There wasn't much analysis. And to be honest, I don't think economic populism played much of a role one way or another. Primary voters are many things, but they're mostly partisans who want the party to win. That's why they dumped Dean and switched to Kerry so fast. You could argue about Dean's chances in a general election, but no one could argue seriously about Kucinich's. That said, DK was sort of a beloved candidate on the primary trail who always got the loudest applause and had the most small donors. Seth <<<<<>>>>>
there have only been 2 exceptions to candidates favored by "strong" party identifiers winning their party's nomination since 1936 when poll data first became available: stevenson in 52 and mcgovern in 72, even carter - party outsider with few significant connections to national party leadership running against several nationally prominent dems - had backing of significant "strong" dems in '76...
part of story is in what poli sci guys ferguson & rogers call 'hidden election', to compete effectively in multiple state primaries in short period of time, candidates obviously need money, lots of it, most serious nominee hopefuls test their fund-raising ability years in advance, knowing that if they can't raise cash, they may as well not enter race... mh