Wednesday, June 30, 2004

The other day I heard (for the umpteenth time) a tape of Howard Dean’s now infamous rallying cry, where he increasingly goes ballistic over a mike to the point where he sounds downright, well, unpresidential. And yet I’ll read something where it’s said that Dean’s downfall was due perhaps to the fact that he was “too real.” Huh? Leaving aside any of the substance he brought to the debate, I believe the reasons for his failing are not a mystery. In fact, it was quite predictable based on past precedence.

For “your guy/gal” to be successful at running for president, it’s not simply the message that is important. It always comes down to the two V’s: Views & Vehicle (or Vessel). Yes, that person’s views must ring true to you (as Dean’s did) but for better or worse in this country, the vehicle or vessel must be appropriate also. Of course this introduces a lack of substance debate, but so what, it is what it is in this country. Wake up people! With that blaring speech, Dean offered us a hint of the non-presidential side of him, even if it was just for a moment. Too late, that’s all many needed to see. Make all the excuses you want, the scorecard on “temperament” suddenly gets a very bad grade, end of story.

On top of this, when we saw Dean standing beside Kerry at debates, Dean received another demerit under the category of “height,” the lack thereof. Yes, again something not of substance, but we’re not in a time when TV doesn’t matter. Ever since TV has become a big factor in elections, the tall guys have beaten shorter guys. Just look at Dukakis or Paul Tsongas – both of whom had great things to say but in reality had no chance. Another: Ross Perot.

So when we read about what happened to the mighty Dean train, and no doubt it’s often filled with high-minded excuses, let’s not forget – warts and all – what the voters of this country look for in a candidate. One can resist and take the higher route, but the tradeoff being a much less likelihood of getting someone in office who will represent their views. Clinton was not perfect, but he was the right vehicle or vessel (he was very electable!). To completely stick to higher principles on this matter is to then not have someone in the highest office that can at least effect change.

So go ahead, cry and sulk about Kucinich not getting a fair shot. In this country, he simply embodies wrong vehicle, right message.

No comments: