Reply #16: I was an early Deanie, sort of

[11cents]

I gave him a contribution and so still receive copious emails from my bestest friend Joe Trippi. I liked the *sound* of him, electorally speaking, and of course I loved the fact that he was speaking out when the other candidates were floundering. But although I found him impressive in some environments (e.g., townhall meetings) in others he seemed distinctly not a "president-sized" candidate. I was also frankly turned off by the rather baffling cult of personality that was developing among some of his supporters. If he gets the nom, of course, I'll work for him and will be delighted to be proved wrong.

My feeling, as I've said elsewhere, is that while Clark and Dean may deliver much the same message, it has far more power and cross-partisan appeal when Clark delivers it. Lately, for example, he's been talking about the importance of maintaining the legitimacy of political opposition and about Republican attempts to denigrate the very idea of there being another party. Were Dean to say things like this he'd be just a Democratic pol defending the Democratic Party. When Clark does it he's a warrior-statesman-intellectual defending the ideals of America. Not entirely fair, not entirely rational, but winning elections is about dealing intelligently with realities on the ground, not denying them.