Why are some Democrats gittery about Dr. Dean?

[poskonig]

Howard Dean has ran an excellent campaign to this date. Dean has raised a lot of money, organized an ocean of supporters, and pulled very effective media stunts which not only improved his name recognition, but placed him in the news cycle repeatedly. However, his success has many Democrats worried. Why?

The angst can only come from his campaigning style or his issues.

On this issues, Dean is close to many other candidates. Dean is perceived as vulnerable on terrorism, taxes, and gays. In addition, trash talk by the DLC and Rove has many caught of guard. Many were not satisfied with Dean's campaign appearance, particularly in interviews, and wonder if one of his random shoot-from-the-hip comments will sink him in the general election, if not sooner.

While this many be an adequate explanation, I am not certain such opinions are justified. The Republican leadership encouraged their base to switch and vote in the Democratic California primary in 1998 for Gray Davis, and it backfired on them bigtime. In addition, the DLC has never won a presidential election. Bill Clinton did. Meanwhile, under their leadership, we've lost both chambers of Congress, including the embarrassing 2002 election cycle where we were projected to pick up seats. Mindless reacting is never a substitute for cool thinking.

Dean has been improving very quickly on the interviewing circuit. Going on Russert early looks like a plus for him, since Dean now looks as good, if not better, than the rest of the candidates in this realm. In addition, Dean's "blunders" on the campaign trail are trivial. Dean made an awkward comment once to the NAACP about "his people," and two comments about Hussein which look weird when taken out of context. Any of the candidates can be attacked in this manner; how they respond to the attacks is where the money is, and Dean always hits back quickly and hard.

On the issues, the GOP will attempt to paint Dean as the candidate of terrorism, queers, and taxes. The taxes aren't a serious issue. One, the majority of the public is with us and not them if we believe the polling data. Secondly, Dean has a record of cutting taxes fairly and responsibly, in addition to balancing budgets during recessions, so Dean will have a big stick to beat Bush over the head with. Civil Unions, in contrast, can be used as an effective device to motivate Christian conservatives without actually delivering them any policy meat, e.g. abortion or vouchers. This may make Bush look xenophobic and hardedged nationally, especially when it is contrasted to the basic value of fairness, which Dean is very effective at expounding. (I'm sure everyone has heard the D-Day soldier story by now). Taxes and Gays are not going to win the election for a Bush with a sluggish economy and a Mess'o' -patamia.

Many Greens don't like Dean on the issues, but if one isn't going to vote for someone who opposes the gestapo parts of the Patriot Act, the Iraq war, and the Bush tax cuts, I'm not sure what else can be done to appeal to this crowd.

The other issue concern with Dean is the defense issue. He positioned himself as antiwar in contrast to the other candidates. The idea is that a majority support the war in Iraq, Dean doesn't, ergo Dean loses. However, Dean not only attacks Bush by getting specific on the Iraq lies, he aggressively challenges Bush on his entire foreign policy reign of error -- North Korea, Afghanistan, homeland security, and other issues. Other candidates seem awfully shy about sticking their neck out on defense, repeatedly taking a nuanced or sometimes a blatantly militarist stance. Dean is doing what other candidates refuse to do -- lower Bush's credibility on defense.

While I thus understand why many are gittery about Dean, I am not convinced such concerns are well founded. While the drawbacks to Dean seem to be small, the advantages are huge. On the issues, Dean's M.D. gives him credibility on health care, his opposition to the war enables him to play offense on defense, he has a record of cutting taxes and balancing budgets which is a massive advantage over Bush on the economy, and he has enough centrist appeal (his 'A' rating from the NRA for instance) to do well in the general election. Many continue to say Dean comes across as a 'real person', and bringing a tidal wave of grassroots supporters to the polls in November is a plus for Democrats everywhere.

Dean is a winner. B-)

[gully]

1. I'm all a glitter!

Go Dr. Dean...

[jus_the_facts]

2. ......honestly it's the *M.D.* that bothers me most.....

....hate 'em for many reasons...ones I won't go into here but just the fact he's a doctor makes me dislike him....just don't trust the f'ers. x(

I'm goin' with the Iowa Unions....EDWARDS '04!!! :)

[gWbush is Mabus]

5. .

At least doctors take the Hippocratic oath.
What oath has Bush taken?

[Mairead]

10. The hypocritic oath

{rim shot}

[PurityOfEssence]

15. Yet they take money for their services

which is against the oath.

Whatever.

[PurityOfEssence]

14. and here I thought I was the only one...

Yes, and it's not only that, but he talks like one. Okay, sweeping statement there, so I'll qualify: an aloofness, presumption of inherently greater intelligence, telling you only parts of things as if you can't understand them and an air of professional superiority.

Having said that, though, I don't think he's a dick, it's more of a personality flaw or two that snags the trip-wire of old feelings. He does sort of tend to bark pronouncements sometimes, and that smacks of the kind of hierarchical self-satisfaction of corporate maledom. Much of that is truly misleading, because I think his heart is in the right place and he really is commendably pissed.

Dems who are afraid of his "unelectability" are just plain bent. He's very electable against Furious George. The "northerner" bit is a red-herring, and all of the analyses of past elections simply don't take into account other issues. If they want to play class warfare against him, they open the sluice of Junior's much greater privilege in life.

Many lefties have been browbeaten and flim-flammed into believing that they have to hide any progressive or liberal beliefs; the right wing has done it's job well. It simply isn't true; band-aid spenders like Gephardt will have a harder row to hoe, but talking about social programs is far from a death knell. We have to stop such worry about pissing off the few and concentrate on energizing the non-voting masses.

The jokes on everyone, because he's a moderate, fer crissake!

The image and perception bit is an issue though, because it's such a media circus. He needs to stop lecturing and making perfuncory pronouncements or he's going to come off as cold and arrogant. The game has changed for him; he's no longer the wacky underdog but the front-runner. That calls for a little noblesse oblige and less bellyaching about the mean ol' establishment; he IS the establishment now.

We all need to adjust for our own prejudices, and this is one I have that he's played into far too well. I don't want someone flatly telling me what to do, and I don't like the holier-than-thou derision to the other candidates.

But enough of that; he's still learning, and clunky though he may be personally, there's a well-tuned machine behind him. I wish I could say the same for Edwards, whom I find to be a genuinely "star" personality and someone whom and whose policies I like more.

[Ripley]

16. Just asking...

Do you think more Americans dislike Doctors than Lawyers?

You sound like my Dad with your disdain for docs, so I can understand where you are coming from. But honestly, he's not running to be your doctor. He is clearly going against the AMA and other big medicine establishments with his health care plan.

[DemBones DemBones]

18. Probably -- Americans have more contact with doctors

than with lawyers, I'd think. And a lot of doctors are arrogant, authoritarian types who expect their patients to listen to them but don't listen to their patients. Dean does come across as that type of doctor.

I don't see that he's going against the AMA or the medical establishment at all. He killed medical marijuana in Vermont (which many doctors support) and he won't support universal health care (single payer.)

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ripley]

27. Thanks Eloriel.

And I really can't believe they think people won't elect him because he is an arrogant doctor, like they all are. :eyes: For one, he seems no more arrogant than any other politican, including Hillary. I guess when it comes to some people they're "arrogant" while others who display the same attributes are considered "confident."

[DemBones DemBones]

29. Yes, it IS true that Dean won't push for universal health care.

He prefers a smaller plan because he doesn't think universal health care (UHC) will pass. Saying he'd sign a bill for UHC does NOT mean he's actively supporting UHC.

As for medical marijuana, Dean killed a bill in Vermont rather than let it be voted on in the legislature and possibly come to his desk.

I'm aware that Dean wants the FDA to study it. The thing is that millions of people have used marijuana, it's been in use for centuries, if not millenia, and common sense indicates that any bad effects would have shown up long ago. That's why many physicians have no qualms about prescribing it.

Studies that have been done indicate that smoking marijuana can cause lung cancer . And, of course, marijuana can be eaten or the active ingredients put into pills (if you don't mind paying the drug companies for the service.) I don't know of studies indicating any other problems, except perhaps birth defects (and this is an old memory I just dredged up so it may be incorrect), again not an issue for the dying patient so long as they are properly informed, the terminally ill not usually desiring to reproduce, anyway.

Having the FDA study marijuana is a delaying tactic that keeps patients from benefiting from the drug. Marijuana is reported to relieve pain and nausea, and to help sufferers from multiple sclerosis and similar diseases with their pain and other symptoms. Does it matter what the exact chemical reactions are if it works to help sick people?

I watched my mother suffer and die with lung cancer. One of my brothers offered to get her marijuana but she would never have used it as long as it was illegal. I will always wonder if it could have eased her pain. Her physician was concerned about her becoming addicted to the medication he prescribed and that made her afraid to take it, so she never took enough. Many physicians do not prescribe adequate pain relieving drugs for people who have acute or severe chronic pain.

Again, Does it matter what the exact chemical reactions are if it works to help sick people?

I take plaquenil, an anti-malarial, for systemic lupus erethematosus, and no one has a clue why an anti-malarial helps people with lupus and rheumatoid arthritis but it does. It was discovered by accident during WW II when anti-malarials were prescribed to troops in the Pacific and Africa.

Eloriel, if you dispute anything I've said about Dean (or anything, really), I appreciate being informed and I would certainly correct any incorrect statement I might have made. But please don''t accuse me of lying again.

[demnan]

3. Am going to the Virginia rally this weekend.

If I can get in through the massive crowds of people swarming to see the good Doctor.

[Touchdown]

4. What's a "gittery"?

:shrug:

[Feanorcurufinwe]

6. I didn't know much about Dean until I got active on DU a month or so ago

all I knew was that he was former governor of Vermont and he was against the Iraqi war. So I was predisposed to like him, and as the candidate getting the most coverage from the mainstream press I considered him my number two choice. But since then I have read a lot about his record in Vermont. There is no doubt Dean would be a better President than the current holder of the office, but the primary season is about deciding who we want to lead our party, and some things in Dean's record trouble me, not because I think they hurt him politically, but because raise doubts in my mind as to his sincerity. I know many don't like comparison's to others but it really reminds me of '92 - one couldn't help but be impressed with Clinton, one couldn't deny that he was an effective politician - but many, including myself, felt he was TOO political, a "slick pol". Well, I didn't vote for Clinton in the primaries but I was happy to vote for him in the generals. As it turned out, I think I was correct in my initial assessment that Clinton was 'a slick pol' but I'm glad he was on our side.

[meegbear]

7. Could it be ...

the constant ramming down our throats that dean is THE greatest man alive and we should give up and follow him is annoying and pissing people off?

No, can't be that ... I must be gittery (whatever the hell that means).

[Ripley]

8. That is the most demented statement I've seen here.

Show me ONE, just ONE post where someone said Dean is the greatest man alive.

Grow up.

[Touchdown]

9. He can't be, because...

I AM!

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CWebster]

12. Well, that didn't last long

When the boys are over waxing their littles carrots, slobbering tweety-style over their clueless hero-studs strutting in uniforms, they are lining up to bash Dean who at least knows what direction he is walking in.

[tjdee]

13. For all the reasons you stated.

You say okay, there's this but it's not an issue, there's this, but it's not an issue, there's yet another thing, but it's not an issue....

Why would the big dog Dems at large go with someone who has so many issues, even though Dean supporters don't think they're issues?

This is not to say Dean isn't a good guy, or even a good candidate (obviously he has a lot of steam, and I think our whole candidate field sucks at least a bit of egg, even my guy). I do think a major part of a winning candidate is a vision, and good policies, some of which Dean has, in my estimation.

But the ideal candidate, in my mind, is someone who is the *least* assailable with the most credibility. Someone who doesn't have to explain himself, or correct himself and who has the least weak points. BUSH should be on the defensive, not our candidate. I don't think that's Dean, you do, that's cool, I'm just answering your question.



Also, doesn't Dean AGREE with Bush on North Korea, Afghanistan, etc.?

??

[DemBones DemBones]

17. Dean makes me jittery because I don't feel that he's

completely trustworthy. My evaluation of him is based on the way he's equivocated on his positions on issues, both during the presidential campaign and when he was governor of Vermont, on the fact that he wanted to seal his gubernatorial records for 20 years -- and did get approval to seal them for 10 years, and on my gut feelings about him, based on all I've seen and heard about him.

It would take me a long time to go into all the equivocations I've seen from Dean and I don't have time for that right now. I will point out that Dean sealed his gubernatorial records for 10 years (and wanted to do it for 20 years.) WHY? What's in there he doesn't want revealed. Previously, I've only known of George W. Bush sealing his gubernatorial records. DId Clinton do this? Reagan? Carter? But most importantly, why did Dean do it?

My gut feeling is unscientific but based on more than fifty years of experience judging people (and I've moved a lot and taught for quite a few years so I've met a lot of people and encountered plenty of untrustworthy people along the way. This is my ninth presidential election season as a voter so I've had a lot of experience judging candidates and seeing how they turned out in office.

Edited for the benefit of those who flamed me, despite my final paragraph:

Before anyone flames me as a "Dean basher," I hope they will remember that you asked what makes people jittery about Dean and I am giving an honest answer to that question. Jitteriness has a lot to do with gut feelings, even if there are problems with a candidate's positions, too. I admire Dean's organization for the money and support it has enlisted but Dean makes me jittery.

[CWebster]

19. It may not register on the radar of some white males-

who think nothing of a major flip-flop on fundamental rights for women - when they are not championing the fundamental requirement for a candidate to lead this country into a hopeful future is that they got a medal in 'Nam, man.

So you want to play this game and dig up the dirt on them all? Don't think your boy's hands are lily-white.

[DemBones DemBones]

21. I am a white FEMALE with stretch marks to prove my motherhood

so back off on your assumptions, please.

I have posted plenty about my candidate's position on abortion. I also display my candidate's DU "logo" as my avatar and a quote from him as my sig line, in the interest of full disclosure about who I support.

The poster ASKED what made people jittery about Dean and I replied. Plenty of people, some of them Dean supporters have said Kucinich makes them jittery because he used to vote pro-life, or because he has "bad hair," or is "unelectable." We all need to know what makes others jittery about our candidate, I think.

[CWebster]

22. It just strikes me as petty

to whine about a pro-choice doctor equivocating when your chosen one swung from the extremes on a fundamental platform. It nauseates me, saddens me, all the infantile fussing over minor issues while pursuing either a pipedream or projecting on undeclared candidate to pin all hopes on... but I will do you the courtesy in not ripping your candidate to shreds let's hope it is reciprocal.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ripley]

28. Whew!

Good comeback CW. Why, oh why was I not surprised to come into a Dean thread where the original poster wrote his positive opinion of Dean and mostly what I see are sneers? And they then have the gall to call Dean supporters the ATTACKERS!

This place has gone to the dogs.

[sangh0]

32. Not true

why was I not surprised to come into a Dean thread where the original poster wrote his positive opinion of Dean and mostly what I see are sneers?

If you go through the thread and count the pro-Dean posters and the anti-Dean posters, you'll see that the pro-Dean posters are more numerous. You'll get similar results if you count by pro/anti-Dean posts (as opposed to "posters")

And the reason you aren't surprised is because you'd be a fool to expect no criticism of Dean in a topic that begs for such criticism.

[CWebster]

33. The difference being

We don't deny that Dean has flaws, we are not ignorant of his record and realize that any candidate can not be all things to all people. What we do know is that he is generating the most excitment and interest - that more people are involved and the momentum is growing. Is that not a good thing for us?

Personally there are some areas where Dean is more conservative than I prefer, but I understand that he has to appeal to a greater audience than just me, and the areas where he isn't ideal are compromises I can live with when weighed against his assets. The decisive outspoken qualities he pssesses in these scary times represents more political courage than any military medal hanging on a wall. Generally, I do not frequent Kucinich threads to list his negatives - if there was evidence that he was gaining I might be more enthusiastic, but I can see that his audience is limited. So why, for whatever reasons, jealousy, resent,idealism, sabotage, would any level-thinking, practical Democrat want to squash our best hope?

[sangh0]

36. Stop bashing Dean!!!

Dean is more conservative

An obvious bashing! Dean doesnt deserve such treatment from people who were brave enough to avoid military service!

[DemBones DemBones]

25. I am not pursuing a pipedream, I am supporting a candidate who

now is a United States Congressman and has previously served in the Ohio State Senate, as Mayor of Cleveland, Ohio, (elected at age 31, against the odds), and a member of the Cleveland City Council (first elected at age 23, against the odds.)

Furthermore, who's fussing over minor issues? You're attacking Kucinich for making a clear change, announced in public, on an important issue. I can name a number of issues that Dean has equivocated on. Clearly changing a stand is better than equivocation and misspeaking, as Dean did on an issue or two.

It is neither "whining" nor "tearing him to shreds" to point out that a candidate has equivocated on issues and has sealed his records. The only candidate I'm interested in "tearing to shreds" is the incumbent, an interest that I believe you share. You have your issues with Kucinich, I have mine with Dean, but we both want to beat Bush*, don't we?

[CWebster]

30. Right

but I understand one thing more:

It is not just about winning over progressives.

[DemBones DemBones]

20. Also, you made a false claim by saying

"He positioned himself as antiwar in contrast to the other candidates."

To the best of my knowledge, Carol Mosely-Braun and Al Sharpton have always opposed the war in Iraq, and Dennis Kucinich certainly has. Please get your facts straight on this. Dean supporters often portray him as the only anti-war candidate and it's patently untrue.

As soon as Bush* gave the order to invade Iraq, Howard Dean backpedaled on his anti-war stance and started talking about supporting the commander in chief while the troops were in the field. It's his prerogative to do that, but others disagree. Trent Lott (R-MS) said you could support the troops without supporting the president (commander in chief.) Of course, Lott said it about Clinton, but Teddy Roosevelt, who was president, said the same thing many years before.


Here is what Dennis Kucinich said the day Bush* invaded Iraq:


"This is a sad day for America, the world community, and the people of Iraq. Tonight, I hope and pray for the safe return of our troops and the end to this unjustified war."

"President Bush has launched an unprovoked attack against another country. Iraq does not pose an imminent threat to the United States or any of its neighboring nations. Iraq was not responsible for the terrorist attacks of September 11. Tonight, President Bush has commanded U.S. forces to go to war in violation of American traditions of defensive war that have lasted since George Washington. This war is wrong; it violates the Constitution and international law."

[Mairead]

31. I don't see 'jittery' as quite the right word, no matter how you spell it

I think it all hinges on one question: 'What will the money flow look like?'

When I answer that question using Dean's stated vision, I don't like what I see.

He has no plans to cut the military-industrial budget, the prison-industrial budget, corporate welfare, or take the hands of the elites out of our pockets on healthcare. Together, those four wealth sinks represent about $1 030 000 000 000 per year. It averages out to nearly $15 000 per year in taxes to a family of four, based on a 285M population. That's a lot of money! Worse: its a lot of misery, because that $1T+ isn't being spent for humanitarian purposes, it's being spent to maim, kill, subvert governments, and generally make a mess of the lives of people who have no say in the matter.

And, speaking of 'no say in the matter', he sees nothing wrong with the idea that 'money buys access'. Since you and I (or at least I) don't begin to have the kind of money that would buy access (maybe access to a broom closet. In Tierra del Fuego), I suspect that means we wouldn't be represented as well as those who can 'draw near the throne'.

I see no reason to be optimistic, honestly.

{this response was cloned from another thread}

[Adjoran]

34. I wouldn't say "jittery"

I just want to nominate someone who can win, and help the down-ticket in the process. My only reservation about Dean and others is just that: can they do it?

I am not yet convinced that Dean can (but HE will have to show me, the words of supporters won't do it alone), but he has run a better race so far than any of the other declared candidates.

Full disclosure: my first choice is and was Gore, and I haven't given up the hope he could still jump in - but that hope will fade quickly after Labor Day and I'll soon be faced with the need to decide.

[Classical_Liberal]

35. Dean is breaking the mold of certain Washington orthodoxies

on how to win elections. His win will hurt he resumes of a lot of insiders particularly in the DLC.

[patcox2]

37. Dukakis, Mondale, McGovern.

Thats why we are jittery. I am not saying we need to move to the right, hell, Deans is already to the right of them (I don't know why people buy into his "born again" progressive charade). Its about the fact he is a geek and the people will not vote for a geek.