Politics

The Howard Dean Nominee

Getty Images

Howard Dean was supposed to be finished back in January 2004, when his once-overpowering presidential campaign collapsed in the cornfields of Iowa – and when he let out a scream that made him as much laughingstock as loser.

Sure, the conventional wisdom went, he’d still have a loud voice in the national political dialogue. Even in defeat, Dean retained the passionate loyalty of much of the Democratic grass roots, the activists who’d grown irate with the timidity the acquiescence of their party’s Washington establishment to so much of the Bush agenda. But, as the ’04 primary results showed, the grass roots alone wasn’t enough to beat the establishment. Going forward, Dean would be the voice of a faction of his party – never a true leader.

That he secured the chairmanship of the Democratic National Committee in early 2005 really didn’t change this thinking. He would serve as the party’s titular leader, a figurehead to mollify the restive activists and, perhaps, to wean a few more bucks out of them. But the real power – the control over message and money – would reside elsewhere. Dean could talk all he wanted about his vision of a “50-state strategy,” but there was no way that Rahm Emanuel and all the other guys who knew how to actually win elections would ever let him throw real money at that pipe dream.

It’s kind of funny where things have ended up.

In two months, Democrats will convene in Denver and nominate for president a candidate who opposed the Iraq war from the very beginning – the very position that made Dean such a radical in 2004. In 2008, though, that prescient war opposition may have been the single biggest factor in Barack Obama’s upset victory over Hillary Clinton – whose own vote to authorize the war, a vote that supposedly made John Kerry a safer choice than Dean in ’04, undermined her campaign from the outset.

The second biggest factor in Obama’s triumph was his stunningly superior financial position, which freed him to organize and compete in every state of every size, while the Clinton operation wrote off entire states. And how did Obama raise all of this cash? By perfecting the model that Dean pioneered in 2003, when his grass-roots army used the Internet to pour hundreds of thousands of small-dollar contributions into his coffers, allowing the little-known former governor of Vermont to outraise Kerry and John Edwards and their big-dollar bundlers.

Supposedly, Dean’s experience in 2004 had demonstrated that the old limits to insurgent national candidacies still applied in the Web age. Despite the buzz Dean had generated, it was Kerry, with his safe, poll-tested message and support from much of the party’s institutional forces, who had won – and, really, it hadn’t even been that close. (Dean’s only primary win in ’04 came in Vermont, after he had dropped out.)

But four years later, another insurgent has come along and – against a woman who was supposed to harness her deep establishment ties to assemble the most fearsome national political machine ever seen – essentially employed an improved version of the Dean model. And he’s won with it.

And then there’s that whole 50-state pipe dream. As a candidate in 2003-'04, Dean promised over and over to mount a meaningful fall campaign in every state – money, field workers and personal appearances invested in states the party typically ceded to the G.O.P. without even trying. To prove his point, he even went ahead in the summer of 2003 and ran television ads in Texas.

Dean’s contention was that expanding the map in general elections would create surprising new targets for the party’s presidential candidate, just as it would force the Republicans to expend resources in states they’d grown accustomed to Democrats writing off. He also proposed that it would be just as beneficial to down-ballot candidates – those running for governorships, Congressional seats, and even state legislatures. The Democratic Party may be an endangered species in Mississippi today, Dean would say, but we can grow it – and it will end up paying off at the national level.

As the nominee in ’04, Kerry ran a conventional campaign, targeting the usual handful of swing states and ignoring the rest. When he became chairman in early ’05, Dean revived talk of the 50-state strategy and announced a plan to fund a field worker in every state. But he quickly ran into fierce resistance from the party’s D.C. establishment, particularly from Rahm Emanuel, the quintessential Washington power-player who’d been tapped to lead the Democrats’ effort to win back the House.

Emanuel had his own fall battle plan – money from the DNC would be poured into the most promising targets on the ’06 map – and it had no room for party money to be sent to Mississippi or other red bastions. Dean stood his ground. Ugly fights ensued. Emanuel told Dean he was clueless and endangering the party’s chances of victory. Traditional big donors vowed not to send a dime to the party as long as the current leadership was in charge.

Dean still refused to fold, and finally a compromise was reached, and the idea of the 50-state strategy survived.

And now this: In the wake of his primary triumph, Barack Obama – the candidate who ran against the party establishment on Dean’s issue and who won with Dean’s strategy – has decided to launch a massive and unprecedented push this fall in all 50 states. Paid staff will be sent to every state. Voter registration drives are under way. Television ads will blanket the airwaves in cities that haven’t seen a Democratic presidential candidate in decades.

Obama’s campaign is selling the idea that this election isn’t just about winning the presidential race; it’s about expanding and transforming the Democratic Party. Senate seats are potentially in play in North Carolina, Kentucky, Mississippi, Alaska and even Kansas this fall. House seats are within reach in similarly unlikely locales. And redistricting is just a few years away. Democratic legislatures elected in 2008 and 2010 could position the party for a decade of dominance. Texas may be a red state, but its Legislature is within reach for the blue team.

Howard Dean will almost certainly never run for the Democratic nomination ever again. But in a way, he’s already won.

  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Newsvine
  • Google
  • Yahoo
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • Stumble Upon
  • Netvibes
  • Windows Live

Comments
Post a comment

The Way to Beat Obama ... (not verified) says:

.
MAKE OIL AND ENERGY THE TOP ISSUE IN THIS CAMPAIGN -----.

Being a Republican these days is like being a Yankees fan--a Yankees fan, that is, starting from the '01 season.

Even if the 50 state strategy doesn't win the O man any more states, all the other benefits--increasing voter registration rolls, building up an experienced grassroots core, forcing the competition to play defense, etc etc--will make the strategy worth it. (To think, our party is still stuck having to defend this idiotic war. Wake up to the real threat people!)

My crystal ball tells me this could be the beginning of the Democrats finally losing their Loser status. If the Red Sox could overcome the Babe's curse, is there any reason the Democrats can't do the same with the ghost of Ronald Reagan?

Political Activist/Pundit, Community Organizer

Barack Obama Supporter, Registered Democrat,

Human Needs, Voter and Civil Rights Advocate,

Borned and bred Texan, Seasoned Optimist.

Yes, these initiatives can and will fly....

Let's expand, let's transform...

RocketScience (not verified) says:

You know these things ebb and flow. Dems are down, GOP is up; and vice versa.

It is more important to look at the state and local elections and how they affect the nation. After trending solidly toward the GOP since 1994, state and local offices have finally moved in the other direction.

Obama isn't going to visit 50 states no matter how much money he has. He, quite rightly, will stick to the battleground states...he and his handlers have their eyes on 271 electoral votes.

cab91 (not verified) says:

Barack Obama is the furthest you can get from being "The Howard Dean Nominee."

"In 2008, though, that prescient war opposition may have been the single biggest factor in Barack Obama’s upset victory over Hillary Clinton"

Nope. There was nothing "prescient" about Obama's war opposition. The speech he likes to hang his hat on was made in 2002, long before he became a candidate for the US Senate. It was made at a time when there was no political risk to do so, compared to Dean who was the only presidential candidate to do oppose the war.

"And how did Obama raise all of this cash? By perfecting the model that Dean pioneered in 2003, when his grass-roots army used the Internet to pour hundreds of thousands of small-dollar contributions into his coffers"

The reason for this is there are lots of ex-Dean staffers in the Obama organization, notably Blue State Digital. Joe Rospars, one of the founders, is Obama's director of new media or some such title. Obama didn't do anything new and wonderful.

Barack Obama is the anti-Howard Dean. Howard Dean ran on substantive issues. Barack Obama merely talks a good game. For better or worse, Howard Dean took a definitive stand on issues. Barack Obama can't be relied upon to keep his word when the time comes, such as completely reversing himself on telecom amnesty and warrantless eavesdropping, just to avoid a fight. There is simply no comparing the two.

swindon (not verified) says:

No kidding, Dean won. And so did all the anti-war Dean Democrats who fueled his campaign, because we went straight to the next anti-war candidate and opened our small wallets again and again and again.

We beat big-money Ds who supported the war. Clinton told anti-war Democrats that if we expected her to apologize for her vote to authorize the war, we should find another candidate.

Well, we did. And he won.

Gas could fall to $2 if Congress acts, analysts say ... (not verified) says:

.
Gas could fall to $2 if Congress acts, analysts say
Limiting speculation would push prices to fundamental level, lawmakers told

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The price of retail gasoline could fall by half, to around $2 a gallon, within 30 days of passage of a law to limit speculation in energy-futures markets, four energy analysts told Congress on Monday.

Testifying to the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Michael Masters of Masters Capital Management said that the price of oil would quickly drop closer to its marginal cost of around $65 to $75 a barrel, about half the current $135.
Fadel Gheit of Oppenheimer & Co., Edward Krapels of Energy Security Analysis and Roger Diwan of PFC Energy Consultants agreed with Masters' assessment at a hearing on proposed legislation to limit speculation in futures markets.

Krapels said that it wouldn't even take 30 days to drive prices lower, as fund managers quickly liquidated their positions in futures markets.
"Record oil prices are inflated by speculation and not justified by market fundamentals," according to Gheit. "Based on supply and demand fundamentals, crude-oil prices should not be above $60 per barrel."

OUR GOVERNMENT SHOULD DUMP ONE-HALF OF OUR STRATEGIC OIL RESERVES ON THE OPEN MARKET TO BANKRUPT THE 'OIL SPECULATORS'.

THE OIL SPECULATORS ARE BELIEVED TO BE RESPONSIBLE, IN PART, FOR THE RUN UP IN OIL & GASOLINE PRICES. THE USA CAN WELL AFFORD TO DUMP A LARGE AMOUNT OF ITS STRATEGIC OIL RESERVES ON THE USA MARKET. BECAUSE OIL SPECULATORS ARE "BETTING” THAT OIL PRICES WILL INCREASE, THEY WILL BE FINANCIALLY RUINED BY A SUDDEN GLUT OF OIL ON THE MARKET.

IT WILL ALSO SEND A STRONG SIGNAL TO THE 'OIL SPECULATORS' THAT WE WILL DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO STOP THEIR DESTRUCTIVE PRACTICES. IF THIS DOES NOT WORK WELL ENOUGH, LAWS & REGULATIONS PUTTING THEM OUT OF BUSINESS WILL BE NEXT.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anthony M. Verdugo (not verified) says:

Howard Dean will lose again, now that more than ever people are upset with the way the whole Obama (real life person) is coming to be known. Realistically, more people are not liking who Obama really is, flip-flopping, (much more than McCain). Obama supporters will never admit it, but he lies constantly, one day this, the next that. The Rev. Wright issue & Trinity Church, still a big problem and more to come. His lack of judgement, the "Judgement You Can Count On" theme, is not true by any means or way you look at it. Those who believe it true are lost in delusion or stupidity. Check his background, no way is he the person he and his supporters would have you believe he is. The nation cannot afford the Marxist he and his parents are, check the record, don't believe me and find out yourself. A corrupt Chicago politician with business as usual for his agenda and remarkably fooling so many people along the way, this is his true calling card.

Anonymous (not verified) says:

Howard Dean represents the Democratic wing of the Democratic party, but he's no way a flaming liberal. In many ways he's a financial conservative, a pragmatic former governor with a proven track record of getting things done.

Barack Obama is a gifted orator, and a pragmatic former organizer, who is otherwise an unknown quantity nationally. He's not going to please every Democrat on every issue, but he's running on a progressive/liberal agenda, and I think that he has the ability to be persuasive to the American people which is the only hope that the Democrats have of getting things done.

I would rather have had Howard Dean for president, but I think that Barack Obama will be a good president.

Mark G (not verified) says:

Barack Obama has raised over $270 million from 1,200,000 donors. The money comes in small chunks; $25, $50 or $100.
He does not take money from special interests, PACs or lobbyists.

Those 1.2 million donors may well give him another $270 million for the fall elections.

But think of this, conventional wisdom suggests that Senator Obama's campaign has 4 or 5 volunteers for every donor. This could be six million volunteers that can be reached by email blasts.

If the Obama campaign can get 1,000,000 volunteers to participate in a weekend in a voter registration drive; the political leverage is enormous. Let's further suppose our million volunteers are each asked to register 5 new Democratic voters. The result could be 3 million of new Democratic votes.

Let those thoughts roll around for a while. Chow!

Jublee (not verified) says:

Very good comment. 50 state strategy is a long term vision and I firmly think that is the way dems should go. Though it is a long term strategy it is also starting to show results. to put it in crude terms, it bleeds the republicans by waking up the dormant democrats in the red states. essentially empowering your base that we your kin is here , something like a wealthy newyork relative coming to see someone in post katrina new orleans. dems will feel very fortunate that dean is a democrat. the main base is the mobilisation of netroots and certainly efficient orgs like moveon has helped in way that they have a strong base and shown that things work. it is matter of copying the formula. let the revolution start.

Michael Sarabia (not verified) says:

The winning Agenda will include the items already listed.
A few more...
1. Global Warming: The totally UNPRECEDENTED Lightning Storm with about 8,000 lightnings in North California is, to date, the best Indicator of Global Warming.
The West and California in particular have the LOWEST average rate of lightning strikes (per sq. Mile, per day) yet had this totally unprecedented onslaught of lightning.

Previous best indicators of Global Warming was the Uprecedented onslaught of tornadoes and the 19 minute swim by a British using speedo trunks, a cap and goggles.

The next indicator of Global Warming is the melting of the ice slush on the North Pole.

Should Obama care what Global Warming skeptics will say to explain-away all these signs? I would recommend delay and postponement, this is mostly a "Dialogue of the deaf" in which few minds will be changed to accept Global Warming.

Many, or most, of them show thinking patterns like the newly defined mental illness "Bipolar Disorder", formerly manic-depressive, people that seem unable to accept new facts and either cling to their old views or, if unable to do that and function normally, become sad or, even, depressed -or violent. Their mind flip flops from one extreme to another.
Best leave them alone and wait for them to gradually convince themselves and accept the truth, if they can, whenver that may be -or not.
We do not want to add to the population, or cost, of mental health care.

Michael Sarabia (not verified) says:

Another item that must be addressed as soon as possible by Sens. Obama and McCain, is where do they stand on the issue of foreign investment in American companies.
We went through a charade that converted Virgin America from a company owned by a Britisher, Sir Branson, into a Virgin America owned by British entrepreneur Sir Richard Branson, after it lost some of its virginity...
That is, with Euros high and Dollar low, and going lower, the laws of Economics (Capitalism) dictate that ownership of things and corporations should change accordingly, or an imbalance is created that leads to an ever bigger drop in sales of goods and services (bankruptcy).

The choice is either, pass enabling legislation now or wait for enough companies to go broke and shareowners demand application of well established practices have have been proven beneficial, principles of commerce.
To limit shares to be not more than 25 Percent foreign owned
seems contrary to all the assumptions made in commerce. Does this apply to McDonald or Wal-Mart?

Let the two candidates speak on this issue and let American Airlines fold and crash in bankruptcy or fly, accordingly.

Post a comment

The content of this field is kept private
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><br> <p> <i> <b> <embed> <img> <blockquote> <span> <strikethrough> <u>
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

By checking this box you are giving permission for Observer staff to contact you to obtain contact information and permissions required for publication.