Why I've become a Dean Supporter.

[styersc]

I've weighed the pros and cons. I've assessed all of the candidates and have contributed time and $ to Kerry. But Dean has always intrigued me. This week Dean convinced me that he is the candidate.

I have waited a very long time for someone in the Democratic Party to shine light on the Repub strategy of driving up defecits to allow entitlements to be slashed. This cynical approach was engineered by Reagan, followed by Bush I and refined by Bush II. Dean's repudiation of the "New Democrat" and praise of the New Deal was the clincher. We have got to get back to our roots and turn our backs on the middle of the road.

I feel that Dean's willingness to shout out Democratic principles, for good or ill is what we have needed for a long time. Even if Dean fails, I'd rather lose on principles then win just to have a "D" beside the name of the person in the Whitehouse.

This progressivem sometimes populist has been won over by Dean.

[DemDogs]

1. You did not have to wait - Edwards said this months ago

Edwards has consistently said that what Bush is doing is transferring the tax burden from entrenched wealth to working people. He has been saying it for at least six months. And he goes further, he says Bush has a war on working people, a war on unions, a war against overtime pay, and a war against health and safety standards.
If you have been looking for a candidate for some time, you could have saved yourself months in this process. It is good to have Dean on board with Edwards ideas (even better if he had credited Edwards, which he did not.) Dean gave his speech in October at Georgetown. Edwards gave his speech in June at Georgetown. You should read it. <http://www.johnedwards2004.com/page.asp?id=125> You may decide Edwards is your guy.

[styersc]

2. Edward may make a good VP-

or even a good president. He is still way too young for one to judge.

When he is mature enough to become president, I hope that he has the fire in the gut that Dean has.

[poskonig]

3. Edwards is fifty, y'know.

Just to be fair.

[styersc]

6. And by the end of his Senate term...

...he will have served six years in an elected office. He will have won only a single race and during his term as Senator he has spent more then half campaigning to be president. He has potential but is still a long way away.

[mbali]

21. Exactly as much public sector experience as the Shrub . . .

Except, unlike the current WH resident, Edwards spent the 20 years BEFORE entering public life doing something constructive with his life.

[caledesi]

12. Edwards looks so young. I can't believe he's 50. nt

[DemDogs]

25. I forget -- how old was Clinton? Kennedy? even Lincoln? (n/t)

[NewYorkerfromMass]

8. And Edwards wasn't even the first himself

we've all known for a long time that they are trying to strip bare the social network FDR built up. Kerry has been a defender of it his whole career. RE: The original post- Why not stick with the genuine issue Democrat (John F. Kerry) instead of going for the newly converted Dean? If there was ever a reason to line up behind Kerry this week it was his VERY strong statment against the 87 bill. package to Iraq: (and I excerpt):

"We need to stand up to this president. They’ve already proven they can’t be trusted, they’ve already proven that they’re willing to mislead, and this particular plan for $87 Billion is top down, starting with Halliburton, and the other great friends of the President. It doesn’t do the job ...... I think it is the right thing to do to vote against the President’s plan; to force him to confront reality, and to force him to do what’s right for America."

“The best way to support our troops and take the target off their backs is with a real strategy to win the peace in Iraq - not by throwing $87 billion at George Bush's failed policies.... I will gladly and proudly vote for any proposal this President offers that protects the troops and provides an effective plan to win the peace.

”But I oppose spending $87 billion - at the expense of health care, education and domestic priorities here at home - on a strategy that does not protect the troops, and does not make America safer.”

That was leadership of the highest order.

[Khephra]

9. Dean also said this months back too

I'm still settling in to my new house or I'd have some links for you.

[DemDogs]

24. Yeah, I'm not holding my breath

No offense (really) but his position on taxes was entirely different ten days ago, so I don't think you are going to find anything.
Good luck with the move.

[blm]

47. He said it "months back" but not years back.

Dean only JUST converted to populism last January. That may be good enough for many of you, but, I believe his core principles are those of a deregulating, compromising centrist. This liberal doesn't believe in campaign year conversions to populist, Democratic principles.

[veganwitch]

4. several things

"turn our backs on the middle of the road."

dean is a very "middle of the road" democrat. he said it himself several times.

"I'd rather lose on principles then win just to have a "D" beside the name of the person in the Whitehouse"

although it plays into the arguments of some nay-sayers, you are better off voting for kucinich who has always stood by his principles, whether they were popular or not. dean's waffling on the war, the 87 Billion grant/loan, the death penalty shows that he is not a man of principle.

and about shining the light on repug strategy.

well duh. it doesnt take a brain surgeon to figure that out. we know trickle down didnt work in the 80s and its been a staple of repug policy since.

"We have got to get back to our roots"

why dont you look at the candidate that never left his roots, dennis kucinich.

editting for clarity.

[Pez]

5. i think the principles are the same-- it's the delivery that differs

we have a great pool of candidates this time around. partly a backlash to BUSH INC.'s co-co-corporate takeover, mostly a drive to bring the you.s. forward so that we can, once again, assume the role of progressive nation. freedom, the environment, economy, trust in government-- all are on the line. we've seen what the pukes are up to, and it's done more harm than good for citizens around the globe. some candidates seem more understated in their criticism only in comparison to other candidates; the level of disgust is so high that as a democrat the only difference is how loud you yell...

[Brucey]

7. Maybe Dean can win...

others deserve recognition also. But Edwards and Kucinich do not seem to get the media going and the people going the way that Dean does. Could be his money, maybe it's his lead in the polls. Kucinich is great on principles but is not connecting with people for some reason. Edwards is too new to know what his principles are (it takes time to get to know someone), he looks to have promise, but right now he is gaining, but still a ways behind. Kerry should have more support than he does, but also is not connecting as well as he should; perhaps he does not have a coherent image or message. I am proud of those who voted against the $87bn.

[DrFunkenstein]

10. Losing On Principles

I don't consider support for the NRA, the use of the death penalty (safe, legal and rare, of course) and an overwhelmingly pro-Likud stance as highly principled. Nor do I consider sealing up your records or handing environmental awards year after year to your state's biggest polluter as particularly principled, either.

Don't mistake Dean's angry-man stagecraft for principles. If you look at people's actual records, you will see that Kerry and Kucinich are the 2 most progressive candidates in the race. Kerry has an amazing history as a Congressional eco-warrior, a corporate crime fighter since the 70's, and consistently gets fantastic grades from progressive groups like Public Citizen.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

28. Overwhelmingly pro-Likud?

I thought Dean was being torn up over saying that we should return to some semblance of balance in the Israel/Palestinian issue. This hardly seems like pro-Likud to me.

Nor, while I disagree with Dean on the Death penalty, do I think this is "stagecraft". Reasonable people can disagree over the disposition of mass murderers. I generally do agree with his position on guns, and I think he's being perfectly principaled to leave such problems up to the individual states.

I guess I'm actually not looking for "the most progressive candidates in the race". I'm looking for someone who can govern effectively with an evenly divided Senate and House.

- C.D.

[veganwitch]

29. hes been quoted...

as saying his views align with AIPAC. ill find that exact quote.

heres a whole article.

http://www.forward.com/issues/2002/02.11.22/news3.html

<snip>
Asked if his appearance at the Peace Now event should be read as a signal of his views on the Middle East, Dean said, "No, my view is closer to AIPAC's view." He said he was bestowing the award because the honoree and fellow Vermonter Barr "is a remarkable humanitarian who has served her state and me. I would not turn down an opportunity to honor her."

<snip>

[Larkspur]

32. The AIPAC Dean was referring to was the one run by Steve Grossman

Grossman, a moderate, is the one who got AIPAC to back Bill Clinton's Middle East Peace Process.

[DrFunkenstein]

36. Overwhelmingly pro-Likud

Dean traveled to Israel on a trip sponsored by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). After meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Dean stated: “I do not think that as long as Yasser Arafat is president there will be peace." Before leaving, Sharon asked if Dean would support requests for new loan guarantees to Israel. Dean “promised him he would.”

http://www.aaiusa.org/countdown/c120602.htm

Last December, Dean told the Jerusalem Post that he unequivocally supported $8 Billion in US loan guarantees for Israel. "I believe that by providing Israel with the loan guarantees...the US will be advancing its own interest," he said. His unconditional support for the loan package, in addition to $4 Billion in outright grants, went further than even some of the most pro-Israel elements in the Bush administration, like Paul Wolfowitz, who wanted to at least include some vague restrictions like pushing Israel to curtail new settlements and accept a timetable to establish a Palestinian state.

http://www.muslimwakeup.com/mainarchive/000119.html

Dean believes the Bush administration should be giving Israel $4 billion in military aid to fight terrorism, not the $1 billion it proposed last month.

http://www.jewishsf.com/bk030418/us02.shtml

And, finally, Dean's foreign policy speech at Drake. Note how one-sided it is.

When they have bothered to state them, the Administration's guiding principles in the Middle East are the right ones. Terrorism against Israel must end. A two-state solution is the only path to eventual peace, but Palestinian territory cannot have the capability of being used as a platform for attacking Israel. Some degree of separation between Israelis and Palestinians is probably necessary in light of the horrible bloodshed of the past two years. To be viable, the Palestinian Authority must become democratic and purged of corruption.

But none of this will happen naturally. The United States is the only country with the ability to give both sides the confidence to move toward a future of coexistence. Appearances matter, and if we are not engaged, it looks like we simply do not care and that we have condemned the entire Palestinian people because of their leadership. In my view, this hurts the United States, it hurts Israel, and it makes it less likely the violence and the terrorism will end.

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_speech_foreign_drake

<>

---

To sum up: Dean says we shouldn't "take sides" - despite promising a leader of another country unconditional financial aid (more than even Paul Wolfowitz would concede). That's 4x the military aid ($1 billion to $4 billion) and 4x the guaranteed loans ($2 billion to $8 billion). He also supports unilateral concessions from the Palestinians, and a "separation" wall that even George W. Bush has reservations about.

Now let's compare to Kerry's foreign policy speech at Georgetown:

Without demanding unilateral concessions, the United States must mediate a series of confidence building steps which start down the road to peace. Both parties must walk this path together - simultaneously. And the world can help them do it. While maintaining our long term commitment to Israel's existence and security, the United States must work to keep both sides focused on the end game of peace. Extremists must not be allowed to control this process.

http://www.johnkerry.com/news/speeches/spc_2003_0123.html

[KaraokeKarlton]

33. And what you seem to forget...

If you look at people's actual records, you will see that Kerry and Kucinich are the 2 most progressive candidates in the race.

This is exactly why neither Kucinich or Kerry can win. Kucinich is far too left to appeal enough to middle America, period. He NEEDS to stay right where he is because that is where he best serves the country. Kerry really is very liberal despite the fact that he's spent the past few years acting ashamed of being a liberal. So, not only has he really pissed off a lot of the liberals but he's done plenty in the past to cause the middle to shy away from him too. As for Dean, his record is very appealing to the middle and he's been able to fire up and appeal to liberals as well. Add to this the fact that he's pulling in so many new voters and disillusioned voters that he's virtually unstoppable at this point and has been for quite awhile now. Dean is definitely the one to bank on.

[OKNancy]

11. Do you like his tax policies now?

I think you were thinking clearer a few months ago.

You wrote the following:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=27026#27267

I oppose his policies.

He supports leaving gun laws up to the states. What good does it do to have restrictive gun laws in South Carolina and none in North Carolina. You just cross the border. One set of laws to protect all Americans.

I oppose the proposed tax increases on middle and low income Americans. We are in a recession and the little guy (myself included) are already struggling. Kerry (like Clinton before him) had a plan of targetted tax hikes. These raise taxes on the wealthy individuals and corporations that benefit from the protections and resources of the US while passing their tax burden on to the lower economic strata.

I oppose Dean's last minute support of the embargo on Cuba. he sized up the polls in Florida and changed his position last minute.

There are lots of things I agree with Dean on and a few more I disagree but the most important problem I have with Dean is that he is the least electable of the candidates. Thingds are too important in this election cycle to vote for a pie in the sky candidate.

If Dean gets the nod, I will vote for him of course. But if we want to seat a president in the Whitehouse this cycle, you had better get behind Kerry or we will lose. Kerry is the candidate they fear the most with good reason.

[styersc]

19. I've already stated that I have been a Kerry supporter for some time...

..and Kerry's policies are much closer to my own. But as I stated in my earlier post- I am interested in electability.

I've followed Kerry in media and in person and am afraid that if he comes off cold and alouf to a supporter- how does he come off to the undecided.

Dean has passion that has taken him from the back of the pack (at the beginning) to the front runner.

I won't bash any candidate- even Kerry. I will support whoever is on the ticket in 2004, but in the primary process I am going to cast my vote for the candidate who has challenged the President's policies from day one- all of his policies from the economy to the war.

Keep in mind that any resistence to Iraq that has been expressed by Kerry, Gephardt, even Lieberman in the last few months has been the result of the effect that Dean has had on the argument. They can resist Bush because Dean has paved the way.

Dean has been good for the debate and the party. I think he would be as good for the country.

[sandnsea]

20. That's just not true

On Thursday Howard Dean said Clark was supporting the war last fall too. Funny thing is, Dean is the one who was saying Saddam had WMD and was a tyrant and a threat. Dean is the one who was saying give him 30-60 days to comply and then go in with or without the UN. Dean is the one who said he supported Biden-Lugar, which only required a new UN resolution, which Bush actually got in October. He wasn't anti-war, anymore than any other candidate. He may be getting a pass on all of this right now, but you can bet your ass he wouldn't be in 2004. They'll either paint him as wishy-washy on all the issues or a tax-raising socialist who hates our soldiers and won't defend our security. Or both. There is not a snowball's chance in hell that Howard Dean can beat George Bush.

[poskonig]

27. Who can beat George Bush?

Specify, please. Will Clark defeat him with mountains of praises? Or is having a mom that worked at a post office our silver bullet? :crazy:

[sandnsea]

39. Not Howard Dean

Edwards, Clark or Kerry could all beat Bush for different reasons. Howard Dean can't. And it's mostly because of Howard Dean himself. He's made too many stupid remarks, has been too unclear in his positions, has no foreign relations knowledge, and no real track record to fall back on.

People on this board can villify George Bush all they want, the majority of the people out there just don't see the world through DU eyes. They aren't going to believe any PNAC agenda or that the Republicans are intentionally destroying social service programs. Remember Medicare withering on the vine? It didn't stop people from voting for more Republicans did it? Remember Hillary and her vast right wing conspiracy? That hurt her and will always be lingering with mainstream voters. What sounds good to the left of the party doesn't sound so sensible to the mainstream.

If you want to beat George Bush, you have to think like a mainstream voter and frame your message to reach THEM. Edwards, Clark, Kerry and even Gephardt have all figured that out. Howard Dean hasn't. Most DUers haven't. And if Howard did start framing his message to reach them, he'd lose the support he has. He's put himself in a horrible position. And what's really stupid, is even if he somehow managed to win, he wouldn't govern in any sort of way his supporters, or most Democrats, would be happy with. This is the goofiest election ever.

[Duder]

13. Excellent choice

May 28, 2003

DEAN: TAX CUTS PART OF BUSH'S RIGHT-WING AGENDA

With the President's proposed budget and the $350 billion tax cut package he is signing today, it has become clear what this President is attempting to do, and why we must repeal the entire package of cuts both those signed today and those passed in 2001.

It is time to level with the American people. The economic plans put forth by President Bush and the Republican party are a fundamental assault on the basic American ideals that we all share -- an assault on our schools, our health care, our environment and our social security.

I will not go along with it.

The sooner we recognize that this isn't a fight over tax cuts, but a battle for our country's heart, soul and future - the sooner the American people will join our cause.

Let me be clear. The President's tax cuts are part of a radical agenda to dismantle Social Security, Medicare, and our public schools through financial starvation.

In Oregon last week, the state had to close schools three weeks early because there was no money. In New Hampshire this week, the sheriffs made it clear that, because there was no money, they couldn't provide the basic law enforcement protection communities expect in this time of heightened alerts about terrorism. All across the country, hospitals and health care systems are cutting back and cities are cutting services because there is no money.

What America needs now is a Democratic Party with the backbone to stand up for fiscal responsibility and against this President's recklessness with the facts, and our future.

No Republican president has balanced the budget in 34 years and if this president succeeds, no future American president from either party will be able to do so without massive tax increases that will break the backs of the American people or without destroying Medicare, social security, our schools and even our nation's security.

My central commitment upon taking office will be to repeal these tax cuts to put our fiscal house in order, and save the very fabric that holds our American community together.

We will not be able to meet our fundamental obligations to teach our children, care for our parents, and defend our nation if we bankrupt our country.

If we fail to defeat this President and end his radical agenda, we will have lost the central ideal proclaimed from one American generation to the next throughout our history: "We are one nation, and we are all in this together."

[polpilot]

14. Dean represents the best hope for the future of this country and will be

nominated and elected. The DLC, DNC, and their long term Bush-like representatives have sold our freedoms and economic security.

Their recent 'conversion' to 'health care for all' and 'piety for the middle class' is as much a sham as their 'democratic' focus has been in their decades old lack of representation for the American people.
Sold out politicians, old and faded, and the reason we're where we are today. Their only mantra is 'WE BEEN IN CONGRESS FOR 30 YEARS BUT AMERICA'S CURRENT PROBLEMS ARE NOT OUR FAULT' That's what they're peddling and the polls indicate the Americans aren't buying.

Howard Dean '04...The New Democratic leader of The NEW Democratic Party.

[veganwitch]

15. um.. dean's policies are very much

DLC, DNC. he compares himself to clinton as much as possible and we all know how easily he folded to the repugs. clinton, while better than bush, was hardly perfect.

if dean gets elected, i will not hold by breath for the real change this country needs.

[Upfront]

22. You won't half to

It will happen so fast you won't have time to breath. Go Dean!

[sandnsea]

16. What principles?

Implementing the CHIP program passed by Congress? Implementing waivers granted by HHS? Raising taxes on the middle class which is in direct opposition to progressive tax policy? Supporting Biden-Lugar and then pretending he's anti-war? Gaining 100,000 acres of Vermont forests and then bending to logging and recreationists so the land isn't really protected at all? Suggesting a coal power plant as an energy solution in Vermont? Dumping radioactive waste in Yucca Mtn and Sierra Blanca with no concern for the people in those areas? Supporting drastic Medicare cuts and then pretending the Domenici plan was the Clinton plan? Cutting Vermont's health programs and raising co-pays as soon as it runs into financial troubles? The man doesn't know the meaning of Democratic principles. Any one of the other Democratic candidates have a far better record and better vision for implementing true Democratic principles than Howard Dean.

[veganwitch]

17. youre hott! can i marry you?

green dot!

[George_Bonanza]

18. Good for you

[Cha]

23. This makes me happy, styersc!

Another thinking person for Dean! I meet a lot of them @
the Co-op where I work. I talk to People everyday who tell me what they like about Dean who "says what they are thinking"!

I talked to someone today who saw Dean on "facethenation" a couple of weeks ago and loved the answer Dean gave bob schieffer when scheiffer asked him about "flipflopping".

My customer said Dean told schieffer that things change and evolve and you don't stay stuck in one position because that's the way you thought of something previously..I'm paraphrasing here. Anyway ..he was really impressed with Dean from seeing him on "facethenation" and now is solidly behind Dean. And wants a Dean pin!

[styersc]

26. I did not want to start another divisive thread, so please let me voice...

..my appreciation of every candidate that is bothering to throw his or her hat in the ring. I see positives in each, and like I said, I'll vote for anyone who weathers the primary as the candidate.

It's just that I recently realized that Dean is the only candidate who seems to have the spark for the job. I'm looking forward to see him debate Bush and I like what I have seen him do for the enthusiasm level of the party.

I also realize that no candidate can give you everything you want on every issue. The only way to get a candidate like that is to run (consider it- we need young blood).

I'm certain that Dean wants to take the country the direction I would like to see it go and I know that he has experience as an administrator and governor. As important I think he can speak to undecideds and independents who are in the "out with the incumbent" state of mind.

To my Kerry friends. I agree with Kerry on practically every issue and am aware that he has been a consistent advocate for issues that I cherish, but I agreed with Mike Dukakis too. I agreed with Gore- but at the end of the day, they could not persuade those voters who are in play.

Best to the party, I hope the presidential candidate can help local and legislative candidates by unting the party and running a great race.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

31. 'spark' for the job?

Dean's an out of control conflagration. I prefer Kerry- the finely tuned 300 HP engine clicking on all cylinders.

[paulk]

30. but will other progressive populists be won over by Dean?

Whose voters will he pick up once candidates start dropping out?

Will the liberals and progressives who support Kerry, Kucinich, Moseley Braun, or Sharpton decide to support a conservative like Dean? Will Gephardt and Lieberman's conservative following cross over or will Dean's anti-war stance scare them away? Will Clark's people embrace Dean? After the flame wars I've seen here between those two camps, I've got to wonder.

I don't see where Dean will pick up support for the nomination, much less a general election. And I also think your stance on losing on principles is extremely ill considered.

[KaraokeKarlton]

34. Dean already has the support to get the nomination

The primary voting base has changed. Over half of Dean's supporters who will be voting in the primaries haven't voted in them before. He's changed the entire base. At this point, I don't see where anyone will be able to stop Dean. And there is also NO WAY Bush can beat Dean as long as those who always vote Democratic get in line and support him. Bush is going to be facing the biggest political humiliation imaginable IF Howard Dean is the nominee. If it's anyone else Bush goes up against, it's going to be really close and Bush might be able to pull off another 2000. He won't be able to do that with Dean because Dean has an army of new voters and swing voters anxious to vote for him.

[paulk]

43. Crap.

"Voting base has changed" "Dean's new voters" Crap. Angels will come down from heaven and annoint the Doctor. Crap. Your post has no substance. It's based on fantasy. It refutes nothing I said.

Dean will win in a landslide. Have you even been following any of the national polls? Dean isn't even doing the best among the Democratic candidates, much less beating Bush in a landslide!

Wishful thinking does not make a good argument.

[DrFunkenstein]

37. I'm Sure The Cockroach Supporters Will Run To Dean

There hasn't been a single candidate that Dean hasn't turned on to claw ahead. His platform is decent (not great), but his campaign has been nasty from the beginning and just seems to get nastier as it goes on.

What is funny is the Dean supporters feign indignation at being called "Newt-Lite," but see nothing wrong in comparing members of the United States Congress to cockroaches.

With the exception of Lieberman, I will turn to Santa Claus before I go to Dean. Ho ho.

[Pavlovs DiOgie]

38. LOL

You have way too much anger in you...try obsessing over something positive in life.

[sandnsea]

40. What's more important?

You sound like somebody who didn't get all in a twit over Bush because 'how much damage could he do'. We see it and we know how much worse it can get. If the direction of the country, and the entire human race really, isn't worth obsessing over, I don't know what is.

[Larkspur]

42. Dean is not Newt-lite. He didn't cave into Newt like the Bush-lite Dems

did to Bush over the Iraq War, No Child Left Behind, and the Tax Cuts.

Dean rejected Newt's Contract with America but agreed on principle, but not on the details, on decreasing Medicare spending. There is nothing wrong with wanting programs run more efficiently so that the remain solvent longer.

[FubarFly]

35. Welcome aboard.

Dean has always stood up for his principles, even when it was odds at with whatever the Democratic "leadership" was pushing. I'm glad you're not letting the haters fool you. Howard Dean is the real deal. He's not perfect, but I'm glad we both agree that he will make an excellent president.


:toast:

[paulk]

41. Haters?

Are you getting your talking points from the wingnuts now?
People who disagree with Bush are "Bush haters".
People who disagree with Dean are "Dean haters".

Refer to my above post on where Dean will get his support - then compare that with your position on those who oppose him. What a wonderful way to win friends and influence people!

[molly]

44. Please explain what you view as his qualifications

I see them as null.

[CMT]

45. Nice to have you

and I agree Dean's economic program is fantastic.

[indigo32]

46. Welcome aboard

eom