Back to MyDD Weblog

We have emerged, Dean will win

I agree with most everything John Judis writes, but today, The trouble with Howard Dean, I have to say he's wrong! Judis actually posits that Dean wouldn't even take Hawaii!

Seriously, I wish I had my copy of TEDM right now (done yet kos?), cause I'd like to quote what John and Ruy wrote. So I'll wing it...

One of the underlying foundations of the book is that the three groups that rallied majorities around McGovern (minorities, women, professionals) have emerged into the current majority. If that's the case (and I believe it is), then a candidate espousing the thrust of this emerging majority is poised to win. Now, I guess they have a caveat about "emerging" that let's Judis say:

As the proportion of professionals in the workforce grows -- driven by the transition from an industrial to a postindustrial capitalism -- a candidate like Dean may eventually command a majority of the national electorate. Positions that now seem maverick -- like Dean's support for civil unions -- will eventually become mainstream, as women's rights and support for environmental protection have become.

Sure. I think the gist of the lacking that Judis points out is a credible problem that Dean needs to address:

Asked at an Iowa forum how he would encourage economic growth, he said his first step would be to balance the budget. That's not what a New Deal Democrat like Kucinich or Gephardt would say, but it is entirely consistent with the outlook of the professionals who have entered the Democratic Party... He's not against the Bush tax cuts because they favor the rich, but because they squander scarce public resources that could be used to broaden access to healthcare, improve education, and get the economy going again. Like any other Democrat, Dean would like to attract the enthusiastic support of blue-collar ethnics or urban minorities, but they are not part of his base...

I concur. Balancing the budget is a long-term solution, the economy needs stimulus. What Howard Dean needs to do is embrace an economic agenda that appeals to not only the sensibilities of the professionals that he's already got in his camp, but that also addresses some relief toward the working middle-class. Dean (and the whole Democratic Party) needs to adopt an economic agenda of cutting taxes. That is, make the first $20k free of payroll taxes for everyone, and, at the same time, make all income subject to the payroll tax.

Getting back to Judis on Dean: Yet if the Democrats nominate him as their presidential candidate, he is almost sure to lose to George W. Bush, and perhaps by a very large margin... Just as the country was not ready for McGovern in 1972, so it is probably not ready for Howard Dean in 2004.

The first problem with this meme is that it gives no context at all. Look, if Dean (or any Democrat) runs as terrible as campaign that McGovern did, they would lose. To date, has Dean not shown the exact opposite in potential? Does a Dean/Clark ticket really remind anyone of McGovern/Eagleton?

Besides civil unions and Dean's stance on the Iraq invasion, where's the weight of the polling to back up the claims by Judis? Are the Republicans really going to shoot their wad in 2004 (ala Johnson's signing of the Civil Rights bill) and ignore the demographics showing that younger voters en masse support social progressive tolerance? Besides, Dean's not anywhere near as liberal as McGovern was, so how can the voting populace not be ready for someone as moderate as Dean? Is Judis now arguing that the voting populace in 2004 has gotten more socially conservative than 1972?

As for Iraq, is Dean clamoring for the troops to leave Iraq now-- ala "Come Home America"? No. Prior to the invasion of Iraq, Dean, saying that we needed UN approval first, stood right with the 2/3rds majority polled in the U.S. He supported the Afghanistan military action, and does so with Liberia as well. Dean has supported the correct anti-terrorist measures that were taken, and opposed the Bush doctrine of unilateral pre-emptive attack. Among the candidates, only Dean and Graham have credibility in taking on Bush's ill-advised invasion and occupation of Iraq. Only Dean has the fire needed to get out the vote to win in 2004.

Even Judis realizes that Dean can win, hence his caveats of "almost sure to lose" and "probably not ready", in announcing the doomedness of Dean.

Final thought. Right now, Bush's approval is sitting at about 60%, and that translates into about 45% of the likely vote. In otherwords, 55% of the voters would give any of the Democrats a shot. I'll make three bets: It's going to be a close election, Dean/Clark is going to be the Democratic ticket, and one of the caveats of Judis is going to be false, the other true.

Back to MyDD Weblog