Clark Avoids Criticism, Specifics in First Debate: AP News Analysis

[sfecap]

Clark Avoids Criticism, Specifics in First Debate AP News Analysis

By Ron Fournier The Associated Press
Published: Sep 25, 2003


NEW YORK (AP) - Right from the start, Wesley Clark bluntly acknowledged his political inexperience - then cited it in dodging specifics and fending off criticism in his first presidential debate. "If I've learned one thing in my nine days in politics," the retired Army general said with a smile, "you better be careful with hypothetical questions."

That's how he avoided the issue of financing the reconstruction of Iraq. He also pleaded ignorance on health care policy - "I don't have a complete package" - and stepped around questions about home mortgages and other issues while nine other Democratic hopefuls gave the newcomer a pass.

(snip)

"He did fine," Dean said of Clark after the debate. Having second thoughts, Dean spun back around and told reporters: "I'm a little worried. I had no idea he has said all those nice things about the president."

Dean has the most to lose if Clark's Internet-driven campaign takes root. Yet he let his rival off the hook when Clark tried to explain his past support for Presidents Nixon, Reagan and Bush.

(snip)

In the rocky first day of his campaign, Clark conceded he needed to learn more about domestic policy and flip-flopped on whether he would have voted for the resolution authorizing the Iraq war.

Even with his no-fouls first debate, "Clark has lot of growing to do," Duffy said. "He's going to have to perform in the next couple of months to live up to his billing."


http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAN4FUE1LD.html

[diplomats]

1. He'll be fine

He'll develop a detailed agenda. And I like the fact Dean didn't criticize him during the debate. And that comment he made about being "a little worried" doesn't bother me, either. That's pretty mild.

[EagleEye]

2. It bothers me too. What bothers me more..

is that he didn't really say anything. No detail. No specifics. He did smile.

[diplomats]

3. He'll have more specifics as time goes on

He did propose a detailed economic plan but I am anxious to hear what he has to say about health care, for instance.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

4. At least he did not stumble!

I like Clark and am supporting him now!


:kick:

[StephNW4Clark]

5. 12 minutes per candidate

on all the issues. It's hard for any candidate to go into specifics on plans. I think debates like this are difficult to call b/c the point of them is: don't mess up, don't say something stupid, don't look bad.

In my opinion, all the candidates did well. (well except Gephardt, and maybe Kerry).

Someone on another board said that early stages of the Presidential Primaries are like stages of the Tour de France. It's about accruing small leads over time, maybe with one or two spectacular displays, but it's an endurance test. I don't think any of the candidates could have made some paradigm-shifting policy proposal, given the format of the debate.

I think some pundits are saying Clark won because everyone thought he'd be a complete blank when it came to domestic issues. But he developed an economic plan, has said he would look into cuts in the military, etc. So in that way, I guess that's how they called him a winner. He held his own against 9 other candidates who've been at it for months now. And it's good for the other candidates too - they get a larger audience b/c people want to see Clark's first debate appearance.

[Closer]

14. Hell

That got Bush in.

Maybe that's all it takes.

Just stand there, and do what the Establishment wants.

After all, he IS their candidate.

[DemBones DemBones]

6. Clark's been flirting with the idea of making the run for some time

so he and his advisors should have put together a health care plan and otherwise been ready to address the issues. To me, that's more of a problem than any "nice" things he may have said about Republican presidents who were, after all, his boss. Military personnel are supposed to support the government regardless of personal feelings about a particular administration.

[bluestateguy]

7. What an elitist "analysis"

Thanks, but I'll do the analysis myself. So will the American people. Kiss of Ron.

[MGKrebs]

8. I just can't figure out what his motivation is.

Crowded field, wide spectrum of dems on the issues, strong candidates, why would he feel compelled to jump in?

If he doesn't have his issues worked out yet, it presumably isn't that he feels something that he represents isn't being addressed.

I guess it's arguable that he feels he would be a stronger candidate based on the polling, but that's pretty weak, especially since by entering he will likely dilute everyone's potential support, including his own.

He could feel that he needs the chance to rehabilitate himself, after having left the service under a cloud (justified or not).

[union_maid]

10. I think he's got policies

Not having them ready for presentation to the public is not the same as not having them. I'm real sure they'll be released one at a time and in plenty of time for people to make a decision. I think he really did decide to run because he was asked to by a lot of people, grassroots and then politicos. To those of us who do hope he's the nominee, he's the man who's right for this time in history, and fills the bill as no one else can.

[MIMStigator]

9. He got good first debate reviews.

n/t

[Yupster]

11. "Don't have a complete package."

It looks like ever since those nude pictures of awnuld showed up that there's now pressure on each male candidate to say whether they're circumsized or not.

<<<<<Groans>>>>>>>>>>

[cprise]

12. Clark will need his policies made for him

...and in that he would be much closer in style to a Republican president.

There would be (once again) little executive accountability, and no doubt a cadre of Reagan worshippers and figurehead-makers running the whitehouse. Economically, he would be penned into a DLC holding-pattern while neocons continue to consolidate power and brainwash the public. His laundry-list of "pro-this, pro-that" programs would become a sideshow like Clinton's healthcare initiative (good PR to keep liberals quiet).

Clark has a mind so far to stop the most stark abuses of American power abroad, but a lot more is needed. Much of the damage we are inflicting is economic violence, and the connection with military violence should have been made in his mind months ago at least -- I doubt we will see it. I know the difference between a person who doesn't want to become unpopular from atrocity, and one that can nurture and truly respect. Clark's (I believe sincere) stand on the Iraq invasion puts him a notch above Kerry and the others, but only just.

I doubt Clark will be able to close the quality gap with Dean. Allowing Clark to run for president would be a tad generous, when there is a world of hurt to heal and encroaching global catastropies to head-off.

Considering the incumbent is nosediving in the polls and didn't even get as many votes as Al Gore, I have decided I have every excuse to support Dean's experience, outstanding grassroots appeal, and regard for the social contract.

[Pepperbelly]

13. "allowing"

What an odd choice of word. Is that actually what you meant>