Now it may seem a little weird at first. After all, how could these two be any further apart? In terms of politics, gender, intellect, etc. they are not close at all. This, however, is missing an interesting similarity between the two. To be fair (to H. Dean), this similarity in its potential implication and effective implementation is quite a bit different from each other (especially in terms of benefits and positives to the respective parties).
In the 2004 campaign, the Democratic primary to be exact, the contest boiled down to four candidates (in order of voters): John Kerry, John Edwards, Howard Dean, and Wesley Clark. This seemingly became much more important than the actual election in the long run because this election brought H. Dean upon the national stage, showed that Democrats must be stronger, and it showed that the Democrats rally around ideals and not leaders (the opposite of the Republican Party). Additionally, while the Republicans held the White House for four more years, that gave the Democrats the jolt they needed to rise again and the Republicans the shocks they did not want to have (the economy exploding for instance). After that election J. Kerry would sink back into the depths of the Senate, J. Edwards would implode, W. Clark would languish in mu (effective nothingness), and H. Dean would, depending on who you ask, triumphantly lead the D.N.C. through the successful elections that were to come or hijack the D.N.C. to pursue an inept strategy that squandered resources and achieved relatively nothing. Either way, he has seemingly become the figurehead of the “progressive movement” that has strived to do two things; 1.) Elect more and better Democrats and 2.) “Keep ‘em honest”. The results: “The progressives forced our hand”, more Democrats, and better Democrats.
Compare that to the meteor that is Sarah Palin. After blasting onto the scene (by blasting the Democrats) she would go on to be the, the, key to the McCain campaign winning. This rabble-rousing, Alaskan angel, energized the base who would go on to radic-whoops “energize” the remaining members of the Republican Party. Now the Palinites (“no compromises!”) are purging the Republican Party of any Democrat-lites and ensuring purity (because Conservatives always win).
I suppose that it really is just a sign of the times. The Democrats after 2004 rallied behind strengthening their ideology by building onto it. They rose around the pillars of Healthcare and the end to the National Security state. They arose from the ashes as Democrats. Meanwhile, the Republicans after 2008 were leaderless. They could not accumulate around any specific person as McCain himself fell into the dark pit of the Senate. They are rising from the ashes not necessarily as Republicans (a coalition of Corporate powers, religious fanatics, “patriots”, among others) but as Conservatives, an ideology largely detached from the vast majority of the electorate.
I guess ultimately that the similarity between the two, H. Dean and S. Palin, is only outmatched by their differences.