It’s Obama’s party, but Dean is still playing host

It sometimes goes overlooked, but once a presidential candidate wins a party’s presidential nomination, he or she necessarily becomes head of the party. When John McCain became the GOP nominee, he effectively began to call the shots at the RNC. With Barack Obama having secured the Democratic nomination, the DNC is his to do with as he pleases.

Not surprisingly, with a compressed general-election calendar, Obama’s campaign isn’t wasting any time. This morning, Obama strategist Paul Tewes took up residence at the DNC, brought in to “help manage the transition as the DNC swings into action on behalf of Obama’s general election candidacy, and to help oversee fundraising and other political matters.” Also this morning, on Obama’s instructions, the DNC announced it will no longer accept contributions from federal lobbyists or political action committees, which is consistent with the fundraising guidelines his own campaign follows.

But what about Howard Dean? It wouldn’t be at all unusual for the Democratic nominee to thank the current DNC chair for his hard work, pat him on the back, and offer him a lovely parting gift, while installing a close candidate ally who would make the DNC an extension of the nominee’s campaign. Indeed, that would generally be the norm at this point in the process.

I’m pleased to report, however, that Dean is staying put.

The Obama campaign confirmed today that Howard Dean will remain chairman of the Democratic National Committee, even as Obama puts his own stamp on the DNC.

“Sen. Obama appreciates the hard work that Chairman Dean has done to grow our party at the grass-roots level and looks forward to working with him as the chairman of the Democratic Party as we go forward,” Obama spokesman Bill Burton said.

Dean has shed his lightning rod status in recent years and focused more heavily on building state party organizations — a mission that gave him a base of support in the states and that matches Obama’s plan to use his resources to keep McCain on the defensive in a wide range of states.

Good. With Dean staying right where he is, Dems are better off.

Interestingly, the announcement about Dean’s continued employment coincides with the requests of state party chairs, who’ve grown quite fond of Dean’s bottom-up philosophy. From a report this morning, before the announcement was made:

Obama also likes control, and though Dean has generally avoided being a distraction, he’s not Obama’s guy.

But Dean also has a new base: The state party officials who love his 50 state program, which has given them cash and paid for something like 200 field organizers around the country. They want Dean to stay, and will fight to keep him.

“The Obama campaign is aware of the affection that many state chairs have for Governor Dean,” Brian Melendez, the Minnesota Democratic chairman told me the other day.

Melendez also said he wasn’t sure Dean would want to stay, but he and other chairs would clearly like him to.

Now, everybody’s happy.

It’s worth noting, from time to time, that Dean has been a real success story at the DNC. His 50-state strategy was extremely controversial with the party establishment, and leaders on the Hill have always kept Dean at arm’s length — while keeping a quizzical eye on him.

But Dean’s efforts paid huge dividends in 2006, and he’s well positioned to deliver again in 2008. That the Obama campaign appreciates this is a very good sign.

Just another example of Obama’s superior judgment.

The DLC voices are growing fainter and fainter. Yay.

  • leaders on the Hill have always kept Dean at arm’s length

    One more reason to keep him around. Most of those “leaders” haven’t.

    What Maria said about the DLC. Time for them to STFU so we can start winning more races.

  • But Dean’s efforts paid huge dividends in 2006

    Indeed they did, and the Carville-led effort the next year to blame Dean for not doing even better and try to replace him with Harold Ford Jr. was a complete joke. I haven’t watched a single minute of the bald jackass on TV since then.

  • What Dean has done with organizing the Democratic party from the bottom-up is not inconsistent that the organizing Obama did to secure his current position. His organizing strategy, more than anything else, threw Clinton off her pace. She had not done her own organizing homework. I can see the party becoming much stronger with Obama and Dean working together.

  • OT, but check this out:

    WASHINGTON, June 5 (Reuters) – Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Michael Moseley has resigned, and Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne may also be on the brink of resigning, the defense publication InsideDefense.com reported on Thursday.
    “Top-level Pentagon officials gave Moseley the option to resign or be fired during a meeting this morning,” the website reported, quoting an unidentified military official. “Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne also could resign later today,” it said.
    Moseley is the Air Force’s top uniformed officer.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/feedarticle/7565484

    I’m thinking maybe they didn’t want to attack Iran?

  • Dean’s “50-state strategy” would demand a real close co-operation between the campaign and the party, and a lot of co-ordination (eg, Obama going to say, Idaho to support local candidates there, but without impacting his presidential campaigning plans)

    Dean is INDISPENSIBLE if we want to win up and down the ticket in November.

  • is Dean a dark horse candidate for the VP slot? I hadn’t considered him previously, but it definately reinforces Obama’s change meme…

  • For the first time since I have been politically aware and experienced enough in politics to have a pretty good idea of what works and what doesn’t, I am finally watching a campaign that does everything right. What an amazing thing.

    Now please please please, don’t make the misstep of accepting Grampy’s baloney about all the “townhall” debates. Grampy knows the only way he can get any public awareness, since he’s going to be outspent 20:1, is to get Obama to bring the people out for him. No! No! No!

  • Classy (and smart) move by Obama. Dean doesn’t get nearly the respect he deserves. I know some folks were hard on Dean over the last few months, but would you have wanted to deal with Hilary’s camp? Yeeesh…

  • Wow, another morning without cringing over a Democrats decision. Now if they don’t let that immunity compromise get through I’ll feel even better.

  • Why would Obama replace Dean with anyone? Even for a politically illiterate dork like me it’s been rather obvious that Dean’s talents are finding a venue at the DNC, that’s where he has done the most good. He’s running aggressive anti-McCain ads EARLY, his DNC is standing up to Republican bullying (I know! the Republicans must feel a little odd, this hasn’t ever happened before…) he’s liked by others… Obama is a smart guy (obviously) and he didn’t win by antagonizing people, oddly enough.

    This makes so much sense, it’s amazing that people have done it differently before. Which is Obama’s superpower: he can introduce innovative ways of doing politics which very quickly start looking like so much common sense. Guy’s a genius, I tell you.

  • once a presidential candidate wins a party’s presidential nomination, he or she necessarily becomes head of the party

    I did not know this. Could this be one explanation why so many “insiders” stuck with Hillary though the all the absurd arguments and mathematical delusions?

  • The Dean DNC deserves a little help, so I went online to the DNC last night and gave $50 and marked in the comment area that it was for the 50 State strategy.

    What do you guys think of it as a fundraising slogan for the DNC?

    50 bucks for 50 states!

    Fight everywhere.

  • Do party pres nominees really have that much power over their respective party committees? Even if they don’t win the general election? This isn’t meant sarcastically; I just wasn’t aware of it. Was Dean Kerry’s choice for DNC chair?
    please cite other examples, too.

  • Danp @13 – I really do wonder about the folks that stuck with her, especially those who pledged support for her late in the game. You’d have to be nuts to have thought she could win, so they were seemingly trying to get on her good side for some reason…

  • Again, this shows that Obama will evaluate the skills a person has – not based on political $ suppport or power for cronyism – he seems to see that a job gets done right with the right person is the most important.

    There is HOPE for those he picks for his cabinet will have appropriate skills and experience.

    And his supporting Clinton supporters – WOW! Obama/Michelle seem to take the stand – the Clinton supporters not losers but people who want to make government better.

  • I think Danp is on to something. If Clinton was the nominee, Gov. Dean would be out in the street by now and one of those “insiders” would be installed, running worthless untargeted, poorly planned national advertising, and taking their 15% of the top.

  • One of the best things about Clinton’s loss is that I never have to utter the phrase, ‘DNC Chair Mark Penn.’

  • “I always laugh when the “50 State Strategy” is praised as brilliant. There are 50 states. Doesn’t it go without saying? Duh.”

    You’d think so but years of only investing in a few designated swing states and “key” Congressional races made it a revolutionary strategy.

  • I love Howard Dean for the work he has done in trying to accomplish his 50 state plan and like most of the things he says. But on an interview with Rachael Maddow on Air America Radio he said some pretty ridiculous stuff which has always caused me to take things he says with a big grain of salt.
    I don’t even know the “Democratic Majority” he speaks of. He claimed most Americans don’t want to see congress use the power of the purse to force Bush to change course in Iraq. “You can’t just turn it off like a spigot. People want to see us gradually withdraw the troops but they don’t want to just stop the funding and leave the troops hanging. We might get up to 60 votes to get a withdrawal timetable bill to the president but he would just veto it and then we’d need 67 votes, which is impossible so we won’t be able to start getting the troops out of Iraq until we get a Democratic president.” So much for his willingness to force Bush to withdraw from Iraq. He just gave up trying to force the issue and thereafter congress gave Bush everything he asked for in the way of funding. At that time the American deaths were under 3000. Then he joined with the Pelosi people in rejecting impeachment forgetting that the 2nd most important issue of ’06 was government corruption and accountability.

    “I’m against impeachment also because we have more important things to do. It’s not what the Democratic majority was elected for and it would cause an implosion of the majority because it would be looked at as a political stunt. Look they impeached Clinton for silly reasons, it left a bad taste in their mouths about impeachment and I just don’t think the American public wants to go through that again. We would have to prove high crimes and misdemeanors and I just don’t think that’s what a majority of American people want. They want us to get on with getting things accomplished and passed. The important business like minimum wage.”

    This will have to wait for the next president also I guess.

    Then Dean said, “If we withdraw too quickly then al qaeda could take over Iraq. They could take over the country.”

    All 80 of them? I couldn’t believe this came out of his mouth and neither could Maddow.

    It leads me to believe there is a Washington bubble that keeps these insiders from reality. This was justification to continue the occupation?

    I watch with caution because along with Dean”s inspiration comes some pretty shallow thinking and of course they all think they speak for the “majority of Democrats”. A short leash should be kept.

  • I second the Other Ed’s suggestion that we should be supporting Dean’s efforts at DNC with more than just words (I like the slogan, too). Of the 4 fundraising “legs” of the Dem’s “chair” (the candidate, the DCCC, the DSCC and DNC), DNC is the shortest one, which makes the whole thing a tad wobbly. I’ve been holding off myself, waiting for the resolution of the nominating process, but will send some soon. Probably on Saturday — as soon as I’ve heard Hillary concede/suspend/whatever and publicly endorse Obama.

  • Soon, the “Dean scream” will refer to the Republicans’ loud terror as they get decimated.

    Excellent move, Obama, excellent. Howard will deliver for you and the party.

    Buh-bye DLC Vichycrats.

  • I did not know this. Could this be one explanation why so many “insiders” stuck with Hillary though the all the absurd arguments and mathematical delusions?

    When you shoot at the queen, you better not miss. 😉

    One of the best things about Clinton’s loss is that I never have to utter the phrase, ‘DNC Chair Mark Penn.’

    Line of the day!

  • RacerX, about your blurb on the airforce resignations: They were pushed out because the Airforce lost nukes repeatedly over the last year or so. That, combined with staggering incompetence, venality and a downright refusal to work with the other services finally got them canned. Gates is a marked improvement on Rummy, in that he is at least half competent.

    Oh, and Dean seems like a good guy. Anyone want to guess if Lieberman still has a chairmanship after november?

  • I agree with Paraparalegal about Gates. After Rumsfeld, he’s a breath of fresh air.

    Hear hear to the Dean comments as well. I was a Deaniac in ’04 and an Obama man this year, and I’m thrilled to see two of my favorite anti-Iraq-war Dems working together. These two serve as evidence of the adage that great minds think alike.

  • I’ve always thought Dr Dean was doing a fabulous job at the DNC and I LOVE the 50 State strategy.

    Keeping him in place is a sign that Obama is making the right decisions, decicivly.

  • Why does anyone think Dean and Obama wouldn’t get along? Obama isn’t exactly party establishment either. Why wouldn’t Obama approve of Dean’s party-building strategy? Why shouldn’t they be perfect allies?

  • Joey –
    “on Air America Radio he said some pretty ridiculous stuff”

    I agree on the face of it. The question is this – Who was Dean’s target audience?

    I believe he was talking to DLC & other Hawks / corporate as much as to a general audience. After all he’s the chair of ‘all’ the Democratic Party. He’s got to reassure the military gravy train lobbyists that we won’t make rapid changes. In this role he provides a firewall between Obama and these folks. Obama gets to campaign on ending the war in Iraq without having to take precious time dealing with the hawks. And Obama doesn’t get associated with Dean’s senseless comments.

    After the election Obama has an ally who will help marginalize the influence of the DLC.

    Make sense?

  • Well, This makes a 10-12 seat or-so pickup in the senate and a 35-50 seat pickup in the house a realistic goal.

  • doubtful @20:

    That line needs to go in a “best of primary closing week” quote file. I laughed so hard it gave me hiccups.

  • no, but he may have to utter the line “DNC Chair Mark Pencil” bwahahahahahahaha!
    8)

    [note to children: this is why you should not blog after vino]

  • Reponding to T Hurlbutt:

    The national committee is designed to serve the needs of the party’s presidential nominee during a general election cycle. When Bill Clinton gained the nomination, he installed his own man at the DNC. (I believe it was Ron Brown, can’t recall for sure though.) Gore did the same thing in 2000, and Kerry in 2004. Obama’s appointment of Tewes is completely in line with normal procedure at the DNC.

    What happens after the general election is over depends on the result for the party’s candidate.

    If that candidate loses, (s)he really has no claim to the mantle of leadership of the party, and so her/her clout and control over the party gets washed away in the election result, and the party finds itself in somewhat of a power vacuum. Control of the central committee in this case generally reverts back to its constituent members. In the wake of Kerry’s loss last cycle, those members turned to Dean; this makes Dean’s acquisition of power at the DNC unique in that he has his own power base rather than being dependent upon a political sponsor for his position.

    A candidate who wins the White House remains the titular leader of the party throughout his/her term, retaining control of the party apparatus through appointments. This can even continue beyond the presidential term, if the successive election cycle fails to generate a new “titular leader” to replace the retiring one. (Again, the example of Bill Clinton applies, through his nomination of David Wilhelm as party chair during his presidency, and Terry MacAuliffe as party chair after his presidency.) That’s partly why these events are significant; Kerry’s campaign was widely seen as allied with and supported by the Clintons, and despite the frayed relations, so was Al Gore’s campaign. Thus, Obama’s nomination is the first real challenge to Bill Clinton’s leadership of the party since 1992. In light of that, one can see why the primary contest was so hard-fought this year.

  • For those interested, support for Dean will be made clear if you add 44 cents to your contribution.(e.g. $10.44, $50.44)

    It was Deaniac code during the campaign (He was going to be the 44th president) and translates directly into support for Dean’s policies.

  • Comments are closed.