2007-11-08 06:13:22 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Howard Dean as in all flash. Self-Imploding. That's what I mean.
2007-11-08 06:42:01 · update #1
It's still too early to tell. I would wait till after the first primaries to make that decision. From the looks of things, it seems the other Democratic contenders have yet to truly distinguish themselves from Clinton, so I doubt she would "crash and burn" in Iowa like Dean did. However, there's always the possibility that her frontrunner position may get upended later on in the race as it gets closer towards the Democratic convention, though it's a rather slim one.
For the time being, I will reserve judgement.
2007-11-08 07:04:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most Likely Democratic Nominee. Howard Dean had a lot of support but was inexperienced with the mudslinging of the regressive right and their henchmen in the media. His whole campaign was torpedoed for one over enthusiastic speech to followers after a defeat that was broadcasted on national TV and repeated over and over.
It was nothing but the right sucseeded in convicing the majority of the voters Dean wasn't serious. In my opinion that says more about the American voters than about Dean. He had the idea's, the solutions and he was right from the beginning about Iraq . But he yelled funny at a speech so nor Presidency. Unbelievable!
Hillary knows how to handle the media and how to handle the regressive right better than any of the other Democratic candidates. She will not be Deaned and she will not be swift boated.
2007-11-08 14:22:38 · answer #2 · answered by justgoodfolk 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
The correlation between Howard Dean and Hillary isn't a very good one. Obama actually is closer to Dean's legacy. Dean was a fresh face to Americans and garnered much of the support of young Democratic adults in this country. He was a relatively unknown quantity that was able to get folks excited about his fresh approach to politics. Who does that sound like? Hillary or Obama? She is a well known figure that represents the status quo for Democrats, not a fresh face.
Also, she won't be making any "war whoop" mistakes. She's much too politcally savvy for that. I think those who compare her to Howard Dean are desperate for the correlation, not realistic about it.
2007-11-08 14:34:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Howard Dean was a surprise, a virtually unknown politician who struck a chord with a group of voters.
Hillary Clinton is completely different. Everyone knows who she is. And few people are going to change their minds about her.
Will she win the nomination? We don't know yet. But she'll make it to the party convention next year.
2007-11-08 14:17:59 · answer #4 · answered by jplrvflyer 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Started out as the most likely Dem nominee, but I hope that she's the Howard Dean of '08!
2007-11-08 14:20:10 · answer #5 · answered by Lisa M 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Clinton
2007-11-08 14:15:30 · answer #6 · answered by azrim h 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The way its going now, she may be the Howard Dean of 08, but the media loves her and usually sweeps any negatives about her under the rug.
Then again the mainstream media sucks.
2007-11-08 14:17:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Clinton is smarter than people think. I don't see her making the same mistakes Howard Dean made back then.
One more thing, she knows the Republicans better.
2007-11-08 14:17:01 · answer #8 · answered by sholiviks2000 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Next time Hillary is asked for a difinitive answer...if she lets out a "yeeeeeeeeeeeeawwwwwwwwwwwwww"...she'll be the next Howard Dean.
2007-11-08 14:16:10 · answer #9 · answered by Yahoo Answer Angel 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think there is a good chance that Edwards takes the Democratic Nomination in 2008.
2007-11-08 14:20:56 · answer #10 · answered by Amar D 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋