I thought Dean would rebound after the Iowa debacle. It appears not:
Howard Dean said Saturday he was surprised by the “under the table” campaigning he faced during the Iowa caucus and said the state needs to prevent such negative attacks if it wants to keep the nation’s leadoff presidential vote.
Dean said his rivals “had their folks really beating up on the people who went in, trying to get them to change their minds in caucus.”
“I think Iowa is going to have to change the way it conducts its caucuses if it wants to continue to be first,” he told reporters in an interview on his campaign bus in New Hampshire…
Asked Saturday for specifics about the negative attacks, Dean pointed to a book distributed by North Carolina Sen. John Edwards’ campaign that instructed supporters how to attack other candidates during the caucuses. For example, it told campaign captains in Iowa to describe Dean as an “elitist from Park Avenue in New York City.”
“I never dreamed that would happen,” Dean said. “And I don’t think that’s a healthy thing for democracy. It’s enough to have it go on for weeks and weeks in the press, but when it goes on inside the caucus, I don’t think that’s good,” he said.
Howard Dean, who has done nothing but throw grenades at the other candidates and employ angry and vicious rhetoric against half the Democratic party and the entire Republican party, was surprised by the negative attacks. Poor baby.
He also said today that Iraqi’s had a better standard of living before the war….it ‘s SOOOOOO satisfying to see this arrogant moron go down in flames. And it’s even more arrogant to see the cretin wing of the Dem. party go down with him.
But please Howard- run as a 3rd party like you hinted you would! YYeeeeeeeahhhhhhhhhhh!
I have Dean jumping ship after Michigan. It’ll either be 3rd party or oblivion. Here’s hoping for the former. It will destroy the Dems chances.
It happens to be true that Iraqis DID have a better standard of living before the war. Before, there were more jobs, more security, more reliable electricity and running water, less crime. Now it may well be true that most Iraqis are happy that Saddam is gone. But that is somewhat of a different issue than standard of living and day-to-day life. By almost any metric, life was more stable, and easier, for the average Iraqi before the war than after.
So go ahead, attack Dean for telling the truth.
On the issue of electricity, Alex, it entirely depended on where you were living.
BAGHDADIANS had electricity running all the time b/c (surprise! surprise!) Saddam diverted all power from the countryside to Baghdad.
As for your comparison about pre- and post-war, life was more “stable” IF you could keep alive. While there may not have been quite mass genocide on a daily basis, quite a few folks were being picked up, tortured to death, and buried out there.
The comparison would be to say that Japanese in 1940 had a better standard of living than they did on September 3, 1945. That may be true—it’s also comparing apples to pears. Would WE be better off if the gov’t that ran Japan in 1940 were still in power on September 3, 1945?
Similarly, one might, almost, argue that East Germans, in 1988, had a better standard of living than in 1990. Would they be better off under the tender ministrations of the Stasi? 14 years later, of course, one suspects that the answer is NO.
Also, I take it you were in support of keeping the sanctions in place. After all, that period of stability and security WAS when we had the sanctions in place. You remember them, don’t you, the ones that Saddam and UNICEF claimed were killing 50K kiddies a year? Not so bad, eh?
M. Scott Eiland
Dean may survive, but Clark is looked mighty chewed up right now. . .he might well finish behind Edwards AND The Living Personification of Elmer Fudd.
Pardon me–I feel an attack of schadenfreude coming on.
M. Scott Eiland
“By almost any metric, life was more stable, and easier, for the average Iraqi before the war than after.”
No doubt the trains ran on time, too.