Dukakis-ize this...History shows Dean is no Dukakis!

[farmbo]

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/content/?031013ta_talk_mayer


Howard Dean, the putative Democratic front-runner, may be gathering strength around the country, but in Washington, D.C., political professionals have tended to see him as a sure loser, a reincarnation of the Democrats’ disastrous 1988 nominee, Michael Dukakis. Many commentators have suggested that Dean bears the markings of a Dukakis liberal. Certainly, Republicans would like to think so. One Republican operative has even coined a political verb, promising to “Dukakis-ize” the Democratic candidate, whoever it turns out to be.

One Democrat who has not found these comparisons particularly amusing is the former standard-bearer himself, the original Michael Dukakis. Reached by phone at home, in Brookline, Massachusetts, on a recent Sunday afternoon, Dukakis, the former governor of Massachusetts, who now teaches political science at Northeastern, took a moment to clarify the record. It would appear that Howard Dean should not be called a Dukakis liberal, for one simple reason: Dean was among those who declined to endorse Dukakis’s Presidential bid when it mattered most, back in the early spring of 1988, and the reason, Dukakis said, was that Dean, who was then lieutenant governor of Vermont, “thought I was too liberal for him.”
<snip>

Kathy Hoyt, Dean’s former chief of staff, noted that after the Vermont primary in 1988, which Dukakis won, Lieutenant Governor Dean did support Dukakis, who was by then the presumptive nominee.
<snip>

This article suggests (IMHO) that the DLC's covert war against Howard Dean is less about ideology and electability and more about power, control and paybacks.

[CMT]

1. he's Dukakis now? I thought he was Gingrich? and before that McGovern

No seriously, Dean is Dean. He will not be like a Dukakis who took an entire month of August off of campaigning after opening a 17-point lead after the dem convention to vacation and mind state business. He will not allow his opponents to define him. He will campaign hard and agressively against George W. Bush. I still say Duke could have won in '88 had he not let Bush define the election in the month of August '88.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

5. Dukakis was an incumbent governor

Dean is not. Huge difference. In fact I would like to see the stats on candidates who were FORMER office holders as opposed to seated.
I do agree that Duke could have indeed won- the people wanted a change.

[dsc]

14. Both Carter and Reagan

won as former governors. Carter's term ended in 72 and Reagan's in 74.

[Cha]

9. I didn't know that! "month off of campaigning in August"!

The Big Mistake for any Dem is to let the sleezy bags "define" anything for the People! And One of my main issues I'm happy about with our campaign is that Dean and we will Not let the GrOPers do that!! :kick:

[Closer]

2. Absolutely Dean is Dean

And he IS going to win the Nomination. I know it.

Don't you all see that someone who's been so outspoken AGAINST the Iraq War and who is a Centrist (while being a social liberal) is the ONLY person who can win?

It can't be any other way.

[Eloriel]

3. You're absolutely right

A column by Charlie Reese lays it out very well and it's worth reading in its entirety:
http://reese.king-online.com/Reese_20031008/index.php

The Establishment is scared to death of Howard Dean. The more progress he makes, the more you will see the Establishment press and think tanks attack him. The Establishment wants a choice between Wesley Clark and George Bush that would in effect be between tweedledee and tweedledum. Clark isn't even sure if he's a Democrat, much less what he believes, if anything. He just wants to be emperor. And the Establishment got him into the race simply because it was afraid Dean would beat Dick Gephardt, John Kerry, Bob Graham and John Edwards.

Eloriel

[Cascadian]

4. Dean is no McGovern either.

Of course a lot of DLC types would want you to believe that. Dean is his own man and that is what makes Dean the right man for the job. IMHO


John

[billbuckhead]

6. NRA candidate Dean is an opportunist who will say anything to get...

elected. Dukakis at least stood for things. The anti-war thing about Dean is bullshit, he was out of office, at the bottom of the pack with no other office to run for and jumped at an opportunity that the Washington Dems mostly couldn't because they had to get along with the military industrial complex to get re-elected. Remember Cynthia McKinney? Dean's support of gay causes is also bullshit, he signed the civil union bill because he couldn't veto it for political reasons in liberal Vermont and now cynically takes credit for it.
I'll never vote for a candidate who has an "A" rating from the NRA. Couldn't Dean find something to disagree about with these "kulturwarriors"? Maybe the AWB?

[Closer]

7. What an ignorant, useless

post.

I'm sure it's not the first either.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

8. well yours certainly didn't add to the useful quotient either

why not try rebutting specific points instead of such a "useful" blanket dismissal?

[w4rma]

10. And this post of your's was useful, NYfM?

You and billbuckhead seriously need to control your anti-Dean rage, IMHO.

[Cha]

11. Because the serial basher doesn't warrant it?

[KaraokeKarlton]

12. Seems you made up your mind before learning the facts

1) Dean retired from Governor so he could run for president. Had he not retired from office, he would have been re-elected. So, that comment you made is false.

2) Dean signed the civil unions bill because it was the RIGHT thing to do. He didn't have to sign it at all and about 70% of this state of Vermont strongly opposed him signing civil unions into law. He risked his political career standing up for the rights of gays. Not only is your assertion false, but you should be ashamed of yourself for saying it.

3) Dean has that A rating because he didn't do anything the NRA opposed. Vermonters don't want gun control and Dean didn't try to pass any. There was no need to pass any because we have virtually no gun crime here, but a lot of hunters. There are A LOT of guns in Vermont but almost no gun crime. Dean worked WITH the NRA on ONE thing...the Champion Land deal, which protected hundreds of thousands of acres from ever being developed. Dean made sure these lands would be open to hunting and the NRA helped get support for this HUGE environmentalist success. Do you oppose protecting our undeveloped lands and environment? I doubt it. The NRA actually helped with this, so they aren't all bad. Sure, you disagree with them on some things, but surely you can't complain about them supporting such a huge conservation project?

It sounds like you decided to hate Dean before you even understood his positions, because you are either not very well informed on the facts or simply don't listen because you are a single issue voter.

[Cha]

13. Thanks Karlton! It's always nice to get a Vermonter's

prospective. I've talked to People all over those New England States who are campaigning for Dean!

And it says a Lot to me that Leahy and Jeffords are supporting Dean!

[farmbo]

15. Even Gephardt was almost "too liberal" for Dean in '88

From the same New Yorker article cited above:

<snip>
Although Dukakis said that he has got over the slight, he still sounded a bit prickly when it came to judging Dean’s record. “He was a pretty good governor,” Dukakis said... But Dean chose instead to head up the Vermont committee for Richard Gephardt, who was also seeking the nomination that year.

Bill Carrick, Gephardt’s campaign manager in 1988 and a media consultant for him now, recalls seeking Dean’s support fifteen years ago, during a visit to Vermont. “I met him in his office, the doctor’s office. We went from there over to his house. He had his brain trust gathered there. We had a conversation in which Howard said he thought that Dick was a little too liberal for him, but he knew that Dukakis was way too liberal for him. So he was more comfortable endorsing Dick.”
<snip>

It will take tons of Rovian slime to portray Dean as the endive-eating liberal that Dukakis stood accused of. While that is no doubt part of Rove's game plan, he may be in the dock for treason by the time the campaign rolls around.

And, by that time, Dean may be able to respond in kind.

[leetrisck]

16. Dean is a good candidate and Dean is Dean

Dukakis was Dukakis and McGovern was McGovern and you know what - there wasn't a damned thing wrong with Dukakis or McGovern either. We need to quit letting the Repukes demonize them.