It's not just that Howard Dean was the initial politician slash blogger, but I really like the way he speaks. Many would charge that gephardt, kerry, or edwards have more charisma when they speak, but I like Dean's choice of content.

When Kerry speaks it's all about specific issues, like health care or jobs. For Gephardt the same thing. And for Edwards as it is with the other two, it's all about vague generalities like "change"

For me, Howard Dean talks about philosophies that I understand and find are solid reasons to reject Bush. The primary one I can think of is when Dean charges Bush with running a campaign that divides clearly liberals and conservatives on pure cultural issues. This is so true! And it BOTHERS me! I'm too young to care about specific policies, nor am I an expert... but when someone generalizes and summarizes what's messed up about Bush in a coherent fashion, that wins me over.

Another example is when Dean describes his foreign policy and how the Cold War was largely won because russians loved America. And how America must strike a high moral order. That's great! That makes sense. Instead the other candidates say something like, "we need to unify, blah blah" ... pooey.

Dean's anger does not bother me. And his lack of panache or style is also not important. What matters is what he says, and what he says convinces me that he cares about doing what is right.

(disclaimer: I'm not saying straightup that Dean is the best candidate, just that his oratory wins me over)