Why a Dean/Clark Ticket Would Never Happen

[Dob Bole]

aside from Clark's recent statement that he wouldn't be a VP, it would never work anyway if Dean got the nomination.

According to the Center for Politics, Dean, unlike Gephardt or Edwards would likely lose some of the swing states that Gore won and be handily defeated by Bush, IF he is still perceived by people as "too liberal" at election time.

He's got to gamble on somebody like Graham and play for the big electoral votes to win. Arkansas has only 6.

[CMT]

1. Dean will not likely lose the swing states which Gore won

if Dean lost some of them then we are looking at a Bush landslide which means no Democrat would be able to defeat Bush. As for Clark's statement many prospective VP candidates say the same thing. But I do agree that Graham would be a better candidate for VP with Dean anyway because he has Washington experience, was against the war, and is not as likely to make gaffes on the campaign trail like a relatively new politician would. He also is strong on intelligence issues.

[Justice]

13. How Will Dean Not Likely Lose the Swing States?

Seriously, I am interested in that statement. How will Dean "not likely lose" the swing states? And what are the swing states being referred to?

If Dean is the nominee and loses some of the swing states, one cannot say that means that no Democrat would be able to defeat Bush. Unless we have a head to head matchup - we would never really know how another Democrat would do against Bush. That is part of our system - like it or not (and why it is important to consider now who could best beat Bush -- not just who can win the nomination).

If Dean is the nominee, I will support him wholeheartedly.

[SahaleArm]

2. How would Graham help Dean look less liberal?

According to the Center for Politics, Dean, unlike Gephardt or Edwards would likely lose some of the swing states that Gore won and be handily defeated by Bush, IF he is still perceived by people as "too liberal" at election time.

He's got to gamble on somebody like Graham and play for the big electoral votes to win.

Are you saying Dean is perceived to be a liberal?

[Hawkeye-X]

4. Even I *see* him as a centrist

and I'm pretty far from liberal. I'm a socialist. Any right-wing dumbshits who thinks Dean is liberal will be sticking their foot in the mouth. Repeatedly.

Hawkeye-X

[SahaleArm]

8. I live in Seattle, Dean has many liberal Dems in a tizzy.

If he's going to win the general election, he'll have to play somewhere between his current position and his governorship.

[Scott Lee]

28. I'd recommend they lay off the coffee. It can do that.

har har

[karabekian]

30. dean's fiscal liberalism

his plans to reregulate some industries are can be viewed as liberal.

[Hawkeye-X]

3. Wrong.

Dean will not only retain Gore's swing states that was won previously, but also win MUCH more in the South and the West.

What Gore didn't have that Dean has now is a strong grassroots support. He is approaching close to 500,000 supporters on the 'Net, and divide that to 50 states, and average is 10,000 supporters PER state, at average, it may be down or up depending on how small the population of the state is...

Colorado has a small number of Dean supporters (about 5,000) but we're doing or damnednest to help Dean win Iowa, NH, SC and the rest of the primaries.. Damn Repukes cancelled our caucuses for next year, or Dean would win.

Hawkeye-X

[SahaleArm]

5. I thought the RNC had 6 million 'grassroots supporters'?

Doesn't astroturf count:)?

[Hawkeye-X]

6. RNC has probably 1,000 true supporters

and the rest, they make shit up.

Hawkeye-X

[stopthegop]

7. seems your analysis has a flaw...

Dean may have 500K supporters...but you can't validly assume they're anything like evenly distributed among the states...
remember the red/blue map for 2000? Dean supporters will be concentrated in the blue/Gore states...not in Wyoiming and Kansas..

[Larkspur]

27. Deans' supporters don't have to be evenly divided between states

because we can coordinate strategies to help each other out no matter which state we live in. Example: many of us Deanocrats are writing letters to undecided voters in Iowa and New Hampshire on our own time. These personal letters are having an effect with Dean's poll numbers because personal letters are more likely to be read than slick campaign advertising that the other candidates are stuck using because they don't have the grassroots army Dean has. And our personal letters did help Dean overtake Gephardt in Iowa back in the summer/early Fall, and the new batch is definitely making a difference now.

[Barbara917]

20. Question about your 500K statistic

Isn't this information anecdotal? What is it based on? Email addresses? Individual contributions? How is the number derived? I am genuinely interested.

Secondly, and this is anecdotal information. There are a significant number of Clark supporters who were former contributers and supporters for Dean. Does the Dean campaign have any mechanism to track lost supporters or do they?

Quite frankly I would be very hesitant to quote a statistic about supporters on the 'Net for Clark. It would seem that the only way to verify individual supporters would be through contributions and there is no guarantee that those contributers haven't also contributed to other campaigns.

[sangh0]

23. The information isn't even anecdotal

It's nothing more than wishful thinking. For anyone to claim that any candidate WILL WIN a number of contentious states is a sure sign that they don't know what they're talking about.

But then again, claiming that victory is inevitable seems to be the latest fashion amongst Dean supporters. I've read it at least three times today, and a dozen times over the last week.

[dkamin]

9. Huh?

How does Clark, who voted for Reagan and is the former Commander of NATO, make Dean look more liberal?

This post doesn't make any sense.

I get the feeling Dean will wrap up this nomination soon. All of those 43% of people who are "definitely voting against Bush" will vote Dean. Clark would pull in many moderates and stand in stark contrast to Cheney and Bush, draft dodgers and idiots both.

Obviously, if Clark is serious that he doesn't want to be VP, then Dean/Clark doesn't happen. But if I'm Dean, and I win the Dem nomination, the first person I look to tap, and aggressively, is Clark.

[cjbuchanan]

10. I think the big reason against a D/C ticket is...

That Dean will need a VP with Washington legislative experience. He will need someone who can work the administrations ideas through Congress (especially if it is still controlled by Repugs). Clark might look better during the election, but once in office, he might not be the best choice.

By the way, I think the same about a ticket with Clark at the top. He too needs someone who knows Washington.

[poskonig]

11. what does "too liberal" mean?

In Dean's case, it is meant to describe his stance on the Iraq war, his position on fiscal policy, and his treatment of homosexuals as equals.

Clark as VP has the advantage of putting two "antiwar" Democrats on the ticket, helping Dean where he is weakest. While if we go with Landrieu of Graham, we won't have that advantage.

Graham feels wrong for the Dean campaign; we would have two firebreathers on the ticket and I would rather see more balance, kinda like a good cop/bad cop deal. Hence I'd go with Edwards or Landrieu, if Clark for some reason is not an option.

[Barbara917]

21. Dean cannot have it both ways

"Clark as VP has the advantage of putting two "antiwar" Democrats on the ticket, helping Dean where he is weakest. While if we go with Landrieu of Graham, we won't have that advantage."

Dean insists on denying Clark is anti-war by throwing up Katirna Swett at every opportunity. He does this in my opinion to further his own political purposes and not out of any sincerity. He has "ticked off" Clark one too many times with this insincere talking point while Clark has continually held the high ground of refusing to put down other candidates including Dean. Clark has no reason to be interested in a VP spot on a Dean/Clark ticket. He still plans on a Clark/???? ticket.

[poskonig]

25. I'm just a joe-blow supporter, dude.

Clark's history gives his competitors opportunities to attack him, and Dean is not the only one who is doing it. Clark also has attacked others a few times, attacking Dean for avoiding the draft, regulation, et cetera. Clark also has Lehane and Fabiani working for him, who are the *masters* of smear. This is politics, not religion. None of this is surprising.

Bush and Reagan were really nasty in the 1980 campaign and eventually teamed up and worked together. If Clark was offered the chance to serve as vice president by anyone, whether it be Dean, Kerry, Gephardt, et cetera, and said no, well, then I guess Clark doesn't care as much about the Democratic Party as his credulous supporters claim.

[ozone_man]

24. Dean is a fiscal conservative, not liberal.

He will be able to cast Bush as a big spending liberal during his 4 years in office. The budget deficit forecast for this year is about $550B (our children will be burdened with our debt). I think that Bush will lose much Republican support as a result, particularly the libertarian and moderate Republicans.

Dean will draw in the left with his liberal social policies, health care, education, civil rights, jobs (3M jobs have been lost under Bush), etc.

Dean is more dangerous than any of the other dems IMO. He has the ability to wake people up and unplug themselves from the Bush Matrix.

[mrgorth]

12. I still think D/C

(or C/D) is the way to go. I think Clark brings in more southern and western swing voters. I like Graham but he's just a bit too wishy washy for me. Besides, the only debate I want to see more than Dean vs. Bush/Cheney is Clark vs. either of them...I think Cheney esp.

[Ninga]

14. Listen up people

it's WAY TOO EARLY to be gnashing our teeth about D/C or C/D or D/G or D/K or any other kind of ticket.

Keep your noses clean, your ear to the ground and dummy up. Seek out all the indpendent voters you can and let them tell you what they think.

When you take the time to "win friends and influnce people" it is unbelieveable the good you will do to open up minds and change the political course.

[lumpy]

16. Hear hear !

Now kids, bickering will get us nowhere. Time spent educating the uneducated is more important.

[salin]

15. If either Clark or Dean win the nomination... they need some DC experience

on the ticket. Outsiders need some insider's experience and guidance in dealing with the ins and outs in congress. Both for the election (and swing voters who might be a bit concerned with NO insider experience/ and a vaccuum that might happen initially while the team would get its grounding), and for after the election. The latter is especially important if the new president were to face to houses of congress of the opposition... warrier GOP party.

[mitchum]

35. and that is the #1 reason there will not be a Dean/Clark or...

Clark/Dean ticket (something those of an ahistorical bent fail to grasp)

[info being]

17. Call me crazy, but Dean / Kucinich

Did you guys see how Dean constantly threw bones to DK during the last debate?

[HFishbine]

26. D/K

I can see it.

[TopesJunkie]

18. Thanks for the conventional wisdom.

I don't buy conventional wisdom. It's wrong far too often.

[SheilaT]

19. It's not as though anything

we say here will have any effect the actual ticket. It is most definitely too early for us to be worrying about who Clark's VP will be, or who Dean's will be, or if Kucinich will select Mosely-Braun or any other "dream" pairings.

And accusations that a given candidate is unelectable, or another one is the ONLY electable one are all nonsense. What we all have to keep in mind is that the upcoming campaign is going to be the dirtiest one imaginable. All potential candidates have negatives, and believe it that they will be exploited to the fullest. Not too mention that every possible means to steal the election will happen.

If we don't want another four more years of the Bush cabal -- which will surely destroy this country as we know it -- we must in the end all unite behind the nominee and do everything we can to get him elected.

[Capn Sunshine]

22. "why a CLINTON -GORE ticket would never happen"

was the title of similarly themed threads in 1992.
Never say never in amrican politics my friend

[HFishbine]

29. There were threads

in 1992?

[Adjoran]

31. It won't happen

They both fit the "Washington outsider" mold, so neither Dean nor Clark helps the other that much.

The key for veep selection will be help in a key state, probably one that was fairly close in 2000 but ended up in the repub column.

Three that immediately come to mind are Florida, Missouri, and Ohio.

If the nominee decides to try Ohio, Evan Bayh is the logical choice. For Missouri, it would be Gephardt. For Florida, NOT Graham, who didn't have a lot of support there for his own presidential bid, but Bill Richardson of NM, who would help greatly with the growing Hispanic vote.

These things apply to either Dean or Clark if they win. For either of them to pick the other wouldn't help as much. The object is to win, not to construct what would be a "dream team" in some people's minds.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

32. Dean can't have anyone smarter or more "presidential looking" than himself

or more mature in their temperment, so that rules out just about everyone. (Actually CMB might be just who he needs.)

[Bertrand]

33. My prediction seems to have been right

If Clark doesnt win the primary, he's going to sit out this election and run again in 2008 - athough obviously we will have to wait for 3 or so years to see if he wants to run again. Smart move on his part.

[jsw_81]

34. Clark

2004 is probably Clark's last chance to be president. If he loses the primary and the Democrats win, he'd have to wait until 2012 to run again (because the Democratic incumbent will be running in 2008), and in 2012 he'll be 68 years-old and probably going up against the Democratic veep (assuming that it isn't Clark).