"Dick Gephardt Deserves Howard Dean. In a sense, he created him."

[flpoljunkie]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31891-2003Jul22.html

The Democrats' War Trap by Harold Meyerson, Washington Post

If anyone has personified the failure of the Democratic establishment to provide the party with a distinct profile during the Bush presidency, it's Gephardt. As House Democratic leader, Gephardt clung to Bush's Iraq policy until it all but unraveled over the past month. Gephardt's endorsement last fall of the administration's war resolution effectively derailed a bipartisan effort in the Senate to require the White House to win more international backing.

There was supposedly a method in this madness: By taking the war issue off the table, Gephardt argued, the Democrats could turn the midterm election campaign to questions of domestic policy, presumably their strong suit. We'll never know if this could have worked, because Gephardt and his fellow congressional leaders never developed a domestic message.

Howard Dean's genius was that he was the only serious Democratic presidential candidate to hear that rage and amplify it -- partly because he spent less time inside the Beltway and more on the road than any other candidate last year. Indignant himself about the Democrats' acquiescence in the war, he became the vehicle for the activists' indignation, too.

<snip>

But how much like Humphrey's candidacy are those of the current Democratic hawks, Gephardt and Joe Lieberman in particular? The radicalism of George W. Bush has concentrated Democratic minds, but are there liberals who would still hesitate to support a pro-war nominee even against Bush, as their forebears hesitated to support Humphrey even against Richard Nixon?


A look at some numbers from last month's MoveOn "primary" suggests that might be the case. The left-leaning, antiwar online organization polled its members on their presidential preferences, and a clear plurality of voters favored Dean. Just as important, however, MoveOn also asked its voters which Democratic candidates they could enthusiastically support if those candidates won the nomination. Dean ran first here, too, with 86 percent backing, but the pro-war candidates fared notably less well. John Edwards came in fourth with 56 percent, Gephardt fifth with 53 percent and Lieberman eighth with 42 percent. (Al Sharpton ran ninth: MoveOn voters clearly thought him an implausible president, and Lieberman, an implausible Democrat.) The surprise was JOHN KERRY, who ran a strong second with 75 percent. MoveOn voters -- a significant, if not necessarily representative, sample of liberal Democrats -- seem to have established a hierarchy of pro-war candidates. At the bottom is Lieberman, the most conservative candidate in the field; then Gephardt, the architect of the party's support for Bush's war; then Edwards, a not very critical supporter of that war; and finally, at the top, Kerry, who managed both to vote for the war and criticize it simultaneously. Some might call that incoherence, but of all the Democrats, Kerry is probably the best able to win support from all quadrants of the party. In message and manner, Kerry often still fails to connect with his listeners. But if he can put his own house in order, he's the candidate best positioned to unite a party that's not been this angry at itself since 1968.

[Khephra]

1. Despite all the bickering between Dean and Kerry supporters

I still wouldn't mind a repeat of the Bush vs Reagan situation, and we end up with either a Dean/Kerry or Kerry/Dean ticket.

And then give Kucinich a job like head of the Dept of Labor.

Put Sharpton as Press Sec't. (he's skilled and he'd also drive the Right batty like Ari does for us)

Graham...well, he'd make a good AG.

[Garage Queen]

3. Sharpton as Press Secretary.

Man, just the thought of that's going to have me chuckling the rest of the day. Thanks. :7

[Pallas180]

2. Yeah. The WP establishment trying to promote Kerry. They dont get

it.

Dean is coming out on top because he represents The real
democratic party. THE LIBERALS. The rest are bush-lite.
The "New" DLC or whatever its called.

The message is that imitation goppers is not acceptable
and get back to being democrats.

Clinton got away with his centrist new DLC on personality
alone. No one else could or can. His support of the WTO
was not a "democrat" issue.

We want to be democrats. Not centrists. Not globalists,

If the entire democratic party doesn;t get back to that
they can kiss the people goodbye.

IMHO

[johan]

4. we can get

away with dean-edwards or kerry-edwards

[flpoljunkie]

5. Regarding the author of this piece, Harold Meyerson...

Harold Meyerson is hardly DLC; He is the editor-at-large of the American Prospect magazine, which is considered to be a liberal, progressive magazine, is it not?

Link to the American Prospect Mission Statement:

http://www.prospect.org/about/

The aim of The American Prospect is to contribute to a renewal of America's democratic traditions by presenting a practical and convincing vision of liberal philosophy, politics and public life. We publish articles for the general reader that attempt to break through conventional understanding and creatively reframe public questions. Ours is not a magazine of complaint, of angry gestures or of private irritations. It is a magazine of public ideas, firmly committed -- however unfashionably -- to a belief in public improvement. America can do much good, and it can do much better.

The American Prospect was launched in 1990 by Paul Starr, Robert Kuttner and Robert B. Reich. The Prospect is available on newsstands, by subscription and online. It is published by The American Prospect Inc., an independent nonprofit organization established by the magazine's founders. We are also proud to host and produce Moving Ideas, an online consortium of more than 125 progressive policy organizations.

The American Prospect does not back individual political candidates, nor does it attempt to achieve unanimity or consistency among its writers. It seeks to provide a forum for working through the heated controversies and hard choices that vex its editors and writers as much as other Americans. The magazine, however, generally reflects moral and political commitments that are broadly identified with the liberal and progressive traditions in America.

The impetus for founding The American Prospect came from the conservative ascendancy of the past two decades. During the 1970s and 1980s, many older liberal publications grew tired or ambivalent. Meanwhile, vigorous, well-financed conservative publications, think tanks and communication networks developed. New circumstances required liberals and progressives to rethink much that they had taken for granted, but they also required new energy and new institutions with a strong, positive sense of their own -- and America's -- mission.

:kick:

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

7. I don't buy your story about Dean

I agree that Dean's people are liberals, democrats, and not centrists, and not globalists.

But unfortunately, Dean is not a liberal, and is a globalist. Perhaps Dean is the best we can do - I don't see Dean as ANYTHING more than another politician, like all the rest, making promises he has no intention of keeping.

But Dean's people are the real deal, and they have shaken up the party, and for that I'm thankful.

[flpoljunkie]

6. John Kerry could be candidate best positioned to unite an angry Dem party

:kick:

[w4rma]

8. Dems need to remember Vice President Humphrey, not only McGovern

http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=4143&forum=DCForumID70