Occam’s Razor

No More Mr. Nice Democrat

The problem with us Democrats in general is that we play by gentlemen’s rules.

What dopes! What morons! No wonder we seem to be a declining party. Large numbers of Republicans may not believe in evolution, but they certainly believe in natural selection in the present. They are predators, devoid of civility and any sense of fairness. Did it bother Sen. Tom DeLay one bit to try to reapportion congressional seats in Texas in 2003, even though it had never been done before? Not at all. While those “play by the rules” weenie Democrats whined, he pressed Gov. Rick Perry of Texas to reapportion congressional seats again. Traditionally states do it every ten years based on the latest census results. Democratic members of the Texas legislature tried delaying tactics by taking up temporary residences in hotels in New Mexico. In response DeLay called the Department of Homeland Security to have their flights tracked. Eventually of course the Democrats had to go home. Once home the state legislature reached a quorum, the bill was rammed through both houses and Perry gleefully and without one moral qualm signed the bill into law.

Did Attila the Hun ask permission before invading and pillaging all those cities and countries? Of course not. Those with the power and the means make the rules. Charge ahead. When you control all three branches of government the likelihood of paying a price is low anyhow. The good news is that Republicans don’t usually kill or maim people in the process these days. They just roll over the rest of us like a steamroller. Perhaps that’s why they admire Israel so much. The Israeli solution to the settlements issue is to keep creating facts on the ground. The rule of law is for weenies. What matters is whether you can get away with it. If you can then it must be okay, is how Republicans apparently see things.

Liberals are morally squishy? Hardly. Republicans are far more morally squishy than Democrats could ever hope to be. It seems Republicans were born with dichotomy in their brains. Liberals who support a woman’s right to choose do so knowing if a woman chooses abortion that the embryo or fetus is killed in the process. Most of us recognize the Hobbesian choice. We are not entirely comfortable with our position. On the other hand it’s not a problem at all for a Republican to be both antiabortion and pro death penalty. State sponsored murder is perfectly okay. And everyone has complete freedom except of course when they find it personally disagreeable. So for those women who operate under the illusion that they control their own bodies, Republicans decide they must choose for them. However that certainly doesn’t mean they will also pay the costs of rearing these unwanted children. I mean, that would be socialism or something.

And on most other issues Republican say one thing and do completely the opposite. They say they want smaller government, but keep expanding the size of government. They say they are against payola but hand it out to their friends. Remember the Contract with America? How many of these congressmen and women elected in 1994 are still in the Congress, despite vows going in on the importance of term limits? Line item veto? Gone. It became politically expedient to do away with it when Clinton wielded it. Fiscal responsibility? Don’t make me laugh. This year alone deficits are expected to be over $400 billion dollars. Personal responsibility? Okay for others, but not for Congress and, oh, red states apparently get a lot more federal dollars than blue states. Laws are still routinely passed that exempt Congress from their provisions. They can’t even get into a war without double checking their intelligence. Their ideas of personal responsibility are charge up our credit cards to the max and pass the debt on to our grandchildren.

If there was excitement a couple years back with Howard Dean’s run for president it was because, finally, there was a Democrat willing to retire fire. Dean is no namby pamby wishy washy liberal. In fact, he’s not a liberal at all. While governor of Vermont he was far more fiscally conservative than any Republican you can point to in Congress.

Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery. The reason Democrats rallied around Dean was not because our party is suffering. We rallied around him because we know he won’t let Democrats get pushed around anymore. If Republicans insist on playing on their rules the Democrats will finally learn that game. And the signs are out there that we are beginning to wake out of our dogmatic slumbers. Where we have political power, and there are plenty of blue states, it is time to use it. Republicans apparently are now trying to redistrict Republican Georgia out of turn. We learn today that Democrats like House Minority Leader Steny Hoyer are realizing two can play this game:

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) has spoken with several Democratic governors in recent weeks about the possibility of revisiting their states’ Congressional lines in response to the ongoing Republican-led redistricting in Georgia, according to informed party sources.

Faced with the prospect of Republicans redrawing Congressional lines in a third state since the initial 2001 round of redistricting ended, a faction of national Democrats is urging an aggressive strategy aimed at striking back at Republican House Members in states like New Mexico and Illinois.

“We have to stop playing defense and go on the offensive,” said Howard Wolfson, who served as executive director at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee during the 2002 cycle and is now a consultant with the Glover Park Group.

“The only way to stop them from doing this is to make them pay a price for it somewhere else,” said a longtime House strategist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Democrats believe their best opportunities lie in Illinois, New Mexico and Louisiana, where Democrats have seized control of all the levers of state government in those states since the 2001 reapportionment and redistricting.

Democratic Govs. Rod Blagojevich (Ill.) and Bill Richardson (N.M.) as well as high-ranking Louisiana elected officials have been contacted by members of House leadership led by Hoyer since the Georgia legislature began their re-redistricting.

“Some of us who believe Georgia is going to happen think that it will help us strategically, to motivate some governors that weren’t interested in doing it to help us,” said one source who works closely with House Democrats.

At least a few D.C.-based Republicans privately acknowledge they are concerned about the possibility of Democratic retribution over the maneuvers in Georgia, but are not in a position to change the situation.

Politics is no longer a fraternal game of tennis, if it ever was. The Republicans have shown it is a game of rugby, and the referees are very absent minded. Republicans have gained clout and influence by bending and breaking rules left and right.

We were fooled once. Hopefully we are smart enough now to realize we have to dish it out like we are getting it. We can see it emerge clearly from the blogosphere. With the election of Howard Dean as the DNC chair we will also see it on the national level.

I wish it had not come to this. While Democrats played nice guy and tried to do the statesmanlike thing, we were figuratively slapped, kicked around and abused by the opposition. We were given no credit whatsoever. But the times, they are a changing. The Republicans have become the overbearing abusive husband. The Democrats have played the role of weak and submissive wife. The Republicans are about to find out how it feels to have what they have served to us daily for years sent right back at them.

I just hope when this is all over we can revert to our better and more civilized ways. But now is not the time.

February 22nd, 2005 at 04:49pm Posted by Mark | Politics 2005 | no comments

Howard Dean for DNC Chair

It looks like what passes for our Democratic leadership is at long last waking up and realizing that the Democratic prospects are pretty bleak and getting bleaker. Perhaps it is for this reason that erstwhile presidential candidate Howard Dean looks likely to win post of chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

This is an exceptional opportunity for the Democrats. During the 2004 campaign Howard Dean apparently reported to intimates that he really didn’t want to be president. What he wanted to do was to shake up the Democratic Party. He wanted to get it to refocus so it could win elections again. In becoming the Chairman of the DNC Howard will be where he will do the most good for the Democratic Party and the country.

Us Deaniacs know that Howard Dean is one unique and tough dude. I suspect Howard Dean at the DNC makes the Republicans smile. If they were more politically astute they would not smile. Instead they should be very worried. Because Howard Dean is really the only person right now who can revive the Democratic Party. But he’s not just the right person; he’s the perfect person. So beware Republicans. Howard Dean is no ordinary man. He will give a shot of adrenaline directly into the main arteries of the Democratic Party.

He starts with a passionate and committed base of people who were estranged from their own party. These people drive hundreds of miles to come and see him give speeches in the back rooms of hotels to a handful of members of the DNC. He has already moved many of them from the Dean for American website into his reconfigured Democracy for America web site. And many states have formed their own offshoots of his organization. Here in Virginia for example we have Democracy for Virginia. And although there are only a few Dean meetups where there used to be dozens, Democracy for America meetups are still available locally. In my case they are a bit out of easy commuting range: I would have to travel about 30 miles to Occoquan, Virginia. But I expect there will be more Democracy for America meetups coming soon.

The droves of youth who came out to vote for Kerry in 2004 weren’t there because they were passionate for John Kerry. They were there because they believe in Howard Dean. Although he lost the primaries he told them they had to work to elect John Kerry. Love him or hate him his network was new and it was powerful. At the time (mid 2003) I thought I was the only person I knew who liked Howard Dean. Then I found two young friends of my wife who had been to his rallies when I was still checking him out on the Internet.

And it was Dean who was Internet savvy. He showed he could bring new people together online, get significant wads of money and huge amounts of volunteer time from them. One of the more astounding statistics from the 2004 campaign was that Democrats matched Republicans dollar for dollar in campaign spending. Typically Republicans outspend Democrats two or three to one. That new money didn’t come from the old party faithful. It was largely new money from passionate people who were fed up to here and, like Howard Beale, weren’t going to take it anymore. That we Democrats lost was a shame, but in many ways we created a new base. All it needs now is the right person to leverage that base. And Dean is the obvious person to do it.

So Republicans should be scared. Because Dean is focused, he is passionate, he is savvy, and he is very, very shrewd. It’s hard for a Democrat even to get on TV these days but Howard will be in everyone’s faces. He will be so outspoken, so passionate and so full of common sense that the cameras will just naturally focus on him. The story will be the Dean personality but through the personality will come the true ideas that need to get heard and permeate the brains of more ordinary Americans.

And you can bet he will have his eye not just on the presidential race but also on House and Senate races. He’ll leverage the power of his network to bring in the serious money to create competitive Democratic candidates. You’ll see him Sunday after Sunday on the TV talk shows putting out the message. John Kerry thinks he can leverage his mailing list for a run in 2008. Here’s the thing: most of that mailing list consists of Dean voters like me. And we think Kerry is as exciting as milquetoast. It’s not until Howard backs a candidate that it will truly mean anything. An endorsement from Dean will be money in the bank for these candidates.

Of course this means Dean won’t be a presidential candidate in 2008. I’m okay with that. And so is Howard. The presidency is really not his thing. Shaking up the country and changing minds, hearts and votes is what he was meant to do. I don’t think my faith in Dean is misplaced. Democrats lost the presidential race 48% to 51%. What’s amazing is how close we came with a less than stellar candidate who was voted the most liberal senator in the United States Senate. Dean, despite his perception, is a strong centrist who is as politically savvy as Bill Clinton. He will bring together disparate parts of the Democratic Party and unite them. He stands a decent chance of doing what no Democrat has done before: uniting us under one common banner.

Go Howard! Go!

February 1st, 2005 at 09:22pm Posted by Mark | Politics 2005 | no comments

Why Bush Will Lose in 2004 - An Update

It was about a year ago (July 4, 2003) that I wrote what at the time seemed to be a rather fantastic prediction: that Bush would lose this year’s election. Judging from the number of hits and comments it has received this entry turned out to be one of my most popular entries. A year ago even the most rabid Bush haters were stewing in silence. None except perhaps Howard Dean really thought Bush could realistically be defeated. His reelection seemed like a slam-dunk.

I think most of us realize now that Bush’s chances of staying in office are at best 50/50. As I said a year ago (and still believe) there are always last minute factors that could tip the election to Bush. I still think it is possible that some horrible September 11th type event, timed perhaps in mid October, could produce an emotional response that would reelect Bush, though not validate his governing style. We will all be hoping and praying that this does not happen. One of the few positive things I have to say about Bush was that I thought his approach to dealing with terrorism within the United States has been decent. It is by no means ideal. Our borders are still pretty porous. There are significant security gaps in our ports and in our air cargo system. But border security is much better than it was. I’d rate this aspect of the war on terrorism as a B, while I’d give others like securing nuclear stockpiles a D or an F.

The economy perked up a bit more than I expected. Bush hasn’t erased the three million jobs lost during his watch but he has perhaps a 50/50 chance of at least ending his term with no net loss of jobs. It’s unlikely that this is the sort of statistic he can use to ensure his own reelection. As others have pointed out the unemployment rate hasn’t changed much these last few months, in spite of the new jobs. This is because those who gave up hope of finding a job are more hopeful now and have put themselves back in the market. But there is also the disturbing problem that the new jobs tend to pay on average less than the old jobs. And though wages are rising, these don’t feel like good times yet to those who are coming off unemployment. And at least so far this year inflation is rising faster than wages. That of course means a net loss in income for the average worker. Gas prices that are likely to hang around or over two dollars a gallon won’t help Bush either.

Those on the top enjoying Bush’s large tax cuts are living large and have seen real income growth. Those on the bottom end of the income scale pay little or no income taxes and consequently haven’t seen much improvement in their standard of living. Most of them are paying markedly higher housing costs that have actually put them further behind.

Howard Dean has been vindicated on tax shifting. When taxes are cut in one place they tend to rise elsewhere. Most of us see it on the state and local level. I haven’t done a personal study of my own income. But I am willing to bet that my federal tax cut has been offset by other tax increases. Our house just keeps rising in value. Just this year alone I can expect to pay several hundred more dollars in property taxes. Over the course of Bush’s term in office I am likely to see my property taxes go up by about $1000 a year. And then there are those other taxes. For example our Virginian Republican legislature decided to raise taxes effective July 1st, in spite of pledging never to do such a thing. Miscellaneous taxes continue to rise too. My telephone bill is about 30 percent taxes. So for the vast majority of us tax cuts on the federal level have at best kept us even in our overall level of taxation.

Most of the trends I noticed a year ago are still true today. Iraq became the quagmire I predicted. Actually it is worse than I imagined a year ago. Not only is our war in Iraq a failure but also our war on terrorism in general is a failure. Our only success was overturning Afghanistan’s Taliban regime, which supported al Qaeda. But despite this Osama bin Laden remains at large. Al Qaeda has launched many attacks on our allies and on us. Liberating Iraq doesn’t really count because it was never a threat to our national security and was never allied with al Qaeda. Our erstwhile “ally” Saudi Arabia is in a virtual state of siege.

Meanwhile the Taliban in Afghanistan are resurging. We don’t really have enough troops in Afghanistan to do more than ensure the Taliban can’t take over the country again. Planned elections in Afghanistan look dicey at best. Female poll workers are being killed. The country, unfortunately, is not yet at a mature enough place where true democracy for all can flourish. Iraq’s culture is more contemporary, but it must fight its own civil war with puritanical Islam before it can take root, if it ever does. Iraqis are more used to strongmen as leaders and are likely to revert to that model. If democracy happens in Iraq it is likely to be a long and violent process. If you can remember what a bloody place Beirut was in the 1970s and 1980s you have a pretty good idea of what Iraq will be going through for many years. And sadly it won’t be alone. Predominantly Islamic Countries all over the Middle East need to complete a soul-searching process. It will likely be violent and last for decades. Much the way the Soviet Union finally got the clue that communism was unworkable, eventually these countries will figure out that theocracy won’t work. Eventually and inevitably these countries will discover what we learned long ago: that a certain amount of secularism is required to enjoy the benefits of a modern state.

But I digress. If you want to know why Bush is likely to lose look not just at his poll numbers. Look also at how Americans are feeling overall about the economy and the war on terrorism. The only area where Bush gets positive marks now is his overall handling on the war on terrorism, and there he holds only a slim majority. When asked about particular aspects, like the War in Iraq, he no longer gets majority approval. And now it is clear that this will not change substantially before the election.

Red states will still vote bright red and blue states will vote bright blue. But Republicans will not vote passionately for George W. Bush. Many of them will stay home out of apathy and disgust, much as Democrats did for Carter in 1980. But apathy won’t be the case with the Democrats in this election. A lot of people, and not just Democrats, really really don’t like George W. Bush. Karmic elements are at work. The sort of rabid hatred Republicans heaped on Bill Clinton for marital indiscretions is about to be returned on George W. Bush doubly by Democrats. Democrats finally have a Republican they just can’t stand. Basically they just hate the guy. And hatred while not the most noble of our emotions can be very strong.

Although it’s too early to say for sure we can perhaps see the future in the weekend’s new box office hit, Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11. Even in bright red states like Texas shows are selling out days in advance. Many of the people I know who voted for Bush in 2000 have changed their mind and won’t vote for him again. Many are doing so as a protest. They just feel he has totally screwed up.

And we feel that America has changed for the worse. This is not the country we remember. We expect our president to act from deliberation and consideration, not from prejudice and instinct. We expect our president to keep an open mind. We expect dialog from our president, not one sidedness. We expect presidents to find synergy with our international partners, not piss them off. We expect most of all: moderation. Lack of moderation is really the key to Bush’s downfall. Moderates win reelection. Radicals don’t. And the swing voters are, as always, the moderates. Bush promoted himself as a moderate but he was a chameleon. Now they know better. Bush will paint Kerry as a left-winger but Kerry will sensibly steer toward the moderate middle. Bush can no longer claim that territory. Through his actions he has shown that he is not a moderate.

Bush will be hit by a tsunami of disgust from large numbers of very angry voters. They will be telling their friends not to vote for Bush, and their friends will be telling their friends. The moderates will be seeking anyone who will actually steer toward the middle in this election. Kerry is the only choice for them. So I put the odds right now at 85/15 for a Kerry victory. And I predict when the popular vote is counted it will be Kerry 53%, Bush 45%, and Nader (plus miscellaneous candidates) at 2%. This is a minimum. I suspect Kerry’s number will actually trend higher.

Come back November 3rd and see how I did.

June 28th, 2004 at 09:17pm Posted by Mark | Politics 2004 | no comments

No Time for Deaniacs to Sulk … Time to Get Busy

Many of us who supported Howard Dean should be having a mixture of feelings right now ranging from hurt, anger, rage and general sulkiness. But if we withdraw from political life at this time we are making a deep mistake. The country, and particularly the Democratic Party needs our talents and energy now more than ever.

Dean always said the campaign was not about him but about us. By “us” he means the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. If we fail to assert ourselves now within the party then we have failed in our true mission. Getting Dean elected was a great goal but the odds were always very long. There were lots of candidates out there and only one can be the nominee. We wanted a revolution but we got an evolution. This should come as no surprise. Now we must complete the mission: we must bring progressives back into prominence in the Democratic Party. We must make the Democratic Party the Democratic Party of old again.

We should not descend into an internecine war. We should not try to topple the Clinton Democrats, or those who follow the Democratic Leadership Council. In truth the DLC has not done well either. Its poster child Joe Liebermann never polled out of the single digits. The DLC wing of the Democratic Party is already a fading memory. We Deaniacs can be proud that we have rushed in and occupied their space.

To start with we need to continue occupying this space. Howard Dean told us it is important to keep voting for him even though he is no longer campaigning. This is because this gives us delegates at the national convention, and that gives us a say in the party platform. It is there that we can make our voices heard. It is in Boston that we can assert that our party should be passionately committed to equal rights for all (and particularly for gays, lesbians, bisexuals and trangenders). There we will also stand up and fight for platforms that call for progressive energy policies that emphasize renewable energy sources and conservation. We can insist that our nation do something real to reduce global warming and respect the world ecosystem. We can also press our party to be fiscally responsible and to work for true universal health insurance for all Americans. We should insist on a fair tax code that does not penalize either the poor or the working poor and requires the rich to provide more of their income in taxes again. In doing we also show that Democrats are truly a party of the people again.

It is also crucial that our country become mainstream again. Our country must be eager to work with the United Nations and other countries to create pragmatic broadly supported international solutions to world problems. We must lead the party and our country toward a longer vision that is not so parochial and recognizes the complexity of the world we live in.

In the short term it is important to work to elect not only a Democratic president but to elect a Democratic congress. We should enthusiastically endorse and fund John Kerry’s campaign, if he turns out to be our nominee. We should work among ourselves, but also with progressive networks like MoveOn.org to turn the election into a rout of Republicans in general. We should be inclusive and let bygones be bygones. We should work with the Kerry, Edwards, Kucinich and even the Sharpton camps to push common goals and values. We need to assert our progressive values, but we need to be nice and persuasive about it.

We need new goals. Our short-term goal must be to remove Bush from office and to elect a Democratic congress. We have the ability to seriously tackle both of these with our existing network. Our long-term goal should be to keep America moving in a progressive and mainstream direction.

Dean for America needs to evolve. It needs to become the Democratic Progressive Network. We need to promote the DPN as an alternative to the Democratic Leadership Council. Howard could be our spokesman, but he doesn’t have to be. There is plenty of new talent among us that is there and could be easily harnessed.

As for Howard Dean, John Kerry would be wise to work to have him on his team. Howard Dean has unique talent and energy that no other candidate has. He would be ideal as the new head of the Democratic National Committee. He should be stumping the country not necessarily for Kerry, but to stir up activists to vote for Democrats in state, congressional and senatorial campaigns. If Kerry were elected, as I fully expect, Dean would make an excellent cabinet secretary. He would be a natural as the head of Health and Human Services, but let’s not rule him out for other key posts. I could see him as Secretary of Defense or Secretary of State. From my perspective Howard Dean’s future continues to look very bright. His talent should not be allowed to atrophy.

February 21st, 2004 at 09:59am Posted by Mark | Politics 2004 | one comment

The Meaning of Dr. Dean

It’s not been a happy time for us Howard Dean enthusiasts. I don’t often get excited about a politician running for office. I wasn’t excited about Bill Clinton’s candidacy. Al Gore’s left me wholly uninspired. But I was genuinely excited about Howard Dean’s candidacy. So it just makes me ache to see him go down in flames.

We were close, so close. In retrospect the mistakes are pretty easy to see. Dean placed too much emphasis on the Iraq war when polls showed most Americans did not consider it a burning issue. It had its place in 2003. It got him noticed and distinguished him as a candidate. But it worked against Dean in 2004 when the electorate started paying attention. It turned out they were more concerned about pocket book issues than the war.

We Deaniacs networked well. But we didn’t network as well with our neighbors as we should have. We needed to be knocking on more doors and calling more people on the telephone. Instead a lot of us spent our time posting our latest thoughts of the day on Dean’s blog.

And the campaign made some huge mistakes. It squandered $40M trying to lock in Iowa and New Hampshire. It succeeded in winning neither. I was shocked when I learned how much money the campaign spent. For a fiscal conservative it was a reckless strategy. Had Dean spent less he could now be carrying his message to those states he is now writing off due to lack of funds. Instead the coffers of New Hampshire radio and TV stations are bulging.

And Dean stumbled frequently with embarrassing gaffes. His primal yowl confirmed the doubts of all the Dean skeptics. Even though the incident was overplayed it showed a lack of political judgment. Dean always walked this fine line. He was always completely genuine. But there are times when a politician just has to fake it. He was too genuine for his own good.

Alas, the candidates I really like are almost always unelectable in the end. Perhaps that is because I am more of an idealist than a pragmatist. So I shouldn’t be that surprised by this turn of events. It is par for my course. But still it hurts. I thought, or perhaps wished Dr. Dean would be the exception, just this once.

And we organized, went to his meetups and sent him tons of money. I never gave a dime to a politician before, but over the last six months or so I’ve sent the campaign $450.

I found I wasn’t a lone voice in the wilderness. At his meetups I met plenty of people like me who not just wanted to take our country back into the mainstream but were eager to invest their time, their money and their energy to do so.

But apparently it wasn’t a critical mass of Democrats. I’m not too surprised because in many ways Dean is a revolutionary candidate, not an evolutionary candidate. Dean is the Democratic Party’s John McCain. Voters though appear to like their candidates more on the bland side. Democrats want decaf, not espresso.

The voters may be wiser than I am. John Kerry is a nice man and I tend to agree with most of his politics. As President he will be 1000% better than George W. Bush on his best day. Exit polls have made clear the voters also are determined to nominate the most electable candidate. Thrice wounded in Vietnam, Kerry has proved he is no chickenhawk. The most die hard military guy must respect Kerry’s service to his country.

But still I ache for Howard Dean. I guess it’s possible he could resurrect his candidacy but I think it’s over. This horse just ain’t gonna win.

But while Howard likely won’t be the nominee this time around, what Howard Dean and his campaign accomplished is still amazing. Howard breathed real life into the demoralized Democratic Party. He got people who were marginalized and disenfranchised to care about politics again. He got us to believe we could change the country. And we will change the country. We will just take smaller steps.

Thanks to Howard Dean the real issues have been addressed. No longer do we have candidates who support our debacle in Iraq. No longer do we have candidates in favor of more reckless tax cuts. No longer do we get half hearted position papers from candidates on the need for national health insurance.

Howard is the best citizen this country has seen in the last ten years. He showed us the meaning of courage and leadership. He showed that by taking unpopular positions when you know they are right you can be heard. It just takes a lot of nerve, persistence and chutzpah.

And he has demonstrated a new decentralized way to organize and to fight for what really matters. This candidacy may end but I don’t believe us in the Dean community will fade away. We may sulk for a while, but we will be back. First we will ensure whoever our party’s nominee is will beat George W. Bush. Then we will move this country back into the international mainstream.

We will take this country back. It’s a shame though that our far thinking visionary won’t be occupying the Oval Office. He would have been a great president.

And maybe someday he will be back, purged of his defects but still blazing with the primal energy and determination. I have not given up on Howard Dean. I hope this experience purifies and refines him. And perhaps the next time he will win.

February 5th, 2004 at 01:51pm Posted by Mark | Politics 2004 | one comment

Some Thoughts on the Upcoming Presidential Primaries and the Election

The presidential primary season is about to begin in earnest on Monday. That is the day when Democrats in Iowa will caucus. Eight days later New Hampshire voters will go to the polls to select their favorite candidate. Whoever wins these primaries will doubtless hope to ride these early victories all the way to the nomination. However, if history is any guide many of those now campaigning like mad in both states might have been better off skipping these states altogether. That’s because neither Iowa nor New Hampshire has a great track record picking the candidate who ultimately will win the nomination. So Wesley Clark may be smart to avoid Iowa. Let the others throw money at each other while he conserves his cash, organizes the key southern states, then hits them big on February 3rd and on Super Tuesday. It’s a smart strategy.

I found online results of both the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary going back to 1972. I excluded those years when an incumbent was running, and looked only at the Democratic primaries in these states. Both states are batting .500 in picking the eventually nominee. In baseball terms this is a great score, but not here. The best that can be said for winning in these early primaries is that the name recognition may improve a candidate’s odds. But that’s about all that can be said for it. It costs a hell of a lot of time and money to even compete in these states. Part of this is because there are a plethora of candidates for the party out of office in these early caucuses and primaries. If Iowa and New Hampshire have a job, it’s to winnow the candidates’ list down.

The primaries on Feb 3rd should be far more telling. Why? Because the states participating are more moderate states than either New Hampshire or Iowa. On that date Democrats in Arizona, Delaware, Missouri, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma and South Carolina will vote. If I had to pick a bell weather state among these, I’d pick Arizona. Traditionally a fairly conservative state, it has been trending Democratic more and more these days. This is due to a very fast growing population, many of whom migrated from northern states. If I had to bet money (and of course I am rooting for Howard Dean) I’d say the Democrat that wins Arizona will win the nomination.

I proclaim no special prognostication skills when it comes to the primaries and the general election. The tightness of the race in Iowa, according to polls, indicates it is up for grabs. My sense is that Howard Dean will win Iowa. I suspect he will win it by about 5%. I believe it because he has a fanatical youth following. They will turn out for him and work for him in droves. My sense from attending four Dean Meetups is that this will be the real big surprise of the 2004 election. Both parties will wake up and discover that a critical mass of younger adults (those under 30) is now politically engaged. It’s about time Generations X and Y woke up from their lethargy. Maybe they were too young to remember Reagan, and took the wonderful and prosperous 90s for granted. Perhaps now they have woken up to what Republicanism has done to our country. It appears that they don’t find it very agreeable.

In the longer term the odds will still favor Dean simply because he has a network in place and he has the money (and can get a lot more when needed). Dean’s biggest problem will be his mouth. The campaign in Iowa suggests that going negative against his fellow Democrats is turning away voters. He will have to tone down those remarks in the future and direct his anger at the Republicans instead.

I’ve thought for about a month now that the Democratic nomination will eventually be fought out between Dean and Clark. I don’t think we will get run of the mill Capitol Hill politician as the nominee this time around. Voters seem to be saying they want someone different and unconventional. If I have been surprised lately it is how quickly Wes Clark is catching up in the polls after having been drubbed down to near the back of the pack after his initial fast start. His campaign has finally come together. He is generating serious money from a large network of supporters. This is causing the Dean campaign to look over its shoulders in worry. Although Dean is still ahead in New Hampshire, I would not be surprised if Clark ultimately wins in New Hampshire. New Hampshire has a history of loving mavericks, as it did in 2000 when it picked John McCain over George W. Bush. But it likes conservative mavericks more than liberal mavericks. Although Dean is really a centrist, Clark is perceived as a centrist and that may be the critical factor in New Hampshire.

Once the nominee is decided then the real battle for the general election begins. It will be a tough campaign for Democrats to win, but it could easily swing either way based on a number of topical issues, such as the ever-present U.S. economy or happenings in Iraq. As much as I like Dean, I tend to agree with the Clark people that Clark has better odds of fairing better against Bush on national security issues in the general election. So if Clark wins the nomination I won’t shed too many tears for Dean. I could back Clark enthusiastically. He just seems a bit suspicious to me because he only recently became a Democrat. I don’t know where his heart really lies.

Clearly the election will be fought over two issues: national security and the economy. On the national security issue Bush will appear to have the advantage, but either Clark or Dean are smart enough to know how to expose the fraud that is our war in Iraq. Clark is more likely to pick off Southern states for the Democrats. But I am dubious that the Democrats need the South to win this time. Based on the popular vote in 2000 we didn’t need the south, except Florida. If we can hold what we won in 2000 and pick up a couple states we can win the election. Bush is beatable. So don’t give too much credence to polls this far out from the election. The vast majority of Americans can’t yet name a single Democratic candidate for president.

The best issue for the Democrats on the economy will be the large net job loss (likely to exceed two million jobs) during Bush’s term. He will be the first president since Herbert Hoover to have a net job loss in his term, and it’s hard to see how that will work to his advantage. Numbers like the December employment statistics (where jobs grew by only 1000 jobs) must make Karl Rove nervous. This appears to be a jobless recovery. The result is a lot of unemployed people competing for the same number of jobs, playing a dispiriting game of musical chairs with each other. Democrats will need to get them to the polls.

I tend to agree with my friend Frank Pierce that the Democrats need to play up the issue of outsourcing. We’ve been outsourcing blue-collar jobs for decades, but outsourcing white-collar jobs is a new phenomenon and troubling for many of us who felt secure with our college degrees. Those who have been outsourced more often than not find themselves making half of their previous income. Democrats need to paint the vision of a nation of clerks working at Wal-Mart if the Republicans stay in charge.

It is a shame the voters won’t focus as much on the federal deficits (which are the largest in history) or Bush’s exorbitant tax cuts for the rich, or the way he is wrecking our environment. Voters as a class seem to care more about short-term than long-term issues. Doubtless the Democrats will leverage them if they can. Of all these issues the federal deficit is the most compelling. Traditionally voters have agreed that the government should live within its means. It is ironic that the Democrats can make the better claim of being the party with a track record on financially responsibility.

Ultimately the Democratic nominee must simply promise more pragmatic and progressive stewardship like Bill Clinton delivered. His was a legacy of real prosperity unmatched in over lives. It should make the difference in many swing states. An appeal to a return to the “Great 90s” might swing the election.

January 17th, 2004 at 09:18pm Posted by Mark | Politics 2004 | no comments

Report on my January Dean Meetup

It felt as cold as January in Iowa last night. We lack the snow, but we certainly have the bitterly cold weather here in the Washington area. That didn’t stop me from bundling myself up in my woolies and heading out to the Reston Regional Library for my fourth Dean Meetup, even though a large part of me wanted to stay somewhere nice and warm and vegetate.

Of the four Dean meetups I have attended, this one was probably the best. About forty people showed up, many arriving very late. There were no donuts this time and for that I was grateful (since I am trying the South Beach diet, and don’t need the temptation). A lady named Jennifer was our host again. Faces are starting to look familiar. I saw Diane, a lady who lives about a mile away from me and who I met at two other meetups. She reported her birthday bash for Howard back in November was a success and she raised over $700 for the campaign.

The attendees this time though were especially sharp and politically astute. Maybe that’s a factor of being in Reston, a community that is relatively liberal by Virginia standards. We had two people there who described themselves as ex-Republicans. The guy at my table spoke eloquently about how the Republican party has moved away from the one he knew. He said it has morphed into the party of big business. He is shocked that traditional values like fiscal constraint were thrown away in a desire to push corporate and religious values at all costs. And he is mad as hell that Bush went to war with Iraq, because in the campaign he marketed himself as an isolationist. If Dean is attracting thinking Republicans, this is very good news. I hope there are a lot more like these two men.

About seventy percent of attendees were at their first meetup. One couple (who recently arrived from Florida) wowed us with their tale of attending a Dean meetup last March.

The big topic for discussion this month was what happened to the Democratic Party. We largely agreed that the Democratic Party had slipped under Bill Clinton into being a quasi-Republican party. We doubted that Hubert Humphrey would have been pressing for NAFTA or would have gone quite as far with welfare reform as Bill Clinton. Don’t get me wrong; I admire Bill Clinton. But he was a very corporate friendly president. In general attendees at the meetup were both appalled and more than a little scared by how far we have gone toward becoming a corporate-ocracy.

We generally agreed that the Democratic establishment saw Dean as a populist and therefore a threat to them remaining in power. We like that Dean is invigorating and bringing new blood into the party, seems to cowtow to no one, and distances himself from the inner beltway Democrats. We see that as Dean’s key ace in the hole. He speaks from his heart, sometimes to his regret, but his passion is real as is his determination. It is that passion that is contagious and keeps his campaign growing, I believe.

The video showed the staff at Dean’s Iowa campaign headquarters. It was good to see a lot of ordinary people, many of whom are much younger than I am, working passionately for the man. It was followed by a couple minute speech from Howard to us. I don’t know how Howard does it, but he connects with me. When he spoke it was like I could feel the empowerment flowing out of the video screen and into me. He told us we would take back our country. And I believed him.

We know a lot depends on the next month in these early primaries and caucuses. Dean is ahead in both Iowa and New Hampshire, but Clark is taking the number two spot in New Hampshire, even though he is not campaigning there. Dean’s margin of victory in Iowa, according to the polls, is pretty slim. So we spent the last part of the meeting writing letters to Democrats in Iowa and New Mexico.

I wrote my letter. (I would have written two, but we ran out of addresses. I’ll write the other one tonight after I get it from his web site.) The theme of my letter was that Dean represented the one person who would truly take our country back to where we were. Elect any of the others, I wrote, and we will effectively have the status quo. The Republicans and Bush have taken us so far to the right that we cannot continue in that direction. We must now stand up for our values and move the United States toward the international mainstream again.

It’s a daunting task. The Republicans have so much more money, and the primaries will drain time, energy and money. Then we must marshal these resources to win the general election. But it will be tough to come close to matching the fundraising by the Republicans. But after watching Dean last night, I believed we could do it. He makes me believe the impossible. He makes me feel empowered and hopeful.

Underlying all of it is a nervousness about Dean himself. Will he implode? Will he make that one fatal gaff that brings him down? His assertiveness is a double edge sword. It gets him attention and draws people too him, but he is often rash and doesn’t think before saying things. In that sense he is the opposite of Bill Clinton, who carefully measured whatever he said. Unlike Clinton though there is no confusion on what Howard Dean feels and believes. His passion and determination is unmistakable and wholly sincere.

It was an exciting meetup and this is an exciting time. In truth if Wesley Clark upstages Dean I can be happily support him as a candidate. Clark might well be more electable. But Dean has my heart and brings out my passion. I feel nothing for Clark. Our task ahead is daunting, but the victory will be all more joyous when we triumph over the odds. And we will triumph!

January 8th, 2004 at 09:19am Posted by Mark | Politics 2004 | no comments

Report on my November Dean Meetup

This Wednesday was Dean Meetup night. Mother Nature did her best to keep me away. Severe weather made my trip home from work a half hour longer than usual. That left me little time after getting home and find something to eat before rushing out to the 7 PM meeting. The Chantilly public library was not available this time, so our host moved the meeting to the Centreville Library instead. This is quite a bit further from my house. The rainy weather and early darkness exacerbated the traffic problem. It took me 35 minutes to make the drive. You would think that with eight lanes of traffic and limited intersections there would be enough room to accommodate traffic on Route 28, but it was almost all stop and go. I arrived a couple minutes late to the meeting, when I had hoped to arrive a half hour early to help set up!

The meeting was quite similar to my last and first Dean Meetup in October and had about the same number of people: 40-50 altogether. There were however some exceptions. The buzz throughout the meeting was on Dean’s comment two days earlier that “White folks in the South who drive pickup trucks with Confederate flag decals in the back ought to be voting with us and not them, because their kids don’t have health insurance either and their kids need better schools, too.”

Several people, including many die hard Dean supporters found his remarks offensive. I thought it was a poor choice of words. What Dean was saying was that for Democrats to win, Democrats had to be more inclusive, and that includes bringing in under the tent people who lean Republican. This makes a lot of sense: many people who vote Republican in the south are Wal-mart workers and live from paycheck to paycheck with no or little benefits. Health insurance is something they cannot afford. Dean’s rivals of course jumped up and down on the remark and tried to imply Dean is a racist, which he isn’t. It was just a stupid remark. Dean can do that on occasion. I sometimes wish he were as careful with his choice of words as Bill Clinton. On the other hand Bill Clinton usually seemed stage managed; Dean comes across as someone who genuinely says what he believes. It is that personality and energy, I pointed out, that is largely responsible for his popularity. He’s not part of the buffed and pampered Washington elite.

There were more people who were undecided or leaning between Dean and Clark at this meeting than the last. The pros and cons of each candidate were discussed at some length. I’m not sure we convinced any Clark supporters. A couple people left early figuring they had heard enough.

One encouraging sign was the presence of an African American family. A young son in the family, about ten years old, was a big Dean fan and waxed eloquently about his favorite candidate.

We also wrote letters to swing voters in Iowa. I wrote two letters to two women at the same address, so I wrote each differently and expressed my opinion that Dean was something truly different. About 80% of the attendees were at their first meetup. Those of us who had been to one before knew what to do and started working on our letters while the debates continued.

One area of contention was whether Dean should foreswear federal matching funds. This is the Bush strategy. With no opponents in his primary Bush has already amassed $170M in contributions from fat cat Republicans. In the last quarter Dean collected $14.8M, a new record, but Dean’s average contributions were less than a hundred dollars each. It is clear that Dean’s support comes from average working people, not fat cats. Even so we will need a lot more people to come close to matching the contribution that Bush will so easily raise. I voted to go without matching funds. It’s not that I don’t believe in public financing for campaigns, it’s just that as long as someone can opt out to their advantage, our campaign shouldn’t be put at a disadvantage.

One person asked how the campaign would reach out to African Americans and other communities. Dean has drawn his support from mostly white and liberal people. Our hostess, Geri, said that it was up to us, not the Dean campaign, to make these connections. She suggested we take up the issue and involve more of our African American friends. This is what is really unique about the Dean campaign: it is genuinely people powered. People don’t follow instructions laid down by Joe Trippi at campaign headquarters. At best Trippi and Dean set broad goals and communicate them through their web sites and web logs. Issues get thoroughly thrashed through by his supporters on his Blog for America web site. I find it remarkable that Dean would let his supporters make his decision on whether to forego matching funds for his campaign.

In the month since my first meetup a few things are becoming clearer. A month ago Wesley Clark was a phenomenon and a worry. Now his luster has been dimmed quite a bit. Clark is still playing catch up, and Dean Supporters have proven to be committed to the man and his cause. I spoke with a very nice lady I saw from the last meetup who lives in my neighborhood. She says instead of spending $30 a week at Barnes and Noble, as she used to do, she contributes this money to his campaign instead. I said I pretty much send him $50 every month when I pay my bills. When a special solicitation comes out I tend to send more. I haven’t added it up but I suspect I’ve given the Dean campaign at least $300 so far.

And so we in the Dean Camp continue to move doggedly forward. We are aware that Howard Dean is not the perfect candidate, but he does offer the personality and creative ideas that we expect from a winning candidate. We do hope though that Howard learns to temper his remarks a bit. There is still a year to the election and Dean can’t afford too many more major gaffes. We’ve got to win this one and take back our country.

You can help by learning more and perhaps contributing to Dean at Dean for America.

November 7th, 2003 at 07:46am Posted by Mark | Politics 2003 | no comments

Report on my first Dean Meetup

I attended my first “meet up” for Howard Dean last night.

For an internet savvy person like myself I wonder why it took me so long. It’s not like I haven’t been working in electronic communities for nearly 20 years now. I’ve been contributing to the Dean campaign for several months now, listening to his speeches on line, haunting his Blog for America site and basically fascinated by what he seems to have started. I’ve come to the conclusion that with Dean it’s not so much what he says as how he says it. He has personality and he has attitude. I can’t say that any of the other candidates, with the possible exception of Dennis Kucinich. In many ways Dean is the Democratic Party’s response to John McCain.

Still these are worrying times even for Dean Supporters as a hitherto largely unknown, recently Republican, but highly respected Wesley Clark recently threw his hat into the Democratic nomination. In fundraising Dean still has “the big mo” with 14.8 million dollars contributed in the last quarter. But in polls he is not so much slipping as is Wesley Clark has filled in the undecided column. This puts Dean in a competitive position again.

Nonetheless I’ve been excited by the Dean phenomenon. At the meeting last night at the public library in Chantilly, Virginia we learned that the average contribution to the Dean campaign was $87. This is amazing. You can guess what the average contribution to the Bush campaign amounts to: thousands and thousands of dollars. The Dean Campaign is funded by the masses. The Bush campaign is funded by Republican fat cats. Even among the Democratic candidates, most of the remainder get their money the old fashioned way: via the rubber chicken circuit.

Dean supporters are the real deal: large numbers of average Americans giving part of their hard earned money and lots of their free time to a candidate they believe in. I don’t think this has been done before in modern history. Moreover, Dean, unlike all the other candidates, can concentrate largely on campaigning instead of raising money. Soliciting contributions over the Internet makes the cost of getting contributions very small. More money can be used to build the campaign, instead of being funneled into more fundraisers.

The Dean Campaign used an existing site, meetup.com, to arrange the logistics of putting otherwise disconnected strangers together. Volunteers agree to host a Dean gathering in their home or in some public space. The Chantilly library was a good choice because about 50 people showed up; most living rooms won’t accommodate crowds of this size. There might well have been more people except the meet up software seems to have been a bit confused, and suggested that our meet up had been moved to another location in Annandale.

The lady facilitating the meeting was a lady named Geri about my age or a little older. I volunteered to help her set up and she took me up on it. The meeting was at 7 PM but I arrived at 6:30 PM. A young guy named Sam was already there and he and I started setting up chairs. Geri arrived a bit late and had us rearrange the place. She needed tables because tonight was a letter writing night.

The Dean campaign seems savvy enough to send packets to meet up organizers. She had a box of brochures, bumper stickers, buttons and lots of writing paper and envelopes, with stamps already inside the envelopes. We lined up some tables near the door and made sure attendees put their names on the attendance sheets and wore name tags. Geri dragged in a TV set and VCR. Her packet came with a short video from the Dean campaign that she used to start the meeting. It was a good video. Howard Dean’s passion clearly came through, and many of us clapped or applauded certain lines. (I particularly like this often repeated observation that he simply tells the truth, and it scares the hell out of Republicans.)

The video followed with 45 minutes or so of general discussion. We had a few people who were just curious and not committed to any particular candidate. We shared our thoughts and opinions on the man and the campaign. I shared my experience working for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee back in 1987-1988 and how disenfranchised I felt when I realized our government was truly up for sale. I said I was excited by the Dean movement because it was the antidote to this mess, and I hoped the decentralized, empowered Dean people would have the energy to take back not just the White House but the Congress as well. Virtually all of us wanted to roll back the Bush years. We want our old country and old values back. In that sense perhaps we were conservatives. Most of us were progressive, but we believed in balanced budgets and for the United States to be a full and equal partner in international affairs. We discussed some frequent myths about Howard Dean, such as that he is a liberal and that he is not electable. I think we opened a few minds that night.

Some people lobbied for particular causes. One person needed people to hand out flyers. Others wanted to staff a table at a Fairfax City parade. Another wanted help reaching out to the senior community. These efforts met with mixed success; not everyone had quite the energy to attack all these causes.

The last part of the meeting was a letter writing exercise. We were asked to compose two letters, in our own words. The first letter went to Al Gore, Jesse Jackson or Bill Bradley. I made mine to Al Gore and said that he should endorse Howard Dean, and I listed my reasons. The second letter depended on your congressional district. In my case it went to Virginia Governor Mark Warner and it followed a format similar to the one I wrote to Al Gore. We addressed, sealed and stamped them ourselves and turned them into Geri.

I was expecting a younger crowd, but it was truly a mixed crowd with the exception that there was not an African American in the room. (We did have some Oriental and Hispanic Americans.) There were a number of students from George Mason University, there were a number of senior citizens or retired folk, and there were lots of middle aged people like me. The common theme though was a feeling of disenfranchisement and horror with three years of George Bush as president and a dogged determination to take our country back.

In short is was a fun time, but it was also useful and meaningful. It felt very much like democracy in action, something we often talk about in theory but fail to carry out. Despite the fact that most of us had never met before, we felt bonded and started calling each other by first names. As the meeting wound up (the library closed promptly at 9) a number wanted to go out for drinks and unwind. I hadn’t anticipated that and declined but it might be fun to do it some time in the future.

I am sure I’ll be at the next meet up and probably at subsequent ones too. It was fun, I felt empowered and I felt connected. I felt that what we were doing was not wasted effort. I felt hopeful and a bit determined to do what I can to take my country back.

If you are a progressive I encourage you to go to deanlink.deanforamerica.com and sign up for the November meet up. Check out both deanforamerica.com and blogforamerica.com. I can tell you for sure now that this movement is very real. It’s a great way to do good for your country as well as to meet new friends. Don’t feel you have to be a Dean supporter to attend. Just go and observe. I think you will be impressed.

October 2nd, 2003 at 07:48am Posted by Mark | Politics 2003 | one comment

Thoughts on Dean vs. Clark

Wesley Clark’s campaign has rocketed out to the stratosphere, despite problems that should be crippling like a virtual lack of organization. I guess a lot of uncommitted Democrats were just hoping and waiting for him to say “yes”. Look at him go! He announces and the following week he is leading the pack, at least according to Gallup which did a poll for CNN and USA Today. This poll shows Clark leading the Democratic candidates for president by a large margin: 22% vs. 13% for Dean, his closest competitor. The same poll says that if the election were held today between Bush and Clark that Clark would win 48 percent to 46%. (Bush’s approval rating is down to a record low of 50%, according to this poll.)

It must be about image because it can’t be about substance. So far Wes has been pretty silent on substance beyond vague generalities. He’s actually stumbled a few times, suggesting in Tampa that if he had been in Congress he might have voted for the war with Iraq, then back tracking. I doubt those who were polled heard these little gaffes.

Dean, who was used to being in the limelight, is now back in the pack and playing the challenger role again. Meanwhile on his website he is challenging his supporters to contribute $5M over the next 10 days. It’s an audacious goal. Will he make it? If he doesn’t some will say he is losing momentum, perhaps at the expense of Clark. I did my part and gave Howard another $50.

I’m still trying to understand the Wesley Clark phenomenon. I understand the Dean phenomenon pretty well. Dean articulated a clear antiwar message and put together a savvy internet marketing team. He tapped the energy of those who wanted to change this country and empowered them by putting them together in MeetUps. He has to spend little of his time or attention on fundraising. This helps him concentrate on campaigning. The other candidates, except Clark, are still trying to figure out what hit them. They were operating under the old rules.

I think there is something in the American character that likes guys riding high in the saddle. Bush gave this illusion and perhaps that’s why he won a narrow victory in 2000. Democrats want to look up and admire someone too. Clark gives them the image of someone who is supremely capable and competent. It can be intoxicating. And we Democrats want to win so badly in 2004. Clark looks like the obvious choice, at least at the moment.

But Democrats also need to look rather seriously at this guy. He is a Johnny come lately Democrat. He candidly admits he voted for Reagan and Bush, both times. I certainly like his position on the war and the United Nations, but given that he has mostly worn conservative credentials it makes me wonder how sincere a Democrat and liberal he really is.

Those looking for vast right wing conspiracies might also consider vast Clinton conspiracies. Bill Clinton has let it slip that Wesley Clark is his man. Maybe it’s because he’s from Arkansas. Or maybe since Bill represents the moderate, centrist Democrat he thinks he has outfoxed Howard Dean by picking Wes. Clinton probably perceives Dean as unelectable and too liberal, and found a way to bring his perfect man into the running to ride the growing tide of disenchantment against Bush.

It remains to be seen if the Clark candidacy has wings. He may be smart, but he’s never run for office before and there is a steep learning curve. He is bound to say the wrong things from time to time, and come across as ill prepared. It may not matter if voters, as they seem to be, are more concerned with personality than they are with issues.

But it is way too early to rule out Howard Dean. This is the Democrat with the money and with the organizational skills that the others seem to lack. He can still collect money hand over fist via the Internet simply whenever his campaign manager, Joe Trippi, wants to. He just puts another Louisville Slugger bat on the web site and the money pours in. That money buys a lot of media attention. Moreover Dean, unlike any other candidate, has grass roots. He has people turbo charged, not so much because they think he is the ideal candidate, but because he has them believing they are empowered.

I am impressed far more with Dean’s supporters than I am with Dean himself. Most of the reason I give him money is because he can feed the energy of these people. This is one determined bunch of people, and they are talking to everyone they know. Don’t think they plan to stop with Howard Dean’s election. They want more. Much more. They want to take back the congress and the country. They want to reverse the last four years. They want to drive a stake through the heart of neoconservatism. He has lots of supporters but most of them are 20 or 30 somethings. In other words he has energized the disenfranchised younger voters, got them to care, and got them to organize. And they will vote in much larger numbers in 2004.

This may well turn into a tsunami a year from now. If Clark is the better candidate so be it. But don’t dismiss the Dean phenomenon. It is much more real and it has legs. I’ve caught the wave too. I’ll be going to my first official meet up for Dean on October 1st at the Chantilly, Virginia regional library. I hope to see some of you there. I want to be part of this energy. I want to take back my country.

September 23rd, 2003 at 02:46pm Posted by Mark | Politics 2003 | one comment