I’ve been thinking about this for a few days, and think that while the Governor has said and done some things that strike me as silly and opportunistic, that he’s made a few points which I think would make a profound difference in creating a Democratic Party with a future.
When he was running, he said something that I approved of profoundly:
“I still want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks…”
He got busted by the politically craven and correct and folded like a wet tortilla; that was a shame, and probably cost him my support.
But he’s saying the same thing in a different way over on his website:
Show up! Never concede a single state, county, district or even a single voter to the Republicans. We must be active and compete in all 50 states and work with the state parties to build a truly national party.
And that sits just fine with me.
Because even if he sets out doing it like he did Iowa – with a coalition of the pierced and the purple-haired leading the way – the reality is that a Democratic Party that’s deeply engaged in all 50 states is a Democratic Party that won’t be able to help beng shaped by the whole of America.
And that’s a thing worth yelling about.
You might want to rethink this:
“I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for.” — Howard Dean, yesterday.
Hatred has seldom been a winning platform in these United States.
Im kinda tired of all the friendly advice to the Dems not to jump off the cliff. The problem isnt that the looney left has hicjaked the party apparatus. The problem is that the looney left _is_ the party apparatus. All the advice we are giving will do is encourage the left to pretend to be something they arent (again). Why? If Howard Dean is their guy, so much the better for everyone involved. If democrats insist on being the minority party, doomed to hemorage their unions and minorities one by one, so be it. Maybe an honest to god Libertarian party (one that doesnt give me a low intensity throbbing in the back of my head when they speak) will emerge.
Personally, I wish Colin Powell would trade horses and run the Democratic Party. They could call themselves ‘neo-liberals.’
Instead he ended up being the candidate for people who carry swastikas to “anti-war” rallies.
I don’t buy it, AL. As a former independent, now Schwarzenegger Republican, I’m looking for some sign that the moderate wing of the Dems is still near the center of gravity of the party – that Mark above is incorrect.. A hope that I should still be paying some attention, rather than writing the Ds off as irresponsible and simply working for their defeat on the next go-round.
Bringing in Dean and the supporters and agenda implied isn’t going to do that for me. Engaging that level of screeching with the entirety of the 50 states is no more likely to succeed than Dean did in Iowa. In some way, it will make my life easier, but I’m pretty sure it’s not a desirable outcome, but rather the road to permanent minority status.
Cicero: Heh. Love it. Not sure Powell needs that level of heartache at this point in his life. I also don’t see him turning on his former team.
I wouldn’t know about “former,” AFAIK former SecState Powell is still very much a Republican and while he’s a bit too far to the left for my tastes as a Presidential candidate; I’m glad he’s on the team and appreciate his years of service. If he ever decides to return to the spotlight as an elder statesmen ala Bob Dole,
Contrary to the wishful thinking of the “watch for the GOP to inevitably implode between the ‘moderates’ and conservatives*” crowd, I am more than willing to support someone whom I agree with 80 plus percent of the time if s/he’s the best candidate. Moreover, while I have little patience for Rinos, there is a difference between a Jim Jeffords who routinely votes with the other side and will stab you in the back at the first opportunity and a Colin Powell who agrees with us on the larger issues and general principles (probably 80% plus) and even if he may disagree with the majority of the Party on some issues, always does so in a constructive manner while working within the party rather than trying to tear it down.
Dissenters who behave respectfully and act constructively always deserve to be treated the same and for the most part, Powell has.
*I’m from the small-l “libertarian” wing of the Party but recognize that “conservative” and “libertarian” are often used interchangeably.
Thorley – I pretty much agree with you, and I’m in the same wing of the Rs – something Ahnuld is making easier.
My ‘former team’ comment re Powell was a hypothetical, as I hope the context makes clear. In fact, I strongly suspect that most of his image as the outlier in the Bush administration is a consequence of the usual media spin. It’s pretty clear that one of his roles has been to play the ‘good cop’ to Rummy’s ‘bad cop’. Given the amount of ideologically driven leaking from State, there’s always been enough chatter to gin up a story that makes the good/bad cop story into one about internal rifts. Wishful thinking, like so much of the media dribble about the Bushies.
The one thing I appreciated about Dean in his early days was that he was honestly anti-war. It was right there, on the table. I didn’t agree with him, but there it was.
Kerry took that position, essentially stuck to it, but caked it in so many layers of nuance, waffle, perhaps, maybe, sideways that it was unrecognizable. Voting for Dean would’ve meant voting against the war. Voting for Kerry really meant the same thing, except all the rhetoric was couched in language to cloak that position. For the war, but against it.
Whether or not Dean makes the cut for DNC Chairman, I hope whoever they pick is clear on the positions they represent.
Tim –
Yeah, but by engagig the folks in all the other states the disconnect will become pretty apparent. Right now, they hide behind the demographic wall, and ignore them…how are they supposed to ever learn?
A.L.
We have to destroy the party in order to save it?
Is it too much to ask that the party of FDR and Truman come up with a responsible adult, and a platform a little more nuanced than “We’ll hold our breath until you give us what we want”?
I just blogged on this and I consider Dean to be a poor choice for DNC chair, here’s my favorite:
*3. Karl Rove.* Currently a political advisor to President George Bush. Extensive political experience, and proven record as a fund-raiser.
STRENGTHS: Huge name recognition among DNC faithful. We’re talking HUGE. Studies show that 73% of coherent verbal utterances by DNC staffers feature “Karl Rove” as either the subject or direct object. Has a reputation in the DNC for god-like competence, and the kind of supernatural mystique previously attained only by Haitian dictators and pagan agricultural deities. Is rumored to have Osama bin Laden tied up in the trunk of his car.
NEGATIVES: Currently a Republican. Has mercenary instincts that could be exploited, but this might require a supplemental appropriation or some creative budget-looting. Also, bears disturbing resemblance to “Principal Weatherbee” from Archie comic books.
OVERALL EVALUATION: Excellent. This choice would be highly appealing to those who feel the DNC needs to be “shaken up” like a hysterical prostitute.
Re: Karl Rove as the next DNC Chair
ROTFLMAO!
_The one thing I appreciated about Dean in his early days was that he was honestly anti-war. It was right there, on the table. I didn’t agree with him, but there it was._
Right. But once Dean explained his position against going to war, he was, in my view, the most pro-war candidate. He spoke the most authoritatively about the importance of winning the war in Iraq. The rest of them seemed partly embarrassed; unsure of themselves; always looking for cover.
Somewhere along the line “toughness” becamed defined as voting to go to war, insead of having the perserverence to win the war.
Howard Dean is a disaster.
He’s probably a decent guy, but is captive to the Kos/MoveOn wing and therefore not responsive to the concerns of the middle class American family:
*Security of the country. Dean wants a “fair trial” for bin Laden instead of deterrence through strength; the money wing (MoveOn etc) isn’t serious and doesn’t comprehend the threat of more 9/11’s , for them it never happened or we deserved it anyway.
*Security at home, i.e. crime. Dean believes in the usual MoveOn/Kos attitudes … don’t lock up criminals it’s not their fault. This is another Willie Horton waiting to happen. Voters picturing a rape and murder of their wives/daughters/sisters /mothers etc will RUN to the other Party.
*The economy. Dean’s focus will be on gay marriage not growing the job base and wage base. Clinton used to get this; and ran in 92 on a populist platform. Voters trust the Dems on this far more than Republicans, but Dean/MoveOn seems intent on throwing this away for social stuff that isn’t important to most people.
Well, the other “candidates” are dropping out of the sky like dead chickenhawks, so it’s all over but the shouting. The shouting will be extra loud with Dean in charge.
The Democratic Party now has two foes: The Republicans, and their own national committee. Just as Democrats are trying to fight a two-front war: against Bush’s Social Security proposals, and a totally stupid war against Alberto Gonzales. I’m sure that all the bellowing from Dean and those Moveon.org rear echelon mother-f***rs will be very helpful.