth, really. He had to do two things really fast: 1) Enunciate a clear message on why he was most electable, and drive it home relentlessly. 2) Drop the 50-state strategy immediately, and replace it with a plan that could keep him in the race through the next round. It's anybody's guess what #2 should have been, but I don't see much rationalle for anything but the course Edwards and Clark took: pick a state or two, focus all your resources there and outflank Kerry competing in all seven. Win a state or two to stay alive and prove to voters in the next round that you were a viable candidate to invest their vote in.

Dean and his team failed miserably on both counts. Two days after Iowa, it was clear that this race was over, because Dean failed to step out and do #1, and on #2 he replaced the 50-state strategy with a suicidal zero-state strategy. I sat in on a couple conference calls with Dean in the days following Iowa, and I knew from the first one that it was over. His grassroots team had served him well in building the movement, but revealed their rank amateur status in the crucial heat of battle. If my heart wasn't invested so dearly, it would have been comical to watch their attempts. They had absolutely no clue. They had the completely wrong team in place, and had no idea what they were doing.

They put all their money on Michigan and Wisconsin, oblivious to the fact that primary campaigns in America don't work that way. Once a candidate looks like a loser, he is. First off, Americans just love a winner and will flock to whoever appears to be out ahead. But even more devastating is the taint of hopelessness. Once a campaign starts to lose credibility, voters in a multi-candidate race wisely conserve their votes. Why on earth would a Michigan voter in love with Dean but disgusted by Kerry spend his vote on his man if they believe his race is over for Dean but alive for Edwards or Clark?

Michigan finally holds it caucuses today and Kerry stands a staggering 50 points ahead. In a state where Dean threw most of his post-Iowa resources.

It got bad enough several days ago that Dean and Clark and Edwards all gave up, and Dean pinned his last remaining hopes on Wisconsin. What? After more humiliations in Michigan, Washington, Maine and a host of others, Wisconsin voters are suddenly going to follow the reverse logic and suddenly stand up for their man?

Hardly. The latest ARG poll this morning (courtesy Kos, thanks), shows Dean all the way back in fourth, 27 points behind. That's before he gets trounced several more times and goes from hopeless-looking to ridiculous.

The time for a last stand is not ten days from now in Wisconsin. It was four days ago in seven states his team just didn't have the basic political sense to choose from.

Am I beating it into the ground too hard now? Sorry, but it's over. It's nearly over for Clark as well, and getting very close for Edwards as well. All Kerry has to do now is avoid a major screwup and he's our next nominee. Ugh. Nine months to learn to live with that windbag. There's still a little hope he'll screw up though. Maybe Edwards can still grab the thing from him if he does. We can only hope.

Update:

I was really happy with the note I ended on there, but a few minutes later I got to posting on the Kos comments, and once I got going, I think I found what I was looking for. The conclusion of my thoughts there:

I admire the hell out of the diehards fighting on and donating for Dean, but he does not have the team in place to win this thing.

So I'm finally admitting the Dean fails on the electability factor--not unelectable as a candidate, but certainly unelectable with this team.

They did a tremendous job getting Howard Dean to the top, and deserve enormous credit for it. But they're in way over their heads, and you have to fault Dean for not bringing in enough professionals for a healthy mix of grassroots and experience. It was a highly naive team, that kept driving on faith when political acumen was called for. They're still driving that way.

In the end, I think Dean gave us a great new model--as well as a reinvigorated party--but it was only part of the model. It was a model for building a base, it was a tremendously innovative model, but in the end, it was also terribly incomplete. The results speak for themselves.

Right candidate, wrong approach.

Best we can do is learn from this for next time. I have learned a great deal from the experience. And I love the guy, love the campaign, but I'm ready to let go, and look ahead to other ways to defeat George Bush.

Deaniacs refuse to surrender

Sat, 07 Feb 2004 16:12:10 GMT

I'm kinda proud of those guys.

Check out this Reuters story:

MILWAUKEE (Reuters) - Democratic White House hopeful Howard Dean scrambled on Friday to avoid a knockout punch in the Feb. 17 Wisconsin primary as his campaign reported raising nearly $1 million to finance what could be his final stand.
The money, far more than what Dean had sought in an e-mail plea the day before, will pay for campaign advertisements in Wisconsin where state Democrats are set to have their say on who challenges Republican President Bush. . . .
Late on Friday, the campaign said it had taken in $986,232 from 14,519 contributors since Dean's appeal, making it one of the best two-day periods ever for the former Vermont governor's fund-raising operation. . . .
In his fund-raising plea, Dean, who spent $40 million on a gamble that he could wrap up the Democratic presidential nomination with early victories in Iowa and New Hampshire, asked supporters for $50 contributions so he could raise $700,000 by Sunday to pay for advertising in Wisconsin.
The success of the drive, using the technique of Internet fund-raising that the campaign pioneered, prompted Dean's aides to double their target to $1.4 million.

I'm really not sure what to make of all the Dean supporters who refuse to give up. I've never actually seen anything like this in my lifetime. At first, I thought they were a little naive to be keeping the faith so fervently, but after a week of mostly letting go of the dream myself--still holding onto to the miracle possibility, but only as a miracle--I'm starting to feel a little envious.

How else to feel about people who refuse to give up, ready to fight to the last man, the last ounce of energy, last hour of disposable time, the last dollar of disposable income unearned or contributed. Seriously. I have a lot of respect for those people. I kinda wish I was one of them. I have been one of them.

I have been one of them, that's the scary part. Old man disease. I've still got it for my struggling writing career, but I've kinda got my hands full with that one already, no last-stand battles available for the doctor. Kinda makes me sad. For myself. Happy for them. Go get 'em guys.

Inspiration in the darkness

Wed, 04 Feb 2004 03:08:40 GMT

Well it's looking pretty bad for Dean. Has ever since he made the strange decision to pull out of all the contests this week. I didn't want to force any more air out of the balloon here, but what friends asked the past week, I was frank. Even when my friend Brett, who was off to New Mexico--Dean's one small hope this week, even with little support from the campaign. We both thought it was probably a lost cause, but who knows, so he was still ready to give it a shot. I really admired him for heading down there anyway.

Here's his report, which he left in the comments. I think it's worth posting here:

Back from Albq--we had a great time and met some locals who are doing amazing things for our party and cause. All under the rader but committed and making a difference in getting people registered and organized. People there are scared of Bush--peop le are hurting there with few jobs and there is a anti gay amendment on the NM ballot in Nov.

We quickly put together an event at a local GLBT bar and had 200 show up for Dean. No one down there had anything going in the community so we took charge and did it. The result: Listed in the Albq Journal for three days, live Channel 4 coverage doing a remote from the event, a live interview on the air during the 10 pm newscast. Went to other bars with signs and got great response and turned more votes. Dean had left town so we would have been shut out that day as far as TV coverage-we got our message on the air for free.

We walked Dem neighborhoods with signs and passing out info, hit the Old Town area and did the same. where ever we went we took a sign and info. Stores, diners, galleries all engaging people and making them rethink Dean. We felt we turned 15 votes from Clark, 8 from Kerry and who knows how many others who just saw us and grabbed info. We never saw Kerry or Clark people, only Edwards seemed organized.

When in doubt do something. I feel great that I helped no matter what the outcome! cheers

I feel great for him, too. I busted my butt in Iowa a few weeks ago, and I thought I would feel foolish and regretful about the lost time and wages if he fell apart and it meant nothing, but I only wish I could have gotten to New Hampshire and New Mexico as well. One of minor standout experiences of my life.

It's very unlikely that what we did matter in the nomination, but it mattered to me. And it did matter to the 2004 campaign. Dean changed the field. Dramatically. Look how pitifully the Dems were all rolling over to Bush and the Repubs. For years, they've been bending over. They were all terrified to vote against him on Iraq. They said Dean was crazy to oppose him.

Now they're a bunch of attack dogs. They're finding their voice. They already found their spines. He showed them where to look.

So he changed everything, but unlikely he could change it for himself.

I expected to feel distraught if this happened. I feel kind of elated. I am so glad he changed the race. But I'm also thrilled to see someone I respected so intensely make such a strong bid, even if he forgot to bring in the pros and the whole thing suddenly fell apart when it mattered most.

I watch that Sominexman John Kerry, and I understand why. I hate settling for guys like that for president. It's going to be an annoying four years if he does beat Bush. I'll vote for the guy, but I'll shake my head when I do it, and I'll grit my teeth at the TV for four years when I have to hear him. I see that crap, and then I see a guy I'd be proud of to be my president. Some day. Can't wait to have another one I can be proud of. That was worth fighting for.

It's been an amazing ride, though, and I'm exhilarated that I've been apart of it.

And who knows. Maybe there's still a miracle out there to be found. I've let go of it emotionally, but in this race, I wouldn't bet my life savings on anything.

My other reaction to Joe Trippi's sacking

Thu, 29 Jan 2004 04:51:44 GMT

That last post was a bit too cold and calculated. Because you only saw phase two. I didn't have time to write about it till I finished work, and then I was over the emotional part.

I cried when I heard the news. Still haven't figured out who it was for. Mostly Joe, I think. We had all come to love him, but I also knew he had stayed longer than he should have, helped bring the house down, figured he knew it and felt really bad for him.

It didn't last long. Right now I'm pretty excited. I actually felt some of the excitement almost immediately, but the sadness was stronger, but we have no time to look anywhere but forward so it brushed away almost immediately. Maybe that's why I felt so bad for Joe. I already sensed he'd be forgotten within twenty minutes. Not for good, but for now. We will all move on quickly, and he will be standing in the dust watching us ride away on the wagon he built with his own hands.

Poor Joe. I'm getting sad for him all over again. Just for a minute, then I gotta run.

Dean replaces Joe Trippi (his campaign manager)

Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:41:15 GMT

This is several hours old now, but I could not break away from work.

Howard Dean went back to Burlington today for a round of satellite interviews and a round of meetings to decide what to change.

And decided to change the biggest thing he could change. He replaced Joe Trippi, the mastermind of his early strategy. He did the polite thing of asking Joe to stay on in another capacity, but of course Trippi bowed out gracefully.

You can read Trippi's statement and Dean's statement on the Dean blog.

The new campaign CEO (are they calling them that now?) will be Roy Neel, who AP describes as "a former Washington lobbyist tied to Al Gore"--or in an earlier version, "a longtime associate of former Vice President Al Gore." (The latest version was penned by the infamous Nedra Pickler, that discredited AP propogandist who seizes every opportunity to slime Dean.)

I am really sad for Joe, but it had to be done. It was definitely necessary for media-image purposes, but as far as I can tell, the campaign needed some new direction.

Trippi will go down as one of the brilliant political strategists of the century for revolutionizing the race the way he did. But ever since I got back from Iowa I've been trying to find time to write a long piece on how the revolution failed to adapt. Trippi was still fighting the battle to raise the army and build the war chest. What he did there was extraordinary--I've never seen anything like it. But he never quite figured out what to do with the army or the warchest once he built them. Nor did he seem to realize that money and troops were only two pieces of the puzzle--key peices, but not the only key pieces.

This is an image age, and the image has been problematic from the get-go. Yes, the media slimed Dean with the McGovern Liberal and unelectable labels from the get go, but he never figured out how to combat them when there was still time--never seemed to realize that he had to, how badly they would hurt Dean if they stuck. They stuck solid and they destroyed him in Iowa, which led directly to New Hampshire.

And there were other key image problems. The first time I saw a Dean TV ad, I commented here on how unimpressive it was. I did not see all of them, or even the majority, but I saw quite a few over the last seven months, and I never saw a good one until last week. And all the reports I heard out of every state he was running in was they were awful.

Bad TV commercials? In the age where campaigns are won and lost on TV? That's not a minor problem.

And as I commented here when I got back from Iowa, it was stunning to see the two separate operations there, in two side-by-side buildings which might as well have been a continent apart. There was the DFA (staff) building, and the Iowa Storm (volunteers) building--generals in the former, privates in the latter, and God knows what the generals were doing, but they sure didn't seem to have any connection to us privates. I was stunned. They recruited this incredible army, and they had no idea what to do with us.

They also failed miserably in Iowa at all the nuts and bolts precinct-level organizing. I witnessed the opening of a dozen different caucuses inside a single big high school in Ankeny, and they were already melting down because we had no precinct captains set up to lead. We had a table with their stuff for them to pick up on the way in, assuming they were all set, and only one came to get them. Other friends sat through caucuses and watched the entire horror unfold.

The other unnerving aspect I saw came from new friends who have been highly active volunteering in the campaign. They actually made several trips to Iowa before last week, done lots of field organizing in Texas, and they were bright guys, they should have been put in charge of something important. But they're not big web guys, they've never been on the blog, and they were treated like outsiders--like if you aren't on the blog, you're nothing. That's when I really started to worry. This whole internet recruitment thing is incredible, but it is just one means to recruit people. And what you ultimately need is foot soldiers out in the field doing the work. If those two were never connected the way they needed to be . . .

No one seemed to have a handle on any of the nuts and bolts of campaigning.

In the end, Trippi seems like a brilliant innovator who got Dean the lead and kept him there right up to show-time, but then had little idea how to actually make the show come off.

And then there's that bold 50-state strategy. Up to a point, I think it was a great idea, but it they got too ambitious, took too much for granted, and it backfired horribly. And they have not seemed prepared to regroup quickly and abandon it. They still have several big trips lined up this week for the primaries after next Tuesday. They don't seem to get how big a momentum game this is--that there won't be any contests for them after next Tuesday if they don't win a couple.

What a horrible price, to abandon all those operations out there you spent so much money and effort on, but that's what good generals do. They understand when a manuever is not working, they cut their losses and charge in from another angle.

All in all, Trippi seems very reminiscent of the brilliant revolutionary who can overturn the old order, but then has no idea what to do with it once he gets hold.

He may have learned enough to put the two together and drive someone all the way to the white house next time, but it's way too late for that today.

This guy Neel better turn some things around fast. And hopefully the fire-the-coach move will buy him a few media days. If the new guy plays the media right, it will play like a new burst of momentum to the campaign, a new hope that with a new direction Dean can come from behind, start winning some primaries and put John Kerry back on the defensive.

But he's only got six days left to win a primary or two.

How Dean has to hone his message

Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:44:54 GMT

The always-insightful Gail just posted a comment that goes to the heart of the problem with Dean's message--especially on the crucial electability question where he's failing.

So I am reposting it here and on the Dean blog, hoping Joe Trippi and team will take notice:

It feels like Dean is the only one in a good position to attack Bush on any number of issues - the tax cuts, or no child left behind, for example. Kerry voted for those things (didn't he?). How can he possibly critize Bush effectively on those issues now?

I know that Dean keeps saying that only a beltway outsider can challenge Bush, but I don't think that gets across the real problem.

One, the insider/outsider thing is tired.

Two, people don't think "Oh, Kerry voted for all those things that Bush likes." They think "Oooh, Dean is swiping Kerry for being a Senator."

Third, its probably the least effective message they have, at least from what I heard in the speech last night.

But, that's what Dean was saying this morning on NPR.

Thank you Gail, for cutting through all the clutter. You're exactly right. Dean thinks he is delivering one message, but voters are hearing another. I agree that using the "outsider" tag that worked for 20 years has gotten to sound as insiderish as being an insider. Worse, it fails to highlight to core problem: that Dean can attack Bush effectively on this stuff and Kerry cannot.

And No Child Left Behind was another great example.

I wonder why his people have not thought of this.

Gary Hart probably not running

Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:39:28 GMT

Thank God.

I'll explain that reaction in a sec. First the info from the Denver Post:

WASHINGTON - Former Sen. Gary Hart likely won't run for the Senate this year, the Democratic Party's top Senate recruiter said Tuesday.
"Gary Hart has made it clear he probably won't run," said Sen. Jon Corzine of New Jersey, chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

. . .

It would appear to narrow the field of Democrats seeking to oust incumbent Republican Ben Nighthorse Campbell to two political newcomers, Brad Freedberg and Mike Miles.

But state Democratic chairman Chris Gates said there are other potential candidates in the wings, although he declined to name them.

A lot of outsiders seemed to think he would be a great candidate, but here in Colorado he's no hot ticket. Very old news, probably weak competition.

And this state has grown so fast since he left that senate 20 years ago, that between immigration and births, a stunningly high number of voters here never had him as a senator. (I heard the figure on a local PBS show a few weeks ago, but can't remember it well enough to wager a guess here. I hate to put out bad information. But I recall being stunned at how high it was.)

I wish I knew more about Freedberg and Miles, but I can convey that both R & D participants on the local PBS version of Washington Week have argued repeatedly that one of those two would be stronger than Hart.

It will be tough for anyone to beat Campbell, but not impossible. He won easily six years ago, but it was a weak candidate (Dottie Lamm, Dick's wife) and Campbell does not garner a lot of respect around here.

I would gauge his support as very thin.

The problem is not him, but the electorate. This state has been going more and more Republican each year, particularly because of our large influx of "immigrants" from other states, who have been heavily Republican.

Statewide office is getting harder and harder for any Dem. We have just one left, Attorney General Ken Salazar.

(Which is why I also find it perplexing that Colorado keeps landing on so many lists of swing states in the presidential election. Not likely. If a Dem wins Colorado this year, he'll have pulled in way more electoral votes than he needed already.)

(Thanks to Kos for the link.)

Format Changes -- Good or Bad?

Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:42:37 GMT

Or unnoticable?

I cleaned up the sidebars a bit, cleared out some old junk (sorry Wes Clark), and moved my blogroll and featured sites to the right side, so you can get to them more easily.

Let me know if you like the change better or worse, or it's too trivial to notice. And while I'm at it, I'm open to suggestions for other changes.

This change will also allow me to add more sites to my blogroll, so I'm soliciting nominations now. (And an offer to exchange links never hurts, folks.)

And what do you think: should the blogroll be above the featured sites on the right or below? Which do you use more? Or does anyone actually ever use any of those links?

(And I was just kidding about Wes Clark being old junk--I just couldn't resist the chuckle. He did have to go. I actually intended to take his picture down after I got off the Dean/Clark fence and swore my full allegience to Dean last month. But I can only make these changes from my main PC in Denver, and I haven't been here much. The truth is, I still love Wes Clark and admire him something fierce, and hope to God if Dean or Kerry get the nomination they choose him for Veep. And if Dean can't get the nom, he's still my second choice as well, though it's starting to look a little iffy for him. Farewell General Clark. You're a good man, and I'll miss seeing your smiling face on my homepage every day.)

Comic relief: Republican Senators try to spin the Kay fiasco

Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:26:49 GMT

Well, after all that New Hampshire heartbreak, it's nice to wake up to a reminder of what we're all fighting about and fighting for:

David Kay is beginning his testimony to a Senate committee right now. That little Administration employee is going to blast a giant whole right through his boss' re-election prospects. (Not all by himself, but Iraq is going to bring this boy down, and Kay's humiliating resignation looks like the first big stone in the avalance.)

Committee Chair and staunch Republican John Warner gets to preface the testimony with his own remarks and he is pedalling as furiously as you can imagine trying to spin this thing.

What a joke. And what a waste of time. The public didn't pay any attention to the details before the war, they just lined right up behind the pres to rush blindly in there, and they sure as hell aren't going to quibble over the details of the disgrace.

Bush fed us a pack of lies to justify going in, and a blue-sky scenario for getting out.

Now we're mired in a hellish situation the Brits took decades to extricate themselves from last century--before the oil complicated everything a thousandfold--and his own man reveals we didn't need to go in to begin with.

That's enough for this public. And that is going to bring this president DOWN!

'Iraq didn't work for Dean'

Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:49:26 GMT

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.

David Brooks: 'Howard Dean is not going anywhere!'

Wed, 28 Jan 2004 05:16:06 GMT

Great commentary from David Brooks on Charlie Rose right now:

He says there are millions of people who are hardcore for Howard Dean and will continue to support him in primary after primary.

He also makes the obvious (to some!) point that Kerry is going to face a lot of harsh scrutiny. "We, in the media, have been obsessed by Howard Dean, rightly so, for several months in a row. And we've hit from every direction. And it has allowed John Kerry to become the front runner under the radar. Well, the radar is going to be turned on him."

Thank you for at least one sensible pundit.

And Michael Kinsley is agreeing with him.

And a third question: "How deep is the love for Kerry?" Was it merely a product of Dean hitting a snag and people looking elsewhere in a rush? Are they really in love with Kerry?

Man, he sure hit the nail on the head. Dean is definitely in rough water, but he's got a lot of people still behind him, and Kerry has only begun to face the onslaught.

Kerry has got the odds in his favor now, but he's got a lot more tough fights to win and could easily go down in flames. And Dean is on the rise again, no telling what might be in store next.

If the media had any sense . . .

Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:58:57 GMT

They would spend the next week ridiculing that stunningly limp victory speech all week.

But boredom doesn't sell, it just loses elections.

And they're in the entertainment business, not the business of helping us pick a good president, or a tough challenger.

At least they didn't stick us with Lieberman. He's giving a slightly more impassioned but exceptionally more unintentionally comical speech right now, claiming a virtual tie for third. Never mind that it's a distant third, or that he doesn't appear even close to tied for it, or that he sat out Iowa to concentrate his efforts here and still came in fifth . . .

Thank God for a little comic relief. I needed a little court jester after watching the appalling newstainment industry at work all day.

Not giving up on Howard yet

Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:43:24 GMT

Can Howard Dean survive?

Survive, definitely. Win, I'm not sure, truthfully. I sure hope so.

He's got lots of money and lots of organization in all the contests next week, and Kerry and many of the others are just getting started.

But . . .

But this is a momentum game and Kerry has sure got it.

Unfortunately, I've been watching CNN all night and they have been really timid about how they are going to spin this thing. Not sure what the other nets are saying. It's all up to them. We know they decide the spin, award The Bounce.

It's looking for a longshot for Dean right now, but there are plausible scenarios starting with a few possilbe wins next week. And God knows we've seen a lot of longshots come true in the last 8 days.

I think I'll go to sleep tonight with this very sage assessment from Kos: "If there's something we should all take from this election cycle, it's that the unexpected can and does happen."

Of course he goes on to add, "But for now, Dean would have to pull a miracle to survive." I think he's getting just as carried away right now as most of us were right up until two weeks ago when we said the same about Kerry.

Things are looking better and better for Kerry, but he's a long way from locking this thing up.

And I'm watching his half-hearted victory speech right now and I'm thinking, "This guy?" I would just love to sit down with some of these Kerry voters who pulled their lever based on electability and ask them what the hell they think is going to win the public over to this guy.

I'm still looking for a guy I can look up to and a guy who can actually challenge Bush.

I'm not giving up on Howard Dean.

Interesting analysis of leading ABC entertainer

Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:08:25 GMT

Off topic a bit from the moment, but I meant to post this all day.

I thought Dean did a great job on the Diane Sawyer interview last Thursday, and his wife Judy did all the better. ABC's star newsmodel Diane Sawyer made her usual ass of herself, however.

Wonderful LA Times analysis, via link from TalkLeft, via Atrios:

Out of the 96 questions that Sawyer asked, 90 were about personality and temperament and only six were even vaguely about issues; virtually all 96 were hostile and negative.

When Dean tried to move the discussion to matters of substance, Sawyer inevitably pushed it back to negative fluff. ("I just want to make sure that I come back on a couple of things --” one thing, you said that --” that you decided that you've got to be yourself. That you've got to return to being what you really aren't. What were you that was not who you really were?")

Does she realize what a joke she is?

Kerry wins -- according to CNN

Wed, 28 Jan 2004 00:46:16 GMT

And I don't think they would go out on a limb on this one.

Well, it looks like a close second for Howard Dean. The main question now is the spin.

How will the media spin this one?

Can't wait to throw up. (At the pronouncements, not the outcome.)

Update:

And Kerry is apparently going to make is victory speech almost immediately.

Update 2:

Now they're saying Kerry is likely to win by 10 points. And our old friend Bill Schneider is back on to say that that number is critical, because they decided before today that 10 points was the spread. If Kerry beats it, he is awarded The Bounce, if he fails, he is not. (No word from him on whether Dean gets it instead or it just bumps along the pavement randomly.) "The name of this game is bounce!" he exclaims. Yeah, because you turds say it is.

How does a man lose that much touch with reality?

Wed, 28 Jan 2004 00:23:19 GMT

Seven minutes the polls have been closed, and already a solid contender for two of tonight's most coveted newsmodel awards:

Most Cynical Conclusion of the Evening
Most Asinine Assessment of the Evening.

Surprisingly, the comment reaping in both nominations came from none of the normal newsmodel contenders, but from CNN chief political analyst Bill Schneider.

And things were going so well through the first 25 seconds of his report. It was a really interesting exit-poll analysis, of the core underlying issue he believes--and I would wholeheartedly agree--ended up deciding this primary election.

Exit pollsters asked voters what their biggest priority was in voting, and then how the votes broke very differently:

Voters saying "Issues more important":

Dean 33%
Kerry 26%

Voters saying "Defeating Bush more important":

Kerry 50%
Dean 18%

What that says to me is that there is some tragic second-guessing going on. A sizeable plurality would love to have Howard Dean as their president, but they're convinced that they're alone, so they have to vote for someone else that they think will appeal to other people.

Sheesh. Trust your own instincts, for God's sake. Who told you Kerry was going to appeal to all those others? The media?

(Of course there is also the possibility that only Dems love Dean, so he'll get slaughtered by indies and Republicans. But remember that 1) lots of those--particularly indies--are also voting in this open primary, and 2) Kerry, not Dean is the one with the liberal record more likely to turn off the great masses in the middle. Again: Who told all these people that Dean was too liberal, even though he was a very moderate governor? You know the answer to that one.)

To me, that kind of polling says it all, and it's very, very sad.

But CNN's top political analyst Bill Schneider saw it very differently. "It was a choice between venting and winning," he concluded his piece. "And that's the race in New Hampshire."

Venting? Venting! People voting their minds, voting for the person they actually agree with, the person they want to be the next president, and not just trying to second-guess what other people will do, that he writes off as venting!

That is one of the most cynically revolting things I have ever heard.

And it was not just some throwaway line he tossed off in a moment of cheesy newsbanter. Those were the closing lines of a prepared piece, read from a script, presumably of his own writing. It was Schneider's first shot on camera seven minutes after the polls closed, his first big moment of glory with a 30-second spot that you can bet he worked on all afternoon. And that was the final conclusion of the chief political analyst, summing up what he considered to be the deciding factor in the election: People honestly voting for the man they think would make the best president are just venting.

How far removed from world you're covering do you have to get to start seeing the world through a lens that twisted?

Polls close: Dead Heat

Wed, 28 Jan 2004 00:03:54 GMT

The polls just closed and CNN unveiling its exit-polling results.

They're not putting numbers to it yet, but they are validating what has been leaked all afternoon:

Kerry has a slight lead, but Dean is close enough that he could catch him
Clark and Edwards way back in a tight race for distant third

Wolf Blitzer says it looks like a long night.

Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!

We may not win this thing, but it's going to be very close.

The crap they're going to feed us tonight

Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:23:16 GMT

So the late-breaking exit polls indicate Howard Dean actually has an outside chance of winning this thing tonight.

And if he does, he'll be The Comeback Kid (thought he'll need a new title--I imagine his people have already focus-tested several, and the nets prolly have a slew of them lined up as well). And suddenly the media will lather him with glory again, which will be ridiculous, though no more ridiculous to the drubbing they gave him last week.

(At least they better anoint him again if he wins it. That's standard treatment in a situation like this. Much as I detest their retarded rules, they better stay consistent.)

More likely he will finish a strong second, coming way back from a distant second or third just a week ago, to nearly catching Kerry in a brilliant comeback. At least I think that's how they'll pitch it, if Dean does come in very close.

That will also be kind of ridiculous.

Yes, I am using this opportunity when my own man is likely to profit from the moronic media to call this preposterous "bounce" BS for exactly the load of crap it is.

So what if Howard Dean was down badly three or four days ago and nearly closed the gap? Or if he had been razor close last night and suddenly plummeted to third?

What are we covering here, timing? We're interested less in who won, placed or showed than the timing of their frequent movement? If someone gains or loses a lot of undecideds at the last minute, that's somehow more important?

No. No more or less important. Much more dramatic. And that's all the media really cares about.

This is not a sporting event. But they cover it that way. Fourth quarter, seconds ticking off the clock, hail mary pass to send it into overtime . . .

That's all they care about. The drama.

It's not a sports competition, it's not a movie, it's not freaking entertainment! At least it's not to me. It's not to most of the country, though that's all it really is to them.

Wait, that's not entirely true. I do enjoy it as entertainment. I admit it, I can't help watching it with one eye as a sporting event. So do most of the political junkies in the country, that's why the coverage works.

But I say "with one eye," because I never lose sight of the fact that while I can enjoy watching the ups and downs as a spectator sport, I never lose sight of the fact that the spectating is secondary. A distant second. It's just a fun sideshow created by the main event, it's not what the damn thing is about.

Somewhere along the line, the press got so sucked into the entertainment aspect of it, that's about all they have left. They are going to make the most preposterous pronouncements tonight about who "won" and who "lost" by how they did against expectations--meaning no more than how much they gained or lost in the last day or two.

It will be one of the most asinine spectacles you can imagine. Try not to swallow a word of it. Even if it benefits my guy.

Dead heat in New Hampshire?

Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:02:45 GMT

The polls all agreed on a big Kerry victory this morning, but the exit polling shows a different story. From Kos:

The 1 p.m. tracking polls had the LA Times exit polling operation giving Dean the slight lead, while the media consortium gave Kerry the lead. The 4 p.m. results supposedly show similar numbers.

Wow. I may just pop out of my sullen mood after all.

Of course it's still just polling, but exit-polling is a whole different story from pre-polling. The main challenge with pre-polling is figuring out who's actually going to vote. Not a problem catching people on the way out.

Fasten your seatbelts . . .