More Early Handicapping
October 24th, 2003 - 3:51 pm
Now we know for certain why John Kerry “launched” his candidacy in North Carolina, instead of his native New England:
Former Vermont Governor Dr. Howard Dean has opened a large lead over his closest challenger in New Hampshire according to the newest poll by Zogby International.
Dean earned 40%, compared to Massachusetts Senator John Kerry
Oh come on, don’t spoil our fun. We can plot and predict with Hillary all we want since the Dems have established that they’re willing to swap candidates in and out of races willy-nilly with no regard to the law or voters.
Dean/Clark will never happen. It’s blatantly obvious that Clark was prematurely hurried into the race by *someone* at the DNC to try kill the Dean media blitz and salvage one of their failing “real” candidates. I seriously doubt Dean will choose one of the other dwarves to play Louise to his Thelma.
Clark is a flip-flopper w/ Clinton strings attached that a year ago was giving speeches at republican fundraisers, Dean is in full on pander-mode to the Left as the anti-Clinton. Those two would never combine, it’d make no sense.
I don’t know who Dean’s veep will be, but I know it won’t be Clark. Either way, unless Dean reverses himself on taxes he’s just setting himself up to be the next Mondale — people don’t KNOWINGLY vote in favor of candidates that want their taxes to go up.
Dean is smart and confident and tough. I shudder to think of Dubya going against him in a debate. You guys who think this is going to be some sort of Mondale-like blow out for the Republicans are dreaming.
Wasn’t it South Carolina?
Yup, just like Walter Mondale cleaned up on the Gipper.
I mean, Mondale WAS smarter, more on his feet, and told the truth, right?
And wasn’t Dukakis much more articulate than Poppy?
And Jimmeh (nuclear training and all), he just put Ronnie to shame, dinnit he?
Yeah, professional smart guy Al Gore, I am sure he couldn’t wait to wipe the floor with poor, stupid, rube Governor Bush.
That worked.
What really killed Gore was his arrogance. Now, people like to say that Bush is arrogant, but he isn’t. He is confident, but not overbearing.
Now, think again about Dean in a debate. With all the other puffed-up folks in the Democratic debates, it doesn’t show. But think of the first Gore-Bush debate. And then imagine Dean there.
I agree on Dean/Clark. I was fantasizing about that ticket way back in June, but everything seems headed that way.
Dean is looking more and more unstoppable, and Clark fills all his holes–and is developing a huge following of his own.
And Hillary–it was always just nonsense and still is.
Gore was a stiff. Debating him was like debating a tree. Dean is not Gore.
Dean is playing to the kook left as they always do in the primaries. Just like Bush played to the kook right – Bob Jones, etc. This dude is not going to be Mondale, McGovern, etc. But if it makes you happy to think that, then go ahead.
So you believe that enough people prefer higher taxes to potentially elect Dean?
I didn’t intend that remark as pro-republican, in case you’re wondering. I don’t like Bush either, but no one is running that would be an improvement. Advocating a large tax increase in the middle of a sluggish economy should – if people know their economics – make one a political pariah, regardless of party.
Some guy:
Two questions, then:
1. How can you tell the McGoverns and Mondales from the non-McGoverns and Mondales? For that matter, how do you know that if Mondale had won, he’d have been liberal, either?
2. If you’re a liberal, then, why should you support Dean? By YOUR argument, Dean is going to turn on the liberals once in office, anyway. Why not vote for Nader or another Green?
Or are you saying that Dean would simply betray the liberals LESS, in which case, you’re really suggesting liberals should just shut up and vote for the Dems, regardless of what they actually put in place.
They tried that, iirc, w/ Clinton, and weren’t real happy w/ the results.
A word regarding the poster’s comments (“Some Guy”) on Dean beating up on the President in a debate.
It has become a bit of a cliche, but the President has, historically, been underestimated – sometimes grossly – in his presentation and debating performances and in his chances of winning an election.
The arrogant Ann Richards – the then incumbent Governor of Texas and career Bush family gadfly – famously underestimated George W. and openly mocked his abilities and intelligence. The president won going away.
A distinction needs to be made between the cocksure and “brainy” intelligence of Dean versus the more hospitable common sense and approachable smarts of the President. As Reagan clearly showed, it is just as important to win the hearts of the voting public.
My prediction is that Dean’s appearances on a national stage will come off as curt, sharp and not viewer-friendly. Very much like the stereotypical view of the flinty New Englanders he springs from. His mannerisms and New England enunciation (“idears” anyone) will remind many of Teddy Kennedy and/or Dukakis, and will not, mark my words, play well in Peoria, the South, the Midwest and the Rocky Mountain West.
I’ve been saying for some time now that Kerry is toast; Dean’s taken his regional base, his ideological base, his demographic base. Can’t run without a base.