 |
||||||||
|
3/06/2003 10:39:00 PM | Timothy The Dean/Bradley Factor How much resemblance does Howard Dean bear to Bill Bradley? Having worked for Bradley in the last campaign, these similarities both excite me and put me off. Bradley got the label of liberal for being bold(er) on Health Care, but he was a fiscal moderate. Dr. Dean is pushing even bolder steps in health care, and if anything he's been even more strident than Bradley in praising balanced budgets. In many respects, Bradley was not that different from Gore on a lot of issues (as say Gephardt ver. 2000 might have been), yet Bradley still acquired the liberal 'label' and got the support of idealistic college students. But he didn't get any of the party faithful, though he did get some prominent endorsements from mavericks. Dean seems to be matching this sort of mold, recruiting and exciting activists and college students. Bradley had (or at least was seen as having) integrity. I do not get any special sense of integrity from Dean (not that I would, or that he doesn't have integrity, I just don't know....) But I think the anti-war stance is the current substitute for this... (of course, it's an anti-unilateral war stance... if we had any chance of getting U.N. approval Dean might face some tough choices...) Unfortunately, such a stance doesn't bring the big fundraising bucks (or does it?) that Bradley's work on tax policy and connections to the business community did. Dean's stance on the war may help him in peacenik Iowa, but I am not sure how much it will help him in New Hampshire, where Bradley gained sympathy from independents (and would have benefitted so much more if McCain wasn't in the picture). Will people 'trust' Dr. Dean? I don't see any reason not too, but I'm just wondering what other attractions he might bring to the table. Can Dean win? My perception is that Dean has three things widely (if that) known about him. He's Dr. Dean for health care, he's against (unilateral) war, and he signed the civil unions bill in Vermont. Will someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see him as being that liberal beyond those things and these issues are why he's perceived as the 'liberal' and why activists and students might line up behind him. (Now I know, he's clearly going full throttle for abortion rights, and is talking a louder game than the other candidates.) Because he's pro-guns and pro-balanced budget (and only pro-civil unions on a state level, not pro-gay marriage), some people think this might benefit him. But I worry the other three things will wash away any 'benefit' those brings from being seen as not a liberal (though I suppose of all issues, guns really excite people). Is this combination of can Dean hold it together during the primaries, assuming he gets a boost? I don't know how i feel about Dean using Wellstone's line that he's from the democratic wing of the democratic party. It seems he should do well in New Hampshire. But is this the type of idealism that people will find it worth it to work hard for? Bradley wasn't seen as an effective counter-puncher and as the kind of person who would meet everyone at an event. Dean, however, seems more promising at going on the attack. Gore's political operatives apparently didn't play clean (for example, all the Bradley signs on the Hanover-Lebanon road were torn down the night before the election, and one Gore operative recently bragged about how during the primary he had volunteers drive their cars in a Bradley-stronghold on election day in order to clog traffic and deter voters. Gore supporters at one rally even made fun of Bob Kerrey's handicap!!). And he has a multi-person field. The 'front-runner' is Kerry- anyone here have opinions? Kerry has gained a lot of former Gore people. I remember after the general election esp. in 2000, I felt sort of dispondent, because Gore had lost New Hampshire by only a few (Nader!) votes. Part of me regretted not having really worked for Gore in the primaries. So, pro-Dean dudes (or those observing the attitudes of college students): is Dean a good combination of (a) worth the idealism in terms of his own stances (b) has enough of a chance to win the primaries and (c) would actually be a good candidate that the Dems would want to put against Bush (I worry that if we have a sacrificial lamb, it shouldn't be a liberal). Anyway, that's some candidate ramblings... perma link |
| 0 comments
0 Comments: |
Dartmouth The Free Press Alums for Social Change The Green Magazine The Dartmouth Dartmouth Observer Dartmouth Review Dartlog Inner Office The Little Green Blog Welton Chang's Blog Vox in Sox MN Publius (Matthew Martin) Netblitz Dartmouth Official News Other Blogs Ampersand Atrios Arts & Letters Altercation Body and Soul Blog For America Brad DeLong Brad Plumer CalPundit Campus Nonsense Clarksphere Crooked Timber Cursor Daily Kos Dean Nation Dan Drezner The Front Line Instapundit Interesting Times Is That Legal? Talking Points Memo Lady-Likely Lawrence Lessig Lean Left Left2Right Legal Theory Matthew Yglesias Ms. Musings MWO Nathan Newman New Republic's &c. Not Geniuses Ornicus Oxblog Pandagon Political State Report Political Theory Daily Review Queer Day Roger Ailes SCOTUS blog Talk Left TAPPED Tacitus This Modern World Tough Democrat Untelevised Volokh Conspiracy Washington Note X. & Overboard Magazines, Newspapers and Journals Boston Globe Ideas Boston Review Chronicle of Higher Education Common Dreams Dissent In These Times Mother Jones New York Review of Books New York Times Salon Slate The American Prospect The Nation The New Republic The Progressive Tikkun Tom Paine Village Voice Washington Monthly Capitol Hill Media ABC's The Note American Journalism Review Columbia Journalism Review CQ Daily Howler Donkey Rising The Hill Medianews National Journal NJ Hotline NJ Wake-up call NJ Early Bird NJ Weekly Political Wire Roll Call Spinsanity Search Search the DFP  |
|||||||
The opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of Dartmouth College or the Dartmouth Free Press.