On the blow off of Dean

Obama snubs Dean, says the title of Jonathan Martin's Politico piece. I doubt that Obama himself knew that Howard Dean was not invited to attend the introduction of incoming DNC Chair Tim Kaine. Obama shows up, someone else does the scheduling. But between Robert Gibbs and Rahm Emanual, there is enough hostility toward Dean for that person to get the cue for this type of childish act.

And yes, the blow-off was intentional. As the AP notes, "Democrats with knowledge of the situation, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid angering the Obama team, say Dean won't attend the event at the request of Obama advisers." That is also the confirmation I received from current DNC officials. "If he had been asked to go to that event, he would have been there," Jim Dean, the chairman's brother, noted twice in an interview.

The reaction I read among bloggers:

John Aravosis:

There is a real problem when Joe Lieberman is treated better than Howard Dean.... This is part of a growing theme of poorly managed relations by the Obama people - or worse, outright vendettas with good Democrats who deserve better.
Yea, it must seem odd to the netroots activists with Deaniac roots, that got on board with Obama in the primaries specifically to defeat the Clinton's, now watch the political clique of Clintonites be engulfed within the Obama administration, while Dean gets the private shaft and the public boot. Perhaps the viewpoint that Clinton & Obama are 'the same' is now being learned.

Steve Benen:

Dean deserves his due.... Someone's going to have to explain to me why Howard Dean isn't treated better.
Well, look. The numbers of us online and active that were around when Dean was big, in the '03-'06 era, are a small minority compared with the numbers now engaged-- even within the blogosphere. We know what Dean did, and that without his leadership and embracement of the netroots people-powered 50 state strategy, victory in '06 would never have happened. It did, and it laid the groundwork for Obama's in in 2008-- that's his legacy, and its a fine one.

Kevin Hayden:

...the reality is Dean's a moderate, despite his being left of the Beltway Bourgeoisie. He's just not a corporate drone like the lot of them. As much as Newt Gingrich is credited with the evangelo-quasi-conservative-yayhoo style of legislatin', Dean should be granted the respect due a Fighting Liberal Rationalist who reminded the Beltway Dems that nobody loves Republican Mimes. But it'll never happen. Because the Beltway Bourgeoisie will never be known for their brilliance or classiness. They'll be known for eating cake... from the crack of each others' butts.

haha, Kumbaya... The Chicago Way has arrived in DC. Yea, and there's a special election for Rahm Emanuel's Chicago CD that the netroots ought to engage.

As for Howard Dean's next step, I've heard he is going on an international speaking engagement tour, and also is planning on getting involved in the battle for universal healthcare, either through some known advocacy group, or through DFA. Well, if Obama really screws up, by staying put in Iraq and putting 40,000 more troops into Afghanistan, maybe Dean will once again be the outsider voice that tells the truth on behalf of progressives. With that in mind, it's certainly not a strategical move in line with the 'Team of Rivals' Obama administration narrative.

There's another issue that has been boiling up, about the "firing" of the 50 state organizers. The truth is in-between. They all had contracts through the end of the election, like most organizers. The bigger concern, that the 50 state strategy goes on, under Obama via Kaine, seems to be the issue.

I'm sure it will, but entirely under the auspices of the Obama organization being brought in, which will likely make OFA 2.0 quite an efficient centralized machine-- with similarities with how the Bush ran the RNC during his presidency (effective but very top-down)? How will the states react to the development? Probably pretty well, as long as the DNC continues some sort of funding of their activities. Probably not well, if the Dean vision of decentralizing the power away from the DNC, and to the states, is effectively reversed back to the pre-Dean era Clinton strategy of centralizing the money within the national DNC.

Update [2009-1-9 11:9:24 by Jerome Armstrong]:DFA has begun a petition for the DNC under Tim Kaine to "Reinstate the 50 State Strategy."

Update [2009-1-9 11:27:41 by Jerome Armstrong]:Flashback, to May 12th, 2004. Howard Dean, then Chair of DFA, sends out an email announcing the first ever "Dean Dozen":

Barack Obama for United States Senate from Illinois. In the race to regain control of the U.S. Senate, Democrats have few better chances to pick up a seat than in Illinois. DFA volunteers all over Illinois helped Obama win his primary, now it's time to help him win the general. Stay tuned: I will be on the trail with Barack soon. www.obamaforillinois.com

Maybe this will have a good ending, maybe not too.

Tags: Barack Obama, Howard Dean, Rahm Immanual (all tags)



Looks like Gibbs is continuing his primary war

With Dean.

Dean VS Gibbs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1DqOwP3X zc

by Joshuagen 2009-01-09 04:49AM | 0 recs
Ack! That was Gibbs?

Revolting. Spit-worthy...

Here's hoping I get to meet Mr. Gibbs in person someday.

by TrueBlueCT 2009-01-09 11:30AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

Stories like this remind me that professional politicians are really different kinds of people. There seems to be absolutely nothing to be gained for the Obama folks by excluding Dean and absolutely nothing to lose by saying a few nice words on his behalf at this event or some other point. And yet...

If one were to try to read this substantively, one would want to know if this signals that Kane will not follow what to me is much more significant than the "50 state" state strategy -- Dean's decision to share funds raised at events with the host state party. If I were someone with skin in the operations of the DNC or of a state party, I'd want to know the answer to that much more than anything else.

by desmoulins 2009-01-09 04:54AM | 0 recs
I'm deeply disappointed

I was never a Deaniac, but I grew to respect the man over the past few years. He deserves much better.

The team will be hearing from me on this. They are last people I'd expect to pursue petty vendettas. That luxury is reserved for bloggers.

by Neef 2009-01-09 04:58AM | 0 recs
Re: I'm deeply disappointed

While I have considered myself a Deaniac, I have never hesitated to criticize him. I am not a blind follower of Dean , yet I am outraged at this trend of the establishment Democrats more concerned with petty personal things than the good of the party while lecturing us about the need for compromise whenever they need to support something unpopular among us. Compromise goes both ways, and in the case of giving Dean respect, it's not even a compromise from a party perspective. Surely, there's gotta be some holdovers in the DNC from Dean's tenure.

by Pravin 2009-01-09 05:07AM | 0 recs
Proud Deaniac here from 04 election cycle.

Went to the meetups organized by Dean for America. I wished Dean For America (now Democracy for America) perserved the blog commentaries and made them available for archival purposes from the original website.

Did not like everything that Dean did in 08 cycle. But I always thought his 50 state strategy was a brilliant idea although some in the party leadership disdained it.

by louisprandtl 2009-01-09 06:31AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

Ugh.  Just ugh.

by XoFalconXo 2009-01-09 05:03AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

Isnt it funny how we were asked to suck it up when they courted Lieberman. But now they can't suck it up for a guy who has been sucking it up for the good of the party ever since his primary defeat?

Total lack of class for the Rahm types in the party. Where is Evan fucking Bayh looking out for the real Democrats? It is freaking outrageous that Lieberman gets more affection from insiders in the party compared to Dean. There is NOTHING political to be gained by not showing him some appreciation. So they can't use political reasons as an excuse. THey will not gain a single crossover vote with this latest snub.

by Pravin 2009-01-09 05:04AM | 0 recs
I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this

I rate the probability of some sort of weird misunderstanding to be "high" here.  It doesn't really mesh with what I know about Team Obama and Dean.

Why hasn't Dean himself said anything?  He's not the sort of guy to just shut up and take it.

by Dracomicron 2009-01-09 05:12AM | 0 recs
wasn't it Groucho Marx who said

"Who do you believe, me or your own two eyes?"

I suggest that in this case you believe your own two eyes rather than what you "know" about Team Obama.

by desmoinesdem 2009-01-09 05:18AM | 0 recs

...which is why I'm going to wait for Dean's imput on this matter, not some half-baked second-hand innuendo passed on by folks who are eager to think the worst of Obama and his incoming administration.

by Dracomicron 2009-01-09 05:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Right...

No, you can read the quote by Jim Dean in the article. I check my DNC sources and wouldn't have posted this if the sentiment hadn't been true, unfortunately.

by Jerome Armstrong 2009-01-09 06:01AM | 0 recs
Jim Dean /= Howard Dean

I'm not privvy to my sister's innermost feelings, or even anything but snapshots of the important issues in her life; going after hearsay/character statements from indirectly involved family is tabloid journalism, sorry.

by Dracomicron 2009-01-09 06:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Jim Dean /= Howard Dean

Jerome did not get this purely from Jim Dean's statement. When you see so many different sources express the same sentiment and little in the way of clear rebuttals or regret from the powers that be, well,, then one can make some inferences.

by Pravin 2009-01-09 07:05AM | 0 recs
From Huffington Post:

It is unclear whether Dean's absence reflects a snub or a scheduling conflict. An Obama transition official said it was their understanding that Dean was traveling.

Looking at the links, everything that Jerome quotes comes across as downright hostile towards Obama from the outset.  I like the Politico, but it's hardly a friendly source for Democrats.

by Dracomicron 2009-01-09 07:28AM | 0 recs
Re: From Huffington Post:

Do you seriously think Dean is traveling somewhere so important that he wouldn't be able to appear at such an event? THat is such a vague statement by them. Kind of like how a resigning coach usually says he quit to spend more time with his family.

by Pravin 2009-01-09 07:43AM | 0 recs
Mebbe. I dunno

I'm sure not going to jump to conclusions like some sort of primary concern troll.

by Dracomicron 2009-01-09 07:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Mebbe. I dunno

I think this is why some of us are hesitant to attack Obama directly. We do not know what exactly went down. All we can tell is that this is not the way you do things. We can only guess based on past behavior. Rahm and his cronies seem like the likely culprits and Obama probably is indifferent about this issue to do anything about it.

by Pravin 2009-01-09 09:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Mebbe. I dunno

until, perhaps, It gets mentioned on Olbermann or Maddow, picked up by CNN, and asked at the 2 question daily news conference (it does speak to a division in the Party, just the kind of divisive thing the MSM wants to latch onto to keep the boring economics thing exciting).

by NvDem 2009-01-09 10:09AM | 0 recs
He does have a lot on his plate.

Your theory is quite possible;  I could see Obama not having the time or inclination to descend into this sort of one-upsmanship.  I'd hope that he'd take Rahm aside (if that's what happened) and inform him that making bloggers even more paranoid than normal isn't necessarally in their best interests.

by Dracomicron 2009-01-09 10:09AM | 0 recs
Re: He does have a lot on his plate.

I object to the word paranoia. If a group of politicians treated another segment of the population with the same contempt, you would see it all over the news. People get offended by a freaking flag lapel these days. I think with the netroots, things have piled up over the time. If we reacted to every single that offended us, we wouldn't have space to accomodate all the diaries.

If we tend to get offended a lot compared to the average joe, it's because we probably pay more attention to what is going on in DC and can call bullshit on more things early on(example: the Iraq war where early opponents were deemed fringe).

by Pravin 2009-01-09 01:19PM | 0 recs
Jim Dean (now chair of DFA) had openly asked

from Obama for a commitment for continuation of the 50 state strategy. The expectation was that the announcement of Tim Kaine as DNC chair will be accompanied by the above statement which went amiss. I don't think Jim would have acted without Howard Dean's concurrence.

by louisprandtl 2009-01-09 06:22AM | 0 recs
Like I said to Jerome

I'll wait for Howard's statement, thanks.  Family doesn't always know the whole story, and often they think they know more than they actually do.

by Dracomicron 2009-01-09 06:55AM | 0 recs
I'm surprised. If you know the antecedents

of Democracy for America then the answer to your question would have been clear to you.

by louisprandtl 2009-01-09 07:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Like I said to Jerome

Dean has always played the good soldier when it comes to party politics. I doubt you will hear anything outspoken from him on internal party politics. He stayed calm when the PUMA crowd savaged him. He stayed calm when Rahm and Carville treated him like dirt. He did not sit at home and pout when time came to stump for Kerry despite a bitter primary loss.

by Pravin 2009-01-09 07:08AM | 0 recs
This isn't like that

Dean doesn't have to be "outspoken on internal party politics."  He just has to say if he was invited or not, and if he chose to go or not.

For all I know Dean didn't feel like rescheduling his trip to Samoa for a purely ceremonial event.

by Dracomicron 2009-01-09 07:32AM | 0 recs
Re: This isn't like that

And why in the world Dean do that?  What does he gain by getting in front of a microphone and saying "Yes, I was snubbed." Whether that's what happened or not, it seems unlikely.  

Dean's brother seems like a pretty solid choice to me, especially given their relationship.

by Denny Crane 2009-01-09 04:02PM | 0 recs
Jim Dean is not a loose cannon,

If he's speaking up, it's because it's true.

Period. End of story.

by TrueBlueCT 2009-01-09 11:33AM | 0 recs
Obama can't reward Dean for disenfranchising...

...Florida and Michigan. Oh, wait.

Seriously, if this is true, then it is up to us to make sure that Dean gets his due place in history as the champion of the 50 state strategy. The stones come with the farm with Rahm Emanuel and his types, and Rahm isn't Obama. We, the netroots, just have more work to do. Nobody ever said this was going to be easy, and nobody said that Obama was going to govern from a far left/progressive position on Day 1. He can't.

And as far as passing Dean over for cabinet positions, Bill Richardson was also passed over. People balked. And then there turned out to be a reason.

Nonetheless, I'm glad you have started posting again, and (coincidentally) there's something finally worth criticizing Obama over.

by iohs2008 2009-01-09 05:16AM | 0 recs
Maybe we send Rachel maddow's show some emails

I think DKos, MYDD and the rest of us need to find a way to get the same voice in the liberal community as talk radio does. The Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity types have more visibility. AIr America is a disaster thanks to bad management. Let's face it. Online is our niche, not talk radio. So we need to find surrogates in the media who will at least hear our concerns. So far, I noticed Maddow and to some extent Olbermann have been giving some voice to stuff we discuss here. Maybe sending Maddow;s show some feedback on this issue may lead to her putting it as one of the issues on the show. She seems to be able to get some guests who then have to answer for this slight in the media.

Just dont expect any Biden like apologies in this issue. I don't think they even feel like they are doing anything wrong in this. They have this self entitlement thing going in Washington.

by Pravin 2009-01-09 05:33AM | 0 recs

Howard Dean deserves better.

by iohs2008 2009-01-09 06:28AM | 0 recs
Who do we call to voice our outrage?

The more I think about it and read other articles, I am convinced this was deliberate. This is a low point. When the party should be focused on important issues, they like to sabotage themselves with their own vendettas. Who needs the republicans when these bozos find their own drama?

I tried to rationalize the Dean appearance on Hughley as a minor dig against Rahm, but now I think Dean's classiness prevented him from bashing him outright.

Dean has been outspoken, but he has always sucked it up when it comes to bashing Rahm. So if he feels snubbed, he is not the Dianne Feinstein type to voice it publicly. Witness his restrained behavior when Carville and Rahm were openly bashing him after the 2006 victories. Or how he went to campaign with Kerry with more energy than Lieberman and the other losing candidates.

by Pravin 2009-01-09 05:19AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

If ture, it is consistent with many other moves indicating Obama does not want progressives.  I hope that is not the case.  Pride goeth before a fall.

by TomP 2009-01-09 05:21AM | 0 recs
Ha, ha, ha

haha, Kumbaya... The Chicago Way has arrived in DC

Happy New Year. Your provocations have been missed these last few weeks.

by brit 2009-01-09 05:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Ha, ha, ha

And for the record that is exactly what they're saying on PUMA sites like Alegre's Asylum.

by venician 2009-01-09 07:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Ha, ha, ha

The first time I heard someone refer to "The Chicago Way" it was Sean Hannity.  Good grief.

by sneakers563 2009-01-11 09:04PM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

How sad..

Well I will always support Howard Dean whatever he chooses to do...

by obama4presidente 2009-01-09 05:25AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

Those of us who supported Hillary during the primaries were particularly angry at Dean. First of all, he clearly played "favorites" as the head of the DNC, 2nd he did a terrible job defending Hillary against the sexism that was blatant and taking place on all the networks and the newspapers. He stopped short of calling for her to drop out, and his acknowledgement of sexism against Hillary came months too late which angered women supporters in particular.

None of this has anything to do with his successful 50 state strategy that helped Obama get selected by having more pledged delegates than Hillary - but I can't help but think maybe this all has something to do with it....

I know many around here will say it's not always all about Hillary, and I'm sure it's not - but on the other hand, it appears as if Hillary (along with many Clinton people) is on the "inside" of the Obama administration.....

Richardson, Dean, etc are on the outside.

by nikkid 2009-01-09 05:29AM | 0 recs
In a bizarre twist of fate

I'm going to have to say that this can not be lain at HRC's feet in any way, shape or form. Obama controls his transition team, and only he is responsible for it's decisions.

by Neef 2009-01-09 05:36AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

Firstly. Hillary and Bill are only "in" because Obama let them in. He most definitely did not need them. Secondly. Please articulate how Dean "played favorites" as the head of the DNC.We are not regressives here, we demand facts. Third. How was there any less racism involved in the primaries (Often egged on by the Clintons.), than there was sexism? Look, no matter how one's feeling may have been hurt by her loss, Hillary LOST fair and square. She lost on Feb. 5 last year when she could not pull away from Obama. She lost when she made the lamebrain decision to not invest in the caucus states. This was an expression of her arrogance, nothing more, or less. Cry no tears for her, she is the Sec. of State, a very respected position. I think it says something when some believe that's not good enough. Ironically, I would speculate that if Clinton was president and she installed Obama as Sec. of State, the very same individuals would be demanding that Obama supporters just accept that the position is more than he could have hoped for going in, and should be happy. Much like they thought he should just subjugate himself to her and accept the Vice-Presidency, even though he had taken the lead in delegates. Remember?

by onlinesavant 2009-01-09 05:54AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

I don't think Dean really played favorites that much, but yea, the very minor examples went Obama's way.

Here's another bizzare twist; because without Dean's DNC investment into Blue State Digitals "PartyBuilder", to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars from '05-06, there would have been no My.BarackObama.com for Obama to unveil in a weeks worth of works time by BSD for Obama in Feb of '07.

As literal as it could be, Dean bought and paid for MyBO entirely.

by Jerome Armstrong 2009-01-09 05:58AM | 0 recs
Correlation <> Causation

While Dean built it, Obama was the wiser candidate to use it.

Are you supposing that Dean built the infrastructure years before an Obama run in hopes that Obama, an unlikely candidate, let alone victor back in 2005, would unseat Hillary, who hadn't even declared her Presidency yet?

by iohs2008 2009-01-09 06:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Correlation <> Causation

No, Obama was just lucky to be there at the right time.

by Jerome Armstrong 2009-01-09 06:38AM | 0 recs
Skill <> Luck

All the other candidates were there at the same time too. Obama was simply wise enough to take the most advantage of the situation, to his ultimate benefit.

Implying luck in Obama's victory carries a bitter connotation.

Luck had very little to do with it. Obama's victory was not only strategically brilliant, but the result of amazing skill and effort.

As a result, we have the most important event in tghe past 20 years of democratic party history happening on the 20th of January, and one of the most important events in American History.

by iohs2008 2009-01-09 07:09AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

In other words, "Waaa."

by TheUnknown285 2009-01-09 06:27AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

"None of this has anything to do with his successful 50 state strategy that helped Obama get selected by having more pledged delegates than Hillary...
He had more pledged delegates than her.

Why would the supers not follow suit?

by iohs2008 2009-01-09 06:30AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

I agree with you, he didn't exactly cover himself in glory during the primary, but in the end I'm going to judge the guy by his full body of work.  I think the party would be in a much worse place today if not for Howard Dean, and I respect that.

by Steve M 2009-01-09 06:47AM | 0 recs
Obama's Free Ride with me, is Three Months

Obama has three months to deliver. If he doesn't succeed in three months to convince me,  that all these lobbyists and insiders he's appointing - are there simply to dismantle the lobbyist machine - I will work as hard as I did to get him into my state, to shut him down. And he won my state by 26%.

Thats not an idle threat or some kind of open misgiving about Obama, I trust the dude. He's appointed panetta head of CIA.. he'd better get things done.

by Trey Rentz 2009-01-09 05:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Free Ride with me, is Three Months

I like the Panetta appointment too.

by Jerome Armstrong 2009-01-09 05:59AM | 0 recs
3 weeks?

Try 30 years.

It will take decades to undo conservatism, and Obama must start with where the country is (not where we want it to be) and move from there.

To come in liberal guns ablazin', like the Clintons did in 1992, will only lead to backlash and setback.

The success of an Obama administration in 2009 will be whether the national dialogue is more liberal than it was in 2001.

by iohs2008 2009-01-09 06:26AM | 0 recs
Re: 3 weeks?

I am fine with Obama's tax cuts as a compromise if that means it will help win votes for stimulus packages. I think there is a lot of trimming that can be done in government. But I do not know if Obama has what it takes to convince the DEmocrats in teh senate to go along and make cutbacks in areas needed like defense.

by Pravin 2009-01-09 06:28AM | 0 recs
In the big picture

it's not just the tax cuts. It's the entire stimulus package, AND Health Care reform, and Card Check, and (hopefully) a modification of our FP vis-a-vis Israel and Hamas.

It's easy to forget how much we're cramming down the GOP's gullet, and I think it's worthwhile to be as conciliatory as reasonably possible while we dismantle their ideology ^_^.

by Neef 2009-01-09 06:33AM | 0 recs
Re: 3 weeks?

Progress is often enough. The question is not whether he has accomplished a goal, the question is whether he is trying and whether that goal is capable of being reached.

It's relatively easy to tell whether someone is going to do right or not once they're actually taking action. For instance, I'm very skeptical of the latest moves with the stimulus package, but he has said he's open to all opinions and that it's still being revised, and that's what I want to hear, that opposing voices from the left are being heard and listened to. He practically dared Krugman to have a courier hand-deliver a huge stack of policy papers to his office.

by vcalzone 2009-01-09 07:17AM | 0 recs

Democratic presidents always seem to get a hundred days before the long knives come out.  Bush golfed for the first nine months of his presidency and Republicans pledged their undying loyalty.

I'm not saying that we have to be Obamatons, but... for christ's sake, these are some seriously challenging issues, and it's 100% certain that Obama's policies are going to need longer than three months to shake out.

by Dracomicron 2009-01-09 07:05AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

Two things 1> To the Beltway boys Dean is and always has been an embarrassment to them. A constant reminder that he was right while they were wrong! 2> The long standing insider rule of rejecting the hippies and rewarding themselves no matter how many times they get it wrong.

by eddieb 2009-01-09 05:58AM | 0 recs
Thanks Jerome for writing this diary

I had been thinking of writing a diary ahout this since two emails from DFA (Jim Dean and Charles Chamberlain)  on the reinstatement of 50 state strategy. It definitely seems Dean does not like what's happening. The DFA is looking for a commitment from Obama to continue with the strategy.

by louisprandtl 2009-01-09 06:19AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

lol fun stuff

by verona 2009-01-09 06:22AM | 0 recs
Welcome to MyDD

I see that this is your first post.

Please keep in mind that, while many of us share differing opinions on Team Obama's policy & practice, we're pretty much all united in disliking trolls who create accounts just to foster dissent between Democrats.

Please keep this information in mind when selecting your next troll post.

by Dracomicron 2009-01-09 07:15AM | 0 recs
Re:This is how our party

rewards success?  It's infuriating.  

I'm glad that Dean is going to take on universal health care.  I have zero confidence that our feckless party can bring it about.  Obama is not committed to it, even though the majority of Americans want it.  It will take tremendous pressure, and Dean is just the one to lead the charge on this issue.  

by half nelson 2009-01-09 06:34AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

Thank you Jerome for writing about Dean.  I have been waiting for the other shoe to drop ever since Rahm was appointed!

Now I feel I have been right on!
Look no further than Rahm, and this will not be the first of his vendettas!

Sign the DFC petition.

I for one think the $ that progressives give speaks more than words.  No more from me except for DFA.

The proof is in the pudding, and right now Obama is showing us that he really listens to Rahm, I suppose he always has, I was just hoping for better!

by Jerome Armstrong 2009-01-09 06:39AM | 0 recs
Did you...

...just thank yourself, Jerome?

My contacts are a bit fuzzy, I'll accept reading it wrong.

by Dracomicron 2009-01-09 07:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Did you...

bizarre indeed. at first i had to read the alias twice to make sure it was not some guy using a similar alias with an intentionally misspelled name. Then I thought jerome was replying to someone and forgot to include quotes. But then a search in this thread reveals nothing of that sort.

by Pravin 2009-01-09 07:14AM | 0 recs
Maybe Jerome can clear the air a bit...his comment

confused me too..

by louisprandtl 2009-01-09 07:20AM | 0 recs
This is intriguing!!


by vcalzone 2009-01-09 07:24AM | 0 recs
Conspiracies abound

[unfounded conspiracy theory]Jerome is sock puppeting his own site to drum up hit counts![/unfounded conspiracy theory]

by Dracomicron 2009-01-09 07:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Conspiracies abound

Confirmed theory: you are trying to drum up intelligence.

by Jerome Armstrong 2009-01-09 11:50AM | 0 recs
At least I said it was 'unfounded'

What's your mom's handle?  I'm curious now.

by Dracomicron 2009-01-09 12:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Conspiracies abound

Dracomicron's not the one who accidentally posted a sock-post under his/her own handle.  You're not exactly MENSA material yourself, buddy.  ;)


by lojasmo 2009-01-12 08:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Conspiracies abound


Trolling your own site. This is great man.

Comedy gold!

by spacemanspiff 2009-01-13 04:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Did you...

Of course not...

Dean has taken the higher ground-he was able to see the big picture years ago and has been proven right.

He states he did this for his country and I believe him.

Deaniac-you betcha!!

We will not see Dean participating in Chicago (Rahm) politics!!

by lja 2009-01-09 11:13AM | 0 recs

None of that has anything to do with wither Jerome is sock puppeting his own blog.

by Dracomicron 2009-01-09 11:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Did you...


by lja 2009-01-09 11:16AM | 0 recs

I'm talking to Jerome, not you.

by Dracomicron 2009-01-09 11:45AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

LOL.  What the hell.  Who is your sock, Jerome?

by lojasmo 2009-01-09 07:32AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

LOL.  What the hell.  Who is your sock, Jerome?

There's probably lots of socks in that drawer ...

by Collideascope 2009-01-09 10:28AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

My guess. Zerosumgame

by brit 2009-01-13 03:06PM | 0 recs

which sockpuppet did you think you were logged in as?

Disappointed twice, in one damn thread.

At least it's Friday.

by Neef 2009-01-09 08:11AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

What's this?  I don't get it.

by mikeinsf 2009-01-09 09:13AM | 0 recs
ok, take it back

eh, that was my Mom (yea, she's a big fan)... I forgot to log out while at home visiting over xmas.

by Jerome Armstrong 2009-01-09 11:44AM | 0 recs
My mom actually did that to me once

I forgot to log out of my e-mail at home, she logs in, sees some interesting stuff, and forwards it to me as well as a bunch of other people.  I was so seething mad, I could've killed her for the privacy breach.

That said, I'm obligated to tell you that it's a "likely story" and sneer a little.

by Dracomicron 2009-01-09 12:10PM | 0 recs
Re: My mom actually did that to me once

Likely is like it is.

I only post under my name, here and elsewhere, giving up the pseudonym route in '02.

by Jerome Armstrong 2009-01-09 12:20PM | 0 recs
Re: ok, take it back

That's awesome that your mom is so supportive. Wish I had parents I could discuss politics with without wanting to bang my head against the wall.

by vcalzone 2009-01-09 03:03PM | 0 recs

A friend of mine used to think the height of humor was logging in as me and posting thing I wouldn't say. My apologies.

by Neef 2009-01-09 04:58PM | 0 recs
Thanks for the clarification. Mom will always

be Mom..they can't be wrong no matter what....:)

by louisprandtl 2009-01-09 07:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for the clarification. Mom will always

My kids would agree!

by Jerome Armstrong 2009-01-10 08:22AM | 0 recs
Howard Dean was the first politician...

I ever contributed money to. I guess no good deed goes unpunished. I'm glad they're dissing him.

by JimR 2009-01-09 06:54AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

Rahm Emanuel is a vindictive jerk.  This is not a news flash.  The fact that Obama chose him as chief of staff is very disturbing.

And the Wes Clark diss is equally disturbing.

And yes, the Obama administration is pretty much what would have been in place if Hillary had been elected president.  There is no significant difference.

by Thaddeus 2009-01-09 07:09AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

It is incredible that the Obama team has not seen fit to reward Clark in light of his being right on many issues and his tireless stumping for many Democrats. Shouldn't Democrats who were right on the issues and work hard for other Democrats be rewarded as part of a meritocracy? Do establishment Democrats only pick and choose what moderate values they want to follow? Isnt merit(like being right on the issues) be an important attribute valued by moderate voters?

by Pravin 2009-01-09 07:16AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

Rahm:  our Cheney?

by the mollusk 2009-01-09 10:32AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

Cheney doesn't alienate potential supporters. He is evil to only the rest of us.

by Pravin 2009-01-09 10:35AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

Please tell me you're not trying to make the point that Rahm is worse than Cheney.

by bottl4 2009-01-10 04:15AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

No, just was making a differentiation.

by Pravin 2009-01-10 10:23AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

Terry  McAuliffe: Political Consult, Chair of Hillary's campaign and now gubernatorial candidate for VA.

Joe Andrew:  Chairman of the New Democratic Network, 2006 helped to found The Blue Fund, a mutual fund which invests in companies that contribute to Democratic campaigns and meet standards of environmental and social responsibility.

Ed Rendell: Gov. PA

Steve Grossman: Back into private life running families marketing business

Disclaimer: this is not an opinion on whether Dean should receive some post for his bringing the DNC into the 21st century and doing a great job. It's just a little history.

by jsfox 2009-01-09 07:21AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

I am a Howard Dean democrat through and through.  If there was good evidence that this was an intentional snub, I would be irate.

That being said, I think this thread is all vapors and pearl-clutching.  Also, some inelegant sock puppetry.

by lojasmo 2009-01-09 07:34AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

It's not that hard to see why Obama does not feel particularly indebted to Dean. Look at the financials (Form FX3A, filed every 20th). McAuliffe left the DNC with a $5 million surplus and two solid months of direct mail fundraising out in the mail, February and March 2005 raised over $6 million each. This was after spending $7 million to help elect Tim Kaine as the Democratic governor of Virginia. From then on Dean averaged under $5 million until Tewes took over in June of 2008, DNC fundraising was flat for Dean's tenure. Meanwhile Dean was spending every dollar he raised.

Then look at the 50 state implementation. Regardless of the merits of the idea or whatever benefit the party may have gotten from spending money in all the states Obama did not see it. Obama largely gutted the state party coordinated committees for the general and used his own infrastructure. Nor do many of the new Congressional Democrats Dean claims to have helped elect credit the DNC's 50 state program as a big help, they see the DCCC and the DSCC as the larger factor in their success, each of which managed to raise and spend more electing Democrats than the DNC did.

Finally look at the internal projects Dean spent a ton of money on. Obama did use BSD for MyBO, and the Neighbor 2 Neighbor program saw some good use within MyBO as well. But both are owned by BSD, not the DNC. And in the end Obama relied more on commercial sources than the DNC's voter database.

Dean picked a lot of public fights and alienated the people who wanted to help him succeed, even with the 50 state program. Obama saw that, saw the results, and made the pragmatic decision.

by souvarine 2009-01-09 08:03AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

What pragmatic decision? No one here is saying Dean MUST continue as DNC chair.And even if one disputes the effect Dean had, how can one tolerate this kind of attitude towards Dean over the years?  It is about a lack of basic courtesy we are dealing with. So it is pragmatic to condone the marginalization of a beloved Democratic figure(maybe not beloved by a lot of people, but by a significant number nonetheless)? Why is it only pragmatic cater to every other niche but ours? It's not like decency and graciousness costs them crossover votes.

And what public fights did Dean pick up? Anything he did was probably insider fighting. He never went on TV and bashed his fellow Democrats the way he was bashed by some of the establishment guys.

by Pravin 2009-01-09 10:33AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

The pragmatic decision not to put Dean in any significant role in his administration. I haven't seen Dean say he was interested in continuing as DNC chair, I had the impression he was looking for a role in government. I can understand why Obama did not see Dean in such a role.

As for the infighting and slights, most of what I've seen in the press came from the DNC. There are people like Carville and Begala who were critical of the 50 state strategy, they were wrong but they have a right to their opinions. Then there were the people who were implementing a 50 state strategy, like Emanuel who recruited all those Democratic challengers in 2006, who Dean's people chose to attack personally in the press over tactical difference. And finally there is Obama himself, who was surprised to find Dean trying to take credit for Obama's strategy and suggesting in the press that he was owed a high position in government for his efforts. Like most people who tried to pressure Obama through the press (a la Kerry), Dean ends up with nothing.

Dean's problem is reflected in your comment, every tactical and strategic difference became personalized. Instead of recruiting allies and strengthening political institutions every dispute became Dean dissed, Dean against the establishment, Dean against the world.

by souvarine 2009-01-10 09:58AM | 0 recs
yeah, Obama replaced the coordinated campaigns

and down-ticket Iowa Democrats paid the price.

We did not win as many seats in the Iowa House and Senate as we should have, given Obama's 9-point victory in Iowa. Talk to any Iowa Democrat, you will hear the same story. We have 56 House seats and should have 58-60. We have 32 Senate seats and should have 33-34.

I am sure not looking forward to 2012 if Obama's people take the same approach to GOTV.

by desmoinesdem 2009-01-09 11:44AM | 0 recs
Re: yeah, Obama replaced the coordinated campaigns

I agree, but I understand why Obama chose that approach. Faced with a weak DNC, the traditional dysfunction in most state parties, and given his huge financial and organizing advantage, it made sense for him to centralize his field program. Doing so did hurt downticket races, I think we should have done better downticket given the political environment. But if the DNC were stronger it would have been in a better position to negotiate with the nominee, and it would have been able to coordinate with more downticket campaigns.

by souvarine 2009-01-10 07:49AM | 0 recs
Re: yeah, Obama replaced the coordinated campaigns

The biggest problem that comes with having a centralized DNC that has integrated a Obama-centric team comes in 2016, when a new candidate is running. I know, we should count ourselves lucky to be in that position. But, you can see it with the RNC in ,08, they were pathetic in terms of being of help to McCain, because they were built for Bush. So, I prefer the route that we've taken thus far, and a very decentralized DNC. Too bad Dean just didn't blow it up, and put it into the 4 regional HQ's while he had the chance. Its pretty clear that Obama is already focused on '12-- nothing wrong with that either.

by Jerome Armstrong 2009-01-10 08:27AM | 0 recs
Re: yeah, Obama replaced the coordinated campaigns

The national party apparatus always falls apart when the party has the presidency. I don't expect the pattern to change under Obama. I've been arguing over the relevance of a national party committee since '91, when Dan Carol argued the party was done. I still don't buy the argument, in fact I think the collapsing cost of organizing is reinvigorating and strengthening the central, national party organization. Ultimately that means a stronger and more ideological Democratic party, which is what I want.

I should read Crashing the Gates, maybe you will convince me I am wrong.

by souvarine 2009-01-10 10:22AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

This is puzzling.  Obama is in many ways an inheritor of the Dean tradition: 50-state strategy, heavy online fundraising, DC "outsider", young base, new voters, not as liberal as people want to make them to be.

I just don't get it?  People don't like Howard Dean because he was DNC chair while the Democrats retook Washington?

I guess all of those reasons make this hard to believe.  But, after all, we're talking about Democrats here.  They are the only ones that could do something this lame.

by the mollusk 2009-01-09 10:30AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

I'm a new voter because I like Obama and only Obama.I don't like either parties too partisan.The blogs have to realize your not the only one's who got O elected.

by eddy1223 2009-01-09 11:25AM | 0 recs
people like you

cost down-ticket Democrats some seats in the Iowa House and Senate. The "drop-off" of people who voted for Obama but did not cast a vote for the state legislative races was huge, much higher than in 2004.

by desmoinesdem 2009-01-09 11:46AM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

We realize that. That is why we do not demand that Obama fill every single cabinet position with our choices.

by Pravin 2009-01-09 01:21PM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

So I take it bothers you to see us try to get a man who worked hard for his party to get some appreciation from the powers that be? What does that got to with partisan divisiveness? We are dealing with basic human decency. Wouldn't you want all the employees in your company to be treated well? If a long hard working employee retired, wouldn't you want your company to see him off befitting his work with the company?

by Pravin 2009-01-09 01:22PM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

How old are you? You don't like partisanship? Remember that the next the GOP rapes you so as to rob you of your future.

This economy didn't happen by accident. This was by design and brought to you by the GOP and their supplyside madness.

by Charles Lemos 2009-01-09 01:43PM | 0 recs
Link to ask Kaine questions

From an email I received from the DNC

"Share your question for incoming Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine -- he'll answer as many as possible in a video on Democrats.org.":

http://www.democrats.org/page/s/welcomek aine

by Do Something 2009-01-09 12:55PM | 0 recs
On the blow off of Dean

For what it is worth and belated at that but thank you Dr. Dean.

by Charles Lemos 2009-01-09 01:45PM | 0 recs
Re: On the blow off of Dean

Well, I see this morning that the head of the CDC resigned!

That would be a nice job-right?

At this point I am just watching Obama and observing the power that Rahm has/will have over him.

As Dean gets passed over time after time it will become quite clear about Rahms power-I hope I am very wrong.  Time will tell.

Dr. Gupta?   Tom Daschle(not a Dr.)

Hope tommorrow is better

by lja 2009-01-10 06:24AM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads