Why did Dean lose?

[zulchzulu]

Poll question: Why did Dean lose?

Just to be "fair"...

[Dookus]

1. simple

people voted for somebody else.

[XanaDUer]

21. YOU'RE BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!Now I can come here more!

:hi:

[Dookus]

27. lol

aw, that's sweet. Thank you.

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. 3 major reasons, media play up of the scream,

no ranked voting ballots, and no same-day primaries.

----------------------------------------------------------
Save this nation one town, county, and state at a time!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/electionreform.htm#why

[LoZoccolo]

14. A caucus /is/ a ranked ballot, in some ways.

There are rounds of voting and coalition-building.

[GreenPartyVoter]

58. Yes, in some ways. But it might still be helpful to have those ranked

ballots for people to make their final decisions for candidates on.

----------------------------------------------------------
Save our country one town, county, and state at a time!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/electionreform.htm#why

[Lexingtonian]

3. His following scared normal people

And still does.

[catgirl]

4. The question is

would he be in the Middle East right now?

[LittleClarkie]

6. And if so, would he be screaming?

I am definitely in a goofy ass mood at the moment.

[catgirl]

18. Hey I need a little humor right now

after the last thread I was in (someone claiming
the KKK deserves freedom of speech and should
have the right to adopt a highway).

[calimary]

46. Good! We need it.

A goofy ass mood would be infinitely preferable to the cloud I feel like I've been under since early November.

I love Howard Dean. I scream for him. If it'd been stolen from him, at least he would have gone down fighting. And as somebody elsewhere here posted - he does have this habit of being correct.

And yeah, he probably still would be screaming, just for the fun of it, judging from how frequently he poked fun at himself for it afterwards.

[NoPasaran]

10. I resent that

I'm a Dean supporter and I pass for normal.

[yardwork]

15. I'm with you. I didn't commit to anybody in the primaries - I was ABB

and we see where that got us - they stole the election anyway.

I think that Howard Dean's "scream" was nothing but a media invention. When I finally saw it I was underwhelmed. What's the big deal?

He was a good governor of Vermont. He would have been an excellent president.

I would never say anything negative about Howard Dean and I don't really understand why any Democrat would.

[LittleClarkie]

20. Normal people scare me

I'm Abby Normal. Glad to meet ye.

(Some days I attempt to pass for normal as well. Shh, don't tell anyone.)

[GiovanniC]

11. I Concur

[LittleClarkie]

22. I should have concurred

The voices inside my head would be happy then. They say hello, by the way.

[proud_Kucitizen]

5. I couldn't vote for him because

he kept saying he was the only candidate against the war which was grossly not true. In fact he wanted to add troops in Iraq, their were others like Kucinich and Sharpton that were against the war and wanted to bring our troops home.

[Freddie Stubbs]

7. Many of his supporters had second thoughts about his electability

Enough of them defected for other candidates to surpass him in support.

[Guaranteed]

24. Yes, that's what Bill Schneider kept saying. nt

[DaveinMD]

8. he was losing

before the scream. If Dean had won Iowa, I believe Clark would be President today.

[moggie12]

51. Yep, I agree

Sequence of events was: He came in third in Iowa, then he screamed. The other sequence of events was: Kerry won in Iowa and everyone rallied around the war-hero winner, relieved that there was some sort of direction after watching the 10-candidate field try to all crowd onto one stage for debates.

[Maat]

9. I think Howard Dean lost because he intimidated those in the Beltway.

You can see it now. If you look at the Rethuglican structure, they tell everyone when and for what they are going to run, and IF they are the one to run. For example, in my state, Rep. Darrell Issa funded the petition-guys at the supermarkets, to get the recall started. He did this because he thought that the Party Machine intended him to run. I will never forget the day he announced that he was bowing out of the race - you KNEW that he had been TOLD, 'Back off. Arnold's the Guy.' He looked like he was going to cry.

I believe that the faction that controlled the Democratic Party during the primary phase discovered that Howard was not going to tow the Beltway party line, and was going to be too independent - and wouldn't necessarily honor all of those insider agreements. He was not totally controllable. So, he had to be eliminated from the contest. The DLC faction wanted/wants total control.

They would be wise to understand that they do not have totally compliant constituents anymore. That there is power in the grassroots. If they are wise, they are going to listen to the grassroots, IMHO.

This was the first time in my 46 years that I had gotten involved in a presidential election. I did not like much of what I saw.

[janx]

29. I'm 47.

And I saw the same thing happening.

[moggie12]

55. Honestly, I don't think there was a DLC conspiracy

I had heard the "DLC knocked him off" theory, too, but don't believe it after reading various DU threads on the topic and looking-up news stories to see the chronology of events.

For example, previous DU threads have pointed to Dean's lack of field organization on the ground in Iowa -- too many outsiders involved, not a lot of Iowans. Also, posts from DUers who are Iowans point to a lack of enthusiasm there for him -- maybe if NY or CA was first primary state he would've done better, but he apparently didn't appeal to Iowans.

Moreover, I don't think it makes any sense at all to blame a DLC-orchestrated campaign for doing him in. He did a fine job on his own without DLC interference!! His biggest fault, in my not so humble opinion, was shooting his mouth off all the time. I personally think he was unelectable as President after his Osama remark, made a few days before the Iowa primary (when he said he wouldn't "pronounce OBL guilty before a trial" -- was this statement in accord with Const. principles, etc., etc.? Yes! Was it stupid to say it out loud when the country was caught-up in delusional war-fever induced by Bush's flag-waving? Yes. Karl would've creamed him with that remark, arguing that Dean would be "soft" on OBL. I think Iowa and NH voters made a reasoned choice, going with Kerry, a war hero who had a better shot at taking Bush down.

Well, that's my two cents for what it's worth. Please consider this stuff before believing the DLC conspiracy theories. And please take me seriously even though I am younger than you (a mere 45.....).


edited to fix typos

[Maat]

57. I didn't mean to imply a conspiracy ...

it's just the way they think.

And our theories are not mutually exclusive. A little bit of both was probably happening.

My point is that the Beltway is so close-minded. They are positive things have to run a certain way. We are not going to win until our leadership steps outside of the box, and addresses the needs of the Democratic grassroots.

They seem to think that huge publicly-held corps. are desperately needed in order for them to be funded. This is very mistaken. Many of us have small corporations, receive more-than-decent income, and are very committed to our causes. I think they need to listen to what Howard is saying.

[moggie12]

61. Oh, okay, I see what you're saying

Not only that, I agree completely now that you put it that way. My biggest problem with "DLC-types" is that they're so beholden to Wall Street and the high-tech industry (e.g., lettings corporate "pigs" pig-out on stock options, not effectively regulating hedge fund guys, etc.) The populist economic message if what I liked best about Dean.

Now I'm finding out that "cozy relationships" is what's screwing up our campaigns, too. If you havent seen this post, it's worth a look:

"Can we all agree it's time to retire Bob Shrum"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1484010

There's a post in there by "NYCGirl" (#8) that provides a link to a Washington Monthly article that made my hair stand on end: It describes clubby "insider dealing" by Dem campaign consultants and pollsters. No wonder our campaigns stink so bad....

[Tom Rinaldo]

12. Dean was in a crowded Field with other good Democrats

Kerry was in a General Election running against one bad Republican. I am really not trying to say anything negative about Kerry here, just saying that it isn't "being fair" to throw this poll up as a counterweight to one on Kerry.

Democrats should think about why we lost. Maybe the options given in the other poll weren't fair. Maybe Kerry didn't even lose if the election wasn't played with. If that is your point, fine. But dragging Dean in misses the point. Kerry was representing all Democrats in November. Asking why we "lost" to Bush is natural.

[Clarkie1]

13. Because most people prefered other candidates n/t

[catgirl]

17. I'd love to put him in a boxing ring

with Bush. Imagine that?

[whirlygigspin]

16. His following scared people who "think" they are normal

and fear Vermonters strange mountain ways & town meeting day.
like my status quo auntie meme.

[Gyre]

19. Kerry and Gephardt

put the hit on him for the DLC in Iowa. Two-prong attacks dragged him down. Tends to happen when two moderately-successful moderates from your own party tell everybody how dangerous you are. People tend to think "well shit, If his own party thinks he's bad, he must be really bad."

The "scream" was the result of being cannibalized by his own party members. Think about it!

Gyre

[Guaranteed]

23. Bill Schneider kept saying "people aren't sure if he's electable."

Seriously, that was it. He repeated that over and over, and it became a doubt.

That's what happened with Iowa, and then the scream.

[seaglass]

40. Yes because EVERYONE takes Bill Schneider's word as

gospel:eyes:

[Guaranteed]

42. That is exactly what happened. I watched it happen over the two weeks

before Iowa.

Bill Schneider would come on CNN, and every single time he would start talking about how "people have doubts about Dean's electability." No real reasoning. Just said it, over and over and over.

And it's a self-fulfilling prophecy when you're dealing with primaries.

[seaglass]

45. I know he said it but you are giving him far more power than

he has.

[janx]

25. My God

Need anything else be said?

[janx]

26. I can't say this

[Democrat Dragon]

28. The Scream

but not really the scream itself, but rather the media spin on it. Personally I thought it was well.......kind of cute (I'm not using the right word, am I?)

[agincourt]

30. They thought his sitting out the Viet Nam war,

would make him unelectable. As if people really gave a shit about that, as most of the repigs bellowing for this war sat it out, with the exception of La Laollie North.

[Tom Rinaldo]

31. Really, why did you feel a need to start such a "provocative" post?

I might have used other words but I am trying not to get deleted. If this is your idea of "fair", what would an "unfair" post look like?

[CTLawGuy]

32. because

people decided he wasn't "electable" because he took stands on the issues that *gasp* were the opposite of Bush's positions.

They wanted to win, and thought that an inoffensive war hero who didn't rock the bush boat could win. They were wrong.

[Cats Against Frist]

33. A concerted effort to destroy him by the media, the Republicans and the

Democratic party.

The hoopla over the scream was ridiculous. I mean, holy fuck, he was cheering at a rally, and our "president" is a clumsy, bumbling, delusional charlatan, who can't keep from hurting himself and sometimes dresses like Fifty Cent.

Now let's talk about superficial bullshit.

Dean was everybody's enemy, because he was somebody a little different, who made a lot of sense. The media should ROT IN HELL for playing up the scream, and the dumb fuckers in Iowa should be ashamed.

And I'm not like a Deaniac or anything, but I can identify an "assasination" attempt when I see one.

[KittyWampus]

50. Please, The Media Gave Dean Endless, Glowing Coverage For Many

many months.

Oh, remember when the Media gave Dean a do-over on his Osama comment?

Funny, they never gave Kerry or Clark a do-over on anything.

And then, after the Scream, the Media had Dean on morning talk shows giving him time to salvage his image.

Heck, the Media even APOLOGIZED for their Scream Pile-On.

Funny, they never apologized to Kerry or Clark.

And when they finally DID turn the spotlight on Dean towards the end he wilted like a plucked daisy in desert heat.

[Cats Against Frist]

60. I think we're both right

I think the media helped make him, and then they broke him. But you have to remember, part of the reason they did cover him so much was because he WAS making waves -- raising the Internet money, and shaming the "go-along" dems, AND he had policies that would typically be seen as "conservative."

You're right, however -- they didn't give Clark a break, either. And they just plain didn't do their fucking job when it came to right-wing crap from the Swift Liars. If this ticket were Clark/Edwards, we would have won. No offense to John Kerry. They could attack Clark on the same stuff as Kerry, only Clark had some hawkishness to him, and Kerry had wayyyy more baggage -- what, are they going to criticize Clark for being a "crazy warmongering asprin factory bomber?" They voted for a crazy warmonger. It would make them look like idiots to bring up Kosovo, and remind them while Georgie was snorting Cocaine and making his twenty-five cent conversion, Wes Clark was busy attaining the status of GENERAL in the Military.

[FrenchieCat]

34. Because Howard Dean had no National Security nor

Foreign Policy experience....and the nominee needed credibility in those areas in order to have a chance of going up against a wartime President (Bush and his cronies sure made that point was made often enough during their convention) during wartime and winning. In addition, the fact that Dean was portrayed as a Vermont Liberal didn't help.....since many Democrats wanted to be competitive in the South.

Voters in Iowa thought about what it would take to win the general election right prior to voting and realized that Howard Dean would be running in the general with a great big hole AND the wrong birthplace on his resume. They decided that they needed someone with some experience in National Security and all of that or at the very least a charismatic southerner a la 1992. Of course voters got Military experience and National Security confused (many thought it meant the same thing....which it didn't)...and the Iowa voters voted for the two that had some of those attributes they felt were required.(Clark who had all of the Kerry/Edwards attributes and even some Dean ones did not run in Iowa).

Everything after Iowa is still just a blur, and although Kerry didn't end up projecting the kind of credibility in the areas required (national Security)...that was not realized until after he had won the nomination. That's when it dawned on a few that serving in the military 40 years prior does not make one knowledgable in the current business of National Sec.

Amazingly, Kerry still actually won, if it wasn't for the Voting "irregularities".

Hope Dems get someone with credibility in the defense area in 2008....and not just forget the reasons this election loss in 2004. Thus far I keep hearing names like Mike Warner, Russ Feingold, Evan Bayh and Hillary Clinton....none of which could tout "National Security" expertise other than the Senators (2004 may have also taught us that Senator is a bad word in Election nominees) sitting on a couple of committees here and there ...at the most.

I don't understand why Dems are acting like National Security continues not to be a prerequisite after 9/11 and this war in Iraq that continues to rage on. Guess the lesson of losing just didn't quite make an impression on us...

Here's hoping that we will have found a couple of "clues" by the time the primaries start in 2007.

[Tom Rinaldo]

35. Frenchie you gave a reasoned reply but I don't think reason was the point

If you look at the wording of the choices given in the poll I think it all comes off as a cheap shot against Dean and his supporters. I backed Clark for the reasons you cited and I will again if given the chance, but looking at the way the campaign played out, Dean brought different strengths to the table than Kerry did. It is possible in my mind that he would have done better than Kerry did. Kerry in my opinion squandered some of his strengths early in the race by not quickly drawing a clear enough line between His Iraq policy and Bush's (he drew a line of course, but initially not sharp enough). Dean would not have made that mistake. Of course you know full well that I thought Clark would have been the ideal candidate.

[FrenchieCat]

36. That's why I didn't vote

in this poll. Because the reason I cited was not listed. I was answering why Dean lost the primaries....not whether he could have done better than Kerry during the general election....although, the more I think of it...the more I think we would have had the same result....because although more may have voted for Dean on reasons like the Iraq war.....others that trusted Kerry with our National Security may not have trusted Dean with the same.

[Tom Rinaldo]

37. I didn't vote because I don't think this is a serious thread

I think it is "retaliation" of some sort because someone else put up a poll thread about why Kerry lost. Kerry "lost" only a few weeks ago, and he was running as the standard bearer for all Democrats. It is relevant to all of us therefor and timely to look at what did and didn't work in his campaign. Dean was eliminated 9 months ago and there wasn't even a fig leaf of an effort to raise meaningful questions with the poll choices. I guess I have just been at the receiving end, as a Clark supporter, of too many threads intended to throw fuel on flame fests to honor this one with a serious discussion. I could chalk this poll up to "humor" but nah, I don't think I will. I think some people are tired of Kerry being blamed for losing and sometimes it comes out like this. It's late, I'm tired, sorry if I am on too much of a serious kick about this. But I really am tired of the candidate wars.

[FrenchieCat]

38. I didn't perceive it as such......

But you may be right.....

I'm so used to Wes Clark getting this kinda of treatment, it just made the thread look like a par for the course to me.

[JNelson6563]

43. Right you are Tom!

You have often proven yourself to be beyond the average level of "politically astute" among your peers though so no surprise.

Julie

[Tom Rinaldo]

47. And you among yours too...

Thanks Julie. Good luck with the DNC Chair.

[Buck_Fush]

39. Dean lost because of media whores propaganda

The Shrub campaign realized Dean would kick their ass and they did not want to face off against him in an election so they had the media trash him over absolutely nothing! That was easy to do because the media are all propaganda whores bought and completely owned by the Shrub family. It wasn't about his policies, it wasn't about his ethics, it was about the "scream" which was NOTHING at all. Imagine, if the most offensive thing the Son Of A Bush had ever done was be too enthuastic in a speach! How much better off the world would have been!

[Township75]

41. Other - Dean lost because he was targeted by the DLC

.

[Catchawave]

44. Other: The DNC already annointed "war hero" Kerry as the

best candidate to challenge a sitting "war" president. The media scream fluff pieces just helped them sell their base on Kerry.

[Bampa]

48. He lost because of Kerry & Gephart attack

If you all remember at that time, JFK & Gephart ramped up an attack of Dean's credibility and character. It was quite ugly to the point that I thought the whole attack was hurting the Democratic Party's image and I wrote to JFK, Gephart, and the DNC. I heard no reply except from JFK. His response to my astonishment was that his attack will make him win. I thought it was plain dirty.

Them came the scream and the media to nail in the coffin. I still voted for Kerry, but dean was my choice.

[sendero]

54. Too bad....

... Kerry never had the balls to tear into Bush** like he tore into Dean.

I'm not saying Dean didn't have it coming, after all, he was not exactly charitable in his characterizations of his primary competitors.

The problem is no guts, no glory. Kerry clearly had guts in the field of battle, but in the field of the campaign he could have given Bush** the total smackdown, instead he settled for a couple b-slaps and that is why he lost - NO PASSION.

[KittyWampus]

49. The Final Nail Was Dean's Outlandish Concession Speech In Iowa

Forget the 'scream'.

His speech was as a National Candidate for POTUS not Governor of Vermont.

He was presenting himself to the American People not his hardcore supporters.

It was totally out of form to give a rally type speech.

The same way it's out of form to Roast someone at their funeral or to tell dirty jokes while toasting the bride and groom at a wedding.

Not only was the speech completely beyond the pale... he appeared unhinged doing it. Probably a bit of exhaustion with emotional upheaval.

I blame his staff, in a way. They should have made sure he had a prepared speech.

[Tom Rinaldo]

52. If this must be discussed see this thread instead:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1484691

That one is not set up to be insulting to Dean or his supporters.

[LiberalCat]

53. The bushies used the media to destroy him...

because they knew he could beat bush by enough votes so that they could not steal the election.

[JaneQPublic]

56. He Dissed the Caucus System

Dean was the presumptive nominee up until early Jan. 2004. Then the media (ABCNews?) dug up an old clip from the 90's of a local Canadian public affairs show in which Dean made disparaging remarks about caucuses.

Soon after, his numbers in Iowa began to plummett. Then came his loss in Iowa, and the "Scream" sealed his fate.

[Radical Activist]

59. Again the Dean camp pretending to be like Kucinich

It was really Kucinich's first campaign manager, Gary, who spent all of that campaign's money on California weed. Come on people! ;)

[Moderator]

62. I'm locking this thread

reason: for consistancy