Were “Dean or bust” people blamed for Kerry loosing?

[darklordoftech]

The way people blame “Bernie or bust” voters for 2016.

[Sumner 1868]

Some did, but the Dean coalition was different from the 2016 Sanders coalition in being far more upscale. Dean did miserably through 2003-2004 among working-class Democrats of all races, and many polls showed him weaker than Kerry against Bush. His voters were mostly the "latte liberal" crowd, many of whom later voted for Hillary over Sanders.

[brucejoel99]

Some did, but the Dean coalition was different from the 2016 Sanders coalition in being far more upscale. Dean did miserably through 2003-2004 among working-class Democrats of all races, and many polls showed him weaker than Kerry against Bush. His voters were mostly the "latte liberal" crowd, many of whom later voted for Hillary over Sanders.

This.

My uncle was a Deaniac at the time & even he admitted that, in retrospect, Kerry was definitely the better candidate. A lot of progressive firebrands were caught into the groupthink of the early netroots internet activism & missed that Dean was actually the latte liberal candidate & that Kerry had the support of the working-class base of the party & was actually giving rabble-rousing populist stump-speeches to blue-collar workers in NH. And yes, you heard me right: Kerry gave rabble-rousing speeches!

[Alben Barkley]

Some did, but the Dean coalition was different from the 2016 Sanders coalition in being far more upscale. Dean did miserably through 2003-2004 among working-class Democrats of all races, and many polls showed him weaker than Kerry against Bush. His voters were mostly the "latte liberal" crowd, many of whom later voted for Hillary over Sanders.

This.

My uncle was a Deaniac at the time & even he admitted that, in retrospect, Kerry was definitely the better candidate. A lot of progressive firebrands were caught into the groupthink of the early netroots internet activism & missed that Dean was actually the latte liberal candidate & that Kerry had the support of the working-class base of the party & was actually giving rabble-rousing populist stump-speeches to blue-collar workers in NH. And yes, you heard me right: Kerry gave rabble-rousing speeches!

Funny thing is that this time it turned out Sanders was more of the latte liberal championed by progressive firebrands on the internet, while Biden had more appeal to the working class voters in real life. So pretty much the same disconnect occurred. The difference is this time some of these people were fooled into thinking Bernie had actual blue collar appeal based on 2016, but it's pretty clear now those were just anti-Hillary votes rather than pro-Bernie votes. And the funny thing about that is that in 2008, when most of the internet (that wasn't behind Ron Paul) was behind Obama, Hillary definitely won the WWC vote. It doesn't seem the internet progressives have ever actually been on the side of the working man the way they think they are.

[Gracile]

Some did, but the Dean coalition was different from the 2016 Sanders coalition in being far more upscale. Dean did miserably through 2003-2004 among working-class Democrats of all races, and many polls showed him weaker than Kerry against Bush. His voters were mostly the "latte liberal" crowd, many of whom later voted for Hillary over Sanders.

This.

My uncle was a Deaniac at the time & even he admitted that, in retrospect, Kerry was definitely the better candidate. A lot of progressive firebrands were caught into the groupthink of the early netroots internet activism & missed that Dean was actually the latte liberal candidate & that Kerry had the support of the working-class base of the party & was actually giving rabble-rousing populist stump-speeches to blue-collar workers in NH. And yes, you heard me right: Kerry gave rabble-rousing speeches!

Funny thing is that this time it turned out Sanders was more of the latte liberal championed by progressive firebrands on the internet, while Biden had more appeal to the working class voters in real life. So pretty much the same disconnect occurred. The difference is this time some of these people were fooled into thinking Bernie had actual blue collar appeal based on 2016, but it's pretty clear now those were just anti-Hillary votes rather than pro-Bernie votes. And the funny thing about that is that in 2008, when most of the internet (that wasn't behind Ron Paul) was behind Obama, Hillary definitely won the WWC vote. It doesn't seem the internet progressives have ever actually been on the side of the working man the way they think they are.

Sanders still appealed to working-class people in 2020, however, the type of working-class voter that comprises his base is far different than the archetypal blue-collar WWC voters that he lost support from 2016. His working-class support skewed much younger, urban, and educated (areas with college-educated populations and below the national median income had some of his strongest showings if you look at precinct data for various cities and compare it to census tract data). Not to mention his support among working-class Hispanic voters - which arguably increased from 2016. The rural WWC voters that made up his 2016 coalition turned out to be some of his softest supporters (motivated more by anti-Clinton sentiment), but that still doesn't detract from his non-insignificant support among working-class urbanites.

[Gracile]

To answer the question, no, this was not a thing because Dean's candidacy itself was kind of a flash in the pan that didn't have an outsize impact on the primary electorate. While Dean got modest support initially from liberals and a large part of the prominent anti-war wing of the party, he was hurt by Kerry and Edwards surging in Iowa (which of course lead to the infamous "Dean Scream"). By mid-February, Kerry had all the momentum, and it was evident by the time Dean dropped out that Kerry was set to dominate the upcoming primaries - and his potential support more or less coalesced behind Kerry. The 2004 primary was not nearly as divisive as the 2008 and 2016 primaries which both lead to the losing candidate's had a non-insignificant opposition movement to the nominee. The goal among groups likely to support Dean turned to defeating Bush more than anything (that was mainly a function of the polarized environment created by the Iraq War).

[Flyersfan232]

Did sanders endorse dean?

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

Some did, but the Dean coalition was different from the 2016 Sanders coalition in being far more upscale. Dean did miserably through 2003-2004 among working-class Democrats of all races, and many polls showed him weaker than Kerry against Bush. His voters were mostly the "latte liberal" crowd, many of whom later voted for Hillary over Sanders.

Dean sounds a lot like Gary Hart. Gary Hart had the upscale white and under 30 crowd as well and was a technocratic Atari Democrat.