Trippi's Army

Joe Trippi has built an army.  If Dean's not going to be the nominee, what is this army going to be used for?

There are still 5 days until the NH vote, but I'm proceeding on the assumption that Dean will not win or place a close 2nd.  Disregard the following if he somehow manages to pull it out.

-----

So Dean pooches IA and NH.  What then?

In the infamous Monday speech, Dean was talking about taking the fight to all 50 states.  If his campaign has no chance to win, why contest California or Tennesee?

In '92, Joe Trippi ran Jerry Brown's insurgent campaign.  The Brown campaign, much like the Dean campaign, was shaped as much by Trippi's obsessions as by the candidate.

The Brown campaign was a call to war against the Democratic Party, rather than against the Republican incumbent.  After Clinton sealed the nomination, the Brown campaign continued, winning significant but clearly minority percentages in state after state.  Brown focused his campaign on relentlessly attacking Clinton.

The result of this assault on the front-runner after he'd already clinched the nomination resulted in Clinton's national poll number sinking lower and lower that spring, until he was running third in the polls, behind both Bush and Perot.  Happily a combination of the bad economy, Perot's flameout, and Clinton's own skill managed to turn things around.  But if these planets had not aligned, it's very easy to imagine Brown's attacks costing the Democrats the election.

In accounts of the Brown campaign written afterwards, the voice always arguing for continuing the campaign and continuing the attacks belongs to Trippi.

This year, Trippi has a much more effective communication system (due to the net) than he did in '92, and much more money.  What will he use these resources for once his candidate is no longer a viable competitor for the nomination?

If '92 is any guide, Democrats concerned with winning the election this fall should be worried.

•  Premature

  An obvious comment.

  Write this same entry after Feb 3.  If Dean loses all of the states, then this becomes a realistic move.  If he doesn't and goes on to Super Tuesday with some possibilities, then all bets are off.

  Clinton against the older Bush was a much different race than this one.  Much less was at stake.

  But, to play your game, I think Dean doesn't have the enormous egotistic need of Jerry Brown.  I think he will return to Vermont happily.  I also think he might stay in, Kucinich style, and hammer at Bush.

  I notice that Dean's policies and attitudes drove last night's debate.  They all still dance to his tune.  Kerry is Dean-Lite.

  by barr on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 08:51:03 AM PDT

  •  I agree

    I agree with you characterizing Kerry as Dean Lite.  It was so obvious last night in the debate.

    by Cederico on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 11:44:18 AM PDT

•  Boo f--ing hoo

  If Dean gets knocked out of it and he and Trippi decide to use the leftover millions to go medieval on one of Senators (hint: rhymes with "dairy") that would be fine by me.

  by PaulDem on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 08:57:44 AM PDT

  •  Re: Boo Hoo

    "If Dean gets knocked out of it and he and Trippi decide to use the leftover millions to go medieval on one of Senators (hint: rhymes with "dairy") that would be fine by me."

    I didn't realize you didn't care whether or not Bush got re-elected.

    I guess Nader was right.  There's no difference between the Democrats and Republicans.  What bullshit that line is.

    Trippi's built an army of people like you, and as someone who does care whether or not Bush gets re-elected, that scares me.

    by Petey on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:04:20 AM PDT

    •  Relax

      Oh, relax. You've been preaching this sermon for awhile and I just don't buy it.

      Dean is no Jerry Brown and has said, in stronger terms than any other candidate, that he will support whoever the nominee is. Dean is probably more concerned about Bush being in office for four more years than most of us here. He did decide to run for President at least partly because of the damage Bush is doing, after all and has been speaking out more clearly and forcefully against this President for longer than any of the others.

      Look at it another way: Who do you think has a stronger personality: Trippi or Dean? If you honestly think Trippi does, and would sway Dean's "army" over Dean's wishes, then I think you're gravely mistaken.

      I think it's all moot, though, because I don't think media hysteria and a tough campaign is going to be enough to push Dean out of the race - especially not before March. I still think he'll pull it out. And if he doesn't, I think Dem chances in November decrease significantly.

      by J from VJ on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:11:21 AM PDT

      •  Re: Relax

        "You've been preaching this sermon for awhile..."

        yes i have.

        "Dean is no Jerry Brown and has said, in stronger terms than any other candidate, that he will support whoever the nominee is."

        My worry is not his post-convention support of the nominee.  My worry is his post-Feb 3rd sniping at the unoficial nominee if his campaign has no shot at winning.

        "Look at it another way: Who do you think has a stronger personality: Trippi or Dean?"

        Stronger political personality?  Trippi.  And it's not even close.

        The Dean '04 campaign is much closer in tone to Brown's '92 campaign than anything Dean stood for or ran for as Governor.

        by Petey on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:16:52 AM PDT

        •  so your contention...

          So your contention is that if Dean says one thing and Trippi says another, that Dean supporters will follow Trippi?

          Or your contention is that Trippi will be a little Rasputin whispering in Dean's ear and Dean is so weak that he'll do whatever the EvilTrippi tells him to?

          The first makes clear your disdain for Dean supporters and the second makes clear your disdain for Dean.

          But your personal opinion about Dean supporters and Dean is no basis on which to assume that your feared "army of Trippi-led snipers" will come to pass.

          Once again. I think this is a moot point, but I'm pretty tired of the implicit smears.

          by J from VJ on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:21:49 AM PDT

          •  Re: so your contention...

            "So your contention is that if Dean says one thing and Trippi says another, that Dean supporters will follow Trippi?"

            no.  my contention is that Dean is letting Trippi run strategy for his campaign.  Dean will say the same thing Trippi is saying, and Dean supporters will follow that voice.

            "But your personal opinion about Dean supporters and Dean is no basis on which to assume that your feared "army of Trippi-led snipers" will come to pass."

            Are you serious?  Those Trippi-led snipers are already here.  It's kinda legitimate now, since Dean is still a viable candidate for the nomination, but it won't be once Dean is no longer viable.

            Based on '92, I strongly suspect it won't end after Feb 3rd.

            by Petey on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:27:47 AM PDT

            •  Rasputin, then

              my contention is that Dean is letting Trippi run strategy for his campaign.  Dean will say the same thing Trippi is saying, and Dean supporters will follow that voice.

              In other words...  your contention is that Trippi will be a little Rasputin whispering in Dean's ear and Dean is so weak that he'll do whatever the EvilTrippi tells him to.

              That's where we disagree. And it's a disagreement over Dean's character, which is utterly subjective.

              What it comes down to is that you have no more than a "Dean will follow Trippi's instructions, no matter what" gut feeling to go on.

              Again, it speaks to your disdain of the candidate, but that's already clear. What new do you have to add?

              by J from VJ on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:33:50 AM PDT

              •  Re: Rasputin, then

                "What it comes down to is that you have no more than a "Dean will follow Trippi's instructions, no matter what" gut feeling to go on.

                Again, it speaks to your disdain of the candidate, but that's already clear. What new do you have to add?"

                I don't have disdain for Howard Dean.  I do have disdain for Joe Trippi.

                I don't think Dean is being manipulated by a Rasputin.  But I do think he's bought into Trippi's agenda.  And Trippi's pre-IA success has led Dean to trust Trippi's judgment.

                As I said before, Dean '04 is a hell of a lot closer to Brown '92 than it is to any of Dean's previous campaigns or governing.  I don't think saying this is a Trippi led campaign is merely my "gut feeling".

                by Petey on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:39:31 AM PDT

            •  I'm a sniper

              Well I'm one of those Kossak Deaniacs who has an irrational fear/hatred of Kerry (would that there were an equal proportion of us in the real world...) and I'd like to add this. I'm glad that Howard Dean had someone like Joe Trippi on board if that will get Dean elected, but if Howard Dean says, "Joe, you've done good, but we need to take this in another direction and I need someone else leading the campaign up front" I would have no problem with it. Trippi is not why I'm here. The grass roots are great, but they are not why I'm here. Howard Dean is why I'm here. Got it?

              by JMS on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 10:24:01 AM PDT

              •  Re: Snipers

                "I'm glad that Howard Dean had someone like Joe Trippi on board if that will get Dean elected..."

                Like I say, the problem comes if a candidate other than Dean sews up the nomination.

                Are you still a sniper then?

                by Petey on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 10:27:11 AM PDT

                •  nope

                  No, I go back to being one of those people who just votes. I work full time, I have an infant and a toddler. My husband was laid off and is looking for a new job. I do have other things to think about and worry about and do. I'm interested in this now because Dean made it interesting. Sniping is fun too. However, I am a Democrat--a couch sitting one to be sure, but very reliable as a voter. And if I'm not as invested in the race as I would be if Dean were the nominee, I will just vote for the nominee, whoever it is--yes, even if it's Kerry.

                  by JMS on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 10:40:12 AM PDT

              •  Yes, only Howard Dean is irreplacable

                NT

                by katiebird on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 11:50:36 AM PDT

        •  60's Rock

          "Look at it another way: Who do you think has a stronger personality: Trippi or Dean?"

          If you're familiar with 60's rock, the analogy here is The Who.

          Dean is Roger Daltry and Trippi is Pete Townsend.

          One guy is the front-man, but the other guy is really in charge of the band.

          by Petey on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:23:48 AM PDT

        •  However

          However, you're not dealing with the sincerely felt reasons Dean supporters and Brown supporters were attracted to those candidacies.  

          In '92, we had just been through the Savings and Loan debacle.  Our Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike, passed an "off budget" $300 billion bill to pay off a financial disaster created by their own coziness and laxness of oversight of that industry.  There was to be no accountability.  Pass it, bury it, don't count it in the yearly deficit.  

          This time around, its that war more than anything else.  Its already cost $200 billion. (and 500 American lives, 3000 wounded, uncounted thousands of Iraqis --- but I don't believe for a second the American people really care about all that tragedy; its just lipservice.  It wasn't until the $87 billion speech that the American public as a whole turned on the war.)  Bush or whoever gets in will be passing another $100 billion appropriation next year.  Theres no end in sight to it.  And everyone in Congress knew we'd have to occupy Iraq and that it would be a long, hard, dangerous, costly occupation.  What a preposterous fairy tale the Senators would  have you believe,  that the Bush administration deceived them about how Iraqis would throw flowers at American conquerors.

          Fact is, trying to calculate the lesser of two evils is just a guessing game.  You could be wrong.  

          by Lois on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:59:45 AM PDT

          •  Re: However

            "However, you're not dealing with the sincerely felt reasons Dean supporters and Brown supporters were attracted to those candidacies."

            i respect those reasons, and i respect those supporters.

            what i don't respect is a campaign that continues taking shots at the Party's nominee once the nomination has been sewn up.

            by Petey on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 10:04:55 AM PDT

        •  what are you talking about?

          The Dean '04 campaign is much closer in tone to Brown's '92 campaign than anything Dean stood for or ran for as Governor.

          dean challenged the status quo of his own party when he was governor as well.

          by niner on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 10:56:57 AM PDT

    •  And it was okay to go after Dean?

      And it was okay to go after Dean?

      Oh, that's right. You all had the best interests of the Party in mind by smearing Dean to high heaven for the last month.

      All those juicy push polls and whispering campaigns just might come back to haunt you.

      Shoulda thought about that at the time.
      

      by PaulDem on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:14:29 AM PDT

      •  give me a break!

        The nomination is wide open (if Dean's lucky) and if I recall correctly it was the Howard Dean who first started calling his fellow candidates "Bush-lite."  Why do you think his negatives in NH are a whopping 42%?

        http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/nhpoll/demtrack/

        Dean has shown minimal respect for anyone in this campaign and the "Trippi army" is the most self-righteous swarm I've ever seen.  Everyone I know in the Kerry campaign is prepared to support Dean if he wins the nomination but you guys...tsk...tsk.  It's a terrible shame.

        by gabe nyu4kerry on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 11:01:34 AM PDT

        •  umm

          Why do you think his negatives in NH are a whopping 42%?

          -kerry's dirty tricks campaign of push polling?
          -edwards under the radar attacks?
          -gephardt's mediscare ads?
          -gephardt/kerry funding ads conflating dean with bin laden?
          -the republican funded club for growth ads against dean?

          are you blind? everybody and their mother piled on dean.
          all this and you're suprised by his unfavorables??

          by niner on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 11:10:09 AM PDT

•  Dean, Dean, Dean

  Dean always dominates the conversation.  Is this a good thing?  Yes!  Even though they're slamming him, it proves he is the most interesting and important candidate.  I've contended all along that he is the one the Repugs are most afraid of, and obviously the one the Dems in DC have been trying to stop.  Pay attention to whom the Bill Presses and James Carvilles are trying to bring down.  It's Dean.  That should tell us something.  They need us, but they want to be able to control us.  

  If we want to take our country back (translation: build a community of involved people who can make a difference), we need to stay connected in some way.  I don't want to bring down the Democratic candidate, but I want us to be able to mobilize on short notice and be effective.  We need to coordinate our efforts with MoveOn; donate to worthy campaigns with our time and energy; lobby our representatives and make them accountable; and most importantly, force the media to clean up its act.

  I don't know if Trippi has a role to play in this, but Howard Dean definitely does.  He is the force that can hold us together.

  I hope my comments makes sense and are relevant to your question.  It's still early!
  

  by Susan S on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:14:46 AM PDT

  •  Re: Dean, Dean, Dean

    "we need to stay connected in some way.  I don't want to bring down the Democratic candidate, but I want us to be able to mobilize on short notice and be effective.  We need to coordinate our efforts with MoveOn; donate to worthy campaigns with our time and energy; lobby our representatives and make them accountable; and most importantly, force the media to clean up its act."

    I understand this and support this.

    But my fear is that the guy currently in charge of the activist network is Joe Trippi, and I believe he is more interested in destroying the Democratic Party than he is in building the left.

    And last I checked, James Carville was a damn good guy.

    by Petey on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:21:04 AM PDT

    •  aberrations

      But my fear is that the guy currently in charge of the activist network is Joe Trippi, and I believe he is more interested in destroying the Democratic Party than he is in building the left.

      We're not interested in destroying the Democratic party, we're interested in realigning the Democratic party so that 1. it represents us and 2. Democrats can actually win elections again.

       The DLC is interested in destroying the left and thus their strident opposition to Dean and his supporters. I can understand this, they've been so successful in leaving us without a voice that it must be anathema for Trippi to organize a group of people which is attractive to liberals, guys who voted for Bush last time and all of those non-voters and independants Bruce Reed insists would not vote for a democrat.

       The DLC has been quite explicit and direct that we 'aberrations', as one DLC poster put it be "encouraged" to establish a third party. We don't want to destroy the Democratic party, we would like to men like Al From and Zell Miller and, in your small way, you to stop destroying the Democratic party.

       

      by colleen on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 10:35:19 AM PDT

    •  Begala and Carville

      In case you haven't noticed, both Begala and Carville have non-stop smeared and sneered at Dean.  When I am speaking for the Party publicly, I don't denigrate any of the candidates even though I have very strong preferences.  I see them clearly and they represent only one wing of the Party.  

      by barnowl on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 10:38:43 AM PDT

  •  If

    If Dean could make it into the White House with a campaign financed by ordinary people, that is powerful.  A true representative of the people would get to look at the books.   If he doesn't take the nomination, just you watch:  the Democratic Party will put rules in place to make it IMPOSSIBLE for anyone other than a big donor special interest-financed candidate to be nominated.

    by Lois on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 10:29:31 AM PDT

  •  i dont

    know how anybody can still argue we have a liberal media after seeing the drubbing they gave dean.

    by niner on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 10:58:39 AM PDT

•  It seems to me

  that doing this would be immensely stupid for the following reasons:

  1. Dean's reputation would be even worse than it is now. If he wants to leave the race with any dignity and self respect, he won't do this.
  2. Dean won't have a future in any Democratic administration. He won't even have a future in the party. I'd imagine the rest of the party would turn against him.
  3. I would imagine it would be hard for Trippi to get any further campaign work. Seems like the word could go out that "Trippi is not to be trusted" and any candidate would be stupid to use his services except maybe the green party or the GOP.

  by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:27:36 AM PDT

  •  Re: It seems to me

    "I would imagine it would be hard for Trippi to get any further campaign work. Seems like the word could go out that "Trippi is not to be trusted" and any candidate would be stupid to use his services except maybe the green party or the GOP."

    The word already is out, and has been for a long time.  There's a reason Trippi didn't work the '00 cycle.

    Donna Brazile has a famous quote about Trippi leaving messes everywhere he goes that other people have to clean up.

    "Dean's reputation would be even worse than it is now."

    If Dean just wants to run another insurgent campaign in the future, there's no reason not to keep the army together, while weakening the Democratic Party at the same time.

    by Petey on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:31:37 AM PDT

    •  Paranoia

      If Dean just wants to run another insurgent campaign in the future, there's no reason not to keep the army together, while weakening the Democratic Party at the same time.

      Paranoia.

      Where you one of those people saying that Gore endorsed Dean so that Dean would lose and Gore could run in '08, too?

      by J from VJ on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:36:04 AM PDT

      •  Re: Paranoia

        "Where you one of those people saying that Gore endorsed Dean so that Dean would lose and Gore could run in '08, too?"

        No.  But I have said that access to the Dean network for a future Presidential campaign was indeed part of Gore's thought process.

        I've also said I like Al Gore a lot, and that there's nothing wrong with having that kind of thought process.

        by Petey on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:42:08 AM PDT

    •  Re: Word is out

      If the word is out, why did Dean pick Trippi?

      Another insurgent campaign? Surely not. But I guess you can't underestimate the ego of some candidates.

      by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:37:20 AM PDT

  •  Ga6thDem,

    Dean's reputation would be even worse than it is now. If he wants to leave the race with any dignity and self respect, he won't do this.

    How's Zell Miller's self respect and dignity? How's he doing now? I haven't seen much outcry from the DLC or the Democratic party or the democrats in Georgia. And he actually is trying to destroy the Democratic party.

    by colleen on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 11:49:12 AM PDT

    •  Colleen

      Obviously, you have missed what the Dem's in Ga are saying about Zell. They are not happy with him and will be glad to see him go.

      As for the DLC, I don't know what they are saying. I'm sure the DNC is not happy.

      by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 11:52:31 AM PDT

      •  the future face of the Democratic party

        As for the DLC, I don't know what they are saying. I'm sure the DNC is not happy.

        The DLC and the DNC are silent on the subject of Zell whose self respect and dignity are, I'm quite certain, serene now that he's making money selling a book whose sole purpose is the destruction of the Democratic party and he's busy assisting the GOP in their fundraising efforts.

        It's interesting because, if the DLC gets it's way, Zell Miller is the future face of the Democratic party.

        by colleen on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 12:08:14 PM PDT

        •  How do you

          know they are silent?

          by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 12:10:16 PM PDT

          •  zell again

            Because I read  several newspapers a day, the DLC and DNC's websites every week and, subscribe to the email lists of both organizations and read this blog. And I've actually been very interested in the establishment dems response to Zell's activities.

            It's possible I missed a squeak of protest of course.

            Have you heard them say anything. Far as I can tell most of the DLC's energies have been devoted to aligning the the GOP and trying to take Dean down.

            Have you heard any whimper of protest? Anything at all?
             

            by colleen on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 12:21:34 PM PDT

            •  No

              but I don't keep up with what the DLC does. The GA Dem's have been trash talking ole Zell regularly-even in the op-eds. So, all the "southern dem's" people here like to trash are in some ways standing up for the party more than a lot of others.

              PS. Not meaning to be snarky.

              by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 01:28:49 PM PDT

              •  a clarification

                Not meaning to be snarky

                I appreciate that.
                I wasn't trashing southern dems. One of the things that fascinates me about this blog is the southern dems. I think we should repeatedly clone PhilS, Jennifer and Bill Rehm...and several of the Texans, for instance.
                When I talk about southern dems I'm talking about the leadership and the sorts of accomodation conservative dems tell us would be necessary to 'remain competative in the South', not the fine people I've 'met' here. I feel strongly that they and we deserve better leadership.
                   

                by colleen on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 01:37:53 PM PDT

•  I remember '92 very well

  That was the most interesting year in American since I don't know when.  I started following the race in January, like most people did, because of the draft/Gennifer Flowers explosions.  

  Jerry Brown's rap on Clinton and why the Democrats shouldn't nominate Clinton was that he was the "scandal a week" candidate.  Sorry if it offends anyone who admires Bill Clinton and the Clinton presidency, but Brown was right.  The proof is definitive: Two years later,  54 House seats and 7 Senate seats lost.  State Legislatures and governorships lost.  

  Clinton won in '92 because of a Texas billionaire businessman who had promoted himself as a super patriot for 20 years (Did you know that Ross Perot speech transcripts and videos had ALWAYS been the most requested C-SPAN item for years before '92.  I heard Brian Lamb say that once.) The Perot vote came straight out of Bush I's hide.  

  The Republicans lost in '96 because they insisted on nominating war hero Dole, who was a terrible candidate.  Clinton got under 50% of the vote.  Perot got about 8% as a pure protest vote.  

  Like it or not, that Monica scandal tarnished the entire Democratic party.  Rail against the Republicans all you want.  The impeachment and trial in the Senate were an abuse of power and its sickening to me to think of that smut on the historical record for future generations to have to learn about.  On the other hand, my daughter was in elementary school and we couldn't turn on the TV without hearing about oral sex.  I blame Bill Clinton for it more than anyone else; it is inexplicable to me that a President would pick up with that young woman so casually and have such a relationship with her so brazenly and stupidly.  That was a tough time for the Democrats; they didn't like having to defend that behavior and it wasn't fair to them.  But having followed the '92 campaign, I'd have to say they were forewarned plenty.  

  by Lois on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:39:47 AM PDT

  •  Re: I remember '92 very well

    "Jerry Brown's rap on Clinton and why the Democrats shouldn't nominate Clinton was that he was the "scandal a week" candidate."

    I had no problem with Jerry Brown making this argument before Clinton sewed up the nomination.

    I had a lot of problems with Brown continuing to make this argument after Clinton sewed up the nomination.  At Trippi's urging, he single-handedly kept Clinton's poll numbers low all spring for no discernable purpose.

    by Petey on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:46:50 AM PDT

    •  Clinton's poll numbers

      That probably had more to do with the budding Ross Perot candidacy than with Jerry Brown.  People were suddenly attracted to Perot; there was a draft Perot movement; then there was the petition gathering all over the country.  It was a huge, spontaneous, sincere, inspiring kind of thing.  During the spring, Perot actually led in the polls, I think.  

      (And I don't buy the "Perot is a nut" stuff. He just wasn't a politician.  I never voted for him but his life's achievements are real and impressive and I never heard anything that would make me doubt his personal integrity.)

      by Lois on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 10:06:44 AM PDT

    •  I was there

      There is a subtext of accepted reality to this discussion that I believe is at least partly false.  I say this from experience as one of the campus organizers for Jerry Brown in 1992.

      In the diary entry you say that Clinton had the nomination sewn up early.  That is actually not true.  Although Super Tuesday was disappointing, Brown still had an outside shot at the nomination though this shot slowly dwindled in the month and a half that follows.  The reason the campaign preserved hope till the end was that California was one of the last states.

      If Brown had managed to win a couple of the last few contests just before California, he might have had enough momentum to win the big one (he still pulled 40% of California).

      That said, I do think that Trippi is making a few of the same mistakes he made with Brown.  1) Not tuning his young volunteers to the expectations of middle aged people for the sake of credibility and 2) too much focus on a 'movement' which makes the canvassers appear a bit unmoored.

      Finally, I don't think Dean is going to do anything to damage the chances of the Democrats this year.  To the extent possible, the four front runners are coalescing now as a team.  We are going to win!

      by wetzel on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 10:59:47 AM PDT

      •  Re: I was there

        "In the diary entry you say that Clinton had the nomination sewn up early.  That is actually not true.  Although Super Tuesday was disappointing, Brown still had an outside shot at the nomination though this shot slowly dwindled in the month and a half that follows.  The reason the campaign preserved hope till the end was that California was one of the last states."

        Bingo.  That's my fear.

        Kerry (or Edwards) sews up the nomination in the next couple of weeks, but Dean is still polling 25% in every state.  Going by the delegate counts, Dean and Trippi can say they still technically have "an outside shot" at the nomination, even though it's not true.  And they campaign by relentlessly attacking the nominee because, having no shot, they don't have to worry about driving up their own negatives.

        by Petey on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 06:29:22 PM PDT

•  Dean

  I've been a fan of Dean since he was chairman of the NGA.  Joe Trippi didn't invent him so I see no reason to think he will control him in the future.

  by Susan S on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:41:05 AM PDT

  •  Re: Dean

    "I've been a fan of Dean since he was chairman of the NGA.  Joe Trippi didn't invent him so I see no reason to think he will control him in the future."

    The Dean of the NGA days was a very different kind of candidate than the Dean currently running.

    by Petey on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:43:15 AM PDT

    •  Bullshit

      Howard Dean in his NGA days lived in different times. Now, he sees what BushCo is doing to the country and how the centrist negotiation/appeasement strategy that has been front and center in Washington has failed miserably.

      He calls people on it. I'm tremendously glad he has.

      And if you can seriously somehow equate calling somebody Bush-lite for participating in that strategy with the sorts of nasty smears that have been circulating about Dean, you are a moron.

      Granted, Dean has by and large owned everything he's done, so you can tag him with it. But websites that distort the other candidates' records? Push polls? Caucus handbooks with ready-to-use smears? Show me anything like that in Dean's campaign.

      John Kerry has proven nothing to me except that he's willing to do anything to be president. That doesn't endear him to me.

      Dean hasn't gone personal on Kerry, or any of the other candidates. The closest to that he's come is to call Wes Clark a Republican.

      Dean has stated repeatedly that he's in this to the convention and that he will support the eventual nominee. Your assumption that he will stick around just to hammer somebody else is pathetic.

      by Bill Rehm on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 11:42:56 AM PDT

•  I disagree

  What I saw in Dean then was a pragmatist.  He seemed to say what needed to be said, and not what was popular.

  by Susan S on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:47:06 AM PDT

  •  Re: I disagree

    "What I saw in Dean then was a pragmatist.  He seemed to say what needed to be said, and not what was popular."

    you are correct that the blunt talk is Dean's.

    but the constant attacks on the Democratic Party are Trippi's.

    by Petey on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:55:01 AM PDT

    •  The Democratic Party

      
      Whats wrong with the Democratic Party is obvious to a lot of people.  They don't need Joe Trippi (or Howard Dean) to point it out to them.  The national Democratic Party, most of it, conspires in a sham of democracy, a window dressing democracy.  There really aren't two parties; its a charade.  Politicians who have their careers financed with $2,000/plate fundraising dinners are going to put their benefactors interests first.  And they do.  

      The Iraq war made it all so much more serious.  Its one thing to know they're rigging the tax system and protecting financial crooks.  Its a whole 'nuther thing to watch them take this country to war and occupation of a large Middle Eastern country for their craven bowing to campaign donors.  Where is that going?  Listening to Lieberman say the war was about "transforming the Middle East," you gotta wonder how many countries we could wind up occupying.  
      

      by Lois on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 10:19:23 AM PDT

    •  Anger about

      but the constant attacks on the Democratic Party are Trippi's.

      the rightward direction of the Democratic party and their failure to adequately represent the very people whose votes the DLC candidates are now seeking is widespread at almost at the boil. All Dean has done is articulate it. This is a good thing for the country, a few more years of
      the sort of politics you represent and economic collapse and that anger will boil over into civil unrest.

        As I've pointed out to you before, 6 out of 10 Democrats are pissed off with the party. A DLC candidate wins this nom, Bush will win and in 4 years it will be 8 in 10. And that's what will destroy the Democratic party.

      Clearly the 'third way' has been a disaster; you cannot consistently win elections by arguing that your candidate isn't as bad as his opponent. Tell your buddies how betrayed people feel and how angry we are about the fact of our betrayal. After a couple of decades of corporate control of the Democratic party the chickens are coming home to roost.
      

      by colleen on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 11:03:41 AM PDT

    •  Same old Petey...

      Trippi didn't join the Dean campaign until Dec. 02, I believe - well after Dean had been standing up vociferously against the War, No Child Left Behind, deficit spending and a Democratic party that seemed to have given up.

      by dpk on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 11:57:24 AM PDT

•  Dean/Trippi

  Why wouldn't Dean, the pragmatist, on his own criticize the Democratic party after their disgusting non-performance over the past several years?  You don't think he could figure that out for himself?

  by Susan S on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 09:58:41 AM PDT

  •  Re: Dean/Trippi

    "Why wouldn't Dean, the pragmatist, on his own criticize the Democratic party after their disgusting non-performance over the past several years?  You don't think he could figure that out for himself?"

    It wasn't the focus of Dean's campaign when he started.  Things changed after Trippi came onboard.

    by Petey on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 10:24:41 AM PDT

    •  this is true

      It wasn't the focus of Dean's campaign when he started.

      Dean says that he actually listened to the people whose votes he was seeking and tapped into that widespread discontent. It's been  a long time since a Democratic candidate actually listened to us.
       

      by colleen on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 11:08:44 AM PDT

•  this is what you have wrong

  The Brown campaign was a call to war against the Democratic Party, rather than against the Republican incumbent.

  clinton attacked his own party as well, not just the republicans. he talked about a "third way" which was a rebuke of old style liberalism. he promised smaller government and welfare reform. these were an antithesis of what the dem party had stood for. he attacked democrats for the deficit and for being "tax and spenders".

  clinton, by distancing himself and showing a willingness to attack his own party, displayed an independence from party, something that swing voters found attractive because they tend not to trust ideologues, preferring moderates instead. bush handlers understood this as well when they packaged him as a "compassionate conservative".

  this is something dean has in common with clinton. he too, is challenging the party structure. it should have the same effect with swing voters.

  after the slaughter we suffered that was the midterms, anybody who cared about the party at all, should also have been calling for change.
  

  by niner on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 10:33:44 AM PDT

  •  While

    Clinton attacked the party from the right, Dean is attacking the party from the left. It seems that would make Dean less viable in a general election.

    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 11:58:06 AM PDT

    •  Eh?

      Which "right" and which "left" would that be, again?

      by J from VJ on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 12:04:10 PM PDT

      •  His two major

        issues-the war and taxation, he is attacking the candidates from the left.

        by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 12:06:23 PM PDT

        •  buying in

          Then you've bought into Republican spin.

          by J from VJ on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 12:12:32 PM PDT

          •  No

            I'm going from the perspective of the average american. The average american sees raising taxes as the left and being anti-war as the left. You can't blame this all on GOP spin. Running candidates like McGovern, Mondale and Dukakis reinforced this impression much more than any GOP spin.

            by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 12:16:06 PM PDT

            •  Exactly

              This is exactly what I mean. Is "raising taxes" the issue or is "fiscal responsibility" and "not indebting your grandchildren" the issue?

              Is being "anti-war" the issue or is "responsible foreign policy" and "multilateral global engagement and leadership" the issue?

              The GOP sets the terms: Taxes! Peaceniks! Abortion! Homosexual agenda!

              And too many Democrats just follow along...

              I'm reminded repeatedly why I don't align with either party...

              by J from VJ on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 12:21:16 PM PDT

            •  dean comes to the platform

              already a moderate. he's got an "A" rating from the NRA, his record shows him to be a deficit hawk in that he balanced the budget and he's even cut taxes in vermont. if the right wants to call him a flaming liberal in the general, dean can point to his record.

              when you compare him to the rest of the field. it's they who are more liberal than dean.
              the rest of the crew is promising everything under the moon AND tax cuts on top of that.

              how are you going to balance the budget, decrease the deficit, provide healthcare, fix education, fund homeland defense, rebuilding and occupying afghanistan and iraq, etc., etc. AND offer tax cuts on top of everything to boot?

              clinton offered a middle class tax cut too, but he never delivered it. he got slammed by the gingrich crowd for lying and breaking his promise. swing voters haven't forgotten that.

              dean wont promise what he can't deliver. dean is framing this issue as one of honesty. while the other candidates will pander and act like santa claus in promising the voters all the goodies they want, without showing how to pay for it, he wont.

              on the war issue, before iowa, there was a washington post poll that indicated dean was winning support from people who had supported the war. i think it's a  misperception to think that a pro-war voter will only vote for a pro-war candidate. i don't think that's true. healthcare and economy is more of a pre-occupation for voters.

              by niner on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 12:55:49 PM PDT

              •  I

                understand all this but he hasn't emphasized these issues. In debates he attacks the other candidates for giving Bush a "blank check". Now, if that doesn't sound a lot more like Dennis Kucinich than Paul Tsongas....

                by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 01:32:43 PM PDT

                •  Yes, he has

                  He has emphasized these issues. Perhaps the media hasn't emphasized these issues, though.

                  Did you watch the debate last night? Almost everything Colleen mentioned, Dean mentioned.

                  by J from VJ on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 01:49:08 PM PDT

                  •  oops

                    Sorry, meant niner, not Colleen.

                    by J from VJ on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 01:50:16 PM PDT

                  •  No

                    I didn't see last nights debate. I have seen previous ones where Dean's mainly focused on "repealing the entire Bush tax cut".

                    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 11:26:28 PM PDT

            •  forgot to mention

              dean has raised the issue of payroll tax cut and has said he's considering it. something that would help the working class. but he hasn't laid out the details yet.

              before you cry flip-flop, this was something raised months ago, on meet the press, in september(?) and before that, in an interview on cnn.

              i'd have to dig up the links.

              by niner on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 01:20:23 PM PDT

              •  I have to

                wonder why he didn't just do this in the first place? I guess the thing that I don't understand is if he is really a Paul Tsongas type D, why didn't he run that way?

                by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 01:34:41 PM PDT

•  Howard Dean Über Alles!

  What will he use these resources for once his candidate is no longer a viable competitor for the nomination?

  You have to ask?

  Take over with the help of his "STORMTROOPERS", of course:

  I am Governor Howard Dean
  My aura smiles
  And at the same time frowns
  Soon I will be president...

  Bush power will soon go away
  I will be Führer one day
  I will command all of you
  Your kids will actually succeed in school

  Vermont, Vermont Über Alles
  Über Alles Vermont, Vermont

  Budget fascists will control you
  100% sensible
  You will scream for the master race
  And always wear an angry face
  Close your eyes, can't happen here
  Big Bro' on white horse is near
  The surplus won't come back you say
  Balance budget or kids'll have to pay

  Vermont, Vermont Über Alles
  Über Alles Vermont, Vermont

  Now it is 2004
  Knock knock at your front door
  It's the J C Penny secret police
  They have come for your prada-clad niece

  Come quietly to the camp
  You'd look nice as a drawstring lamp
  Don't you worry, it's only a shower
  For your clothes here's a pretty flower...

  DIE on organic methane gas
  Cow dung is already in place
  You will croak, because he's mean
  When you mess with President Dean

  Vermont, Vermont Über Alles
  Über Alles Vermont, Vermont
  

  by Felix Deutsch on Fri Jan 23, 2004 at 12:44:31 PM PDT