January 28, 2004
Dean Replaces Trippi
I guess this shouldn't be so surprising considering his recent showing, but I was shocked when I heard Dean had replaced his campaign manager, Joe Trippi with Roy Neel. Apparently Trippi was advising Dean to wait until Michigan to really try and win, but Dean wants to fight in every state. What effect will this have on his campaign? I certainly don't know, but despite the amazing harnessing of the Internet that Trippi engineered, he hasn't been able to help Dean beat Kerry. I just hope that even if Dean doesn't win the nomination, future candidates will recognize that the power of the Internet in politics will only continue to grow and that, at some point, they will be forced to embrace it.
UPDATE: Not only has Trippi left the campaign, they're also broke. So much for Dean's financial lead. Unless he can raise some more money quickly, he'll be out after February 3rd which should mean Kerry coasts to victory. I was counting on Dean to hang around and tear Kerry down some so Edwards would have a shot, but it looks like that's unlikely to happen now.
Yeah when I heard this I was a little surprised. I understand Dean's performance in the opening primaries was disappointing but it seems to me that Trippi was the one that made it possible for these outcomes to be disappointing to begin with. Dean was an unknown governor from a small state who became a household name on the cover of Time and Trippi played no small role in that. It seems like you'd stay with what got you where you are but perhaps a change was needed and the CEO can do things that Trippi wouldn't have been able to do.
I guess so. From what I heard on the news, Dean wanted to contest every state, but Trippi wanted him to wait until Michigan (as I posted) so Dean suggested they bring in someone else to handle the day-to-day stuff and let Trippi focus on the big picture, an offer Trippi rejected. So, seems like Dean and Trippi fell out over a strategy disagreement, not necessarily because Dean was disappointed in his performance so far.
Well if Dean goes out early that isn't necessarily hunky dory for Kerry. A lot of his hard-core activists would likely go to Clark and to a lesser extent Edwards. There seems to be a lot of Kerry-hatred in the Dean camp. We'll see if an anti-Kerry emerges post Feb. 3. Apparently the DNC wants all candidates that fail to win a state by then to drop out.
Incidentally, if Dean really is broke, then Trippi is right--he shouldn't be engaging in a seven state Feb 3. strategy. Better to go all out for a Southwest win on Feb. 3, and then Michigan/Washington, rather than duke it out with Edwards and Clark in the South.
Scott, Why the Kerry hatred? Have there been a lot of attack ads on Dean from Kerry?
if Dean really is broke, then Trippi is right--he shouldn't be engaging in a seven state Feb 3. strategy. Good point.
Kerry and Dean have been locked in mortal combat for about 8 months now. I remember watching a debate back in May(!) where they couldn't resist using all of their time to snipe at each other. With the exception of Lieberman, Kerry's attacks were the most infuriating. Clark and Edwards have, by contrast, run relatively positive campaigns. Also, most hard-core Deanies actually buy the "Washington politician" rhetoric, which makes Clark more likely to capture their hearts.
I don't think the Deaniacs will go over to Clark. Almost every one of them is, at heart, an ABB voter; they just thought Dean had the best chance to change the game. Once he's proven to be no longer a viable candidate, they will rally behind either Kerry or Edwards. Sure, some might go towards Clark, but he hasn't excited anyone through anything other than his resume.
Kerry's position as the presumed nominee was one of the major factors in Dean's rise. I have serious doubts that the campaign could have gotten off its feet had it faced Edwards or Clark as the man to beat. They would have been beaten to death with the electability issue--while against Kerry (who was planning to win the primary as the left-tilting candidate) it was a relatively moot point. Besides, Kerry's IWR vote was a much bigger issue back then than it is today.
Speaking for myself, I would have never jumped on the bandwagon if Dean hadn't looked more dynamic and electable to me than Kerry, whatever my doubts, and I think many felt the same way. People just couldn't get excited about Kerry and when Dean started moving the train just took off. True, some of the people who abandoned Kerry for Dean have come back recently, but I think most of those were simply going with the flow. As far as the hard-core Dean activists are concerned, "taking back the party" from the likes Kerry is what the whole fight is about--they're not just going to drop this mantra and support Kerry. Go to Daily Kos or Democratic Underground or Democrats.com or any activist site and see for yourself. The disapointment with Kerry is widespread.
The sooner Dean drops out the better for Clark (and Edwards, who seems to be picking up a lot of jaded, more realistic post-Deaniacs). As much as I love Dean, I now hope he gives up soon enough to make a difference, though I'm not optimistic.
Yes, they are definitely disappointed, but they will support the eventual nomineee regardless of who he is. I've heard this from many Deaniacs, including my friend who flew to Iowa from Texas to work on the campaign. In the end, it comes down to getting rid of Bush, not getting Dean elected.