Tuesday, December 06, 2005

The Dean-ocratic wing of the Democratic party

Howard Dean said on Monday that "The idea that the United States is going to win the war in Iraq is just plain wrong." He doesn't say that he is pessimistic, or doubtful, or even that building a stable democracy in Iraq might not be able to work, he said flatly that we will not win in Iraq, which to me is no better than Republicans asserting as a fact that we cannot lose. Perhaps the war in Iraq is unwinnable. If so, let that be said by a Congressman or other government official who can speak for themselves alone, NOT the Democratic chairman who technically speaks for the Democratic party!

Do Democrats not have enough to worry about than having to constantly use their airtime to answer questions about whether or not they agree with their party chairman?

Say what you will about Dean's Republican counterpart, Ken Mehlman, Mehlman keeps his head down, does his job, and does not constantly force his fellow Republicans into a difficult position of having to either split ranks with their party chairman and send a message of disunity to supporters, or support a politically unpopular statement. He also raises more money than Dean, probably because he is more concerned with helping the party than getting his name in the news. Sigh.


dcat said...

Marc --
I cannot help but wonder if the dems did not try to marginalize Dean like the GOP hoped to marginalize TR by putting him up for VP, and if it will not similarly backfire. The thought was that dean could do the necessary work o mobilize the base and that he might be effective as a fundraiser. But by being as vocal as any parety chair in recent memory, all he has done is let the left wing of the party, and especially the anti war wing, think they can call in chits in 2008. Whatever one thinks about the war, i have a hard time buying that dean has been, on whole, good for the party.

Cram said...

I have not thought of that analogy before but I think you might be dead on.

I was a long-time fan of Dean before he became the party chairman and never thought that he was as so-called "crazy" or unpredictable as his enemies have said. I even met with him during the 2004 election and he seemed like a really great and intelligent guy.

After seeing him as party chair however, I think you are correct that he has not been good for the party. It was, in retrospect, foolish for Democrats to believe that they could put a presidential candidate in such a thank-less position and not expect him to want headlines.