Well, I disagree about the ad. It's better than the last Iowa ad attacking "Washington Democrats", but it still has it's flaws... see my post below..

"Now More Than Ever"? Hey, maybe Dean can work that phrase into his reinvention - it worked well for Nixon!

Does this mean Byron will be putting his tattered Dean bumper sticker back on his car again?

Seriously, for Deanites, this Hugh Hewitt post should be encouraging.

If Dean is the nominee I certainly will... I happen to disagree with Jim here, but we'll see.

Funny, I thought Howard Dean was trying to just be Jerry Brown all over again. That didn't appeal to me in 1992, and hence, it doesn't appeal to me now. Let me know when the doctor delivers a better idea for the economy, defense, health care, and education than his seemingly bigger priority of campaign finance reform. Trippi strikes again (now more than ever).

I found it interesting that Michael Moore (a Clark supporter), today encourages Dean supporters to not give up! I couldn't agree more. Even if Howard Dean doesn't win the nomination battle, he's already won the war by giving many Democrats a swift kick in the butt and by getting younger people involved in the whole political process.

There was a great post on dKos (from a Clark supporter, of all people) encouraging Dean supporters to quit belly-aching and get back to work. Loose paraphrase: "Quit acting like you're going to switch to Clark... you're Deaniacs, for God's sake! You supported him for a reason, remember that reason and stand by your guy!"

Well, I ran throught his on my blog, but it appears the Deanies have run the cycle. On Monday and Tuesday, they were disillusioned. On Wednesday they were working through the ramifications. Today, they were back....

We lost some (not an insignificant number), and some are incredibly bitter.

But at least we frickin' hit bottom, and can now try to move back up. I expect, as long as Dean handles himself well tonight, to see Dean's poll numbers to bottom out tommorow, then start moving up.

I can't pretend to be a neutral observer, or even to wish the Democratic party well. Well, I could try, but no one would believe me :) I really find it fascinating, though, how so many Dean supporters (and former supporters) are willing to declare his candidacy all but dead, and affirm that a defeat in NH would end all hope. Out of curiousity, why? I mean, you are left wingers who support him for a reason, and presumeably you believe he has a much better stand on the issues than Kerry. Why give him up for dead after one or two states?

Again, I'll mention how conservatives in my party reacted in the 2000 primaries. McCain folded in Iowa early, and the media didn't give Bush any sort of boost for winning there. NH was the first real test, and Bush got spanked, and badly. Then came my state, the "firewall" Michigan, where McCain again trounced W. Following the logic of so many posting here, Bush should have given up at that point, and we should have nominated the "electable" but ubermoderate McCain. Of course, conservatives didn't give up, and after two losses Bush re-tooled his campaign, came back, and with his committed conservative supporters, and a hefty campaign finance advantage, whupped McModerate in S.C., and then when the major states started voting ... it was all over but the shouting. Of course, Bush went on to win in Nov., to the dismay of many at the BOR.

So why do you assume it is impossible for Dean to do the same, why is Kerry the all but inevitable nominee? I just don't get it. If you believe in Dean's positions and what he stands for, and are not simply looking for anybody/thing but Bush, why not roll up your sleaves and get down to work? If Gulliani won Iowa and NH handily in 2008, there is no way I would concede the nomination to him, but I'd get back and fight him and fight for what I believe in. And that, with the knowledge that the wicked witch of the east is waiting to take on whoever we choose, and that she would wreck the country if she won. Your feelings towards Bush go double for those on my side about Sen. Clinton. But electablility doesn't trump all considerations, you have to stand for something. Seriously, why are you so willing to give up on the guy you've eagerly supported for the past half year?

Sherk

I stand for something and that is to beat Bush. Give up on Dean, he is now totally unelectable.

Sherk, like most Republicans, wants Dean backers to fight on to the bitter end. If Karl Rove can't get his wish of Howard Dean at the top of the Democratic ticket, the next best thing for Rove would be pointless and protracted warfare within the Democraic Party.

The only thing that is really clear this year is that Democrats will give their support to any candidate who can beat Bush. This is a mature attitude which is necessary for victory in November

Tim Z,

Well, you are partly right. I don't really care if Dean or Kerry get the nod, I think they are both easily beatable, while I would really enjoy seeing a brokered convention. No nominee until July and pandering to the hard left delegates to win the nomination would pretty much sink your chances. But that is still unlikely, and is only part of why I am writing this.

Mostly, though, I just don't get your (Dean supports) reaction. Sure I'm not on the same team as you are, but I'd honestly like to know why so many of you are ready to quit after one caucus loss. I was trying to point out that Bush got trounced early on, and won both the nomination and the general election, and wondering why you assume Dean can't do the same. Honestly, besides my not so disinterested partisan bias, I would like to know why so many Deaniacs threw in the towel so quickly.

Regards,

Sherk

Umm, yeah, that would be Dean Supporters in the second paragraph, not Dean supports.

Sherk

Sherk,
Speaking for myself, I've always been a Dean skeptic.
I do give him credit for energizing folks who had never previously gotten involved in politics. And the fundraising and organizational skills of his campaign are nothing to be sneered at.
But his personality just does not inspire confidence. If he has this effect on a hardcore Illinois Democrat, how would he be viewed by the 15% of the electorate which still does not identify too closely with either party?

Many of them threw in the towel because it's their first big political experience and ultimately they're fair-weather fans. They are highly influenced by media coverage, lacking ingrained ideologies, and are easily disillusioned with lost battles.

Dean support has been a fad, especially among the college anti-war crowd, and many people haven't looked that hard at Dean's actual policies. As long as Dean maintained momentum he was okay, but now he's testing the support of an unstable and inexperienced constituency.