Both the Associated Press and the Politico's Ben Smith point out that in deciding to keep Dean as DNC chair, Obama will most likely also keep the state party chairs happy; they've liked Dean's 50-state strategy. Before the move to retain Dean was announced, Smith wrote that the state party chairs "want Dean to stay, and will fight to keep him."

That is very happy news for the Democrats. For all of some folks' complaints about Dean, his 50-state strategy was exactly the shot in the arm (and kick in the pants) the Democratic Party needed. One of my biggest worries about a Clinton win would have been the end of that strategy in favor of the losing, defensive "blue island" strategy the Democratic Leadership Council embraced -- the one that wrote off everything outside the blue islands as irretrievably Republican.

But Dean had the vision to go on the offensive, and it's been working admirably. Viva local, municipal, and state Democratic grassroots party activism -- death to astroturf, top-down, DC-centered Democrat-in-name-only triangulation!

Kudos to Obama for keeping Dean there. This is very good for the Democratic Party in particular, and the country at large, by reconnecting the party with the rank-and-file in meaningful ways that'll (ideally) bring fresh voices and new ideas into the national discourse.

So far, Obama has only won the nomination and only by a nose. There was no overwhelming mandate within the party for him (given that his opponant recieved just shy of 50% of the vote) and until he wins the presidency and is able to implement the "change" that he keeps talking about, a lot of the chatter about him "taking over" the DNC and the "death of Clintonism" (posted in other articles) is very premature.

Let's take things as they come, and please tone down the rhetoric. If Obama wins the election, we’ll actually get to see if his is able to change the rules of the game. Otherwise, it’s just a lot of empty talk.

@SO: Totally agree. Keeping Dean on will be really important in helping the Democrats make even more gains in congress.

@Ravanne: Actually, no. The system is set up so that the nominee for President becomes the head of the Party. Obama will control the majority of the delegates at the convention, so his organization can control personnel matters at the DNC. In other respects his political power has to wait until he takes office, but not in this respect.

Once you have the majority of the delegates you become the presumptive nominee and you control the national committee. Obama and McCain have crossed that threshold and Clinton . . . well, she has a sketchy claim about popular votes.

And if you think that "threshold" quip was nasty, read it again. You will see that I borrowed it from a genius of nasty.

Dean's 50-state strategy is, has been, will be great for the party. If I've understood things correctly, Clinton's advisors have been trash-talking Dean all along and dumping him as chair of the DNC would have been their first move. Great sign that Obama plans to keep him on board.

Does anybody know exactly what the problem Carville has with Dean? I remember him shooting off about how they shoulda won more seats in 2006 and that Dean was to blame but I've never heard anything more substantial as to why Carville hates him.

Is it just a DNC/DLC thing?

I was just thinking this morning how bitterly disappointed I was when "the Scream" knocked Dean out of the running, and how pathetic I found Kerry as the nominee. That is the only analogy I have to those who are bitter about Hillary. But, looking back, you can see how the long-term consequences have paid off for Democrats. May Hillary take a leadership position that similarly streamlines her strengths.

There's no asterisk attached to Obama's victory: yes, it was close, but he's now the leader of the party. As winner, he's now in control of the party, at least through November.

On the other hand, it's likely that he won't be making major changes to the DNC, other than relatively minor ones (like having the DNC stop taking contributions from lobbyists).

Dean's approach to politics is close to that of Obama; had Clinton won, Dean would be replaced (and it would have been Clinton's right as winner to do so). Even though as DNC head Dean remained neutral during the campaign, he and Obama are natural allies.

Carville's opposition to Dean had to do in part with how the money was spent; the old approach lavished money on the DC-based consultants, people like Carville; Dean's approach, as well as Obama's approach, spends the money at the state level, even in red states, meaning people like Carville make less money.

How wonderful, the guy from Hawaii who went to the highly reputable political arena of Chicago is the nominee and new head of the DNC. Obama is moving up from the likes of his helpfull Senate leader in Illinois, Emil Jones, who states on earmarks, "Some call it pork, I call it steak" and has received tens of millions for his district with help of Obama once in the U.S. Senate-Bon Appatite!. (Read Todd Spivak's work, "Barack Obama and Me", of whom reported on Obama starting when he was new to Chicago). Perhaps the Obama's will now sell their home they obtained with the help of the honest and civic minded Rezko. We may be entreated to a new version of a video showing a woman lusting for Obama in 'Obama Girl Two' to help gain even more national attention. Perhaps the religious Mrs. Obama can be proud for the second time. They will not have to allow slogans like "Bro's before Ho's", or T's showing Obama's two smiling faces over the female wearer's breast since Hillary is history. What will the one time highly reputable Daley spokesman/advisor, Axelman do now? I wish them success in finding another activist church in the D.C. area. What a marvelous day for the DNC and the country as a whole. How wonderful this change you can believe in!