July 29, 2003

The Dean Candidacy

Chris Caldwell in The Weekly Standard writes:

It's more accurate to say the race has become Howard Dean versus a half-dozen blow-dried shills for an intellectually exhausted party who are now, as one New Hampshire newspaper put it, "scurrying around New Hampshire--boring people."

That's a great line with some truth behind it. Caldwell takes a more serious look at Dean's Candidacy and his chances for success. If the party is trying to replicate '92, I think Howard is a pretty convincing cast for Governor Clinton.
Caldwell makes an interesting point about fund raising. It seems Dean can raise big money in small hunks, rare for a Democrat:
Republicans outraise Democrats by 63 percent to 37 percent among penny-ante donors--those who give under $200. The GOP retains that advantage at all levels up to $100,000, although it steadily narrows as the dollar amount rises. Once you hit $100,000, the Democrats really begin to clean up. They hold a fundraising advantage that widens rapidly as the numbers get more stratospheric. In contributions of over $1 million, they outraise Republicans by 92 percent to 8 percent.

Umm, that would be "The Party of The People," yah. I got it.

Posted by jk at July 29, 2003 08:42 AM
Comments

Yeah, and George W. Bush, born of priviledge, educated at elite prep schools and Ivy League colleges is just a "regular Texas guy"

Posted by: Silence Dogood at August 4, 2003 10:08 AM

I'll almost concede the point, Silence. But my attempted point was that the Democratic party loves to portray the GOP as the "fat cat" party, when in fact, the GOP is funded by small donors and the Dems by elites who can throw millions of dollars at elections. This was not a swipe at Dean (although I am currently writing a very long one of those).
Lastly, I think that W enjoyed patrician advantages but is in many ways a guy from Midland, Texas.

Posted by: jk at August 4, 2003 10:38 AM
| What do you think? [2]