Can Dean turn a gaffe to his advantage
NASHUA, N. H. -- The moment could not have been scripted by campaign workers.
Fresh from a week that saw the name Howard Dean and the Confederate flag entwined in controversy, a young African-American approached the presidential contender at a voter forum here to say he had been offended by Dean's suggestion that the Democratic Party must be a broad tent that extends to men with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks.
It seemed a repeat of the upbraiding Dean endured at the start of the Faneuil Hall debate two days earlier. But this time, a young man said he'd been so moved by what he considered Dean's heartfelt apology for the pain invoking the symbol caused that he was now prepared to vote for him.
The exchange followed hearty applause for Dean, as he again waded through his explanation and apology, in marked contrast to criticism he heard for five days straight. This left some political observers wondering whether Dean's Confederate flag comment might prove to be a misstep-turned-political-boon.
In the minds of some, the matter permitted Dean to show that he does not pander to the usual Democratic constituencies and helped to free him from ties to the peace-and-love left, a perception born of his stances opposing the war in Iraq and his signing of a bill authorizing civil unions for gays and lesbians in Vermont.
"Dean had the reputation for being a little more liberal than he is. There was a misread of Dean," said Stephen Ansolabehere, a professor of political science at the Massachussetts Institute of Technology. "So it does have the potential to help him. Certainly, it makes the criticism that he's received in the Democratic debates much more confused."
Indeed, for all the criticism, by week's end the tide had seemed to turn for Dean, as some commentators compared his Confederate flag comment to those Bill Clinton made in 1992, when he assailed rap singer Sister Souljah and won plaudits for his willingness to challenge core Democratic groups.
A number of editorial pages leaped to Dean's defense, including The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post. The Post laid blame on Dean for what even he acknowledges is a tendency to confrontation. But it went on, "That, and not bogus suggestions that he is a racist, is the real concern raised by Mr. Dean's flag remarks and their aftermath."
Even some of Dean's most outspoken detractors relented. John F. Kerry, who initially denounced as a half-step Dean's apology, said by week's end that he "accepted the expression of regret . . . whenever somebody apologizes, my inclination is to accept their apology and move on."
But moving on and receiving political benefit are separate matters, other specialists said.
"If Dean is going to do well in the South, it will be because he puts together a biracial coalition," said Al From, the founder and chief executive officer of the Democratic Leadership Council, a centrist group. "I just don't know who you gain with that statement, so I don't think it helps him in the long run with anybody." 