Friday, December 05, 2003
The Dangerous Gamble is Unraveling
Back this summer, I thought Kerry was running a great general election campaign with the low key message of “there are a better set of choices, America could take at every turn than those chosen by this administration.” The message was subtle, but would have offered the American people a new way to think about the decisions made by this Presidency. It was not an angry message, but regardless of whether the war went poorly or the economy improved, Kerry’s summer message would have given the Democrats a shot at the White House. But then again, I guess you have to win a primary now don’t we?
I wrote in early September that Dean’s angry message was a long shot and needed to two conditions to happen for him to win the Presidency.
“Sadly if Dean is the candidate in order to win, Democrats have to hope the economy gets worse and more soldiers are killed in Iraq. That is not a position I want my party to be in November of 2004.”
Interestingly enough in today’s USA Today, Walter Shapiro’s article (yes, there are still a few journalists who actually can do primary research) uncovers a statement of Dean’s from 2002.
During a lengthy interview, when he was a long-shot prospect at best for the nomination, Dean spoke candidly about the connection between his assumptions about the economy and his decision to seek the presidency. "Here's my whole theory about this, which will be interesting to see how it plays out a year from now," Dean said. "I don't think a Democrat can win the presidency in 2004 if the economy is good. As much as I hope the economy is good for the country's sake, I'm going to make the assumption that it won't be good. Because otherwise, why would you do this?"
Yes, Dean is a dangerous gamble for Democrats. He geared his long shot Presidency on two premises, one of which is unraveling. He has now pushed the language of the primaries so far out of line with the average general election voter, even if we were to nominate a candidate with Kerry’s summer message, it just might be too late.
I wrote in early September that Dean’s angry message was a long shot and needed to two conditions to happen for him to win the Presidency.
“Sadly if Dean is the candidate in order to win, Democrats have to hope the economy gets worse and more soldiers are killed in Iraq. That is not a position I want my party to be in November of 2004.”
Interestingly enough in today’s USA Today, Walter Shapiro’s article (yes, there are still a few journalists who actually can do primary research) uncovers a statement of Dean’s from 2002.
During a lengthy interview, when he was a long-shot prospect at best for the nomination, Dean spoke candidly about the connection between his assumptions about the economy and his decision to seek the presidency. "Here's my whole theory about this, which will be interesting to see how it plays out a year from now," Dean said. "I don't think a Democrat can win the presidency in 2004 if the economy is good. As much as I hope the economy is good for the country's sake, I'm going to make the assumption that it won't be good. Because otherwise, why would you do this?"
Yes, Dean is a dangerous gamble for Democrats. He geared his long shot Presidency on two premises, one of which is unraveling. He has now pushed the language of the primaries so far out of line with the average general election voter, even if we were to nominate a candidate with Kerry’s summer message, it just might be too late.
# posted by AB @ 8:28 AM 
