Howard Dean wasn't the best speaker at the New Hampshire Democratic Party's annual Club 100 dinner last Thursday. His stump speech needed work in places, and he was clearly still adjusting to the role as candidate for President of the United States of America. Yet it was abundantly clear that in a crowded field of nine Democrats, the party might just have found its saving grace.
In front of a crowd of party insiders, fundraisers and activists -- all gathered to watch one of the first candidate showcases for a primary election almost a year away -- Dean trotted out a line he's been using a lot lately: "I'm Howard Dean and I'm here to represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party."
Hokey? Yes, but not altogether untrue. What this year's group of candidates has in size and political diversity, it lacks in impressiveness. At the head of the pack are John Kerry and John Edwards, the two big money, consultant-dependent Senators whose actual political beliefs are hard to determine, but who apparently look presidential. Then there's Lieberman, the pro-war, pro-censorship, ex-running mate, who might have felt a little more comfortable at a meeting of the New Hampshire Republican Party. Senators Bob Graham and Dick Gephardt, who make up the last-chance-to-run wing of the candidate pool, are solid Democrats with 60 years in office between the two, but neither stands much of a chance of energizing a national campaign. And then there are the long shots: Sharpton, Kucinich and Senator Mosley-Braun -- three lefties who between them stand about a seven percent chance of winning.
So what about Dean? Conventional wisdom says he can't win. He doesn't have the most money, the greatest name recognition or the strongest campaign. He's the former governor of a tiny state on the Canadian border, and outside of New England he's virtually unheard of. Even so, Howard Dean is going to win, and for the sake of the Democratic Party, he had better.
The 2000 presidential election and the 2002 midterm election were striking indicators of a party in decline. Sure, you could argue that Gore won in 2000 and that Senate Republicans hold only a two-vote majority. Nevertheless, Gore should have won by a much greater margin coming off of eight years of peace and prosperity, and Democrats failed to capitalize on the abysmal economy this past November.
There are two reasons that Democrats have faired so poorly recently. One, they have been unable to deal effectively with a popular president and, as a result, have not promoted a coherent opposition platform. Two, their leaders and spokespersons are an unappealing bunch of polling-addicted moderates whose every word and action is run through a machine of focus groups and consultants to determine its electoral viability before being uttered.
Ever since Clinton's strategy of emulating the GOP's fiscal discipline paid off in 1992, party leaders have nudged the party away from its liberal roots to the "New Democrat" mantra of moderation and quasi-conservatism. Now, the front-runners for the nomination -- Kerry, Edwards, and Lieberman -- are all hawks who fail to offer an alternative to Bush's misguided foreign policy.
So back to Howard Dean. What does he have that the others don't and how can he save the Democratic Party? Dean's most appealing characteristic is that he isn't completely full of it. He's a bit of a loose cannon and he's refreshingly blunt. Dean is the kind of candidate who signs the country's most sweeping civil rights legislation -- allowing homosexual couples to form legal civil unions -- while still maintaining a 100 percent rating from the N.R.A. While I disagree with Dean's stance on guns, I respect his ability to take unconventional stances on important issues, rather than simply relying on polls to determine his platform. Kerry, Edwards and Gephardt have shown that they lack this sort of political courage and independence. Their respective stances on Gulf War II are perfect examples of their political squirminess, and the voting public can see this.
Dean is the right candidate for the job because he knows what he's doing; he has 11 years of experience as a chief executive. Unlike the slew of senators and congressmen running, Dean has balanced budgets, worked with unfriendly legislatures and actually run a state. Though Vermont is hardly America, serving as governor of a small state prepares a prospective president far more than merely casting votes in the Senate.
His record on health care is unrivaled. Almost every child in Vermont has health coverage, as well as 92 percent of adults in the state. As a physician, Dean is easily the most qualified candidate to lead the battle for universal health care -- the one issue that should come first for whoever ends up as the Democratic nominee in 2004.
Lastly, Dean is against unilateral action in Iraq. Unlike the vast majority of politicians in this country, Dean is ready and willing to take Bush to task on his reckless foreign policy. Diplomacy is a word suspiciously missing from the President's vocabulary, but one that would hopefully emerge once again in a Dean administration.
So keep your ears and your eyes open. If you haven't heard of him yet, you'll soon see Howard Dean as a solid alternative to the status quo. If he plays his cards right, he might be moving to Pennsylvania Avenue in the near future.
