Inside the Dean Campaign (old article on the Dean implosion, relevant for 2020 Dem analysis)

The Atlantic ^ | May 1, 2004 | Elizabeth Shelburne

[DoodleBob]

The Dean campaign had a true air of revolution about it. There was the feisty and original candidate, the daring and brooding campaign manager, the young and eager volunteers, the committed grassroots network, and all those under-$100 checks that kept pouring in and breaking records. But after Dean's spectacular collapse, beginning with his loss in Iowa and the "I have a scream" concession speech, it was hard not to question how everything could have fallen apart so quickly. Was the revolution for real?

According to Paul Maslin, Dean's political pollster, it was for real. For Maslin, that revolution—and all the changes wrought by it in the American political scene—is the legacy of the Dean campaign. In "The Front-Runner's Fall" in the May 2004 Atlantic, Maslin tells the inside story of the Dean campaign—shedding new light on its failures and its successes

Dean's willingness to confront George Bush, attack the Democratic Party, and oppose the Iraq war drew voters to him. That boldness, however, was also accompanied by Dean's "erratic judgment, loose tongue, and overall stubbornness," as well as his refusal to "to be scripted, to be disciplined, or to discipline himself." Maslin writes that the campaign

[DoodleBob]

Before we all lose our minds over the 2020 Dem field and early polling, remember at this point in the 2004 election season that Howard Dean was a guaranteed nominee and Lurch was Mr. Heinz. Nobody has cast a vote that counts yet, and there is still a LOT of ball game left.

[Steely Tom]

There was the feisty and original mentally ill candidate...

[billyboy15]

The only ones loosing their minds are the perennial nervous Nellie’s. They remind me of sports fans who are worried about their team losing a game not just before the game starts but before the f’n season starts!

[LS]

I don’t do polling. I found that in 2016 a much better indicator of voting trends was voter registration changes. No, this didn’t work in 2018, largely because a) the GOP had a LOT of candidates who just didn’t really run campaigns, b) probably 3-5 seats in CA were stolen; and c) we lost 20 seats by >2%. That likely won’t be the case in 2020, especially with President Trump on the ballot.

Voter registration DID look much better predicting the senate races, where I got all but one seat (McSally, again >1% and possibly stolen) right.

[hardspunned]

No member of the clown posse can legitimately lay a glove on Trump. In the democrat calculations I wonder how many illegitimate votes they plan on manufacturing? What they did in 2018 would have made Richard Daley blush and they got away with all of it. 10 million tainted ballots wouldn’t surprise me. The cheating will be so widespread and over the top that it will overwhelm any efforts to control or even track it.

[Jeff Vader]

I’m in AZ, that seat wasn’t stolen, she was just a terrible candidate who’s probably going to lose the seat again in 2022

[nwrep]

You mean lost 20 seats by <2%, not >2%. Same with McSally, she lost by <1%, not >1% like you say?

[catnipman]

i tried to read the article, but gave up after finding zero relevancy to the current election ...

[DoodleBob]

Here is an interesting study on voter turnout by the Rising American Electorate (RAE) of unmarried women, Millennials (ages 18-34), African Americans, Latinos, and all other people of color, from 2012 to 2016 and beyond. What's interesting (assuming they got the analysis correct) is that:

-RAE as a block grew more than non-RAE contracted,
-the same is true in PA, MI, and FL -battleground states that Trump won.

Could this mean that "minorities" voted more for Trump than we are being lead to believe?

[DoodleBob]

I’m sorry. Here: Early Dem primary season leads don’t usually crystallize into the Presidency.

[catnipman]

“Early Dem primary season leads don’t usually crystallize into the Presidency.”

agreed. but thanks for the synopsis because no way was i going to read a 15 year old long-winded article from the Atlantic to find out that that was the point ... for one thing that’s pretty obvious to most people who follow politics closely anyway ...

[DoodleBob]

Well, yea...leave it them to spend thousands of words on the blatantly obvious. However, there are plenty of pearl-clutchers I’m seeing who forget the past. I’m glad you’re one of the normals.

[LS]

Yes. Bad w symbols. Should stick to words. Sorry.

[LS]

Jeff, the state GOP did a post-election study & found the entire margin of victory came fronm the polling places kept open whete literally people were getting stacks of ballots & filling them out & driving “late” voters to the polls.

I agree McSally was terrible, but the state GOP may have a point.

[Jeff Vader]

I had not heard of that, you’d think they’d raise bloody murder over it

[LS]

They did. Fought it in court that week & lost. 5 key Maricopa Co polling stations.

I asked pollster Rich Baris about it & he thinks the results were so skewed it had to be fraud.

[x]

True. I liked that he was giving Kerry a beating early on, but in his own way Dean was probably worse than Kerry. He was more twisted and Nixonesque. Kerry was too shallow for that.

[Jeff Vader]

I was not aware of that, thanks for the education