Uh, the cars salesman article? It's all about psyching people up through primal screams. Dean may have been reaching outside of his "latte drinking, New York Times reading, tattoo-wearing" demographic (to quote an Iowa campaign commercial), but that's hardly cause for alarm.

Excellent!

BRAVO!

Of course, after his speech, Henry V went on to win a convincing victory, rather than losing by double digits to Montjoy.

And he was commanding seasoned troops, not a crew of 25-year olds who, according to the arch-conservative New York Times, are already "disillusioned" over hvaing to actually campaign for the nomination.

I can't even think of a wacky Shakespearean parallel for the folly of Dean blowing through $40 million to lose twice, putting himself in the position of having no advertising dollars available for any of the February 7th primaries.

I'm not saying he's through, but let's just say the Internet and college-student crowd doesn't appear to be panning out as well as, say, longbows.

Well in the Times article you cite, the disillusionment of Dean's supporters is not from "having to actually campaign for the nomination." In fact the volunteers who were interviewed come across as very involved, putting in lots of hours, etc. I don't know what you'd call that, but I'd call that "campaigning."

No, the disillusionment comes from: 1) having lost, which is natural. I'm sure you could interview a bunch of Gephardt volunteers and get the same quotes. And: 2) the treatment of Dean in the media.

Now I'm not saying that Dean is a good political strategist -- he really was counting on an early victory, and now he's got nothing to work with -- or the best candidate to beat Bush. He's no Henry V. But I would note two things: a) Dean has tried to do an "end-run" around the Democratic establishment, and b) the media has been quick to try and sink his candidacy. Are a) and b) connected causally, or merely casually? I don't know. But it does seem that the flap over the "Dean shriek" or "yaaaagh" or "barbaric yawp" or whatever is the flimsiest of excuses to attack his electability. The man was delivering a speech to his troops, for goodness' sake, which was the point I was making here.

Putting in lots of hours is certainly campaigning. But the sources of disillusionment cited go beyond mere losing. The article notes how disappointed the grass roots people were about the so-called "dirty tricks" of other candidates, about how the press "turned" on them, and about having to deal with an experienced Washington lobbyist taking the reins of what started as a grass-roots populist movement.

To be critical, I think these are all shallow forms of disappointment. They are only two states in to the game!!! Where is the staying power? Where is the gritty can-do attitude? Are they going to sulk when they take a beating on Tuesday (note that Dean himself is already spinning how he doesn't need/expect to win a single state next week)?

What made Henry V's speech so compelling was that he spoke to people who were in what looked to be an utterly hopeless situation. Dean's supporters, for all their pouting, are still in the LEAD, from a total delagate count. If they need a good primal yell to buck them up already, then such fair-weather staffers are a far cry from the doughty warriors of Aigncourt. I suspect Kucinich's hardy staff is more deserving of such praise - now THAT'S a guy in a hopeless situation.

FWIW, I actually disagree that the media has been intentionally trying to "sink" Dean's candidacy, quickly or otherwise. The media is doing what they always do - looking to make noise at whoever's expense they can. I know people like to claim that negative news stories show an "intent" to "take down" a certain candidate, but I suspect that they could care less who wins - they just want action. And red-faced yelling is action.

Dean should have known - live by the sword, die by the sword. He's been a media tramp all along, and if he is at all shocked they turned on him in a moment of weakness, he has no sense of political history. Going on Letterman as a mea culpa isn't nearly as good a tonic as not doing something silly for the cameras in the first place. Clear out the news cameras before you rally the troops.

Anyway, before everyone jumps on me for not adoring Dean, I think it is fair to say that he is having a real impact on getting people to think about politics (certainly generating more heat than dynamos like Kerry and Clark). Whether he is on the ticket or not this year, he may well have a legitimate claim to being partially responsible for a Democratic victory this November (should such a thing happen). But yeah, I'm not feeling real bad for the guy. He's right on track.

O.K., now everyone can jump on me for not loving Howard Dean.

By the way, lest I forget to note this - your riff was utterly brilliant. I may not love Dean, but you, I'd vote for. Outstanding stuff.

Glad you liked it. If writing satirical blog posts were all you needed to raise millions of dollars and run for President, my hat would be in the ring.