Is Deans fundraising ability indicative of anything

[Capn Sunshine]

just wondering in all the Kerry juggernaut join in threads, what they make of Gov. Deans ability to raise over a million dollars in about 36 hours. Probably a million four by days end.

over 30% of the donors were new.

New faces at the Meetups nationwide last Wednesday night. Nationwide Meetup figures:

Dean >189,000
Kerry> 39,000

There's a street level disconnect it seems.

Explain this to me.

[gWbush is Mabus]

1. IMO

Kerry gets more votes from people who are ignorant of the issues
and pay close attention to state-run media (CNN, Fox, etc.)

[Armstead]

5. Yup

That's basically it.

Dean screams. Kerry is "electable" according to those "in the know."

That's all that counts.

[vi5]

10. Oh brother...

You people really do believe this stuff you shovel, don't you? That's the scary part.

[Armstead]

20. Yup I totally believe the stuff i shovel

I may be wrong, but at least I'm sincere. O8)

Do you not not believe the bandwagon effect has a lot to do with whoever the perceived frontrunner is? That was true when Dean was riding high too.

[vi5]

29. Not to the degree that Kerry is winning by....

I've got no grudge against Dean and no particular love for Kerry. But I don't think that close to 40% of the voters in many of the states that have had primaries already, and at least 25% of the voters in the rest have all been mindless sheeple who only get their news from cable news media. Did he get some bump? Yeah, I wouldn't deny that. But the numbers he is pulling in are just not reflective solely of a group mentality.

And it's that kind of condescending, dismissive attitude which has caused a lot of people to make the decisions they have been making in the polling booth, as much as it has been the omnipotent media machine.

[Armstead]

38. Lemme tell you about my mother..

She is an intelligent woman, who relies on the mainstream media for her news. She loathes Bush with a passion.

She was very enthusiastic about Dean, based on seeing the debates, what she read and saw on TV. Plus the fact that I did some convincing too.

Then after Iowa and New Hampshire she changed her mind. Why? That famous scream over and over really bothered her. "It's not the way a president is supposed to behave," she said. She wasn't enthusiastic about any of the otehr candidates, but figured Kerry was the only choice.

Then she saw Dean on Meet the Press, and the ABC interview with his wife, and some more of Dean. She regained her enthusiasm for him, and admitted she'd been wrong in judging him so quickly.

But, she added, she doesn't believe he has a chance anymore, and although she really preferred him, she felt like Kerry was the only real choice now.

I don't think of my mother as a "sheeple" and I am not condescending about her intelligence. But if someone who still prefers Dean can be turned by the constant repetition about Kerry's "momentum and electibility" and the inevitability of him after two states voted, then it does show how much the media can shape the perceptions of even intelligent people.

[vi5]

48. Hey...you're entitled to your opinion....

Do I think Kerry is electable? Yes. How did I come to that conclusion? Through the fact that I have a politically diverse group of family and friends. I have republican friends who really like Kerry and are really disenchanted with Bush. I have independent leaning towards Bush in-laws who really like Kerry and would vote for him. I have moderate Dem family and friends who really like Kerry and would vote for him. I have very liberal friends who like Kerry and would vote for him.

Amongst this same group of people, everyone is divided on Dean. Not because of electability just because they don't all agree on his approach or his style or any number of things.

So my assesement of Kerry as being electable is definitely there but I can say with 100% honesty that it had nothing to do with the media or anything but looking around at a diverse group of people who all find something they like in a guy enough to vote for him.

I don't think it's outlandish to assume that many other people could be using this same criteria for their decisions just as much if not more than the media.

[joshcryer]

39. I think the degree Kerry is winning by is the evidence!

If he was leading by only a few points then people could say "hey, everyone likes him and everyone supports him on their own violition," but it's hard to make that argument due to the swing in polls. I mean, seriously, one day he's no one and the next he has 50 point lead. That's the bandwagon effect my friend.

[Southsideirish]

26. Like the woman who said she for Edwards because his dad was a

"coal miner." Anyone who has been watching the candidates knows Edwards dad was a "mill worker" we heard it a million times. That is just an example of the kind of people who jump in at the last minute - haven't been paying attention and form judgments on the basis of a 90 second fluffed up commercial or stump speech. I feel most Edwards supporters are like this ( I know some of them and I've heard what they say about him) and many recent Kerry people too, i.e. a relative of mine, newly declared for Kerry, thinks JFK is an Irishman!

[NewYorkerfromMass]

34. but the essentials of the candidates came across to this woman

after all there's no mistaking Howard Brush Dean III as any mill worker's son now is there?
and...
Kerry- Vietnam vet and liberal Senator- check.
Wes Clark- General- NATO command- check.
I think most people get the essentials correct.

[D G]

68. So should we deny this woman the right to vote?

"Sorry, lady, you must complete the DU re-education process before entering the voting booth."

Obviously, Edwards' message got through to the woman you mentioned. Just because the woman remembered his profession incorrectly (and was apparently quoted on it somewhere) does not mean that she is ignorant. If your preferred candidate did not get his/her message to her, it's his/her problem.

[absyntheNsugar]

2. It's indicative that he can raise funds

it's also indicative that he can garner financial support.

Sorry - I had to be a wiseass. Caffeine hasn't taken control yet.

[HazMat]

3. at this point money doesn't matter

as much as momentum does.

[Renew Deal]

4. Votes are all that matters.

What a bunch of rich kids donate to Dean doesn't matter. The number of people that show up at meetups mean nothing. Votes are what counts.

[LuminousX]

7. Rich kids? Have some evidence to back that up?

[NashVegas]

77. In a Parallel Universe I'm a Rich Kid

If only I could unlock the door ...

[ScreamingMeemie]

11. I do have to say, my good friend, a gray haired mother of two, with

tight finances just donated. Not rich, she just believes in her candidate. We should all believe in our candidates this much. :hi:

[LittleDannySlowhorse]

15. I am neither a kid nor am I rich

Most of my fellow Dean supporters who I know are between 40-50 years of age, and they're not exactly rolling in dough either.

Sorry to disabuse you of your simplistic and completely uninformed analysis.

[Clem]

18. Please provide evidence

on your unfounded factual assertion.

Thank you.

Clem

[Feanorcurufinwe]

32. You mean voters have the final say, not campaign donors?

Wow, what an interesting way to choose leaders.

[ScreamingMeemie]

37. I would bet these people voted for Dean as well as donating Fean

;)

[Feanorcurufinwe]

59. Yes, and many, many, many more people voted for Kerry.

lol

[ScreamingMeemie]

60. There are many who are not laughing. I applaud Dean supporters

for standing their ground. It is my hope to restore Democracy and see all of these fine men make it to the convention. We need change. :hi:

and on edit: those votes have come from a pitifully small group of states. A group of states perhaps not indicative of the rest of the country. Let's all join hands and be fair to our candidates. I think they all have a fair shot. No one has "run the table" which is interesting to me. They deserve it.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

82. More power to them.

I'm all for folks supporting their candidates and campaigning and then accepting the will of the voters.

[ScreamingMeemie]

87. Please read my post again.

I think we need to change things and I think supporters of all candidates should realized this, instead of stubbing ourselves in the toe and battling each other.

We would all catch more flies with sugar.

I support a fair race for all the candidates. They're all terrific!

[Feanorcurufinwe]

90. I have the feeling our views may not in reality be very different.

[ScreamingMeemie]

93. Probably not.

Have a great weekend Fean. I've enjoyed debating with you. :hi:

I don't do it often much anymore and it was fun.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

99. Wow, my proffered hand - rejected! My peace offer - dissed!

lol

[ScreamingMeemie]

100. Oh no, I was agreeing with you Fean! Sorry it sounded that way.

I meant probably not as in you are right, we are probably not that different at all. Sorry about that!

:hi:

[Feanorcurufinwe]

101. Sorry for the misunderstanding!

:pals:

[Nazgul35]

64. The minute there is a perceived weakness

in Kerry....will those same voters stick with Kerry?

Or will they believe that he can not win?

You live by the bandwagon sword...you die by the bandwagon sword!!

ANd from what I have seen of Kerry and his record, he will not continue this firebrand campaign but will DLC his message in the general, thereby diluting the very momentum that the Dems have garnered by showing some back bone....

ANd as many said here about Dean and what we supporters would be responsible if we won him the nomination...I say that ipso facto....if Kerry is elected and reverts back to form, than everyone who voted for him will be responsible for four more years of Bush....

[progressivebydesign]

33. If the rich kids I saw the Dean meetups are 60+ low to mid income..

Wow. I didn't think anyone still believed that lie that Dean is only appealing to rich kids, or kids in general. I have YET to go to a Dean event and see more than a handful of young supporters. They are mostly 50+ modest income people. I'm sure they'd get a kick out of being called "rich kids".

[HFishbine]

70. Rich Kids, huh?

Average aggregate per contributor:

[ScreamingMeemie]

6. I think a statement is being made...and I applaud these people.

:hi:

Let Democracy live and breathe!!

[wabeewoman]

8. This whole thing feeds into citizen discontent.

EVERYONE I know who supports Kerry does so because they have bought the premise that he can win. They prefer Dean but they are going for Kerry because they have been sold a bill of goods and of course, hate bush and want him out. And some recognize that the powers that be (whether it is media or the democratic machine) have annointed Kerry the winner. Doesn't make you feel good about democracy and those of us who care are really pissed off that not only is it a set-up but its shafting the people again. We are not going to be John Kerry's special interest group. He already has been bought by others. I think we are sick and tired of being pushed around and we are pushing back. MHO, anyway.
On edit: BTW have you noticed how the media is treating Kerry with kid gloves?

[CWebster]

24. nice...nt

[lyonn]

51. CWebster, need your help

You cited an article concerning a get together with Kerry and the media approx. 2 months before the Iowa caucus. Could you repeat that internet address again?

[Zomby Woof]

9. Dean's votes are not cost-effective

He is getting fewer votes per dollar than the leading candidate.

When you have the momentum and the coverage, and less wasteful spending *cough Trippi cough*, the money matters less.

I would demand a refund, Dean is wasteful with people's money.

[Capn Sunshine]

13. You miss the point

this has all happened in the PAST WEEK.
I can't find or haven't heard a satisfactory explanation from the Kerry juggernaut about this.

[Zomby Woof]

16. whether I get it or not

His dollars will prove even less effective when he drops out by Easter.

[edzontar]

79. And much of that support--money, organization, and grass-roots

Commitment--may not prove to be "transferable" to JFK in the general.

When he might need it.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

What's to explain?

The same people who gave to Dean last year are giving again now. Dean is gaining any new supporters, he's just wasting more of his old supporter's money.

[GumboYaYa]

67. If we can slander Dean, damn the facts.

One-third of the donations over the past two days are from new donors. I'm sure you will be mentioning that in future posts.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

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

[NewYorkerfromMass]

36. "He's a loser, face it"

Same is being said about someone other than Kucinich.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

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

[MercutioATC]

57. Well, when YOU donate to Dean, you can "demand a refund".

The rest of us are comfortable that we're making an investment.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

12. Good marketing.

People have also made a lot of money selling pet rocks in this country, that doesn't mean it's actually a good product.

[Capn Sunshine]

14. That is not a ringing endorsement for Kerry is it?

That's what I want to know: why the street level disconnect?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

23. What are you talking about? Because Dean is a failed candidate

that somehow reflects badly on Kerry? :wtf:

[GumboYaYa]

17. It means that there is a large number of active Democrats

who are not just unhappy with Bush, but also are unhappy with the Dempower brokers in Washington. They want real change and they are willing to put their own money into achieving change. Even if the numbers are not sufiicient to garner a win for our candidate, they are significant numbers nonetheless.

To glibly dismiss Dean supporters as willing dupes vastly misses the point. I hate to say it, but if the Dems don't open their eyes to what is going on in the Dean movement they risk alienating a significant portion of the Dem base. As close as the country is divided, that could be a tragic mistake for us all.

[corporatewhore]

25. It shows that he created a very strong grassroots network that should be

a great model and hopefully after 2004 could be kept intact as a way for progressive grassroots activist could use to help further the progresssive agenda and challenge insider party politics.I have always said i didnt care for dean (to centrist for me)but have always admired his revolutionary grassroots network

[HereSince1628]

27. Yes, mysterious...It _is_ the $40 million question

Typically supporters who give money are expected to also be voters.

I don't get it, either.

[LuminousX]

28. It is indicative that there are still a lot of people out there

who haven't bought into the Kerry campaign who still like Dean's clear and unmuddled positions.

Is Dean PRO or ANTI Iraq war? Easy, Dean opposed it.
Is Kerry PRO or ANTI Iraq war? Difficult, all depends on who is asking the question, what forum the question is asked, and if we are talking about a theoretical war fought in a theoretical manner or an actual war fought like standard wars are fought.

[XanaDUer]

31. No, Dean did not oppose it

http://www.howardsmusings.com/2003/02/20/salon_on_the_campaign_trail_with_the_unbush.html


Dean, who had no vote in the matter anyway, supported Biden-Lugar.

"As I've said about eight times today," he says, annoyed -- that Saddam must be disarmed, but with a multilateral force under the auspices of the United Nations. If the U.N. in the end chooses not to enforce its own resolutions, then the U.S. should give Saddam 30 to 60 days to disarm, and if he doesn't, unilateral action is a regrettable, but unavoidable, choice.

[joshcryer]

42. That's because Biden-Lugar wasn't such an easy mandate.

Bush himself said he didn't want his "hands tied" with regard to Biden-Lugar. If Bush didn't want Biden-Lugar, then I don't see what the problem is.

[LuminousX]

44. While combat was occurring, Did Dean speak FOR the war or AGAINST it?

I'm not talking about leading up to the war. Only DK in congress spoke against taking action. I'm talking about once units were commited into combat and we say how Bush was going to go about it: Did Dean speak AGAINST it? or FOR it?

Seeing that he has been branded the ANTI-Iraq War candidate along with Sharpton and Kucinich, I think the answer is obvious.

So tell me, was Kerry FOR or AGAINST the Iraq War?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

54. Dean backed off, while Kerry criticized Bush

Dean: "It's hard to criticize the president when you've got troops in the field" Dean to ease up on Bush

Kerry: "What we need now is not just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States"
Kerry Says US Needs Its Own Regime Change

Kerry: "This is a democracy, we could be at war a year from now. Would we put the election on hold?" Kerry Stands By Bush Criticism




After all Kerry was learning about speaking out during wartime while Dean was learning about skiing bumps.

[GumboYaYa]

46. If you recall, at the time of Biden-Lugar, Hans Blix was reporting

that the Iraqis were actively participating in the inspections and he expected to resolve the outstanding issues with their participation. Bush could not wait the extra thirty days because if Iraq complied it would remove his pretense for a war he had set his mind to long before. Biden-Lugar would most likely have avoided war and confirmed that Saddam was disarmed, without any dead Americans or Iraqis. To say support for Biden-Lugar is the same as voting for the IWR completely rewrites history.

The question I have is how anyone can believe that Kerry and Edwards were mislead into their support for the war. I wasn't misled and I had only a fraction of the resources available to me that they had as members of Congress. Most people here know that the IAEA called the Niger documents forgeries BEFORE we went to war. Where were Kerry and Edwards on that one. To me it is a lie of omission not t o present these facts before the war and it is a lie committed by Bush and everyone else who voted for the IWR. We also know that the IAEA had said that there was no evidence of active nuclear programs in Iraq BEFORE the war. We also know that the so-called evidence of chemical weapons was based on defector testimony and that the President and Congress failed to mention that the same defector also said Saddam had destroyed those weapons. Again we knew this BEFORE the war. It is completely unfathomable for me how Kerry and Edwards did not know these things and I did. I remember a few brave souls who pointed out the lack of any true evidence of WMDs in Iraq. Howard Dean was one. Another was Robert Byrd.

I simply do not buy the "we were mislead line." IMO the Dems who voted for IWR are just as guilty for this war as are the Repubs.

[Eloriel]

73. And of course, the process is all-important too and comes with

its own set of "it depends."

[EXE619K]

30. Is Howard Dean's candidacy this year worth $2000?

Howard Dean might not be the most "electable" candidate this year but, has his presence in the primaries certainly made a difference in the political dynamics of American politics?

Dean's nomination is a slim chance, however, he spoke out when all the so-called Democratic Party "standard bearers" decided it was much more convenient to sit on their bums.

I cannot speak for others but, that alone deserves $2000 from me.

But, that's just my opinion.

[LizW]

53. Excellent point

It is well worth the money I donated to Dean's campaign to have large numbers of Americans hear a fresh voice on the issues. His forthrightness and fearlessness inspire me and will continue to do so, regardless of the outcome of the Democratic nomination.

Money well spent and I'd double it if I could legally do so.

[Larkspur]

80. I too gave Dean $2,000 in 2003

I'd never give a penny to Kerry and the other pro-war Dems.

Dean did light a fire under the Dems and it was worth every penny I gave him. To me that $2,000 helped revive democracy. Kerry, Gephardt, Edwards, and Lieberman were suffocating the Party to death.

Kerry may win the nomination but he'll never inspire the kind of loyalty Dean has from us. As far as I'm concerned, if Kerry gets the nod, he can mortgage more of his property to fight Bush in the Fall. I won't give him a penny, unless Dean gets respect and a position where he can help us continue to change our Party and our country for the better.

[D G]

86. Dean didn't light a fire under me

I've been a Democrat all my life, but it's been the disastrous (to say the least) policies of the Bush II Administration that lit the fire under me.

I didn't need Dean to reflect my anger back at me. I can be angry all by myself, and I will continue support candidates who offer solutions rather than yell about problems.

[Larkspur]

97. I wasn't referring to average Democrats but to the Dem leadership

Kerry, Edwards, Gephardt, and Lieberman sold out to Bush prior to Dean chastising them.

[TheDonkey]

35. Indicative that while Dean can raise the most

and has the most intense support he fails to realize this with the general public and gain any meaningful votes.

It is a sort of comfortable, well educated, middle class vote, elite liberal niche. Proof that not everyone has or can use the internet where he gains a large portion of his money.

[HazMat]

41. Exactly. Kerry is drawing his support

from a broad range of Democrats. That is the difference.

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

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

[blm]

52. Nope. It's a reasonable assumption based on past GOP efforts.

Did you post "Flamebait" when Dean supporters said that the GOP was helping Kerry?

[joshcryer]

75. I ignored their posts.

But certainly it qualified as flamebait.

[LuminousX]

47. You would think that if they wanted to prolong the sniping

they wouldn't have overplayed the anti-Dean rhetoric and having all the pundits tell us he is through.

Gosh.

I alerted this tripe.

[demolition angel]

49. 1/3 new donors...

At least according to the blog.

I'm one of those new donors. I have been a supporter for quite some time, but wasn't able to donate, due to financial considerations, until now.

My question is as follows:

If Dean is able to raise close to 900k in less than 2 days, why can't Kerry raise more than $1.5 million in 10 days?

[no name no slogan]

50. Money is GOOD, but it is NOT God

The Shrub outspent Gore by $60 MILLION in 2000, and he only won on a technicality in FL. Paul Wellstone won his first US Senate race in 1990 and spent 1/10th as much as his Republican opponent.

Money is a good thing for a campaign to have, but it is no substitute for getting voters to the polls or to the caucuses. "Armchair activists" who are willing to pledge are one thing, but committed voters are another.

[Desertrose]

61. amen no name no slogan!

"Money is a good thing for a campaign to have, but it is no substitute for getting voters to the polls or to the caucuses. "Armchair activists" who are willing to pledge are one thing, but committed voters are another."

Well said!!!!


Peace
DR

[demolition angel]

62. Sure, but that doesn't answer the question

The question is why can't Kerry translate his "presumptive nominee" status into campaign contributions.

Both Kerry and Dean opted out of the primary matching funds.

If Kerry gets the nomination, how does he campaign against the $200 million dollar Bush campaign without doing better?

[no name no slogan]

66. Who says you need Bush's $$ to WIN

Like I stated earlier, GORE BEAT BUSH WITH $60M LESS! If you insist on trying to "out-Bush" Bush, you'll lose.

Democrats don't win elections by trying to outspend the Republicans-- they WIN because our issues connect with voters, and our voters work hard to get our supporters out. This can be done with (or without) money.

I've witnessed it firsthand on numerous occassions where the Repub with the $$ outspent the Dem, but the Dem still won. Why? A WINNING platform (liberal on economics, liberal/moderate on social issues) and supporters who are energized to be working for a REAL Democrat, and not some mush-mouthed free-trading NAFTA apologist in Democrats' clothing.

[Cuban_Liberal]

55. Cheap shot!

No factual basis for that assertion at ALL. :eyes:

[PAMod]

43. Well the money comes in from across America, and so far...

the votes have been tallied for about, what, 15% of the Democratic primary voters?

Dean is kicking a** in the fundraising (getting regular people to make themselves stakeholders), but it obviously has not helped in the early primaries/caucuses and I'm afraid, since the bandwagon has left the station - it might not help now either.

"Big Mo" trumps big money every time.

If Dean can just survive 'til March & get it down to just himself and Kerry...

this might get interesting.

Otherwise, can you say Kerry-Tsongas-Dukakis 3 times real fast?

How about Democratic Bob Dole?

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

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

[LuminousX]

58. May the energy you give to the world come back to your threefold.

[JNelson6563]

95. insulting to all Dean supporters

and inflammatory.

So when do you post your woo-the-Dean-supporters-to-Clark's-camp post? Will you forget your slams when you do? Most do and are utterly shocked when we don't rush to their table.

Julie

[TexasPatriot]

63. i'd say

it's a fairly dire omen for Kerry. Anyone donating to Dean at this point is seems pretty unlikely (to me at least) to say to themselves 'ah well, lets donate to Kerry now' later if he becomes the nominee. Same with a lot of the Clark folk.

I fear a Kerry nomination would leave the party with very little GOTV capacity.

On the other hand, I did see 5 or 6 Kerry people down on First Thursday in Austin last night - first time i've actually seen a Kerry person in Texas. They seemed surprised there were other partisans to be seen.

[Nicholas_J]

65. Since 70 percent of the donor

are not new, and since Deans support in polls and in actual primaries is so small, it is not indicative of anything. The fact that Sharpton whohas almost no money, and certainly has had less ground support than Dean beat him in South Carolina. Remember o few days ago how we heard how big and visible the Dean machine was in South Carolina, in posts here on DU? Didnt do him much good, did it. And who were the 30 percent new contributors. Was the donations made on the wives credit card, instead of the husbands this month? It is difficult to state exactly who these new contributors are, and what is certain is that Deans support base is falling back to consist of that small core of supporters who have supported him unquestioningly from the beginning. The can contribute every month every week, every day. But they can only vote once. Every month Dean makes the claim that a certai percent of contributions are being made by new contributors. But this does not translate into more support. If it did, Deans support base would have grown beyond all measurable proportion, and Deans would simply be in the lead. You cannot add 30 percent new contributors each month and hve your percentage in the votes drop and drop in consecutive primary and caucus.

[PAMod]

71. You can if the bandwagon has left and you aint leadin' it.

I'm sure many of the early Dean financial supporters are now firmly with "the electable John Kerry". Gee whiz, they sure dodged that bullet, now didn't they?

Face it - Kerry is getting votes for his perceived "electability". He is strong because the perception is so. This phenomenon will only grow until he has the nomination wrapped up. The coattails of "electability" fall off at that point. Then you have to actually get elected.

I hate to rain on your self-congratulations (not you particularly, but all of the Kerry lovers), but no one in the blessed USA dreams of a Kerry presidency. Nobody is saying, "wouldn't America be great if John Kerry were president."

Do you understand that?

Idealism has gone out of the window in 2004, replaced by a clouded, confused and desperate pragmatism. People were switching to Kerry literally at the last moment. We are going for the most famous candidate, the perceived safest choice. Because. We. Want. To. Win.

The bitterest of ironies, if you ask me.

Dean had cultivated this large following, attracting new participants to the process - giving people a voice, only to see the undecideds and many of his soft supporters flock to the "electable" John Kerry. So please pardon the remaining Dean die-hards as we mourn what almost was.

Allow us to enjoy the fact that Dean can live another day through this fundraising miracle.

[D G]

69. Read this - it has some proposed answers to your questions

from another Dean supporter wondering the same thing.

http://www.corante.com/many/archives/2004/02/03/exiting_deanspace.php

To keep this honest I will say I am not a Dean supporter but I think this is a very thoughtful piece that should be read by ANYONE active in campaigning.

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

72. I was just going to post that myself. You beat me to it.

It's a very interesting analysis that examines the disconnect between the amount of money he raised, the long held assumption that he would be the inevitable victor, and the fact that the votes never materialized and he ended up doing so badly.

It's a long article, but has some thoughtful lessons that can be useful campaigns to avoid making similar mistakes.

here's a snip

Howard Dean had the best-funded, best-publicized bid to be the Democratic nominee; he was so widely understood to be in the lead that the inevitability of his victory was a broad topic of discussion. (Google “Howard Dean”+inevitable if you need independent confirmation.) Even the people disputing the posited inevitability burnished the idea; no one bother debunking the idea of, say, Kucinich’s inevitability.

I’ve had a hard time processing his Iowa and New Hampshire losses because I’d spent months hearing about how well he was going to do. It has taken me two weeks to decide that my mental model — how could such a successful campaign suddenly do so badly? — was the problem.

Dean’s campaign was never actually successful. It did many of the things successful campaigns do, of course — got press and raised money and excited people and even got potential voters to aver to campaign workers and pollsters that they would vote for him when the time came. When the time came, however, they didn’t. The campaign never succeeded at making Howard Dean the first choice of any group of voters he faced, and it seems unlikely to do so today.

If this thesis — call it the ‘mirage’ thesis — is too strong for you, consider its cousin, where the campaign was doing well until the last few days. In this version, one New Hampshire voter in three dumped Dean after no event more momentous than a third-place showing in Iowa (rarely known to track to New Hampshire elections) and a little hootin’ and hollerin’ in the concession speech (to use Sharpton’s memorable phrase). Not one Dean supporter in three, mind, one voter in three.

[NashVegas]

84. Interesting Essay

I wonder that there's no mention of the press memes, "angry" and "unelectable."

[Larkspur]

96. As a systems analyst and programmer, who is of the old school

mainframe school that is, I agree to a certain point with this article.

The Internet, like any computer system, is a tool for record keeping and managing information. In Dean's case, the Internet was to supplement a traditional campaign and it initially did that. Dean's first task last year was to create a political base from scratch and he did that phenominally. Remember, he started with 7 people and $157,000.

What happen in Iowa, is what happens in most software production implementations -- the transision from developement or test phase to production or reality abended. The Dean Campaign did not make the transistion from building a political base to executing the game plan -- campaigning for the nomination with voters who had not paid attention to the political scene for a year. Why? We may not know the whole story for months to come. There were a lot of factors involved in Iowa other than the Internet. Al Gore's endorsement unified Dean's opponents to attack Dean more than each other. Like volume overflows in a new system, the Dean campaign did not handle this multiple prong attack well. They got off message, which was the design of those negative attacks. Instead of trying to get his message out -- his bio, his record in VT, and what his national platform was -- he got into a negative spin battle with Gephardt, whose aides admitted to committing a murder-suicide campaign. When average Iowa voters/caucus goer tuned into the political scene about 10 days before the Caucus, they saw Dean and Gephardt locked in a deadly embrace and Kerry and Edwards looking good, but whose campaigns were trashing Dean and each other behind the scenes. Kerry and Edwards got 78% favorable press compared to 49% for Dean. That indicates a major perception problem right there.

If Dean had stayed on message and not gone into a deadly embrace with Gephardt, would he have suffered the 3rd place loss he did? Maybe, maybe not. We'll never know. After the Iowa loss, chaos theory took over and the negative media from that loss, which was aggrevated by the Scream speech, started a snowball effect.

In New Hampshire, Dean got back on message. He was free-falling below Clark and Edwards right after Iowa, but Karen Hicks managed to help Dean rise to a solid 2nd at the NH Primary, but that 2nd place was 13 pts behind Kerry's first place and that wasn't enough for the Media to call a Comeback. What was interesting in NH was that where Dean got fair press, he won. Where Dean got unfair press, he lost.

What Dean did last year in building his political base was create events that made positive news. He didn't do that after becoming the front-runner. What he should have done was between Christmas and New Years, review the game plan to reach average voters who do not follow politics a lot. What he did in New Hampshire worked and I think that was the originaly game plan. He just didn't have enough time to regoup from the negative Iowa loss and the Scream speech to win New Hampshire by Primary Day. And the loss from NH plus the lack of air ads in the Feb. 3 states continued the negative snowball effect.

[Uzybone]

74. Indicative of the fact

Dean supporters believe in their guy which is a good thing. Apart from that it means nothing. Money doesn't mean votes and Deans rapid descent into the hole proves that.

[demolition angel]

76. I agree that it means that Dean's supporters still believe.

So why aren't we seeing the same from Kerry supporters?

From what I've been able to gather, "Dean is dead" and the only possible candidates are Edwards, Clark and Kerry.

I have no clue about Edwards fund raising.

Clark has been doing fairly well.

But isn't the bar higher for the "presumptive nominee?"

Should I have concerns about Kerry's ability to raise money?

Should Kerry supporters?

[edzontar]

78. Dean has a core of committed supporters--Kerry has broader but

....much shallower support.


Dean supporters are in his his camp because they are inspired by him and belive in the issues he has raised.

Kerry supporters are attarcted to his "electability," a factor whoch may or may not prove to have legs in the general election.



The DP nominee will need the Dean coterie and its grass-roots power in the general election, but may not get much of it, since Kerry is especially unpopular in the Dean camp for his war vote and his frequent attacks on Dean in the debates, not to mention the much-rumored dirty tricks.

I see the possibility of a real break in the party as a result of this years' primary.

[Edwards4President]

81. It doesn't say much more than that he can raise a lot of money

After all, George Bush raises a googob of money but I don't think that's indicative of anything other than that he raises a googob of money.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

83. Yes. It's indicative of the fact that he has organized a core of support

that has worked very hard to get him elected and has tapped into some more support as a result with his message. It is indicative of the fact, that some people like his message and some people are contributing to more than one candidate to have an open field from which to choose and hone our platform (not everyone who has contributed to Dean is a Dean supporter.

It is also indicative that he HAS laid a foundation to give progressives a voice in the Democratic party regardless of whether he wins or not...but only if they fight from within...NOT if they pick up their jacks and leave in the event that he is defeated.
He has a lot of followers, but compared to the entire voting population of the US..what they will do (based on threats on this board) if he doesn't get the numbers is marginalize them and ME more by further dividing that VAST array of issues that make up everyone who considers themselves left of center.

[Exgeneral]

88. I gather YOU are one of those "left of center"s...

How can nominating a more liberal guy than Dean win this election?
The meme against Dean before this was "he's too liberal"

[Uzybone]

89. Too Liberal??

Dean? No Democrat could say that. Dean is and has always been a solid centrist.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

92. I'm not certain. I'm not certain either can win.

I'm not certain ANY of them can win.

As one who has worked on elections (even accidentally worked on winning ones) all I know is what I will do so that they may.

Either way, I see Kerry having broader appeal and experience but for die hard rabid righties.

[edzontar]

91. I think you will see that not all of this support is "transferable"

For a variety of reasons.

Dean supporters and Dean himelf have been very poorly used by the Dem establishment and its institutions.


I for one am unlikley to give any significant, other-than-voting support to Kerry.

[janx]

94. I'm not sure that I can even do THAT.

And plenty of Dean supporters share my feelings about it.Droves of them are currently refusing to vote at all.

[TexasSissy]

85. Wishful thinking?

[JNelson6563]

98. indicates it's not over yet Cap'n!

Much to the dismay of some who wish it to be so. :-)

Julie