I'm back from the front lines in NH (Dover, Rochester, and Salem).
No predictions, but some reflections.
OK, one prediction.
I've never lived in a state where anyone really cared about how I voted, so I've only ever really been exposed to strategic campaigning. That is, I get the issues, I get the ads, I listen or don't listen, research or don't research as I see fit, and then decide. No one really bothers me during this process, and it's pretty easy to predict how voting of my kind will turn out.
Having been in NH, I now understand why there can be such dramatic shifts as have happened in the last week. This is tactical campaigning. It's the political analogue of house-to-house fighting in downtown Bagdahd. It's messy, it's difficult to predict, it's made or broken on reacting just right to each individual person, and you can never be quite sure who the hostiles and who the friendlies are.
That said, it's anybody's race out there right now. Kerry has lots of hard support, but there are many, many leaners in Dean's direction. I doubt the margin will be more than 5 points either way, and I'd hesitate to bet money on either outcome at this point. I have learned a few things, to wit:
- No one in the Democratic party cares about foreign policy except me.
- The Clark supporters are really cool folks, but his campaign is in the toilet - they're totally demoralized. I don't know how he'll do in the polls, but unless he manages to inspire his troops soon, he's a dead man walking. All they could talk about was trashing Kerry HQ and going back to the bar where it was warm and they could get a beer.
- John Kerry is 100%, 112%, totally and completely unelectable in a general election. I have never been more sure of this. First off, all his staff and volunteers are assholes. If you're a Kerry staffer, and you're not an asshole, you were not in NH. Plus, there's not many of them. Kerry simply doesn't have boots on the ground, despite his strong polling.
This points to, I think, the fundamental reason why Kerry will be so much a grease spot that Karl Rove won't notice there was even an election until 2007. Seriously, they'll only know that Kerry even existed because two bone chips found in Alaska will be a DNA match.
But, ahem. The fundamental reason. Kerry seems to be everyone's second choice. I couldn't find a single person - not even amongst his asshole staff - who supported Kerry because they believed in his policy vision. It's not that they didn't have *good* reasons, it's that they didn't have *any* reasons that they supported Kerry aside from his perceived 'electability.' And that simply won't sustain him in the general election, even if it dupes people into voting for him in the primary. 'Electability' is not a property on its own, it's a function of how much people want you to be their leader. And any candidate propped up almost entirely by the perception that other people will want him to be their leader is doomed. It will never get out the people needed to have any chance of standing up to the Bush/Rove machine. Whoever is the Democratic nom is going to win by getting an army of supporters out to the polls, to talk to people in swing states and convince them retail, and make sure that Dems don't get scared, don't get demoralized, and get to the FUCKING POLLS. Dems will need to be reassured that Bush can be beaten, that it is not a foregone conclusion. I don't know if that's true - but if people believe it isn't, there's no chance. And John Kerry will not inspire that sort of dedication from his supporters. They will stay home, thinking that others will perceive him as a good leader, and leaving it to those others to actively work for him. That's why I think he's at least at even odds to lose NH (more if it snows) and he stands no chance in a general election.
From everything I've seen, I still think Dean is our best shot - in part because I think he's the best on the issues, but in part because of his personal charisma and smart (and learning, from Iowa) organization. But I'm not just a Dean booster. I think Edwards and Clark could also make strong candidates, if they shape up their organizations (Clark would be my second choice for nom, if I had my druthers). But Kerry isn't going to make it. A Kucinich/Sharpton ticket would stand a better chance of beating Bush.
-----
Update about no one caring about foreign policy: people care about the perception of fp *experience*, but no one cares about the details of the issues. Exhibit A, a quote from a Kerry aide:
"Howard Dean wouldn't know good judgment on foreign policy if he fell over it. Remember, this is the same man who has said that the nation was not safer with the capture of Saddam Hussein, said we shouldn't take sides in the Middle East, and that Osama bin Laden should get a jury trial," she said.
I'll grant you that we may be in some attenuated sense safer with Hussein gone, because he was a destabilizing regional threat in an area we care about... but he certainly wasn't an imminent threat to *us* in the way that W&Co. made him out to be. But anyone who thinks that our aggressive partisanship is helping solve the Israel/Palestine situation, or that it wouldn't help strengthen our position to give bin Laden a nice flashy trial with all the bells and whistles needs his giant Skeletor head examined.
No predictions, but some reflections.
OK, one prediction.
I've never lived in a state where anyone really cared about how I voted, so I've only ever really been exposed to strategic campaigning. That is, I get the issues, I get the ads, I listen or don't listen, research or don't research as I see fit, and then decide. No one really bothers me during this process, and it's pretty easy to predict how voting of my kind will turn out.
Having been in NH, I now understand why there can be such dramatic shifts as have happened in the last week. This is tactical campaigning. It's the political analogue of house-to-house fighting in downtown Bagdahd. It's messy, it's difficult to predict, it's made or broken on reacting just right to each individual person, and you can never be quite sure who the hostiles and who the friendlies are.
That said, it's anybody's race out there right now. Kerry has lots of hard support, but there are many, many leaners in Dean's direction. I doubt the margin will be more than 5 points either way, and I'd hesitate to bet money on either outcome at this point. I have learned a few things, to wit:
- No one in the Democratic party cares about foreign policy except me.
- The Clark supporters are really cool folks, but his campaign is in the toilet - they're totally demoralized. I don't know how he'll do in the polls, but unless he manages to inspire his troops soon, he's a dead man walking. All they could talk about was trashing Kerry HQ and going back to the bar where it was warm and they could get a beer.
- John Kerry is 100%, 112%, totally and completely unelectable in a general election. I have never been more sure of this. First off, all his staff and volunteers are assholes. If you're a Kerry staffer, and you're not an asshole, you were not in NH. Plus, there's not many of them. Kerry simply doesn't have boots on the ground, despite his strong polling.
This points to, I think, the fundamental reason why Kerry will be so much a grease spot that Karl Rove won't notice there was even an election until 2007. Seriously, they'll only know that Kerry even existed because two bone chips found in Alaska will be a DNA match.
But, ahem. The fundamental reason. Kerry seems to be everyone's second choice. I couldn't find a single person - not even amongst his asshole staff - who supported Kerry because they believed in his policy vision. It's not that they didn't have *good* reasons, it's that they didn't have *any* reasons that they supported Kerry aside from his perceived 'electability.' And that simply won't sustain him in the general election, even if it dupes people into voting for him in the primary. 'Electability' is not a property on its own, it's a function of how much people want you to be their leader. And any candidate propped up almost entirely by the perception that other people will want him to be their leader is doomed. It will never get out the people needed to have any chance of standing up to the Bush/Rove machine. Whoever is the Democratic nom is going to win by getting an army of supporters out to the polls, to talk to people in swing states and convince them retail, and make sure that Dems don't get scared, don't get demoralized, and get to the FUCKING POLLS. Dems will need to be reassured that Bush can be beaten, that it is not a foregone conclusion. I don't know if that's true - but if people believe it isn't, there's no chance. And John Kerry will not inspire that sort of dedication from his supporters. They will stay home, thinking that others will perceive him as a good leader, and leaving it to those others to actively work for him. That's why I think he's at least at even odds to lose NH (more if it snows) and he stands no chance in a general election.
From everything I've seen, I still think Dean is our best shot - in part because I think he's the best on the issues, but in part because of his personal charisma and smart (and learning, from Iowa) organization. But I'm not just a Dean booster. I think Edwards and Clark could also make strong candidates, if they shape up their organizations (Clark would be my second choice for nom, if I had my druthers). But Kerry isn't going to make it. A Kucinich/Sharpton ticket would stand a better chance of beating Bush.
-----
Update about no one caring about foreign policy: people care about the perception of fp *experience*, but no one cares about the details of the issues. Exhibit A, a quote from a Kerry aide:
"Howard Dean wouldn't know good judgment on foreign policy if he fell over it. Remember, this is the same man who has said that the nation was not safer with the capture of Saddam Hussein, said we shouldn't take sides in the Middle East, and that Osama bin Laden should get a jury trial," she said.
I'll grant you that we may be in some attenuated sense safer with Hussein gone, because he was a destabilizing regional threat in an area we care about... but he certainly wasn't an imminent threat to *us* in the way that W&Co. made him out to be. But anyone who thinks that our aggressive partisanship is helping solve the Israel/Palestine situation, or that it wouldn't help strengthen our position to give bin Laden a nice flashy trial with all the bells and whistles needs his giant Skeletor head examined.
VIEW 6 of 6 COMMENTS
hey, how are doing?
I hope that Dean gets it. I think people are a little intimidated by him right now, by his willingness to display an actual personality (god forbid, REAL personality in a politician
And I want to see more from Clark, but he has just been so quiet. I think crazybob is right...he could balance out a lot of the areas that Dean is less experienced in. If they get it, it could be a good time up in America. Let's hope....