I think you're mostly right. Dean is certainly trying out a Southern Strategy, but it's important to note that his reference to the guys with confederate flags in their trucks will be read in the South as a fairly nuanced one, and one that people who have no experience in the South (I lived for 24 years in Mississippi, and then nearly 10 in Oklahoma [which is NOT Southern, Max. I'm sorry Those Okies really want to be Southern, but bless their hearts, they just ain't]) may not be able to recognize as being as complex as it is.
He's appealing at once to both socio-economic class and to ideology here. And that ideology is far broader than just the "klan rally on the weekends" or the "never had a black person in my house" breeds of racism that are all over the place in the South. That ideology is terribly stubborn. It's incredibly independent. It is often reactionary. It is usually isolationist.
The South is also, you should keep in mind, a culture that has been told, for 140 years, that it is backwards, ignorant, savage, and otherwise generally nasty. Southerners are told not only that they talk funny, and slowly, but also that they sound stupid. This, of course, despite the fact that Mississippi alone produced William Faulkner, Eudora Welty, and Richard Wright all in roughly the same generation.
Most importantly, it is a culture that has SEEN the rest of the country "come after it"--first during the Civil War (which my great grandmother called "The War of Northern Aggression") and then a century later during the Civil Rights movement. If you don't believe that this is important, let me tell you this: when Kennedy was assassinated, the children in my mother's classroom cheered. My uncle Charlie was in a national guard unit mobilized to protect James Meredith (the first black student to enroll at Ole Miss), and apparently one night had to fire upon a bunch of drunk rednecks out looking to lynch someone. There is a part of the South that knows it has been invaded and remade twice by "yankees."
One of the results of that is an attempt to co-opt the symbols that are used to put it down (i.e. pointing to the confederate flag as a symbol of the South's horrid history), and so the flag becomes a sign of pride despite its negative connotations. It becomes adopted by good ol' boys as a sign not of racist ideologies (although certainly this is the case sometimes), but as a statement that despite what the rest of the culture seems to want them to think about themselves, they will no be ashamed.
And I think this is also an attempt to tap into what seems to me to be a really bizarre block of voters in the South. I believe it was in Alabama recently (Montgomery, maybe?) where the voters voted out someone because taxes were "too high" and yet turned around and supported a series of policies that were obviously, even to a partisan eye, not in their best interests. Sorry I can't be more specific.
There's something about this little "slip" that strikes me as a bit of "strategery." I mean, look at how all the conservatives here have responded. You all mostly said, in some form: "Look at Dean! He's appealing to racists with confederate flags!"
How's that going to play in the South when republicans all over the country start pointing to those joes in the South with confederate flags in their trucks and effectively calling them racists?
Southern strategy, indeed.
Might work, too.
Cheers
Scott
That's problematic because Dean (as well as every other democrat) has publicly denounced the confederate flag itself as a symbol of divisiveness. He's not gaining any ground on southern conservatives that way. Dean's appeal to that group is entirely on his own terms- as in his education and health care policies.
That's problematic because Dean (as well as every other democrat) has publicly denounced the confederate flag itself as a symbol of divisiveness. He's not gaining any ground on southern conservatives that way. Dean's appeal to that group is entirely on his own terms- as in his education and health care policies.
My point is that he doesn't have to gain ground. The Republicans have to lose it. This comment of Dean opens the door for the talk radio attack dogs to go after him for the comment...and potentially insult a huge block of voters.
My point is that he doesn't have to gain ground. The Republicans have to lose it. This comment of Dean opens the door for the talk radio attack dogs to go after him for the comment...and potentially insult a huge block of voters.
Cheers
Scott
Maybe I'm being obtuse, but if this is Dean's strategy, doesn't he have something to gain from this?
Maybe I'm being obtuse, but if this is Dean's strategy, doesn't he have something to gain from this?
Here's how it works:
1) Dean makes a remark about guys with rebel flags in their trucks.
2) Even though the remark is CLEARLY meant to be a reference to health care and education and other Southern issues, the only thing that gets picked up on is the flag
3) His fellow Dem candidates go after him
4) In the process of going after him, they have no choice but to potentially insult those southern voters Dean is appealing to
5) Right-wing talk radio and television goes after him, in turn alienating and insulting those southern voters.
6) Dean emerges as the only viable democratic candidate in the south, and the republicans lose ground in the south
Given what just happened in MS and KY tonight, this all may be a moot point, but then, the South is a strange place, politically.
I think you're mostly right. Dean is certainly trying out a Southern Strategy, but it's important to note that his reference to the guys with confederate flags in their trucks will be read in the South as a fairly nuanced one, and one that people who have no experience in the South (I lived for 24 years in Mississippi, and then nearly 10 in Oklahoma [which is NOT Southern, Max. I'm sorry Those Okies really want to be Southern, but bless their hearts, they just ain't]) may not be able to recognize as being as complex as it is.
He's appealing at once to both socio-economic class and to ideology here. And that ideology is far broader than just the "klan rally on the weekends" or the "never had a black person in my house" breeds of racism that are all over the place in the South. That ideology is terribly stubborn. It's incredibly independent. It is often reactionary. It is usually isolationist.
The South is also, you should keep in mind, a culture that has been told, for 140 years, that it is backwards, ignorant, savage, and otherwise generally nasty. Southerners are told not only that they talk funny, and slowly, but also that they sound stupid. This, of course, despite the fact that Mississippi alone produced William Faulkner, Eudora Welty, and Richard Wright all in roughly the same generation.
Most importantly, it is a culture that has SEEN the rest of the country "come after it"--first during the Civil War (which my great grandmother called "The War of Northern Aggression") and then a century later during the Civil Rights movement. If you don't believe that this is important, let me tell you this: when Kennedy was assassinated, the children in my mother's classroom cheered. My uncle Charlie was in a national guard unit mobilized to protect James Meredith (the first black student to enroll at Ole Miss), and apparently one night had to fire upon a bunch of drunk rednecks out looking to lynch someone. There is a part of the South that knows it has been invaded and remade twice by "yankees."
One of the results of that is an attempt to co-opt the symbols that are used to put it down (i.e. pointing to the confederate flag as a symbol of the South's horrid history), and so the flag becomes a sign of pride despite its negative connotations. It becomes adopted by good ol' boys as a sign not of racist ideologies (although certainly this is the case sometimes), but as a statement that despite what the rest of the culture seems to want them to think about themselves, they will no be ashamed.
And I think this is also an attempt to tap into what seems to me to be a really bizarre block of voters in the South. I believe it was in Alabama recently (Montgomery, maybe?) where the voters voted out someone because taxes were "too high" and yet turned around and supported a series of policies that were obviously, even to a partisan eye, not in their best interests. Sorry I can't be more specific.
There's something about this little "slip" that strikes me as a bit of "strategery." I mean, look at how all the conservatives here have responded. You all mostly said, in some form: "Look at Dean! He's appealing to racists with confederate flags!"
How's that going to play in the South when republicans all over the country start pointing to those joes in the South with confederate flags in their trucks and effectively calling them racists?
Well thank god another southerner weighed in, I was starting to feel a little lonely. It's a thankless job trying to explain why the confederate flag doesn't necessarily play as a racist symbol in the south, as opposed to all our helpful northern friends who are always so willing to patiently explain why southerners are bone ignorant yahoos. You did a much better job than I in setting out the issues.
By the way, the Alabama thing was the republican gov Bob Riley staking his administration on a big tax increase, in the hopes that Alabama "could be first in something besides football". The measure was defeated, and he has basically said, Okey doke, the people have spoken, now I gotta empty the prisons and close the schools.
And Dean tried to keep his sense of humor. Reacting to criticism by Kerry over his position on gun control, Dean grinned and said, "I told a group of press people in Iowa, the reason I knew I was the front-runner is that I keep picking buckshot out of my rear end all the time."
It's certain Dean is in for more buckshot in the coming days. As the storm over his comments on Southern whites show, the plain-talking style that is so appealing to many frustrated Democrats can be troublesome to his candidacy, especially now that he's receiving much greater scrutiny than when he was an underdog candidate. Dean made virtually identical comments as far back as the DNC meeting last February, telling the crowd that "white folks in the South who drive pickup trucks with Confederate flag decals on the back ought to be voting with us because their kids don't have health insurance either, and their kids need better schools, too." Back then, he received standing ovations from the crowd and glowing reviews in the media.
He will also be blasted for his apparent desire to withdraw from the public finance system, which -- when he was a poor underdog early in 2003 -- he said he would abide by, contrasting his poverty with the campaign of President Bush. (The Bush campaign did not abide by the primary spending limits in 2000, and won't this year.)
But if his recent past is any indication, Dean will try to turn the assaults upon him to his advantage. Back on June 22, after a contentious appearance on "Meet the Press" in which he appeared to stumble under tough questioning, Dean supporters rallied to his defense by pouring in donations on his Web site. Tonight, after CNN host Anderson Cooper asked him about a past comment on gay partnerships, Dean accusingly fired back: "You sound like Tim Russert."
"Certainly, the Confederate flag is a divisive symbol, and certain Republican politicians have in fact embraced it while campaigning in the South. In the 2000 Republican presidential primary in South Carolina, both George W. Bush and John McCain refused to criticize the Sons of Confederate Veterans' campaign to restore the flag to the top of the statehouse (Democratic Gov. Jim Hodges had moved it), though McCain later expressed regret for his position. And in the 2002 midterm elections, as Sean Wilentz showed last year, the GOP defeated Hodges, along with Georgia Gov. Roy Barnes, with a campaign that quietly pandered to flag backers while avoiding outright racist appeals. Post-election surveys showed that rural whites in both states crossed over to vote Republican, and that the flag controversy was a crucial reason why.
Was Dean's statement in that same tradition? Clearly it was not. For one thing, such appeals by Republicans are usually confined to the South -- and ironically, they're normally a little less open than Dean's. Although it hasn't gotten much attention until now, Dean has made his flag remarks before. Last February, he told a winter meeting of the Democratic National Committee in Washington: "I intend to talk about race during this election in the South. The Republicans have been talking about it since 1968 in order to divide us, and I'm going to bring us together. Because you know what? White folks in the South who drive pickup trucks with Confederate flag decals on the back ought to be voting with us because their kids don't have health insurance either, and their kids need better schools, too."
After his remarks last week drew criticism, Dean released a statement saying: "I want people with Confederate flags on their trucks to put down those flags and vote Democratic -- because the need for quality healthcare, jobs and a good education knows no racial boundaries."
Dean put his finger on something crucial that explains the Democrats' lack of nationwide mass appeal: While they correctly addressed the problems of racism from the 1960s on, they lost sight of the issues of class, which don't always dovetail with race. Defending his remarks yesterday in Iowa, Dean explained: "What Franklin Roosevelt did was to get the Southern white working class to vote with the Southern African-American working class," said Dean, about the former Democratic president. "The only time we're ever going to make progress in this country is when black people and white people and brown people work together and put race aside." I happen to believe that, too. It's disturbing if other candidates don't.
If there was any political subtext or hidden calculation behind Dean's remarks -- and I have no evidence there was -- my guess is that he knew his candor would trigger his opponents' inner scolds. And then, while they scrambled to proclaim their political correctness, Dean would once again look like the plain-talking guy who takes risks, who says what's on his mind, who leads and doesn't merely follow. Whether Dean planned it or not, his rivals -- predictably -- took the bait."
Thanks for the posts Chewie. My wife and I were discussing the same thing last night after the debate. I felt that the adverse reaction from the other candidates and Dean's insistence that he said nothing wrong was actually going to solidify southern white males. And they are now taking a good hard look at Dean...something they might not've done before.
He softened his tone a little today... but is standing by his point.
``I started this discussion in a clumsy way. This discussion will be painful, and I regret the pain that I may have caused either to African-Americans or Southern white voters in the beginning of this discussion. But we need to have this discussion in an honest, open way,'' Dean said.
Rival John Edwards, who had complained on Tuesday about Northerners telling Southerners what to do, said during a campaign stop in New Hampshire that he accepted what he characterized as Dean's apology.
Krugman says what I've been saying all week. NICE!
"Howard Dean's remarks about the need to appeal to white Southerners could certainly have been better phrased. But his rivals for the Democratic nomination should be ashamed of their reaction. They know what he was trying to say Ñ and it wasn't that his party should go soft on racism. By playing gotcha, by seizing on the chance to take the front-runner down a peg, they damaged the cause they claim to serve Ñ and missed a chance to confront the real issue he raised.
A three-sentence description of the arc of American politics over the past 70 years would run like this: First, Democrats and moderate Republicans created institutions Ñ above all, Social Security and Medicare Ñ that provided a measure of financial security to ordinary working Americans. The biggest beneficiaries of these institutions were African-Americans and working-class Southern whites, and both were part of the moderate-to-liberal coalition that dominated American politics until the 1960's.
But the right opened an increasingly effective counterattack, with a strategy that included using racially charged symbolism to get Southern whites to vote against their own economic interests. All Mr. Dean was saying was that Democrats need to understand and counter this strategy."
Comments
Originally posted by midwinter
I think you're mostly right. Dean is certainly trying out a Southern Strategy, but it's important to note that his reference to the guys with confederate flags in their trucks will be read in the South as a fairly nuanced one, and one that people who have no experience in the South (I lived for 24 years in Mississippi, and then nearly 10 in Oklahoma [which is NOT Southern, Max. I'm sorry
He's appealing at once to both socio-economic class and to ideology here. And that ideology is far broader than just the "klan rally on the weekends" or the "never had a black person in my house" breeds of racism that are all over the place in the South. That ideology is terribly stubborn. It's incredibly independent. It is often reactionary. It is usually isolationist.
The South is also, you should keep in mind, a culture that has been told, for 140 years, that it is backwards, ignorant, savage, and otherwise generally nasty. Southerners are told not only that they talk funny, and slowly, but also that they sound stupid. This, of course, despite the fact that Mississippi alone produced William Faulkner, Eudora Welty, and Richard Wright all in roughly the same generation.
Most importantly, it is a culture that has SEEN the rest of the country "come after it"--first during the Civil War (which my great grandmother called "The War of Northern Aggression") and then a century later during the Civil Rights movement. If you don't believe that this is important, let me tell you this: when Kennedy was assassinated, the children in my mother's classroom cheered. My uncle Charlie was in a national guard unit mobilized to protect James Meredith (the first black student to enroll at Ole Miss), and apparently one night had to fire upon a bunch of drunk rednecks out looking to lynch someone. There is a part of the South that knows it has been invaded and remade twice by "yankees."
One of the results of that is an attempt to co-opt the symbols that are used to put it down (i.e. pointing to the confederate flag as a symbol of the South's horrid history), and so the flag becomes a sign of pride despite its negative connotations. It becomes adopted by good ol' boys as a sign not of racist ideologies (although certainly this is the case sometimes), but as a statement that despite what the rest of the culture seems to want them to think about themselves, they will no be ashamed.
And I think this is also an attempt to tap into what seems to me to be a really bizarre block of voters in the South. I believe it was in Alabama recently (Montgomery, maybe?) where the voters voted out someone because taxes were "too high" and yet turned around and supported a series of policies that were obviously, even to a partisan eye, not in their best interests. Sorry I can't be more specific.
There's something about this little "slip" that strikes me as a bit of "strategery." I mean, look at how all the conservatives here have responded. You all mostly said, in some form: "Look at Dean! He's appealing to racists with confederate flags!"
How's that going to play in the South when republicans all over the country start pointing to those joes in the South with confederate flags in their trucks and effectively calling them racists?
Southern strategy, indeed.
Might work, too.
Cheers
Scott
That's problematic because Dean (as well as every other democrat) has publicly denounced the confederate flag itself as a symbol of divisiveness. He's not gaining any ground on southern conservatives that way. Dean's appeal to that group is entirely on his own terms- as in his education and health care policies.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
That's problematic because Dean (as well as every other democrat) has publicly denounced the confederate flag itself as a symbol of divisiveness. He's not gaining any ground on southern conservatives that way. Dean's appeal to that group is entirely on his own terms- as in his education and health care policies.
My point is that he doesn't have to gain ground. The Republicans have to lose it. This comment of Dean opens the door for the talk radio attack dogs to go after him for the comment...and potentially insult a huge block of voters.
Cheers
Scott
Originally posted by midwinter
My point is that he doesn't have to gain ground. The Republicans have to lose it. This comment of Dean opens the door for the talk radio attack dogs to go after him for the comment...and potentially insult a huge block of voters.
Cheers
Scott
Maybe I'm being obtuse, but if this is Dean's strategy, doesn't he have something to gain from this?
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Maybe I'm being obtuse, but if this is Dean's strategy, doesn't he have something to gain from this?
Here's how it works:
1) Dean makes a remark about guys with rebel flags in their trucks.
2) Even though the remark is CLEARLY meant to be a reference to health care and education and other Southern issues, the only thing that gets picked up on is the flag
3) His fellow Dem candidates go after him
4) In the process of going after him, they have no choice but to potentially insult those southern voters Dean is appealing to
5) Right-wing talk radio and television goes after him, in turn alienating and insulting those southern voters.
6) Dean emerges as the only viable democratic candidate in the south, and the republicans lose ground in the south
Given what just happened in MS and KY tonight, this all may be a moot point, but then, the South is a strange place, politically.
Cheers
Scott
Originally posted by ShawnJ
That's brilliant!
Maybe he can get the dixie chicks to do campaign stops.
Originally posted by midwinter
I think you're mostly right. Dean is certainly trying out a Southern Strategy, but it's important to note that his reference to the guys with confederate flags in their trucks will be read in the South as a fairly nuanced one, and one that people who have no experience in the South (I lived for 24 years in Mississippi, and then nearly 10 in Oklahoma [which is NOT Southern, Max. I'm sorry
He's appealing at once to both socio-economic class and to ideology here. And that ideology is far broader than just the "klan rally on the weekends" or the "never had a black person in my house" breeds of racism that are all over the place in the South. That ideology is terribly stubborn. It's incredibly independent. It is often reactionary. It is usually isolationist.
The South is also, you should keep in mind, a culture that has been told, for 140 years, that it is backwards, ignorant, savage, and otherwise generally nasty. Southerners are told not only that they talk funny, and slowly, but also that they sound stupid. This, of course, despite the fact that Mississippi alone produced William Faulkner, Eudora Welty, and Richard Wright all in roughly the same generation.
Most importantly, it is a culture that has SEEN the rest of the country "come after it"--first during the Civil War (which my great grandmother called "The War of Northern Aggression") and then a century later during the Civil Rights movement. If you don't believe that this is important, let me tell you this: when Kennedy was assassinated, the children in my mother's classroom cheered. My uncle Charlie was in a national guard unit mobilized to protect James Meredith (the first black student to enroll at Ole Miss), and apparently one night had to fire upon a bunch of drunk rednecks out looking to lynch someone. There is a part of the South that knows it has been invaded and remade twice by "yankees."
One of the results of that is an attempt to co-opt the symbols that are used to put it down (i.e. pointing to the confederate flag as a symbol of the South's horrid history), and so the flag becomes a sign of pride despite its negative connotations. It becomes adopted by good ol' boys as a sign not of racist ideologies (although certainly this is the case sometimes), but as a statement that despite what the rest of the culture seems to want them to think about themselves, they will no be ashamed.
And I think this is also an attempt to tap into what seems to me to be a really bizarre block of voters in the South. I believe it was in Alabama recently (Montgomery, maybe?) where the voters voted out someone because taxes were "too high" and yet turned around and supported a series of policies that were obviously, even to a partisan eye, not in their best interests. Sorry I can't be more specific.
There's something about this little "slip" that strikes me as a bit of "strategery." I mean, look at how all the conservatives here have responded. You all mostly said, in some form: "Look at Dean! He's appealing to racists with confederate flags!"
How's that going to play in the South when republicans all over the country start pointing to those joes in the South with confederate flags in their trucks and effectively calling them racists?
Well thank god another southerner weighed in, I was starting to feel a little lonely. It's a thankless job trying to explain why the confederate flag doesn't necessarily play as a racist symbol in the south, as opposed to all our helpful northern friends who are always so willing to patiently explain why southerners are bone ignorant yahoos. You did a much better job than I in setting out the issues.
By the way, the Alabama thing was the republican gov Bob Riley staking his administration on a big tax increase, in the hopes that Alabama "could be first in something besides football". The measure was defeated, and he has basically said, Okey doke, the people have spoken, now I gotta empty the prisons and close the schools.
Originally posted by chu_bakka
I'm not even FROM the south and I understood Dean's point.
Well then, sir, I am pleased to name you an honorary redneck. (hands chewey a moon pie and an RC).
From Salon:
And Dean tried to keep his sense of humor. Reacting to criticism by Kerry over his position on gun control, Dean grinned and said, "I told a group of press people in Iowa, the reason I knew I was the front-runner is that I keep picking buckshot out of my rear end all the time."
It's certain Dean is in for more buckshot in the coming days. As the storm over his comments on Southern whites show, the plain-talking style that is so appealing to many frustrated Democrats can be troublesome to his candidacy, especially now that he's receiving much greater scrutiny than when he was an underdog candidate. Dean made virtually identical comments as far back as the DNC meeting last February, telling the crowd that "white folks in the South who drive pickup trucks with Confederate flag decals on the back ought to be voting with us because their kids don't have health insurance either, and their kids need better schools, too." Back then, he received standing ovations from the crowd and glowing reviews in the media.
He will also be blasted for his apparent desire to withdraw from the public finance system, which -- when he was a poor underdog early in 2003 -- he said he would abide by, contrasting his poverty with the campaign of President Bush. (The Bush campaign did not abide by the primary spending limits in 2000, and won't this year.)
But if his recent past is any indication, Dean will try to turn the assaults upon him to his advantage. Back on June 22, after a contentious appearance on "Meet the Press" in which he appeared to stumble under tough questioning, Dean supporters rallied to his defense by pouring in donations on his Web site. Tonight, after CNN host Anderson Cooper asked him about a past comment on gay partnerships, Dean accusingly fired back: "You sound like Tim Russert."
"Certainly, the Confederate flag is a divisive symbol, and certain Republican politicians have in fact embraced it while campaigning in the South. In the 2000 Republican presidential primary in South Carolina, both George W. Bush and John McCain refused to criticize the Sons of Confederate Veterans' campaign to restore the flag to the top of the statehouse (Democratic Gov. Jim Hodges had moved it), though McCain later expressed regret for his position. And in the 2002 midterm elections, as Sean Wilentz showed last year, the GOP defeated Hodges, along with Georgia Gov. Roy Barnes, with a campaign that quietly pandered to flag backers while avoiding outright racist appeals. Post-election surveys showed that rural whites in both states crossed over to vote Republican, and that the flag controversy was a crucial reason why.
Was Dean's statement in that same tradition? Clearly it was not. For one thing, such appeals by Republicans are usually confined to the South -- and ironically, they're normally a little less open than Dean's. Although it hasn't gotten much attention until now, Dean has made his flag remarks before. Last February, he told a winter meeting of the Democratic National Committee in Washington: "I intend to talk about race during this election in the South. The Republicans have been talking about it since 1968 in order to divide us, and I'm going to bring us together. Because you know what? White folks in the South who drive pickup trucks with Confederate flag decals on the back ought to be voting with us because their kids don't have health insurance either, and their kids need better schools, too."
After his remarks last week drew criticism, Dean released a statement saying: "I want people with Confederate flags on their trucks to put down those flags and vote Democratic -- because the need for quality healthcare, jobs and a good education knows no racial boundaries."
Dean put his finger on something crucial that explains the Democrats' lack of nationwide mass appeal: While they correctly addressed the problems of racism from the 1960s on, they lost sight of the issues of class, which don't always dovetail with race. Defending his remarks yesterday in Iowa, Dean explained: "What Franklin Roosevelt did was to get the Southern white working class to vote with the Southern African-American working class," said Dean, about the former Democratic president. "The only time we're ever going to make progress in this country is when black people and white people and brown people work together and put race aside." I happen to believe that, too. It's disturbing if other candidates don't.
If there was any political subtext or hidden calculation behind Dean's remarks -- and I have no evidence there was -- my guess is that he knew his candor would trigger his opponents' inner scolds. And then, while they scrambled to proclaim their political correctness, Dean would once again look like the plain-talking guy who takes risks, who says what's on his mind, who leads and doesn't merely follow. Whether Dean planned it or not, his rivals -- predictably -- took the bait."
``I started this discussion in a clumsy way. This discussion will be painful, and I regret the pain that I may have caused either to African-Americans or Southern white voters in the beginning of this discussion. But we need to have this discussion in an honest, open way,'' Dean said.
Rival John Edwards, who had complained on Tuesday about Northerners telling Southerners what to do, said during a campaign stop in New Hampshire that he accepted what he characterized as Dean's apology.
Krugman says what I've been saying all week. NICE!
"Howard Dean's remarks about the need to appeal to white Southerners could certainly have been better phrased. But his rivals for the Democratic nomination should be ashamed of their reaction. They know what he was trying to say Ñ and it wasn't that his party should go soft on racism. By playing gotcha, by seizing on the chance to take the front-runner down a peg, they damaged the cause they claim to serve Ñ and missed a chance to confront the real issue he raised.
A three-sentence description of the arc of American politics over the past 70 years would run like this: First, Democrats and moderate Republicans created institutions Ñ above all, Social Security and Medicare Ñ that provided a measure of financial security to ordinary working Americans. The biggest beneficiaries of these institutions were African-Americans and working-class Southern whites, and both were part of the moderate-to-liberal coalition that dominated American politics until the 1960's.
But the right opened an increasingly effective counterattack, with a strategy that included using racially charged symbolism to get Southern whites to vote against their own economic interests. All Mr. Dean was saying was that Democrats need to understand and counter this strategy."
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/07/opinion/07KRUG.html