Democrats Battle for Anti-Dean Mantle
By Terry M. Neal
washingtonpost.com Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 31, 2003; 7:35 AM
With a fascinating year in politics coming to an end, the most coveted title of the moment in the battle for the Democratic presidential nomination is The Anti-Dean.
Democratic nominating contests are set to begin in just weeks, with the race shaping up to be Howard Dean vs. Someone Else. The real competition now is among the eight other candidates who are engaged in a fierce fight to become that "someone else." Dean's opponents, intensely focused on the former Vermont governor, have all but conceded that he is the front-runner, the man to beat in the race to challenge President Bush.
But even as Dean's rivals escalate the rhetoric against him, his position as the person to beat seems to solidify. On Monday, the Dean campaign announced that it had raised more than $14 million this quarter, which ends today, for a total of $40 million for the year. The latter figure is a record for a Democrat the year before a presidential election.
That Dean – a guy hardly anyone knew a year ago – could raise $40 million is phenomenal. That he did so while competing with a crowded field of candidates all vying for the same the pool of Democratic dollars is astonishing. But perhaps even more surprising is how many people have contributed to Dean's campaign.
In a press release, Dean campaign manager Joe Trippi said: "With more than 280,000 contributors this year – and more than 52,000 contributors in this quarter alone – we've now reached more than $14 million raised so far in the fourth quarter. And the most incredible thing is how we've done this – through everybody taking action and doing their part – through hundreds of thousands of contributions averaging nearly $100. This is the $100 revolution."
This has got to be a disconcerting moment for others in the field, whose main message these days seems to be, "vote for me, because I'm not Howard Dean." If Dean's fund-raising success is a sign of his grass-roots appeal, it could spell deep trouble for the rest of the field next year.
Even those on the other side of the fence are impressed by Dean's success in tapping the Internet and expanding the base of people who contribute to campaigns.
"During the Clinton years, the Democrats relied on high-dollar fundraising," said Republican Scott Reed, who managed Bob Dole's presidential campaign in 1996. "Dean has picked up on this and filled the void in the party. A $14 million quarter is very impressive and over 200,000 donors is even more impressive."
Reed explains further the strategic importance of Dean's accomplishment: Because so many of Dean's donors are small-money contributors who haven't gotten close to the federal spending limits, he can tap them time and again.
"Remember, they waived the federal matching funds, and that gives them the infrastructure to continue raising money through 2004," said Reed. "The best use of his time is to continue harvesting these low-dollar donors. . . . Dean is looking at it from the long view, as opposed to the others who are on short-term life support."
The Unstoppable Force Meets the Unmovable Object(ions)
So Dean continues to roll, despite seemingly finding himself embroiled in a new controversy nearly every day. His opponents have hit him recently for everything from attending secret meetings with Enron when he was governor of Vermont, to not declaring the world a safer place since Saddam Hussein's capture, to not calling for the summary execution of Osama bin Laden if he's caught, to being a big old meanie to Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe (whom he accused of weak leadership for allowing his rivals' attacks).
But the criticism of Dean doesn't appear to be sticking, at least with the people who vote in party primaries and caucuses.
Should we start calling him the Teflon Dean?
In recent weeks, polls show Dean has extended his lead in key early states such as New Hampshire, and moved ahead in the polls in some states where he supposedly couldn't win, most notably South Carolina. Of the seven states that vote on Feb. 3, the first big test after New Hampshire, Dean is the front-runner in three: South Carolina, Arizona and Oklahoma. He's running second in two others, Delaware and Missouri (where naturally he trails native son Rep. Richard A. Gephardt). A dearth of current polling data makes it difficult to assess the two other states, New Mexico and North Dakota.
So if Dean is as horrible as Sens. Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.) and John F. Kerry (Mass.), and Rep. Richard A. Gephardt make him out to be, why is he leading the pack? According to Donna Brazile, who managed Al Gore's campaign in 2000 and is considered one of the best grass-roots organizers in the party, "the activists are willing to give Howard Dean a pass. They're not going to hold him accountable for some previous statement or comment. They're just anxious to get rid of Bush.
"That's why I think for Dean's rivals to make up any ground in the next couple weeks, they need to go after undecided voters. They're not going to move Dean's voters. His supporters are rock solid. They're not going anywhere. Now all [Dean's rivals] are doing is lasting damage to themselves and the party."
But many in the party remain concerned about Dean's rise.
"The point we've made over and over again and continue to make, we cannot win this election just by depending on people who don't like George Bush," said Al From, founder and CEO of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council. "We've got to be able to persuade people to support us. That's still the challenge in front of Dean. He needs to lay out a thoughtful agenda to get people to support him. It's not enough to just tap the activist anger against George W. Bush."
Will the Real Anti-Dean Please Stand Up
With the war in Iraq dominating the concerns of so many Democratic voters this year, part of the problem Dean's opponents are having is distinguishing themselves beyond their support for it.
"The fact that the pro-war Democrats haven't coalesced around one candidate is the other problem," Brazile said. "You've got four people who supported the war and Bush."
But University of Virginia Center for Politics director Larry Sabato emphasized that while Dean is the undisputed front-runner, someone else will almost certainly emerge to challenge him early next year. For one thing, the media, the pundits and the analysts will demand it, he said.
But for now, many analysts like Sabato and Brazile agree that the closest thing to a Dean antidote for nervous party centrists is the most Dean-like candidate, retired Army General Wesley K. Clark, a staunch Iraq war opponent who, like Dean, is prone to gaffes, is raising money hand over fist and is rising in the polls.
"Clark is in the same situation as Dean," Brazile says. "He's flip-flopped and made mistakes, and his support is still growing. You've got to ask, why do you have these newcomers, these outsiders coming to the forefront of the national scene."
Clark is coming on strong in three of the Feb. 3 primary states (running second to Dean in Arizona, South Carolina and Oklahoma), and his campaign is expected to raise about $10 million this quarter, more than enough to keep him competitive through Feb. 3.
The question remains though, who else breaks out of the pack? |
