Steve Bainbridge did the stream of consciousness thing and did the yeoman service of enduring the CNN coverage for his report. He was rewarded for his efforts with an appearance by former Wyoming Senator Alan Simpson, one of the funniest politicians ever, who remarked that Dean “‘[l]ooked like a prairie dog on drugs’ or something like that.” [Update: “a prairie dog on speed.”]

Apparently Bob Novak thought Dean was “ranting”–and Novak knows from ranting.

Robert Prather thinks “the real losers will be Clinton and Gore if this trend continues. The Clintons’ candidate is Wesley Clark and Gore’s candidate is Dean. Again, if the trend continues, and Kerry actually wins it will sideline both the Clintons and Gore for the next eight years.” Thems a lot of “ifs,” my friend.

Matthew J. Stinson posts a picture and caption of Dean that depict him as “unhinged.” He also applauds the grace with which Gephardt accepted his defeat and reminds us that he is not running for re-election to the House, so this is likely the end of his political career.

Sean Hackbarth fears the impact of the results on the long-term viability of the Duck Hunt. He also thinks it shows that Democrats are more pragmatic than we’d been led to believe.

Stephen Green links a Will Saletan post noting that Dean, who was running against “the Establishment,” wound up with most of the Establishment behind him. And came in third! Robert Tagorda addresses the endorsement issue as well.

Kevin Aylward thinks John Edwards is “a hottie.”

Dean Esmay has another picture of Dean ranting and some reflections of why Dean lost.

Steven Taylor admits that maybe his initial positive reaction to Dean ranting like a loon was hasty. Still, he thinks it showed a defiant Dean who didn’t look like a loser and was “a speech his supporters no doubt liked.” Alas, there are far fewer of them than we had been led to believe.

Mark Hasty, who is originally from Iowa and thus has no problems with “a bunch of elderly pig farmers” having a disproportionate role in the selection process, reminds us that the winner of the Iowa caucus is seldom the nominee.

Tom Bevan thinks the results showed that “there were simply too many questions left about Dean’s anger, inexperience, and electability for caucus goers to stomach” and that Dean’s ranting, loony, Pat Buchananesque speech demonstrated that “Dean doesn’t get it.” He also provides his regular list of links to mainstream pundits. My guess is none of them say anything I haven’t read on a blog somewhere already.

Glenn Reynolds, not surprisingly, has a good roundup of his own.

Scott Ott has the best line of the day: “Dean Flop Threatens Internet, Bloggers Hardest Hit.” Heh, indeed.

Donnie observes,

Howard Dean’s third-place finish last night isn’t what will do him in.

What will do him in is that horrendous noise he made at the end of his speech…that “Aieeyahharrgghhh” growl/moan.

Nobody who makes a noise like that can expect to become President of the United States. Nobody.

Kevin Drum notes that George W. Bush was the real winner.

FILED UNDER: 2004 Election, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is Professor and Department Head of Security Studies at Marine Corps University's Command and Staff College. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm veteran. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.


  1. I knew that was going to come out wrong…

  2. Kevin Hayden says:

    Kerry won’t have Kennedy available to carry his water for him once Congress is back in session. I don’t think Iowa will prove representative of the outcome in subsequent states. I mean Sharpton may come in second in South Carolina!