Random thoughts about last night’s results in Iowa:
I like Howard Dean well enough, but his electability has worried me from the start. I would not relish seeing him devastated by Karl Rove in the general election. He’s Northeastern, no military experience, his record on gay civil unions will mobilize the Evangelicals against him, he appears to hate Bush which won’t play well to swing voters. On the other hand, his straight-talking style has a certain appeal, as does his genuine status as a Washington “outsider.” In the end, however, I don’t think it would be enough to get him elected. I’m honestly glad to see him vulnerable after Iowa. At least it’s clear that the Democratic party has other candidates to choose from. Dean isn’t “inevitable.” Also, one wonders where all the “new voters” were when it came time to support Dean. The theory is that he doesn’t have to rely so much on moderate swing voters in the general election because he’s mobilizing an army of new voters. If that’s so, where were they? Could we count on a similar performance in November against George Bush? The thought is worrisome. Still, there is something genuinely unique and special about the Dean campaign. Especially the fact that it seems to have an actual grass roots base. (As opposed to the rhetorical grass roots base claimed by every other campaign in history.) I’m excited about the Dean campaign’s use of the internet as an organizational tool and about the fact that a lot of people have a greater sense of participation through it. Win or lose the nomination, I think there’s something of great value to be learned here. We may be studying the Dean campaign for many years hence, citing it as the starting point for the internet playing a larger role in American politics.
I like John Kerry. He strikes me as presidential. He seems to have a spine. His policies are quite as acceptable as any of his rivals and his military record will have appeal in a general election. Still, one wonders about other things. He’s a Washington “insider” if ever there was one. Many will see him as part of “the problem” rather than the solution. He has a long voting record for the likes of Karl Rove to sift through looking for ammunition. Plus he’s a wealthy North-easterner. So he’s definitely got liabilities to go along with whatever appeal he has.
John Edwards. I barely knew he existed before last night when I saw him address his supporters after the results came in. Souther accent. I like his message of two Americas. I hear he runs a positive campaign. Unfortunately he’s also an ex trail-lawyer who will no doubt be painted as “another one of those damned lawyers” by conservative spin doctors. Besides, nice guys finish last. He’s one to watch in any case.
Joe Lieberman did not compete in Iowa. Joe Lieberman is not an actual Democrat as far as I can tell. If he were to get the nomination I would only vote for him because he would be running against George Bush. But hell, I would vote for Bob Dole if he were the only person running against George Bush.
Kucinich who? seriously, this guy is too liberal to be elected. Simple as that.
Dick Gephardt wasn’t going to be president anyway. His service to our country has been long and distinguished. But he’s no president. He’s a legislative deal maker: very useful, but not very presidential. Plus his big appeal was with unionized blue collar workers. The Democratic party just doesn’t look like that anymore. The influence of this constituency is waning. He could never have won anything on that. Anyway, he’s out now.
Wes Clark didn’t compete in Iowa, but it bodes well for him that Dean has had his “inevitable” status taken away. I’m fascinated by Clark, actually, and the main thing I’ll be watching for in New Hampshire is a strong showing by him. I hope he does well. I just cannot see a down side to this guy as a candidate. His policies are as likable as any of the others. Add to that, he’s got no political record for the opposition to tear apart, but he does have credibility as a leader, being a retired four-star army general. He’s not a privileged rich kid. From a single-parent family he did well in school, graduated top of his class at West Point. Was a Rhodes scholar at Oxford. Was captain of the debate team at West Point. Is a decorated Vietnam combat veteran. Won the war – and the peace – in Kosovo against Slobodan Milosevic without losing a single American life. Is a Southerner from Arkansas. Again I ask: where’s the downside of this guy? He would have tremendous appeal to moderates, undecideds and anyone concerned about matters of national security.