Major misconceptions about Dean and Dean people

[BurtWorm]

in the media and among those in other Democratic "camps."


#1 Misconception: Dean leads a cult of personality.
The fact is that Dean leads a movement of ideas--about the power structure in the parties and in the US and about the future of American democracy in particular--that tend to excite a broad range of people. He is an excellent messenger, but the movement he leads is democratic with a small d; it doesn't need a leader so much as it needs activists.

#2 Misconception: Dean is a leftist.
He's more accurately described as a rationalist.

#3 Misconception: Dean supporters think Dean is a leftist.
This is a common misconception among supporters of other candidates in the primaries who thought Dean's attraction was his ideology, or who misunderstood the nonideological appeal of his iconoclasm. This misconception continues.

Any other misconceptions you care to name? I'm sure I've barely scratched the surface.

[janx]

1. "the Democratic wing of the Democratic party"

The misperception here is that Dean stole Wellstone's line and then proceeded to call all other Democrats cockroaches.

When that's not what happened at all. The Wellstone line was used in a new context (empowering Americans) and the cockroach comment was used to refer to lazy members of Congress--particularly Republicans.

Yet the misperception continues...

[BurtWorm]

3. Guilty consciences, I think.

Or willful misunderstanding.

[Cheswick2.0]

4. willful misunderstanding

[LSdemocrat]

2. That Dean was purely an "antiwar" candidate

[NYCGirl]

5. That Dean people are "kids" or politically naive. NT

[Voltaire]

8. That would make me a 45 year old political naif

Fascinating

[janx]

13. 47 here.

The largest house party I attended had maybe three people under 40 years old; most were well over 50.

[madfloridian]

15. We are grandparents.

Many of our group are grandparents, only one couple with small children, most retired.

There was a group at the college near us, but they did their own campus thing, not meet-up...they supported Dean however.

[JNelson6563]

6. Dean lost primaries fairly

When presented with evidence of very dirty business by the other Dem campaigns they brush it off as "politics". Great masses of Dems did not get to choose the nominee, the fix was in and the powers-that-be (including the corporate media) got the guy they wanted. The guy who couldn't fight back for weeks on end after intial GOP broadside attack was luanched. A guy who ran so close a race with a trained chimp, less-than-widespread fraud may have turned the election.

Just my view.

Julie

[Capn Sunshine]

7. right there with you

we all know that had this remained an actual primary, not couched in the "WE MUST UNITE TO DEFEAT THE MOST HORRIBLE THREAT SINCE HITLER" rhetoric, Dean would have garnered significant delegates, including WA, OR, CA, HY, NC, and OH.

That is was "decided" after Iowa was just ridiculous, yet that's what they had planned.

[Larkspur]

9. If Iowa was a Primary, not a Byzatine Caucus, then Dean may have come

in at least 2nd. He was hoping for a first or second placing in Iowa. The IA Caucus system is geared for the political hacks, not the average voter. Dean lost a lot when he could not gain viability and his supporters had to support someone else, like Kerry or Edwards.

[Kolesar]

11. The Iowa caucuses are undemocratic

I dread having another one of "those contests" again in 3 years. (Whether Dr. Dean is running or not)

[PassingFair]

12. It was like watching the best looking, smartest person

get voted off on "The Weakest Link" by the mob of dummies.

[madfloridian]

10. I think the worst is the way they underestimate us, calling us worshipful.

The danger is that they underestimate the power of pissed off Dean supporters who saw their candidate brought down in such an ugly manner.

People who think we are just adoring little fans, or "followers" as some here at DU love to say....just do not have a clue. He tapped into an anger and a passion that our dumbed down party had ignored. It is still there, and just waiting.

I also think people might judge DFA by the blog. Hardly anyone I know posts there. They don't even know the comments section is there. Great folks there, but only a small core group.

I called to order the transcript of the Charlie Rose show. I have quotes from it, but I want to verify. I have heard it pooh-poohed about what a certain guy said to Rose on Feb. 12 about the reasons for running. Combined with things in Dean's book, I am convinced it will happen again, no matter what Howard Dean tries to do.
I found two paragraphs today from the old Dean forums about that interview. Not sure whether to share here or leave it alone. I got angry all over again.

But as I say, they seriously underestimate us. I have a feeling lately that a lot can happen in 4 years progressive groups wise.

As Capn said above...reactive and deep-pockets. Oh, yeah. And pissed off.

[janx]

14. Please share it!

And especially share what you find in the transcript!

[madfloridian]

16. Check your inbox.

Have not had a call back about the transcript yet.

[madfloridian]

17. I got the transcript. Check your inbox again.

The first I sent was correct.

[janx]

18. Oy.

So the guy who posted the excerpt in the Dean forum was right!

This whole thing leads to more questions. Do you have the link to the Rose show--the one from which you ordered the transcript? It might be worth my while to order a copy also.