Talk:Howard Dean

Tom Harkin?
A quote from one of Dean's speeches (the one with the "scream") seems to be addressed to Tom Harkin. Is there a reason why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.214.169.224 (talk) 20:54, 30 August 2005 (UTC)


 * The speech was given in Iowa, a state in which Harkin is a Senator and Harkin was one of Dean's biggest supporters in the state. Dean's "scream" was the beginning of his speech after having been introduced to the crowd by Harkin.  It is customary to recognize the person who has introduced you and that is what Dean was doing. - Jord 16:03, 31 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Ah, I didn't know Harkin introduced him. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.188.223.206 (talk) 20:13, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

The Al Gore photo.
Image:AlGoreHowardDean.jpg is clearly identified as the property of the Reuters wire service on its page. Wire photos are against Wikipedia policy, so I removed it from the page. --12.217.121.245 04:30, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

POV
This paragraph is very POV:
 * Dean attended a post-caucus rally for his volunteers in Iowa to deliver his concession speech, aimed at cheering up those in attendance. Forced to shout over the cheers of his enthusiastic audience, Dean didn't realize the crowd noise was being filtered out by his unidirectional microphone, leaving only his full-throated exhortations audible to the television viewers. To those at home, it sounded as if he was raising his voice out of sheer emotion. Recordings from within the crowd made it clear that Dean was shouting in order to be heard over the cheers of the crowd.

Anyone who's seen the video should be able to realize that Dean's style of speaking cannot be explained as his attempt to be heard over the crowd. He's not just speaking loudly. His body language is also very intense and forceful. And the scream at then was clearly not an attempt to just be heard. Dean was obviously trying to pump of the crowd with a very emotionally charged performance, and while there's nothing wrong with this in the end he just looked silly.--198.93.113.49 15:02, 4 October 2005 (UTC)


 * The problem is that "the video" is about 20 seconds long and loops over and over again, people who were actually watching the origional broadcast seem to be the only ones to notice that there was no scream at all, not even a little one, simply a side effect of the 'liberal' media playing the 20 second clip, over, and over, and over, and over again, constantly repeating that Howard Dean was crazy....--205.188.117.71 07:05, 7 January 2006 (UTC)


 * It depends on which video, and which sound feed, of the event, you're listening to. As a former "orange hatted true believer" whose seen and heard a few recordings, I would say there are *very* few feeds where the famous scream isn't noticable, i.e., you always *can* hear it if you're listening for it. By the same token, if you're watching the famous audio feed the networks ran, the audience is dowright quiet by comparison to the feeds from inside the crowd. Check out http://www.valuejudgment.org/archives/000441.html for some context, and take a swing at rewording, based on both crowd nosies and comparisons with other audio feeds? Ronabop 08:07, 8 January 2006 (UTC)


 * There was a screm - I was 6 feet in front of him (in the buffer between the crowd and stage) - there was a scream and it wasn't presidential. In the end the reasons for the screma being audible are not material - the fact ramains that it gave the media a 'Dukakis in a tank' or 'Dan Quale "Potatoe"' moment to define Dean and that did a lot of damage to his campaign. Trapper 21:03, 8 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Fuck off! Not presidential? Who gives a fuck? He was getting the crowd pumped, and it worked, and it was fucking funny. Lighten the fuck up, like Howard Dean, bless the lovely bastard.
 * Byaaaaa!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Disciple of Marlowe (talk • contribs) 06:43, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Media image of an empty room?
"However, those who were in the actual audience that day insist that they were not aware of the infamous scream until they returned to their hotel rooms and saw it on TV. There were many thousands of people in the room that day, all screaming for all they were worth, making it hard to hear Dean, even with a microphone - this is very different from the media image of Dean screaming to an empty room."

Is there anyone who is aware of a media image where Dean was screaming to an empty room? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.74.80.240 (talk) 22:16, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Messages and Themes
Atlant and I talked over why he reverted the phrase he did, and here's what I think works. My original phrase was imperfect because it implied that all or most of Dean's supporters were radical. His correction was imperfect because it implied that Dean was branded as a radical due to the actions/rhetoric of his moderately left-wing supporters. So I corrected the language to be more precise: his most radicalized supporters, by association and their visibility, branded Dean as being a radical. The lorax reverted that as well, apparantly on POV grounds, but I've re-reverted because I think that this is the least POV and most descriptive wording. Dean was branded as an extremist by both the media and his opponents. This was facilitated by his most radicalized supporters' rhetoric. These supporters were not "left-leaning", but similarly they weren't necessarily his core or mainstream supporters.

I'm trying to avoid implying that it was his "left-leaning" (ie more moderate) supporters who contributed to his characterization as a radical. What POV was being detected?

Wellspring 12:34, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * UPDATE: I've been reverted again, this time by 8bitJake, with the comment "Message and themes - "most Left" That is not true. Dean supporters were no where near the Kucinich people". I'm not sure what the problem is, but clearly my wording is misleading somehow. As I say above, I'm not saying that most of Dean's supporters were radicals. I'm saying that those of Dean supporters who were radicals were covered to the exclusion of his more moderate supporters, and that this lead to Dean himself being branded a radical.
 * As reverted, the sentence implies that somehow Dean's moderate supporters were responsible for this. Worse, the last sentence has now been changed to the point where it no longer fits in the flow of the section. I'd like to see some suggestions about what specifically can be done to express the facts without causing offense or misunderstandings. Could we have some dialog on this talk page before we go further?
 * Wellspring 19:48, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Howard Dean's recent remarks
Since I do not have or could possibly be NPOV, concerncing Dr. Dean, should his recent remarks concerning Jewish Republicans be relevant, especially as a quote? His remarks given on the heels by a simmilar speech by Republican National Convention chair Ken Mehlman, given to the American Jewish Commitee, "took a swipe at Republicans saying..." I was recently asked about the difference between the Democratic and Republican parties... when it comes down to it, the difference is that the Democrats fundamentally believe that it is important to make sure that American Jews feel comfortable being American Jews."" [http://seattlepi.com/national/1110AP_Dean.html?s=dean. This was in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. is there any chance someone wants to add this into his quotes section, if not, I will do it myself in a couple of days, and y'all can edit me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valentinejoesmith (talk • contribs) 23:57, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

need help phrasing liberals' criticism of Dean paragraph
8bitjake- feel free to rephrase the sentences, but factual, documented examples of criticism of Dean's DNC leadership belong in the paragraph about taking fire from his own side. If you would like to rephrase the sentences (although I largely echoed the Bismarck Tribune's wording, so it's hard for me to think it's too biased), I'm sure we can work something out.

Additionally, media outlets have reported on Dean's repeated refusal to debate the RNC chairman after former DNC chairman McAuliffe regularly made appearances with his Republican counterpart. Again, if you would like to rephrase the sentence, please help yourself.

Continuing to delete relevant information is not appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nhertel (talk • contribs) 05:16, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Controversial Quotes
Shouldn't the Confederate flag remark be included? --Silver2195 18:18, 24 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Sure, as long as it's done in an NPOV way. It marked a major schism between the mainstream of DNC thought (to mostly disregard the South) and the difference that Howard Dean was trying to make.
 * Atlant 20:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

As far as the white, Christian remark goes, along with Senator Obama's remark, a nice addition would be RNC Chairman, Ken Mehlman's, response to the effect of, "I'm sure those who attended my bar mitzvah will be surprised to hear that I am now the head of a white, Christian party". Lmeister 21:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

On the Kelo case, I changed the dissenting justices. O'Connor wrote the opinion that others joined, not Thomas. Thomas both joined her opinion, and wrote a separate dissent to which no one joined. --Redheaded dude (talk) 15:43, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Did he really have the support of the NRA?
I know he said he did, but i don't quite trust it, doesn't fit well with such a left wing carreer politician--John Herbert Walker Bush Smith 00:36, 8 July 2006 (UTC)


 * He certainly did when he was the governor of Vermont. And he's not really much of a lefty.
 * Atlant 00:46, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Well he was not a NRA member but he did not pass any new gun laws in Vermont when he was Governor. So he got a good rating from the NRA. This came up in the 2004 primary debate. I don't think American poltics is as simple as right and left--8bitJake 03:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)


 * He's a gun-owner, gun user, etc. His social policies about things like gay marriage, social security, etc don't impact his NRA rating. The NRA doesn't care if gay married couples are getting married and living off of social security, as long as they're allowed to be gay, married, living off of social security, and have guns. Ronabop 07:43, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually gay americans can't get married in Vermont. They can get "Civil Unions" but not married. --8bitJake 19:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

"Yeaaaaagggggh!!!"
give me a break, this is not a word, he said the word yes or yeah, even including 'Yeaaaaagggggh' in an encyclopedia article is beyond silly, if someone can find the actual transcript, sure, but including Yeaaaaagggggh!!! as part of a quote...--64.12.116.12 20:32, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually, I believe the word you are searching for is Byaaaa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chublin (talk • contribs) 21:40, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Dave Chappelle is the one who popularized the BYAAAAW, Howard Dean screamed YAW. Everyone remembers Chappelle's version of it, but it is incorrect to the the B in front of the YAW. Watch this video on Youtube, it contains Chappelle's BYAW and the Dean Scream. Byahhh. Anyways, Dave Chappelle should be mentioned someone on Howard Dean's page. --Rhymingisfun (talk) 03:44, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I agree, Dave Chappelle has to be referenced in this article. It is incomplete without it. Deeejazzy (talk) 14:39, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Scream heard round the world vs collapse of the campaign
Neither title is POV free - anybody got a better suggestion? Clearly the scream is a big part of of mythology around the end of the campaign and may or may not be why it effectivly collapsed when real voting started. Trapper 18:59, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Dean's article proves to me that Wikipedia is a liberal outlet
Dean is one of most controversial people in American politics yet his article barely stratches the surface. Many of his controversial quotes are left out yet if you look at any Republican's bio, there is a special section for controversies. --Rambone (Talk) 20:12, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually I removed a whole section on contraversial quotes from this page as they will always be riddled with POV. I would do the same with any I saw on Republican pages (or any other persons of any other political persuasion), too. Wikipedia is supposed to be non POV and non political - the only way this can be achieved is to leave this kind of information out and just present bland facts. Mickmaguire 17:53, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * So are you saying that it's not even relevant to mention that he called the Iraqi PM an "anti-semite" yesterday? How about when he said that the only way that Republicans could get black people to come to an event is if they invited the hotel staff into the room? How about when he compared Katharine Harris to Joseph Stalin???  If a Republican said that then it would be posted on Wikipedia and never deleted.  --Rambone (Talk) 20:12, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * See my reply above, I would delete it. The question is whether or not the content provides a meaningful significant reference on the individual. Whether or not it is encylopedic. If the comment spawned a significant world event then it would be relevant and worhty of leaving (along with a description of what the effect was) but on its own it is pratically valueless in an encylopedia. I cant answer for whether others would delete in the same way, but this is my practiced philiosphy on it. I shoudl add that I have removed plenty of +ve POV content from Democrats too, in fact more than I have -ve. Mickmaguire 20:24, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, the removal of the controversial quotes section is ridiculous. Dean's controversial statements are noteworthy, especially in that his current role as DNC chair is in large part a spokesman role. You would expect at least some of his infamous quotes to show up in any obituary on him. Other people who famously made controversial quotes get theirs (rightly) mentioned here - see the entries for, say, James G. Watt and Frank Rizzo. Can the section be truncated a little? Maybe. But removing it altogether is unreasonable. Korny O&#39;Near 21:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * That's what I'm saying. Type in the name of any conservative Republican politician/commentator and almost every one of them has a special section dedicated to controversies/criticism.  Are you willing to delete those as well, Mick?  --Rambone (Talk) 21:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * As I said earlier - I would (please read my replies fully). I'm happy to let the quotes section stay as that seems to be the concensus. I resent your implications that I am politically motivated in this, that is simply not the case. Mickmaguire 15:17, 28 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I despise Republicans on principle; and, at least until his revolting and unprincipled anti-Semitism charge vs. Maliki I kind of liked Howard Dean. But I would concur especially from trying to keep the Joseph Sobran page halfway acceptable, that there is some bias in favor of the left.  I don't know precisely how this can be addressed, but I agree that it is a problem. St. Jimmy 01:15, 28 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't know if it can be addressed. I'll admit it...I'm a conservative, however, I leave my political beliefs out of my editing of articles.  I totally believe that left-wing bias exists on Wikipedia and unless those people take it upon themselves to become NPOV then I don't know how it can be changed.  I'd say the same thing for right-wing bias (if it existed here) as well. --Rambone (Talk) 01:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)


 * there is always going to be claims of bias one way or the other, especially when anybody is free to change the pages in nay way they see fit... The site will likely always end up at least partially reflecting the views of those who maintain it, but then this is no different from other media. Removing content that could be identified as bias is the only way to avoid the majority of this. Mickmaguire 15:17, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Fixing something which can be fixed
POV disputes can go on forever, because they are just that. POV. Whether an article is POV or not depends on one's own POV. But something that is more objective is whether Howard Dean was the longest-serving Governor of Vermont or the second-longest serving Governor of Vermont. The article's current contention is that he was both. The confusion here is from the fact that for some of the time that Thomas Chittenden was governor, Vermont was not admitted as a U.S. state and was really still its own country. Dean is the longest-serving governor of the U.S. state of Vermont; adding his post- statehood time as governor to his time as the head of the goverment when Vermont was independent, Chittenden is the longest serving Governor of Vermont. So either one can be right. Should the article go with the "longest-serving governor of the State of Vermont" answer? Rlquall 21:03, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Quote section
Should this section be moved to Wikiquote? I dont know and havent been able to surmise the admin policy on this. Other political pages have their own wikiquote pages and not a quote section. However, is there anykind of stated policy on this matter? I wont move anything until people weigh in on the situation but will put a nominating tag on the quote section just so people are aware of the discussion. Jasper23 18:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, after no response I moved the quotations. What do people think?Jasper23 22:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Big Improvement! Mickmaguire 14:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Dean's connection to Skull and Bones
The addition of possible skull and bones affliation while attending Yale, or the fact he did not deny the claims, should be added to the article. I think it would give a better insight into the Dean character, why he supported Kerry, and information about his activities at Yale. Can someone find some sources and post it up? Thanx. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.225.35.36 (talk • contribs).


 * Can someone follow up on this too? It would be pretty interestingTallicfan20 (talk) 04:00, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Homosexual Marriage
It says at the bottom that Dean supports same-sex marriage. That's the first time I've ever heard that - when did he change his position on that issue?--Mr Beale 19:03, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Controversial statements
Is a horrible POV + OR mess. It's not even mostly about his statements. Needs fundamental reworking. Derex 22:35, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

The Dean Scream Speach OGG file
This is the speach leading up to the scream. The speach is clearly intelligable, but the scream gets lost in the crowd chant. It think it is a worthwhile addtion to this article. The actual scream could be added as a separate OGG file. --68.207.206.69 18:55, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Link To Video and a Link To Article--68.207.206.69 19:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Dean Denies the scream http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA426285.html?display=Breaking+News&promocode=SUPP&nid=2228--68.207.206.69 19:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Vermont Governorship info box
Members of the wiki Vermont Project are attempting to place the official Vermont State House portrait in the info boxes of past Vermont governors. As the infobox is about the state's governorship, not earlier, or later careers, please make room for this and locate other images in the article where appropriate. Thanks. CApitol3 13:38, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Who is Green?
In the part about the Dean scream there is a sentence that reads, "The incessant replaying of the "Dean Scream" by the press became a debate on the topic of whether Dean was the victim of media bias. Such reports certainly fit with reports of "unelectability," as shown by Green's Atlantic Monthly piece." Who is this Green person? Nowhere else in the article is there a reference to Green who apparently writes for the Atlantic Monthly. --Tocino 06:48, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Superlarge image in FireFox3
The picture of Dean filled my webbrowser and pushes out all content from the article. I am using FireFox3 and maybe that is the problem, but every other article on Wikipedia displays correctly. --John Bahrain (talk) 15:22, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Yay, I fixed something. "A recent MediaWiki revision is responsible for many images not resizing correctly inside templates and infoboxes. These can usually be fixed by removing "px" from the image size parameter. See ClickFix for more information." Wikimancer (talk) 17:50, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

50 state strategy
The article has a long section on the 50 state strategy, and nowhere in the section does is mention that Dean came under serious crticism from establishment democrats for this change in strategy. An editor immediately removed by sourced insertion of a mention of this, claiming it was irrelevant. It seems very relevant to me--What do others think? Gilbertine goldmark (talk) 20:53, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Scream more notable than career as governor?
There seems to be a long section about the Dean Scream. Is this to suggest that the scream is more notable than his career as governor? Should there be an effort to count sentences and allot a quota to early life, governor, chairman, scream? Yes? No? Does length (either too long or too short) create a biased situation?

There was a citation needed tag-has become known in American political jargon as the "Dean Scream".[citation needed]

I have found two citations to prove that the term is used. FridayCell7 (talk) 21:51, 21 June 2008 (UTC)


 * This is a non-problem. There is no bias, and we don't count sentences. Of course it is notable, and it doesn't have too much weight in the article - he is far more known for the scream than for anything he did as governor.  It's well-cited and not a problem. Tvoz / talk 17:02, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

he is far more known for the scream than for anything he did as governor Really?! FridayCell7 (talk) 19:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Since when is he know as a moderate in Vermont?
There is a sentence that keeps reappearing stating that in Vermont Dean is considered a moderate not a liberal. I have not marked this as "reference needed." Instead I have removed this statement (twice). Having lived in Vermont for Dean's entire political carrier, I have never seen him regarded as a moderate here. If somebody wants to reverse my edit please state why here first. The Goat (talk) 00:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Throughout Dean's tenure as Governor, left-leaning democrats would accuse him of secretly being a Republican based on his fiscal conservatism. I clearly remember how centrist he was considered to be as governor, and have always been amused at how liberal he is perceived to be nationally.Example 1 Example 2 —MJBurrage(T•C) 03:26, 11 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Liberal vs. Conservative is not the same as Democrat vs. Republican. The Vermont republican party is liberal.  Just look at Jim Jeffords.  So saying that Dean worked with the Vermont republican party while he was in office makes his record moderate is simply not true.  Dean was always understood to be liberal while in office in Vermont.  The fact that the Vermont media never did an expose recording this speaks more about the media and voters in Vermont then Dean's political leanings.  No expose was required because Dean was behaving just like the voters wanted. (or what the media thought the voters wanted.  But that is a larger discussion.)The Goat (talk) 15:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Would this link be good enough to insert into the article as a reference for Howard Dean being a Liberal? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34482626/ns/politics/  If it is not could you please explain the reason to me?  I am having difficulty in the MoveOn.org article trying to remove this link as a source for the MoveOn.org claim of 5 million members.  If it is not good enough for this article, could it be good enough for another?Bikeric (talk) 01:38, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

What's next?
The article doesn't have any mention of his next gig, after relinquishing the DNC chairmanship. Is there speculation worth covering out there? MrZaius talk  07:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Confederate Flag flap
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/11/01/elec04.prez.dean.confederate.flag/

This was a key element in opposition to Dean as a candidate by other Democrats. As such, it should be included in the article. I placed it in the timeline until the regular editors of this page find a more relevant place for it. 71.102.30.217 (talk) 07:38, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Curious about something
How much of this page is written by Randall Monroe? Trustworthiness:Vendor reliability:Privacy:Child safety: —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djaked (talk • contribs) 06:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

RE; Mujahedin-e Khalq ......2011 update dissapears ! had a decent source  whats up ?
Regarding public-relations campaign on behalf of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), lobbying Obama to remove it from the official list of terrorist organizations.

His current activities now need further updating regarding pharmacy industry work.....

As I'd like to get resolution before bothering overworked staff at Wikki, is there just going to be a constant removal of relevent stuff here? This is easily verifiable stuff.

Thanks Kraig Richard (talk) 13:24, 8 September 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kraig Richard (talk • contribs) 13:22, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Supporter of universal healthcare?
The page says this: He is a noted staunch supporter of universal health care.[3]

When I go to source number 3 and read the whole thing, it never once says that he supports universal healthcare. How can someone use this article claim he is a "staunch" supporter of it if he never comes out saying he supports it?

Is there another source for him supporting universal healthcare? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.222.56.199 (talk) 18:48, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Citation for uninsured claim?
"The uninsured rate in Vermont dropped from 12.7% to 9.6% under his watch."

This statistic is in the page, yet there is no citation for it. Doing a google search does not provide a source for this statistic, hence I am skeptical. A claim using specific numbers such as these should have a citation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.222.56.199 (talk) 16:22, 18 November 2014


 * Thank you for this suggestion. I have supplied a reference with updated numbers. (Please remember to sign your posts, using ~ .) User:HopsonRoad 22:43, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Howard Dean. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071124213546/http://www.cnn.com:80/2003/ALLPOLITICS/12/09/elec04.prez.debate.ap/index.html to http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/12/09/elec04.prez.debate.ap/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 21:03, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Chair, chairperson or chairman?
An IP editor asserts that, when Dean headed the party, he was Chairman, not Chair. This is plausible, but I have been unable to find references that support when the changeover in terminology took place, apart from resume-type material. The DNC bylaws of 2005 make reference to a "chairperson". The party website uses the term, "chair". User:HopsonRoad 13:22, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Howard Dean. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110511224245/http://www.observer.com/2008/look-whos-back-its-gore-and-lieberman-08 to http://www.observer.com/2008/look-whos-back-its-gore-and-lieberman-08

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:18, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Howard Dean. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://politicsny.today.com/2009/02/03/daschle-drops-his-bid-for-hhs-post/
 * Added tag to http://www.lewin.com/~/media/Lewin/Site_Sections/Publications/1549.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080625031927/http://www.preventchildabuse.org/publications/lookin_up/downloads/fall02.pdf to http://www.preventchildabuse.org/publications/lookin_up/downloads/fall02.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:13, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Howard Dean. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050831155100/http://www.politics1.com/dean.htm to http://www.politics1.com/dean.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930121906/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/printout/0,8816,1200740,00.html to http://www.time.com/time/magazine/printout/0,8816,1200740,00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:10, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

The audio should be on the page.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3f/DeanScream.ogg

it should ideally be in the intro paragraphs.

AllThatJazz2012 (talk) 17:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)


 * "Intro paragraphs"? Absolutely not. The 2004 section, maybe. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:21, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , it's already in there. See Howard Dean. That's the appropriate placement. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:22, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Anti-Senotism controversy
Howard Dean has a troubling record of posting extremely anti-Semitic remarks on Twitter, and I am frankly surprised this is not mentioned in the article. Whenever a right-wing politician says something someone deems offensive, Wikipedia makes sure to include at least a paragraph about it. Source:. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clerkaggi (talk • contribs) 03:46, 3 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi, . Please remember to sign your posts with ~.
 * The Jerusalem Post link that you provided leads to some Tweets regarding Israeli policy, commentary on its politicians, and the nature of support for that country among American Jews. This is not the same as being antisemitic, any more than criticizing American policy, American politicians or their adherents is anti-[fill in the adjective]. It's fine to summarize Dean's opinions, based on reliable sources, but WP editors may not provide their personal point of view on topics, per Neutral point of view. Not even the article that you cite calls him "anti-Semitic", in focusing on Israeli politics more frequently than on the politics of other interest groups.
 * Sincerely, HopsonRoad (talk) 12:40, 3 May 2021 (UTC)