Would you support Dean even if he's not that Liberal?

[R_Ram_U]

While Dr. Dean can talk brimstone to the Progressive faithful, as governor of Vermont he was a staunch centrist.

A fiscal conservative who heavily courted IBM to stay in Vermont,
saying, "<t>here have been very few things that <IBM> asked for, that
they haven't gotten." (IBM is Vermont's largest employer). He cut taxes
in Vermont his first year as governor, refusing to soak the rich. And he
comes from an upper-class background. "His father and grandfather were
stockbrokers, his mother an art appraiser--Dean grew up in the Hamptons
and on Manhattan's Upper East Side, attending elite private schools
before going to Yale University."

Of course you could say his fiscal conservatism will bring in swing
voters who might not have agreed with Bush's tax-cut. That if
Republicans try to paint him as some left-wing radical, he can always
point to his record in Vermont. He opposes gun-control, which might
bring in southern/western voters.

I personally support Howard Dean, and think he'll make the best
candidate. He hasn't been equivocal on Iraq, like some other Democratic
candidates, plus he has the governing experience-more experience in fact
than Bush had in Texas-that Americans look for. He's a five-term
governor. And frankly, Bush can't run as the son of a toothless
sharecropper, because he was also the scion of Northeastern blue bloods,
with all the advantages that gave him. So Dean can neutralize two
issues, his upper-class roots, and gun control. At least Dean didn't
depend on his dad's friends for business or political favors. Dean can
stand on his own two-feet.

But even with that said, would anybody not vote for Dean because of
these issues, or does anyone feel that he's misled them in some way?

Quotes attributed to Robert Dreyfuss, "The Darkest Horse," The American
Prospect vol. 13 no. 13, July 15, 2002
http://www.prospect.org/print/V13/13/dreyfuss-r.html

on edit: replaced '<' for '<'.[br />DU software doesn't recognize anything in brackets that's not html

[MercutioATC]

1. Absolutely!

His being a centrist is what appeals to me, and I think it makes him more attractive to independants.

[joeybee12]

2. I don't think he's mislead anyone

I don't agree with a lot of his views, but like him for his fire.

If anyone is doing the misleading, it's the pathetic American media. They call Dean a liberal mainly because he's from Vermont, and in their tiny little minds everyone there is a liberal. If they weren't such lazy sacks of s**t and did a little homework, they wouldn't label him as such.

[diplomats]

3. I would have absolutely no problem

A centrist is fine with me.

[Cha]

6. ABSOLUTELY!

[papau]

7. I agree - He and Kerry have the right attitude - Dean more than Kerry

Edwards also sounds good. Grp and Gram and Joe are all solid but have no fire.

I agree with Dennis more, but I just do not see his winning the general.

[caledesi]

4. They can call him a f*cking commie, for all I care...labels don't matter.

He doesn't "do labels"...I am supporting this guy because I believe in him, he is blunt, as angry as I am about the Dems, is not afraid to take on *, shares 95% of my values, and is running an absolutely brilliant campaign. He's a leader.

[Cha]

5. I know who Dean is!,,,,,And I support him!!

Dean'04 :kick:
:dem:

[Rick Myers]

8. I love it!

He can bring in the kids, the disenfranchised, and still appeal to a centerist base!

I was walking at a plaza in Youngstown, OH last week with my DU shirt on and from behind someone said "Hey DU!" I turn around to see a young couple (20-ish) both with "Dean for America" buttons on! It was a great moment!!!

[Cha]

10. Cool!!

COOL!

[caledesi]

14. Cool RM. I don't think I will find that in Tampa. Boo-Hoo.

[w13rd0]

9. I myself am a "moderate" who has been "radicalized"...

...by the extremism of the present Administration. I don't think he's misled anyone as to his centrism, the inability to label him convieniently. It's more than a line going from left to right, it's a spectrum and a sphere. Basing one's policy decisions on full and complete accurate information, basing one's executive style on finding workable solutions that look at the 10 and 20 year scope, rather than just the 4 and 8 yr election cycles...I think these are good positions to come from. And I think that the Dean campaign has been notable for the degree to which it interacts with, and is willing to communicate with, it's supporters and the electorate as a whole. Unlike what might occur with a more "certifiable liberal" candidate, I don't think Dean is an idealogue <sp>, and he'll give an ear to the liberal view, even if he might personally disagree.

That's my thinking at least...

[Nashyra]

12. My first choice is Clark

But if Dean is the nominee I will work my tail off for him. Any combination Clark/Dean /Edwards/Kerry could beat * we just have to get the vote out.

[belab13]

21. Try reading Noam Chompsky' Open media Series

and you will be radicalized beyond your wildest moderate imagination.

[gottaB]

25. give an ear to the liberal view

I haven't come to any hard and fast conclusions about Dean yet, but one thing I am definitely looking for is his ability to listen, and the extent to which he will accomodate opposing views. As a liberal, I won't be satisfied with a pat on the head.

The "bombthrowing" aspect of his campaign has bothered me, but I won't rule him out until I see how his message develops over the next few months.

[Demobrat]

11. I am supporting Dean mainly because

he speaks for me. 99% of what he says makes me want to weep for joy that anybody is saying it at all. The other 1% is his stance on medical pot. I wish he supported it a little more. But I can live with that. And I'm sure over time there will be other things I don't like. I didn't like everything Clinton did. In fact, I didn't like a lot of things Clinton did. But Clinton was a smart man with a good heart who wanted to make things better for everybody, not just those who already had the best of everything. That's good enough for me. And so is the good doctor.

[UrbScotty]

13. Absolutely! Anyone but Bush!

[gully]

15. YUP!

:dem:

[T Roosevelt]

16. He's actually NOT that liberal

Seems only the Dean supporters (I'm one) understand that he is not, and has never referred to himself as, a "liberal." It's the whore media and the GOP which are calling him that, simply because he has some socially liberal policies. He is fiscally conservative. That's a great combination in my book.

[belab13]

22. fiscally conservative is good policy as long as it is not polluted

by special interest dictates.

[Mairead]

27. "Fiscally conservative" is ALWAYS "polluted by special interest dictates"

'Fiscal conservatism' is code for 'I want to spend tax money on the rich, not on the poor'.

It's very disheartening to see how many people here do exactly what they rail against GOP voters for doing. They vote against their own interests and they completely fail to see it. How smart is that?

[killbotfactory]

28. Not really.

Thanks for playing, though.

It really means you don't like to deficit spending and living within your means. When the deficit piles up, you can't pay for all your nifty little gov't programs anymore. Wheeeeee! Fun!

[GOPFighter]

17. Hell YES!

An open minded centrist beats a fundamentalist conservative any day!

I'm still undecided but there's not a Democrat running that I wouldn't vote for over BUSH!

[Orangepeel]

18. Everyone here knows that he is a centrist

[DeanandBushSuck]

19. I would NOT support Dean-ever!

Dean represents all that is wrong with both Republican Party and the Democratic Party. He is pro-death penalty. Anti-environment. Pro-gun and has zero foreign policy experience. This country needs the opposite. Some of you may say, "Hey, we want to beat Bush". Well, what is point when we will replace him with another lying, decieving idiot. Dean will do to the Democratic Party that Bush is doing to Republican Party. No Dean No Republicans. A vote for Dean is a vote for Bush.

[MercutioATC]

23. Ok, I'll type slowly so you can understand...

1) "Pro-death penalty" Only in certain circumstances like the murder of children or law enforcement. I'm not 100% with him on this one, but his position is hardly PRO death penalty.

2) "Anti environment" Under Dean's Governorship, 470,000 acres (8% of Vermont) was bought by the state to prevent development. Vermont has emmission controls more stringent than the Kyoto Protocols.

3) "Pro gun" He's in support of enforcing the current federal gun legislation and leaving any NEW restrictions up to the states. That's NOT "pro gun".

4) "zero foreign policy experience" He has as much as Clinton did...or Bush Jr....What he DOES have is experience in governance; something that the rest, save Graham, lack.

Not only are your posts inflammatory, you obviously have NOT researched the issues at all. Please look into things before you spread your fertilizer any further.

[belab13]

20. Special Interest Groups have ruined the political process

I like Kerry because he has supported campaign finance reform and it sounds like he is willing to stand up to the energy cartel that pretty much dictates our nations reprehensible foreign policy.

[killbotfactory]

24. Yes.

I like him because he is not an ideologue, dislikes emotional arguements, and bases his opinions on facts. Even when I disagree with him, which isn't much, I can see where he is coming from and can respect his position.

[polpilot]

26. 100% support. Dean's the answer.

Dean '04

[Nicholas_J]

29. I could not support Dean at all

Because far from being a centrist, he is very ffar to the right fiscally; The fundamental, defining fiscal differences between DEmmocrats and Republicans were laid out in the Hyde park Declaration in 2000. Two very impoartant defining statements were made.


Who beleives in the democratic platform, which states that the nation CAN afford its Social Spending. if it institutes a fair proogressive tax system, WHich Howard Dean has aqlways opposed. Dena is a cut tax, cut programs conservative.

THe ENTIRE NEW DEMOCRATIC PLATFORM, as putt together to oppose PNAC states:

DLC | Key Document | August 1, 2000
The Hyde Park Declaration: A Statement of Principles and a Policy Agenda for the 21st Century


Publisher's Note: Last May, at the invitation of the Democratic Leadership Council, elected officials from across the country met at Franklin D. Roosevelt's estate in Hyde Park, N.Y. Their goal was to begin drafting a statement of New Democrat principles and a broad national policy agenda for the next decade. This manifesto, The Hyde Park Declaration, is the result of their work...



We believe that fiscal discipline is fundamental to sustained economic growth as well as responsible government.

We believe that a progressive tax system is the only fair way to pay for government.

http://www.ndol.org/print.cfm?contentid=1926

That is the DEMOCRATIC party's idea of how to balance the budget. Fairs taxation, so that the rich pay their fair share. Under Dean, this reversed in Vermont:

Dean did not sign onto, or approve of the Hyde Park Declaration.

What happend to taxation under Dean:


Vermont’s Tax Code: No Breaks for the Poor and Middle Class
When all Vermont taxes are totaled up, the study found that:

The richest Vermont taxpayers—with average incomes of $686,000—pay 9.7% of their income in Vermont state and local taxes before accounting for the tax savings from federal itemized deductions. After the federal offset, they pay only 7.1%.

Middle-income taxpayers in Vermont—those earning between $27,000 and $44,000—pay 9.8% of their income in Vermont state and local taxes before the federal deduction offset and 9.5% after the offset—much more than what the rich pay.


# Vermont families earning less than $16,000—the poorest fifth of Vermont non-elderly taxpayers—pay 10% of their income in Vermont state and local taxes, one and half times the share the wealthiest Vermonters pay.

“Vermont’s income tax is not progressive enough to offset the regressivity of its sales and excise taxes,” McIntyre said. “Taxes ought to be based on people’s ability to pay them, which means that the share of income paid in taxes should rise as income grows, not fall as is the case in Vermont.”

http://216.239.51.100/search?q=cache:fJRaEEEPn3gJ:www.itepnet.org/wp2000/vt%2520pr.pdf+Vermont+Taxation+regressive+Tax+institute&hl=en&ie=UTF-8


Deans policy was to oppose raises income taxes. IN fact, proportionally, Dean's income tax cuts and raises to consumption taxes were WORSE thna Bush's tax cuts alone. as Dean cut income taxes and favored the rich, while rasing cosumption taxes that made it harder for the poor to afford to live.

Deans qualitative spending was indeed qalitative, While he was governor, the quality of life of the rich was the only quality of life that improved:

The heart of the Democratic Party's entire fiscal platform is to create a Progressive Tax system, in which the poor pay a smaller percentage of their income, and the wealthy a larger percentage, without all of the deductions and schemes by which the rich avoid paying their fair share to support a government and system that allow them to prosper. Even in European nations with as much as 90 percent income taxes, there are still rich people. The Democratic Platform is based on the ideal that without economic democracy, there is NO political democracy. The goal is to make the gap between the rich and poor smaller. To reduce the level of poverty to as close to zero as possible, and to reduce those with obscene wealth, to as near to zero as possible as well. So that those with obscene wealth CANNOT use that wealth to alter the government to favor their personal interests over that of society.

Fiscal conservatism is a proven failure in advancing the cause of real, one man, one vote democracy.

Dena has cut taxes, and balanced budgets by cutting INCOME taxes, and cutting programs, The exact opposite of the description of the Democratic party centrist ideas posed at Hyde Park.

Deans fiscal performance as governor is almost the behavior promised by Newt Gingrich's "Contract with America"

In another thread, someon resonded to a similar post with "WHAT DOES ONE DO TO BALANCE A BUDGET if one is not a tax and spend democrat.

The problem is, is that the ENTIRE democratic platform of fiscal responsibility is based on taxing and spending. That is ho CLinton got rid of the deficit. By raising the top income tax bracke on thr rich. It IS the democratic party way to balance the budget.

So by the party's one defining documentation, Dean is more Republican than Democrat.

[AmyStrange]

31. What's does the phrase "federal deduction offset" mean?

ALSO, I noticed you left this sentence out:

“When it comes to paying for services, Vermont has a moderately fair tax system"


Dave (AmyStrange.com)

DU (slang/ folklore) Glossary (Dictionary): http://DUG.SeattleActivist.org/
Index of WMD Articles: http://WMD.SeattleActivist.org/

Here are some excellent resources and timelines of quotes and interviews and newspaper article quotes documenting the different things Bush and Co did and said for the last two plus years concerning the war in Iraq and WMDs (and other fun things) from the Howard Dean Website---even if you're not a Dean Fan, these are still excellent resources:

The Bush Administration And WMDs: Then And Now:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=bush_wmd_summary

Niger-Uranium Timeline:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=niger_timeline

Bush and WMD: Assumptions vs. Reality:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Bush_-_Iraq_-_Side_by_Side.pdf?docID=781

The Bush Administration and WMD: What did they know and when did they know it?:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Administration_-_Iraq_Deception.pdf?docID=762


(EDITED IN:
ALSO, I noticed you left this sentence out:

“When it comes to paying for services, Vermont has a moderately fair tax system")

[Nicholas_J]

39. Federal offset means

that if you are rich enough to file taxes and get deductions, you can deduct your state income taxes and so get a portion more of your federal taxes back because you were taxed by the state. (NO DOUBLE TAXATION ALLOWED BY FEDERAL LAW) but if you cannot deduct enough, you get to pay the FULL tax both federal and state.

When Dean followed through on Snellings proposal to dismanthle Vermonts three tiered tax system (lower percentage for the poor, a little higher for the middle class, higher still for the rich), for a single percentage tax, it caused the taxes to become regressive.
They stated that Vermonts system was moderately fair. Before Dean it was te most progressive system in the country, and the rich pid a bit more than the middle, the poor less than that. Deans changes turned it on its head. The poor essentially pay 25 perent more of their income in total taxation than the rich becasue of Dean reducing income taxation, and creating a property tax, rasing other consmption taxes. No matter how you slice it, if a rich guy and a poor guy are buying the same item, and the tax on that item is fixed, the tax takes a bigger percentage of the poor guys income than the rich guy, and that is what Dean created. ANd that is whqt the entire recommends he STOP doing. Even it they said it was moderately fair. it was not completly fair, and it indicates Deans economic policies STILL favor the rich over the poor and middle class:

the heart of the recommendation is not the statement about it being moderately fair, but:

“Vermont’s income tax is not progressive enough to offset the regressivity of its sales and excise taxes,” McIntyre said. “Taxes ought to be based on people’s ability to pay them, which means that the share of income paid in taxes should rise as income grows, not fall as is the case in Vermont.”

http://216.239.51.100/search?q=cache:fJRaEEEPn3gJ:www.itepnet.org/wp2000/vt%2520pr.pdf+Vermont+Taxation+regressive+Tax+institute&hl=en&ie=UTF-8


AS noted, IS NOT THE CASE IN VERMONT


It was however, before Howard Dean.

[AmyStrange]

46. hmmmm

"No matter how you slice it, if a rich guy and a poor guy are buying the same item, and the tax on that item is fixed, the tax takes a bigger percentage of the poor guys income than the rich guy, and that is what Dean created."

Name one state where this doesn't happen?

Dave (AmyStrange.com)

[Nicholas_J]

47. Vermont

Before Howard Dean...

As the ITEP article indicated, when consumptions taxes are a larger portion of a states revenues than any income tax, then the tax system is REGRESSIVE. Dean introduced and fought to pur through Snellings plan to take the three tiered system in whiich the federal offsets actually crested a system in which ALL groups paid the SAME percentage even AFTER the federal offsets.


The issue again, is NOT that most states have progressive tax systems, but that Dean worked for regression in the system that existed.

Idaho, with more millionaires than any other state, though it has a LOW tax burden, has one of the MOST progressive systems in the nation.

Oregon is another state with a progresive tax system:


this is what makes a states taxation REGRESSIVE:


What Makes a State’s Tax System Regressive?

The study highlights the common features of states with particularly regressive tax systems. In the ten
most regressive tax states, several items particularly stand out:

# Six of the ten states lack a broad-based personal
income tax.

# The other four states levy broad-based income
taxes, but have structured the tax in a way that
makes it much less progressive than in other
states. Three of them have flat-rate income taxes,
and one allows a deduction for federal income
taxes paid.

AS a matter of fact, Vermont was considered to be one of the most progresive states tax-wise. Still is moderately fair, as the article states. But the concern is the direction Dean decided to take Vermont. Which has follwed the national trends towards regression, even since the Reagan Administration. It is the policy of the DLC to try to reverse this trend, working towards PROGRESSIVE, fair taxes.

The DLC wants to creste a progressive system, and COMPLETELY eliminate tariffs at th fderal level, which would cut the cost of things like clothing, shoes, furtniture, and other cheap items made overseas that add more than 45 cents to every dollar of every item, like a pair of sneakers, made in China. The items that are those that can be afforded by the average middle class or poor person are heavily hit by this taxation

The Hyde Park Declaration, whci his the platform statement of Centrist DLC members, making progressive taxxation the goal of the Democratic Party, was not signed onto by Howard Dean, nor has he given any idea as to his support of the platform or not.

That is essentially what the article was about. Chiding Vermont for losing its edge as a progresive tax state. ANd this was from a bunch of economists andaccountants, hardly the most radical people in the world when it comes to taxation.

It is the assertion of CONSERVATIVES, that progressive systems PUNISH the sucessful and hard working.

Yet the vitality of Canada, and The European Economic comunity is s stark reminder that tax regression has nothing to do with prosperity, and everything to do with the widening gap between rich and poor.

How Much is Too Much?

It is taken for granted in much of the public debate over taxes that our taxes are "too high." But "too high" is a relative term. Too high compared to what?

The usual answer is that we pay too much compared to Americans. On a collective basis we certainly pay more than Americans (although the average-income Canadian pays less income and payroll taxes, than the average-income American; see Table 2). But we also have medi-care, public universities, more generous public pensions, and a range of other things that most Canadians have indicated they are quite willing to pay for. And largely thanks to higher taxes and more generous public programs, Canadian society is still far more equal and inclusive, despite recent cutbacks. Try as they might, Canada's business leaders have not yet succeeded in convincing us of the strange propo-sition that the United States of America is the prototype against which all social and economic variables must be measured.

Do we pay "too much" compared to a broader sample of other countries? Not especially. Taxes and other revenues collected by all levels of government in Canada are just below the average level for all industrialized countries: 41.8 percent of GDP this year, compared to 42 percent for the OECD, according to the OECD's own data (see Table 2).

Table 2
Are Canadians Overtaxed?


Source: OECD Economic Outlook, OECD Tax/Benefit Position of Employees. Averages are unweighted. Average worker tax is net income tax, social security, and transfers as share of wage income, for a married average production worker with two children.

Do we pay "too much" compared to how much we used to pay? Even here the evidence does not justify the unprecedented air time that has been captured by the tax rage campaigners. The tax revolt worked up a real head of steam through the latter 1990s. But ironically, that was the same decade in which total taxes did not increase at all-for the first time in the entire postwar era.

Longer-run trends in taxes and program spending by all levels of government in Canada are illustrated in Figure 2. Taxes increased signifi-cantly relative to GDP in every decade of the postwar era, until the 1990s. Since 1990, total taxes collected at all levels have remained stable at about 43 percent of GDP, and they are now falling.

http://www.caw.ca/whatwedo/research/taxcuts.asp

But think about this...when you add up all of the taxes, income, sales, excise, and on an on, the average member of the middle class pays about 39 percent of his earnings in taxation of some kind. And gets jack for it, compared to Canadians, who pay a bare 3 percent more.

But the differnce is, that in Canada, and Europe, the rich pay a a much larger percent of their taxes in income taxes to offset the lesser amont that they pay in other taxes. They may buy more expensive clithing, but if one person makes a thousand times more money than another, he just is not going to spend a thousand times more in pants or shoes or on eating out, or on gasoline or cigarette taxes.

Dean reversed the trend in which in Vermont, the rich paid more. Or at least a fairer share, if not more. Brought in even more taxation based on consumption, rather than ability to pay.

Dean did it, and set it going in that direction, in which Vermont Conservatives wish to take it further.

That is the goal of REPUBLICANS at the federal level. And since it was Deans philosophy at the state level, there is NO evidence that he will do any different at the federal level. Bush's tax cuts for the nation favor the rich. Deans tax cuts in the state of Vermont favored the rich. They both did the same things. Vermonts small budgets and relatively large surpluses allowed Dean to continually balance the budgets with the assistance of raiding the loacked box surplus. Like movint money from savings to checking to pay the rent when you are out of work.

But Deans income tax cuts resulted in the crisis that Vermont faced in 2002 leaving Vermont with as large deficits as there were when Dean took office. If he had not cut income taxes, the need to slash the budget would have not occurred.

[AmyStrange]

51. Oregon...

and Idaho have budget problems and Vermont doesn't. As a matter of fact Vermont has a surplus.

Oregon has no sales tax, but has an income tax.

And I dispute your insistence that Idaho has more millionaires. What are you using as your source? They are cutting social programs because of it. How does this help those in need?

By the way you never answered my original question.

Also, you are constantly complaining how the liberals got screwed in Vermont, but you fail to bring up these facts

FROM: http://www.sevendaysvt.com/insidetrack/
MIRROR WEBPAGE: http://www.seattleactivist.org/Dean/DEAN-JUL-16-2003-Exclusive--Howard-Dean-is-a-Woman.html
As former liberal Democratic State Sen. Dick McCormack tells it, it was Howard Dean who laid down the law to the liberals. And it was a lecture McCormack will never forget.

Then-Lt. Gov. Dean told the liberal Senate Dems, “You will never achieve your lofty goals of social and economic justice because people do not trust Democrats with their money.” And until they do, prophesied the future presidential contender, the well-intentioned liberals would be failures!

You see, Ho-Ho’s bottom line has always been the bottom line. For his first six years on the Fifth Floor, Dean annually battled the liberals nose-to-nose on the state budget and the income tax. The liberals wanted to spend like drunken sailors and tax the rich at a higher rate to get the cash.

Dean would have none of it. They called him names. Accused him of neglecting the aged, blind and disabled. They even called him a “Republican in sheep’s clothing.” Meanwhile, Ho-Ho drove the liberals positively mad by squirreling away tens of millions of dollars in rainy-day funds and paying down the state’s bonded indebtedness.



Dave (AmyStrange.com)

[Nicholas_J]

52. Vermont doenst HAVE a budget problem

Like hell it doenst.

And most of the anticipated problem is a result of Deans fiiscal performance.

Dean claims he left a balanced budget, by calling major priorities a "WISH LIST",like federally mandated medicaid matching funds" and state mandated transfer of general fund money into education funds and then shifing them all over the place to create a balaqnced budget on paper, but in realirt, a 40 million dollar deficit.

The cause, Dean's using a 25 million dollar surplus for income tax cuts, ten months before the 2000 elections brought budget cutting Bush into office.

By the summer of 2002, there was a 27 million dollar deficit, by the day he left office, the deficit wa 40 million. Deans paper budget slashed millions of dollars from programs that were not alloweed to be slashed.

Vermont is facing a 100 million dollar deficit withing the next teo years due to Deans poor fiscal ideas, like trrying to fudge his way into provding medicaid funds by using unused federal funds under a medicaid exemption to avoind using state funds. Dean tried to get soething for nothing and screwed up. It was Richard Snellings idea of creating a three tiered income tax that got Vermonts 60 milion dollar deficit under control. Dena just folloewed Snellings plan and took the credit from a dead man. Then Dean rolls back the tax and immediately spends the rest of his career trying to prevcent budget deficits from popping out all over the place by raising consumption taxes, cutting programs. SNellings plan worked perfectly, and had it been maintained, conmsumption taxes would not have been needed, and program cuts completely unnecessary.

Dean screwed up the success of Snelling plan.
The progressive tried to bring back what worked before.

Dean did not balance the budget responsibly. He was reactionary, His reactiob to every budget crisis was to cut. Dean held the Bush-Cheney economic concept that it is possible to cut income taxes and government revenues, and institute NEW social programs like health care. It didnt work for Bush, it didnt work for Dean.

The fact that he balanced the budget is not as important as HOW he balanced it.
Retiree's have to live on a fixed income and balance their budgets. Sometimes they do so by eating cat food and dog food.

That was the Dean solution to balancing budgets.

[MercutioATC]

53. Somebody had better tell the Rutland Herald, then...

http://rutlandherald.nybor.com/News/Story/68442.html


"Vermont Administration Secretary Michael Smith said credit for the budget balancing should be shared by the Legislature, former Gov. Howard Dean and Gov. James Douglas."


"Klein agreed that lawmakers and both the Dean and Douglas administrations deserve the credit for the state’s strong fiscal health, but added, “I think Dean gets a large amount of credit.”"


Vert under Dean's governance had a healthy budget. With the national recession, ALL states were hurt. The issue isn't whether Vermont was totally insulated from the state of the national economy (it wasn't, and couldn't have been) but how the policies of its leaders, past and present, have allowed Vermont to bounce back.

[AmyStrange]

55. Exactly...

One thing I gotta give the Rutland Herald credit for is that they report both the positive about Dean and the negative, which is a lot more than you can say about ALMOST all the Deanie Bs (Deanie Bashers) on this forum,

Dave (AmyStrange.com)

DU (slang/ folklore) Glossary (Dictionary): http://DUG.SeattleActivist.org/
Index of WMD Articles: http://WMD.SeattleActivist.org/

Here are some excellent resources and timelines of quotes and interviews and newspaper article quotes documenting the different things Bush and Co did and said for the last two plus years concerning the war in Iraq and WMDs (and other fun things) from the Howard Dean Website---even if you're not a Dean Fan, these are still excellent resources:

The Bush Administration And WMDs: Then And Now:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=bush_wmd_summary

Niger-Uranium Timeline:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=niger_timeline

Bush and WMD: Assumptions vs. Reality:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Bush_-_Iraq_-_Side_by_Side.pdf?docID=781

The Bush Administration and WMD: What did they know and when did they know it?:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Administration_-_Iraq_Deception.pdf?docID=762

[Nicholas_J]

40. Never look at Dean own site

Or Kerry's...
When find something, it comes from some other source, and NOT from the campaign source, which are the most unreliable.

It like asking a cigarette company if tobacco causes cancer.

Their answer will never surprise you.

[MercutioATC]

33. We know. You've said you won't vote for him if he's the nominee.

Query:

Rules of the board state that once a nominee is chosen, he's no longer open to attacks. If Dean's the nominee, what are you going to do?

[GreenPartyVoter]

30. Yes, because I will support any Dem running against Bu$h

even if they are mostly moderates.

[paulk]

32. sure

he's not my number one choice, but I'd support him if he won the nomination.

he's not as liberal as I'd like, but I like the fact that he's taken Bush on so directly. It may only be political opportunism on his part, but at least he's doing it. And the fact that people are responding to it is clueing in other Dems. that they, too, can go after Bush directly.

He's weak on foreign policy, but that can be corrected with the right VP.

[Ishkaboogl]

34. wait a tick

people somehow assume that every flaw a candidate has can be corrected with the "right" vp. first of all, the myth that vp's can provide regional balance, ideological balance, racial balance, sexual balance, etc, is overblown indeed. how much did bentson help dukakis with the south? or ferraro help mondale with the women? major flaws CANNOT be corrected with vp's. vp's can only someone push the flaw under the table. case in point: bush suffered from voter's concerns over his lack of experience, first in washington politics (no official experience) and governing as a whole (texas governor isn't really a full-time job). conversations went something like this:
Person A: "I dunno about Bush. I think we need someone with experience"
Person B: "Yeah, but he's got Cheney, who has a lot of experience. He'll be surrounded by knowledgable people."
Person A: "Yeah, I guess so..."

Now, a lack of foriegn policy experience is much more of a problem now than it has ever been in recent memory. in fact, foreign policy may be the most salient issue in this election. one cannot nonchalantly brush aside a huge huge problem like lack of foreign policy experience by saying "well, he just needs to pick the right vp." it doesn't work that way.

[Egnever]

36. You really think foreign policy will be an issue?

How the hell is bush going to defend his?

[paulk]

37. I'm sorry that I gave the impression of "nonchalantly" brushing it aside

I agree that foreign policy is Dean's achilles heel.

If Dean won the Dem. nomination, it would have to be the right VP choice to balance the ticket, say, Wesley Clark. Or even Kerry, if he would accept it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not endorsing a dean/clark or dean/kerry ticket. We're talking hypotheticals here. If Dean does win the nomination, his lack of experience in foreign policy will have to be addressed - I'm just throwing some ideas out there.

[Egnever]

35. I do support Dean and hes not that liberal

Any more stupid questions?

[MaverickX]

38. of course...

I'm glad he's not that liberal because hardcore liberalism isn't what got us such a great economy under Clinton.

[sonias]

41. Yes and I know that he's not that liberal

I support him because he can win the nomination and more importantly beat bu$h.

We are never going to raise the money the BFEE can, so we have to play a different kind of campaign. Let's not forget Gore beat bu$h with over 500,000 votes and he was outspent by bu$h too. Now Gore had the incumbency in his favor, so the only thing that's going to help us win the election is voters. We have to have someone who will energize the base of regular voters plus get those who haven't come out in a while out too. I've listened to Kerry, Gephardt, Lieberman and Kucinich they don't excite me. I love Dennis and the stands he takes for us in the House. I love Senator Robert Byrd too, but we all know the whole country would not elect Robert Byrd president. We need Dennis in the House continuing the fight to retake that body someday.

Lieberman and Gephardt are just bu$h lites. Kerry is my second choice but again I don't think he's going to excite the whole country. Just my
opinion. And I of course will support the Democratic nominee whomever that happens to be. I just want to win.

Sonia

[DrFunkenstein]

42. Liberal Rhetoric, Centrist Policy - Sounds Familiar...

This is PRECISELY what I hated about the New Democrat "Third Way," albeit with one major distinction - New Democrats were hookers for their corporate backers, while Dean's money (at least) seems to come from the grassroots.

I loved the progressive reforms Ralph Nader presented in 2000, although I thought he was too eccentric. Kerry seems to have quietly taken up the progressive flag in substance, if not in rhetoric. While there is a very real possibility to put a progressive in the White House, I will give my every effort to that candidate.

That being said, I will absolutely vote for Dean if need be. He is, in fact, my second choice. I have serious doubts about the other candidates going toe to toe with Bush, but I know that Dean will at least put up a good fight. He may be pegged as this years eccentric, but at least he doesn't pull punches.

However, I still believe there is a huge gulf between the capacities of Kerry and Dean. I truly believe that Kerry is able to see the larger picture in a way that Dean does not. Both are fighters (just ask Bill Weld about Kerry) but Kerry seems to be the only candidate able to play the game at Karl Rove's level. Beyond that, Kerry seems to have a clear and progressive vision that holistically ties together all the issues, and presents a black and white alternative to Bush's cowboy diplomacy and corporate cronyism.

In the end, though, I think I would vote for Dick Cheney if it got Dubya out of the White House.

[Mairead]

43. The GOP wing of the Democratic party

certainly seems to be well-represented at DU, doesn't it. :(

[mdmc]

49. I hear that

I want Bush out and I want a PRO MEDICAL MARIJUANIA MD to do it! But, I'll vote for the nominated candidate.

[dpbrown]

44. No, but I'd vote for him if he were the nominee

Dennis Kucinich is by far the best progressive.

John Kerry is the best war hero, "electable" candidate.

Howard Dean is neither.

If I'm going to have to compromise my principles for "electability," I'm not going to subsequently compromise my desire to have an electable candidate.

Dennis Kucinich is the anti-Bush. He can, and will if given the chance, excoriate the unelected Fraud and restore the White House.

If not Kucinich, Kerry.

I know what Dean is about, and his brand of "say anything" politics is not for me.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[LWolf]

45. I'd support him against Bush.

Not in the primary. In the primary, I'll vote for someone more aligned with my political perspective.

[Dear Prudence]

48. Anything is going to look left next to Bush

So does it really matter as long as he can hold his own against Bush? At the rate he's going, Bush can not keep it up forever; he's already on the downward slide. When you think he's ruined something, he moves on to the next thing to destroy.

So, I like the idea of having a "real" Governor in the WH who can identify with the predictiment the states will find themselves in (as if they are not already up a creek w/o a paddle) at the close of Bush's term. We are going to need a man who knows the deal and how they got there (what really caused the problems) and work with the states.

Dean has traveled and spent more time abroad than Bush - so I think foreign policy will be only a matter of surrounding himself with the proper support.

[Andromeda]

50. That's why I like him.

Only a centrist can see both sides of an issue and make a choice that is good for everybody concerned. When you are too far left or right your own issues are the only ones that are important to you and everybody else be damned.

It's like seeing out of only one eye, metaphoricaly speaking. You can't see the whole picture. That way everybody gets a little of something instead getting a whole lot of nothing.

[DrFunkenstein]

54. You Are Confusing Moderation and Centrism

Moderate is too often confused for reasonable in politics. And centrism has little to do with being reasonable, certainly no more so than any other position on the political compass.

Note: If you haven't already, try the political compass test:

http://www.digitalronin.f2s.com/politicalcompass/index.html

I'm far down on the libertarian bottom, and fairly far left towards the economic regulation side. Neither of which is anywhere near the center.

[ProudToBeLiberal]

56. absolutely

I would still support him