Is it true that Howard Dean has no prospects in the new administration????? I don't want to

[LittleApple81]

believe it!!!!!
Ingratitude of such magnitude is hard to imagine. All of us Democrats owe him a great debt, but Obama especially owes him A LOT.
FORGET ABOUT THE FUCKING INCLUSIVENESS FOR A WHILE.... DO THE RIGHT THING!!!!! We need Howard Dean and his ideas!


http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/12/the_decline_of_dean.html

The Denouement of Howard Dean?
Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, the man regarded by many sharp political operatives as the progenitor of President-elect Barack Obama's successful 2008 campaign, finds himself without an obvious next job as his tenure at the head of the Democratic National Committee comes to an end.

additional quote from the article:
.....

Dean then made a play to be secretary of Health and Human Services in the Obama Administration but was quickly shot down in favor of former South Dakota Sen. Tom Daschle, a confidante of the president-elect.
It's now clear -- with the Cabinet all but filled out -- that Dean won't be a member of the Obama Administration, at least not at a senior level.
.....

edited to add the second quote

[mnhtnbb]

1. Room for the likes of Rick Warren to strut his bigotry, and no place for Howard Dean?

That's unbelievable. Simply unbelievable.

[cali]

3. yep. it looks like Howard is persona non grata in the O administration

and he let it be known he was interested. disappointing.

[LaydeeBug]

34. without Dean, Obama would not have won the nomination.

and you know it's true.

[JamesA1102]

36. How so?

Please explain.

[crispini]

38. Dean implemented the 50 state strategy.

Dean's model of grassroots fundraising and organizing on the internet was the prototype for Obama's campaign.

[JamesA1102]

40. So you're saying that Obama's campaign

wouldn't have used the internet had they not gotten the idea from Dean?

[LaydeeBug]

63. No. I'm not. nt

[Honeycombe8]

71. The 50 state strategy is not the internet strategy. Those are 2 different things.

Both were begun by Dean.

Yes, Obama took his 50 state strategy directly from Dean. Rahm Emmanuel took credit for that strategy (I saw the writing on THAT wall on TV, when Emmanual was standing behind a podium, sheepishly accepting the applause by the Democratic Congress for his "responsibility" at devising the winning 50 state strategy...that Dean actually devised).

No, Obama wouldn't have had that strategy, but for Dean's insistence.

Yes, Obama would've used the Internet. But it looks to me that what he did was take what Dean did, and build on it. So he didn't start the Internet strategy from scratch.

Poor Dean. I never much cared for him. But he surely has been done wrong by his party. And yet, they let Lieberman keep his powerful committee chairmanship. They're all corrupt.

[JamesA1102]

89. Sorry but that is just not the case

Obama did not take his strategy directly from Dean. As I said before that is just popular myth. Just as it is a myth that the "50 state" strategy is anything knew. The true architects of Obama's strategy are David Axelrod and David Plouffe. Dean didn't insist that Obama do anything. He was moved to the sidelines last summer when Obama moved several DNC functions to Chicago from Washington which is something no presidential candidate had done in the past.

Nor did Obama take his internet strategy from Dean. Dean's internet strategy used meet-up to build-up grassroots activism. Obama's people threw that out. Instead they used Facebook to build a national network for fundraising as well as building a pool of volunteers. The two strategies were totally different.

[bvar22]

95. Dean built the infrastructure for the 50 State strategy.

The offices were open and staffed in 50 states.
The funding was in place.
The volunteers were already recruited and trained.
The machinery of the 50 State Strategy was tuned and running.

Deans's 50 State Strategy was successfully tested in 2006, and refined for 2008 when Dean handed it to Obama.

Attempts to DENY these facts reek of Rahm, Carville, and the Republican Wing of the Democratic Party who OPENY OPPOSED Dean's 50 State Strategy. NOW, they want to take credit for it!
:thumbsdown:

[JamesA1102]

97. They are not facts

It is just popular mythology around here.

[MaineDem]

100. In my state they ARE facts.

Please show your proof that this is a myth.

I am not a huge Dean fan but I must give him credit for this. I know for a fact it is true. You have shown nothing but verbiage that it's false.

[JamesA1102]

104. Show conclusive proof that it is not a myth

I don't dispute that Dean and the "50 state" strategy did a lot of good on the local level for state parties. Nor that he and it were one of many contributing factors to the victories in '06 and '08. I just dispute that it was the only, or even the biggest, contributing factor to those victories and that Obama owes his victory to Dean. That conclusion ignores the general anti-Republican mood in the country as well as the scandals involving prominant GOP officials in both '06 and '08. It ignores that both Obama's campaign ground strategy and internet strategy had signifigant differences when you look beyond the general similarities. It ignores that Obama moved DNC functions to Chicago and away from Washington for the general election, which is totally unprecedented. It ignores that the DNC is ending the "50 State" strategy program at the end of the year, something that is not done to a program if it had proved so successful. And that conclusion replaces any critical thinking that takes all the various factors at play into account with "post hoc ergo propter hoc" logic without showing any direct causal link to prove that conclusion. Instead any reasonable question of that conclusion or criticism (such as the assesment by many credible strategists that the Dems could have won 5-10 more seats in '06 if DNC money had been better focused) is just dismissed as being the product of jealously or hatred for Dean.

[Honeycombe8]

110. No, I saw Dean on TV talking about this when he took over the chairmanship of the DNC.

This was his plan. It was on TV because it was innovative and new. The main players of the Dem. Party even disagreed with that approach, and that was public.

I saw this with my own eyes. Heard it with my own ears. Millions did (who were paying attention).

Later, Obama started mulling over the idea of running for President. Long after the 50 state strategy had been put into place....by Dean.

Where does Rahm fit in? No one knows. He was not involved, but the Dem. players who opposed Dean made sure Rahm took credit. It was such a surreal play-acting scene, when Rahm was taking credit for it, surrounded by Pelosi and others. It reminded me of the "you're doin' a heckuva job, Brownie" photo-op. It was really weird.

I knew then that Dean was o-u-t. Dean was even interviewed on TV about Rahm taking credit for Dean's strategy, and Dean said a couple of things, but wouldn't go to the mat and task Rahm for that overt stealing of thunder. Dean was like, "well, we all need to work together and put disagreements behind us...." yada yada yada.

Issa fact. Hey, I don't even LIKE Dean. If I can point out that Dean had these ideas and was totally screwed, others should be able to. And I don't even LIKE the fact that Dean's ideas worked. But the fact is....they did.

[JamesA1102]

114. And Bush was on TV claiming victory in Iraq

Millions saw and heard that on TV too. Just because someone says something on TV doesn't mean that it is true, especially if it is a politician. Nor was it innovative or new. It was just a different spin on a strategy that had been done in the past with a few different tactics thrown in. And Rahm was the head of the Congressional Campaign Committee in '06, that's where he fits in.

[AdHocSolver]

127. You are comparing apples and oranges, and you are obviously trying to rewrite history.

You sound like a DLCer who refuses to give Howard Dean the credit that he is due. It is common knowledge that the DLCers dislike Dean for showing how arrogant, pig-headed, and inept the DLCers are: bad for the Democratic Party and bad for the country.

It is not too far out to say that the ineptness of the DLC in 2000 and 2004 put George W. Bush in power.

Dean's unusual approach to campaigning paved the way for the Democratic wins in 2006 and 2008. Many of us who worked hard in Democratic campaigns were inspired by Howard Dean. Dean energized a lot of people to get involved with the grass roots.

The DLC has bad-mouthed Dean since the 2004 election. The facts are that the DLCers are losers, and would have lost in 2008 to Republicans if they had been running the election.

[JamesA1102]

136. Not trying to rewrite anything

Just putting things in perspective. I am giving Dean the credit he is due and have acknowledged several times that he and his "50 state" strategy is one of the contributing factors in the wins in both '06 and '08. But I also acknowledge that there were also many other contributing factors to those wins. The problem is anyone or anything that doesn't put Dean up on a platform and speak of him in less than glowing terms is immediately derided around here.

Also, for the record I have nothing to do with the DLC, but also don't have the knee-jerk hatred of it either. By accusing me of being a DLC supporter you've only proved my point that any form of critical thinking or anything that doesn't conform to the approved dogma around here is just attacked and dismissed out of hand.

[Honeycombe8]

109. Sorry, you're wrong on that. When someone invents the wheel first, and someone else builds a car...

they have used someone else's invention. It's not correct or true to say, "But MY wheels are different! And I really didn't analyze HIS wheels too much before I made mine." Fact is....someone invented the wheel first. All other wheels after that first one, have taken the idea and the substance of it from someone else, ipso facto.

Dean was all over TV talking about the 50 state strategy. This was long before Obama even DECIDED to run for President. Dean implemented this strategy in his chairmanship of the DNC. Later, Obama decided to run, and voila....Obama's team has a 50-state strategy.

It's a no-brainer.

[JamesA1102]

113. That is just "post hoc ergo propter hoc" logic

and over generalizes what happened. Obama's campaign built a strong ground campaign in the primaries that was totally independent of anything the DNC had done. By the DNC's own rules it had to be independent and neutral. To use your own car analogy just because someone once had the idea for a car doesn't mean that Henry Ford had to share credit for inventing a car.

[LaydeeBug]

62. Just watch the DNC meeting on how

to deal with Michigan and Florida. Howard Dean and Donna Brazille, for better or worse, like it or not, clearly swayed it in Obama's favor.

[madfloridian]

65. They followed the rules.

If following and strictly enforcing rules helped one candidate over another, then so be it.

They did not sway it, the rules were followed.

[LaydeeBug]

134. That's a wafting load, and you know it.

or at least you should.

[fadedrose]

74. Michigan ....

We were blessed with the most incompetent elected officials of any of the other states. Our primary was a joke...

When I think that Jennifer Granholm is being considered for Energy and Dean is not being considered at all, I feel sick.

Don't blame Dean for Florida and Michigan, I am so tired of the blame not being put where it belongs...

We're supposed to forget about the primaries, but when I see Dean maligned, I feel like fighting still. Sorry.

[madfloridian]

80. It is just plain wrong. Europe appreciates him....he going 3 times first of the year.

To talk to progressive groups in different countries like he did in 2006.


I feel the same way about his getting the blame. Someday I am going to let it all hang out about what happened here with the blessing of a candidate.

Furious.

[LaydeeBug]

135. Dean kept saying the problem would solve itself...it did not

and those hearings were a joke. Nevada, South Carolina? No problem...Michigan? Florida? Go take a flying leap...it. was. a. JOKE.

[Honeycombe8]

111. I watched a lot of the hearing. How do you think they swayed the meeting in O's favor?

I presume you mean unfairly so? Because from what I saw, the facts were clearly in Obama's favor...or rather, when you applied clear, hard facts and fairness to the situation, it was a detriment to Clinton, since those states wouldn't be fully counted for Clinton. And rightly so.

[polichick]

35. It's pathetic.

[QC]

2. Don't be silly! Dean's a Democrat! n/t

[coffeenap]

4. He is the reason we have this hope for "change" and

he deserves just about anything he wants! Grrr...

[mtnsnake]

18. Yeah, I guess 8 years of Bush had nothing to do with it

Howard is a very good man and was my choice in 2004, along with Clark, but he isn't the sole reason we won this election, not by any means. Other factors include 8 years of Bush and a well-run campaign by the Obama camp.

[Freddie Stubbs]

5. Vermont's Republican Governor is up for reelection in two years

[cali]

7. Nah. Howard won't run again for gov here.

though he is the only dem I can think of who could beat Governor Milquetoast.

[mnhtnbb]

8. Dean's been there, done that. He's capable of handling a much bigger stage.

[WI_DEM]

6. I'm tired of one attack after another on DU towards PE Obama

I was and am a big Dean supporter and I would like for him to have a place, but we don't know what has been discussed. Maybe Dean doesn't want a position or he wants to go back to Vermont or run for some office.

[LittleApple81]

9. Attack against Obama? We, including me, elected him. But to recognize the ideas and personal value

of Howard Dean and wish that he stays connected to our future as a country is not an attack. It is criticism, but one of the ideas behind democracy is that we can point and criticize errors made by the leaders we elect. We are not repug robots.

[WI_DEM]

11. attack after attack on DU from the day after he was elected

And again we don't know what has been discussed about Chairman Dean and until we do why not wait and stop assuming things.

[MadBadger]

12. You are attacking Obama calling him ungracious, because Obama owes him a ton

which is BS by the way. Dean thought of a good strategy, Axelrod and Obama employed a similar one, making it their own. I dont see really how he owe's Dean anything. "Here you thought of a good strategy, so have a completely unrelated position in my cabinet!"

Not saying I wouldnt want him there, which I do, I just dont think Obama owes him anything. I think Obama's strategy of playing in caucus states for the the primaries and winning big in small states was much of his own. And for the general, he competed where he though he could be competitive. That just sounds like common sense.

[karynnj]

14. Dean's contribution was not just his 2004 run,

nor the IDEA that you run everywhere, that ignores his 4 years working to strengthen all the local parties. When he came in, there were many states where teh Democratic party was in shambles and pretty ineffective. I would bet that just swapping the Ohio Democratic party 2008 for the Ohio Democratic party 2004 would have led to a President Kerry.

[JamesA1102]

21. You're 100% right

The Obama campaign never employed the "50 state" strategy. They targeted their money and resources where they would be most effective and didn't waste money in states like Texas where Obama had no chance of winning.

Even the success of the "50 state" strategy in 2006 is in dispute. There are many that believe the Dems could have at least 5 more seats in the House had Dean not spent money in areas where Dems had no chance.

Give Dean and the "50 state" strategy full credit for Democratic party success in the last 2 elections is like giving Bush and the surge full credit for the reduction of violence in Iraq. Both merely took advantage of trends and changes that were already taking place on the ground but niether were responsible for those changes happening in the first place.

[AdHocSolver]

128. You are displaying a lot of hostility toward Howard Dean.

Obama did campaign in "red" states, which was the real basis of Howard Dean's so-called "fifty-state" strategy. That name for the strategy is not accurate.

Dr. Dean's strategy was to campaign in "red" states, rather than just states where he was "assured" of winning. Dr. Dean pioneered the concept of appealing to non-Democrats which is the successful strategy he used in Vermont to win the governorship for several terms.

Dr. Dean also kept, or appointed, Republicans to posts in his administration. The "reach-acroos-the-aisle" strategy was employed by Dr. Dean long before Obama was elected to the Senate. That is why Dean was re-elected governor several times in a state with a lot of Republicans.

[JamesA1102]

139. Not hostility just reality

Dean (nor Obama) were not the first to campaign in red states. So Dean didn't really pioneer anything. Nor was Dean the first to "reach-across-the-aisle" and appoint Republicans to posts in his administration.

Now I know that I'll be announced as a Clinton/Rahm/DLC lover or shill for saying this but the DLC strategy in the '90s was to reach out to moderates and other non-Democratic constituencies. And Clinton have several republicans in his administration.

I find it odd that when Clinton or the DLC does something that it is denouned as selling out the base but when Dean does almost exactly the same thing it is praised as being innovative and pioneering. A fascinating double-standard.

[ecstatic]

10. As a former Deaniac, how do we know Dean even wants a position?

That's a lot of assuming you're doing there. Piling on Obama with no proof. (Yawn)

[LittleApple81]

13. Quoting from the article in the main post:

Dean then made a play to be secretary of Health and Human Services in the Obama Administration but was quickly shot down in favor of former South Dakota Sen. Tom Daschle, a confidante of the president-elect.

It's now clear -- with the Cabinet all but filled out -- that Dean won't be a member of the Obama Administration, at least not at a senior level.

[Cronopio]

75. Passed over for Do-Nothing Daschle. Unfeckingbelievable.

I have no doubt Rahm was the one that pushed to dump Dean. Obama should have overridden him on that.

There aren't many out there with Dr. Dean's integrity and skill. The Obama admin is losing big in passing him up.

[judasdisney]

81. Democrats have always had knives drawn for Dean...They still do.

[Cronopio]

92. Dean's a team player in the wrong team. He should go Independent if he can.

And Rahm should p off with his little personal vendettas. The job is too important to be indulging in all of that petty crap.

[Doctor_J]

15. Looks like Dr. Dean and Wes Clark are getting stiffed. Kinda sad, IMO

I think both men were key in getting the country back.

[Kalyke]

16. Of course they were.

But, heck, they're apparently too liberal for the O Admin.

Sigh.

[MadBadger]

25. How is Wes Clark getting sitffed?

The position that would fit him best, Sec of Defense IMO, he is inelgible at this point. Now once Gates is done his short stay, I wouldnt be surprised if Clark took over for him at Defense.

[Kalyke]

27. I think State would have fit him best - better than Clinton, actually.

He has had to actually negotiate peace treaties and terms.

And, he has all the heads of state already programmed on his BlackBerry. :)

[MadBadger]

33. Well, I doubt Wes would feel like he was getting stiffed if Hillary got the position he didnt

He was a big supporter of her.

[nomaco-10]

17. Emanuel and Dean are not exactly friends...

they have had some bitter clashes dating back to 2006 over what path the dem party should take in the future.

Obama chose Emanuel, an ardent DLCer and Dean is out in the cold. I'm afraid the rahm appointment may come back to bite Obama in the ass, possibly even sooner than most people think.

Dean would have been an outstanding SoHHS. It sucks, but what can you do. I too, am very disappointed.

[PassingFair]

30. ....possibly as soon as those Blago tapes are made public.

Emanuel is a foul-mouthed thug.

[mnhtnbb]

39. There's the problem.

[camera obscura]

19. I found that article heartbreaking... I wish Obama would ask him to stay on for 4 more years.

I would if I were him.

[democrattotheend]

24. I don't think he wants to stay on

He made it clear from the beginning that he did not want to stay on, especially if we took back the White House. The role of DNC chair is pretty different when Democrats control the White House...the DNC chair basically answers to the president, I think.

[JamesA1102]

20. Obama owes Dean nothing.

Obama and his team won this election on their own and their were many factors that contributed to it. Dean was never a member of Obama's team and despite popular myth the Obama campaign did not engage in the "50 State" strategy. Plus Obama took Dean out of the loop last summer by moving several DNC functions and staffers to Chicago and away from Dean in Washington.

[demwing]

22. Popular Myth?

"...despite popular myth the Obama campaign did not engage in the "50 State" strategy..."

care to support that comment at all?

[JamesA1102]

26. Sure

Obama did not bother spending money in states like Texas or Alabama where he had no chance. He focused his resources in state where he could make inroads. That is not a "50 state" strategy

The truth is giving the "50 state" strategdy full credit for Democratic gains in the last two elections is like giving the surge full credit for the reduction of violence in Iraq. In both cases it ignores the shifts taking place on the ground that had begun well before either was implemented.

[madfloridian]

29. Are you on a mission here?

Don't see a profile??

Just wondering why you keep saying the same things over and over that simply aren't true?

[JamesA1102]

31. I've said nothing untrue. nt

[demwing]

59. "Obama to send staffers to Texas, other GOP strongholds"

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/5856495.html

THe 50 State strategy was already in play as well, and even if Obama spent relatively small amounts in Texas, the DNc had game in the state, and Obama capitalized on it.

http://www.burntorangereport.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=7132

[madfloridian]

61. Exactly, thank you..

.

[JamesA1102]

66. To support congressional races, not Obama's campaign

That's a key fact that you're leaving out. And it is not unusual to target specific districts where you can make inroads in local races since no state is completely red or blue. This is where the mythologizing comes in. Acting as if this had never been done before.

[demwing]

73. That's a key part of the 50 state strategy -

Laying the groundwork for down ticket victories.

You claimed Obama didn't play the 50 State game, and you specifically called out Texas, and that's just not correct.

[JamesA1102]

84. Yes it is correct.

Spending money on local congressional races is not the same thing as spending money on the Presidential race. National money has always been spent on local congressional races their is noting new to that. But the Obama campaign waste time, money or resources on the Presidential campaign in Texas because they knew they couldn't win the state. It is 2 different things that you're generalizing into one.

[ecstatic]

23. Also, I don't think HRC was going to use the 50 state strategy

she didn't use it in the primaries. Dean set the groundwork, but he couldn't shove the strategy down anyone's throat.

[JamesA1102]

28. Any Democratic candidate would focus their money

in states where they had a chance to make inroads. If Hillary had been the Democratic candidate you may have seen more spending in Arkansas. But like the Obama campaign, no candidate was going to spend money in states where they had no chance of winning. Obama didn't do it, Hillary wouldn't have done it either.

Nor did Dean set any groundwork, Obama's campaign built up their own ground operations in the primaries. Dean had nothing to do with it.

[Sunnyshine]

37. You are so wrong. We had Obama offices in all 50 states. Dean's grassroots orgs were heart of it all

From the earliest days of his upstart campaign, Obama pledged to run a 50-state effort, vowing to move past the traditional partisan divide and expand the electoral map by appealing to independents and even Republicans. But few people, even among his own staff, thought he'd actually invest in every single state. As it turns out, Obama's phenomenal fund raising has allowed him to deliver on his bold promise and place staff in every one of the 50 states, as his campaign announced it would Monday. The strategy could force McCain to defend Republican strongholds, help those lonely Democratic candidates in so-called red states and further expand Obama's already massive volunteer and donor bases (indeed, the move was announced in a fund-raising e-mail plea to donors).
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1813397,00.html

Dean's "50-state" strategy was essentially vindicated during the presidential election, with Barack Obama investing heavily in, and winning, states such as Indiana, North Carolina, Virginia and Colorado, which all went Republican in previous cycles. And, of course, a Democrat is moving into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in a few weeks.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/11/12/dean

[JamesA1102]

41. Every Presidential campaign maintains an office in every state

That is just SOP. It is the amount of money and staff invested in each that makes the difference. Obama's campaign took advantage of both economic and demographic shifts to focus their resources. They did so in states were they knew they could make inroads. They didn't waste money making media buys or shifting resources in states like Texas where they knew they had no chance to win.

[Sunnyshine]

43. Obama had 1/2 hr. National ad, also in places like Texas and AZ. DNC dbled staff in red states.

They focused resources later in the campaign, but the outreach was certainly going to every state. New strategy for Democrats. Saturating the obvious leaners that were more likely to flip was top priority, but the entire campaign was 50 states to call.

[JamesA1102]

44. Not a new strategy at all

This is exactly why I called it popular myth. I know everyone here hates the DLC but one of the reasons it was formed in the '90s was to reach out to constituencies in more moderate areas of the country. So the strategy itself was not new for Democrats.

Also, one of the reasons that Obama moved DNC functions to Chicago and away from Dean in Washington was to stop him from continuing to squander money in areas of the country where they had no chance. Rahm Emanual and many in the Obama campaign believed that Dean cost the Dems 5 to 10 additional seats in the House (and possibly Harold Ford's Senate race) because he was spending money in states and districts where Dems had no chance.

It's like giving credit to H.G. Wells for landing a man on the moon because he once wrote a story about it rather than to the people who took the idea that many had, before and since, and made it a reality.

[madfloridian]

45. Now you are making sh** up. Twelve state parties were bankrupt...

when Dean became chair. You don't get to make up your own history, and people seem to be letting you do it.

Dean had to get 12 state parties out of bankruptcy, pay unpaid debt, get padlocks off doors.

THAT is what was the legacy of the party when he became chair in 2005...that was the legacy of the DLC.

Bankrupt state parties.

[JamesA1102]

52. That's a different issue.

It has nothing to do with campaign strategy. And has nothing to do with the DLC either.

[madfloridian]

47. You are blaming the loss of Harold Ford on Howard Dean? Oh, really.

And people are letting you do it.

You are spouting Rahm/Carville talking points one right after the other.

Shame on people in this thread for being so afraid of the conservative Dems here that they will not defend Dean against slander.

[JamesA1102]

53. I'm not blaming anyone.

I was just repeating what some strategists have stated to show that the conclusion that the "50 state" strategy being responsible for Dem gains in '06 and '08 is not universal.

And Dean is a conservative Dem. He was one of the most pro-business Dem Governors in the '90s. He got an A rating from the NRA and supported the confederate flag.

BTW you're boardering on the verge of stalking me. If you continue, I'll have to file a complaint.

[madfloridian]

58. I am replying to what you have posted. If you call it stalking, please report it.

Those Dem strategist who did NOT want to make the party more inclusive have been blaming Dean for everything, even what they broke through the years.

Those strategists will lose money if the party power continues outside of DC.

I have in one post or another corrected almost everything you have gotten incorrect.

Fair is fair.

No one did anything singlehandledly at all. And by dismissing the ones who worked so hard for the election and for the party...2012 is being put in jeopardy.

That's a crying shame.

[JamesA1102]

68. Then why do you keep following me from thread to thread

And I'm not blaming Dean. I acknowledge that he contributed to the victories just not that he was 100% responsible. Many, many people as well as a confluence of events contributed to it. Which is why for some to say that Obama owes his victory to Dean is ridiculous.

[madfloridian]

77. From thread to thread? What in the world are you talking about?

I don't even remember having much conversation with you until today. Explain.

NO ONE claims Dean is totally responsible for anything...but there was a vacuum in the party leadership in 05...and he stepped up spoke out and kept people together when there was no clear leader.

I don't think I have seen anyone say he was 100% responsible. That would be silly.

But he has been totally shut out of the party at a national level from the day of the election. He deserves better than that.

He is an outsider, he prides himself on being one. He has said in several interviews he is going back to working on policy issues instead of working to get people elected.

That would be a very good thing for the party which is appearing to be very lopsided right now.

[JamesA1102]

88. Well in at least two threads just today and others in the past.

And here is where you mythologizing again. There was no vacuum in the party leadership in '05. There were several credible candidates for DNC chairman. Dean made deals with the state party chairs to funnel National money to them if they would support him as DNC chairman. That's the true genesis of the "50 state" strategy. Dean bribing the state party chairs to vote for him.

While maybe no one has said the actual words that Dean was 100% responsible, when they say that Obama owes his victory to Dean, which he doesn't, they are saying that Dean was mostly if not totally responsible for Obama's victory. Now that is really silly.

Finally, if Dean prides himself as being an outsider then he should have no problem not getting a job in the Obama administration.

[MaineDem]

48. Sorry, you're wrong

This program was new to the states in 2005. There was nothing in place like this prior to that.

[JamesA1102]

55. There you are right.

It was a different type of program for directing national money to the states. But that is implementation, not strategy. How effective it was is debatable.

[MaineDem]

82. Prior to that there was no money to the states.

Nothing for infrastructure in the state parties. Maybe some national money came through the states during a presidential campaign. But nothing like this existed until the state party chairs asked ALL candidates for DNC Chair to support a program in 2005. Dean actually expanded on it as part of his "platform". It was extremely effective. Ask the state chairs.

[JamesA1102]

83. You're both right and wrong.

There was no money for infastructure but there was always money for local congressional and Senate races. That's not in dispute. What is is that it was the deciding factor in this victories in '06 and Obama's victory in '08.

[karynnj]

102. Rahm Emanual has a vested interest in saying that.

In reality when the tide turned in 2006, if only Emanual was funding the House candidates, there would have been FEWER representatives who won, because many who won would not have gotten the funding they did early on because they they were in areas deemed not winnable. Both the DNC and independent efforts by Senator Kerry funded some of these candidates early on - only later were they added to Rahm's list.

Ford lost to a racist ad as much as anything. He was also hurt by a scandal involving a relative - not his fault, but it hurt. I've never heard it blamed on lack of money.

[JamesA1102]

105. Maybe/maybe not.

Unfortunately we don't have a big time machine to turn back the clock to see how things might have turned out differently. (And I wasn't quoting Emanual BTW.) The point is there were many factors for Dem wins in '06 and '08. You can't credit just one of those factors or one person's efforts as being the main reason for those victories. They all contributed.

[karynnj]

112. Of course there were other factors

The biggest was that country was on our side.

By 2006, the majority of the country agreed with getting out of Iraq in a year or less (you need to add the categories)

The President's approval rating was in the 20s and over 80% said the country was going in the wrong direction) in 2008 - by 2006, he was below 40%.

2006 was one year after Katrina and New Orleans was still a mess. In 2008, there was a financial crisis that is as scary as anything (economic) since the Great depression.

Remember we lost 2004 by only about 118,000 votes in one state - with a President just over 51% in approval and 59% answered that things in the country were going very well or fairly well. (Question 7 - http://www.pollster.com/polls/tn/08-tn-pres-ge-mvo.php Question 6 is better, but the way question 7 is phrased allows for a more accurate nuanced answer. This is far different than 2008.)

In 2008, you also have to add:
Obama

Excellent surrogates, who were there instantly to defend Obama who did an excellent job negatively framing McCain (Kerry especially did a great job with his candidate McCain vs Senator McCain that explained positives many Democrats had said in the past and helped some people I know change previously positive opinions)

financing - Obama had FAR more money in the general election - compare that to 2004 where Kerry had to stretch the same amount of money over 13 weeks that Bush had for 8 - and on top of that the Republicans cheated by having the Congressional and Senate ads speak of Bush, and they were paid for entirely by the Congressional funds.

Better media - in 2004 the only cable Democrats were Carville and Begala who attacked Bush, but did little to help get John Kerry's accomplishments, vision or positions out. This year, there was KO and Rachel Maddow - who both did an excellent job for Obama - I think they were still skewed to the right though.

To that add:
The DNC
the DSCC
the DCCC
the many many volunteers

[JamesA1102]

115. That is exactly my point. Thanks. nt

[karynnj]

118. If I may be so bold - I think that others here all know

at least most of this and it appeared to them that you were saying that Dean did nothing significant - although you did often say many people were responsible. So, it appeared that you were attacking people who were already unhappy that Dean is out at the DNC and has not been given anything.

I assume that many Democratic organizations will offer him opportunities, but this isn't obvious yet. So, there is a sense that he worked extremely hard for 4 years - and when we are back in power - he has nothing. Can you see how people who believe in him feel? He is not like Edwards - who deserved his exile.

It is disconcerting that Rahm and HRC have two of the plum jobs, when in fact those of us who preferred a change not just from Bush, but from the last several decades - now see that there never was a real choice. Kerry 2004 might have been our only real choice to get the Kerry/Kennedy wing since 1968.

[JamesA1102]

120. You could have fooled me.

Reading the most of the posts here most were saying that Obama owed his victory to Dean which is just not the case. And the problem is that the 'people who believed in him' as you put are so blinded by their hero worship of Dean and/or hatred of the DLC that they can't abide anyone not speaking of him in less than glowing terms.

[karynnj]

124. That is the nature of this thread - not the entire site

That is generated by the content of the OP written by a Dean supporter. It dealt with his not having a position in the DNC or the administration. It's clear that you are more impressed with Emanual and the DLC - you should be happy with the way things are going. Emanual has a powerful position and the DLC has a strong presence in the Cabinet. Your side won - even though the official DLC candidate lost. This is a thread where they are expressing their sorrow, frustration and disappointment - that is likely sharper because they thought that the DLC had lost.

You have done the same thing. You can't stand that some of us really do not like the sometimes ethically challenged Bill Clinton. This thread that you posted with an obnoxious article - that essentially says - "Now you have to love the Clintons or else" shows just as much blind hero worship and it attacks anyone who would show him in a negative light. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=7911696

(disclaimer, like most people, I also have a politician I respect more than other politicians - and it shows.)

[madfloridian]

125. Good post, karynnj

Something I have noticed. At several blogs when a discussion of D*** is attempted, there are many there using the almost identical words about worship and how he had nothing to do with the win. It's amazing, really.

I don't use his name because two right wing sites are zeroed on me if I post anything about him at all. And I have been a dummie for days now. Kind of sad.

I would reply to James, but he says I am stalking him.

I just posted a thread about the DLC wins, they really are getting high in the administration.

There will be no talking about him here, I believe. Nor the others who were left out of the bigger picture.

Well said: "This is a thread where they are expressing their sorrow, frustration and disappointment"

[JamesA1102]

133. See this is the attitude I was talking about

Unless you speak of Dean in anything less than glowing terms you must love the evil DLC. You are just proving how closed-minded some are here. And how posting anything that doesn't subscribe to certain dogmas is immediately attacked.

[karynnj]

137. Actually, no

I am neither a "Deaniac", as you likely think of or call them, nor have I ever been one - as a look at my posts would show. I also have never posted anything calling the DLC "evil", though they clearly and intentionally moved the party to the right. That was their stated goal and what they thought needed to be done. I am to the left of the DLC Senators, so I disagree with that move, but I do not think them evil. I merely disagree. I've actually donated to some DLC members who were in tight general election races.

What I was showing with the flamebait article - from a well known, well respected author but still flamebait - was that you did precisely the same thing - in fact, maybe worse. I have NEVER seen Madfloridian or any of the people I recognize as Dean advocates ever label people "Dean haters" because they disagree with his actions. As I have argued with Madfloridians on other issues involving Dean, I would know if she did, but she never has. Yet there are MANY Clinton (DLC if you want) people referring to "Hillary haters" or "Clinton haters" and there is the puerile obnoxiousness of Clinton supporters of saying the rest of us blame the "Clenis" for everything. I have NEVER seen anyone but Clinton people use that term - and it is used as a club to attempt to end any discussion that is in the least bit negative to the Clintons. The strange thing is that this seems to be about the least effective way ever to change the minds of anyone posting or lurking. It is a technique that almost says you can't win on the merits of your arguments.

What is astonishing to me is that you got absolutely nothing that I actually wrote.

[JamesA1102]

138. Now you are making unfair assumptions.

I have not used the term 'Deaniac' nor the term 'Hillary-hater'. While I acknowledge that you have not called the DLC evil there are many others that have. Just as many have accused me of hating or being hostile toward Dean.

Nor have I engaged in any of the other activities that you cite. And again you are making an assumption that the Conason article was posted as flamebait. It was an interesting article from a respected writer that I posted without comment. I neither denounced or endorsed what he was saying but instead was attacked for posting. Nor did I defend what Conason said just his right to say it.

But both prove what I've been saying all along, that unless you subscribe to certain dogmas around here you are attacked and denounced. You're accusation of me using the term 'Deaniac' is just another example of this. Despite the fact that I have stated several times that I do think Dean and the "50 State" strategy deserves some credit and recognition, I'm still accused of being in league with Rahm or the DLC.

I also find it interesting that even after I agreed with you several posts above and made no further comment, you decided to pursue this not on the facts of the issue at hand but on a personal level. Thank you once again for proving my point.

[JamesA1102]

121. You could have fooled me.

Reading the most of the posts here most were saying that Obama owed his victory to Dean which is just not the case. And the problem is that the 'people who believed in him' as you put are so blinded by their hero worship of Dean and/or hatred of the DLC that they can't abide anyone not speaking of him in less than glowing terms.

[AdHocSolver]

129. The DLC is responsible for eight years of George Bush. Stop defending them by trashing Dean.

[FraDon]

64. • Are you Jim Carville?

Are you being paid to post (not to be confused with pay to play)? • I've read the thread twice. I am experiencing your contributions as a Gatling gun of propaganda & upward smoke blowing.

As a Vermonter and Dean supporter, my take is that this (treatment of the good doctor) is another example of no good deed goes unpunished. Certain personality types don't take kindly to criticism, let alone embarrassing them publicly with successful alternatives.

[JamesA1102]

69. Wow how progressive of you!

Someone offers a differing point of view that is at odds with your cherished beliefs and you accuse them of being a paid shill. I'm met evangelicals more open to discussing evolution than some of the closed minds around here.

[mmonk]

32. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

The leadership is cutthroat at times. The leadership has always has the attitude it has the only wisdom and the only room. But the party sits in its current position at times in spite of the leadership and the ice beneath its feet is thinner than they realize.

[Sorceress]

42. Hmm. Well, I am disappointed that Dean won't be a member of the cabinet. He has my total respect

and I feel he has a lot to contribute to this administration. I do hope Obama has something key for Dean that will truly utilize him.

[madfloridian]

46. By now I guess you have realized...

that is not easy to mention Dean's name here anymore. There will be some who come to correct you and to say he did nothing.

There are those who will mock. Many of them. And they get away with it because no one stands up to them.

[LittleApple81]

50. The revisionism of these people now trying to dismiss Howard Dean appalls me.

I cannot believe this way of behaving towards Dr. Dean, when during the election everybody was lauding him and congratulating themselves for the way he was helping the Democrats win.

[madfloridian]

51. It is being done on purpose in an organized way.

.

[JamesA1102]

56. No one is trying to dimiss him, just being realistic.

He contributed to the victories in '06 & '08. But so did a lot of other people and many other factors. The problem is that many have a blind hero worship for the man and don't like it if anyone doesn't give him 100% credit for Obama's victory.

[LittleApple81]

57. I have not said 100% credit. But apparently people here want to give him 0 credit or even imply

that he was guilty of losing seats in 2006.
Apparently the idea is that Obama raised from the foam of the sea, ready to be president and did not use anyone's help in particular so he does not owe anything, including respect, to anybody. It is sad.

[JamesA1102]

70. But some think that Obama owes Dean his victory

which he clearly doesn't. And there are those who legitimately feel Dean cost the Dems some close races in 2006. They have a right to that opinion whether you agree with it or not. The problem is so many are blinded by their hero worships of Dean that any attempt to put his contribution in perspective and not speak of him in only glowing terms is deemed an attack.

[karynnj]

103. If it was lack of money in a congressional race - why not blame Emanual as well

Maybe he allocated too much elsewhere - or annoyed people with his "leader" survey in 2005 - which included himself but not Dean or the last standardbearer of the party. Leading at least one to give money a different way to Congressional candidates.

[JamesA1102]

107. Maybe so

But I've never heard any one make that assertion about Emanual. .

[karynnj]

108. I must travel in different circles as I did hear that

he had ruled out many districts where vets who Kerry and Clark supported or DNC supported candidates succeeded. I know the Kerry people tried to identify promising candidates beyond the DCCC ones - and many ultimately became DCCC candidates.

The fact though is that if the problem was allocation of money, you can always after the fact say that candidates with landslides likely didn't need what they had - and ones near the borderline might have succeeded with a bit more. In Ford's case, I doubt it was money - TN was not competitive with Obama - who lost to McCain 41.5% to 53.8%. (Obama never polled near McCain - http://www.pollster.com/polls/tn/08-tn-pres-ge-mvo.php )

As to the idiot obnoxious survey, there were many people just here on DU who said they would not give to the DNC, but would to the DNC or Kerry's individual solicitations for candidates - and many were people I know personally. So, it did happen. I have no way to estimate the impact.

[JamesA1102]

116. Well I know what I heard in NY

where several candidates in close races were frustrated because they couldn't get enough money from the DNC. In one case there was no money available for get out the vote efforts in a race where the Dem lost by only 2,000 votes in the end. (We took the seat this year though.) And as one person who was very involved said to me, "we can't get the money we need to win this because Dean is spending money in Montana where there is no chance of winning".

[karynnj]

119. That must have been frustrating, but it is likely that the DCCC

also didn't give them sufficient money. We actually won in Montana - Tester and Sweitzer - so he was wrong there.

[JamesA1102]

122. No actually the only money they were getting was from the DCCC

and they were very frustrated that they couldn't get any from the DNC. And the Montana race he was refering to was for the congressional seat in the house not the Senate race. Also, I believe Gov. Sweitzer was elected in 2004 not 2006.

[karynnj]

123. You're right on Sweitzer - I had not meant he was elected in 2006,

rather that Montana, per se was not out of the question. Did he get any answer as to why no money was allocated from the DNC?

It also doesn't help this person, if there were examples that were the other way - where they had DNC money and no DCCC money.

[EFerrari]

67. No, not at all. The problem is that the DLC hates, hates Dean

and when it's not trying to take credit for his work, it's actively trying to lose him.

I hope they fail.

[JamesA1102]

72. Thanks for proving my point.

A prime example of the closed mindset that many have here.

[tkmorris]

76. Oh Horsehockey

Every word sfexpat2000 said was 100% true.

You seem to have an agenda here.

[JamesA1102]

85. My only agenda is the truth.

Like I said before some people here seem to have a blind worship of Dean and anything said about him in anything less than glowing terms is immediately pounced upon.

[w4rma]

94. That's very truthy of you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness

[JamesA1102]

98. I'm not the one engaging in truthiness

It's those blinded by their hero worship of Dean that are.

[w4rma]

99. Um, yeah. Don't you have an Al From altar to pray at, somewhere? (nt)

[JamesA1102]

101. So just because I don't worship Dean

I must be a fan of From. Get a life!

[AdHocSolver]

131. Your agenda is to rewrite history. You seem to have a blind hatred of Dean.

Your responses are all canned. You repeat the same nonsense again and again, and your responses are not even apropos to many of the comments to which you reply. An example of pure sophistry.

[JamesA1102]

132. It's not nonsense

It's the truth. Sorry if you can't handle it.

[EFerrari]

78. LOL. Right. I made Rahm try to get Dean fired. I confess!

[madfloridian]

79. No, they really do dislike him intently. AND his supporters.

They called Dean all kinds of names, one of them was fringe. He was a centrist, he just wanted the party to be more inclusive.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/62

And Al From constantly blasts noisy activists.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/696

[madfloridian]

49. And what's more...

GDP has backed off defending anyone who tries to mention the names of some of the Democrats who are not getting any credit at all.

There is a super article by Ari Berman today at The Nation. No one has even noticed it or posted about it.

There is a concerted effort here to keep Dean's name from being mentioned. I have had two highly recommended posts locked just this month because of the vitriol...not what was in the OP...but the flamebait that follows..

I am giving it up for now because of the DUmmie crusade against me right now. AND by the way, people here are afraid of them also. That's a shame.

We should take up for those who worked their hearts out for us for the last four years, and we should take up for each other when a right wing board does things like that.

[Critters2]

54. He's a progressive. So,

no role for him!!


Bitterly,

Critters

[cali]

91. No he's not. I love Howard, but he's not a progressive

In fact, we here in Vermont see him as pretty much a moderate to liberal dem. And we know him in a way that non-Vermonters don't.

[fadedrose]

60. I am bitterly disappointed...............nt

[depakid]

86. There will be plenty of much better opportunities for Dean outside of this adminsitration

and when the establishment Dems screw up- yet again, which is their wont, Dean will still be in a position to represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic party.

[LittleApple81]

87. I sure hope so. He has been great for the party. nt

[Algorem]

90. Daschle over Dean.All you need to know.

And Warren!?Holy crap.

[w4rma]

93. Emmanuel and the many DLCers, who Obama picked for his cabinet, shut him out. (nt)

[SoCalDem]

117. Yep.. once the boat started filling up with them, I don't think Howard wanted to be there either

I'm sure Howard will find plenty to keep him busy.. he's not a frivolous guy.. He's got plenty to live on, and I'd be willing to bet that he'll be approached to write a book about the 50-state strategy..

Or maybe he'll become a campaign consultant for some bright young dems in republican country...and work his magic on a smaller scale:)

[w4rma]

130. I want him in politics, not writing books (unless he hires a ghost writer so he can do both). (nt)

[earth mom]

96. Wow, talk about ungrateful-after all Dean did for Obama & the dem party!

It's utterly shocking to read this! :wow:

But then again, maybe not.

[Cha]

106. I don''t believe anything the corporatemedia

has to say. I'm not jumping to any conclusions based on their shit.

Dean is stellar quality and will end up doing something fantastic.

[kenny blankenship]

126. That was the first clue.

[LWolf]

140. You still don't get it.

"Inclusiveness" never included the left.