Bad News: Elite Dem operatives predict Dean will be nominee - will lose.

[janekat]

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dcspoliticalreport/
The following is from a non-partisan political digest that I get. It's mainly a group of detached political insiders/junkies who analyze different races. If anyone is interested, you can sign up for the digest at the above link:

Basically, what they think so far is that Dean will get the Dem nomination. Many think that he will lose rather badly in the general election. The best ticket in their opinion in Clark/Edwards, some like Clark/Shaheen.



>>>>>Elite list of Dem operatives predict presidential nominee.An elite list of 50 Democrats nationwide (operatives, not officeholders) were asked by political magazine National Journal who they really think will be the Democratic presidential nominee-- not who they are supporting or who they want to be the nominee.

In the survey, the group's consensus was that Howard Dean would be the nominee.<<<<<<




>>>>>If Dean picked up the nomination, he will lose every
Southern/Rocky Mt. state without any chance whatsoever. Here
in Alaska, Bush would win by a larger landslide than he did with
Gore in 2000.

Clark should get the nomination. It would appeal to moderate
voters everywhere and people concerned about national
security(ahem, GENERAL Clark).

I concede that Shaheen would never get the nomination for VP
JUST because she's a woman and she's working for the Kerry
campaign. Clark should choose Edwards.

Edwards would appeal to the Southern moderates because he
has said he would work VERY hard in the South-critical to any
Democratic nominee.

Clark/Edwards is poised to win Arkansas and West Virginia, and
lose New Mexico in exchange.

Right now Democrats are divided and Republicans are united
(with a lot of money). Unless the Liberal and moderate
Democrats join together to bash bush in '04, the party will never
have a chance. Nominating Dean would be the most foolish
thing- moderates would walk away from his candidacy and
Democratic congressional races would suffer without coattails.
(Bush vs. Clark=coattails)<<<<<


>>>>>>Unification is easier said than done. There are several different views on tax cuts and there are several different views on the war resolution and several different views on the supplemental appropriation.<<<<<<


>>>>>>Dean will be the nominee. Learn to deal with it. I learned to deal with Dole.<<<<<<<


>>>>>>>And the GOP in the South, Midwest and West hope so! especially the ones running against Dem House members!<<<<<<<


>>>>>>Ex-General Wesley Clark from Arkansas is quite the impressive
one, raising $3.5 Million in 2 weeks is not too bad in a splintered
Democratic field. After he wins the Democratic nomination, he
should team up with Ex-New Hampshire Governor Jeanne Shaheen as his VP running mate (even though she's working for Kerry's campaign).
She is a moderate - fiscally conservative and socially liberal. She
lost in a very close race for U.S. Senate (51-47) in Republican New
Hampshire. It would appeal to women/moderate voters nationwide
and would seal New Hampshire for the Democrats because last time New
Hampshire went Bush by only 8,000 votes.

Clark/Shaheen '04

ARKANSAS 6
California 54
Connecticut 8
Delaware 3
FLORIDA 25
Hawaii 4
Illinois 22
Iowa 7
Maine 4
Maryland 10
Massachusetts 12
Michigan 18
Minnesota 10
NEW HAMPSHIRE 4
New Jersey 15
New York 33
Oregon 7
Pennsylvania 23
Rhode Island 4
Vermont 3
Washington 11
Wisconsin 11

294 Electoral Votes

Gain:
Arkansas
Florida
New Hampshire

Lose:
New Mexico

The new dream team.<<<<<<<


>>>>>>what is this fascination with female VP's? It's not going to
happen!!! not braun, not hillary, and not Shaheen. It's too risky, america is not ready.<<<<<<

[quinnox]

1. I also think Dean would be the weakest candidate

among the top bracket. But I don't put much stock in this prediction (that Dean will win the nomination), like most predictions.

[JaneQPublic]

137. I don't put much stock in this prediction by "party operatives"

Considering that Dean's revolutionary grassroots campaign is threatening to render "Party Operatives" obsolete, they have a vested interest in the failure of his campaign.

If he wins, future campaigns will be "people-powered" and party operatives will be the political equivalent of Beta-max.

[Hep]

2. Good!

Further proof that we're on the right track when we say that we need to make Elite Dem Operatives irrelevant.

[Woodstock]

61. really - how about questioning them on their motives

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[PurpHaze69]

3. If I wasn't an atheist

I would pray every night that Clark would pick up the nomination. I like Dean, I think he has a lot of fire and he's not afraid to say what he thinks, but he doesn't have a shot. It's just being realistic.

[Ripley]

9. Why doesn't he have a shot?

He has a proven record of accomplishing good things in his state as a Democratic governor for 12 years. What has Clark done other than be a general. Not that I'm anti-Clark. In fact I think Dean/Clark would win by a sizeable margin.

[AWD]

24. Flashback to 1991....

"I like Clinton, I think he has a lot of fire and he's not afraid to say what he thinks, but he doesn't have a shot. It's just being realistic."

[Bandit]

44. Exactly.... Who are these people who see so well into the future?

I think they know not what they say. It is all guess work at this stage of the game. Hell Bush* may not even be alive in November of 2004. Let's just let the cards fall where they may and make lemonaide if we get lemons. I will vote for the Democratic nominee and I encourage all others to do likewise.

[Nederland]

65. Newsflash: This isn't 1992

Bush Jr. didn't isolate his base by raising taxes like his dad did, and the economy is already better than it was in 1992 and likely to only get better. The one thing that can really hurt him right now is Iraq, and I wouldn't be surprised to see Rove pushing for a major withdrawl of troops (50%-70%) by election time.

[AWD]

75. Newsflash Part Deux....it's a comparison, not scientific.

The point being that they didn't give Clinton a chance then, and they're not giving him one now.

Translation - why believe the doomsayers now? They've been wrong before. Clinton is proof of that.

[RetroLounge]

92. Just another failed Governor of a failed State, right?

Just like they said about Carter.
Just like thay said about Clinton.

So I guess we're on the right track if we are pissing off the right people...

[mikehiggins]

117. Perot

Fellas, without Perot in the running, Clinton would have sunk into obscurity as the candidate who played saxaphone on TV one night.

The advantage of having Clark as our nominee in attacking Bush's war is that Clark has the credentials to be beleived. Dr. Dean is just another voice from the left (of course, Attila the Hun would be to the left of the Bush League) from a party long labeled soft on defense (I know, I know. I'm just talking about what people think, not what constitutes objective reality.)

As long as Clark has a half-way sensible domestic agenda (and I'm for anyone looking to rescind the upper class tax breaks--the people who benefit the most should carry a proportionately greater part of the burden, sez I) it all comes down to the war on terrorism.

So, on one hand you have the Action-figure President, and his VP, Dick Satan (I mean Cheney). Opposing him would be Clark and, I hope, Edwards, in an effort to win back the southern states. We only have to win one of the majore states that went for Bush in 2000 to put an end to this insanity.

I don't think a "Connecticutt Yankee" is going to do it, and I'm not sure we'll ever get another shot.

[DemPopulist]

157. Nobody said that

Clinton in 1991 was considered the most electable of all the candidates, with the possible exception of Bob Kerrey. Nobody started questioning his electability until the Gennifer Flowers/draft stuff.

[okieinpain]

152. not sure about either one, but both have negatives. why is dean

called a liberal, I'm really trying to figure that one out. clark has so many holes that he is really starting to look a little gore'ish. but will someone please explain to me how dean can be branded a liberal when he's not anti-gun, not exactly pro affirmative action, and fiscally conservative.

[Armstead]

4. Are these the same geniuses who........

Steered the Dems to such a sweeping victory with their "centrist" strategy in 2002, has really bolstered the Democratic Congreessional presence, did such a good job of reelecting an incumbent VP in the "peace and prosperity" environment of 2000?

The same geniuses?

Dean is basically a moderate. In some ways a conservative. If he's too "liberal" for these people maybe they should become GOP advisors. Maybe if they use their brilliant insights to guide the Republicans, the Democrats might actually have a chance of winning.

[brainshrub]

6. Amen! nt

[West Coast Democrat]

13. I Agree. Dean Is Not A Liberal

And anyone who believes he is a Liberal hasn't been following any of the candidates very closely.

[knight_of_the_star]

22. Doesn't matter

In the US, image is more important than substance. If the GOP can spin Dean as being another Dukakis, then he will go down in flames. And they probably will have no trouble doing that.

[West Coast Democrat]

31. But the NRA Backs Dean's Stance on Gun Control

so it would be hard for Republicans to spin that.

[Bandit]

49. Dean needs to get a Harley and a Black Leather Jacket

He can't dress up military style so he needs to go street tough. Image is all Americans care about so if we put forth the "Fonz" we should win hands down.

[Pastiche423]

156. The Fonz Dean

[spooky3]

82. I'm sure they'll try but I don't think that will work.

The averij Murkun is probably going to pay more attention to gut feel when watching candidates on Tv than to policy spins. Dukakis' major problem was lack of charm and emotion, which should be irrelevant, but we all know it is not. Dean has a completely different persona and gives a great stump speech. He'll put off some people, but he won't bore many.

[RetroLounge]

94. JC on a stick!

No one even remembers who Dukakis is...

Ge real....

[janekat]

32. You know that and I know that - but will the American people know it

or will they hear "Dean is a Liberal and supports gay marriage" over and over again. Courtesy of Karl Rove, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, etc.

[Touchdown]

51. Flashback to 1988

Dukakis was ahead of Bush Sr. for most of the Summer. Then he made a speech about gun control, and it was this sentence...

"If I had my way, I'd ban B-B Guns."...that clinched it, especially in Texas, which he was winning at the time.

The next week, his poll ratings dropped like lead.

People pay attention to their gun issues. Dean will not be another Dukakis.

[AlinPA]

113. That sounds like their $200 million dollar message.

They can flood the airwaves and newspapers with that message with $200 million. Its all people will hear and I'm afraid they will fall for it.

[JackRiddler]

144. GAAAAH! Enough!

The $200 million or 87 billion or whatever they stick into the Bush campaign will be used against ANYBODY! Kapish! If it's Dean, he'll be called "the gay-marriage candidate," and if it's Clark, he'll be the "unstable perfumed general." Or whatever! Figure it out, that money is simply there and the best thing you can do is not worry about it. Seriously!

Anyone can and will be attacked on an ad hominem basis. The question is, who can fight back best? And that has everything to do with personality. So far, Dean looks and acts like the fighter, Clark actually not. The Clarkies assign to him the attributes (general and what not) but his live performances belie that.

And who cares what a bunch of high-level party operatives think? Seriously, these guys obviously specialize in LOSING!

[denverbill]

18. Ditto Armstead.

I'm so friggin tired of the having no say in the candidates. Every year we end up with such a sorry pool. Dukakis in 88. Clinton in 92 (sorry, pro-NAFTA philander only got my vote as the lesser of 2 evils. I woulda voted for Perot if he hadn't been such a dumbass as to withdraw temporarily from the race).

I'm also getting a bit tired of pandering to the South. If they want to live in the dark ages fine. If they wanna be anti-northern bigots who will only vote for southerners, then screw em. This isn't fucking 1870. The Civil War ended 140 years ago. Get over it.

The 'elites' can go f themselves.

[blm]

20. If Dean had stuck with his original centrist campaign he wouldn't be

in this position HE created. He has been running with hot populist rhetoric and his longtime record doesn't SQUARE with the rhetoric. He is too easy to pick apart in that regard when you have 250 million dollars to pick someone apart.

Hell, just airing an ad using every inconsistent statement Dean has made on Iraq alone would be an embarassment. Especially when running that ad 40 times a day. Or Dean last Sunday saying he had as much experience as Bush when he took office, and he'll have a STAFF to deal with foreign policy. Sheesh. We're supposed to be electing a PRESIDENT not a staff. Bush's lack of foreign policy chops and "staff" didn't work out well, did it?

Dean's own words would be used to defeat him.

[livinontheedge]

28. And weeeezly clark hasn't been inconsistent?

His flip flops are becoming legendary.

[blm]

Then the ads will be used against him, too.

But, his reputation was not built upon the antiwar pedestal as much as Dean's is.

[JackRiddler]

145. There will be no such ad...

Believe it, the last thing the Bushies will want to talk about in 2004 will be IRAQ.

[FrenchieCat]

151. Don't forget that Blacks will probably stay at home.....

rather than support either candidates (bush or dean) who doesn't seem to really support Affirmative action....even if he does, currently that is not the perception...

Also the military and their families will stay home or vote Bush.....

Cause no matter how terrible Bush has been to them...they will not vote for an Anti-war candidate.....

[IrateCitizen]

48. Agreed, Armstead

They're scared of him because his grassroots support threatens their power base. And while they want to beat Bush, I think they would be willing to sacrifice electoral victory in order to maintain their power base.

Just look at the hatchet job that the DLC and Joe Lieberman have been doing on Dean, for this very reason. And should Dean get the nomination, the DLC and Lieberman will have done a lot of the dirty work for the GOP to get ammunition against Dean. Just like Al Gore did against Michael Dukakis in 1988.

[Woodstock]

62. Amen, Armstead! I'll pass on their brilliant 2002 strategy, thanks

[Larkspur]

109. Exactly! When Dean is underestimated, he wins

and he will win next year because he is willing to fight in every state and he will have us, his supporters helping him along.

These operatives haven't a clue what a movement is and that is what Dean's campaign is. We are on a verge of a paradigm shift in American politics and Dean will lead us to the new emerging Democratic Majority.

[killbotfactory]

5. OMG! THE HORROR!

These elite idiots are working from a script several months old. Dean is not an ultra-liberal, and he appeals to moderates.

[onebigbadwulf]

11. What?!

We haven't even seen his ticket. IF Clark is his VP then everything you said is just plain wrong.

Personally, I think Dean will win simply because he can expose every single lie, exploitation, and contradiction bush ever did with his millions of dollars. He can rip bush a new one in any debate. And as more and more soldiers die in Iraq every day... it wont even matter who is nominated...

Bush will lose to a jar of mayonaise.

[denverbill]

23. Bush would lose at Jeopardy to a jar of mayo.

[0rganism]

underestimating bush* got us where we are today

It doesn't matter if Dean "can rip bush a new one" in the debates. Al Gore did that, too, and the network spinmeisters shifted the focus onto "sighing" or "color coordination" or "Al's reinventing himself again" or some other shit. Bush can lose the debate pointwise and still win popular approval, just by appearing harmless and friendly.

What will matter is the ability to get a strong grassroots media campaign cranking to counteract the reactionary mass media lies, over $250 million worth of them. There really wasn't anything like that prepared for 2000 or 2002, and we've paid a heavy price. With any luck, the CIA will help the Democrats in this election by leaking the right stuff at the right time.

[On the Road]

7. None of These Projections Take Campaigning Ability into Account

Dean has shown himself to be a much better campaigner than most of his rivals.

My biggest concern has to do with certain tax breaks like the marriage penalty that Dean wants to repeal. Most of the tax cut -- OK to repeal. But it's the smaller provisions that will hurt him. If he's going to change his position, he should do it early.

And forget this shit about not winning in the South. Florida and the Great Lakes states will again be the key. If Bush can't win NY, CA, MA, or NJ, it will hard for him to overcome the large block of democratic electoral votes.

[Hawkeye-X]

15. Guess what?

*'s ineptitude will cost the Republicans EVERY SINGLE state. The media is backing the hell away from *'s so-called "popularity" and exposing him for the true imbecile he is... I predict a 50 state/DC sweep for Dean. Republicans will be SO embarrassed for * that they will not come and vote for their party's candidate NOR their party's Senators who are at risk to lose their seat. As a matter of fact, Dean's extreme popularity and straightforwardness will bring not only himself at the helm, but a majority of Democrats in both sides of the House. *'s 200 million warchest will do him NO good. As a result of this idiotic moves from today till November 2004, the Republican Party will become officially extinct after the last of the dinosaurs are shooed off in 2008.

From my mouth to God's ears, may this be granted.

Hawkeye-X

[TexasPatriot]

45. i'm sorry

but the more I watch, the more I think these guys are right. A lot of republicans in texas will talk about Clark - but Dean is an absolute non-starter (and this is texas). I dont think Dean will lose by more than 150 electoral votes, but i think it'll be a stomping (and the pubs will pickup 10 congressional seats - they're already pretty much guaranteed 5 from Texas).

The centrists like Clark/Kerry/Edwards could actually have some local coat tails - and win by enough to actually mandate some legislation.

Fine - a lot of dems dont like the idea of letting the party swing to the center. We saw what happens when those dems dont vote or are unwilling to compromise... the scary people win. There's no voting on principle thing here - the principle of winning and getting Senor Smirk out of the whitehouse is too damned important.

If I felt we could to vote on principle - I'd be out there lining up for Kucinich, or voting Green, or writing in Mickey Mouse because all the candidates pissed me off, God knows I've done it before. We don't have that luxury this time - and people need to stop acting like we do.

[JackRiddler]

146. You're right on one thing...

The media has begun to turn on Bush, and the press con yesterday was a milestone, not so much because they showed some bite, but because of his stiffman-in-a-snit reactions. He could have defused every problem with a soft touch, but kept true to his idiot's inflexibility: "Bring them on."

[jobycom]

8. I agree with them, but they can still bite me.

You never know until you try it. Historically, Dean looks like a weak choice. But there's no good historical parallel to an idiot like Bush, either. And who knows whether Clinton or Gore will jump in at the last moment, upsetting the dynamics. Too many ifs in a very dynamic situation where the incumbent is always one discovery or leak away from prison, and where the opposition party has not settled on anyone yet.

[KittyWampus]

10. At Least ONE Elite Democratic Operative Supports Dean

Donna Brazile!

Some think she's a Mole... and many have bashed her.

[Sagan]

16. Brazile needs to take a hike...

The thought of her heavily involved in a Dem campaign during the week and chatting it up with Karl Rove on Sundays sickens me.

I know she likes being "in", but what has she proven she can do? Nothing.

She can sit out this race, and the Dems will be better off for it.

[AP]

35. Gore's campaing was one of the worst I've ever seen. Even without RW media

spin, it sucked.

[Woodstock]

67. I agree - his brilliant campaign let BUSH trump him on the environment

that is what is called messing up BADLY

[AP]

78. Gore spent a career making this HIS issue, and he handed it to Bush in 04

That is stunning.

[Sagan]

12. Like Armstead, I think these "operatives" are in a rut...

They talk a *little* bit about fundraising capability, and ignore Dean's astonishing success with organizing and fundraising on a grass roots level -- something that ANY Dem Presidential candidate will have to be able to do. It's the natural counterweight to the big corporation backing of the GOP.

I like Clark. I definitely want to see him on the ticket. But I think Dean has to be there, too. If only for the strenghts his campaign organization brings to the table.

I still predict a Clark/Dean or Dean/Clark ticket. I'm happy with that.

Of course, I'm an Anyone But Bush man, so......

[janekat]

126. Wish we could have a "Co-Presidents" instead of a President - Vice

Pres. because I'm not sure how much of a difference a VP really makes....

[charlie]

130. We almost did recently

Reagan's team tried to talk Ford into joining Ronnie in a "working" co-presidency, splitting duties between prez and veep.

[chaumont58]

14. These things are pure fantasy, just bullshit

Its like there isn't going to be a campaign. Bush won't have any record he will have to defend, and Governor Dean will not be able to use his voice to bring forth any positions. Delusions! This has been the PC crap for months now. And, it will continue. There may or may not be 'elites' saying this. Reporters have been known to lie.

[livinontheedge]

17. Dean will beat Bush's pants off in the debates.

Weeezly Clark has done way way way too many flip flops on Iraq and sucked up to Bush for too long for me to ever vote for him.

Dean will win '04 election in close contest.

[AP]

36. Gore won debates, objectively, and still isn't president.

Dean isn't twice as good as Bush, which is what it's going to take for the Dem to win in 2004.

[AWD]

19. Looks REALLY non-partisan...

....NOT!

One of them says "learn to deal with it. I learned to deal with Dole."

Sounds like a Republican to me.

Nice try, though...you almost convinced all of us to give up now and abandon Dean. And we were SO gullible too.

[janekat]

27. It's non-partisan: Both Repubilcans and Democrats picking apart

different races.

[AWD]

33. Funny though....

...how you oh-so-convieniently left out any comment supporting Dean.

You only posted comments from people bashing Dean or saying he'll lose.

[janekat]

47. I'll try to see if I see any positive comments about Dean - I'm really

hoping. I'm not a Dean fan - but I think he is going to win so I'm hoping that this is all wrong myself.

Most of these people are NOT cheerleaders for any candidate or party for that manner. They are usually pretty dis-passionate in that group and discuss things in a pretty analytical way...

[CWebster]

118. And those supporting Clark.

[el_gato]

21. Elite Dem operatives destroying the phoney opposition party

If an opposition party actually existed the bush gang would be in
jail but that will never happen.

These "elections" are nothing but window dressing for the dumbed down masses that live in the heart of a crumbling empire.

[onebigbadwulf]

25. (sigh)

I miss Clinton... :(

[knowledgeispower]

37. Amen el_gato

A-fuckin'-men. These are interesting times. How many people can say they have lived through the death of the last empire on Earth?

[FrenchieCat]

155. But what about the Progressive Press? They are also for Clark

note that Clark has captured support from some illustrious Progressive publications and liberal writers. Gene Lyons, Joe Conason, Michael Moore, Robert Scheer, Josh Marshall, Michelle Goldberg, McCrudder, Bill Maher, Salon, Mediawhoresonline.com, dailygusto, Tnr, Buzzflash,Bartcop, and others.
http://aggressive-voice.com/zz585.html
http://www.winternet.com/~trashman/
http://www.emergingdemocraticmajorityweblog.com/donkeyrising/archives/000298.html
http://www.salon.com/opinion/scheer/2003/10/08/clark/index_np.html
http://salon.com/news/feature/2003/10/23/clark/index_np.html
http://www.tnr.com/primary/index.mhtml?pid=851
http://www.dailygusto.com/news/october/democrats-101503.html
http://www.dailygusto.com/news/july/wesley-clark-072803.html
https://ssl.tnr.com/p/docsub.mhtml?i=20031103&s=lizza110303&e=1
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?pt=bjq57awwJ36hUmhMuLKmgm%3D%3D
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2003_09_28.html#002033
http://demwatch.blogspot.com/2003_10_12_demwatch_archive.html#106619446353495555
http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/03/10/int03221.html
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh102703.shtml
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/10/14/wclark14.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/10/14/ixworld.html
http://aggressive-voice.com/zz590.html
http://aggressive-voice.com/zz584.html Satire....Why I hate Wesley Clark

IT IS ALSO BE NOTED THAT THE CORPORATE MEDIAWHORES ARE ATTEMPTING TO EXSTINGUISH CLARK ASAP!!! WHY???? Me thinks, that they also suspect that Clark would Win against Bush.

Many cable network talking heads have been writing Clark off for about 3 weeks. Drudge, Tucker Carlson, William Kristol, Pat Buchanan, Novak, Tony Blankley, and many other mediawhores are saying that he is has all but disappeared. Now this is based on the fact that Wes Clark (1.3 months) into entrance is now statistically tied with Dean in the National polls in first place (16%Dean/15%Clark/margin of error +/-5), and he's in the top 2nd or 3rd in most state polls. The whispers are out......Clark is finished.

This does turn on the point that the "elites" are in good company in feeling that Clark would win....and that they not speaking the same as the mediawhores Corporate establishment.....who would love nothing more than to have Bush for 4 more years.

[DemNoir]

26. Give me a break!

How can anyone how has watched Clark say he is the best canditate. I think that people should drop the knight in shining armour image of Clark that they hold in their imaginations and look at thr real person.

[AWD]

29. But...but...but...

He once said the war was bad. So he MUST be the best ever. never mind thathe praised Bush (and team Bush), never mind that he raised money for Repukes, never mind that he's STILL not registered Democratic, he's the bestest EVER!

Oh, and never mind that he also said the war was a good idea once too....these are not the droids you are looking for.

[FrenchieCat]

153. Here is "your Praise team Bush"......if you read, then you will know

Unfortunately for those who would rather forget all information provided to them on Clark one day, to start anew the RW talking points given as a gift to Dems...(in particular Dean and Lieberman's who have used it to no end) bashing next day....maybe some don't like reading in general:

clark's lincoln day speech:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004065

here is the full paragraph of contention:
------------------
You see, in the Cold War we were defensive. We were trying to protect our country from communism. Well guess what, it's over. Communism lost. Now we've got to go out there and finish the job and help people live the way they want to live. We've got to let them be all they can be. They want what we have. We've got some challenges ahead in that kind of strategy. We're going to be active, we're going to be forward engaged. But if you look around the world, there's a lot of work to be done. And I'm very glad we've got the great team in office: men like Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condolzeezza Rice, Paul O'Neill--people I know very well--our president, George W. Bush. We need them there, because we've got some tough challenges ahead in Europe.
----------------------
notice he says he is glad to have them in office for the challenges ahead in EUROPE! obviously they have failed in holding Europe to our cause.

two paragraphs up from the maligned "praise" we find this:
------------------------
But we're also extremely vulnerable. Our economy--we're using three times--we've got three times as much foreign investment as we're investing--capital flow--as we're putting out there. They're investing here because they believe in us. We're using energy like it's going out of style. We're using five to eight times as much energy per capita as people in the rest of the world, twice as much as even the Europeans. We're vulnerable to security threats--everything from terrorism to the developing missiles that are--we know rogue states are developing to aim at us.

And so I think we have to have a new strategy, and we have to have a consensus on the strategy, and we have to have a bipartisan consensus, and politics has to stop in America at the water's edge. We've got to reach out, and we've got to find those people in the world and share our values and beliefs--and we've got to reinforce them. We've got to bring them here and let them experience the kind of life that we have. They've got to get an education here. They've got to be able to send their children here. They they've got to go home. And they've got to carry the burdens in their own lands, and to some extent we have to help them.
----------------------------
notice that in the first paragraph clark talks enviromentalism to a republican audience. also note the warning about terrorism pre-9/11.
notice in the second paragraph he talks about bipartisanship, and reaching out to the world community. two traits that he shares spot on with his positions today.


in the next two paragraphs he further defines the European challenges:
-------------------------
We've got a NATO that's drifting right now. I don't know what's happened to it. But the situation in the Balkans where we've still got thousands of American troops, it's in trouble. It's going downhill on us as we're watching it. Our allies haven't quite picked up the load on that. But our allies say they're going to build a European security and defense program with a rival army to NATO. Well, I think it's a political imperative that they do more for defense, but I think we have to understand that that linkage between the United Sates and Europe, that bond on security, that's in our interest.
Look, in politics they told me--I don't know anything about politics now, I want to make that clear. But they told me--I read, do my reading in Time magazine and so forth. And they said in politics you've always got to protect your base. Well, for the United States, our base is Europe. We've got to be there, and we've got to be engaged in Europe.

[Cush]

38. doesn't show in debates

He does a lot better in the Town Hall meetings, TV Interviews etc. If there were less people in the debates, he would probably have a better showing

[knowledgeispower]

41. I think the point is that the ignorant masses will see Clark as...

the knight in shining armour. Whether that is true or not is supposedly irrelevant.

I don't buy the theory myself. But then again I don't like Clark, I don't like the DLC, and I don't like people telling me that I should just shut up and vote for a guy I know absolutely nothing about because he can win. Fuck that. I have ideals and I am sticking to them.

[xultar]

30. Dean's not my first choice...

But I would make it my personal mission to make sure he wins if he gets the nod.

I expect no less from any member of DU.

And Greenies...you have a vested interest. If we are to oust SHRUB we will need your votes as well. Perhaps we can get the nominee to appoint some Greenies to cabinet or administration posts as a trade off.

[janekat]

42. I think 99% of us will support whoever runs against Bush - but will other

people do it also. I will certainly support ANYONE who runs against Bush. He's a fraud and should not even be allowed to set foot in that White House - much lees be the pretend President....

[Woodstock]

73. Why don't you look at the national polls

instead of listening to a bunch of people with ulterior motives

Dean and Clark are within 6 points of Bush - and the gap is narrowing

[candy331]

119. Dean probably

could get the votes to win but will he President? I think more emphasis should be put on voting machines now while there is time to do something about it rather than who can win or can't win. It'll be time enough for that after the nominee is selected. Who knows what things will be like next year Chimp could be under impeachment ready to resign or things may have gotten so screwed up that the voters are ready to vote him out but we have to be ready to not let the votes be stolen.

[CWebster]

34. Oh look

another Dean bashing thread from a Clark supporter.

What a surprise. Ho-hum.

Oh yeah, I forgot.
How come you hardly ever post threads about your own fave?
Two reasons:

Not much of substance and not enough response.

Everyone is most focused on Dean.

Dean..Dean..Dean..Dean...Dean....

[janekat]

95. My faves are Clark, Kerry, Edwards, Gephardt - anyone who can beat

Bush... I only post about Dean all the time because I'm terrified he's going to lose. If I thought he could win - I would think he was the greatest person in the world....

[CWebster]

97. yes, as I was saying

...

[IrateCitizen]

39. "Elite Dems" are scared shitless of Dean's "movement"

Elite Dems want to beat Bush, that much is certain. But perhaps what they fear even more than Bush is a grassroots surge to take control of the party, therefore taking some of THEIR power away.

That's why they're so scared of Dean. Not because he is some kind of radical, but because he has awakened this sleeping giant of grassroots support.

I say, the hell with them. They had their chance, and they blew it. More than anything, we need something that gets people energized about civic involvement. If Dean's candidacy can help accomplish that in the long-term, then I view it as not just a good thing, but a GREAT thing, no matter the electoral outcome.

[knowledgeispower]

43. I agree, this is why I like Dean

Not to be a pessimist, but I see the whole thing as pretty much hopeless at this point. The U.S. will have to fall and fall hard before things will get any better. But, having said that, Dean is our best chance for a turnaround without hitting complete rock bottom.

[Merlin]

50. BINGO! Dean has his own organization.The elitists aren't part of it.

That's what they're afraid of.

The idea that Dean could be successfully painted as a wild-eyed radical liberal is horsefeathers. People listen to what he says and they know he's talking common sense. They can tell he's not feeding them a line, pandering, or barking some ideology.

Dean WILL be the nominee. Clark will be the VP. And they WILL WIN!

[janekat]

131. Yes - at least things will be different that way....

We have the Dean grassroots people and moveon.org to thank for that. Also the draftclark people (they drafted a candidate). The power of the "little people." If we don't win this time around - at least we have a new way of fundraising. Politics will never be the same...

The Pubs have their $1,000 a plate fundraisers - we have our $86 checks from the "regular" people. And it's only going to catch on more and more. More people will get computers - get access to the internet. Once this catches on - it will be the wave of the future. Next time more people will send in money.

Maybe we started this all too late to take effect for 2004...

[sendero]

40. Elite?

Elite? Are these the same elites who have brought us no success since Clinton?

I'll bet not a one of them could find their own ass with both hands.

[charlie]

46. WaitAMinute! The subject title is misleading

The "elite group" only predict that Dean will be the nominee, they don't predict a loss. The rest of the assessments are comments from the posters in the Yahoo group.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dcspoliticalreport/message/3830

[janekat]

52. Yes you are correct - these are all separate posts

BUT most of these people are political operatives who really pick these races apart. AND I've haven't seen one so far who says that they think Dean will beat Bush and can win. Very depressing...

[charlie]

56. Oh man

Are you reading this thread? Everyone thinks it's Elite Dems predicting a loss.

Here's a post explaining why the poster thinks Dean is the strongest candidate against Bush:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dcspoliticalreport/message/3148

[janekat]

90. well at least ONE is saying that..... AS I've been saying you have to

take all this with a grain of salt. Obviously, NO-ONE has a crystal ball. These are all mere people - "political wonks". They can be wrong.... There are some people who really know what they're talking about - others who don't.

Some of them correctly predicted that the Dems would lose the Senate in 2000. THAT'S what scares me.

[Hep]

57. "I'm so (FAKE) concerned"!

What's depressing about it? It's not like you are going to do anything to help Dean if he wins the nomination, because you hate him, right?

[janekat]

58. I don't hate Dean - I just don't think he has a rat's chance to win in the

General. Why would I hate Dean? I'm not in the habit of hating people I don't even know (well except Bush) I admit, however, I don't think very highly of him.

I'm not sure if I would work on his campaign. Might give him money. I cannot get my heart broken again as I did with Gore in 2000.

I will support him or anyone (Lieberman included) that wins the Dem nom.

Currently I support ABB - then Clark, Kerry, Edwards, Gephardt,


THEN: Dean, Kucinich, Sharpton, Braun in that order merely because I think those are the candidates who have the best chance.

[Hep]

66. The (FAKE) concerned speak

And lemme guess. You would be happy to share why you don't think he has a chance, but I won't listen anyway, so you won't bother sharing.

Thanks in advance for writing me off!

Note: If this is a different JaneKat than yesterday, My Apologies.

[Hep]

53. GASP

JaneKat being dishonest in her negative post about Dean?

Perish the thought? The sun must have risen again today.

[CWebster]

121. You know I wondered about that

because I came across some announcement of big party wigs predicting Dean.

My stars! To think that someone from the Clark corps deliberately spun this to give the opposite impression!

How unexpectedly diabolical!

[DancingBear]

54. Hang in there janekat

I think the analysis you posted has merit. Rove et al. will hammer Dean relentlessly with gay marriage, Vermont is a socialist state, Ben and Jerry, you name it. They are absolute masters at this, and it works. The Clinton analogies don't hold water - he was a virtual unknown in '91, and had no real "anti-morality" (read: Christian right) positions (that we knew of!) to attack. Whether real or perceived, Dean does. If anyone out there does not believe that Rove is praying for Dean to be the nominee, you are sadly mistaken.

I think we need a shot of realism here - remember who we are dealing with - Rove makes Atwater look like Mother Teresa, and he has $250M to paint Dean in whatever color he chooses. Perception is EVERYTHING.

BTW, I find Dean to be refreshing in his demeanor, candid in his responses, and fast on his feet. I would love to see him in the Oval Office, but I must step back and ask myself who I feel has the best chance to defeat Bush. At this point, I believe that to be Wesley Clark, but should that not happen I will work as hard as I can for whomever gets the nomination.

[indigo32]

60. I won't deny that I see some danger in some of Deans positions

(as far as the election goes) but I have to measure them against the other candidates strengths and weaknesses, and so far...Dean still wins IMHO. Clark... who I've been watching (at least through campaign e-mail updates, website, and on the debates)... looks, to me, to have a steep learning curve that I'm not sure he can overcome in time(smart as he is). But thats only my opinion. Frankly none of them are perfect... but then neither is *.

[DancingBear]

69. Agreed

I see Clark as having a long way to go from a political perspective, but I think he has the (I can't believe I'm going to use this word) "gravitas" to stand Bush down easily. The General vs. The Pretender will play well in Peoria, if scripted correctly.

[Hep]

64. Apparently I am sadly mistaken!

And Dancingbear was the one who showed me the error of my ways!

I think the analysis you posted has merit. Rove et al. will hammer Dean relentlessly with gay marriage, Vermont is a socialist state, Ben and Jerry, you name it. They are absolute masters at this, and it works. The Clinton analogies don't hold water - he was a virtual unknown in '91, and had no real "anti-morality" (read: Christian right) positions (that we knew of!) to attack. Whether real or perceived, Dean does. If anyone out there does not believe that Rove is praying for Dean to be the nominee, you are sadly mistaken.

What (FAKE) concerned people like to say is that Dean will be taken apart on civil unions. (FAKE) concerned people think that Americans are too stupid to actually think objectively. (FAKE) concerned people don't realize that Gay Marriage is not Civil Unions, and thisnk that Americans are too stupid to know the difference. (FAKE) concerned people think that people don't know what STATES RIGHTS are.

FAKE concerned people can be picked from a crowd as the ones carrying magic 8 balls.

I think we need a shot of realism here - remember who we are dealing with - Rove makes Atwater look like Mother Teresa, and he has $250M to paint Dean in whatever color he chooses. Perception is EVERYTHING.

Perception is everything, and Rove has 250 mill to spend against whoever wins. The only way the left can fight it is by making Rove irrelevant, and to match his spending. Donate to the DLC and get your writing hand ready for some LTTE. Anyone who thinks that only Dean will be hounded by Roves propaganda machine is "sadly mistaken"

BTW, I find Dean to be refreshing in his demeanor, candid in his responses, and fast on his feet. I would love to see him in the Oval Office, but I must step back and ask myself who I feel has the best chance to defeat Bush. At this point, I believe that to be Wesley Clark, but should that not happen I will work as hard as I can for whomever gets the nomination.

Amen to that. On this point I shake your hand and offer to buy you a beer.

[janekat]

71. I've been saying all along that I also have concerns about Clark also

He - like Dean is also a risky candidate. I'm holding my breath and will feel much better if he makes it to Feb without any major military or corporate scandal breaking out about him.

Until then, I will continue to also quietly root for Kerry, Gephardt and Edwards - just in case...

I'm not too terribly picky.

[Hep]

74. Fair enough

A couple of things go differently in the next several months, and Dubya could beat anyone.

Of course, something bad enough happens and Dubya can suspend elections, so...

[janekat]

91. or, he might call Osama and have him crash another plane into a

building... (said with only a very small grain of salt).

THAT would get his poll numbers up.

[AWD]

112. So....

I'm holding my breath and will feel much better if he makes it to Feb without any major military or corporate scandal breaking out about him.



So.....if he gets past a couple of primaries and THEN a major scandal hits him, you'll be OK with it???

It's only bad until AFTER he has a chance to beat a few Dems out of the race?????

[NewYorkerfromMass]

115. and what's to stop the same thing from happening to Dean?

'ya know... a major scandal working its way out of those sealed records?

[DancingBear]

93. Hello Hep

Good point on the fact that Rove will demonize any of the Democratic candidates. My belief, however, is that Dean wll be much easier to do it against. I lived next door to VT for 12 years, and I can't tell you the number of times I've heard it referred to as a "socialist" state. Think perhaps that Bernie Sanders may get a little "love" from the GOP in the election cycle?

As for your contention that Americans will know the difference between civil unions and gay marriages, I believe that Rove et al. plan to make gay marriage a centerpiece of their 2004 re-election bid. Care to fathom a guess as to why? Here's a clue - they think it will work. Surely you don't believe that if a Bush commercial pops up and and says "Howard Dean signed into law a bill that allows gay couples to live together" people will stop and say "oh, that's OK - those are civil unions, not gay marriages." If so, I think you need to get out more. That message will be designed for one thing and one thing only, and we both know what that is.

With regard to your (FAKE) comments - lose 'em, OK? This should be a healthy debate between two different points of view. No more, no less. I am no more (FAKE) in my concern than you.

Fianlly, thanks for the beer offer - ya never know... :)

[Hep]

I got your point

But if you think a Dean commercial saying, "Dean signed a law allowing people to visit their same sex partner in hospitals, which was previously illegal" isn't good enough counter, then we're in trouble.

How sad is political discourse when even liberals think that granting equal rights to same sex couples is a political liability? We're all worried now that a person who did the right thing is going to suffer for it? Dean's clear about not forcing all states to adopt civil unions. Dean's clear about not forcing the church to comply.

And what you appear to be telling me is that Dean would have a better chance at being president had he fought against the civil unions law rather than standing up for the rights ofhis citizens. That's right wing punditry, and I think it's insane for the left to grant that premise.

With regard to your (FAKE) comments - lose 'em, OK? This should be a healthy debate between two different points of view. No more, no less. I am no more (FAKE) in my concern than you.

Don't worry, I won't apply that to you anymore. (FAKE) concern is something you'll see a lot of here. From all sides. People make these posts where they're so concerned about this or that as a veiled attempt to discredit a candidate. Some Deanies do it, some Kerry fans, some CLark fans, some Kucinich fans, doesn't matter.

And my red flag went up when I saw you express concern about Dean's doing the right thing being a political liability. I was wrong to apply it to you and I'm sorry.

But I'm not ceoncerned about this. I hold people ina higher regard than lots of folks here. I know that my ultraconservative mother agrees that gay couples should be able to visit each other. And it wasn't hard to convince her. The whole point of the Dean campaign is to take these things to the streets. Make the media irrelevant. If we can expose the Rove machine for what it is just once, it's all over for them. And I think we can.

[DancingBear]

133. Thanks

for your well thought out response. It is indeed sad for all us that we find ourselves having to define someone's right to happiness with regard to how it plays politcally, but for now that seems to be the case. I am very hopeful that Clark will take the same stance as Dean with regard to this issue - I believe he will. I commend Dean for his stance on the issue, and in response to your question I do not believe he should have fought against civil unions. Hell, it's about time the last bastion of discrimination gets torn down.

No, we're not in trouble. There's an idiot in the White House, and the right will overreach, as they always do. I've been taking up space on this planet now for about half a century, so I tend to see progress as being incremental (based on past history). Will Deans positions hurt him? I can't say - they'll be fodder for the right though, to be sure. Does he have the abiltiy to turn them into positives? I hope so.

Whoever wins the nomination, though, I've think we've proven one thing - they'll be two of us working like hell for him.

Take care,

DB

[NewYorkerfromMass]

98. I'm tired of saying this

but you have said it as well as I ever could have. John Kerry can do it. Dean can't.

[Hep]

124. And no one ever says why

Apparently all of that information is hidden in some secret thread where no one can find it.

[janekat]

55. Here's one that said Clark could win - haven't found a good one about Dean

yet...

>>>>>I am predicting that Wesley Clark will win the 2004 Democratic
Presidential nomination. He will come in 3rd place in New Hampshire,
1st place in early primary states like Arizona,Delaware,Oklahoma,and
South Carolina. Some rank and file Democrats and Majority of
Independents will join the Clark campaign.

Clark's VP runningmate should be New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson.
Richardson is a former US Congressman,a former UN Ambassador, Energy
Secretary and current Governor. Richardson is Hispanic. The Hispanic
Electorate is a key electorate for the Democratic Party. Richardson
has strong legislative and executive experiece and strong domestic
and foreign policy credentials. This an excellent balance for Clark
who is former Military General of NATO,Licensence Investment Banker
and CEO Technology Firm in Little Rock,Arkansas, Clark's home state.
Clark is also a Rhodes Scholar.
Clark/Richardson-
1)Arizona 10 (strong Latino Electorate- Clinton narrow win 1996,Gore
narrow loss in 2000. Recent polls show Bush trailing in Arizona.
2)Arkansas 16 (Clark's Home State)
3)California 71 Clinton Gore State
4)Connecticut 78 Clinton Gore State
5)Delaware 81 Clinton Gore State
6)Hawaii 85 Dukakis Clinton Gore State
7)Illinios 106 Clinton Gore State
8)Iowa 113 Dukakis Clinton Gore State
9) Louisiana 122 State Clinton win in 1996 with more than 50% of the
popular vote. Strong Black electorate and French Canandians will help
Democrats.
10)Maine 126 Clinton Gore State
11)Maryland 136 Clinton Gore State
12)Massachusetts 148 Dukakis Clinton Gore State
13)Michigan 165 Clinton Gore State
14)Minnesota 175 Dukakis Clinton Gore State
15)New Jersey 190 Clinton Gore State
16)New Mexico 195 (Richardson's home State)
17)New York 226 Dukakis Clinton Gore State
18)Oregon 233 Dukakis Clinton Gore State
19)Pennsylvania 254 Clinton Gore State
20)Rhode Island 258 Dukakis Clinton Gore State
21)Vermont 261 Clinton Gore State
22)Washington 272 Dukakis Clinton Gore State
23)West Virginia 277 Dukakis Clinton State
24)Wisconsin 289 Dukakis Clinton Gore State
D.C 290

US Senate
Democratic Pick up

Alaska- Knowles(D)
Illinios- Hynes(D)
Oklahoma- Carson (D)


Republican Pick up
Georgia- Isakson (R)


Democratic Retention
Florida- Graham-D
North Carolina Bowles-D
South Carolina Tenenbaum-D

Republican Retention
Colorado- Campbell
Missouri- Bond
Pennsylvania- Specter.

+2 Democratic

Governor 2003
Democratic win in Louisiana and Mississippi
Louisiana- Blanco-D 52%
Jindal-R 48%
Mississippi- Musgrove-D 50%
Barbour- R 49%
Republican win in Kentucky
Kentucky- Fletcher-R 53%
Chandler-D 46%

Governor 2004
Democratic Pick-up
Montana- Schwietzer-D
Utah- Matheson-D

Republican Pick up
Indiana-??? If Kernan runs for re-election- Democratic Retention. If
Kernan stays out of race- Republican pick up.
Missouri- If Holden loses Primary to McCaskill- Democratic Retention.
otherwise- Republican Pick up.

Democratic Retention
Delaware- Minner-D
North Carolina- Easley-D
Washington- Gregorie-D
West Virginia- Manchin-D

Republican Retention
New Hampshire- Benson-R
North Dakota- Hoeven-R
Vermont- Douglas-R

+2 D <<<<<

[Hep]

68. Good one on Dean

was posted before your claim to not be able to find one:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dcspoliticalreport/message/3148

[janekat]

77. Unfortunately- that person endorses him - doesn't say that he can win

try again...

I know you may not believe but I'm hoping Dean can win too (if he's our nominee). I want him to beat Bush like a bad piece of meat...

[Hep]

80. I'll take your word for it

Why would an elite political operative endorse a candidate that can't win?

If you say you want any D to win the election, I'll believe you.

[janekat]

106. I want any D to win (or even any "I" to win for that matter)

Why, I'm so desperate - I will vote for anyone against that fraud. If you ran Ronald Reagan (even in his current state of Alzheimers) against Bush I would vote for Reagan. ANYONE is better than that *@#%#!.

[charlie]

84. Yes he does

"...Arkansas-Clark's Home State, West
Virginia- Democratic Stronghold in the border South- voted for
Dukakis in 1988 and Clinton in 1992 and 1996 and New Hampshire- A
swing state in the NEw England region. This adds up to 275 ev"

There's also a Dean/Richardson post with a similar electoral calculus.

[janekat]

101. can you post it - I didn't see that one....

thanks.

[charlie]

104. Dean / Richardson

"Dean/Richardson-D 280ev Gore States and AR,NV,NH,WV"

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dcspoliticalreport/message/3435

[janekat]

111. Thanks! Can you believe these people are such wonks they already

have a cabinet picked out? AND we all thought WE were bad!

[Woodstock]

59. then why is Dean tied with Clark in the polls - both 6 points behind Bush?

and that's half of the gap that it was last time Newsweek polled

they are gaining on him - and the unnamed Democrat beats Bush

the reason for the gain/reconciliation of the two (named vs. unnamed)?

Dean's name recognition is growing

[Skwmom]

139. How many times does this need to be repeated on this board.

1. Clark has been attacked from the get-go.
2. The corporate media has been cheerleading for Dean.
3. This is a national poll and doesn't show how weak a candidate Dean would be in many parts of the country.

[Hep]

148. 4.

1. Get-go is subjective, since he got more hype than just about anyone else in the months before he declared. He hasn't been attacked for nearly as long as anyone else because he hasn't been in race but for a few months.

2. The corporate media has not been cheering for Dean if you are a Dean supporter. Some think that any article or mention is a cheer, except that probably 30% of those cheers started like, "Gimme an M, Gimme a C, gimme a G, gimme an O". Or maybe we're talking about The Nation, a well respected publication, with such articles as "Dean's No Wellstone". Rah Rah Rah!

3. Who cares? Nothing show how anything anyone will be anytime in the future. Stats are fun when they're in your favor, and they suck when they're not.

[Zgrrl]

63. I get the feeling...

...there are some on this board that would experience a certain degree of schadenfreude if Dean were to lose in a landslide to Bush, although for the life of me I can't imagine why. Democrat, Green, Moderate Republicans...we need to all stick together and get this insane administration out of the White House.

Repeat after me: Anybody but Bush...anybody but Bush...anybody but Bush.

I happen to be a Dean supporter, but I would vote for ANY of the dem candidates, even Sleazerman, before I'd give Der Shrubber another 4 years.

[Hep]

72. Amen

I'm right with you. And I get the very same vibes from the Anti_Dean crowd here. IF Dean gets the nod and loses the general, I expect several here to come in gloating.

[janekat]

81. Believe me - I will be in a DEEP depression if Bush is re-selected

I do like to be right - but not THAT MUCH.

Took me a month before I came out of it last time. I'm only in a "mild" state of depression now....

[AWD]

70. What janekat's NOT telling us....

...is that this amazing group of non-partisans have posted a GRAND TOTAL of 110 posts for the ENTIRE 29-day month (so far) of October.

Wow. Some focus group, huh? Hell, the "How fast will this thread die" thread in the Loungs has 5 times that many posts....and that's just ONE thread.

[janekat]

83. This is NOT a forum like DU - just a small group of political junkies who

"check in" about once a day. I find that they're pretty knowledgable. YOU may not agree with them - I don't always agree with all of them - but there are a few people who DO know what they're talking about...

[AWD]

76. Typically misleading headline...

...NOWHERE does it say thatthe elite Dems predict ta Dean loss....it ONLY predicts his nomination.

Janekat's pack of 11 friends from that board are the ones predicting the loss.

[janekat]

86. The 50 elites predict a Dean Win - overall the group says that Dean will

lose... A couple of these people predicted in 2000 that the Dems would lose the Senate - so I tend to listen to them (with a grain of salt).

[AWD]

108. Address the misleading headline

WHY did you try to craft the headline to make it say that the "elite Dems" said Dean will lose?????

[VermontDem2004]

79. America is not ready? Bullshit

Most of the adult population is female by a small margin so they are not a minority and males will vote for someone who has a female on the VP ticket believe it or not. America has been ready.

[mzmolly]

85. What was their analysis when Dean entered the race? NT

[janekat]

87. When did he get in again.... can't find it yet....

n/t

[aquart]

88. "Elite"??

Think they're better'n me?

Or do they simply plan to not support the ticket and hope there is still an America left in 2008?

Because ANY so-called Dem who doesn't support the 2004 Dem ticket is a traitor and I do not mean to the party.

If they DARE play politics after the ticket has been decided I want their heads on pikes.

[janekat]

99. These people are not the elites- they are citing what a group of elites

have said about the election.

We have two different groups here.

The elites say that Dean will win.

The second group is a group who is stating their opinions about the Presidential race (that Dean will lose). A few are "endorsing" a candidate.

[SeattleRob]

89. Are these the same elite Democrats who...

masterminded the 2002 election?

Gee. Thanks for the information. I don't know what I was thinking. I was basing my decision on information, positions on issues, and personality. Now that these anonymous Elite Democrat Insiders have spewed their wisdom, I guess I will have to support whomever they think will win.

[haymaker]

96. If Dean is the nominee, then we should all vote for Bush.

Might as well, he can never win. Let's get on the winning side.

By the way, I'm going to Vegas nest week, would you mind telling me who is going to win the Suyper Bowl. Thanks in advance.

On edit: Janekat, keep working, you'll have an effect yet.

[RetroLounge]

100. Here's my stock reply to Dean-Bashing Clarkies

DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN
DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN DEAN

[janekat]

102. I'm not bashing Dean. I'm stating what some knowledgable people

are saying. Would I say that Dean was going to be the nominee if my purpose was to "bash" him? C'mon - don't think in such terms of "black and white." There are various shades of gray....

Don't forget - there are many who will run out and jump on the Dean bandwagon if they hear a bunch of experts say that they think he will win...

[w4rma]

You don't think that DUers are knowledgable people?

Do you think that 10 or 20 anonymous people on a small Yahoo mailing list are smarter than us?

[janekat]

123. I think we're too emotional about it. They pick it apart very logically

What we need to do is break it down logically - state by state. You can't predict anything until you do that...

[leetrisck]

103. "Elite Dem Operatives" can shove it

They can shove it. Don't know if I'll vote for Dean or not but I sure wouldn't have any qualms about doing it. We have a great slate of candidates and I could support any one of them. Slimy Shrub can certainly be beaten by any one of them.

[Capn Sunshine]

105. I think these are the SAME "operatives"

who interviewed for positions with the Dean, Kerry, Edwards, and Gephardt campaigns. I heard from many of them how Deans campaign had the weirdest strategy they'd ever seen and had no chance.Not even on the map. How do they expect to overcome the Kerry juggernaut?

Last train leaving the station:Clarks.

No wonder they don't like Dean: it challenges their assumptions that they know shit about shinola.

Yeah, I know a LOT of these guys.

[AlinPA]

107. Are any southern states in play at all beyond AR & FL?

Even FL seems out of reach. It seems that Jeb Bush is now popular there..

[janekat]

125. Arkansas and North Carolina if we have Edwards or Clark in there...

n/t

[PROGRESSIVE1]

110. I like Dean and he is a good man, but.....

he has appealed only to the base of the Dem Party!

If he is the nomminee I will fully go out and campaign for him though I am a Strong Clark supporter!

However, he will sweep the northeast and will probably take
67%-70% of the vote in states like Massachussetts, Vermont, Rhode Island, Maine, Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey due to a shift of Northeast Republicans who have been turned off by Bush's extremism! He will also win California and DC along with Hawaii but that's it!!!

He will not be able to win over many moderate swing voters and will get about 45% to Bush's 55% and Bush will take about 60%-65% of the electoral vote! While not a landslide it will certainly be a mandate and we do not want that!!!

[janekat]

120. We need to get rid of the electoral vote - it really screws us over....

n/t

[PATRICK]

114. Can we cobble together 50

elite theorists here? We ALL share the same concerns as these illuminati. Serene finality about anything at this point about the likely candidates is rather a sign of premature bad judgment.

In some ways it appears that if ANY candidate of stature was NOW the choice against Bush the real downslide in his polling would commence. It hasn't even begun yet and look how weak he is. The problem is more a Bush victory by "other means".

How many degrees and how much money or how many years on losing campaigns or devising Republican Lite leadership councils are necessary to be in the elite? Are they elected?

I notice none are able to transcend their parochial regional perspectives. But Shaheen? That they could not even pick a winner says a lot for their knowledge of women candidates. I wonder what this guy's alternative to Ferraro was when he was pontifcating on that election?

WHat is the name of that journal? "The Trail of Beers"?

[ThorsteinVeblen]

116. I don't care as long it is not Kerry, Gephardt or Lieberman.

I will vote for Bush if any of the above 3 are nominated.

[bearfartinthewoods]

122. ooouch...this one hurts

>>>>>>Dean will be the nominee. Learn to deal with it. I learned to deal with Dole.<<<<<<<

[CMT]

127. I take this with a grain of salt

Dean is doing as well in matchups against Bush as Clark is in many recent surveys. He can win and do well in many western states.

[janekat]

128. Here's one that says Clark/Richardson....

But then someone shot him down saying that Clark is ahead in zero states....


-- In [e-mail], "nquasimoto"
<nquasimoto@y...> wrote:
> The 2004 Democratic Presidential Competition is between Howard Dean
> and Wesley Clark. I predict that Clark may get the Democratic
> nomination if Independents in early primary states vote in the
> Democratic Primary for Wesley Clark to stop Dean from getting the
> nomination.
>
> Wesley Clark is the most electable and most qualified Democratic
> Candidate for the 2004 Presidential election..
> Clark is a Former NATO Military General, who prosecuted the War in
> Yugoslavia which brought to the Brutal Dictator- Slobodon
Milosevic.
> Clark is also a Rhode Scholar of Oxford University,a Decorated
> Vietnam War Veteran, Investment Banker and CEO of a Technology Firm
> in Little Rock, Arkansas, his home town, Clark will give Democrats
> credibility on Foriegn Policy and NAtional Security Issues and will
> be able help Democrats win states in the Southern Region.
>
> Clark's VP runningmate should be Bill Richardson- The Governor of
New
> Mexico- Richardson is the only Hispanic Governor in the US, He is a
> former Congressman, and a former UN Ambassodor ,and former Energy
> Secretary, He has both legislative and executive experience, and
> domestic and foriegn policy experience.
>
> Democrats are favored to win all the states Al Gore carried during
> the 2000 Presidential Election. The Gore States voted Democratic
> during the last 3 Presidential Elections and they add up to 260 ev.
> CA Clark/Richardson= 55%-42%
> CT Clark/Richardson= 59%-38%
> DE Clark/Richardson= 56%-41%
> HI Clark/Richardson= 61%-36%
> IL Clark/Richardson= 57%-40%
> IA Clark/Richardson= 54%-43%
> ME Clark/Richardson= 53%-44%
> MD Clark/Richardson= 57%-40%
> MA Clark/Richardson= 66%-31%
> MI Clark/Richardson= 55%-42%
> MN Clark/Richardson= 53%-44%
> NJ Clark/Richardson= 58%-39%
> NM Clark/Richardson= 52%-45%
> NY Clark/Richardson= 63%-34%
> OR Clark/Richardson= 53%-44%
> PA Clark/Richardson- 53%-44%
> RI Clark/Richardson- 65%-32%
> VT Clark/Richardson- 56%-41%
> WA Clark/Richardson- 55%-42%
> WI Clark/Richardson- 54%-43%
>
> Clark has to win states like Arkansas,Louisiana,and West Virginia-
> States that Clinton carried in 1992 and 1996 with more than 50% of
> the popular vote.
> AR- Clark/Richardson- 54%-43%
> LA- Clark/Richardson- 52%-45%
> WV- Clark/Richardson- 52%-45%
>
> This adds up to 280 ev
>
> Other States that will Clark will carry are states that Bush
carried
> in 2000 with less than 50% of the popular vote Nevada and New
> Hampshire- Nevada has a strong latino population - and with
> Richardson on the ticket and the YUCCA issue. Clark may win Nevada
in
> 2004.. McCain Independents will more likely vote for Clark.
> NV- Clark/Richardson- 49%-48%
> NH Clark/Richardson- 49%- 48%
>
> Tennessee- a swing state in the Southern Region
> TN= Clark/Richardson= 50%-47%
>
> Clark/Richardson-D 300
> Bush/Cheney-R 238



Clark couldn't keep the faith of his own campaign manager for more
than a couple weeks and is ahead in 0 states, good luck!

[JNelson6563]

129. Very interesting

I had lunch today with someone I cannot name. I will just tell you he is intimately connected to national politics and a seemingly neutral observer in the Pres. race.

The skinny from this great inside source is quite the opposite of what you post here regarding Dean's electability in a General. OF course the conversation was lengthy, full of possible future scenarios and facts already known on the way it's all played out thus far. It was pretty easy for me to be somewhat objective in this discussion because, like my lunch partner, I am a Dem above being an anyone-supporter.

It was a very interesting lunch to say the least. I learned a lot and not all of it would be to the anti-Dean crowd's liking.

Julie

[janekat]

132. well -are you going to fill us in. We could all use some good news...

We're a little depressed here....

If it means that Bush is getting beat I'm happy. I don't care WHO beats him. Clark, Dean, Kerry, Lieberman, Pat Buchanan, Nader, Roanld Reagan, Bob Dole, George Bush Sr. The list goes on and on....

I just want to see that little fraud out of office.

[javadu]

142. ????????

I had lunch with someone today also. I can't tell you who it was or what we talked about, but some people on this board would not like it.

[JNelson6563]

154. javadu, janekat, etc.

I'm sorry. I really cannot say. There are times where name-dropping is a really bad idea. Wouldn't want to lose anyone's confidence.

I will tell you this, many in Washington do not have the fear of beating Shrub that many here express. Disagreement on who can do it, with consensus comming along daily though--after certain last ditch efforts appear to be falling flat.

Believe it or not real politicos are not nearly as petty, small-minded and/or hateful regarding candidates aside from their favs as we here on DU are.

Oh and javadu, if you don't understand the concept of keeping confidence but wanting to share what is possible with one's cohorts than I am sorry, I cannot help you.

Julie

[javadu]

134. Clark Supporter Here

I am a very strong Clark supporter. However, I am not anti-Dean. Earlier posts on this board suggested that some of us pro-Clark/anti-Dean folks would gloat after Dean lost the general election. There are two things wrong with this.

First, I am pro-Clark, but not anti-Dean. I like Dean very, very much. If he wins, I will be wearing Dean buttons and buying Dean tshirts and campaigning hard for him.

Second, I think that Clark has the best chance of winning the general election. I am from Missouri, and I can think of 10 or 12 people who will probably vote for Bush, I don't think that any of them would vote for Dean, but most of them would at least consider Clark.

I think about it like this: Will the carrier landing and the flight suit be a positive or negative for Bush? If Dean gets the election, I think it will help Bush more than hurt him. If Clark gets the election, I think it will hurt Bush more than help him.

Moreover, I just like Clark the best. He is bright, articulate, and hopeful. Dean is bright, articulate, and angry. I have also been angry about the misadministration's policies, but most people just are not as angry as the segment of the population who posts messages on DU. To paraphrase the Salon.com article, hope for the future just feels better than anger for the present.

[Skwmom]

140. I won't gloat but will I be very angry.

This election is not about any one candidate. If Bush gets four more years, there will be more body bags coming home, more kids growing up without Dads, our environment will be raped, our country bankrupt and the voting process even more corrupt. This is too important not to put up the best nominee that we have to beat Bush. It's like a train wreck waiting to happen and the rabid Dean supporters refuse to open their eyes and put this country and its people ahead of their own desire to see their "chosen" candidate succeed. If another candidate entered the race tommorrow that had a beter chance of beating Bush than Clark I would support that person in a heatbeat.

[Hep]

149. Honestly, I doubt it

If another candidate entered the race tommorrow that had a beter chance of beating Bush than Clark I would support that person in a heatbeat.

Based on your posts about Dean, I don't think you'd believe that any new candidate COULD have a better chance than Clark.

[MrPrax]

135. Elite Democrats?

I don't think an elite democrat would write:
"Dean will be the nominee. Learn to deal with it. I learned to deal with Dole."

Why would HE have to learn to deal with it...he's a democrat??

[janekat]

138. No - these are two different groups here

These are all separate posts from different people (Dems and Reps).

The moderator posted that an elite group of Dems all said Dean would win the nomination.

THEN the other posts are from people mostly saying that they think Dean will lose. I've seen two that say that they think Dean can win the general election. Also two say that they think Clark will win the nomination and will beat Bush.

[Iverson]

136. secrets revealed!

I had lunch today with a non-partisan group of elite academic analysts who had plenty to say about the 2004 race. I can't name names without putting all of you in danger, but here are a few numbers:

CMB-Bush* 270-270

W.Clark-Bush* 271-269

Sharpton/Dean-Bush*/Lieberman 272-268

These are strictly for discussion, mind you. No insiders from the Edwards campaign were hurt during this lunch.

Shhh!

[Forkboy]

141. I think you showed us very clearly yesterday

that you'll latch on to ANYTHING even remotely negative about Dean.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=608657

[janekat]

143. I made ONE comment: "Now I'm totally depressed...."

gimme a break!

[Forkboy]

147. Oh I'm sorry

I must have mistaken you for another Janekat that always posts negative things about Dean.

[schultzee]

150. If a democrat loses it will be due to DIEBOLD stealing for W

because I have met too many bu$h voters who are totally fed up with him.