Clark's Effect on Dean's Run - some thoughts

[WilliamPitt]

Before I lay my thoughts out here, let me say that this is not a "flame" or a "bait" or a "bash." This is an analysis. Before I got involved in 9/11 and Iraq stuff, 98% of what I did was political/campaign analysis. It's nice to get back to it, now that we have a race, but I hope people can avoid thinking I am "bashing" anyone. I also hope people don't think my analysis is colored by any advocacy for one candidate or another, because it isn't. This is an objective look at the battlefield.

Standard wisdom holds that a Clark entry into the race will adversely affect Kerry, because Clark will siphon natural Kerry voters who want to go for a guy with 'foreign policy experience' and a war service record. This is probably true, but I also think a Clark entry bodes very, very poorly for Howard Dean.

Why?

Because Clark will become the instant front-runner when he enters, the "flavor of the week" with his mug on every magazine and evety newspaper and every TV network. He is very media savvy and will use this to maximum effect.

This will, instantly, change the nature of the media dialogue towards discussions of Democratic strengths in the foreign policy realm. The problem for Dean, despite his Iraq vote, is that he really has no bankable foreign policy experience. "But neither does Clark!" will be the rejoinder, and that is correct to a degree...but people and the media will see "General" and "NATO" and translate that into foreign policy experience.

Foreign policy will become the framework for the campaign, post-Clark-entry. This is especially true with the Iraq mess all over the place. They can all stand around and talk about bread-and-butter economic issues, but the media will frame it as coming from "former NATO general Clark," or from "Kerry, member of the Senate Foreign Relations committee and a Vietnam Veteran."

When this reframe comes, Dean will be on the outside looking in.

Yes, Kerry is going to be hurt by this as well, but because the media has him tabbed as having that foreign policy experience, he will at least be within the tent. Dean won't be.

Don't get mad, Dean people and Dean campaign people. Figure out a way to deal with it, because it will be the reality as soon as the Clark announcement comes.

My 0.02 cents.

[Clete]

1. Besides the foreign policy experience, I see another problem

with Clark that Dean doesn't have. Clark has no experience in governing as an elected official, which Dean does. This is not bashing Clark in favor of Dean. It's only an observation I have made.

[democracyindanger]

3. That's Will's point

The media environment will be all about foreign policy. It's true that Dean's advantage over Clark is governing experience, but because domestic issues will be pushed to the back burner, that advantage is negated, at least in the short term.

[WilliamPitt]

6. Right

I am *not* sitting here saying Clark has this experience, or that Kerry does, or whatever. I'm talking about the media play, which you can't ignore. Dean is outside that envelope.

[Woodstock]

109. I disagree - they will be "all over" Clark about the lack of governing

It wouldn't be wise to make an argument without taking into account the appeal of Dean for the voters. There's a reason people picked him - and contrary to the belief of some here, he's gotten a pretty rocky deal from the media, so he did it largely on his own (with his army of supporters getting the word out, of course.)

Will some people be swayed by the media? Sure. But I suspect they are likely the same ones who will support Lieberman, knowing zilch about him, just because they were told he's the best/they know his name. The base, however, is going to take a bit deeper look than that - even if just to hear each candidate for one minute or read one quote from both. I think Dean has enough going for him under those conditions to hold his ground.

All of them will lose a little ground to Clark - I don't see one hurting more than any other.

[LoZoccolo]

7. I'm more concerned about the fact...

...that he's never /run/ for office. With the right advisors he could be the president, no problem, and I'd like him to be, but I don't know if he can handle the current political climate, having no experience running for office, and without a huge aggressive multi-faceted distributed campaign like Dean's.

[salin]

11. I think the point is not about voters perceptions

as much as media coverage and framing - and from that potential shaping of public perception. If the media focuses on foreign affairs - then they aren't spending interview after interview asking about his lack of elected official experience - and thus the casual poltical viewers/watchers don't spend much time being exposed (and exposed, and exposed - as is the nature of cyclical media coverate) to that idea.

[Woodstock]

110. I see ZERO reason to believe the media will give Clark a free ride

This whole argument is based on the presumption that they will pick on Dean but not Clark. That somehow one candidate's limited foreign policy experience is more important than another candidate's having never been in an election before in his entire life, and now his first one is a presidential one, and he's never governed a day in his entire life (and there is no record), and now he wants to be president.

I like Clark. But I don't think it will be a cake walk. And I don't think it will hurt Dean more than any of the others. The ones who are senators - they don't have executive experience. Everyone has strengths and weaknesses.

I reject the argument, because it doesn't take all factors into account and singles out Dean unconvincingly.

[salin]

2. question (not directly about this analysis)

why is Kerry viewed as having foreign policy experience more than Graham, Gephardt, Lieberman and Edwards (granted I am not sure of Edwards committee positions but he hasn't been in the senate very long).

I think that fp experience is different than military service. I do not mean to detract from Kerry at all, just not sure why it is not considered a plus for, say, Gephardt who was in the democratic leadership in congress for more than 15 years. Who was thus was briefed on foreign affairs and security issues by multiple administrations.

[Julien Sorel]

4. Interesting.

I expect Dean to be able to weather this storm -- many of his followers are dangerously close to fanaticism at this point, which will see him through campaign highs and lows -- but the real damage I see is long term. Whereas before Clark's entry, if one of the other candidates dropped out, his or her followers didn't have a strong alternative to Dean, and so Dean would likely have picked up support from lots of those folks who might be simply looking for a 'winner.' With Clark in the race, though, the perception of a viable alternative might be there. And there are lots of folks who have found some of Dean's behavior off-putting, who would glom onto any strong alternative to Dean.

I'm looking forward to the rumble from here on out; for me, this is going to be the most exciting election since Anderson's '80 campaign.

[Rose Siding]

13. Constructive

Here's where I quit reading, FYI:

"...many of his followers are dangerously close to fanaticism"

[Julien Sorel]

16. I'm sure after a few sleepness nights of anguished self doubt

and second guessing, plus lots of alcohol, I'll forget my disappointment.

[w13rd0]

5. I disagree...

...because everyone already knows about Clark's foreign policy experience, much of the dialogue will be a process of discovery about his domestic agenda. Furthermore, the Dean Campaign has been fairly adept at not permitting the media to define the debate for us...

[WilliamPitt]

8. Which means you agree

:)

Because 'everybody knows' about Clark's fp experience, that's what they'll talk about. As for Dean handling the media on this issue, we'll see.

[Cha]

14. Yeah! "We'll see".

[diamondsoul]

77. Yep, I think your analysis is right on the mark, Will.

The military experience, from a media standpoint, is going to catapult him into the lead once he announces I think. I'm not so sure they'll be able to carry that on for long, though, especially if the economy keeps heading farther and farther down the toilet. Even long established straight-party voters are going to demand some focus on the economy before too much longer.

Clarks entry may very well wind up helping Kucinich in the long run. I was worried about it on the 11th but the more I think about it the less worried I get. That's not to imply over-confidence, just that I really don't think it's going to change the Kucinich supporters "battle plan" all that much.(and I just looked at what an odd oxymoron I typed there, Kucinich "battle plan"):D

[bearfartinthewoods]

137. i think we'll see another two effects in action as well.

first, Clark dilutes the DCaphobes. That's the DNC, the DLC and washington DC. lots of people were drawn to Dean initially because he was not tightly affiliated with any of the above. Clark will offer them an attractive alternative.

and i still feel, and i know i'll get protests about this but....
faced with bushco entry into iraq despite all the protests, there were a LOT of people who were soooo very frustrated. they needed an outlet, some movement in which to invest their passion. the anti war movement sort of went into hiatus. but there was Dean, not only offering them a way to hit at the war but as bush as well.

joining the Dean campaign was the logical outcome of the "i just need to do SOMETHING" lamment that we heard so much of last spring. now,
there are options, other naisent campaigns, other candidates.

i guess i'm saying that for some people, their alliance with Dean was a summer romance and now, with the change in the weather and bush's circustances, they may be casting about for a new suiter. Clark will fill that bill nicely.

i'm with Will on this. clark will peel support from most of the candidates but i see Dean taking the biggest hit.

[Rose Siding]

9. Clark may well come on strong.

And your analysis is well reasoned. But it doesn't seem to take into account the structure of the Dean campaign. It sure looks like an unknown, at this point because it is sort of unique in modern politics.

Also, I see Dean's numbers trending upwards over the last six months pretty steadily. Coming from way behind is something he *has* had practice at. -This certainly doesn't dispute your analysis, but the shift could be temporary. In fact, Dean's supporters just get madder and more determined when they see any set back! *So far*, of course.

[Code_Name_D]

133. Don't forget you are looking through the looking glass.

When ever you talk about what the media will do, you must first remember that this is through the looking glass, and what you see isn't exactly real, and what is real, isn't exactly what you are going to see.

I have to laugh every time I hear some one say "Clark will the be automatic front runner once he announces." Front runner to whom? The press? Pitts should know vary well that the press will be rooting for W, and will have no shortage of dirt and lies to throw against whom ever runs against him. Media Savvy or not, these bullets will bounce off of Clarks chest, no more than they bounced off of Gors.

Party_line is quite correct pointing out the differences of Dean's campaign, against a traditional one. And right now, the press is looking for a spoiler to take the wind out of Clark's sales. Its a classic strategy, rather than trying to abolish the field of any one who might challenge your authority, you fill the field with them, and keep the opposition divided.

Dean has gotten so far because he won't play this came of being a pony in the dog show. He has instead used alternative media to get an accurate message out, and doing so within hours. And because HE controls the message, the media can't saddle him with straw men like they did with Gore.

The question that remains unanswered is this, dose Clark's media savvy include this? If he lets the media paint him for his fp experience, than Clark is taking the first straw man onto his back. And he WILL pay for it later against W where that fp suddenly becomes a liability. It will only look like Clark is getting a free ride from the press. But rest assured, they will let him out at the end of a vary short peer, and as much lead baggage as they can fabricate. And he would have just been a tool to take out Dean.

But if Clark dose heed this, and refuses to let the media define himself and his campaign, than he will do well later on.

[eleny]

10. Given how the Dean campaign...

seems to have focused more on Clark than Kerry has, I suppose they must agree. At least the memes about the VP slot point that way.

[dsc]

12. I have no clue

Given that I have no real idea what issues Clark cares about. I have only the most basic understanding of his positions, and that I have no idea what he is going to campaign on; I can't say what effect he will have on this race. There are several reasons I think Dean will be OK. First, his support is the most solid. In every poll I have seen with Gore, Hillary Clinton, or Clark added to the list he loses the least support of the top four. That bodes well for Dean in the short term. As to long term, I think the race will turn on the economy at least as much as foreign policy. Unless, and until, Bush can turn the economy around people will care. Clark will get a month, maybe two, of honeymoon coverage. Then people will want to know, beyond the platitudes he has so far stated, what his position on economic issues actually is. Then we will know.

[Pepperbelly]

19. I think that the biggest mistake that can be made by other candidates ...

is to underestimate Wesley's economic acumen. He may well have a better understanding of that arcane art than any President in our history. No one currently in the race in either party comes close.

[dsc]

23. I have asked on several occasions

on this board for concrete views of his on domestic issues and have never been directed anywhere that helped. I am not saying he doesn't have a plan but he hasn't shared it. If you have a place where we can get a detailed understanding of his views please share.

[Pepperbelly]

26. he is a classical ...

economist and has already suggested that Bush's tax cuts should be rolled back. As an Oxford economist, I think that the first thing that he will do is what Bill Clinton suggested yesterday: when you are in a hole, the first thing you do is stop digging.

I don't know how Wesley feels about this but one thing I am sure of ... the talk about health care programs, etc. by the candidates are all nothing but politics now and I hope Wesley doesn' play that same kind of promise-them-anything game that the pro pols in the race are playing. The fact is that Bush has so fucked things up that those proposals are simply not going to happen, not until our financial house is put in order. IOW, until we get our house payment and utilities paid, we are damned sure not going to buy a new car. The candidates that are promising those things, IMO, deserve contempt for thinking we are stupid enough to buy the snake oil.

[dsc]

30. I had heard that as well

so that is a start. We do need a positive idea on which to campaign and we can afford these things if they are phased in which presumedly they would be. I have no idea what Clark's big idea will be but he will have one you can count on that.

[Skwmom]

81. Clark is like Clinton.

Extremely smart and an excellent communicator! I can't wait for him to jump into the race.

[dsc]

126. But what will he communicate

that is the problem. I am impressed with Clark as a person and as a spokesman. But I would like to know just what he thinks. Clinton had a lengthy record. It was easy to determine just what he thought on the issues of the day. Maybe Clark will have great ideas but I want to see.

[salin]

15. The one odd thing about Dean's campaign

is it has not been driven by media coverage. Indeed it was the summer fundraising feat that brought the media coverage to him. I think that Dean's campaign is a very interesting phenomenon - and it will be harder to predict how things will be effected since it is running an exceptionally countertraditional set of strategies.

Dean may fade - primary cycles are fickle. BUT for anyone to be able to beat the money advantage that Bush will have - that campaign will have to learn from the lessons of the early Dean campaign - and run a similarly nontraditional campaign - that spreads even in the absense of media coverage. Indeed the springing up of the Draft Clark movement suggests that they are taking note and cues from the interesting Dean camp - and might be able to do the same.

Sadly some very strong candidates' campaigns are not.

Fortunately neither is the campaing for my least favorite candidate who seems to have nearly completely squandered his natural lead due to name recognition, and has yet to build any natural momentum.

[Skwmom]

142. It makes you wonder whether the Repubs had a hand

in helping Dean raise all that money to propel his campaign.

[VolcanoJen]

17. As someone who is leaning Clark, I want Dean in this race....

... and watching him on "This Week" to me today, I feel Dean's ready for the fight.

These are the two guys (and I like John Edwards too, and see him as the annointed "dark horse" here, but for topical purposes will leave him out of this discussion) who I want to represent the issues of the Democratic Party. This is a "win-win" situation for us, Dean vs. Clark, and we'd best pay attention early.

Dean offers to us a telegenic, intelligent, qualified anti-war candidate who echoes many of our domestic concerns better than other candidates.

Clark offers us a telegenic, intelligent, qualified anti-war (as it's being waged, that is...) candidate who echoes the craving of international leadership echoed by Americans in recent polls.

Team them up, and it's a winning ticket. I like Clark/Dean, personally, but it's waaaaaaay to early to talk tickets right now.

Dean has nothing to lose from a Clark candidacy. Unfortunately, Kerry has the most to lose here. Fortunately, Democrats country-wide have nothing but gains in their prospectus. Dean and Clark are winning Dems, and I want them both to stick around SO THAT I CAN MAKE UP MY DAMNED MIND ALREADY.

- Jennifer (just another selfish, wishy-washy Dem)

ON EDIT: Clarification. :-)

[Cha]

29. I like your analysis! I tend to agree! Except I am already a

Dean Supporter but I welcome Clark in this race..

We need all the "telegenic, intelligent, anti-war candidates" we can get! :bounce:

[clar]

18. I agree

I've long thought that Clark's entrance into the race may well be more damaging to Dean than any other candidate, though I don't entirely agree with your reasoning. I believe Clark has the potential to connect through the internet in a way that Kerry seems unable to master. The Draft Clark movement has already exhibited impressive internet fundraising creds. Clark is going to benefit from Clinton/DLC backing. OT, but this is in fact, the one thing that keeps me from being excited about the General. It's redolent of backroom manipulation.

The other side of the coin is that Dean may raise an astounding sum of money in q3. Fineman's new column suggest a figure of 15 million (can this be possible?!!) That should bring the coverage right back to Howard's door. Dean's primary asset is his large and dedicated body of supporters. It's been growing by leaps and bounds. If they stick with him, and support him with actions and $$$, he'll stay in the forefront. If not, he's done. And if the movement that's grown around Dean, splinters into nothing, we all lose. It's the best thing that's happened to the Democratic Party in years. It's survival without the Dean candidacy is doubtful. It's not yet a mature enough movement to survive without a central figure and/or a full time staff to feed it.

BTW, If Clark announces Wednesday and Hurricane Isabel smacks the East coast a good one on Friday, he's not going to make top story for very long. I hope like hell it doesn't happen, but if it does, Isabel, not Clark will be flavor of the week.

[molly]

20. I talked with my sister in NY yesterday

she does not have time to follow all of this as I do. She is under the very naiive assumption that Clark will be Dean's running mate. I'm sure a lot of people think this.

[Donna Zen]

113. They were suppose to

that was attempt to weaken his campaign...read Josh Marshall.

[Jacobin]

21. Compare Clinton's foreign policy experience to George The First

They are not even comparable. Poppy had a lifetime of impressive foreign policy experience, perhaps unparalleled in presidential candidate history. Clinton was the governor of Arkansas prior to his presidential bid and had exactly....none.

A president with the capacity for critical thinking, who is interested in foreign policy (and not dismissive of intellectuals), who is a quick learner, and who is not swayed by ideologues with an agenda is what we need.

Clinton did a masterful job with foreign policy. I believe Dean will, too. Clark has had experience running an impressive military organization and is quite photogenic. Conflating that with foreign policy experience may not sell, even to the American voters.

BTW, I would be perfectly happy with Clark or Dean, as neither of them assisted in the authorization of the illegal invasion of Iraq. My preference is Dean.

[Pepperbelly]

25. come on, now ...

"A president with the capacity for critical thinking, who is interested in foreign policy (and not dismissive of intellectuals), who is a quick learner, and who is not swayed by ideologues with an agenda is what we need."

That is a near-perfect description of Clark.

[Jacobin]

34. Hey, I'll take either one

I watched and listened and read more about Dean than Clark. He was anti-war when anti-war wasn't cool.



ABBorL

[Julien Sorel]

36. Clinton did not do a 'masterful job' on foreign policy.

About the best I'll say for him is that he was lightyears ahead of baby Bush, but baby Bush's daddy was equally as far ahead of Clinton. Where people get the idea that Clinton was some kind of foreign policy wiz mystifies me, as his 8 year long presidency was almost entirely devoid of achievement in that area.

[Pepperbelly]

41. you are wrong in that ...

and he made progress in what Bush Daddy had given up on ... Ireland, the Holy Land (it was certainly not his fault that Bonehead pissed away the good offices he had established), Bosnia, and North Korea.

[Julien Sorel]

60. North Korea was a half-success, not a breakthrough.

He made no progress at all on 'the Holy Land' as Oslo (holding my nose and calling it a success) was something that happened under the elder Bush, not Clinton; he simply happened to be there when they signed. Clinton's inability to hold Israel to the task of following the agreements is why the region is where it is, in fact. Bosnia I give him credit for, although he was slow to react, and he failed to take similar action in Rwanda, a failure for which I will not forgive the man.

Now, that's 1 1/2 successes in 8 years in office. The elder Bush (in 4 years) did better, Reagan did better, Carter (again in 4 years) did better.

Overall, Clinton's approach to foreign policy was marked by passivity and reactiveness. Sure, he flew around the world and was well-liked, but he lacked a vision, an outline for where America should go in this 'new world order,' as came out of, for example, the Truman administration or Wilson's administration (I'm comparing Clinton to Truman and Wilson because America was in similar positions in all three presidencies: atop the world after winning a massive struggle; Clinton's position with these guys comes via the end of the Cold War). If he'd had such a vision, perhaps Bush and his PNAC crowd would have been unable to fill the void Clinton left.

[Pepperbelly]

64. i disagree with your assessments and ...

note that you left out Ireland altogether.

What successes did RR have? Lebanon? No way. And Bush Senior? They were floored when the Soviet Union crumbled, totally unprepared and what little progress that has been made in Russia is due far more to Clinton than to Yeltsin.

Rwanda ... a sore point. I don't know exactly what could have been done although I am certain that Europe had far closer ties with the area than the US ever did.

Bosnia as a half? Give me a break. Old Bush totally farted it off because he couldn't figure out what to do with it. As far as Oslo, I think you have forgotten Dayton.

[Julien Sorel]

72. What kind of success is Ireland?

And how much impact on it did Clinton have? Ireland is hardly a flashpoint for world conflicts -- it's a genuine regional conflict, and a very low grade one at that. I gave him full credit for Bosnia; it was NK I give him half-credit for.


I'm not sure why you credit Dayton as a plus for Clinton. Dayton would fall under the rubric of Bosnia/the Balkans (already credited), not the Middle East, and Dayton largely failed, anyway, leading to the conflict that Clark led.

I'm not in the business of acting as a Republican apologist; I would simply suggest you take a look at Reagan's and the elder Bush's records for their accomplishments -- and they are there.

[Clark Can WIN]

76. Hey Pepper!

Gotta ask ya, does that competitive fight streak run through your WHOLE FAMILY? LOL

:pals:

[LWolf]

22. I agree.

I see Clark as a concern for both Kerry and Dean. Which helps my candidate, and some of the other candidates as well.

I don't see any Kucinich supporters siphoned off by Clark, but I think that (DU flame wars to the contrary), Dean, Kerry, and Clark will attract the same people.

[Mairead]

28. I do too

I think Clark will not attract from Kucinich's support.

But (responding to Will, here, not you LW) I'm not so sure he'll get anywhere, either. What if Dean (or Kerry or both) brings up General Sir Mike's 'I'm not going to start WW3 for you!'? I.e., paints Clark as a reckless, egoistic lunatic who would have been perfectly happy to start WW3 just so he could claim his is bigger. How could Clark deal with that?

[DoveTurnedHawk]

50. Yawn

We'll just rebut them with the facts, which have been posted on this board countless times before.

I'm quite certain the General knows he will be confronted with this "issue" and I'm also quite certain his response will knock it out of the park.

DTH

[Cha]

31. Dean and Kerry are Not attracting the same People, IMO.

[Prodemsouth]

87. I don't see any Kucinich supporters to be siphoned off either.

n/t

[Renew Deal]

139. What Kucinich supporters?

This is kind of a joke, but there is no real support for Kucinich. The people that do support him are few and committed. They aren't going anywhere soon.

[thinkahead]

24. Clark will have problems of his own

for starters, nobody knows how he will look as a candidate. We all know how he looks as an analyst on TV (great), but there is a world of difference when you are running for President, when you must fire up the base, carry the middle - and the guns are blazing from every direction. Clark may very well get to be the flavor of the week - but it won't be a cakewalk, and considering the fact that he has waited so long - will compress the amount of time he has to make a solid, strong impression.

Clark will certainly have a great strategy going in, but things rarely play out like you suspect - and he certainly doesn't seem like the most decisive fellow in the world. He's going to have to make quick strategy changes, and it will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

Dean hasn't gone from nobody to front runner for no reason. I think his people have been preparing for a Clark entrance into the field for some time now - and I agree, the Dean folks will have their work cut out for them. But I don't think they're going to drop the ball. They have a formidable machine in place now - and Clark is going to have to try very hard not to alienate that machine, if he wants any hope of grabbing the nomination - or being placed on the ticket.

The other thing to remember: Dean and Clark have been far more in line with each other on Iraq than Kerry and Clark. In that sense, Dean and Clark could both benefit from the reframing of the media deabte you describe, Will. And Dean has been out front on this issue (like so many other issues) from the beginning. In a sense, you could say even though Clark holds the same opinion, Dean wasn't afraid to share it from the beginning, while Clark formulated his position as the political landscape shifted. This is the strength of Dean, unflinching political courage. Dean may not have the experience, or the uniform, but he has not been afraid to take a stand, unlike so many others. And that's why he is doing so well, and will continue to do so.

[Pepperbelly]

27. untrue ...

"Dean wasn't afraid to share it from the beginning, while Clark formulated his position as the political landscape shifted."

Horseshit.

[clar]

33. Is it possible

to just inform somebody that they're wrong and then courteously explain why? On another thread you claimed that you prefer to engage in civil discourse. "Horseshit" doesn't qualify as such.

Let's start a new meme: Exquisite politeness is the best revenge.

[Pepperbelly]

38. whatever ...

telling fibs does not justify civility nor do the misguided efforts of frustrated net nannies. Perhaps if you wait until I request a lesson in manners, it might be recieved with more enthusiasm.

[clar]

66. Let me put it a little more bluntly

Blustering, name calling and name dropping don't make you an asset to General Clark's campaign.

[Pepperbelly]

68. there is ...

no courtesy owed to untruth. If you do not like what I write, then don't read it. Easy enough. But do not presume to lecture me about anything. I do not know you and I will not lay awake tonight worrying about your being offended. Is that blunt enough for you?

[Name removed]

71. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[thinkahead]

35. Yes, we've known Clark was against the war

but he certainly wasn't out front on this issue like Dean. And, as we are discussing how the media might frame things - one could reasonably assume that one could SAY Clark has crafted his positions to fit as in-line with the current political landscape before entering the race. Yes, these are probably deeply held beliefs of his, and this is not a flame - I REALLY like Clark. But waiting so long to enter the race will have drawbacks as well - and this could very well be a legitimate complaint he will have to face.

Clark's main reason for entering race is because he says there is a hunger for leadership. Waiting to enter the race until 3 months before the first primary isn't exactly a stellar example of that very point. I'm willing to give him some wiggle room because I think he is great - but assuming he will have a cakewalk is dangerous.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[thinkahead]

46. I appreciate your horseshit comments

and will take them for what they are worth

[Pepperbelly]

you think you can just make things up and ...

no one is going to call you on them?

Whatever.

:eyes:

[thinkahead]

114. I didn't make anything up

I expressed what could be considered a line of attack against Clark. It's called "analysis". Had you read my comments closely (which were actually intended for the author of the thread), you might have noticed that. I can appreciate your support of Clark (he's high on my list as well), but if you want any sort of civil debate (which is questionable in your case) I would suggest not resorting to the cop-out "horseshit" response. It proves absolutely nothing - and just makes people think you're an asshole.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

53. Then You Weren't Paying Attention

Yes, we've known Clark was against the war but he certainly wasn't out front on this issue like Dean.

Clark was against the war and he was against it loudly. The only way he was less "out front" about this issue compared to Dean is if you consider that Dean had a more prominent pulpit solely by virtue of his status as a candidate. That's hardly Clark's fault.

But Clark will have the megaphone now, I have little doubt.

DTH

[thinkahead]

108. Umm you just made my point

Soley by virtue of being a candidate. Yes, that's the pulpit I'm speaking of. I wasn't blaming Clark for anything, he just didn't seek the megaphone until only recently. I certainly didn't know he was against the war until after he quit doing analysis on CNN.

Has he said he would have voted against it?

[VolcanoJen]

37. You know, that's the favorite curse word on "Inside the Actors Studio."

When polled, many actors (Tom Hanks and Nicolas Cage, for starters) choose that word as their favorite bit 'o slang. It's also my favorite curseword:

Horseshit.

:-)

[Pepperbelly]

40. I am also partial to ....

bullshit.

:D

[OKNancy]

42. I thought it was

cocksucker

[Skwmom]

78. I don't think Dean supporters are required to get the nomination.

<Clark is going to have to try very hard not to alienate that machine, if he wants any hope of grabbing the nomination>

The number of people currently supporting Dean is a drop in the bucket compared to the people who will cast votes in the primary.

[OKNancy]

90. I was just going to write that

and look up a bunch of numbers too, but thought...oh well it won't make any difference to the Deaniacs. It's been a constant irritation to me that some people on DU think that just because the majority here think a certain way, then it must be that way everywhere.

[Skwmom]

85. Unflinching political courage?

Is that why he waffles on the issues? Seems to me I read that Dean ducked the civil union issue in Vermont because he was afraid it would hurt his political ambitions. Now he tries to use the issue to his advantage. Yes, that sounds like real political courage to me.

[Woodstock]

112. Good points, thinkahead, I agree.

I said some of the same things above. We both saw the same weaknesses in the argument.

Your point of Dean and Clark being more in line is a good one. As I'm helping with the Dean campaign locally, I hear almost all of his speeches/interviews. But I try to catch all the Clark ones, since he interests me - I think he's a great asset to the party. The thing that strikes me each time is how alike Dean and Clark sound on many issues. The package couldn't be more different - one with rolled up sleeves full of fire, one urbane but with a quiet force of conviction, yet the message is quite similar.

[carpetbagger]

32. Once people hear Clark on the stump, he'll get different voters.

I think at this stage of the primary, he is likely to pull away votes from Kerry ("the military thing") and Lieberman (both his perceived moderation and, well, gosh, that needing to bail from a sinking ship).

Once people start hearing him as a candidate, then the perceived progressives and "more anti-Bush than that guy" candidates like Dean and Gephardt get competition, as well as the southerners.

Then it becomes that weird game of finding three candidates to be finalists.

[KoKo]

43. You have a good point, except Clark will attract a different group than

Dean......Just a short comment....but Clark will turn off older progressives who remember Eisenhower's caution.

There are many of us.......and we will always "beware the generals." I'm talking about "liberal 60's types," btw. And, just as you've seen so many "oldies" on your book tour, I've seen many of them at the War Protests here in NC.

Clark may attract Lieberman type Dems who just don't feel comfortable with Kerry or Lieberman (for various reasons, I won't get into), but I don't think "oldies attracted to Dean" will come onboard Clark if he runs for President. They might accept him as a VP. . Might....But that's the group I'm watching because they vote.....even if they have to drag their bodies bleeding to the polls. And, I don't think that the young Dean supporters will abandon him because Clark comes into the race. Generals don't mean much to them.....even "liberal Generals." Dean from my observation has big groups of oldies and youngies. Kuchinich also has big groups of oldies and youngies (I've seen many Kucinich and Dean supporters amongst young and old at demostrations here in NC the last two weekends).

I really don't believe that Dean and Kucinich voters will move over to Clark if he declares a Presidential run. In fact (I'll go out on a limb here). I think the oldies and youngies of those candidates will defend their candidates even more against what they see as "creeping militarist influence in America's politics."

This is a simple.....off top of my head analysis......if I had time......I probably could ramble on ......

The media can "annoint Clark" all they want........just like with Aunold.... But, it remains to be seen what will happen with that.........California isn't going "according to plan" and Clark may not go "according to plan" in that his supporters may find that his military background is more of a liability than they may have thought.

I hope Clark runs, though. It should make for an interesting race. He will bring another perspective to our Democratic Hopefuls.......The more voices against Bush.....the better, IMHO!!

I wrote this in a rush........and don't have time to correct typos, etc.

[OKNancy]

55. Well this 60's peace liberal is

really leaning for Clark.

[Cha]

62. Well this 60's "Peace Liberal" is Not!

:-)

[KoKo]

83. Zidzi.....help me out here....why aren't you........

because we need to know "WHY" some of us would support Military......and others of us are VEHEMETLY AGAINST anyone whose military being higher than Colin Powell is today in Bush's Administration. I think Powell is an example of why and how our military can have TOO MUCH POWER.......and yet...I understand why weak Presidents would rely on Military rather than their own judgement.........Bush = Weak....needed Poppy's Powell....and Cheney(who was all over CNN and made the network during Gulf War I with his "daily briefings as if he himself (Cheney) had any military knowledge at all being a "draft dodging chicken hawk.....but because he "talked tough" innocent Americans thought he was the "cat's meow" during puny Poppy's Reign......before he fell into the dustbin of history...(forget what he's doing for Carlyle).." Poppy I" was a "sick puppy" and a prop of Bakers......well nevermind......I could go on........:-)'s

[KoKo]

80. OK Nancy.....Why......could you give a little more detail..I'm really

interested if you were against the VietNam War.....why would you be in favor of Clark?

What is your resoning...it would be good to hear.......where you were then.....and why you are "where you are" now that you would support a "General."

I'm serious......one always needs to qualify on DU......not looking to flame you........

[OKNancy]

97. Because these are very bad times

It would take a much too long post to get into everything, but I want to win this election so bad I can taste it.

I went through the divisive 1968 Chicago convention and kids on our own side gave the election to Nixon because they wouldn't compromise for Humphrey. They wanted to stop the war but that creep Nixon didn't get us out of there for five more years.

The fact that Clark is a general doesn't bother me in the least. I have no animosity to him at all or the military in general. Koko you have to remember that the rabid anti-war people were a small minority of the anti-war movement. My husband was in the military during Vietnam ( he didn't go there thank god) Most of our activism was through our very liberal church we went to, a good bit was underground, as he would have got into trouble.

I have listened to Clark and he is very intellectual. He talks about ideas. I noticed Clinton said this yesterday. Clark sounds liberal to me, in fact more so than Dean. Also politics is local. Dean and Kerry have no chance in Oklahoma. I don't want Lieberman or Gephardt to win here.....so I'm down to Clark or Edwards. Since Clark was against the war, I'm leaning his direction.

[KoKo]

98. Thanks.........I see where you're coming from......and I know what you

mean about Dems compromising during campaigns......Hindsight........yes....I understand.

I feel differently....for different candidates.....but Gephardt and Lieberman we DEFINITELY agree on!

:-)'s good to hear your perspective.......even thought this is Will's post...I was really curious.

[Donna Zen]

116. Where was I: At Kent State

a professed Quaker was in the White House.

I do not judge people by placing labels on them; each person at least deserves to be judged on their merits.

I was shot at by the US Army reserves, lived under martial law, and some of my best and finest friends were in the military.

I am a liberal not a name calling labeling small minded person and I chose to think for myself.

[Donna Zen]

92. Er....

Clark will turn off older progressives who remember Eisenhower's caution.

Eisenhower was a general...who sees more clearly the problems of the Pentagon, the outsider or the insider.

Sorry, that was just too much of a stretch.

[KoKo]

96. Different time.....but I trust his judgement.....and get your "irony" of

quoting Eisenhower about Generals.......But, it's my experience that has said...what he said was true.......so I will always Mistrust Generals.........:D They need more "scrutiny" than the rest of them......

[jeter]

44. In the end I think it will be between Clark and Dean

Kerry, Lieberman, and Gepthardt the other "top tier" candidates will be out the day after New Hampshire.

Dean will emerge as the winner of NH and Iowa. And then only Clark will be able to "stop him." DLCers will swallow Clark's opposition to the war and support him over Dean.

Then the south, industrial states and west will be the battle ground between Clark and Dean.

That's how I see it playing out.

[OKNancy]

49. I was going to post to Will's original, but this is a good

place too.

All I know is about what I see and hear at my local level. I think too many people here think like it's a national election.

Oklahoma is now in a good position because of our primary two weeks after New Hampshire. With twice as many delgates as New Hampshire, a Dean win in NH will be overshadowed with a big win by Clark or Edwards in South Carolina and/or Oklahoma.

Kerry is not campaigning hard here. I've only seen Dean ads, and Edwards ads on the television. But I have to tell you the Clark buzz here is tremendous. Again, these are my own personal observations. He already has a few high political operatives on his team ( hush hush) and I've been surprised by the different kinds of people that are interested in him.

All in all it is way too early for anyone except the political junkies to even care about the primaries.....but from my reading of things, it looks like Clark will do very well in Oklahoma.

[Dover]

How do Clark's views on foreign policy differ from, say, Lieberman?

I lump Clark, Lieberman, Gep and Kerry all in the same club.
And if the media manipulates this showdown in the way you suggest, I also lump them in this club.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kahuna]

48. You couldn't be more wrong. You have obviously...

never peak at any of the hundreds of the Clark posts on DU or you would know better. Since you obviously would prefer your own version of reality I won't bother to try to inform you. I promise you though, you WILL BE, unpleasantly surprised when you discover the truth.

[Dover]

52. I hope Clark does better at answering questions than his supporters.

But that was a GREAT nonanswer....thanks.

[Pepperbelly]

56. check out this thread ...

I would have snipped the parts that are relevant but my 'puter locks up on long threads but in the original post, there are some good quotations that answer your question.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=321720&mesg_id=321720

[ignatiusr]

63. Answer

This is really simple: Clark differes on Kerry, Gep and Lieberman fundamentally on the Iraq War- He opposed it, they didn't. He was an unabashed skeptic from the beginning. Just last night in Knoxville, he strongly said that the point of the military should NOT be to wage war, but to prevent it. This is why he is grouped with Dean rather than the others. I'm not sure why you would attempt to equate him with Lieberman, etc., but it's an illogical thing to do.

[Eloriel]

73. Here's a tip, Kahuna

*I'm* not familiar with the hundreds of Clark posts you refer to. I might have liked an actual answer to the question.

Pffft.

Eloriel

[Chomskyite]

47. I think of the issues, not the candidates

And Clark's entry can only be good for our issues. I don't care who saves the country as long as it is saved.

[CMT]

51. yes Clark will be the flavor of the month

and Dean people and campaign will deal with it. Trippi and company have raised the bar many times and they won't let Clark's entry into the race slow 'em down. I've said before this is a good thing for Dean--if he and his campaign can overcome the Clark challenge and win the primaries--it will prove that he is battle tested and ready for Bush.

Now why the Clark move will be good news for Dean:

1) Right now he is getting all kinds of bad press regarding flip-flopping on issues. When Clark gets in (as I expect he will do) it will take the glare off of Dean on this issue as Clark will dominate the news for a time.

2) Dean will be back in the headlines with positive news in about a month when the third quarter fund raising dollars will be announced. It is clear that Dean will break Clinton's 1995 record and estimates are in the 11-12 million dollar range. He will easily have raised more money than any other democrat in the race taking the top spot once again. At this point in the game reporters look at fund raising as a source of legitimacy and Dean will be the big victor. The news again will be how much came from small contributors. This should put Dean back in the headlines. This along with continued good performances in debates (his best one yet was last week) will help him.

Finally, I know this is off topic but speaking of debates the best way for Dean to handle Clark is to praise him for his patriotism and his duty to country. Never attack Clark. Point out that the two of them share the same view on Iraq. The best way to contrast with Clark will be on his record as a elected official. When Clark says "I support Civil Unions" Dean should say, "again, we agree Gen. Clark, and I signed the first civil unions bill in the country...". When Clark says, "we need to make sure our citizens are insured." Dean should say, "Yes, I agree and as a matter of fact in Vermont I...".

I hope, and expect this will be the strategy that the Dean campaign employs against Clark.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

54. Good Analysis

I also hope there will continue to be a lovefest between Clark and Dean. Each man appears to have great respect for the other.

DTH

[kentuck]

57. Clark will hurt the other candidates - not Dean.

He would really cut into the support of Kerry, in my opinion, moreso than Dean...

[KaraokeKarlton]

58. I don't think Dean will be hurt at all

Those who support Dean now are extremely loyal. We aren't going anywhere. His grassroots campaign is massive, and it grows everyday because Dean's supporters are very active in getting his message out and recruiting more support for him. As for the debate being reframed, I don't think it will be, at least not for long. As a typical swing voter, foreign policy and national security are nowhere near the top of my list of concerns. Domestic issues and the deficit, economy, jobs...those things are what's on people's minds. Clark has no experience there, and it doesn't matter how much foreign policy or military experience he has...if he has no experience balancing a budget and handling financial affairs in an executive position. Keep in mind that Dean doesn't use speech writers. Everything you hear out of his mouth comes directly from him. He thinks on his feet and is smart as a whip. He adjusts to the enviornment very easily. On top of these things, he's unique from typical candidates in that the more pressure he's under and the tougher things get for him, the better he performs. It's the same thing with attacks and criticism...nothing sticks to him and it only gets him more energized. He is a marathon campaigner and you won't see him slow down significantly or tire of the pace he's keeping. He has the stamina to keep it up and all the time in the world to campaign.

What I see happening is Clark taking supporters from the others in the field for the most part...sort of like the "spoiler" for everyone but Dean. I'm confident Dean's supporters will stick with him and others will be joining as time goes on. Clark will get a lot of those who want a military man with foreign policy experience, and will hurt Kerry. He'll hurt Graham and Edwards due to him being southern. I doubt he'll hurt Kucinich much, though.

As someone who has watched Dean right here in Vermont, I would say you should probably toss all conventional wisdom right out the window when it comes to Dean. If it's at all possible to overcome something and end up on top, Dean WILL do it.

[dkf]

59. I haven't seen that Wes Clark understands the bigger picture:

The contempt for Democracy being displayed by the GOP, the way they are trying to deunionize the federal government so that they can reap the spoils of the federal contracting business, and the bankrupting of the treasury so that entitlement programs can be strangled.

These arguments must be made, and I am not sure Wes Clark will do it.

Dean on the other hand, gets it.

In addition, the thought of the DLC/Clinton backers helping out Wes Clark makes me want to heave. I do not want a government that is bought by corporate interests.

In my opinion, if Wes Clark does not want to sell his soul, he has to join Dean.

If he jumps into the race, he's already been bought, because there is no way he will be able to duplicate the grass roots efforts of Dean as he is too late. He will have to rely on the DLC/Clinton structure that to me is all about money money money.

On the other hand, if he eschews the DLC/Clintonistas, maybe he is ok.

I'll be watching.

[Pepperbelly]

61. and your acumen is that much more superior than his?

Do you have any idea how arrogant that is?

[copithorne]

67. Oh, Will, this is not you at your best

I remember you prowling around the boards in January saying that Dean will never raise the money to be competitive. You were quite certain of this analysis.

Now you trot out more conjecture that will embarass you later. After Bush, nobody is going to measure foreign policy resumes anymore. And Dean has always parried that attack effectively by saying that he may not have experience, but he knew enough to oppose Bush's catastrophic war.

Dean does have the most to "lose" by Clark's entry. Dean is now the only candidate with anything to lose after Dean left the other candidates in the dust.

It makes more sense to say that Clark ends your favorite son Kerry's candidacy. Most of Kerry's message has been that he is the military hero in the race. He's now overshadowed on that score.

Clark will get a gush of media buzz, taking the oxygen away from the other candidates. Dean has the organization to run the distance. It's a Dean/Clark race. Those are the two with the wattage to win. I'd be delighted with either one. We'll have to wait and see.

[Skwmom]

75. Dean left the other candidates in the dust?

You've got to be kidding? He's ahead in a couple of states and there are many, many, many people who are undecided or who are willing to change their minds.

I think Clark is going to go to the head of the pack and stay there. When this occurs, I hate to say it but it's going to be really difficult to feel sorry for some of you Dean supporters. Some of you are extremely obnoxious and arrogant. But what the heck, it only makes me that more determined to work to get Clark nominated.

[copithorne]

104. Glad to hear it!

Anything I can do to inspire you to work harder.

But really, I won't need your sympathy. I'll be glad if Clark gets the nomination, as I said.

And yes, Dean has left the other candidates in the dust. If nothing changes, Dean gets the nomination. I can't see how any of the other candidates besides Clark can change that.

[dkf]

123. I just want him to talk about this.

Most people have no idea what the big picture stuff really is.

Wes Clark probably does understand it, who wouldn't? But I want him to express it because the public needs to be educated. Folks, this is really scary stuff.

So...will he take on the right wing? Or in an effort to be "moderate", will he shy away?

C'mon Clark, I wanna see what you've got!

[ignatiusr]

65. Actually

IMHO, your idea of Clark couldn't be more incorrect in that regard. One of the main reasons that I have supported Clark is for the very reason you described, because he gets that problem completely. He has talked over and over and over and over about bringing back fair, representative government, how we've lost trust in our leaders to work for our interests, and how we are craving a return to transparent government. I think Wesley Clark is absolutely the man to make this argument, and he has repeatedly done so.

[mandyky]

69. The ball-sy thing I would like to see is

for Clark to enter, and he and Dean campaign together at times, and let the public know that whichever one of them wins the nomination the other will be the VP on the ticket.

I'll vote for any Dem but I'll work and donate for a Dean / anybody ticket (including an anybody/Dean ticket), not necessarily the others.

I think the stakes are so high this election, Dean (or whoever) needs to really step out and be unique. The co-campaign would be one way.

[Donna Zen]

111. illegal

n/t

[monchie]

70. Yeah, this analysis does make some sense.

As someone who, after Gore dropped out, leaned toward Kerry, was disappointed, then leaned toward Dean and even gave money to him, I gotta admit that Wesley Clark is a very attractive candidate. I may even end up supporting him over Dean.

If he runs, Clark's candidacy will probably hurt Kerry more at first and will most likely destroy Lieberman. Both Kerry and Lieberman are much too tied to the wimpy, Daschle-esque Beltway Dem conventional wisdom--ie., a candidate should be "statesmanlike" and not sink to the Republicans' level. IMHO, such a strategy is almost a sure loser at this time.

OTOH, what Dean and Clark have in common are telegenic personalities and the willingness to speak bluntly about the failures of the Bush junta.

So far, on domestic issues, Clark doesn't seem all that different than Dean--he's a moderate Dem in the Clinton-Gore mode. But on foreign policy and national security, Clark would instantly have more credibility with swing voters than Dean simply because of his military background. This isn't a criticism of Dean's foreign policy/national security positions, as they aren't all that different than Clark's.

What it comes down to is this: Clark and Dean seem like ideological and personality twins, but Clark has the edge over Dean in foreign policy/national security background, while Dean has the edge in domestic policy background. And since foreign policy/national security has long been perceived to be the Dems' weakest point, I think Clark is more likely than Dean to win the 2004 general election.

Whether he can get the nomination, though, is another matter entirely.

[Julien Sorel]

74. Here's wishing you posted more often.

That's my way of saying I agree with you, by the way ;-)

[edward]

79. Clark is a big bore.

Since this is not the first post praising Clark, this is my response.
Say what you will, but he has no chance. The idea that a career military man is praised here shows how pathetic the democratic party has become. (please don't post websites to me)

[Prodemsouth]

84. Just listen to me, don't challange what I say.

I got it.

[edward]

86. Like fundamentalists,

people love quoting passages. Because I could not possibly be informed. Otherwise I would convert. Got it?

[Prodemsouth]

91. Huh, No I don't got it. I have no dog in this fight.

Come clean-who is your candidate?

[KoKo]

89. But, I don't think the Dem party itself is pushing Clark as Pres.....more

as the "Ocar Nominee" for VP....... Hey......I don't have a problem with politicians running billboards for a chance at being VP! We live in a media age.... Selll, Sell, Sell.

Clark may be "onto something," here. If you want to run in politics....set out "feelers." It's a NEW AGE......Why the hell not??? :-D

[newsguyatl]

82. instant frontrunner will?

we'll see about that...

but even so, that "instant frontrunner" status didn't work for kerry did it? :shrug:

this is gonna all depend on how he runs the campaign... he has no experience in campaigning, but he has one HELL of a successful one to now emulate...


time will tell... but i have a hunch you're wrong on this one.

[Prodemsouth]

88. Many of the replys tell me that this looking just like in 68 and 72.

The Democratic party primary can be manipulated by the Republicans, they are picking their general election opponent. They are being helped by the same group, only much older, (those that are still here-and have not joined the Republicans out right) and their ideological children.

[farmbo]

93. Methinks the General will have to win this one without ground troops.

Not to say that couldn't happen-- witness the Kosovo campaign-- but Dean has accomplished something extraordinary with his enlistment of 400,000 volunteers and contributors. He has preempted the field of democratic activists: the ground troops who will lick stamps, wave banners on overpasses, and win the campaign by slogging through the snowy environs of Iowa and NH.

And unless I missunderstand human nature, those folks who have signed on with Dean...who have kicked in even $25 or $50 bucks... are going ratchet up rather than ratchet back their support for Dean when Clark enters the race. Two reasons:

First, many have signed on initially for non-"security" reasons; his feistiness, CUs, health care, gun owner's rights, etc. Those four (or is it five?) stars mean little to them.

Second, they've driven the new car home and parked it in the driveway for all the neighbors to see. They can't return it now.

[GiovanniC]

122. I Can Only Speak For Myself

But Clark will have at least one "ground troop".

I will fight with every fiber of my being to help General Clark to the nomination and to a win in the general election.

[CWebster]

94. Pitt's usual ploy

The set-up usually starts with a disclaimer that no bashing is intended- but there would be no compulsion to make excuses if the intent wasn't questionable. Then into the body of the post - which is Pitt's usual measure of all things military as the assumed univeral indicator of eligibility---Finally Pitt's wrap-up- "don't get mad Dean people..." why would he even express it if he didn't know on some level that he deliberately was targeting doubts.

[KoKo]

95. ROFL! C Webster.......

Free Polling amongst DU'ers..........:D Oh well.......to each his own....we are a "Think Tank."

Good place to "test the waters," "dip toes in" and other such stuff.......

On Edit: It's amazing to me that the "Military Thing" grabs so many folks......who should be more skeptical

[phegger]

101. What I read...

...was a comment on the possible direction the campaign would take, not the merits of any candidate. Get over it...this is a contest, not a coronation.

-ph :smoke:

[CWebster]

107. No shit it's a contest

Got a problem with calling out the tricks?

[Woodstock]

118. Agree, CWebster, I don't usually bother with his threads

because the title usually is the biggest trick of all. F*** + something inflammatory in the title = the response that was desired. This time, though, I got fooled by the title. Whereupon I found that the flaw in logic was so obvious, it was a great setup for saying something good about Dean.

[Merlin]

99. Some points I think you're overlooking.

First, it must be noted clearly that Kerry is probably toast already, and will surely be toast if (when) Dean beats him in New Hampshire. So I'm not counting him out, exactly, but he's become a long shot. (Kerry's disintegration is the biggest unnoticed political story of the year, imo.)

Second, true Clark will dominate the headlines for a while. However, given the press's prediliction for covering conflict where it exists, and creating it where it doesn't, there will still be enormous attention on the "horserace" between Dean and Clark. The daily question will be which is currently the front runner, which has momentum, etc, ad nauseum.

Third, as someone has already pointed out, it's up to Howard Dean to just deal with it. If he's the kind of man I think he is, he'll beat Clark by the force of his arguments and personality. If not, then so be it.

Fourth, it's true Clark has very strong military and perceived foreign policy credentials. Media focus on his background will be very helpful to him--and to our party. However, once that plays itself out in a month or so, the media will find he's very short on the other suits, and unfortunately for him, this isn't bridge. I do not believe the Democratic party will nominate for President a man who has no elective background and who is brand new to the political scene. I think many liberals will not fully trust him. Nothing against Clark. It's just that he'll be the new guy on the block, with no record by which to validate his actions vs. his promises.

Fifth, do not underestimate the significance in this coming election of health care. It will be perhaps the second major issue, next to the economy. People are seriously pissed. Dean's credentials in this area are impeccable.

Finally imo, take it to the bank: the ticket will be, either Dean-Clark or Clark-Dean. And either way, that the ticket is going to win.

I honestly do not feel completely confident about beating the fascists with either Dean alone, or with Clark alone. But I do with them together. Together, they're a dream ticket!

[CMT]

100. Wow!!

now that is a well thought out analysis. Great job.

[Pepperbelly]

102. I disagree about health care although ...

some of the points you made I did find myself agreeing with. Other than what I noted in my post title, with which I shall deal momentarily, Clark's credentials go far beyond military/foreign affairs. In fact, on economic matters, he might well be the strongest candidate ever fielded for the Democrats if he wins the nomination. And that ties into my point on health care.

I think Dean's health care plan is a fraud. So is that of Gephardt, Kucinich, Braun and everyone else who has advanced a plan. I realize that is harsh but it is my opinion.

Bonehead and his thugs have eviscerated the economy and frankly, there simply IS no money with which they can play. No money for comprehensive health care for everyone, no money for a med bennie for medicare. None.

That is the ugly truth that none of the candidates are addressing because it does not allow them to promise the moon and stars knowing full well that they cannot deliver. Until we get our house in order, a new health care plan would be tatamount to using our rent and utility money to buy a new stereo and that would be irresponsible. None of these guys are that irresponsible except for Bush.

People need to be told this truth.

[Merlin]

120. Hmmmm.... A couple of questions, PB.

"In fact, on economic matters, he might well be the strongest candidate ever fielded for the Democrats if he wins the nomination."

What do you mean by this?

Also, of course money is a problem. The instant solution is twofold: (1) deal Iraq off to the UN by giving up control nearly completely if necessary, and saving untold billions in the process while restoring our military capacity, and (2) reversing the tax breaks granted to the upper income. That brings us about $350 billion, which reduces the deficit to about $250, which is not out of line in a time of economic stagnation. In that context, a health care plan costing $100 billion a year or so is not only feasible but stimulative and essential in terms of heading off an absolute health catastrophe in the offing in a couple of years.

But the larger point is that the public has no idea about the details of the health plans. What they DO know is that Dean is an MD, and that makes all the difference.

[Pepperbelly]

125. thanx for your response ...

I have been checking back for this dialog ... and I may not be able to finish it... my 'puter locks up when threads get a bit too long and this one is at that point ...

Ok ... point one of your post, regarding how Wesley is strong on economics. Of course, I do not generally favor resume as a substitution for experience but in the world of megamacro-economics, only Bush has experience and his, frankly, leaves much to be desired. There is no one in the race with successul experience dealing with an economy this large or a government this large. So on that score, all are on equal footing.

Where Wesley excells in this is that not only is he an Oxford-educated on the grad level economist, but a professor of same at West Point. BTW, he could probably do that at virtually any institution in the world. Academic training is not all of his experience. Since leaving the Army, he has worked in the private sector as an investment banker. Admittedley, this is not running a mega-economy but it is similar to the background of Robert Rubin.

Regarding the balance of your post, it is true that what you suggest might well bring the deficit down but bringing it down to a quarter of a trillion dollars a year is still no reason to bring the figure back up to 3/5s of a trillion. This is just not the right time for a universal health care plan in my view. Perhaps, after the economy recovers from its devestation and our fiscal house is put in order, the issue should be visited but until then, it would be irresponsible.

I do not know if Wesley intends to advance a plan. In a way, I hope he does not and instead treats us as adults rather than children who can be placated with promises. I would welcome it if he merely told the truth about the shape we are in and promised to fix that so we could then offer genuine improvements to our lives.

[KoKo]

105. Merlin..what you say in your post doesn't add up to your conclusion..Clark

/Dean or Dean/Clark. The second scenario I could see...a stretch.....but could see but Clark/Dean....when all your reasoning says it wouldn't work for folks like me....very liberal.......questioning of military.

[Merlin]

121. Well, I really don't see Clark/Dean either.

I was trying to give Will the benefit of the doubt.

[janx]

135. From the Wash. Post article on Sept. 11:

Clark, in a telephone interview yesterday, said he did not want to comment about the private meeting. Asked about reports that the two men had discussed a wide range of issues, including endorsing Dean, joining the campaign, possible roles in a Dean administration and the vice presidency, he said only, "It was a complete tour of the horizon."

Later, an adviser quoted Clark as saying, "I have only one decision to make: Will I seek the presidency?"

It was the fourth time Dean and Clark have met face-to-face to discuss the campaign. No decisions were made at the California meeting because Clark is still considering a run for president. Clark is scheduled to make a speech Sept.19 at the University of Iowa, when many political insiders expect him to announce his intentions.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57770-2003Sep10.html

[newsguyatl]

119. wow

awesome post!

[Donna Zen]

103. Interesting topic

First let’s establish that anything can happen and we cannot do much about it.

70% Chance that Clark does well with the press because of connections beyond the Clintons.

Also, he is actually a well respected figure who has lived an honorable life. How do I know this? Because I read.... Richard Holbrooke, Christopher Hedges and Sydney Blumenthal would be a good place to start.

The four stars will help him more than hurt him...but there is a downside from the far left and the far right. Also, Faux doesn’t give a shit what they say as long as their boy is returned to the White House. This morning Newt portrayed a Clark Pentagon as antiwar, which made a pleasant break from reading threads, where the Democrats he is asking to represent, bill him as the world’s greatest baby-killer.

Dean has a game plan and it is working very well. I don’t see any real impact among Dean’s followers. Plus, he will have the head start and the bucks to votes ratio. Dean will still get press because Trippi knows how to do that and Dean is the front runner.

The question is who will win over the remaining voters, the ones not currently engaged, more conservative than the average DUer, and very likely to go to the polls. Here we reach a murky area steeped in endorsements, money, and face time. There are many retired military in NH, not necessarily a liberal state, who might be so sick of junior they will make it to the polls. Anyway, for now the buzz is Deans.

The South will be a very different story. Clark will probably be very happy with a third place in NH. If it is a two or three person race when they hit the South, the media will turn into real assholes. Faux will continue to diss Clark, because that’s what rove wants.

Extra thoughts

Dean is quite smart, has thought about foreign policy and at this point must have latched on to some good ones. He will do fine but the knowledge base will be fresh. Clark is considered one of the worlds experts. Actually, he is part of a team that puts out foreign policy (for free...it’s kind of hobby) for businesses. Also, please remember that he was at Dayton when the accords were written, he was J-5, the policy seat on the Joint Chiefs, he worked on the Korean policy for Clinton during the crisis, and he has spent a life time hanging and talking about this. He has spent 3 years of his life working in the White House Generals just don’t march around all day.

Dean has run a state government with its departments. Clark ran a quarter of the world’s armies including schools, housing, and supplies. Both are proven executives who have managed large staffs and juggled schedules.

Many people mention possible VP slots. It is strictly illegal for these candidates to talk about this at this time. Besides, I think it highly unlikely that both of these men will be on the final ticket.

Oh_and one of these days I think I’m going to explode from the military bashing I see here. If your world picture sees America with no military what so ever, I worry about that. Even so, those folks are humans who have chosen a different path and I will not judge or hate them. The problem with our defense establishment is the same problem that exists throughout our system: money. If you want to change that, I'm with you.

[tjdee]

127. EXCELLENT. Really excellent post.

I hope that one day soon you, or Pepperbelly, or any DUer with information on Clark will post a thread about his very real experience. Twice in the past hour I find people who don't know that Clark taught economics at West Point, and I personally had not known he was at Dayton, worked on Korean policy, etc. etc.

Wesley Clark, as you say, did not march around all day, and I too disagree with some of the blatant dismissal of him due to his military background. I find him to be quite suited for the actual WORK of the presidency, at least at the same level as any of the other candidates. This attempt to shove him into a VP slot is premature, and again I agree with you that I don't think they will be sharing the final ticket together.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

131. Holy God, You Are Awesome

That is just a fantastic, fantastic post.

:toast:

:yourock:

DTH

[David Zephyr]

106. The N. Mexico Debate Was Evenly Divided Foriegn & Domestic. Dean Won.

The "reframe" as you call it of foriegn policy will be dominated by the burning issue of foriegn policy right now: Iraq. In the eyes of activist Primary voters Kerry got Iraq wrong in spite of his "foriegn policy experience" and Dean and Kucinich and Graham and Clark got it right.

I disagree that Kerry will get traction on his "foriegn policy" background with Primary Voters. Graham has as much and General Clark trumps them all.

I could turn this around and say that when it comes to Domestic Governing Experience, only former Governor Dean and Governor Graham can even speak to this. And in this case, Kerry will be "on the outside looking in".

[ulysses]

115. question, Will.

How does the admitted "flavor of the week" stand up over the long haul to a campaign based on the grassroots?

Not saying he can't, but please. Clark's "maybe, maybe not" performance so far has kept him from the primary wringer. He'll have to face it eventually, just like everyone else.

[quaker bill]

117. I agree provisionally

The energy of the Dean campaign has attracted massive free media attention. This and his success with internet based organizing has placed Dean at or near the lead nationwide, depending which polling operation you find credible.

No doubt Clark's announcement will grab the free media focus from Dean for at least a time. I also concur that concomitant with this the discussion will be reframed around Iraq and foriegn policy, Clark's apparent strengths.

Clark is telegenic and well spoken. This will do him nothing but good.

On the other hand, the economy will remain on the rocks and fiscal policy / economic management remain very important matters in most polls.

I note the Bushites hinting at moves to staunch the bleeding (literal and figurative) in Iraq. Polling there suggests that Karl Rove will be looking for some sort of face saving way out of this mess before the election is at hand. If for no other reason than that they want the troops freed up for the next engagement.

Over the short haul, I think your reasoning is sound. Over the long haul, events may favor one candidate over another. Mr. Rove has his hands on the levers, and no doubt will use them to their percieved political advantage. The emergence of a strong Dem candidate, be it Clark or whomever, will likely cause them to try to reframe the debate away from his/her strengths.

Does this assure GWB another term? Given the quality of their planning post war Iraq, I have some confidence they will remain vulnerable.

Dean, Kerry, and the rest may just need a bit of patience here.

[sal]

124. Clark is a gad fly

He will be dispirited by the grind. I do not believe he has the fire in the belly.

[Larkspur]

128. As Carville would say, "It's the campaign orgainzaiton, stupid!"

Not the policy issue differences.

Will, the real difference between Dean and Clark, and Dean and the other contenders is not policy or issue differences that will win the nomination.

As D.J. Dionne Jr. said in his July 8, 2003 Washington Post column titled Dean’s Grassroots Cash Cow:
Howard Dean has issued a virtual rebuke to Democrats who can't stop complaining about how difficult it will be to raise money under the reformed campaign finance system.

The message: Don't whine. Organize.

What Dean has that the other's don't is the organizational ability to back up their candidate whether he "flys" or flubs. Dean's camp is quick to respond to important issues and parry the other campaign's political gimmicks and misinformation pograms. And the Dean campaign has terrific customer service. They make you feel like part of the team. Even Dean personally thanks those who came to his rallies and patiently waited to meet him. He also listens to criticism from his support base and when appropriate makes adjustments. Dean knows that "change is the only constant" and he is adept at making adjustments when necessary.

And the other thing is that Dean has the charisma to excite the Democratic base. He saw what the problem was and wisely addressed it. He saw that Democrats were angry at both Bush and the current Dem leadership, and he gave voice to it. The other major tier candidates chose to ignore that anger, hoping that it would disappear. It didn't. Instead of letting that anger smolder and weaken our democracy further by turning more voters apathetic, Dean seized that anger and wisely channeled it into a loyal support base that wants to constructively change this country.

What Clark lacks is that fiercely loyal grassroots army that Dean has won and the imagination to keep that army excited about their candidate -- think of the Cheney Challenge and the picture of Dean eating a $3.00 turkey sandwich lunch when VP Cheney was having that $2,000 plate lunch. That picture of Dean in response to Corrupt Cheney's fundraiser captured the fancy of many.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

138. I Guess We'll See

If you're right, he'll peter out soon.

I'm willing to bet you're wrong, though. He's a general who understands well that logistics, not fancy maneuvering, wins wars. I'm quite certain the lesson will not be lost on him in a political arena.

DTH

[Larkspur]

140. True a good general understands logistics and maybe that's why

Clark has been delaying making an announcement. He knows that his late entry against a popular juggernaut, like Dean's campaign, is full of very big and costly risks. Clark has got to weigh his campaign organizers' abilities against Dean's, as well as his own personal ability to attract unpredictable civilian voters.

Assuming that Clark enters the Prez race, he will initially win the support of some people who have not been paying attention to politics until the Fall, but it will be poll numbers based upon a bubble of media hype. Dean's popularity has weathered many storms to date and is likely to keep growing, despite Clark entereing. When people get to meet Dean firsthand, most are drawn to him.

[populistmom]

129. I think your right on with the media analysis

Which is in many ways what bothers me a bit about Clark as a candidate. I think the shift will turn to foreign policy at a time when what's going on domestically is just as bad, if not worse. If it ends up being Clark vs. Bush and Bush has say another "trifecta", it ends up being a "foreign policy guy" against "another foreign policy guy" and I'm worried the sheeple will stick with the foreign policy guy they know.
If Clark ends up winning, he needs to hit on the domestic issues hard-very hard, in order to show the masses how their daily lives would be better under a Clark administration. It will be Clark's job not to just be a foreign policy guy despite what the media pushes. If he could do that, he'd be my guy.

[Larkspur]

130. Here's a question for Clark supporters?

How does the general relate to regular citizens -- women and men who weren't in the military and see their healthcare, public education, civilian infrastructure, environment, and job opportunity needs being squandered in Iraq?

Does Clark treat non-military types like privates in an army and expect them to follow his orders or does he have empathy with the average citizen?

The 2 times I personally met Howard Dean, I came away both times with the impression that Dean had empathy with people. He can be brusque to the press, but when he deals with average Americans he is a gentleman.

[w4rma]

132. “doesn’t eat into Dean’s lead…Dean is the only one who could hold his own”

…
Under the Clinton scenario, Kerry would fall into the second tier of Democratic hopefuls, favored by just 16 percent of voters. All the other Democratic candidates would be relegated to the single digits.

Dean’s support among independent- and reform-minded voters seems intact with or without Clinton in the race while Kerry would find his base of support among traditional Democratic voters threatened, according to Herald pollster R. Kelly Myers.

“If Hillary Clinton suddenly expressed some interest in the race, the biggest potential loser is Kerry,” Myers told the Herald. “She doesn’t eat into Dean’s lead at all ... As of today, Dean is the only one who could hold his own (against Clinton).”
…
http://www4.fosters.com/News2003/July2003/July_28/News/reg_pol_0728a.asp

A new Prez Preferece poll
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=190456

Clark V Dean
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=196331

[RevolutionStartsNow]

134. Hey Will

I have to say thanks for this well-thought out post. I notice that many of the posts you start DON'T end up in the typical flame-fest. You seem to attract the more thoughtful and intelligent among us. Keep it up.

One thing that this race so far has been is surprising, especially where Dean is concerned. No one would have predicted he'd be where he is today.

Clark is the x factor right now, and I am excited to see him come in the race. Hate to see him take from Dean's support (I'm working my ass off for the guy...), and I still think he's more damaging to Kerry, who is struggling a bit right now.

I tend to agree with CMT's excellent post above, but then again, that could just be wishful thinking...you know how we Deanies are. I could come up with an argument either way (he'll hurt Dean/he'll hurt Kerry).

I do think Dean's big fundraising numbers at the end of the month are going to raise the bar...

[Shanty Oilish]

136. Republican campaigns are about Democrat shortcomings.

That's a consideration in the primaries. We know that when R's get through with nominee Dean, his experience in politics is going to look like inexperience in politics. White bread New England disconnect, worse than Dukakis.
We know that when R's get through with nominee Clark, he's going to look like a military renegade, not an Eisenhower---the last of 12 generals to occupy the White House, hero of an heroic war. Controversial in his own field, like MacArthur, Clark will be vulnerable politically, and his sense of loyalty (as opposed to his loyalty) will come into question.
It's nominee Kerry they fear. He has the experience and whether we like it or not, the center won't be unsettled by his vote for the war. He did what so many Americans did---he put some faith in the government.

I don't disagree with your premise that Kerry and Clark will put Dean in an unenviable position, but Dean is already getting there without them. He's got all the support he's going to get unless he moves to the center, and whenever he tries to, he makes it look very awkward.

A lot of us vividly recall McGovern and Dukakis---and can't really feature the Democratic Party going off the cliff again, no matter how wretched the Republican opponent. It's all very well to ask, Is he right? They're all right. We must ask, Can he win? Can he govern?

[Larkspur]

141. Dean is a centrist and has never claimed to be a liberal unless you

call balancing the budget a liberal goal.