All ABB bets are off the DLC and Kerry can freak each other for all I care. Bush will win anyways with Kerry as a nominee. THEY ARE ALREADY TAKING THE WAR IN IRAQ OFF THE TABLE
Another Vote for Hope Over Anger
For the second week in a row, rank-and-file Democrats have spoken loud and clear: The Democratic Party is moderate, middle-class, and motivated by hope, not anger. Sen. John Kerry firmly established himself as the big comeback story of the nominating process. He won a second straight victory by following the path urged on Democrats by the original Comeback Kid, President Bill Clinton: showing the country not just what Democrats are against, but what they are for. Kerry's solid middle-class message and mastery of the issues once again lifted him to a big margin over Gov. Howard Dean in a state Dean was supposed to "own" and badly needed to win.
For the past year, we have said time and again that Democrats need to offer answers, not just anger. As in Iowa, voters in New Hampshire proved that they're not interested in simply making a statement; they want a candidate who can beat George W. Bush and who offers answers to their most pressing problems. Candidates like Kerry who supported middle-class tax cuts picked up 70 percent of the vote in New Hampshire, crushing candidates like Dean who reflexively opposed them. As in Iowa, the
Blair Democrats who supported the use of force in Iraq solidly defeated Democratic candidates who tried to stoke anger against it.
Kerry's decisive margin over Dean shows the enormous appeal of a comprehensive, rational critique of George W. Bush combined with a comprehensive, positive agenda for what Democrats would do after replacing him, based on clear progressive principles.
As in Iowa, turnout was very high, which is good news for Democrats generally. Indeed, about half of the primary voters were self-identified independents, attracted by a campaign that was generally positive in its final phase.
As in Iowa, an electorate that was by national standards unusually opposed to the decision to go to war in Iraq actually focused on a lot of other issues in choosing a candidate. According to the final exit polls published by a major media consortium, only 19 percent of primary voters said the war was their top issue, as opposed to health care (28 percent), Economy/Jobs (22 percent), and other issues (25 percent). About half of primary voters declined to describe themselves as "angry" toward the Bush administration.
As in Iowa, Kerry put together a winning coalition that transcended ideology, party affiliation, age, income, education level, attitudes towards the war, and nearly every other variable. He did significantly better than his overall state average among moderates (winning 43 percent), and nearly as well among independents (37 percent) as among Democrats (41 percent). Though his only major union endorsement was from the intrepid firefighters, Kerry did equally well among union and non-union households.
And as in Iowa, it appears the key to Kerry's success was his willingness, day after day and night after night, to stand before some of the country's most discriminating voters and answer their questions on a host of international and domestic issues.
Finally, as in Iowa, Gov. Howard Dean did not wear well on the electorate in one of his best states. The Dean campaign had New Hampshire organized to the hilt, and benefited from a big money advantage over Kerry and his other opponents. According to the American Research Group tracking polls, one month before the primary, Dean led Kerry by a 45-20 margin in New Hampshire. Other polls showed an even bigger margin. As in Iowa, Dean lost nearly half his support, and as in Iowa, the slide cannot be attributed primarily to media coverage of his post-Iowa "rant." His support was dropping, and his "unfavorable" ratings were rising, all over the country, and specifically in New Hampshire, well before that.
Put simply, Gov. Dean's support seems to have shrunk to the same hard core of upscale, antiwar, white liberals who were first attracted to him when his 2003 surge began many months ago. The rest of the Democratic electorate looks upon him dimly: On primary day in New Hampshire, he had the worst favorability ratio -- 56 percent favorable, 40 percent unfavorable -- of the five major candidates.
All the hype and buzz about the "transformational" nature of the Dean candidacy has been buried by actual voting results. He failed to attract new voters and turned off moderates and McCainiac independents.
The nominating contest now moves into a host of states that are far more diverse than Iowa and New Hampshire both demographically and ideologically. These states will provide the first real opportunity for African-Americans and Hispanics to participate. And their voters are, on average, less liberal, less dominated by strong antiwar sentiments, and less inclined to believe that Bush's poor record is matched by an evil character. In a party that's looking for hope and answers, it's not clear Dean has anywhere to go unless he abandons his past tactics completely. Sen. John Edwards emerged from New Hampshire, as from Iowa, with a finely honed message and positive campaign that even voters for other candidates like. Now he must win South Carolina on Feb. 3. Likewise, Gen. Wes Clark and Sen. Joe Lieberman both have one more chance, in more favorable terrain, to show that Kerry is not the only candidate capable of mounting a stunning comeback.
As we have said all along, a good contest about ideas is good for Democrats. This remains an open race, and it's too early to predict the nominee. But one winner is already clear: The Democratic Party heads for November far, far stronger by voting for hope over anger.
http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=252351&kaid=131&subid=192&FREM=Y&sid=19513
&mid=2682
