mememiner

a blog by wallace winfrey

Howard Dean has ’em running scared

By

Yesterday I was watching a political roundtable on CNN. It featured Peter Beinart of the New Republic, Donna Brazille (Al Gore’s campaign manager in 2000), National Review’s Jonah Goldberg and some guy from the conservative rag The Weekly Standard.

The question came up about Howard Dean and his fundraising prowess. Beinart and Brazille poo-poohed it, saying Dean was going to have to tilt back towards the center to avoid alienating the electorate. Goldberg and the other conservative hack started off by saying, if Howard Dean is the Democratic candidate in 2004, Bush is going to win 45 states, and that the Democrats would be smart to choose someone more moderate. What was interesting was that Goldberg then immediately conceded that Dean was actually quite the centrist, but had been absolutely wrong on the war.

Then I read this on Drudge, where Dean is supposedly going to dump Terry McAuliffe after he wins New Hampshire, and quotes a senior Dean campaign advisor as the source. Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t see anyone in the Dean campaign going to Drudge to drop juicy quotes.

Then we have this story about Karl Rove claiming to be delighted with the prospects of a Dean candidacy.

Why all the attention on Howard Dean? I think the Bush Cartel is genuinely concerned about the prospects of a Candidate Dean. The man is blunt and would mop the floor with Bush in a debate. Try as they might to paint him as the “new McGovern”, the man is a centrist and the biggest threat. By pooh-poohing him and saying yeah, he’s exactly who we want to face in the 2004 election, Rove & Co are trying to play mind games with the Dems.

It’s my opinion that Howard Dean scares the bejeebus out of the Republicans. If he’s such a weak candidate, why all the attention? Why the mind games?

3 Comments

  1. 07.10.2003 at 02:25

    I tend to concur with this line of thought. The increasing popularity of H. Dean (as a potential candidate for the 2004 elections) comes as a complete surprise to the Republican machine. The Republican reaction has been masked to avoid any public display of panic. Dean’s popularity seems to be linked directly to the amount of money he has gather thus far in his campaign.
    This does bring forth an interesting question:
    Is the amount of campaign money that one candidate can raise the only factor in conceiving one’s popularity by the end-voter? If so, then the entire process is corrupt and doomed to failure from the start. We all know where the money really comes from… interest groups, unions and corporations, and not the end-voters themselves.

  2. 07.18.2003 at 12:12

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10056-2003Jul18.html?nav=hptop_tb
    This article is about the previous comment to the main article.

  3. 08.30.2003 at 23:06

    Dean looked really bad on Meet the Press some weeks ago. Was clueless about the number of active military personnel the US has.
    The electorate has a short memory, but Rove’s PR machine will be certain to remind us of that poor performance. I hope the voters will, by November 2004, be so sick of Rove and Bush’s lies, that they won’t care about an 18-month-old interview. But you never know.