Is the Democratic base projecting its anti-war sentiments on Howard Dean? So asks Robert Kagan in this oped.

"Another possibility is that Dean's opposition to the Iraq war has been over-interpreted by his supporters on the Democratic left. They think he rejects the overall course of American foreign policy, just as they do. But maybe he doesn't. They think he's one of them, but his views may not be all that different from those of today's Democratic centrist establishment...'There are two groups of people who support me because of the war,' Dean told Mara Liasson a few months ago. 'One are the people who always oppose every war, and in the end I think I probably won't get all of those people.' The other group, Dean figures, simply 'appreciates the fact' that he 'stood up early' and spoke his mind and opposed Bush while other Democrats were cowed. Dean may not be offering a stark alternative to Bush's foreign policy, therefore, so much as he is simply offering Democrats a compelling and combative alternative to Bush himself."

Were this true, and it seems likely it is, that Dean is not as lefty as many of his core party supporters want him to be, I would like him much more. It's amazing how he has become this figure that represents what so many left oriented groups want, without actually convincingly proving he has those credentials. For instance, a British friend with very liberal political inclinations told me, she thinks Dean is for rolling back globalization, while Clark would just put a kinder face on Bush's global economic policies. Well, would Dean, the candidate whose constituency has been described as Starbucks voters, really roll back globalization? What evidence?

Amazing how he is able to capture that hope, almost like an actor. Clinton had some of that -I will be what you want me to be - ness. But once he was elected, many were extremely disappointed!

Posted by Laura at November 19, 2003 01:30 PM