January 20, 2004
Some observations on Iowa:
1. Apparently, Gephardt’s last-ditch attacks on Dean, and Dean’s responses, dragged both down and, in a multi-candidate race, ended up benefiting Kerry and Edwards.
2. A related point, Gephardt and especially Dean are “hot” candidates who can burn out with the electorate. Kerry and Edwards, by contrast, are “cool” candidates who come across better on television, if not in person, and inasmuch as the campaign now shifts away from the person-to-person retail politics of Iowa and NH, it should benefit Kerry and Edwards, and hurt Dean. (Did you see their appearances last night? Kerry and especially Edwards, no doubt understanding they were on TV, immediately took the opportunity to launch into their standard “message” speech. Dean spoke directly to the crowd and gave a loud, defiant “let’s move on!” exhortation that never mentioned anything substantive. It may have been rousing in person, but it didn’t come off at all well on TV. I didn’t like it at all.)
3. Dean set the policy agenda of the campaign, and in my mind, has served an important purpose, even if he completely flames out. Before Dean came on strong, the rest of the field was trying to re-run 1992 by agreeing with Bush on Iraq and hoping to fight him on domestic policy grounds. Because of Dean, the rest of the field is now more boldly criticizing Bush foreign policy and making the linkage between that and domestic/economic issues, and are generally more vocal and pointed in their criticism of the administration.
4. The capture of Saddam may have spelled the end of Dean, not because Saddam’s capture proves Bush right, but because it boosted Bush’s approval ratings and drove home the point to Democrats that W may be hard to beat. Hence, the electability issue started to resonate with Iowa voters, hurting Dean.
5. As I watched the two caucuses on C-SPAN, it struck me that even though a lot of people were “first-time caucus goers” – a lot of them appeared to be middle-class, middle-age (or older), middle-of-the-road (ok, they lean liberal) – but clearly of a moderate, middle-of –the-road temperament – not the types to go for Dean, but perfect for the more palatable Kerry and Edwards.
Some observations on Iowa:
1. Apparently, Gephardt’s last-ditch attacks on Dean, and Dean’s responses, dragged both down and, in a multi-candidate race, ended up benefiting Kerry and Edwards.
2. A related point, Gephardt and especially Dean are “hot” candidates who can burn out with the electorate. Kerry and Edwards, by contrast, are “cool” candidates who come across better on television, if not in person, and inasmuch as the campaign now shifts away from the person-to-person retail politics of Iowa and NH, it should benefit Kerry and Edwards, and hurt Dean. (Did you see their appearances last night? Kerry and especially Edwards, no doubt understanding they were on TV, immediately took the opportunity to launch into their standard “message” speech. Dean spoke directly to the crowd and gave a loud, defiant “let’s move on!” exhortation that never mentioned anything substantive. It may have been rousing in person, but it didn’t come off at all well on TV. I didn’t like it at all.)
3. Dean set the policy agenda of the campaign, and in my mind, has served an important purpose, even if he completely flames out. Before Dean came on strong, the rest of the field was trying to re-run 1992 by agreeing with Bush on Iraq and hoping to fight him on domestic policy grounds. Because of Dean, the rest of the field is now more boldly criticizing Bush foreign policy and making the linkage between that and domestic/economic issues, and are generally more vocal and pointed in their criticism of the administration.
4. The capture of Saddam may have spelled the end of Dean, not because Saddam’s capture proves Bush right, but because it boosted Bush’s approval ratings and drove home the point to Democrats that W may be hard to beat. Hence, the electability issue started to resonate with Iowa voters, hurting Dean.
5. As I watched the two caucuses on C-SPAN, it struck me that even though a lot of people were “first-time caucus goers” – a lot of them appeared to be middle-class, middle-age (or older), middle-of-the-road (ok, they lean liberal) – but clearly of a moderate, middle-of –the-road temperament – not the types to go for Dean, but perfect for the more palatable Kerry and Edwards.
posted by JFH @ 5:32 PM
<< Home