With the next presidential election only one short year away,
Democrats would do well to start getting their act together. The
fact is, as of now, two-thirds of Americans cannot even name one
Democratic candidate.
And that’s saying a lot, considering we’re just shy
of a full football team’s worth of candidates so far. For us
Democrats to have any chance, a clear front-runner must emerge
early on, capable and well-funded enough to challenge Bush in
2004.
Surprisingly, for such a large field, real choices are few and
far between. The early favorite, Joe Lieberman, lost his lead as
candidates with pulses entered the race. Or, perhaps voters are
just remembering he played second fiddle to a losing Gore against
Dubya in 2000.
The favorites remain John Kerry and Howard Dean. Kerry’s a
real life war veteran with experience in foreign policy ““ the
anti-Bush. Dean on the other hand is the Last Angry Democrat.
Rabidly against Bush’s war and tax cut, he has made his way
to nearly the top of the Democratic heap through aggressive
grass-roots campaigning and internet fund raising.
Then there are John Edwards, Bob Graham and Dick Gephardt, three
candidates with moderate buzz, but little chance of winning. They
will only steal votes away from the main candidates and bring
division into a party that needs unity more than anything.
Obviously, they have their own unique stances on one thing or
another ““ but the point is, they cannot win the Democratic
nomination or defeat Bush.
The outliers in the field of prospective candidates include
former Illinois Sen. Carol Moseley Braun, Ohio’s Rep. Dennis
Kucinich and Reverend Al Sharpton. Essentially non-factors, they
are only indulging their delusions of political grandeur.
And finally, there’s the wild card. Wesley Clark is a
former four-star general and former NATO commander in Kosovo. He
has the military prestige of Kerry, and he’s the next big
story on the 11 o’clock news, bumping Dean to the second
segment. The only problem is he’s late to the game.
In spite of this list of impressive candidates, many Americans
know nothing substantive about them. For the Democrats to have a
chance, they must unite behind a prominent candidate now. The
natural choice is Dean, the only one to land a cover story in Time
(August 11th) and more importantly, perhaps the only one that can
challenge Bush, popularly and financially.
As of this August, Dean had raised more than $7 million ““
more than any of the other Democratic candidates. While this number
is sure to balloon in the coming months, comparatively, Bush is
expected to have a quarter-billion. As the front-runner and most
probable Democratic nominee, Dean cannot afford to have a drawn out
fight with other Democrats while an unthreatened Republican
president watches the internal fighting of a struggling party.
Just as they did during the Sept. 4 Democratic debate, the
candidates must stand together now against Bush and later, behind
Dean. This means that the other nine candidates should be ready to
go back to their day jobs. John Edwards made the wrong move in
deciding to give up his senatorial post to devote his full effort
on the presidency.
He may be serious, but does he really expect to win the
Democratic nomination when he’s not even pulling in double
digits at the polls?
It would further serve the interest of the party for Clark to
decide against running. His entrance into the race would only
further split the crowded field and force Dean to defend his
foreign policy platform. His resume is impressive but he would best
serve his party by being a viable vice presidential nominee for
Dean. He could be as influential with Dean as the fatherly Cheney
is to a confused Bush, forming a ticket Republicans may actually
learn to fear.
It’s just a matter of practicality. Everyone knows that
when all is said and done, the losing candidates will rally around
the nominated leader, assuring the public that he’s the best
man for the job. But in an election where Bush will most likely
have a huge advantage from a recovering economy and Republican
fund-raising, Democrats cannot let their candidates kill each other
off, wasting money and confusing voters with little known choices
like Kucinich, just to have a weakened Dean hobble into the ring
against the heavy-weight incumbent.
A pinch of unity now can mean the difference between a
fragmented party and a strong ticket. It would go a long way in
assuring them at least a snowball’s chance in 2004.
Moon is a second-year business economics student. E-mail him
at jmoon@media.ucla.edu.