Dean Jitters Spreading
This morning Howard Dean is attacked from both the left and the right (or what passes for the "right" in the Democratic Party). The Washington Post's Richard Cohen recites some of Dean's recent blunders, worries about the competence of both candidate Dean and his staff, and concludes:
"Dean's ability to give voice to the raw anger some Democrats feel toward Bush -- everything from the Florida vote fiasco to the Iraq war -- propelled him to the No. 1 spot in his party's nomination race. But he remains a problematic prospect who too often does not look before he leaps -- off Brooklyn Bridges of his own making. Dean may jump, but unless he does better, the Democratic Party would be foolish to follow."
Meanwhile, the Washington Times' Donald Lambro writes that "Democratic leaders increasingly worry about the prospect of antiwar candidate Howard Dean becoming their party's presidential nominee next year." Lambro recounts a conversation with Leon Panetta, a relatively sensible Democrat and Clinton confidante, in which Panetta said:
"There clearly are concerns about Dean's ability to appeal to the entire country, particularly on national security issues. There is concern about how does this [Deanīs antiwar campaign] play out a year from now? How can you compete with President Bush on the national security front? There is some concern about whether Dean can rise to the occasion on this issue." By "rise to the occasion," I take it Panetta means "change his positions and get the electorate to forget all the dumb things he said during the primaries."
There is a lot of speculation about whether it is too late to stop Dean. Of course it isn't; it will be more than a month before the first vote is cast, and the only primary that Dean has locked up at this point is New Hampshire. The indispensable Real Clear Politics has collected the poll data. There are no recent polls in most of the primary states, but as of the most current data, New Hampshire is the only state where Dean polls above 33%. Granted, his performance in New Hampshire is impressive--he now leads John Kerry by 42% to 12%--but primary results in New Hampshire are often out of step with what happens thereafter.
So Dean certainly can be stopped; whether he will be is another matter. The Democrats' real problem is that they don't have a good alternative. Kerry, considered a powerhouse before the campaign began, has flopped. Wes Clark was pushed forward as the un-Dean, but his campaign promptly fizzled; the idea that Democrats will nominate a candidate who voted for Ronald Reagan and first registered as a Democrat in 2003 is, in my opinion, ridiculous. That leaves Dick Gephardt, who currently languishes at 3% in New Hampshire, 7% in South Carolina, 8% in Arizona, 12% in Delaware, 9% in Wisconsin, and so on. Only in Iowa, where he runs neck and neck with Dean, and Missouri, his home state--where he polled an unimpressive 36% in September--does he show any strength at all. And several of the big unions, on whose behalf Gephardt has labored for his entire political life, have now abandoned him for Dean on the theory that he is "unelectable."
So Dean can be beaten, but probably not by anyone who is currently running on the Democratic side.
