Hey, all you folks knocking Clark's campaign?

[mikehiggins]

How about comparing where all these candidates stood in, oh, lets say, August 2003.

Now Clark has "won" Oklahoma (don't they still have to count the absentee ballots?) and picked up delegates in some of the other states.

His people have raised millions (not as much as Dean but Howard had over a year and help from MoveOn to raise his money) in one quarter, the first quarter he was running.

We may still lose the nomination to Senator Treebeard but the Clark campaign is the real story of this primary season. In a perfect world, where the newsmedia wasn't owned by the moneychangers, it would be all over the headlines.

So it goes.

And it keeps on going and going and going and going...

[Jerseycoa]

1. Edit

:spank:

Edit to candidate's real name or you will be in trouble.

[maxr4clark]

2. ...and picking up steam!

Clark's fundraising picked up strongly in the first few weeks of January, picked up again after NH, and picked up again after Feb 3rd. And he pulled in $14.5M from mid-September through December.

I remember a lot of pundits saying that its the money that wins the election, back in November and December. I wonder why I'm not hearing that now?

[BootinUp]

14. Read todays "the Note" @ abcnews.com

for the answer...its that momentum trumps money in the shortened primary schedule.

[democratreformed]

19. I read that too

I get more discouraged by the day.

[bryant69]

3. Clark is a Good man

But he's not a politician. I mean the media problems didn't help him, but with a bit more skill as a politician he might have been able to do better.

Him starting late was a calculated risk that didn't pay off.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[democratreformed]

21. Will you discuss this issue of "politician" with me?

What, exactly, is a politician? What makes a "politician" better able to lead? Or is that only a "politician" can be given the chance? What does that say about our country?

[bowens43]

4. What's your point?

Is this supposed to be another 'blame the media for Clark's short comings' thread?

[Myra]

5. Bravo Mike. I don't know of anything else like it in recent political

history.

Bravo Wes.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LandOLincoln]

7. Your "argument" is totally lacking in facts and I expect your

candidate of choice would be the first to tell you that.

[AP]

8. It was discusseed on Democracy Now last month

and I posted about it hear the day after I heard it discussed on Democracy Now.

You want me to search the archives?

[BootinUp]

15. Is Democracy Now equal to mainstream thinking?

[AP]

17. Facts aren't "mainstream"?

It's a fact that Clark was doing those three things all at the same time.

It's very uncool.

[BootinUp]

25. Help me with the facts part again

you said:

"...CNN loved the fact he was entering.

Perhaps it was because they appreciated that he appreciated their game plan.

Clark was a registered lobbyist for a company which sold airport security devices. He was on CNN stoking up fear among the public making them feel like they needed airport security devices. At the same time, he was raising money to run for president."


I don't see one correct fact there.

The first two statements are opinion or guesswork.
He was a lobbyist for a computer database technology company.
More dubious opinion on "what" he was doing on CNN.
And a demonstrably false claim that he was raising money before he announced his candidacy.

[LandOLincoln]

34. Lying about a man as honest and stand up as Wes Clark

isn't "cool" either, my friend, I don't care if it's Karl Rove or Amy Goodman doing the lying. Democracy Now has done several hit pieces on Clark, all of them seriously misrepresenting and/or omitting the facts.

As a longtime NPR and Democracy Now listener, it's beyond bizarre to realize they're now carrying water for the RNC and Slobodan Milosevic.

[krkaufman]

12. I doubt it

...'cause his "candidate of choice" appears to have a hard time grasping the difference between opinion polls with margins of error and quantifiable vote counts.

Edwards ties for first in Oklahoma! At least his web site says so...

[AP]

18. That's the best spin you can put on Clark's declining popularity and

bad campaign skills?

OK.

[krkaufman]

23. Don't see your point

I don't see anywhere in my email where I was trying to address those issues. Was merely communicating to another poster not to expect the Edwards campaign to post any retractions or corrections, 'cause they seem to be taking a bit of a vacation from reality. That's all.

Cheers!

[liberalnurse]

33. I agree with your point.

It has become acceptable per my experience.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=273470

[democratreformed]

9. That's funny. My view of Clark on CNN was of a person who exhibited

calm and gave me a sense of peace - no fear. I never saw him "stoking up fear".

[OKNancy]

10. Pish posh

Edwards voted for the patriot act. And you know what, I don't fault him there because it was done in a fever. The fact that Clark wanted to help find hijackers with a database ( for free) is laudable. Neither one is some right-wing whacko because of it.

Pick another subject.

[Donna Zen]

22. Except that this was never the case.

On the day he entered the race, Woodruff was commenting on the Clark's surprisingly "tiny" house. Actually that is about the last time Judy said Clark's name.

[Bread and Circus]

31. AP, you used to be fair, but now Edwards and Clark are running neck and...

neck you have turned sour and little better than what
you used to deride.

I know you are doing this to "help" your guy but it just
makes me not want to like him.

[Julien Sorel]

32. I've already been pushed into the Kerry camp by them.

If Clark drops, Kerry gets my money and time. I spent months dealing with obnoxious Dean followers; I'm not about to lower my standards for Edwards -- who was my strong second choice until the past two days. These people are simply the underbelly of enthusiasm, unfortunately.

[KnucklesBuchanan]

11. A response from the Edwards campaign about Oklahoma

Amy, from the Clark Blog, had emailed the Edwards campaign about the "tie" for first in Oklahoma.

"From the head blog guy:

I run the campaign's blog and was not aware of the graphic on the home page. Statistically Oklahoma was a tie and we are very proud of the
amazing work our Oklahoma staff and volunteers have done to propel the Senator to the top. Oklahoma means a lot to us -- which is why we spent more time there than any other candidate."

So, for those of you Edwards Cult of Personality members that insist on saying that he spent less time there than any of the candidates, I have to say you are flat out wrong.

[krkaufman]

13. Did Amy point out that vote results don't have M-o-Es?

Wow. All looks, no books. Vote *results* don't have margins of error, to the bloggie's excuse is lame. Grasping...

Excellent post, though, rebutting the "Edwards miraculous victory" theory.

[Jerseycoa]

16. Edwards campaigned for a year in Oklahoma

Pathetic result.

[AP]

20. And closed what? 20 points on Clark without trying hard in the last week?

Same thing happened in NH.

Interesting trend.

[returnable]

24. Interesting trend, indeed.

Edwards keeps coming in behind Clark in contested states.

Expect this interesting trend to continue in Tennessee and Virginia :hi:

[BootinUp]

26. Sometimes crossing the goal line

is the hardest part. ;)

[AP]

27. Edwards up, clark down as you get to know both candidates.

Seems to me that things like that should matter if you really want to beat Bush.

Maybe I'm wrong.

[Qutzupalotl]

28. Maybe so.

Edwards gets points for style, but not much for substance. I almost never hear specific plans from him.

[DancingBear]

29. Does Edward's wife know Phil Fullmer as well?

Or Al Groh?

Seems like that was the OK strategy, anyway. :)

If the Edwards website was used during WWII, would this be the headline?

"Germany, Japan tie for second place!!" :)

[returnable]

30. According to whom?

Why do you feel the need to run Clark down just cuz your candidate can't get past him?

The bottom line is that Tuesday, voters in 4 states who "got to know" both candidates preferred Clark to Edwards.

Seems to me that things like that should matter if you really want to win the nomination :hi: