According to many Democrats, including those who know him best, Howard Dean is really a moderate, not a liberal.
Is this supposed to be reassuring? If true, what does it say about the center of gravity (if there is one) of the Democratic Party?
Since there are so few conservative Democrats left (far fewer than liberal Republicans), maybe it no longer makes much sense to refer to liberal Democrats or moderate Democrats.
Howard Dean really is more moderate than many of his supporters. Except for his position on the war, and on gay marriage, he’s pretty centrist and even a little right-of-center in some areas.
Of course, Bill Clinton was more conservative than a lot of his supporters. So was George McGovern.
The McGovernites who took over the Democratic Party in the 1970s were further to the left than their standard-bearer–so much so that McGovern himself felt compelled at one point to make it clear that he was not a McGovernite.
Thus, the Dean phenomenon is still fascinating to watch. It may be a sign of a permanent change within the party. Or it may be the last gasp of the old guard. We’ll see I suppose.
I don’t think Dean generates excitement because of his beliefs, not even Iraq, but because of his ‘tude. Most of his competitors give the impression of being afraid of Bush, and with reason, as he has outmaneuvered them in the past. See this Weekly Standard article.