Burnt Orange Report

Karl-

It doesn't matter at all if people in the audience heard the scream, the cameras did and so everybody in America saw it. Millions of Americans' first impression of Howard Dean is as a screaming, growling, crazy guy who acted like an asshole on live television. Its hard to unring that bell and like your mom always told you- first impressions are the most important. Dean converted millions of Democrats and Independents into "Anybody But Dean" voters with his actions. We'll see how he does in NH and beyond, but I'd start girding myself for someone else being the nominee.

And I'll start girding myself for yet again, another incredibly boring presidential election. The worst kind of voter these days seem to be people flitting from one candidate to the next because of the media. What will you do when the media gets on it's new meme, the "Howard Dean comes back stronger and isn't out of it yet" meme because as much as they don't like him, he still gets them more ratings than corpse-Kerry. The media can destroy someone, yes. But as much as they love the fall from grace, they love the return of the down guy.

This is one of the things that is wrong with America and it will only get worse if voters keep being wieners about it and hide under the safty of the guy who hasn't been attacked quite so much yet.

Others should try being the front-runner for over 6 months. When was the last time you remember that being the case?

Karl-T, I wasn't there, and I don't have any reason to doubt you when you say that you didn't hear "the scream." But that's different than suggesting that it never happened. I don't understand you to be making that suggestion.

But when your link reads, "Hear and Watch the Truth," and you say in your post, "This is what really happened," you give the impression that what's been playing over and over in the blogosphere and in the national press is somehow a lie. People may very well believe you about relative volume levels — I do! — but nobody is going to believe that Howard Dean didn't make that noise. Respectfully, I submit that your choice of words ends up unfairly diminishing your credibility and detracts from the point you are trying to make as an eye-witness.

There's a lot more to politics than truth and untruths.

Obviosly I'm not trying to say that Howard's exhuberant noise didn't happen. That's just dumb. What I'm saying is that the reporting of it is detached from the reality of the situation. Those reporters where physically there as well. They have ear and eyes. There is no reason to dampen the crowd to pick up on the 'scream' and single that one part out of an longer speech.

It's not about this one case. It's about a larger fault of the media. If some people are too blind or deaf to realize that I'm talking about a deeper problem, then they have been fooled by what's happening.

I seem to remember another presidential candidate who got in trouble because of his enthusiasm or lack thereof. Didn't Al Gore get critcized because he was so boring, lifeless, dull, unexcited, and unethusiastic?
Maybe the national press will harp on the speeech enough to cause a speech backlash against the press. The way the press is characterizing this, it seems somwhat similar to the Wellstone memorial backlash.

Some of this has been said before, but it all just came together in my mind in this form...

One of the oddities of our system of government is that roles of head of state and head of government are combined in one office.
The head of government (HOG) handles all the nitty gritty of everyday governance. That individual is usually the head of the ruling party and is not afraid to get down and get dirty in the political arena. The HOG deals directly with the formulation and implementation of policy.
The head of state (HOS) is supposed to be the living embodiment of his/her country. The HOS is viewed in almost parental terms. A good HOS gives the impression of quiet strength, serenity, and maturity. In this role, the HOS stays above the fray in most political matters.
Japan is the perfect example of this separation. It is also demonstrable in Thailand, the UK, and Germany - just to name a few countries.

In the US, people usually don't mind if their politicians are a bit peculiar as long as they are effective. A snarling Tom DeLay, a flamboyant Huey Long, a gritty Richard J. Daley, or a nerdy Paul Tsongas can go quite far in our system.
But when it comes to the presidency, voters pay more attention to the HOS aspect of it than most pundits realize. And since most Americans are certainly not policy wonks who stay up late researching NAFTA or debating ethanol subsidies, personality is a major factor in whom they vote for for president.

Medium also determines how candidates are perceived. Those who heard the 1960 Kennedy-Nixon debates on radio felt Nixon had won. But those who watched them on TV gave the edge to JFK.
Howard Dean's speech may not have seemed peculiar to those who saw it in person. But on TV, people saw some sweaty, ranting character screaming at them in their living rooms. This image, combined with previous outbursts from the former governor, made many feel that he was emotionally unfit to serve as the "living embodiment" of the US.

One reason Dubya won in 2000 was his pledge to "restore dignity to the Oval Office" after the Lewinsky affair. When the story of his 1976 drunk driving conviction made the news, he began to dip in the tracking polls because this was viewed as unpresidential.

Like it or not, personality will always play a huge role in presidential politics.

Karl-T wrote,

What I'm saying is that the reporting of it is detached from the reality of the situation. Those reporters where physically there as well. They have ear and eyes. There is no reason to dampen the crowd to pick up on the 'scream' and single that one part out of an longer speech.

That's a persuasive argument. But it's different than suggesting that "the truth" or "what really happened" isn't being reported. Hone your message! Al Franken notwithstanding, it's far more effective to keep the "He's lying!/They're lying!" arrows in your quiver for the most part.

You may well be right about the possible backlash. I think you're certainly right in suggesting that most of the press-and-pundit coverage left out some context that makes "the scream" look somewhat less bizarre. For instance, lots of folks who've seen the TV clip or, worse, only heard it, don't understand that he was gesturing (unfortunately with his overused index fingers) at supporters from the various states he was naming off — is that right? (Certainly he wasn't listing Texas as a state he expects to win, I'd think, but I can certainly see him wanting to recognize his volunteers, like you, from the Lone Star State.) But, ya know, the press really isn't fair in an absolute sense to either the left or the right, and ya just have to get over it and soldier on anyway.

Dean's campaign and his supporters have to recognize, though, that all the stuff about "the scream" was taken by the press and pundits as the logical climax of the whole "angry" meme — and that blowing up in the candidate's face can't be a complete surprise, surely. I know he wants to secure his base with Dems who are mad as hell and don't want to take it any more; but he's also got to broaden his message and pitch it down below the ultrasonic range — metaphorically and literally!

On the issues, Dean is anathema to me. I think he's oftentimes so hyperpartisan (that is, reflexively and unthinkingly anti-Dubya) that he's made himself look silly (e.g., "America's no safer after Saddam's capture"); and occasionally he's been reckless with facts (e.g., calling Charles Pickering a "racist"). I don't think, though, that he's a deliberate liar; I certainly don't doubt his patriotism; and I credit him with vastly more sincerity and self-consistency than Kerry, Edwards, or Clark. Which is to say, I respect Dean more than them (albeit less than I respect Lieberman, but that's another story). If one believes that elections ought to offer up stark choices for the voters — and I tend to agree that they should — a Bush vs. Dean race would be a doozey. So frankly, from way over here on the right, I'm hoping that your guy will demonstrate that he can learn and adapt from the disaster that was Iowa, and that he'll do more campaigning and less shouting. I definitely do not count him out of the race!

Thanks for letting me share a bit of your bandwidth. I commend you and your co-bloggers for your passion and your enthusiasm, and I frankly envy you the great experience I know you're having during this campaign. Hook 'em!