Kevin Phillips: Bush very Vulnerable, but Dean is Hopeless Against Him

[Raya]

Kevin Phillips was on Paula Zahn tonight. He thinks its not credible for the Dems to try to unseat Bush with “some little-known Governor from a state with 500 times more art galleries than electoral votes.”

He says he can see “endless ways” in which the Republican machine can “attack this Guy.”

Kevin Phillips is one of those serious political and economic thinkers and commentators that some of us over-40 Democrats have respected for many years.

In his book, “American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune, and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush,” Kevin Phillips argues that some perverse dynamic of U.S. national politics has allowed the creation “of a dynasticized presidency that would have horrified America's founding fathers.”

He argues that the Bush Dynasty needs to be exposed, taken apart and removed from power. He sees Bush as very vulnerable. But Phillips is entirely dismissive of the notion the Dean and his team could possibly do it.

Is anyone listening? For everyone I respect who thinks Dean has a chance, there is another thoughtful person I respect that thinks Dean is leading the Party to place called nowhere.

Wish Dean was a great leader of the progressive movement that I would be willing to go over the cliff with. But he is not.

[PassingFair]

1. Are there any prospects...

of a great leader of the progressive movement showing up anytime between now and February?
Dean is a populist candidate the likes of which has never been seen. He will pick up people who haven't voted in years.

[kerrygoddess]

69. Well actually there is

John Kerry has spent the past 20 years in the Senate pushing the progressive movement. In fact his entire agenda is progressive. Be open to the concept that the Republicans and the Democrats have a lot to lose with John Kerry in the White House. Special Interests.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

93. Thanks goddess

JK's the man for those who will look closer.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

105. It's sad that people cannot forgive him for 1 vote. A vote that wouldn't

have changed anything. If he would have voted against the IWR - it still would have passed with flying colors.

[kerrygoddess]

120. Others have...

Many strong anti-war Dem's including long time anti-war activist Peter Yarrow have endorsed John Kerry...

You can not hold John Kerry accountable for the war. Bush and only is accountable for the war.

John Kerry's 2o years of foreign policy experience put him a position where he felt based on false evidence it was the right thing to do. The man who came forward and told the truth about the false evidence has endorsed John Kerry - Joe Wilson.

These arguments of not supporting John Kerry because of his war vote are weak and a very poor excuse.

Gore-is-my-president, let me remind you that Al Gore supported the Iraq 1 war under Bush Sr. That war was not supported by John Kerry. Yet, Gore is your president? I see no logic in your claims.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

89. Maybe a Bobby Kennedy could do it..... You don't have enough Progressives

They've done studies that show that the population is getting more and more conservative. We can only hope that when people figure out what BushCo has done - there will be such a fierce reaction that the moderates will come to our side. Unfortunately, I don't think this is going to happen in time for the election.

The Republicans have done a good job of propagandizing. "Liberal" has been turned into a dirty word. Reagan and Newt Gingrich started the movement.

[GalleryGod]

123. Oh, Really?

Get a hold of yourself and your rhetoric, Babba-booey!:silly:

[worldgonekrazy]

2. Did he give a reason?

Because you sure didn't.

[Cheswick2.0]

3. Link?

I'll take Paul Krugman and William Greider anyday.

[oasis]

14. Krugman backs Dean? I missed that one.

[retyred]

50. Yeah! He said Clark is more electable

<But there's nothing in the polling data suggesting that Mr. Dean is less electable than his Democratic rivals, with the possible exception of General Clark.>

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/02/opinion/02KRUG.html?n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fOp%2dEd%2fColumnists%2fPaul%20Krugman


retyred in fla
“Good-Night Paul, Wherever You Are”
So I read this book

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

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

[maddezmom]

84. yup, looks like he thinks they are both electable. n/t

[LuminousX]

101. Missing keywords: with the possible exception of ... Clark

[blm]

4. Kevin Phillips is as thoughtful as they come.

I just have no doubt that he will be dismissed by so many who don't want to hear what Phillips has to say.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

103. Not dismissed.

Phillips is excellent. Just disagree with his conclusion. He's been offering this speculation about Dean for months. There's no way a governor of a small state can win the Presidency? Seems to me that the last 12 years of Dem Presidencies were just that.


No big whoop.

[AP]

106. Kevin Phillips's views, with which I've been familiar for longer than I've

been familiar with Howard Dean, inform opinions which were the lens through which I looked at Dean, and are the basis for my intense nervousness over his candidacy.

Dean is diametrically opposed to Kevin Phillips on many fronts. And in the RARE moment when he talks like he appreciates issues Phillips cares about (redistribution of wealth to the wealthy), you scratch the surface and Dean comes up short.

One small example: in Wealth and Democracy Phillips has special scorn for the insurance industry. He thinks they're a DRAG on the economy. They create wealth for themselves today without creating any real value for society. Who did Dean help ALOT in VT: insurance companies. And he did it with tax breaks for corporations, something else Phillips thinks have been dramatically abused to help big businesses and which hurt the economy.

Phillips also talks about how biography matters as a symbol. He thought Bradley was a terrible choice of candidates (and he he quotes Bradley favorably, if I remember correctly, as someone who, unlike Gore, appreciated the direction America was headed -- towards corporatocracy). Of course he's not going to like Dean. And he's right too, as I see it.

[blm]

109. You were the first person I thought of when I read this.

Maybe you can write a post explaining it again in simple enough terms and include Phillip's latest remarks because YOU have a greater insight than most on what motivates his words.

[AP]

112. I didn't see this thread until it was over 40 posts.

Now I regret not jumping in earlier.

[blm]

142. Would still like to see an analysis

from your perspective on the overall situation. And Dean's conversion, of course. heheh

Just as we expected...political expediency, not heartfelt.

[Clark4VotingRights]

140. There's an interview with him on buzzflash right now.

I don't think he mentions Clark in it though.

http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/04/01/int04001.html

[pasadenaboy]

5. was he the same kind of "respected leader"

the DNC has been listening to the last 10 years as we have the lost the house and the public debate has teurned more and more conservative?

If so, he can take his cowering, fearful, don't stand up to the republicans, philosophy with him! Where were all these "respected leaders" before Dean? Why weren't they standing up to Bush? Besides Kucinich, Sharpton and Braun everyone running for President was lining up to kiss Bush's butt.

[greyowl]

78. Well said...

When are people going to see the lie being sold to them from their own party?

[blm]

143. That's not true.

Dean's criticisms were the only ones the media allowed to be heard.

Remember Kerry on the Tora Bora debacle? The media didn't talk much about that, but Dean did...he said he supported Bush and that Tora Bora was a success, after Kerry was raking Bush over the coals for months on it.

[DancingBear]

6. Just another hack, I guess

I started reading him from "The Politics Of Rich And Poor' forward. He is very well respected, and in hindsight has been proven quite savvy. I really don't know how many more folks will have to say what he has said before someone in the Dean camp will at least listen. These unending "kill the messenger" responses when someone speaks ill of Dean are just bizarre.

And damned scary, too.

[pasadenaboy]

12. To be honest

I think a lot of Dean supporters feel so sold out by the DNC that they just don't trust many people who are affiliated with or supported by the DNC establishment. I think that is why people don't take the criticism seriously, because they have seen the same establishment push us closer and closer to the republicans, say nothing about this stupid war, and compete with the repubs to see who can be bigger fund raising and corporate whores.

The DNC has a lot of work to do if it wants to patch up their relationship with the base, and all this doom and gloom about Dean isn't helping.

I think Clark would be getting a lot more serious hearing from the Dean people if it wasn't clear he is becoming the institutional candidate to keep the Washington democratic establishment in power.

Clark's whole campaign has been run be former Washington Dems, and it worries a lot of us who are very turned off by them. We want someone to shake up the party.

I know Dean's not perfect, but he will definately clean house if he gets the nomination.

[Walt Starr]

17. DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING!!!!!!!

Fuck the DNC, they've been fucking the base of the party and wimping out for too long. I won't accept their bullshit any more. They fucked us royall in '94 and have been fucking us ever since, with the biggest screwing up the anal passage in 2002.

Nobody but Dean '04!

[Walt Starr]

18. dupe n/t

[DancingBear]

20. That's a valid response

But some (I would argue many) of these "pundits" (geez, I hate that word) are predicating their responses not so much on any DNC inspired rhetoric, but rather how they view the political landscape. in Phillips case I see not any type of DNC points but literally a blueprint as to how Dean will be soundly defeated. I also argue that he (Dean) is no more of an outsider than anyone in politics, but he has convinced many that he is.

As for me, I wouldn't know the DNC if it bit me in the ass, but I agree with his (Phillips') assessement.

P.S. How come Al and Bill are OK now? I would think they would be two of the poster boys for the DNC, as the Dean people define it.

[Walt Starr]

24. Putting up anybody but Dean is to bend to the DNC/DLC

BULLSHIT!

Nope, not me. Fuck 'em. They've fucked over the party for a decade. I WILL NOT accept one of their fucked up candidates, especially Clark.

Nobody but Dean '04

I'm more pissed off at the establishment in the Democratic Party than I am at Bush.

[DancingBear]

26. I get your point, already

:shrug:

[bearfartinthewoods]

57. iit's obvious who you view as the enemy

and what your goal is.

we differ on both points...........

[Walt Starr]

90. Since 2002, the DNC and the RNC have had identical goals, IMO

Both are the same enemy.

[dave29]

29. We're not just talking DLC

We're talking DNC as well. Gore has distanced himself from the DLC - and Clinton hasn't really been putting out the love for the DLC's poster boy Lieberman. The DLC is completely out of touch with the base, and it shows.

The DNC has not put as much distance between itself and the base, it has just been innefective, and that is obvious. The base of the party has waited too long for the DNC to get it's act together against the massive advantage the GOP has in party machine. So, here comes Howard Dean. A lot of the base is feeling stabbed in the back now at the lack of establishment or DNC support for Dean - who gave them a wake up call by building a better organization than the DNC itself. Dean could potentially raise more money for congressional Dems than they can. That's something quite remarkable. Dean told them to stop being Bush-lite. To stop being afraid of Republicans. Some listened - but most chose to bite back, or take offense.

I can understand them feeling stung - but rather than embracing the new folks Dean is bringing in - and build the party around a strong unified center, they have instead tried to slow Dean's momentum, adopt his apparatus - and put in their own guy, that will assure them continued power.

It's really quite infuriating when you think about it. There was a remarkable opportunity for party unity if they embraced Dean's innovative campaign - not played kingmaker - but not allowed the clear impression that they back someone else either. All they are doing is alienating Dean supporters. We want so badly for Bush to be gone - but we don't want the candidate chosen by those whom have failed so miserably before. Stiffing the guy who has awoken the base is a stupid, stupid move.

I strongly feel that a Dean/Clark ticket could have unified this party - in such a way that we could have been invincible in '04. But, alas, it seems the powers that be want Dean to go down, and his supporters to go with him.

And now we are in for a collosal fight.

[Walt Starr]

33. The DNC would rather see Bush in the White House than Dean

Fuck 'em. If they push Dean down with their bullshit, I take a walk out of the fucking party.

[Military Brat]

13. No one is advocating "kill the messenger"

I am just a little weary of the naysayers who fail to come up with plausible reasons why Dean is not the candidate to beat bush. It's almost become a mantra, and if we aren't careful, it will become a self-fulfilling prophecy, as in, "Why should I bother and vote, since Dean can't win anyway."

All this negativity against any Dem candidate just brings me down. No one, no matter how savvy, is infallible. I will trust my instincts and vote my conscience.

[Jerseycoa]

23. Great Book

He's brilliant.

[bearfartinthewoods]

55. "kill the messenger" responses

get used to it. they can't respond to something they refuse to hear.

[molly]

87. The responses are a reflection of the Dean campaign

messages - rage and anger before logic.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

107. "Rage and anger!"

[GalleryGod]

129. Succinct and to the Point,Molly!

Ever the cogent messenger.:pals:

[JaySherman]

7. Not exactly a convincing argument.

Don't know much about this guy, but for a supposedly serious political thinker, you'd think he could make a better case than a snide remark about art gallaries.

[DancingBear]

11. You should read him

I think you'll find his grasp and understanding of the political process to be quite extensive.

[sally343434]

31. Phillips

This topic caught my eye, but I almost skipped it because of all the sophomoric "my candidate is better than yours" nonsense that permeates DU these days. (It looks like both Clark and Dean have their own little armies of brownshirts right here on DU, complete with the silly campaign slogan signatures.)

Anyway ...

I've been listening to and reading Kevin Phillips for twenty years, after I heard one of his commentaries on the old CBS Radio Network's "Spectrum" program.

In those (Reagan) days, he was an 'intellectual' conservative apologist. By the time Poppy came along, he began to see the fascist monster that the republican party was turning into, and started to speak out and write about it. As a "real" conservative, Phillips loathes the current republican agenda.

The title of his latest book pretty much reveals his current political leanings:

"American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune, and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush"

He is one of many conservatives that see nothing whatsoever to like about the republican agenda of today.

Anyway, I think anyone would be doing themselves a disservice by dismissing what this student of history (Phillips) has to say. His analysis of politics is very keen, and his political predictions have been eerily accurate. He's one person I believe has a real handle on the dynamics of contemporary politics.

That's all. You may now return to your brawling.

[QC]

80. Very true!

When it comes to issues of class and small-d democracy, Phillips is better than most Democrats.

Anyone who dismisses him out of hand is worse off for it.

[QC]

81. DUPE

[Capn Sunshine]

8. Too bad he's grown so out of touch

that the populist movement backing Howard Dean did not show itself in his cozy little insular intelligentsia world.

This is the problem with ALL the pundits; they only believe what their "sources" tell them.

Inside the beltway, those sources have gotten it wrong about Howard Dean since the beginning.

No surprise they would still be wrong. We'll send him a memo after the campaign.

In the meantime, what are YOU so afraid of?

A REAL democratic president?

[PurityOfEssence]

79. That statement is unfounded and ridiculous

Kevin Phillips is a cultural icon; he is head, shouders and torso above other analysts, and his grasp of history and economics are astounding. After having been one of the young turks for Nixon, he saw the light on conservatism and has dedicated his life to a thoughtful and civilized approach to a moderate course. His stature doesn't innoculate him to criticism--nor should it for anyone--but his very moral, brilliant and disciplined mind does.

Bill Moyers deeply respects him as one of the most profound thinkers and most ethical people in the business.

Please read "Wealth and Democracy" before you make blanket statements of which you are radically misinformed.

What prompts me to respond to you rather than others is the idea that he is just some member of a chirping chorus of the insular elite. This is completely off base for this guy: he is an absolute original in every sense of the word.

If people are bugged by his not picking specifics for how Dean is vulnerable, remember that this is quoted from TV.

[bluestateguy]

9. dean

If Dean is demolished in November his primary season supporters will have a lot to answer for.

[oasis]

16. The faithful will still be in denial.

[PAMod]

21. Nah, Dean's primary opponents will have done him in.

The attacks on Dean have been pretty harsh.

My biggest fear is Rove using actual footage of Kerry or Gephardt or Lieberman badmouthing the nominee.

My fear is that these guys have put personal ambition ahead of the good of the country.

[JaySherman]

28. Yes. There was an article yesterday

Talking about how the Bushies are preparing to battle Dean. Unfortunately, I was unable to find it again to post a link. But basically, Karl Rove said something to the effect of "They're doing our work for us." I'm not a Dean supporter, I'm firmly in the ABB camp. But I am getting sick and tired of all this pettiness and intra-party candidate bashing. We're going to beat ourselves.

[bearfartinthewoods]

60. that remark by rove was the first credible evidence of the

'they want dean' theory. there is no other explanation for that statement. why would rove say anything that might slow the infighting. bushco should be encouraging the bickering, not repressing it. unless they really do want dean?

[bearfartinthewoods]

59. My biggest fear is Rove using actual footage of dean

[beaconess]

95. You're right

nobody had better say anything bad about Dean or else Karl Rove - who would otherwise just sit on his hands and not be able to come up with negative - will have some ammunition to use against him. After all, Rove wouldn't have any other possible way of finding out any of Dean's weak points and using them against him in the general election.

So everybody, just shhhhhhh! We don't want to give Karl Rove any ideas!!!

[PAMod]

108. Rove will bloody our nominee regardless of who it is.

The problem with the candidates this year is they are willing to torpedo the nominee in an effort to promote themselves.

It may not prove fatal, but it certainly doesn't help.

[GalleryGod]

126. Nah! Rove's going "Morning in America" + " Brave Sheriff"

A No-Brainer Vs. The Gov'nuh.:silly:

[dave29]

34. absolutely false

we will all have to answer for it as Democrats, whomever the nominee is - if we don't support them fully in the General election. That is the only way we will lose. Bush's record is tragic - and here we are tearing ourselves apart.

[Walt Starr]

37. You may not like it, but I will only support Dean in the GE

All others can take a hike. I won't vote for them. The DNC has pissed me off more than *.

[BobbyJay]

48. I'm glad. Because I don't want people like you voting anyway.

You're determined to run the Party off a cliff and continue the status quo of Republicans controlling all government.

[Walt Starr]

91. I think you've got me mixed up with the DNC

That's what those fuckers did in 2002.

[Armstead]

10. I respect Kevin Phillips a lot but I disagree with him on this

I don't see how Dean is not as capable as anyone else of carrying the banner. Maybe he isn't perfect, but he's one of the few -- along with Kucinich, Shaprton and Btaun -- who were going on offense at a time when it mattered.

Maybe Clark can do it, too. But Dean is certainly equipped to take on Bush.

[GalleryGod]

128. You're talking March '03-A Lifetime Ago in Contemporary Politics

Cover of TIME this week? Hatchet jobs galore in the Elite Media?
How's the Gov'nuh doing in January '04 versus the The Big W Machine?

How does "Willie Lowman Angry Guy" match-up against $150 million
"Morning in 'Murica" + "Steely-Eyed Gary Cooper".

Easy. He doesn't. In at least 49 States.:dunce:

[lovedems]

15. I am doubting my own thoughts about Dean and it pisses me off

because I don't know if Dean can beat bu$h or if I am buying into what the media says. On the one hand, I think Dean is truly for the people and only the people. I really respect the way he tells it like it is when it comes to his criticisms against this misadministration. On the other hand, I feel like I am a victim of the media stating that Dean can't beat the chimp. 4 more years of the village idiot is a frightening thought. So, while I really like Dean and what he stands for, I also like Clark too. Hell, with the exception of Lieberman, I could vote for anyone of the 9 with a good concious. I guess my point is, this election is far to important to take a chance and that is why I remain undecided. I want the dem who will give the chimp a run for his f-ing money and will win. Because of all the bs reporting, I don't know who that is yet.

[PAMod]

22. If Dean can't beat Bush, none of the current field can.

Those who are saying that Dean is unelectable are, in effect, saying that no one can defeat Bush in November.

[blm]

32. Running against fellow Dems is different

than running against Republicans. Dean was always comfortable attacking Dems because he had 11 years of practice siding with Repubs in Vermont and often scorned the progressive Dems there.

Some candidates run against Republicans better.

[dave29]

36. Dean pissed off both fringes

the far right wanted him dead. The far left was pretty mad at him a few times. And Dean has won 10 elections in a row.

He gets results for the majority of people. He Governed in the center. He'll do it again.

[greyowl]

83. Then why is a Republican currently Governor of Vermont?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

111. More importantly,

how "Republican" is Jim Douglas? Like Jeffords, he's a centrist. You won't see Delay Republicans in Vermont getting elected.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

110. And, as blm always fails to mention,

Vermont is the most liberal state in the Union. Running in the "center" in Vermont does not equate to running in the "center" in National politics.



Proof= Bernie Sanders, Vermont's socialist Representative. How far right does Vermont go? Jim Jeffords.

[retyred]

51. I like the way you think

retyred in fla
“Good-Night Paul, Wherever You Are”
So I read this book

[greyowl]

82. Amen

Every now and then a little truth gets out on DU

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

113. See post #110 if want some truth.

Context is very important.

[PAMod]

85. I understand your point, but that's not what I meant.

Dean is clearly the strongest candidate in this race. He has run a marvelous, inspiring campaign.

He makes a unmistakable case for replacing Bush and has the ability to attract new voters in 2004.

On top of that, he is a terrific fundraiser, and will be in a position to help congressional campaigns.

Every other candidate and campaign is utterly forgettable, except General Clark of course, and if Dean can't beat Bush, it is illogical to think that the others would fare any better.

[dave29]

35. always believe yourself

over the media.

Take that to the bank. ;)

[lovedems]

43. Thanks

I very rarely (if ever) listen to the media. The thought of this adminstration getting 4 more years has made me listen a little more closely to what the sheeple are hearing and it sends chills down my spine! They have all of the dem candidates counted as losers to bu$h already and we aren't even on the national level yet! UUGH! I despise the media.

[maxr4clark]

41. Dean and Clark

My main beef with Dean on electability was the poll data I saw back in Oct/Nov. The more recent polls haven't borne that out, probably because of the set of endorsements Dean has been picking up. I'm correspondingly less concerned about Dean and his electability.

I still see a few advantages for Clark over Dean in the general election, though. This isn't a dis of Dean, I'm just explaining my perspective. One is that I believe that the election will be won or lost on foreign policy, and I don't think anyone can compete with Clark on that.

Another is that I see a difference in style between Dean and Clark. Dean makes an emotional appeal to people, which is attractive to a certain set of people. I mostly see emotional responses from Dean supporters on the DU, which confirms my view of Dean's style. I see the emotional appeal meaning a lot to those who are already convinced that Bush is evil, like the Democratic base. I don't see it attracting a lot of Republicans or undecideds. I also think that Bush also appeals to people on an emotional level, and between an emotional appeal from a governor and a President, the President is going to win out.

Clark, on the other hand, takes a more rational, concilliatory approach that appeals more to people like me. Bush doesn't appeal to Republicans or independents or Democrats on a rational level. I therefore see more voters out there that Clark can pick up, which Dean isn't likely to appeal to.

So in summary, these are the reasons I see Clark as a better candidate for the general election than Dean: (a) foreign policy experience, and (b) appeals to rational voters, both Dems and otherwise.

[John_H]

42. You should keep paying close attention to the media.

Respected media people on our side--Carville, Begala, Shields, Phillips, Washington--know and say Dean can't win, while at the same time the chimp shills we've been railing on for four years suddenly say stuff like "Howard Dean is inevitable."

My way of approaching this is pretty simple: When people like Carville say Dean can't win and people like Frank Lunz try to help him the picture gets mighty clear.

[redqueen]

114. Carville says Dean can't win - Frank Lunz tries to help him

Is that so?

Geez. It's worse than I thought.

[Printer70]

64. I can't tell you what to believe, but here are facts

http://www.pollingreport.com/gallery.htm

In the recent Time/CNN poll (Dec 30-Jan 1), Dean outpolls every Democratic candidate against Bush. It's Bush 51- Dean 45. In comparison, it's Bush 53 - Clark 43 - a 10 point margin.

I'll leave it up to you to make what you will of the argument that Dean has an electability issue relative to the other Democratic candidates.

[GalleryGod]

131. What Does Dean "STAND For"? Help me out here.

In Vermont it was Insurance Companies.:argh:

[QC]

19. Those tempted to trash Phillips,

as is now the custom here whenever anyone anywhere expresses even the mildest and gentlest criticism of Howard Dean, would do well to read The Politics of Rich and Poor.

The book is nothing short of brilliant, and if Democrats had read it and acted on it when it came out in the late 80's, we would have won Lord knows how many elections since then and we would never have had even one Bush soil the White House, much less two.

Phillips laid out the underlying reason for everything Reagan did--concentrating wealth at the very top--back when most Democrats, even allegedly liberal ones, were too busy giving Reagan tongue-baths to notice what was happening.

It's an amazing book, the kind of thing leftists used to write, back when they cared about class issues.

[Jerseycoa]

25. I deeply second all of that nt

[JaySherman]

30. That may be so, but...

Backing up a claim with a baseless soundbyte isn't going to win him any friends with me. If he gave a longer and more substantiated response, I'd love to read it.

[dave29]

38. Phillips is great

but even the greats are sometimes wrong.

[stopbush]

49. I've not read Phillip's books, but I've seen him on TV many times.

Here's a few questions for those who know his writings and recent history:

1. What were his thoughts on Clinton pre-Dem '92 convention? Did he think he had a chance of winning when he was 20 pts down in the polls? BTW - His description of Dean as Gov of Vermont could pass for Clinton in AK...minus the art galleries, of course.

2. Who were the candidates Phillips HAS supported over the past 20 years? Does he do endorsements? What's his track record on picking winners, both D and R?

3. If not Dean, who does he support as a Dem candidate?

I ask these questions not as one looking to disparage Phillips but as one who really wants to gain a greater insight into his skills as a political visionary.

[bread_and_roses]

52. Absolutely right

I read it years ago, and the two next...havn't read this one yet, but he is quite remarkable. Rich and Poor is an amazing book...read it and weep, anyone who hasn't.

[Leilani]

56. You're Correct

His book is considered a classic, & thus he is a frequent guest on C-Span. The viewers are always pleased when he is on.

I really relate to him because I've always been registered Independent, but I was really more a Republican. Over the yrs, I've gotten more liberal as I watched the Repukes rape & plunder the average American.

[Printer70]

65. Electoral Politics is a different matter

He may be brilliant at dissecting policy and how it affects people at different class levels. But weighing in decisively as an expert in electoral politics is a mistake- there is a fallacy for this- it is called "Appeal to False Authority". None of us here are authorities, but we dont' claime to be one either. Howard Dean is polling only 6 pts behind Bush in the most recent Time CNN poll and fares better in that matchup than any other candidate, including Clark. The Dean "electability" charge is more than a myth, it is a big lie which gains credibility through repetition.

[RamboLiberal]

67. Actually Phillips has the bonafides in electoral politics

His first book in 1969 predicted and became a Republican bible:

Kevin Phillips first became known for his 1969 book, The Emerging Republican Majority, written in 1967 and 1968, and used by Richard Nixon in his successful 1968 presidential campaign. The Emerging Republican Majority predicted a new era of GOP control of the presidency based on the realignment of the South. Newsweek described it as “the political bible of the Nixon Administration.”

Educated at Colgate, the University of Edinburgh and Harvard Law School, Phillips, at age 27, had served as the chief elections and voting patterns analyst for the 1968 Nixon campaign. In 1969, he began twelve months tenure as Special Assistant to the U.S. Attorney General, but left in 1970 to become a syndicated newspaper columnist. In 1971, he became president of the American Political Research Corporation and editor-publisher of the American Political Report (through 1998). Discussions of the 1972 presidential election widely acknowledged how it had followed Phillips’s outlines, but then in1973-74, the Watergate scandals confused the future.

After Ronald Reagan’s election in 1980 restored the 1968-72 dynamics, Phillips was generally acknowledged as the Republican party’s principal electoral theoretician. In 1982, the Wall Street Journal described him as “the leading conservative electoral analyst -- the man who invented the Sun Belt, named the New Right, and prophesied ‘The Emerging Republican Majority’ in 1969.”

http://www.americandynasty.net/kp.htm

I'm sorry to see Phillips feels this way about Dean. You know I'm a Dean supporter, but on my dark days I do wonder if the pundit spin can be correct, or if the constant drumbeat will make it true. But with the exception of Clark, I think any of the other Dem candidates might provide an equal landslide to Bush.

I think Dean or Clark are the Dems that have the best chance of beating Bush.

[Printer70]

74. Confused

A. For a Democrat, he seems to love getting Republians elected.

B.>1969 book, The Emerging Republican Majority

The majority emerged in 1994. He was 25 years off. I don't know if I'd call him an "expert".

[QC]

75. Phillips is not a Democrat.

He was a Republican in the past and has been an independent for some time, in large measure because of his disgust with the Reagans and Bushes and their wealth-über-alles policies. He identifies more with old-style Main Street Republicanism. You know, Pat Nixon's "simple cloth coat" and all that.

As for the rest of your post, I would remind you that Republicans held the White House for all but four years of the span between 1968 and 1992. If that's not a majority it's something mighty close.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

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

[dave29]

39. Not Bush lite

by a long shot. Nor is Sharpton ;)

[Raya]

46. Who can deny that.

[Printer70]

66. I assume this is a joke?

What Sharpton can do is poll 15% or higher in a few of the Southern states, get a few delegates to the convention, and focus the party on a few issues that he cares about such as guaranteeing the right to vote.

[John_H]

40. Is the obvious obvious enough yet?

How long can Dean supporters keep telling themselves that respected Democratic thinkers have turned into idiots overnight? And how long can they keep tellng themselves that media whores like Tweety and CiCi are cheerleading dean because they have suddenly stopped being Bush* shills?

The fact is almost every serious political thinker knows Dean can't beat Chimp. The ones who have the best interests of the Democratic party in mind say he cant win publicly. The ones who have the best interests odf the GOP in mind cheer for Howard.

[blm]

44. But...But...Frank Luntz even said Dean could beat Bush.

Why would he lie?

[farmbo]

54. Err...Kevin Phillips is a REPUBLICAN! Why are we listening to him?

And Get Real on your electability issues.

By accepting the federal cost share -- a measly $3.7 million-- along with spending limits, Clark has doomed his campaign.

How long can Clark supporters keep telling themselves that respected Democratic thinkers (who advised against that bonehead move) have turned into idiots overnight.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

133. Kevin Philips has been a Republican

but he has been harshly critical of the Republicans' economic policies for some time now. He's no hypnotized Bush worshipper.

[bearfartinthewoods]

61. they don't recognize respected dem thinkers because

many of them have never heard of them. they are very new to politics and are making a newbee mistake.

[redqueen]

115. A newbee mistake that may end up costing us all very dearly n/t

[stopbush]

73. Honest question for you:

what do you think of the many Dem politicos who have come out and endorsed Dean? People like Al Gore, Bill Bradley et al? Are they idiots for supporting Dean? Why should I take the opinion of a Repug like Kevin Phillips over the opinion of the elected president (Gore) and others in my party who are busy campaigning to get Dean nominated and elected?

[BobbyJay]

45. ARRRGH HE'S A ROVE PLANT ARRRGG

ITS A CONSPIRAACY!!!!!


MORE TAXES '04!!!!

DEAN!

[Jerseycoa]

47. Kevin Phillips on C-Span NOW nt

[JI7]

53. yuk, i see arnold

i'm guessing it's because i saw this post some time after you posted.

[Clark4VotingRights]

58. Did he say who he thought was...better than hopeless?

n/t

[SharonAnn]

62. There are endless ways the Bush team will attack any one of

our candidates, so I don't think Dean is any more vulnerable than anyone else. And, he speaks up, which appeals to many.

Honestly, I could name 2-5 things that the Bush team will use on each one of our candidates and I'm sure they ahve already had teams working on the lists for each candidate and have come up with lots more.

Some think Clark is invulnerable, but remember, the Pentagon fired him from his Supreme Commander role in Kosovo. I'm sure they'll find a nasty way to try to destroy his reputation and it'll be really, really ugly.

This is not meant as pro-Dean or anti-anyone else. It's just a fals argument from Phillips.

[WiseMen]

68. Close You Eyes: Imagine the Ads, vs Clark, vs Kerry, vs Gep vs Dean

What do you see? No differnece?

Not to say anyone is invulnerable or perfect. But there are
fundamental differences in the records, resumes and real-appeal of each candidate.

[kerrygoddess]

70. Agreed!

Huge differences. I get that the Repubs fear John Kerry and will have a harder time attacking him.

[Printer70]

63. Phillips vs. Reality; unelectability = myth

People with vested interest in the talking point that "Dean cannot win" are doing a good job of repeating it until reasonable people believe it. The problem is that it doesn't square with reality.

(http://www.pollingreport.com/gallery.htm)

In the recent Time/CNN poll (Dec 30-Jan 1), Dean outpolls every Democratic candidate against Bush. It's Bush 51- Dean 45. In comparison, it's Bush 53 - Clark 43 - a 10 point margin.

While one man's opinion is interesting, statistically significant polling shows that Dean is running neck-and-neck with an incumbent president and doing better than any other in the field. That's reality and I'll repeat myself as much as I need to in order to debunk this myth.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

104. Once Rove begins running "clips" of Dean - it's all over IMO. Dean's

numbers will crash and we will be wonder WHAT we were thinking. The Dem Party will be a laughing stock and many will not want to be associated with it. This is kind of what happened after Mondale. We had Republican Presidents for another 20 years (broken up by 4 years of Carter in between).

The Dem Party was looked upon as "pitiful" for a while after that.

[bain_sidhe]

71. If you think you're beaten, you are

The famous poem by Walter D. Wintle

If you think you are beaten, you are;
If you think you dare not, you don’t.
If you’d like to win, but think you can’t,
It’s almost a cinch you won’t.
If you think you’ll lose, you’re lost,
For out in the world we find
Success begins with a fellow’s will;
It’s all in the state of mind.

If you think you’re outclassed, you are;
You’ve got to think high to rise.
You’ve got to be sure of yourself before
You can ever win a prize.
Life’s battles don’t always go
To the stronger or faster man;
But soon or late the man who wins
Is the one who thinks he can.

I keep saying we should banish the word "unelectable" from our vocabularies. I don't like Dean, I don't support him, but I will never say that Dean is "unelectable." I won't even let myself think it, although I do have some worr...

::SLAPS SELF:: Stop that!!

Er... as I was about to say. My guy is MORE electable than Dean. IMHO.

[Sensitivity]

72. Who is Kevin Phillips? Any links to his stuff?

[QC]

77. Try the local library.

I'd recommend Wealth and Democracy : A Political History of the American Rich , and The Politics of Rich and Poor: Wealth and the American Electorate in the Reagan Aftermath. Both are excellent. I haven't read his latest yet, but it's getting good reviews and sounds like a winner.

Also, here's a good interview:
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m1093/5_45/91659834/p1/article.jhtml

[w4rma]

86. The GOP can attack *any* of the candidates in endless ways

The Democratic PArty can attack Bush* in endless ways.

It's time to quit balling up in the fetal position and hoping that we don't lose, instead of working to win.

[CWebster]

88. Dean has launched an extraordinary campaign

Has raised record-breaking sums, has rallied vast numbers of grassroots supporters, has spoken truth to power, has answered the call to step up to the plate, has won the respect and endorsements of our finest political figures and that must be very, very alarming to the status quo. He is undeniably a threat, otherwise they wouldn't be putting so much focus on denying his viability. Why would they bother otherwise? So, you are going to hear this meme repeated endlessly through the echo chambers of our media to manufacture the consensus. All focus is on Dean because he has been so stunningly successful--promoted by the people of this country as their candidate, so now it is the job of the establishment to crush the uprising and silence the public voice and reinstruct what it is they are supposed to think. Whose team are you on?

[kerry-is-my-prez]

92. Joe Klein agreed with him.... This is what EVERY expert says

n/t

[Walt Starr]

94. Just like EVERY expoert said Clinton would be defeated by Poppy

in a landslide?

[beaconess]

96. Really?

Which experts said that? Please be specific.

[Walt Starr]

99. Every expert I read back in '92 in January said no way Clinton would win

Everry last one of them. I was there. I voted that year. Did you?

[beaconess]

100. Yes, I was there and I voted. Now answer my question

Specifically which experts made such a prediction?

[Walt Starr]

102. I'll pull out my specifics when the original poster of this subthread

tells us the names of EVERY expert.

[redqueen]

116. Why?

Why wait for others to do something worthwhile before you'll do it yourself?

If you don't remember any specifics, just admit it.

[Walt Starr]

118. Because my post was in response to the original claim

In logical discourse, the claimant with the initial poistive assertion is under the burden of proof. I am under no obligation until it is proven that EVERY expert is claiming Dean cannot beat Bush.

BTW, go back and look for yourself if you're so hot on it.

[redqueen]

121. Rationalization and nastiness

I'm not 'so hot on it'.

It just really looks pathetic to say 'i won't until you will'. It gives the impression you're not serious and don't really know for a fact if what you say is true.

Everyone knows what 'the high road' is. Too bad so many would rather wiggle around looking for a way to avoid it.

[Walt Starr]

130. I responded in kind to a post

When that poster backs up their assertions, I'll back up mine.

BTW, one expert in '92 was Bill Schneider. Another was Bernie Shaw.

[beaconess]

134. Hmmm

That's interesting. A LEXIS search fails to turn up any mention that Bill Schneider or Bernie Shaw made in 1991 or 1992 about a Bush landslide victory over Clinton. However, in July of 1992, Schneider did say, "Republicans in Congress are worried and, indeed, they're angry - not just about George Bush's reelection, but about their own ability to survive what they fear will be a Clinton landslide. These data suggest they have reason to be worried."

Maybe you just remembered wrong.

[beaconess]

119. In other words, you can't back up your assertion

You do have an obligation to back up the assertions you make in your posts, regardless of what is contained in anyone else's. This sorry excuse you've offered for not offering any substantiation for your claim doesn't cut it.

[oasis]

98. Will Dean's multitude of gaffes outpace the millions he is raking in?

A juggling act of message and damage control can be a drain on resources.

[Hep]

97. Opinion duly noted

We're talking names so that we can keep track of who to send shit sandwiches to come November 2004. Some of you won't be welcome back to the party.

[redqueen]

117. Why, what a truly wonderful thing Dean is doing for our party!

:puke:

[mitchum]

139. Well, he and some of his supporters are just borrowing the party...

for awhile. They will return it all beat up and out of gas

[Douglas_Barber]

122. Can a Governor with his foot in his mouth win?

A governor who shoots from the hip, often puts his foot in his mouth, has no foriegn policy experience, is too far to one end of the political spectrum...can not win.

Where was Kevin Philips when the guy I just described came out of Texas and got the Republican nomination? Dean can win. Too much of politics is the feeling you get from a candidate as Bush demonstrates. (Why else would anyone have ever voted for him for pete's sake). Dean gives a lot of people the right feeling.

[GalleryGod]

124. Phillips is one of the best ; In this case he's 100% correct

They are literally "telegraphing their campaign" against Dean and the polled Dumbo-crats aren't listening.:wtf:


"Gee, Professor...this sure smells like 1972 all over again":dunce:

[ElementaryPenguin]

125. Such Bullshit!! Bush lost to Gore - and Dean is a better campaigner!

Any of the top Dems could beat the unelectable Chimp - no matter how hard the corporate fascist mainstream press works for BushCo! Bush unbeatable - WHAT A FUCKING JOKE!! Anyone's unbeatable if an election is rigged! If it isn't - Bush and his indefensible record hasn't got a prayer!

[mzmolly]

127. hmmm, most debatable.

Unelectable, My Ass! ~ By Arianna Huffington, AlterNet


"Far from Dean not being able to "compete" with Bush on foreign policy, he's the one viable Democrat who isn't trying to compete on the playing field that Bush and Karl Rove have laid out. No Democrat can win by playing "Whose swagger is swaggier?" or "Whose flight suit is tighter?" Instead Dean unambiguously asserts that "We are in danger of losing the war on terror because we are fighting it with the strategies of the past... The Iraq war diverted critical intelligence and military resources, undermined diplomatic support for our fight against terror, and created a new rallying cry for terrorist recruits."

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=17512

[zulchzulu]

132. Time for Dean supporters to call Phillips a "presstitute" yet?

It's been pretty predictable so far that any journalist who sees behind Dean's curtain is labeled a "presstitute". Next thing you know, Phillips won't be allowed to be posted on DU due to being a "right winger"...

[beaconess]

135. Interesting Buzzflash Interview

"You've got the sort of arrogance of the family that's entitled to rule. And you've got the presumption of having been anointed by God to play this specific role. Now, you can find other rulers in world history that have had the arrogance, and family, and the sense of being anointed by heaven to do something, but you don't look for that in the United States. That's nothing we did."

http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/04/01/int04001.html

[Kolesar]

136. EVERYBODY READ THIS INTERVIEW

It is an excellent terse summary on the Bush family for 80 years and 4 generations.

One thing that I found interesting is that the Bushies cannot do elections very well. Old Bush failed to win the Texas Senate seat.
I recall Phillips labeling Shrub as unelectable in a presentation on NPR in late 2000 (before the election). If we can only get the public to see the real Bush, we may be able to defeat him.

Sorry about the shouting in the subject line, but this is better than 90% of the P2004 forum's material.

[Very Good Dem]

137. Excellent interview

He makes some very interesting points.

[snyttri]

138. If he says thinks Dean is unelecatable, he must be saying the opposite

of what he thinks, according to some Dean supporters.

[genius]

141. I agree about Dean. We need someone stronger

Any of the other nine will do.

[Sensitivity]

144. So Raya, are you going to endorse, finally?