Clark Strategy

[Vis Numar]

What do people here think Clark's strategy is? He's leading in the national polls (though Dean is gaining), but in the first key states, he's lagging in single-digits. I had thought that with Fowler, he could win in South Carolina, I'd guessed that's where he would have to beat Edwards to become the second candidate, but with Folwer gone (and there will be fallout in SC because of this), it seems unlikely. So, with the first two states seem out of the equation, his best shot seems to be to go for third in New Hampshire, and try to claim some sort of momentum out of there, pick up Arizona or Oklahoma... I don't know, seems a weak strategy, any others?

[carpetbagger]

1. Clark's strategy...

It may be a plodding strategy, but the roadmap is there for winning the nomination. In broad brushstrokes, it's this...

Run in the pack in the early primaries based on good national numbers. The likely outcome is that there are four winners in the first four primaries, so consistant 3rd place (even 4th in NH) is ok. It should give him enough strength to show respectably in NM, AZ and OK. He should be able to pick up one of these states.

His next task is to knock off Edwards, Kerry, or Lieberman in TN and VA.

Then it's a three-man race, with Clark being one of the three. It's unlikely Gephardt will seal the nomination before March 2d, and barring an unexpectedly strong showing in the South, Dean will not do so either. Although many of these races would tilt towards a regional candidate, NY, CA, and OH are going to be the enchilada. Thus, it will all be based on campaign performance in the last two weeks of February.

[LastKnight]

2. hmm

i see it as standard liberal principals with a good ammount of national defense talk, and a good side of bushbashing, which we all can apprecieate

i still have my reservations about him though, hes been a republican most of his life and hes been a democrat less than 3 months and hes already one of the frontrunners, i like his platforms dont get me wrong but i just hope hes not flipflopping just for the nomination.

-LK

[Kool Kitty]

3. He wasn't a republican.

He lives in Arkansas and you don't have to register any particular party to vote there. It's not out of convenience or flip-flopping.

[catforclark2004]

4. Lord, Clark did vote for Lieberman

Clinton, Clinton, Gore....that's not "Democrat" until 3 months ago.

He was a military non-partisan Independent who voted for each President that ended getting elected......

That's means when he votes for himself next time, he wins!

Now, let's move on, shall we?

[union_maid]

7. Here's something to consider

Yesterday my sister attended a work related meeting that was made up largely of minority professionals, most of whom work in public interest occupations. It wasn't a political meeting, but most people in the field are liberals or to the left and was a good sized meeting of 75 or a hundred people. She said that after the business of the meeting was done people were just socializing the subject of the Democratic nominees surfaced quite a lot and Clark was the only who interested people. Dean never even surfaced as a subject of conversation. This doesn't surprise me. From the beginning I've seen Clark as the one who was going to appeal to a very important segment of the Democratic base, which is working class people and minorities.

[Larkspur]

5. To con Dem voters that he is a Dem

to con voters that he is competent to hold the office of President when he has never held civilian political office before

to con voters that he is not the same face to the same corrrupt body that Bush fronts

Clark's whole campaign is a fraud and Clark is a flim-flam man.

[DannyRed]

6. Larkspur

I support Dean...and I disagree with you.

I think Clark is a decent enough guy with some bad history, good education, good heart, and good intentions.

I think his campaign is having a bit of growing pains....and that his strategy at the moment is to hope that no-one notices long enough to get things ironed out.

The pressure on all the candidates right now is so intense that if Clark is really a flim-flammer, it will come out sooner or later.

Give Clark the benefit of the doubt, let him and his supporters work out their deal...and work for Dean.

And no, I don't think his past votes count against him...in the same way that I don't think Dean's comments in 1994 count against Dean.

It IS kinda funny to see the same people attacking Dean for 1994 statements then turn around and defending Clark for his Reagan vote, though...

I mean...sheesh...Reagan????

[Larkspur]

13. Clark is not applying for an entry level political office

He's running for Dem Prez nominee and Dem Party standard bearer.

Based on his resume, Clark is unfit to be the Dem Prez nominee. Lip syncing Democratic slogans is not a reliable indicator that Clark is a Democrat. If he was running for a lower office, then I'd be willing to give him a pass, but he is running for the top spot and as a Democrat, I do have problems with his sparse Democratic resume an absolutely NO civilian political campaign and office experience.

[Padraig18]

15. I agree with you, DannyRed

Let's face it, none of the candidates can actually PROVE how *they* voted--ever, and for that reason I found Clark's candor about his voting for Reagan, et al, rather remarkable and refreshing; frankly, it makes me MUCH more likely to believe him about other things, like his realization that he self-identifies as a Democrat, because his admission that he voted Repuke a few times in the past didn't *benefit him* at all.

Those Dean supporters who think they are in ANY way 'helping' Howard by constantly bashing and flaming Clark are demented; all they are doing is alienating the very people we will HAVE TO work with, when Howard gets the nomination. Let's not get so caught up in being self-righteous that we forget how to add: THEIR votes count one each, just like everyone else's do.

[Larkspur]

18. I'd feel the way I do about Clark even if I was an Undecided Voter

My support for Dean has nothing to do with my feelings towards Clark.

My antipathy and distrust for Clark comes from the General himself, just like my disgust of Arnold comes from Arnie himself. It's up to Clark to alleviate the doubts, just like it is the responsibility of a prospective employee to convince a employer that he/she is the right person for the employer's job. I'm one of the employers and Clark is one of the employees. That's how I look at the Presidential race.

[wakfs]

8. Couldn't disagree more

We must learn the lesson of California, which IMO is that star power trumps issues. Nearly all the time.

Ah-nold won because his star power attracted people and guaranteed non-stop coverage in the media. Gore LOST because he didn't have any star power. Reagan won twice because he had it, as did Clinton.

To defeat Bush and his evil cabal, who WILL stop at nothing to win, we need someone with star power, plain and simple. We need to get over our petty internecine squabbles over policy details and political strategies and get behind the Democratic candidate who has star power.

In my view, and I am so far still a Dean supporter, Clark has the greatest star power of all nine candidates (Well let me amend that-Sharpton has a lot of star power too but could never get elected ever for different reasons). THAT is the reason all these early polls show that people are interested in Clark. They are attracted to his star power. He's a general, he's macho, he's handsome and well-spoken, he radiates qualities that most people perceive as leadership qualities. Laugh if you will, bemoan the lack of substance in our modern political campaigns if you must, but admit the truth: STAR POWER wins every time.

Every time.

[Larkspur]

12. No, it's not START power that prevails

Gov. Davis had NO or LITTLE SUPPORT from his political base. That is why Davis lost. That is why Dems in swing states who supported Bush lost in 2002. These politicians either pissed off their base or never had one to begin with

It's not the media STAR power of a potential candidate that wins election. It's how well the politician, incumbant or challenger, connects with their political base. The Dems who had good relations with their politcal base won in 2002 or had no serious challengers to contend with.

[yelladawg]

14. Clark's whole campaign is a fraud ?

You write:
Clark's whole campaign is a fraud and Clark is a flim-flam man.


I too have questions about Clark's staff which no one answers here.

But I think Clark will be a great President.

[Larkspur]

17. Ike wasn't a great President, why would Clark be?

Ike was a more powerful general than Clark, but he was at best a mediocre President.

Clark has serious credibility problems that needed to be alleviated before he decided to run for President.

[beyurslf]

16. I support Dean

But that doesn't mean I want to bad mouth other candidates. It is one thing to take issue with their stances, it is another just to call names.

My question on Clark's strategy is this: what if Dean (or some other candidate) wins Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina all three? Wouldn't that put his late stratgey in peril just from the momentum of those 3 wins?

In any case, I will vote for any of the 9 candidates who wins the nomination. I might have to hold my nose and shake my head doing it, but I would work for and vote for Lieberman over Bush.

[DemCam]

9. I don't normally put much stock in MSNBCCCC

But this story addresses Clark's strategy this morning.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/977989.asp

I don't know if he has enough time...but I do know he does have the magic ingredients...IF...he can get to enough voters in the town hall format. Last night's format was just terrible for him...and he has to move away from that...and I think he is.

February and March seem really, really soon.

[Vis Numar]

10. Thanks

""Instead, Clark has adopted a more national campaign for the nomination, focusing on a variety of other states, including Oklahoma and New Mexico, that will vote in February. Clark’s advisers think it would be hard, if not impossible, to win in Iowa or New Hampshire, but they predict he will fare better in the South and other states, such as Florida, that remain wide open.""

So, it's basically Lieberman's strategy with a better candidate. That's a tough row to make, with probably Dean coming out of Iowa and then NH with a big media bounce.

[kang]

11. Tough for Clark to come in first place in NH or Iowa

so it's best to engage in a scorched earth campaign. That is, try to stay in the top tier (top 3-4) in NH and Iowa and hopefully do very well in SC (although Edwards should squeeze out the win there), but lay the groundwork for being very competitive in the multiple states that come afterwards.

Those campaigns that start out strong (Gep winning Iowa, Dean/Kerry NH, Edwards SC) will be played down as a result of them being there for a year and their regional/labor ties. In other words, they were must wins but don't show that the candidate is a nat'l/general election contender. For example, unless Dean makes a very good showing in the Southern states, you will hear talk that he won't be able to win a single southern state (which he probably wouldn't) and that will help Clark (and Edwards).

In addition, if Clark is going to beat Bush IF he gets the nomination, he needs to work in the swing states now in order to be competitive w/the Bush Money Machine. It's really the only way he can go right now.