As it becomes increasingly obvious that Democrats are going to name Howard Dean as the chair of the DNC, the chorus of protests from Republicans is growing stronger and stronger. “He’s too liberal!” they cry. And I don’t get it — why say anything? Have they never heard of Napoleon? “Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake”?
It strikes me as staggeringly unlikely that any Republican complaining about Dean right now actually has the best interests of the Democratic Party in mind. Were the roles reversed, I would certainly be seeking to weaken the RNC through misinformation. I suspect that Dean is the perfect choice for the positions of DNC Chair, if for no other reason than to keep the Dean Democrats engaged in the party. And I suspect that many Republicans are all-too well aware of that fact.
What are you talking about. Turn Sean Hannity on for an hour Monday and this subject will surely come up. I want Howard Dean to win because he’d destroy the Democratic Party, by leaving moderate Democrats with no representation. As the Democrats have shifted to the left, more and more “libs” have turned right. If Howard Dean is elected, and Boxer and Kennedy keep their current roles as spokesmen, the GOP will have 60 senators next election. You’re driving your party right into the ground Waldo.
Just look at Dean. He’s goofy. Doesn’t his “I had a scream” speech just kill you.
Hell, I’ll endorse him tonight on my site.
Um, Brandon? Didn’t you just prove Waldo’s point?
No Dan,
My point is that having Dean in the position will hurt the Democrats. Waldo’s point is that it’ll help the democrats.
Um, Waldo? You know how sites like Blogspot and Xanga have those features where it asks you if you want to navigate away from the page? Well, that’d be real swell to have here, if you have time. That way, I wouldn’t be making my third attempt at this thing (it turns out the preview window has a mean streak).
Anyway. What Waldo is saying is that if Republicans really thought that Dean would be bad for the Democratic Party, it would be most beneficial to the GOP to not say anything about it. And since you are saying something about it, it follows that you might actually be worried about a Dean chairmanship (as you should be). And since you are speaking out against Dean, you either really love us Democrats or you just proved Waldo’s point.
But you can take comfort in the fact that Karl Rove already did it to Dean, way back in the primary season. Knowing that most Democrats despise anything that Rove says, why would he essentially endorse Deab, knowing that it might turn off Democratic primary voters? He wanted to turn voters off of Dean because je didn’t want to face him in the general election. Fortunately, not that it was that particular statement, Rove got his wish. Granted, it might make more sense for you to “endorse” Dean now that he’s all but guaranteed the spot.
Now here is why you (the collective you) should fear a Dean chairmanship. True, Dean is more centrist than many believe him to be. True, the DNC chair will not have as much power as many of Dean’s supporters expect he will. But, what the selection of Dean does signify is that people in the party (apparently overwhelmingly) recognize that something is not right. In case you haven’t noticed, your party has been doing fairly well in the past few years. A Dean chairmanship brings its benefits, but the most significant aspect of it would be a committment from the party to do something different. What we have been doing isn’t working, and as the most “disestablishment” candidate (besides perhaps Rosenberg), a Dean chairmanship signals a reverse in direction for the party. And since the old ways weren’t working, you should fear a new one.
And besides, there’s a glass ceiling up there somewhere. And I bet the GOP finds it very soon.
Remember when Carter’s people wanted to run against Reagan because they thought the electorate would see him as a right-wing nut?
So Mr. Meyer what I am saying is dont count the chickens till they’re in the pot. Or I suppose I could say be careful what you wish for.
But, I suspect that what Mr. Meyer and his ilk are really up to is to indelibly mark him
Liberal, compromising his effectiveness . . . regardless of reality that the lefties in VT just hated Mr. Dean, and that his policies where about as centrist as you can get!
So our job is every time we hear the liberal liable on Dean to to point out that as
Governor he cut taxes, cut social spending, balanced the budget and pissed off a lot of environmentalist somewhere along the way.
I was just playing devils advocate. I’m looking at this situation not as a Republican, but with both sides in mind. The problem the Democrats have been having lately is that they are shifting too far left. There’s no sixputing it. Today JFK looks like a neo-con (ie: stuff like the Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missle Crisis) This has turned many in the national electorate off and thrown votes at the GOP. Just look how far us Republicans have come in the past ten years. We have made breakthroughs in holding down a majority in both the house and the senate, and now the Presidency. We now hold the largest majority in both houses of congress in the history of our nation and with honesty in mind, it’s because the left is turning even far left.
If I were to become a democrat, I’d ease up a bit and head towards the center a little to regain some moderate support and then move on with my plans. You can’t win the war without the best Army. Plain and simple.
But speaking as a Republican again, I hope that the left does contine their radicalism, because if you all do, there will be no GOP trainwreck.
Brandon
The DNC Chair is the spiritual leader of the party. Not the moderating hand. Not the guy with the most average beliefs. Not the person who sets the agenda. Right now, the DNC needs somebody who can get people excited, who can capture the momentum that led up to November and bottle it. Dean’s the only man who can do that.
Eh… I think it’s probably zero net with Howard Dean as DNC chair. I hear as many Republicans laud his advent as decry it. Maybe the plan is to try to get half of Dems to move towards the center, and half to move towards the left.
Well, in any case, it’s a certainty that Dean will become chair, as he is now unopposed.
LINK
Brandon, we’re both happy, and in four years, one of us will be eating crow. We shall see.
I am certainly not going to question our party’s predicament but “We now hold the largest majority in both houses of congress in the history of our nation”
I dont have time to search this, but didnt the Repubs get a much bigger drumming in ’64?
And even though the Republicans control more state capitals Democrats in 04 have taken the majority of toltal seats. Hmmm, could this be an indicator of a rising Dem tide . . .
Also, the Rebubs have only won the presidency by the skin of their teeth. Think about it for a minute; all the money and amazingly superior organization (anger points and narrow casting) that the Republicans utilized in 04, not to mention gay marriage, Kerrys ineptitude as a national candidate, and Bush running as a war president; and all you got was a 4 point win? Thats a small margin considering the advantages, so dont make any misundermations about where the electorate is ideologically.
But really I am fine with Repubs trying to claim such broad mandates. Let them try to govern out of proportion to their actual political capitallets call it a political capital deficit, the creditors will come to collect soon enough.
Waldo is right about Dean at the DNC, he keeps the base white hot. This means more grass roots activity, money and more volunteers–this by the way has been the advantage on the Republican side and a major force in their rise to power, now we have something equivalent.
This is exactly what the Repubs shouldnt want!
Plus Dean has so much capital with the lefties he can do no wrong, he can move as far center or right as he wants, which would have been very hard for another head to pull off.