The Democratic Contenders

New year, new hope! An overview of the Democratic field.
by Toby Vest

"As history shows, McGovern had the momentum in his fight against Nixon but shady political maneuvering and bad decisions in the late months of the election caused many of his young supporters to simply abandon him on Election Day." 

     The New Year is always a celebration, bringing hope that things can only get better. And why shouldn’t we feel this way, especially this year. This is 2004, our one and only chance to remove the Bush dynasty from the frontline of a new and dangerous world order they have recklessly created through four years of duplicity, lies, and hypocrisy.

     Of course, we’ve faced this dilemma before. In the 1972, the American political landscape was ripe for change. A generation of new young voters, 25 million to be exact, were faced with choosing between the Nixon administration, a gang of profiteers riding to the bank in the flames of a highly unpopular and vicious war in Vietnam, and George McGovern, a progressive candidate brandishing new ideas and the support of the youth vote.

     As history shows, McGovern had the momentum in his fight against Nixon but shady political maneuvering and bad decisions in the late months of the election caused many of his young supporters to simply abandon him on Election Day.  These young voters didn’t suddenly discover a hidden love for Nixon and his cronies; they simply didn’t bother voting at all. The young voters McGovern was counting on didn’t believe he could follow though on all his promises

     Today, the players on the political field have modern uniforms but the formations and the game plans still resemble the same old battering ram politics of the past. In 2004, the Bush administration is carrying the right-wing torch and fighting off the growing distrust in their war on terrorism and the occupation of Iraq. On the other hand, we have Howard Dean, who many in the national media have characterized as a McGovern facsimile.

     I hesitate to tie the McGovern albatross around Governor Dean’s neck because no democratic candidate should have to fend off that curse. Dean is the most out spoken of the current crop of democratic presidential hopefuls and many see him as a progressive candidate and the majority of his supporters are under the age of thirty so he may be stuck with that comparison for good or ill.

     Dean has characterized himself on every issue as the anti-Bush. He has opposed every aspect of the war in Iraq and has frequently and vigorously attacked domestic and foreign policy decisions of the Bush administration. During his governorship in Vermont, Dean created a statewide health care system and maintained balanced budgets, so he is solid on domestic policy. Dean’s adversaries feel he is vulnerable in the areas of national security and defense but George W. didn’t have any experience in those areas either and Dean couldn’t possibly mess it up as badly as the president has.

     Dean’s naysayers also claim he is angry and temper mental but where they see anger I see conviction, a word not often used to describe politicians and a strange development in a world where a ruffling of feathers can destroy a political career. But let’s face it; after the last four years we should all be angry.  So who can really blame Dean for his boisterous campaign approach thus far?  Besides, Dean’s vigor has already won him the support of democratic heavyweights Al Gore, Bill Bradley, and Tom Harkin but his “radical” image could lose him the support of moderate democrats, just as the same image cost McGovern votes in ’72    

     Of course, there are several candidates other than Dean hoping to gain the Democratic National Party’s nomination for president in 2004.

     General Wesley Clark is currently Dean’s closest adversary. The General’s biggest draw back might be that he is, well, a general and the fact that he only recently joined the Democratic Party but he is taking the stand as the lone candidate who has experience in defense and his former position as the head of NATO could go a long way with more moderate voters concerned with our nation’s security.  Clark is a little shaky on domestic issues but the heart of his policies seems to be in the right place. As a side note, he also has close ties with the Clinton family. Former president Clinton has even called Clark the “star of the democratic party. Truthfully, I see him as a possible VP candidate, one the democrats can use to close the gap on the issue of security.

     Also, close behind Dean is Richard Gephardt (we’ll call him Dick), a congressman from Missouri who has strong ties with worker’s unions and gives Middle America the nice grandfatherly image it traditionally desires in a president. But Dick is exactly what America doesn’t need. He’s a spin-doctor, a chameleon, ready to fill any role it will take to garner the most votes. Ask Dick a question and he’ll give you everything but an answer, but he’ll do it with a smile so you can walk away feeling at ease. But that tranquility fades when we realize America needs new ideas and new leaders to guide our nation through this critical time in world history, not just an average politician.

     Gephardt is this generation’s version of Ed Muskie (another democratic candidate in 1972), a lifelong politician running for his party’s presidential nomination for a second time and eager to say anything in order to get there, like a kid on the playground desperate for acceptance. After the first few primaries he will hopefully fade away as Muskie did in ‘72 but don’t rule out him being a factor. I mean, he’s a Baptist and has a lesbian daughter so anything is possible.

     Another hopeful is Senator John Kerry, a Vietnam vet who fought to end the war and has dedicated his life to public service. He always appears genuine and is undeniably a likable, compassionate guy playing on idea that he is the next JFK but he also comes off as boring or deliberate so it’s more likely he’s seen as a Hubert Humphrey or an Al Gore. Kerry talks big about his plans for the good ‘ole U.S.A. but so has every American presidential candidate since forever. Kerry seems to hide behind policy issues rather than stand for them. He is a quality candidate, we could do worse, but he seems too composed, too stoic. It’s a great demeanor for moving up the political ladder but will not help dethrone Bush. We need a candidate who is prepared to destroy the president because polite politics will not do come November. In another political climate Kerry might be a lock for his party’s nomination but he has yet to separate himself from the rest of the pack on any issue, so for now, he’s just another politician but if he grows some political guts he could certainly be a factor.

     Senator Joe Lieberman is also hoping to give Dean a scare in the upcoming primaries. In early 2003 Lieberman was probably the most recognizable, aside from Al Gore, of the speculated democratic candidates but now having been backed into a corner by Dean’s leap to the forefront, he is attacking every chance he gets. It is said that at the sight of a television crew and a microphone he begins salivating like a rabid beast, like some cross pollination of Gene McCarthy and George Wallace (more ’72 candidates). 

     Just like McCarthy and Wallace in ’72, the senator has criticized every candidate on every possible issue and his cruel disregard for the impact his criticism could have on his party’s possible candidate could be disastrous.  I imagine Bush strategist Karl Rove is savoring every minute of Lieberman’s vicious tirades and I guarantee he’s taking notes, waiting for the right time to pounce.

     Lieberman’s attitude suggests he believes either he wins or the whole ship goes down in flames. I imagine he’s still feeling the effects of the lost election of 2000 and his thirst for revenge is only growing stronger as he watches his name gradually slide down the polls.  The Senator’s blind pursuit of reciprocity shows he has more in common with Republicans than he does with most Democrats. He’s our George Wallace, the double agent, Diet Bush but we shouldn’t worry, Lieberman’s days are running short.

     Think about it, only four years ago he was Al Gore’s running mate and now Gore is backing Dean, so it is obvious the democrats are tiring of him, by the end of the year he will be shipped off to an internment camp for old, vengeful, broken down politicians where he can lick his wounds and revel in his egomaniacal right wing fantasies.

Besides Lieberman, Gephardt, Kerry, Clark, and Dean there are four other candidates, including Senator John Edwards, Representative Dennis Kuccinich, Representative Carol Mosley-Braun, and the Reverend Al Sharpton, vying for the Democratic National Party’s nomination but just like ’72, the accepted wisdom shows these candidates have no real shot at a party nomination. 

     John Edwards is a southern senator shaping himself in the image of Bill Clinton. He is extremely charismatic and seems to have his finger on the pulse of middle class America. He is the youngest and possibly the brightest of all the candidates and while he won’t be a factor in this election, if things go south in 2004 and Bush is re-elected he could be battling Hillary for the keys to the White House in 2008.

     Dennis Kuccinich, along with Dean, has the most progressive ideas and a true understanding of the direction this country should take in the next four years but unfortunately he doesn’t have a chance. He, like Dean, is seen as too radical, too liberal and that has definitely hurt his chances. There’s only so much room for radical ideas at the top so his shot at the presidency will have to wait for now but he will certainly be a major player in American politics for years to come.

     Congresswoman Carol Mosley-Braun has, in the early debates, shown a reserved and intelligent nature, being both humorous and incisive but like her ’72 counterpart Shirley Chisholm, the fact that she is a black woman means more than her politics. My observation is not meant to be racist but it is certainly the sad reality of the America we live in, whether it’s 1972 or 2004.

     And finally, the most entertaining of all the candidates, the Reverend Al Sharpton. I don’t think that even Sharpton believes he could be the next president. Sharpton's motivation is to bring issues that affect the African-American community to the national arena and I have to admire his perseverance. Hell, I salute a man who believes in his right to speak his mind and to say it at top volume so everyone hears but your average American can’t possibly comprehend the notion of a wild-haired, crazy-eyed man who speaks in rhyme leading their country, regardless of his race. The mere idea of it could cause some to spontaneously combust.

     In the next few months anything can happen and probably will. Never underestimate what politicians will do in order to become the most powerful man in the world. Facts are facts, history has shown, we have to face up to it. Things are going to get ugly. Our duty is to sift through all the muck and decide who should lead the attack on the Bush boys. Hopefully, the democratic candidate, whoever it is, can avoid the suspect, late election maneuvering employed by McGovern in 1972.    

     This is a critical election at a critical time in history, much like the ’72 election. As patriotic Americans we should arm ourselves with information in order to understand the policies and plans of each candidate, because patriotism is involvement not detachment, questioning not acceptance. Patriotism is awareness and the national news media not the way to find it. Check out zmag.org or prospect.org for alternative sources or find them on your own it doesn’t matter, the most important thing is to educate yourself so America can escape the grasp of the Bush administration’s puppet masters and their so called compassionate conservatism.