August 21, 2003
What's Great About Dean?
In a previous comment, DC asks what is so great about Dean.Well, two things. One is that he's allowed normal citizens to participate in the political process of his campaign, so there's more a sense of participation and ownership there. I think that's really a huge deal. They've also demonstrated again and again their willingness to adjust the campaign based off of feedback given from normal citizens. So there's a community-building vibe to it.
Second is he's relatively immune (so far) to the various tricks and attacks from the right. A good test is when someone from the right asks a leading question. Some people allow themselves to be restricted by the framework of the question. Others have the ability to recognize the trick and actually object to the entire premise of the question. That's really the heart of why people feel like Dean will stand up for them, because they see him standing up for himself. A common feeling in the population is that they're being tricked and are not sure how. So they appreciate when someone can actually point out how.
In that sense, Dean is better than the other five reasonable candidates. I've seen them all of them except for Graham fold at one point or another, and Graham bugs me for other reasons. I've seen Kucinich fold too. I saw Lieberman fold in the 2000 Florida election, and it basically cost Gore the presidency.
The only prospective candidate better at that part of things than Dean is Wesley Clark. I've seen some interviews with him on Meet The Press, Fox News, etc - the guy is awesome and handles himself extremely well, and even turns it around on the questioner. There was a great exchange on Hannity and Colmes, where Hannity started by showing a clip of Tony Blair giving speeches, right in the middle of the big recent Blair controversy, and at the end Hannity said, "A great speech, a great man. Don't you think Tony Blair is a great leader, General Clark?" in that smarmy tone of "of course you agree with me". Clark's response: "Oh he sure is - in the darkest days of the Kosovo conflict, he was right there when we really needed someone." Hannity must have been seething because he railed on Clinton and Blair about Kosovo, but Clark turned it on him in such a way that Hannity couldn't exactly go back on what he just said.
My number on criteria on a candidate is actually how effective he is in avoiding those traps. The right's biggest skill is in convincing idealists to compromise themselves. So I think a centrist with the ability to stand up for himsellf would probably lead to a more liberal result than a President Kucinich who would just get run over.
Yipes! That was fast...
So are you giving Dean support because 1. He's left 2. He is clever enough to talk his way out of traps while debating?
I did read a blurb about his campaign getting people's vibes from their blogs, which is pretty cool. But I don't know if I would vote for him based on his internet savvy. Of course I may not even get a chance to.
Posted by: DC Barns at August 21, 2003 03:08 PMWell, it's not just debates, it's all the power struggles and manipulations that happen in that sphere. I think an impotent liberal is pretty pointless.
My own political beliefs are pro-meritocracy, pro-safety net basically. Right now the republicans are so crazy that that only fits democrats. I probably could have been a pre-Reagan republican though.
Well, socially I'm a bit more tolerant than that I guess. :)
But anyway, I think Dean is pretty pragmatist and I like that. He talks a lot about facts before ideology.
I have a liking for Dean as well, but I am not articulate enough to explain why. When dealing with politicians I constantly get the feeling that the info I have is not the whole picture, and indeed I would surprised if it was the whole picture. Advertising has jaded me so much that I am perhaps too skeptical. And so much of politics is advertising.
Posted by: DC Barns at August 22, 2003 06:51 AM