Political Crossfire Forums

[flamboyant]

James Carville: Democrats Should Fire Howard Dean

Democratic political strategist James Carville said Howard Dean should be fired as chairman of the Democratic Party, comparing him to former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in his level of incompetence.

Carville, meeting with political reporters Wednesday morning, said Democrats could have picked up as many as 50 House seats, instead of the nearly 30 they have so far.

But Dean’s Democratic National Committee did not spend some $6 million it could have used in so-called "third tier” House races against vulnerable Republicans, the Austin American-Statesman reports.

Carville said he tried to meet with Dean to push for additional spending for Democrats in the last days of the campaign, but Dean declined.

Asked by a reporter whether Dean should be fired, Carville replied, "In a word, do I think? Yes.

"I think he should be held accountable. I would describe his leadership as Rumsfeldian in its competence.”

There was no immediate response from Dean.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/11/15/162840.shtml?s=al&promo_code=2946-1

----------------

Okay, just ignore the fact that NewsMax is the source because they're not going to make up something as easily verifiable as comments made to reporters, especially something as memorable as "I think he should be held accountable. I would describe his leadership as Rumsfeldian in its competence.”

I think Carville is right on the money. The average pick-up in the sixth-year mid-term for the party out of the White House is 34 House seats and yet even with the unpopularity of the war and numerous scandals that hit a good five Republican candidates right down the stretch working to their advantage, the Dems couldn't even manage to hit the average pick-up.

Do you believe the Dems missed an opportunity to score a victory on the scale of the 8 Senate Seats and 52 House seats the Republicans scored in 1994 and do you agree with Carville that Dean should be held accountable for the missed opportunity?

[Charlie Man]

Tch, I think they should fire James Carville. That guy is smart, but creeepy.

And I think Dean is trying to play Rove and build up a long term organization to mobilize a democrat majority.

[Snoop]

If Carville would be willing to take the job and prove he could handle it, I wouldn't have much of a problem with it, but in all fairness Deans 50 state strategy did in fact work despite the heavy criticism it received and its a bit hard to argue against success.

[flamboyant]

You don't think for the anti-incumbent mood across the country it was actually a pretty weak showing?

I agree with Carville completely, although of course, I hope the Dems keep Dean right where he is. In bonehead statements alone he's been a godsend to Republicans. I don't know enough to know whether he's succeeded in playing catch-up with what Mehlman's done with his voter lists, but we're a lot better of with him in charge than if Carville were head of the DNC. He was like a freaking master artist with what he did with the Clinton campaign.

[Snoop]

flamboyant wrote: You don't think for the anti-incumbent mood across the country it was actually a pretty weak showing?

I agree with Carville completely, although of course, I hope the Dems keep Dean right where he is. In bonehead statements alone he's been a godsend to Republicans. I don't know enough to know whether he's succeeded in playing catch-up with what Mehlman's done with his voter lists, but we're a lot better of with him in charge than if Carville were head of the DNC. He was like a freaking master artist with what he did with the Clinton campaign.

I agree that Carville did damn good job with Clinton, and would love to see him take a bigger current roll, but doubt he would be willing to do so.

However Deans plan has always been aimed at 2008 and beyond far more then 2006, the fact that it is already paying off is vary impressive and more then a bit surprising to me. I had though Dean had us spread way to thin for any immediate pay off.

[Dookiestix]

flamboyant wrote: You don't think for the anti-incumbent mood across the country it was actually a pretty weak showing?

I agree with Carville completely, although of course, I hope the Dems keep Dean right where he is. In bonehead statements alone he's been a godsend to Republicans. I don't know enough to know whether he's succeeded in playing catch-up with what Mehlman's done with his voter lists, but we're a lot better of with him in charge than if Carville were head of the DNC. He was like a freaking master artist with what he did with the Clinton campaign.
This is a joke. How quickly Carville forgets the governorships and state legislatures that went Dem as well.

How the hell can Dean be a godsend to Republicans when they LOST?

:rotf:

Boy, the minute Dean helps give power back to the Dems, they all start bickering over who should take the credit (or blame in Carville's case).

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7005529449

Quote: Yet, after a big win, Democrats see no reason to abandon Dean. Former DNC Chair Don Fowler says, "This is is nonsense... Democrats won a great victory on November 7; control of the United States House of Representatives, control of the United States Senate, majority of Governors, and majority of state legislative bodies. Governor Dean deserves to continue as DNC Chair."

Nebraska's Democratic Chair Steve Achelpohl, in an open letter to Carville, adds, "From my perspective, Governor Howard Dean's 50 State Strategy is the best thing to happen to the Democratic Party in many years... Our Party is well-served by Howard Dean. He gives Democrats hope and opportunity in all parts of the country, many far too long ignored by the National Party... I strongly supported Governor Dean for DNC Chair."
And yet Carville thinks:

Quote: Carville, on the other hand, tells the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, if he thinks Dean should resign; "In a word, do I think? Yes... I think he should be held accountable. I would describe his leadership as Rumsfeldian in its competence."

According to the paper, Carville likened the Democratic takeover of Congress to the civil war battle at Gettysburg, which the Union army won but failed to pursue the Confederate army when it retreated. Carville believes, "We should have chased them down."
Now, how funny to hear conservatives b!tch one minute about civility and bipartisanship because the Dems won big, only to demonstrate that perhaps Dems should have gone for the jugular and been unrelenting. In other words, instead of bi-partisanship with Republicans, Dems should just "chase them down."

I have no doubt Dems will chase down a few more Republicans next year when they get control of Congress and the power of the subpoena.

Be careful what you wish for.

[flamboyant]

Snoop wrote: flamboyant wrote: You don't think for the anti-incumbent mood across the country it was actually a pretty weak showing?

I agree with Carville completely, although of course, I hope the Dems keep Dean right where he is. In bonehead statements alone he's been a godsend to Republicans. I don't know enough to know whether he's succeeded in playing catch-up with what Mehlman's done with his voter lists, but we're a lot better of with him in charge than if Carville were head of the DNC. He was like a freaking master artist with what he did with the Clinton campaign.

I agree that Carville did damn good job with Clinton, and would love to see him take a biger curent roll, but doubt he would be willing to do so.

However Deans plan has always been aimed at 2008 and beyond more then 2006, the fact that it is already paying off is vary impressive and more then a bit surprising to me.

That's funny, we're both quite the optimists - I tend to see the election as a pretty poor result for the Dems all things considered, you seem to have much optimism going forward.

[Moracca]

flamboyant wrote: You don't think for the anti-incumbent mood across the country it was actually a pretty weak showing?

I agree with Carville completely, although of course, I hope the Dems keep Dean right where he is. In bonehead statements alone he's been a godsend to Republicans. I don't know enough to know whether he's succeeded in playing catch-up with what Mehlman's done with his voter lists, but we're a lot better of with him in charge than if Carville were head of the DNC. He was like a freaking master artist with what he did with the Clinton campaign.

I agree, leave Dean where he is. Unless of course Kerry wants the job.

[Dookiestix]

flamboyant wrote: Snoop wrote: flamboyant wrote: You don't think for the anti-incumbent mood across the country it was actually a pretty weak showing?

I agree with Carville completely, although of course, I hope the Dems keep Dean right where he is. In bonehead statements alone he's been a godsend to Republicans. I don't know enough to know whether he's succeeded in playing catch-up with what Mehlman's done with his voter lists, but we're a lot better of with him in charge than if Carville were head of the DNC. He was like a freaking master artist with what he did with the Clinton campaign.

I agree that Carville did damn good job with Clinton, and would love to see him take a biger curent roll, but doubt he would be willing to do so.

However Deans plan has always been aimed at 2008 and beyond more then 2006, the fact that it is already paying off is vary impressive and more then a bit surprising to me.

That's funny, we're both quite the optimists - I tend to see the election as a pretty poor result for the Dems all things considered, you seem to have much optimism going forward.
This is a pretty divided and polarized country, so the Dems win was that much bigger, IMHO.

[flamboyant]

Dookiestix wrote: flamboyant wrote: You don't think for the anti-incumbent mood across the country it was actually a pretty weak showing?

I agree with Carville completely, although of course, I hope the Dems keep Dean right where he is. In bonehead statements alone he's been a godsend to Republicans. I don't know enough to know whether he's succeeded in playing catch-up with what Mehlman's done with his voter lists, but we're a lot better of with him in charge than if Carville were head of the DNC. He was like a freaking master artist with what he did with the Clinton campaign.
This is a joke. How quickly Carville forgets the governorships and state legislatures that went Dem as well.

How the hell can Dean be a godsend to Republicans when they LOST?

:rotf:

Boy, the minute Dean helps give power back to the Dems, they all start bickering over who should take the credit (or blame in Carville's case).

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7005529449

Quote: Yet, after a big win, Democrats see no reason to abandon Dean. Former DNC Chair Don Fowler says, "This is is nonsense... Democrats won a great victory on November 7; control of the United States House of Representatives, control of the United States Senate, majority of Governors, and majority of state legislative bodies. Governor Dean deserves to continue as DNC Chair."

Nebraska's Democratic Chair Steve Achelpohl, in an open letter to Carville, adds, "From my perspective, Governor Howard Dean's 50 State Strategy is the best thing to happen to the Democratic Party in many years... Our Party is well-served by Howard Dean. He gives Democrats hope and opportunity in all parts of the country, many far too long ignored by the National Party... I strongly supported Governor Dean for DNC Chair."
And yet Carville thinks:

Quote: Carville, on the other hand, tells the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, if he thinks Dean should resign; "In a word, do I think? Yes... I think he should be held accountable. I would describe his leadership as Rumsfeldian in its competence."

According to the paper, Carville likened the Democratic takeover of Congress to the civil war battle at Gettysburg, which the Union army won but failed to pursue the Confederate army when it retreated. Carville believes, "We should have chased them down."
Now, how funny to hear conservatives b!tch one minute about civility and bipartisanship because the Dems won big, only to demonstrate that perhaps Dems should have gone for the jugular and been unrelenting. In other words, instead of bi-partisanship with Republicans, Dems should just "chase them down."

I have no doubt Dems will chase down a few more Republicans next year when they get control of Congress and the power of the subpoena.

Be careful what you wish for.

I'm just telling you, I totally believe with Carville in charge, the Dems could have milked the mood of the country for all it was worth. Seriously, could the Republicans have had more going against them in those final months? I think they dodged a bullet.

Moracca wrote: I agree, leave Dean where he is. Unless of course Kerry wants the job.

:lol:

[flamboyant]

Dookiestix wrote: flamboyant wrote: Snoop wrote: flamboyant wrote: You don't think for the anti-incumbent mood across the country it was actually a pretty weak showing?

I agree with Carville completely, although of course, I hope the Dems keep Dean right where he is. In bonehead statements alone he's been a godsend to Republicans. I don't know enough to know whether he's succeeded in playing catch-up with what Mehlman's done with his voter lists, but we're a lot better of with him in charge than if Carville were head of the DNC. He was like a freaking master artist with what he did with the Clinton campaign.

I agree that Carville did damn good job with Clinton, and would love to see him take a biger curent roll, but doubt he would be willing to do so.

However Deans plan has always been aimed at 2008 and beyond more then 2006, the fact that it is already paying off is vary impressive and more then a bit surprising to me.

That's funny, we're both quite the optimists - I tend to see the election as a pretty poor result for the Dems all things considered, you seem to have much optimism going forward.
This is a pretty divided and polarized country, so the Dems win was that much bigger, IMHO.

Hmmm . . . funny, I seem to remember a lot more being made about the president's poll numbers and how almost everyone in America was coming to your side on opposing the president . . .

[Dookiestix]

flamboyant wrote: Dookiestix wrote: flamboyant wrote: Snoop wrote: flamboyant wrote: You don't think for the anti-incumbent mood across the country it was actually a pretty weak showing?

I agree with Carville completely, although of course, I hope the Dems keep Dean right where he is. In bonehead statements alone he's been a godsend to Republicans. I don't know enough to know whether he's succeeded in playing catch-up with what Mehlman's done with his voter lists, but we're a lot better of with him in charge than if Carville were head of the DNC. He was like a freaking master artist with what he did with the Clinton campaign.

I agree that Carville did damn good job with Clinton, and would love to see him take a biger curent roll, but doubt he would be willing to do so.

However Deans plan has always been aimed at 2008 and beyond more then 2006, the fact that it is already paying off is vary impressive and more then a bit surprising to me.

That's funny, we're both quite the optimists - I tend to see the election as a pretty poor result for the Dems all things considered, you seem to have much optimism going forward.
This is a pretty divided and polarized country, so the Dems win was that much bigger, IMHO.

Hmmm . . . funny, I seem to remember a lot more being made about the president's poll numbers and how almost everyone in America was coming to your side on opposing the president . . .
No, actually, it's MUCH more complicated than that. You should know better not to simplify matters in order to make a point. Bush's poor numbers certainly helped, as Republicans ran away from him in droves, insisting that he not campaign with them. And they still lost. They lost because of Iraq and corruption. The lost because American wanted change. They lost because of the realization of what happens when run party runs all of Washington.

Almost everyone in America? Bush is currently at 31%. He was floating around 35 - 36% right before the elections. That means 35-36% still approved of his job. That figure shoots down your "almost everyone in America" theory.

[Nixon]

Don't get rid of Dean.

Between crazy-eyes Pelosi and that criminal Murtha, Dean looks like an elder statesman. Not to mention he balances the Dem's leadership group, which up to now has acted so ultra-left it would make Jane Fonda blush.

[ubikk]

flamboyant wrote: James Carville: Democrats Should Fire Howard Dean {...snip...}

Carville, meeting with political reporters Wednesday morning, said Democrats could have picked up as many as 50 House seats, instead of the nearly 30 they have so far.

But Dean’s Democratic National Committee did not spend some $6 million it could have used in so-called "third tier” House races against vulnerable Republicans, the Austin American-Statesman reports.

No offense to James Carville, but you can't buy 20 races with $6 million. Maybe maybe 3 or 4, tops -- and that's if you've got competitive candidates. They're using the $6 million now to fight tight cases and recounts.

[Kumar]

Howard Dean is a phenomenal man. You Americans are lucky to have him.

[Revenant]

Kumar wrote: Howard Dean is a phenomenal man. You Americans are lucky to have him.

Eh.

[Galafron IV]

While it is true that democrats did a phenomenal job in the midterms, compared to the republican victory in 1994 they really botched their campaigns. When running against a corruption filled, scandal plagued party whose president has record low approval ratings, the suprise is not that they took both houses but that they took so few seats. They had no clear party line and one of their senior party members (John Kerry) insulted the US military (intentionally or not).

[Mr.Bill]

I hate to admit it but Carville's right. The Dem victory should have been much bigger. An unpopular president in an unpopular war and the democrats pick up less then average amount of seats during a 2nd term of an administration. In FDR's 2nd term the democrats lost 71 seats. FDR!!

[Kilo Tango]

The dems won because people voted against incumbents not because they voted for the dems.

I really hope they don't get rid of Dean. I love having that crazy, vein bulging, angry tourette's poster child as the face of the dnc. I also love Carville since he frightens away the children too. Those two should team up and make a buddy flick. :lol:

Alas, the Clinton mafia hates Dean so he's on his way out. What the Clintons want they get.

[Moracca]

Kumar wrote: Howard Dean is a phenomenal man. You Americans are lucky to have him.

We found Him! Howie's Colorado ski bum bud in his college days! :dance:

Kumar wrote: Howard Dean is a phenomenal man.

Memories, eh?

:lol: