A lot has been made of James Carville's recent attacks on Howard Dean that include a demand that Dean be replaced at the DNC.
Personally, I have had mixed feelings throughout the past couple years about Dean's stewardship. His strategy, while roundly denounced by establishment Beltway Democrats, was never anything worse than a calculated risk. It may have been right, it may have been wrong, but it was a gamble that was worthwhile at least for the sake of trying something new when the "old" clearly wasn't working.
More below the fold.
Carville now specifically criticizes Dean for not providing more money for House races, saying we could have made 10 or more additional gains than we did.
But today, National Journal's "Hotline" analyzes Carville's claim with a realistic eye. And what do they conclude? That no more than 4 additional Dem challengers could have been helped by more national party committee money. Hotline identifies Hafen in NV; Maffei and Massa in NY; and Wulsin in OH as 4 on whose behalf indy DNC expenditures would have been well spent and could have knocked off the incumbent Rethugs there.
I appreciate what Hotline has to say, and I note additionally they also gave Dean some credit here and here for this year's successful Dem election.
I'm still not 100% sold on the immediate effect of Dean's agenda. But I appreciate that the agenda always was, and still is, about the long-term. And the improved morale of Democrats nationally because of the DNC's committment can't be questioned--that in itself is worth a lot long-term.