Clark & Lieberman to bypass Iowa caucuses

[pruner]

2 Top Democrats Will Not Contest Iowa's Caucuses

By ADAM NAGOURNEY
Published: October 20, 2003

WASHINGTON, Oct. 19 — Two prominent Democratic presidential candidates, Gen. Wesley K. Clark and Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, have decided to bypass Iowa's presidential caucuses, angering some party leaders there and signaling what could be a very different nomination battle next year.

Mr. Lieberman's advisers said on Sunday that they would pull out all but one of his 17 staff members in Iowa and send them to states considered more receptive to his appeal, like Arizona. General Clark's aides said he would maintain a minimal presence in the state, which has the nation's earliest presidential selection contest. Last week, the general hired the former Iowa coordinator for Senator Bob Graham of Florida, who quit the race two weeks ago, and dispatched her to other states.

General Clark's advisers said they concluded last week that his late-starting candidacy had left him unable to assemble the intricate organization needed to win the Iowa race, which puts a premium on drawing voters to some 2,000 precinct caucuses. Most of the state's experienced organizers have signed with other candidates.

"What we'll do is what I call the General MacArthur strategy," a senior Clark adviser said. "General MacArthur was very successful in World War II because he skipped over the Japanese strongholds, where they were more organized, and instead picked islands that were favorable or neutral terrain. Which means we would choose not to focus resources on Iowa and instead focus them on New Hampshire and on Feb. 3," when there are Democratic contests in seven states.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/20/politics/campaigns/20IOWA.html?ex=1067227200&en=676aa42b713a12a2&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

[pandatimothy]

1. Proof that Dean is gonna win

Memo to the other candidates: Bow out now or Howard's gonna beat you like a red headed stepchild......

GO DEAN!

[Kahuna]

11. No. It's proof that either Dean or Gephardt will win.

Currently, Gephardt leads in Iowa by one point. Gephardt has been picking up steam nationally too. Probably as a result of his strong debate showings and his strong positions on jobs and healthcare.

[Pale Blue Dot]

14. Gephardt voted for the $87B

I will not vote for him unless he wins the nomination.

[sleipnir]

20. He's Toe to Toe with Bush

I may get flamed to high heaven, but I won't vote for him even if he gets the nomination. Because he's bent over once too often for Bush and his ilk. The Iraq war vote (and now the 87 billion) did it for me. You stand with the opposition, you are the opposition...

[Carolina]

28. I'll join you!

Gephardt could not even retain his leadership position among House Democrats! He (& Lieberman)stood for a photo-op in the Rose Garden with Tush showing support for the Iraq War, and now he's signed on for the $87B. He can call Tush a miserable failure in the debates until the cows come home, but I'll never get over his pink tutu behavior for the last couple of years.

I'm starting to get resigned about 2004 anyway, what with BBV/Diebold. So if Repug-lite Gephardt becomes the nominee, our fucking fate as LOSERS is sealed and I'm off to Canada.

[RummyTheDummy]

23. Funny, I think that's what Gephardt said in 1988 after he won Iowa

NT

[Capn Sunshine]

24. What, that Dean is gonna win?

[Capn Sunshine]

25. CLARK's "general " strategerie

Don't fight if you can't win. What about those polls that show him in the lead? CHICKEN!

Buk Buk BUk Buk Buk Buk BuKAW!

More proof he's running for VP

[IranianDemocrat]

29. You give new meaning to the term Deanie Babie.

How old are you? seven?

Jesus we're all one party here, trying to oust Bush. Quit this bullshit.

[WillyBrandt]

2. A National Primary Strategy?

I don't know enough about primary politics to have the best analysis of this, but I wonder if Clark isn't trying to "nationalize" the primary process in his favor. Clark has (in some polls) a nation lead, but hasn't yet translated that into leads in early primary states.

The danger for Clark is that others--Dean especially--will win in the early primary states, and use that momentum to coast to victory, even though if all the primaries were held on the same day, Clark would win.

Clark's challenge is, at minimum, to keep any other candidate from gaining large early momentum by either winning or at least placing well in two early states--NH and SC. Those are also strategically easier spots. SC is Southern, and has a HUGE number of black voters in the primary, both of which portend well for the General. NH, while near CT, MA, AND VT, is nontheless near NY where Clark is very strong and has a large pool of volunteers. And there's not all that caucus nonsense that makes getting each vote more difficult.

If he can get past the early bump, he has a very good chance of winning the nomination.

[Code_Name_D]

3. If Clark wants to "natonlize" the elections...

than I would applade him for the effort. I resent a hand full of states domenating the prosses in the first two months.

Unfortuanly, I just don't think this is the case here. Sounds more like souwer grapes. CLark is not doing well in the Iowa polls, and Leberman just need to give it up. But rather than take a "defeat" in the Iowa poll, he will just by-pass it.

But if he by-passes Iowa now, what is the implication for this in the Genral election? Can he even WIN in Iowa? Part of the problem with the primary system as it is set up now, is that it is front loaded. Januwary and Febbuary will DESIDE who the nomoney is. Even though the actual caucuse would still be half a year away.

By passing Iowa, is not a good sign.

[pruner]

4. this paragraph from the article is somewhat on point…

There is another risk for Mr. Lieberman and General Clark. Iowa is certain to be one of the most contested states in the general election, given Mr. Gore's 4,100-vote victory in 2000. Democrats said Mr. Clark and Mr. Lieberman could appear to be snubbing Iowa, a perception that President Bush's advisers might use to try to hold down Democratic turnout, should either of the truants be the party's nominee.

[FrenchieCat]

21. Missing Iowa isn't bad as evidenced...

Clark's campaign based on circumstances have opt for a different strategy. Clark cannot be cloned in 62 days so that he can be all over Iowa to be with the so ever famous "getting to know you, all about you" folks there. It's not even a reasonable demand....in particular because of how the vote is held there.

Why should he try to compete with those that have been there.....22 years (Gephartd) or Dean who's been there at least 1/2 of a year if not longer?.....let's be fair now and keep perspective.

The money is probably the least of the problems.

Plus according to this:
Why Iowa Doesn’t Matter
Michael J. Ring

And so these games will continue until New Hampshire.

But how much should the rest of the nation draw from the Iowa caucuses? Not much.

Except for weeding out the weakest of the weak candidates the Iowa caucuses prove and predict little. They are an exercise in political curiosity and not much more.

The problem is the caucus system itself. The process used in Iowa is dominated by party ideologues and foot-soldiers, effectively disenfranchising a large percentage of the population.

To a political tyro or the faint-of-heart, the process is very intimidating. Iowa Democrats do not employ a secret ballot; a caucus attendee must publicly state a preference for a candidate. Iowa Republicans do have a secret ballot, but gathering with a small group of neighbors and listening to them talk about politics can still be disconcerting for the politically uncourageous.

The great utility of the primary system is its ability to attract Independents to the polls. Since Independents are the fastest-growing group bloc of voters nationally, and their numbers now top 40 percent of registered voters in many states, a truly reflective nominating process must include these voters.

In theory, Iowans registered as Independents could switch their registration to either of the parties to attend the caucus. But few actually do.

Many voters choose to register as Independent not because of centrist ideology but because of a distaste of political parties and gridlock politics. Do you think a lot of Independents who loathe “politics as usual” are going to enjoy a Democratic or Republican caucus fight between union bosses or evangelical Christians?

With the effective exclusion of Independents and political novices, it’s no wonder that the overwhelming majority of Iowans skip the caucuses altogether. Such poor turnout allows party bosses to control the caucuses;

Iowa’s track record of predicting future presidents is poor. In 1980, Iowa Republicans chose George Bush in their caucus; Ronald Reagan won the White House. In 1988 Dick Gephardt and Bob Dole won the Iowa caucuses; Michael Dukakis and George Bush were the party nominees.

In New Hampshire will also be overplayed, but not to the extent to which Iowa’s caucuses were overcovered. New Hampshire does matter more. The Granite State’s primary process allows Independents to vote and offers a secret ballot, thus allowing all voters to feel comfortable exercising their right. Turnout will assuredly be a lot higher than 11 percent. And since 1952, only one person -- Bill Clinton -- has been elected president without winning the New Hampshire primary, and Clinton’s close second-place finish after surviving the Gennifer Flowers scandal in 1992 was a moral victory. While we don’t need to have the candidates stalked by an army of media around the clock in New Hampshire, we should pay some attention to the final result.

Iowa’s track record of predicting future presidents is poor. In 1980, Iowa Republicans chose George Bush in their caucus; Ronald Reagan won the White House. In 1988 Dick Gephardt and Bob Dole won the Iowa caucuses; Michael Dukakis and George Bush were the party nominees.
http://www-tech.mit.edu/V119/N69/col69ring.69c.html

[Deja Q]

5. How strange, the two candidates I will not vote for under any circumstance

Lierberman is obvious, and Clark's chequered past bothers me too much. It should be bothering everybody.

[Pastiche423]

9. Same here

I believe it is a "good thing".

[retyred]

15. Nice Dig

but why?



Retyred In Fla
So I Read This Book

[KittyWampus]

6. Clark Is Polling At Bottom In Iowa

Edited to show Clark's position in Iowa according to Zogby Sept. 11th.
Couldn't find a more recent poll.

Dean 23
Gephardt 17
Kerry 11
Edwards 6
Lieberman 4
Kucinich 2
Mosley Braun 1
Graham 1
Clark 1
Sharpton 0.3


The man is only human and the campaign is barely a month old.

Lieberman, on the other hand, has been running for what seems like an eternity.... :(

[Kahuna]

12. Clark was not a candidate on 9/11. You should try to find a

more recent poll. This one is totally useless.

[KittyWampus]

13. Been Looking But No More Current Poll

Maybe someone with a better search engine???

[sleipnir]

7. Not a bad strategy, however.....

Clark and Lieberman have LOST Iowa, they had no chance, it's not that bad of an idea. Clark got in too late and Lieberman just doesn't have what it takes to win in the Midwest. I mean, this is desperate move on both camps, but they need some magic to win the nod....If Clark/Lieberman can't win an easy Midwest state like Iowa, they can't beat Bush. Simply stated, this next election year, the Midwest will swing the election in many respects. Sad for Clark, but he's done for in the nomination process if this is the "MacArthurian" approach he's looking at.

[union_maid]

8. This has been under consideration for Clark all along

It's not a desparation move and it's not something they just thought about now. They probably just recently solidified the decision, though. It's the way the Iowa caucuses work, not the people in Iowa that causes it not to add up for a new entrant into the race.

[Donna Zen]

10. If it works, we'll say it is brilliant,

if it doesn't work people will say: "Oh, he shouldn't have skipped Iowa"

Truth_no one knows for sure.

The other night, I was reading a complete breakdown of the delegate count, and what Clark had to do to win. I'll go back and read it again for clues. I know the poster has managed three presidential campaigns at the state level and really follows the weird workings of the process.

Anyway, the good news, Clark's campaign has been crunching the numbers, and making some calls. This decision was probably being seriously considered last week.

[oxymoron]

16. Correct me if I'm wrong but...

as I recall, didn't Clinton lose Iowa and New Hampshire?

[Renew Deal]

17. No correction needed.

Also Bush and Dole lost NH, Dukakis lost it too. Clinton also lost Maryland in 92. Iowa would have been tough for Clark. Considering there is a guy who has won it before is in the race, I wouldn't worry about it. Let Dean and Gep dump tons of money there. Clark's momentum out of NH will be unstoppable.

[newyawker99]

22. Hi oxymoron!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[DoveTurnedHawk]

18. I Predicted This a Couple of Weeks Ago

Iowa is too cost-intensive, for too little upside, IMO. McCain didn't need it, and I think Clark is modeling his run partly on McCain's.

Of course, McCain DID win HUGE in NH, so Clark is going to have to firewall pretty heavily in SC and in the other states having primaries on the same day as SC.

Still, as long as Clark can finished 2nd or 3rd in NH, he'll be doing fine. I think Clark's ideal situation is this:

Gephardt narrowly wins Iowa, with Dean coming in 2nd and Kerry and Clark (even without campaigning) coming in 3rd. This limits Dean's momentum and keeps his most antagonistic rival in the race.

Dean wins NH, with Clark coming in 2nd and Kerry coming in 3rd. This will kill Kerry's campaign and result in a lot of Kerry voters likely going over to the only other foreign policy expert and war hero, Clark. Simultaneously, Dean's momentum is limited since by now everyone expects him to win NH, while Clark's is boosted by the unexpectedly high finish.

Then it comes down to SC and Clark/Edwards, and the other states and Clark/Dean. If Clark can win SC, Edwards is finished, and if Gephardt gets shut out on this day, he's finished too.

It then comes down to Clark/Dean neck-and-neck, with the South and the superdelegates giving Clark an advantage.

Of course, if Clark's Q4 fundraising numbers are as high as I'm hoping they're going to be, his way will be greatly smoothed, both in terms of resources and momentum.

DTH

[pruner]

19. Clark needs to raise massive amounts of money quickly

up til now he's only raised money… hasn't had to spend any.

building the infrastructure necessary to win (in any state) isn't cheap… and neither are his campaign operatives.

the $3.5 million he's got doesn't go too far considering how much needs to be done in such a short period of time

[jonnyblitz]

26. birds of a feather avoid caucuses together!!

JUST KIDDING! :hi: I am in a playful mood today and couldn't resist. If Clark is the DEM candidate I will vote for him no problem. I would even vote for Lieberman but I doubt he will be chosen. Clark is a different story , he could be the man.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. Why Are The First Primaries And Caucuses In Lily White Iowa And New

Hampshire anyway....


It is a slap in the face to every person of color who are the backbone of the Democratic party....

There are probably more people of color in East Los Angeles than in all of Iowa and New Hampshire....

Iowa and New Hampshire have inoridinate power in the nominating process and it' ain't right.....

[salin]

30. Real live irony is alive and well...

Wasn't Lieberman rather public in his criticism of Gore's campaign. Among other things it was too "populist"...

Didn't Lieberman start with a HUGE advantage in the polls - albeit mostly from name recognition. Didn't he also have a fund raising advantage?

So Lieberman is now pulling resources out of Iowa. Hmmmm. Given this point in the game it might be a good move. But perhaps if he had not been so rigid in his view of how a campaign should be run (eg a little more time, sooner, with people rather than larger campaign donors and strategists)... he wouldn't need to pull out of Iowa?

Who says Irony is Dead?