IT SEEMS like every presidential candidate, Democrat or Republican, talks about how their campaign for the country's highest office is different than all the rest. From George Bush (Senior or Dubya) to Bill Clinton, every candidate has told us that they're not interested in "politics as usual" and that they're going to "shake up the system," "send a message" or something else equally as powerful-sounding.
In so doing, candidates feed on the public's widespread -- and largely irrational -- distrust in politicians and frustration with politics to propel themselves to national office. But the cycle always continues: Candidates pander to the near-minority of Americans who actually vote, sell themselves to massive corporations for campaign contributions and rely on a small number of contributors to donate massive sums to buy media exposure. This creates the brand of politician Americans are used to: One who is controlled by powerful special interests, accountable mostly to the tiny, elite class of huge campaign donors and whose message, if anything more than a meaningless sound bite (ex. "compassionate conservative"), is hopelessly bland.
And then Howard Dean stepped into this presidential nomination race.
Every corner of the American political world has been rocked by the surprise emergence of the doctor from Vermont. Only last spring, Howard Dean was considered a lark candidate at best, grouped with the quixotic campaigns of Carol Moseley-Braun, Al Sharpton, Dennis Kucinich and Bob Graham. Since then, "Dr. Dean" and his brilliant campaign manager Joe Trippi have defied the expectations of virtually every election watcher in the country to rise to the status of front runner in the Democratic nomination race. They did it with innovative campaign tactics -- like high Internet visibility -- to organize, disperse information and raise funds in ways that have never been seen.
The nature of Howard Dean's fundraising is one of the astounding parts of his campaign. Part of the reason why the American political establishment has reacted with awe -- and for some, fear -- to the Dean campaign's fundraising success is because it really is historic. Not only has Howard Dean topped fundraising records among all Democratic candidates, but he's done it in a way never before seen. By law, individuals are limited to campaign contributions of $2,000 each. What this means is that most candidates pursue those donors who are willing -- and capable -- of maxing themselves out. The Republicans have become [in]famous for their $2,000-a-plate fundraising dinners that typically ensure the GOP's traditional fundraising advantage over Democrats. Even most Democrats rely heavily on these wealthy contributors for the lion's share of their funds: According to the Center for Responsible Politics, both John Kerry and Dick Gephardt raise 55 percent of their funds from $2,000+ donors, and John Edwards 65 percent. Wealthy interests do demonstrably play an influential part in these campaigns, and while the candidates' platforms indisputably remain far less tainted by rich, special interest manipulation than our current president's (whose number of $2,000+ donors is 73 percent), these facts do say something about their true support base.
In contrast, Howard Dean has raised only 13 percent of his funds from $2,000 donors -- a never before seen figure for a major candidate. In fact, a full 56 percent of his fundraising comes from donors of $200 and less. Bearing in mind that he has also raised more money total than any other Democratic candidate, one can see a major grassroots support differential beginning to take shape. Simply put, no other candidate for president has ever accomplished what Howard Dean has. While other candidates' national campaigns implode (Kerry), struggle to take form (Clark, Lieberman, Edwards) or barely exist at all (Gephardt), Dean has taken his relatively simple message of practical change -- for health care, a sane foreign policy and respect for all Americans, not just the wealthy -- and made it audibly resonate among the vast majority of Americans for whom the Bush presidency has been a disaster.
With the recent endorsements from two of the most politically powerful labor unions in the country, Dean has firmly established his seat as the front runner in the Democratic race. The loud support from low-income, blue collar workers that Dean's endorsement from the SEIU and AFSCME labor unions represent further undermine the fantasy that Dean is an out-of-touch leftie, which conservatives have been nervously trying to pitch to the public since his emergence. Might we be witnessing a new resurgence of the Democratic Party? One can only hope.
(Blair Reeves's column appears Mondays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at breeves@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | YesterdayInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
SHRAUGER: McIntire’s three-year model limits opportunities for first-year students
By Alex Shrauger | 4 days agoBy pigeonholing students into commerce so early, the University violates its own mission of providing a holistic education that produces students capable of succeeding in a variety of fields.
