Centerfield: Is Dean losing ground as more voters pay attention?

December 27, 2003

Is Dean losing ground as more voters pay attention?

At the Moderate Independent Betsy R. Vasquez has a very interesting take on the current dynamics in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination:

The biggest story, though, is the beginning of the end for the Dean campaign. The first blow was landed by the Gore endorsement. Dean had painted himself, within a party still resentful of the toothless, wavering campaign Gore ran last election, as the anti-Gore, a straight-talker who wouldn’t sit by and say, “I won’t attack,” as Gore did. Indeed, Dean’s people went to great lengths early on to paint Kerry as the “Gore” in this election, pointing out he had hired much of Gore’s staff and saying he was prone to qualified double-speak as Gore often was.
Then, Gore joined the Dean team, and ever since then the weight of the double-talking loser has been lifted off of both the Kerry and Lieberman campaigns. Ferocious attacks by Kerry and others that simply point out Dean’s constant knack for emphatically saying contradictory things are devastating the man who would be the lone straight-talker. And Dean’s ability to fight back against the people attacking him is completely undermined by the fact he launched his campaign and rise in the polls with a nasty flurry of personal attacks – in particular, on Senator Kerry, painting him, as mentioned above, as someone who contradicts himself.

In the meantime, Dean’s biggest asset and the thing that earned Gore’s endorsement, the awesome, ground-breaking campaign he is running, is become less and less important. The reason, in fact, Dean’s tightly-run, highly-run campaign was so appealing to people was that it represented the opposite of Gore’s campaign. Fervent activists finally had a man who not only would speak boldly, but knew how to make a campaign that would have the ground troops and counterattacking swiftness to be able to stand up to the Bush/Limbaugh machine.

But problem number two for the Dean campaign is that the people who are just beginning to tune in now are not the activist types who pay attention to such things. Now, Democrats and Independents are tuning in simply to see the people who are running, how they present themselves, and what they have to say. And Dean’s uncharismatic nature, tendency to boldly contradict himself, and his, for many Americans just tuning in, incomprehensible stance with regard to Iraq, makes him simply seem unelectable to the late tuners.

John Kerry had gotten the early bounce and frontrunner status when people looked and saw the Democrats had a veteran in their midst who was strong on defense but also had a solid history of supporting Democratic issues domestically. Now, John is getting that bounce once again from people tuning in for the first time.

And then there is Clark, who is neutralizing Dean’s other former advantage – outsider status. Clark is just as much the outsider as Dean, and one with strong defense credentials and far more charisma.

By all practical measures, this is should now be a three man race for the top spot, but not the three the rest of the press is reporting. No, don’t include Dean in this. At this point, it should be a tight three way battle between Kerry, who is in position to pull off an Iowa and New Hampshire one/two punch, Gephardt, who has crucial Midwest support, and Clark, who can make a big showing on February 3 following a nice launch in New Hampshire.

Since Gore's endorsement of Dean, I've noticed that the press and pundits have suddenly felt obliged to place Dean's weaknesses under the magnifying glass.

That, as we said, is how things should be, but two more things have to be considered: Kerry’s anemic campaign, and Gephardt’s lack of appeal on defense issues. This weakness for Gephardt is a fatal one.
So in fact, more and more this is becoming what should be a two man race, between the two veterans, one with more military leadership experience, and one with more domestic and campaign experience. But, for some reason, what should be Kerry’s advantage is his weakness. Clark’s campaign outshines his vastly.

With all of this in play, the only thing the Clark campaign needs to really get off the ground is a media momentum builder. When the fundraising quarter closes on December 31 and he has far outraised everyone else – even Dean – this quarter, his surging campaign will hit full stride.

How can we write off the Dean campaign so early? Funny, somebody should be asking the rest of the press how they managed to write him in so early.

If Clark can make his domestic agenda case, he can win it.

If somehow the Kerry campaign – not the candidate, but the troops – manage to get it in gear, he may make it interesting. Even led by a revitalizing Cahill, they have a long, long way to go to undo the damage the previous campaign staff has done so far. But a few strides have been made in the right direction.

If they can’t do it, and Wesley Clark can stand toe to toe with the other Democrats on domestic issues, then Clark will be the Democrats’ man.

Posted by Erasmus at December 27, 2003 11:47 AM

Comments

This is from Politics 1 (below). I think Dean is losing ground with mainstream voters because they are seeing him for what he is: a radical leftist. I have my doubts that Dean is losing ground with Democrats, in fact I think the capture of Saddam might have actually helped him with his party's base.

DEAN NOW LEADING JUST ABOUT EVERYWHERE. Independent polls continue to pile up showing that Howard Dean is now leading the field for the Democratic Presidential nomination in just about every key contest state -- even in states with a more conservative electorate. We're not even going to bother with any NH polls today, as Dean holds a landslide lead of around 30-points there. Here are some of the latest poll results from the past week ... OKLAHOMA: Dean-24%, Wesley Clark-21%, Joe Lieberman-9%, and all others each at 4% or less. Lieberman has made OK and AZ key "make-or-break" states for him, so a loss here on February 3rd will be fatal for him. John Edwards is also trying to make a dent here here, so far without results ... ARIZONA: Dean-26%, Clark-15%, Lieberman-9%, Dick Gephardt-7%, John Kerry-6%, and all others at 1% or less. Yet another sign that Lieberman's strategy is failing ... SOUTH CAROLINA: Dean-16%, Clark and Al Sharpton tied at 12% apiece, Edwards-11%, Lieberman-7%, and all others at 3% or less. Lots of second place finishes are nice, but can anybody tell us what is the first state that Clark is actually going to win?... WISCONSIN: Dean-33%, Lieberman-12%, Clark-11%, Gephardt-9%, and Kerry-6%. The primary here is February 17 -- three weeks after NH -- so several of these guys will already be gone by that date ... GEORGIA: Dean-18%, Gephardt-8%, Clark-7%, Sharpton and Lieberman tied with 6% each, and the rest trailing behind. Clark dropped 6 points -- and from first to third -- since the last Atlanta Journal-Constitution poll in October. Gephardt dropped 4, while Dean moved up by 11 points. President Bush, meanwhile, continues to lead Dean by a comfortable margin in all national polls of the likely general election match-up. In related news, John Kerry loaned his campaign more than $6 million this week, secured by a mortgage on property he owns, in an effort to revive his failing campaign.

Posted by: Mathew Pruitt at December 27, 2003 01:15 PM

I find myself wishing something could be done to get Joe Lieberman's campaign moving. He really needs to be one of the top three.

I know that if he was, this is one registered Republican who might swing...

Posted by: Heather Feuerhelm at December 27, 2003 01:48 PM

I don't see signs that Dean is losing ground. The capture of Saddam, and the roll Bush is on should make Democrats reconsider, but it seems like they are digging in their heels. An example of cognitive dissonance.

Posted by: rickheller at December 27, 2003 02:49 PM

Heather brings up a good point. Why is their no McCain-like movement for Lieberman. He is clearly the only candidate in the race who is truly an authentic centrist, and unlike McCain Joe has always been middle of the road.

Posted by: Mathew Pruitt at December 27, 2003 03:48 PM

There are probably several factors, there. Among them, the fact that we have a few candidates playing the "moderate" role in this campaign, rather than just one. We're not all rallying around the same person.

The other factor, though, is the relative lack of organization and commitment we bring to building our movement. Dean has pretty much reinvented the campaign process, using the new technology along with a flexible, open structure that allows people to take their own initiative on behalf of their candidate.

The bottom line is that liberals are doing this, but moderates generally aren't. The Dean guys had vibrant on-line communities many months ago, along with meetups where folks were figuring out how to spread the word in different communities. By contrast, Lieberman started his official blog just recently. It's been fascinating to see a bunch of passionate centrists gather over there -- and even succeed, at times, in overwhelming the Dean folks who come over to post angry rhetoric about Joe. The problem is, we're a few months too late in making all the connections and stirring up all the support we might find around the country.

We really need to be exploring the technology implementing those decentralized strategies that allow folks all over the country to contribute what they can to what we're doing.

Posted by: William Swann at December 28, 2003 09:41 AM

I really hope Clark catches up to Dean in the polls, but I don't see it happening. I really don't see Dean as far left (that is Dennis K.). Sure he sounds far left now, but that is what the primaries are all about: aim for the party mainstream then a sharp dive to the center for the general election.

Posted by: cn at December 29, 2003 06:30 PM

I think the problem for Dean is going to be that in the internet age its going to be much harder for him to hide his leftward voyage from the general public's eye when he tries to sail for the center. He's partied hard while the internet gaveth, but later it's going to taketh away.

And pragmatically, unless the effort in Iraq starts going much worse, he's going to be dead in the water. If the shorthand narrative for how things are going is 1) the economy's looking up and 2) we're feeling safer because we ousted the Taliban and liberated Iraq and captured Saddam Hussein, then dean is going to be high and lonesome with all of his turd in the punchbowl rhetoric.

In other words, there are 2 lessons for the 2004 election. Clinton taught everyone about "it's the economy, stupid." but as long as a large portion of the populace is very concerned with terrorism, the other rule for the first post 9/11 election is certainly going to be "it's homeland security, stupid."

A substantial majority or americans was scared sh!tless by 9/11, and views an aggressive and sustained response to those viewed as responsible very pragmatically as a good thing, and cares not a whit for exotic philosophical principle. So as long as Bush's aggressive sustained response seems to be producing the sorts of things that the average guy sees as positive results(2 hostile regimes deposed, a very evil dictator captured, increased airport security, a no-nonsense approach to hostile regimes leading to capitulation by Libya, etc. etc.,), Bush is in a VERY strong position.

Some domestic terrorist act MIGHT change this, but it also might make people even less likely to want to change horses to a guy (Dean) who seems like he might be conciliatory towards those who are hostile to US interests.

My gut instinct today is that Bush is going to mop up the floor with Dean. If he's the candidate and things are much the same as they are today, Dean gets routed in an historically embarassing fashion. Even if he carries more states than McGovern, he serves to solidify the chasm between the blue and red states.

The only question is whether Hillary Clinton might step in the provide a more palatable alternative to Bush than Dean, even though she too would be likely to lose if the economy is good and the war on terror continues to show slow progress.

Posted by: bk at December 30, 2003 02:19 PM

Centerfield

A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics

December 27, 2003

Is Dean losing ground as more voters pay attention?