Michael Dukakis

The Massachusetts Democratic primary, along with nearly two dozen other primaries and caucuses, was held on Feb. 5. Hillary Clinton won it by 15 points, one of her best showings anywhere this year, and Michael Dukakis voted in it—but he won’t say for whom.

“I voted for a candidate, yeah,” is about all Mr. Dukakis, the state’s former governor and a lifelong resident of Brookline, will say.

Mr. Dukakis has maintained an adamantly neutral public stance throughout the campaign, hoping instead to sell both candidates and their campaigns on the need for assembling a massive grassroots organizing effort—a captain and six block leaders in all 200,000 precincts in the country—for the fall. But he also said that Barack Obama will probably be the nominee and the race decided by early June, and possibly much sooner, with primaries in Indiana and North Carolina on tap next week.  read more »

When Bill Clinton pointed out yesterday, while talking about Barack Obama's South Carolina victory, that Jesse Jackson won the state in 1984 and 1988, the former President got plenty of attention.

Clinton seemed to be encouraging the perception that Obama won because of support from black voters, and that his victory was more about racial allegiances than substance.

He was also misrepresenting history.

It's true that Jackson won South Carolina in '84 and '88. But Clinton failed to mention several key points. For one, the state held caucuses back in those days, not primaries, and they attracted only a fraction of the participation that yesterday's primary did. Also, Jackson is a native of Greenville, South Carolina, which gave him an extra advantage. Finally, and most importantly, no one campaigned against Jackson either time, and the contests had nowhere near the same significance to the race.  read more »

The inability of any of the three Democratic front-runners to establish a clear lead in Iowa is raising the obvious question of how the media would interpret a virtual three-way tie between Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards.

Actually, it wouldn’t be the first time there were three Iowa “winners” on the Democratic side. In 1988, Richard Gephardt, Paul Simon and Michael Dukakis all finished within a few points of each other in the caucuses. And the fallout from that result suggests that a split verdict in Iowa would ultimately be good news for Hillary.

Consider the similarities between the two campaigns.  read more »

Don't blame Mr. Dukakis for not yet planning his trip to the 2009 inaugural celebration. He's been here before.  read more »

A post on The New Republic's blog The Plank cites "a rival campaign operative" taking issue with John Edwards's promise that, as the Democratic nominee, he'll win multiple Southern states. The operative supports this note of skepticism by pointing to the anemic performance of the Kerry-Edwards ticket in North Carolina, where President Bush won 56 percent of the vote.

I too have doubts about Edwards' ability to deliver so sweepingly in the south; his message seems more likely to resonate in the Rust Belt than in the Sun Belt. That said, it's questionable at best to bring up figures from 2004, because Vice-Presidential candidates simply do not have a measurable impact on the final vote count.

After all, remember Lloyd Bentsen?  read more »

Competency usually doesn’t win Presidential elections.  read more »

You probably know this one already: the celebrity Senator—a Democrat from a big Northeastern state  read more »

You probably know this one already: the celebrity Senator—a Democrat from a big Northeastern s  read more »

Mike Berg is running for Congress in Delaware as the antiwar, Green candidate against the incumbent Republican. Berg calls for the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq on the grounds that the U.S. is increasing suffering in the Middle East, not decreasing it. I'm as spavined as just about everyone else on the left over the immediate withdrawal question, still I'm pulling for Berg. Berg is the father of Nick Berg, a humanitarian and telecommunications worker in Iraq who was beheaded by al-Zarqawi two years ago. Or as the networks say, "personally beheaded by Zarqawi." (Is that a distinction?) So today Berg is finally getting some air time. Reporters are asking him how he feels about Zarqawi's death. On CNN, he was shown saying, "It doesn't bring me personally any relief because it doesn't bring my son back." He went on about how much suffering the U.S. has brought to Iraqi families. Amen. I was disappointed in Berg's answer. Michael Dukakis lost the presidency in 1988 for, among other reasons, flubbing the death-penalty question, when an anchor at a debate asked him if he'd support the death penalty if his wife was raped and murdered. Dukakis answered very coolly and technically, No, and explained why. People felt that he wasn't in touch with his real emotions, if he even had them. Mike Berg has said before that he has struggled with his vengeful feelings toward Zarqawi. Would it be so bad if he let it rip today about how he feels about the killing of his son's evil murderer? It might help his candidacy.

In 1988, a precocious Queens student named Michael Gianaris, a son of Greek immigrants, registered 1  read more »

In 1988, a precocious Queens student named Michael Gianaris, a son of Greek immigrants, registered 1  read more »