The biggest political story of the weekend came after an off-hand remark from Howard Dean in response to a John Kerry criticism. This story probably won’t have legs, but I think it speaks to a larger flaw in Dean’s campaign strategy.
Kerry has been reminding voters, particularly those in Iowa, that Dean is the strongest opponent of gun control of the nine Dem candidates. Of the current field, Dean is the only one to have ever received an endorsement from the NRA, a fact which Dean brags about as proof of his ability to win votes in the South.
Kerry said on Friday, “We don’t need to be a party that says we need to be the candidacy of the NRA. We stand up against that.”
Dean responded that his position on federal gun control may help him in states that Gore lost. “I still want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks,” Dean told the Des Moines Register.
Dean’s rivals pounced. Dick Gephardt, among others, chastised Dean for outreach to those “who disagree with us on bedrock Democratic values like civil rights.”
“I don’t want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks,” Gephardt said in a statement. “I will win the Democratic nomination because I will be the candidate for guys with American flags in their pickup trucks.”
Is all of this criticism justified? Probably not, but it’s a symptom of a larger theme in the race for the nomination.
Clearly, Dean was not embracing the Confederate flag; he was trying to make a point about political strategy. Dems aren’t doing well in the South, as the 2000 election made clear.
Dean made it sound as if the Dem Party should reach out to those who embrace the Confederate Flag. To be sure, that’s a dumb idea, but I don’t think that’s what he meant. While Dean could have articulated the point a lot better, his argument — that white guys in the South could help Dems beat Bush next year — has merit.
I think the reason Dean’s rivals jumped all over the comment is that it counters Dean’s “Bush-lite” attacks. Quite effectively, in fact.
If you’ve been watching the campaign thus far, you’ve probably noticed that Dean calls anyone who disagrees with him, and has ever sided with the Republicans, Bush-lite. Clark voted for Nixon? He’s Bush-lite. Edwards voted for the war resolution? Bush-lite. Kerry thinks we should keep some of the middle-class tax cuts? Bush-lite.
To hear Dean tell it, to side with the GOP on any issue is all the proof he needs to label you Bush-lite, and in turn, insist that you’re inadequate to challenge Bush next year.
The overarching point of Dean’s criticisms isn’t wrong, but the substance of the attacks is misguided. I agree with Dean that voters will want a choice next year. If Dems simply become moderate Republicans, we’ll lose.
My problem with Dean’s tactics — and the reason the Confederate flag flap generated such a strong reaction — is that Dean’s campaign is just as open to criticisms of being Bush-lite as anyone else.
On the one hand, Dean is a liberal governor of a liberal state who supports gay rights, opposed the war in Iraq, and wants to repeal every penny of Bush’s tax cuts. This is the Dean that feels justified labeling others Bush-lite. Fine.
On the other hand, Dean boasts of his A rating from the National Rifle Association, favors the death penalty, endorsed the Republicans’ Medicare cuts in the 1990s, agrees with many of Bush’s foreign policy positions (including stances on North Korea and Cuba), and is now reaching out to those who embrace the Confederate flag.
Dean desperately wants to have it both ways. The first Dean wants to be viewed as the ultimate anti-Bush, taking the polar-opposite positions on everything of importance. The second Dean wants to be viewed as the quintessential moderate whose GOP-like positions will make him palatable to independents and centrist Republicans.
The line between these two Deans is sometimes confusing, to him and his supporters.
During the last debate, Dean said, “If you’re going to defend the president’s tax cuts and you’re going to defend the president’s war, I frankly don’t think we can beat George Bush by being ‘Bush lite.’ I think we’ve got to stand up for Democratic principles.”
Is it fair for Dean to make this charge against his rivals? Sure. But then it’s also fair to ask if Dean is going to defend the president’s policies on gun control and death penalty, defend the president’s foreign policies in North Korea and Cuba, defend Republicans’ Medicare cuts, and tacitly defend those who wave the Confederate flag, then why can’t we label him “Bush-lite”?