In the top political news of the week, former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean’s withdrawal from the race highlights what has been one of the most interesting and surprising presidential primary races since the members of the Editorial Board were born.
He was once the out-of-the-blue front-runner sporting the biggest campaign wallet and a legion of Internet supporters; the rogue candidate who touted himself as a mighty knight, the best hope to defeat who Dean paints as a snarling dragon reallocating countless gilders to the wealthy in times of duress, shamefully burninating the Iraqi countryside and trashing relations with other important principalities. Dean plummeted quickly, though, following a distant third finish in the opener Iowa caucus and his much-lampooned “I Have a Scream” speech, managing to fall from the front of the pack to winning none of the 18 primary contests to date.
By throwing in his towel, Dean disappointed a grab bag of American political activists: the difficult-to-energize young voters, Democrats of all stripes, hippies, voters contemptuous of Beltway insiders and, more cynically, Bushites who wanted to see a fall contest against a Northern progressive Democrat with an anger streak. (The last non-Southern Democrat to hold the nation’s highest office was a softer-spoken but assertive New Englander named John Kennedy.)
Still, despite the disappointment of his diverse fan base, Dean’s withdrawal is a welcome move, as it should expedite democracy, in a roundabout way. His retreat reduces the race effectively to a two-man competition: Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., versus Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C. (Of the 2,161 delegates needed to secure the party nomination, the Rev. Al Sharpton has picked up 16 delegates, whereas Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, has snagged only two).
There’s something psychologically and mathematically palatable about a two-candidate race. Wider races force voters who like less popular candidates to mull over some game theory. Should they decide to support someone whose ideals most closely align with their own, or is it better to drop their vote to a candidate with a better chance of winning the nomination?
With only two contenders, the criteria are much simpler: Depending on your taste and objectives, vote either for the candidate whose views agree most with yours or for the candidate you think has the greatest chance of defeating President Bush in November’s election. (The latter title is up in the air for the moment. In hypothetical match-ups against Bush, reported a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll released Wednesday, Kerry topped the president 55-43, and Edwards led him 54-44 — both much wider margins than the 4-percent error margin.) Voters can spend more time learning about each candidate, too, with fewer candidates in the field. In an age where sound bytes are too often substitutes for substance, any chance for more voter awareness ought to be a good thing.
In consolation to his fans, Dean can still play a critical role in the primary process. Dean might instruct the 201 delegates currently pledged to him to Kerry or Edwards, a moderate but substantial prize. And with Super Tuesday just weeks away, a Dean endorsement could be a deciding factor in which candidates captures most of that day’s 1,151 delegates — an electoral smorgasbord.