Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Howard Dean and reverse psychology
There's some talk of Howard Dean running for the head of the Democratic National Committee. The talking heads to the right are saying that if this happens, it would be great for the Republican Party. Same thing they said about his possible nomination to the democratic ticket earlier this year (or was that last year?).
Maybe they're right. Maybe a move too far to the left would hurt the Dems and strengthen the repubs even further. I can't say for sure.
I am a bit suspicious of all their talk, though. I can't help but read fear in all their posturing, but that's probably just me.
The right wing are, of course, generous with their advice. The big problem is that the Dems are way too easy at taking advice. So in 2000 Gore adds Lieberman to his ticket for a dose of relatively conservative values or some bullshit and then the campaign distances themselves from the popular (though controversial) Clinton administration, of which Gore was a part. They lose. Even if you *think* they won, the margin of victory would've been so small, that it wouldn't even be worth mentioning.
When the Dean campaign caught fire during the primaries, the word "electability" seemed to become a new buzzword with a purpose towards placing doubt on his chances in a national election. Right-wingers spoke words that indicated that they'd be shit faced with glee if the Dems were to dare nominate this hippie loon to the candidacy, but I sensed fear. Again, maybe it was just me.
The conventional wisdom in the democratic party had been that three time losers like Gephardt or Kerry would be the best choice to run against Bush, so perhaps they saw a threat in Dean as well. I would've prefered to see Dean run, whatever the outcome. It would've been a real contest rather than the farce we got. At least it would've been a more entertaining farce.
I don't really care who ends up leading the DNC, I'm just fascinated with the strange responses I see to Howard Dean. Makes me think there's something bigger happening. Again, that's probably just me.
Maybe they're right. Maybe a move too far to the left would hurt the Dems and strengthen the repubs even further. I can't say for sure.
I am a bit suspicious of all their talk, though. I can't help but read fear in all their posturing, but that's probably just me.
The right wing are, of course, generous with their advice. The big problem is that the Dems are way too easy at taking advice. So in 2000 Gore adds Lieberman to his ticket for a dose of relatively conservative values or some bullshit and then the campaign distances themselves from the popular (though controversial) Clinton administration, of which Gore was a part. They lose. Even if you *think* they won, the margin of victory would've been so small, that it wouldn't even be worth mentioning.
When the Dean campaign caught fire during the primaries, the word "electability" seemed to become a new buzzword with a purpose towards placing doubt on his chances in a national election. Right-wingers spoke words that indicated that they'd be shit faced with glee if the Dems were to dare nominate this hippie loon to the candidacy, but I sensed fear. Again, maybe it was just me.
The conventional wisdom in the democratic party had been that three time losers like Gephardt or Kerry would be the best choice to run against Bush, so perhaps they saw a threat in Dean as well. I would've prefered to see Dean run, whatever the outcome. It would've been a real contest rather than the farce we got. At least it would've been a more entertaining farce.
I don't really care who ends up leading the DNC, I'm just fascinated with the strange responses I see to Howard Dean. Makes me think there's something bigger happening. Again, that's probably just me.
Labels: bullshit, media, politics
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
