|
Volume CXXXIII, Number 6 |
 |
The Dean vs. Kerry dilemma
BRYANT ANTHONY RICH
COLUMNIST
As the Democratic primary nears, two candidates have emerged as the leading fundraisers after the most recent fundraising reporting deadline. Dr. Howard Dean, former Governor of Vermont is in the lead with over twenty five million dollars raised. John Kerry, Senator of Massachusetts, the former democratic leading fundraiser has fallen into second place with over twenty million dollars. Their closest follower is freshman Senator John Edwards of North Carolina who has declined to seeks a second term in the Senate (undermining the Democrats' fragile position in the Senate) so far raised fourteen million dollars. While all of these Democratic candidates combined do not approach President Bush's astronomical eighty four million dollars in funds hopefully the Democratic nominee will be able to compete with the full party organization's support. Before we become preoccupied with who is winning the primary race and who will win let us take a moment to examine what the two front democratic front-runners would do to the party's image if elected. As evidenced by the elections in 2000 and 2002 the Democratic Party is in flux and is struggling to create an identity that centrist voters can embrace. Meanwhile, different factions inside and outside of the party advocate becoming more liberal, more conservative or perhaps maintaining the present course- whatever that may be.
John Kerry represents the Democratic Party of yore while Howard Dean epitomizes what the Democratic Party could become. In the end, each candidate possesses attributes that could prove to be detrimental to the party's evolving image.
Shall we begin with an old favorite? Senator John Kerry is the prototypical old-school democratic legislator. He is from Massachusetts, Ivy League educated and wealthy. Despite his efforts to match President Bush' machismo by posing with his motorcycle and emphasizing his service in Vietnam, Senator Kerry invokes feelings of a compassionate New England liberal and veteran statesman- as if he were born to carry the torch for the democrats right into the White House.
He's clearly not Bill Clinton- the southern Rhodes Scholar from humble beginnings with the intellect and political savvy to accomplish anything including beating the republicans at their own game and winning-over centrist voters- a goal that other Democrats have been hard-pressed to accomplish.
The problem is that John Kerry is just the sort of candidate that Republicans have been frustrating for years. Let's face it. It is not the sixties anymore and while we may be nostalgic for the Kennedy era it may not be the best image to ride into the White House in the year 2004. Indeed, times have changed. The terrorist attacks of 9/11 have thrust defense and homeland security into the political spotlight- an issue that they have traditionally used to their advantage by portraying democrats as being ill-prepared to lead the military. The Bush administration and the GOP have succeeded, through the war I Iraq, to make sure that defense stays a relevant issue. While John Kerry's actual Vietnam experience (and by actual I mean literally confronting enemies other than those that one might potentially encounter in the Texas Air National Guard which never left the states) should be an asset, history may very well repeat itself and his old-school Democrat image prove to be a prime target for Republican strategists. Remember the McGovern disaster? He only won one state: Massachusetts. Michael Dukakis was not terribly popular either.
Former Governor Dean succeeds where prototypical politicians like Senator Kerry have failed. He has empowered the common supporter by encouraging grass roots fundraising- not relying solely on big name donors and lavish fundraisers. Dr. Dean's campaign has turned the Internet into a powerful fundraising tool and rejected traditional Washington insider politics. Through these avenues it seems that Dr. Dean has been successful at appealing to the common man and woman who feel disenfranchised by the current political scene.
Dr. Dean also draw large support from young people and those who feel disgruntled by the war in Iraq and even more so in democratic legislator's complicity in the war in Iraq- legislators like John Kerry and Richard Gephart.
Before we laud Dr. Dean too enthusiastically we should identify the potential pratfalls in his candidacy as well. Dr. Dean's antiwar stance, while popular with those who are the most frustrated with the war in Iraq (a constituency whose numbers are growing daily) could alienate centrist voters.
Vermont's reputation as a liberal enclave of legalized gay civil unions will not play well with the socially conservative South and Mountain west. Though the Vermont health care initiative was impressive we should be skeptical of a similar application nationally as most of the rest of the country is not terribly similar to Vermont.
There is also the fact that Dr. Dean may not even be the candidate that he is widely perceived to be. Though Dr. Dean may come off as a hardcore liberal he did hold an "A" rating from the NRA- a hardly liberal credential. Also, before we take his anti-war rhetoric to heart we should bear in mind that had Dr. Dean been a legislator during the time of the war resolutions that he may have sang a different tune. His position as a political outsider presents him with this advantage.
In essence the Democrats are stuck between a rock and a hard place. While the party leadership struggles to reform the party's image and ideology to fit twenty-first century politics voters are faced with choosing between candidates who are very different. As President Bush's poll numbers fall the choice of Democratic candidate becomes more and more significant to the image of the Democratic party at this crucial point but, it will be interesting to see how Dr. Dean or Senator Kerry attempt to tailor their image to the political center.
|
FastCounter by bCentral |