Is Howard Dean screwing up as DNC chairman?

[elucidator]

You forgot about the revelation that Hillary was a founding member of the Wellesley chapter of Deisel Dykes for Trotsky…

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Magiver

Huh? What charge did I make?

Oh, my bad. When I first read that you said “DNC donations are paying for it,” I interpreted this as “DNC donations are suffering for it,” the same assertion as was made in the OP. I now understand that you probably meant “DNC donations are funding it.”

Nevermind.

[Liberal]

@Ludovic

It’s sad when Howard Dean is the Fred Phelps of the left. There’s gotta be someone more loony the centrists can look at that makes the rest of the left mainstream. Whereas about the only person who does that for the right is Fred Phelps (ironically a Democrat – a conspiracy perhaps?)

It’s even worse than that. Extreme left-wing sources are disowning Dean: Dean’s Democrats Remain Pathetic.

[cosmosdan]

@elucidator

“Mr. President, how do you explain the wild overpayments to Boeing for a leasing project that the Pentagon neither needs nor wants?”

“Just the kind of thing Howard Dean would say!”

“Mr. President, a while back VP Cheney said that the insurgency was about to collapse, yet more of our people die every day. How do you account for this discrepency?”

“Howard Dean is dissing our wonderful troops, which causes the insurgency to be encouraged, because they, like all of us, hang on Howard Dean’s every word. Did I mention our wonderful, wonderful troops? Well, Howard Dean doesn’t think so, because Howard Dean hates freedom!”

“Mr. President, Tom DeLay was recently implicated in a plan to circumvent American labor laws in the Mariannas, to permit sweatshop labor products to be sold in the US under US labels. Have you any comment?”

“Howard Dean! Look over there, it’s Howard Dean! Shiny! and hateful!”

I love this one.

[cosmosdan]

@Psycho Pirate

Okay. Taking a step back and removing my “USA can do no wrong rose-colored glasses ™”, I freely admit that though it doesn’t rise to the level of torture perpetrated by Hussein and many others still active, it was indeed torture, and it is a shame. I retract that statement.

Well, things are getting better in Iraq every day. And unless the average man in the street is on a street in Baghdad or in close proximity to the local airport, he is (relatively) safe. I certainly wouldn’t call Iraqi’s provisional government “Anarchy”.

You put your glasses back on for that second comment didn’t you?

Once you get used to them then reality hurts more. It’s like taking off your sunglasses in the bright sunlight. Ouch!! that hurts put them back on.

[cosmosdan]

@BobLibDem

Certain Democratic leaders are distancing themselves from Dean. I think that’s smart. It gives you the best of both worlds- you get to take advantage of Dean’s attacks while at the same time insulating yourself from the backlash. If I’m a Democratic politician, I’d publicly express regret over Dean’s comments but then call him privately and say “good show”.

Exactly. I haven’t been too happy with Dean’s comments but in reading thise thread I see some kind of logic. He draws the fire and gets attention, while potential candidates become the voice of reason and reconciliation.

Isn’t that a simialr tact to what the GOP did? Get someone else to make the really nasty comments we want made and stir things up. Then Dubya can try and take the high road, if he can pronounce whats written for him.

Look at the swift boat BS? Does anybody believe Rove wasn’t behind that?

[cosmosdan]

@John Mace

Not necessarily. McCain has been very successful in embracing Bush when needed and distancing himself from Bush when it’s expedient. Plus, there’s 3 years for him, and other candidates, to distance themselves even further if necessary.
.

I think the point was that the same behind the scene manipulators that influence Bush will want to have the same influence in 08. Thats probably how the candidate will be chosen. I only wish McCain would run or had won instead of Dubya.

[cosmosdan]

@John Mace

I’m sure the Dems will want to make '08 all about Bush. That might work, but they better have a vision of the future, too. Fighting yesterday’s battle is not a good gameplan.

I’m with you on this one.
One of the big problems I see is that the way politics is done needs some serious changeing. McCain makes a good case for this. It seems that there are too many Dems that don’t want these changes any more than those in power now. They want to win…but they don’t nessecarily really want things to get better. On some level even the most uneducated voter feels this reality.
The doctor gives you a band aid to cover the wound and says he’s helping you, but he doesn’t really want it to heal completely. There’s too much money at stake.

[Khadaji]

@John Mace

Politics.

Good point. And my point is that Kerry (he’s the French guy, btw, not Dean) bumbled his way thru a losing campaign against Mr Lightweight himself (Bush). It would be sad to see the Dems shoot themselves in the foot yet again.

I’m sure the Dems will want to make '08 all about Bush. That might work, but they better have a vision of the future, too. Fighting yesterday’s battle is not a good gameplan.

The Democrats had a chance to win my vote in 2004, but did not have a clear enough game plan. In the end, I voted for no one. I am still not thrilled with the Republican party and the Democrats can win my vote in 2008 - but only if they truly win it. If their best message is “anyone but Bush” (of course, he can’t run) then they won’t win me again.

[cosmosdan]

@Khadaji

The Democrats had a chance to win my vote in 2004, but did not have a clear enough game plan. In the end, I voted for no one. I am still not thrilled with the Republican party and the Democrats can win my vote in 2008 - but only if they truly win it. If their best message is “anyone but Bush” (of course, he can’t run) then they won’t win me again.

I heard this sentiment repeated by several of my friends. I think Kerry’s loss shows a lot of people felt this way.

[John_Mace]

@rjung

And besides, making much ado about Howard Dean is an easy way to avoid discussing other matters, such as Bush’s continued evasion of the Downing Street Memo, the White House’s stonewalling on papers Congress has requested on John Bolton, and Bill O’Reilly hacking up Joe Biden’s videotaped interview on ABC This Week. I guess the Michael Jackson trial isn’t providing enough distraction this week…

Yeah, if only the moderators would allow you to open threads on those subjects. It’s a shame that they’ve forced you to discuss all those items in the hundreds of threads about Dean.

[Merijeek]

@John Mace

Yeah, if only the moderators would allow you to open threads on those subjects. It’s a shame that they’ve forced you to discuss all those items in the hundreds of threads about Dean.

So, continuing based on, you know, the OP, seeing as how I’ve read over 300 posts in here…

1. Some people claim Dean is screwing up in regards to fundraising. Their basis on this is a couple offhand comments and some figures showing that the Reps are out-raising the Dems.

2. Others point out that the Reps have always out-raised the Dems, and the Dems are actually raising more so far since Dean took over than they ever have before in an off year.

3. The people from point 1 above repond with a “well, I don’t have any numbers or cites, but I know I’m right.”

Is that a pretty accurate summary of the thread so far?

-Joe

[Snag]

@Evil One

No, but this party chairman is working pretty hard to get fired. If he doesn’t watch his mouth in public and start raising more money, he’ll be gone in a year.

Um, maybe not.

Democratic National Committee leaders embraced feisty party boss
Howard Dean on Saturday and urged him to keep fighting despite a flap over his blunt comments on Republicans.
After a meeting of the DNC’s 40-member executive committee at a downtown hotel, members said Dean was doing exactly what they elected him to do – build the party in all states and aggressively challenge Republicans.

“I hope Governor Dean will remember that he didn’t get elected to be a wimp,” said DNC member Gilda Cobb-Hunter, a South Carolina state representative. "We have been waiting a long time for someone to stand up for Democrats.

Dean is getting plenty of media face time. He only spends a couple minutes making or replying to the snarks, the rest of it is presenting his talking points. And he’ll likely be getting more time too.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Howard Dean said Saturday that positive responses from supporters have reinforced his determination to keep talking tough despite suggestions from some congressional Democrats that the party chairman should tone down his rhetoric.

People want us to fight,'' Dean told the national party's executive committee. We are here to fight.’’

Despite the focus on his remarks, he still gets more time to present the Democratic agenda and critiques. The media thrives on sensationalism (See Michael Jackson) and Dean is exploiting it.

Besides, he is not only firing up his base, but also speaking to half of the Americans that do not currently vote. It’s probable that at least half that number agrees with him, and it’s probably easier to get two or three of them in the tent than it is to convert one fence-sitting moderate.

[rjung]

@John Mace

Yeah, if only the moderators would allow you to open threads on those subjects.

I was referring to the conservative-kowtowing corporate media, not the SDMB.

[Captain_Amazing]

@rjung

I was referring to the conservative-kowtowing corporate media, not the SDMB.

The Washington Post, at least, has reported extensively both on the Downing Street memo and the fight between Senate Democrats and the White House regarding the Bolton papers.

[Mr.Moto]

@Hentor the Barbarian

The link I gave you also shows Gallup poll numbers that show Dean’s approval rating among the general population going up over time, not down. So it is hard to support an argument that his “hot rhetoric” is chasing anyone away.

I gave my opinion of polling earlier, but it is seen as an end in itself to Hentor and others on this board. So I was amused with some recent numbers, and thought I would share them.

Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll. Dean is 23% favorable, 41% unfavorable, a shift of -18% since March.

Rasmussen poll. Dean is at 25% favorable, 40% unfavorable.

These numbers make it easier to support an argument that his hot rhetoric is turning some people off.

Thoughts, Hentor?

[light_strand]

You know, Mr Moto, those poll numbers would be more meaningful if we knew the political breakdown of the respondants.

It really doesn’t matter how much Republicans disapprove of him, as long as the Dems do, and show their approval with cash.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Mr. Moto

I gave my opinion of polling earlier, but it is seen as an end in itself to Hentor and others on this board. So I was amused with some recent numbers, and thought I would share them.

An end in itself? Boy. What can one say. I cited a variety of measures to counteract a bullshit OP. One of them was polling. But, I am glad that you brought these up. I’ll use exactly what you provided, as well as some other information. I myself was amused when I saw your effort here.

Here’s a reference: http://www.pollingreport.com/D.htm#Dean

Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll. Dean is 23% favorable, 41% unfavorable, a shift of -18% since March.
[/quote]
Where do you get an 18% shift? He was at an unfavorable of 32% back in March 05, and is now at 41%. Looks like a nine point change. What math are you using?

Additionally, look at Dean’s numbers in Fox’s poll from January of 2004. Fav: 28%/Unfav: 43%. Very similar to the most recent numbers. So, rather than Dean showing a downward trajectory, Fox’s pollees are showing quite a bit of vacillation when asked about Dean.

Scroll down to look at CNN/USA Today/Gallup: He showed a drop from Feb 04 to Feb 05 of 4 points in his unfavorable rating, from 42 to 38, and more relevant to your argument that he is tanking since being DNC chair, he has dropped another 5% in unfavorable ratings when polled in May 05.

@Mr. Moto

Rasmussen poll. Dean is at 25% favorable, 40% unfavorable.

Unfortunately, the numbers presented here are static; no trend can be discerned. However, they do give favorability numbers for Ken Mehlman. 25% had any opinion of Mehlman, 16% unfavorable and only 9% favorable. So, of those with any opinion, 62% (40/65) had a negative opinion of Dean, and 64% (16/25) had a negative opinion of Mehlman.

These numbers make it easier to support an argument that his hot rhetoric is turning some people off.

Only if you are predisposed to think that. Actually, they say that Ken Mehlman is proportionally more disliked. Funny you didn’t notice that.

If you are interested in poll numbers, Howard Dean has some company: Check out Bill Frist’s numbers here: http://www.pollingreport.com/E-F.htm

Thoughts, Hentor?

Well, I think I love seeing someone hoisted on their own petard. I also think I’ll be seeing a media blitz about how despized Ken Mehlman and Bill Frist are because of their hot rhetoric. (I’ll be more likely to see a media blintz before that, however.)

I also think even less of the weak-ass argument you have brought to the table.

What are your thoughts, Mr. Moto?

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

Of course, that should read “…Ken Mehlman is proportionally more disliked among those with an opinion.”

[Mr.Moto]

Sure. An opinion about party chairmen. The flipside of that, though, is that Dean is very high profile while Ken Mehlman is floating under the radar. Only 25% of the population had any opinion of him at all.

So your guy is well known and unpopular, while ours is completely unknown and not popular. But our guy is raising scads and scads of money, which is the other measurement you seem to favor, Hentor.

I know what side of this equation I’d want, and Howard Dean would trade Ken Mehlman for numbers any day of the week.