After weeks of coverage, Clark only polling 8-12% of Dems. White flag?

[stickdog]

Does this mean that 90% of Democrats realize that Clark is a trojan horse for corporate interests?

Or does this mean 90% of Democrats are uncomfortable running a candidate with no political experience?

[poskonig]

1. LOL!

:yourock:

[mzmolly]

2. heh

:)

[_NorCal_D_]

3. 'Weeks' of coverage.

Clark has only been in the race for a handful of months, and the media has wholly ignored him. I'm not surprised by these results.

[Demobrat]

6. Well, except for the weeks of

breathless wall-to-wall coverage of the will he or won't he question. And the almost nightly appearances on talk shows.

[helleborient]

10. Even Faux News ran an ad featuring Clark's indignance

About his comments that Iraq is a sideshow.

This is ignoring Clark? Hmmmm....

[Demobrat]

4. Maybe it means that 90% of Americans

don't think that being in the army automatically qualifies someone to be president.

[LuminousX]

5. I would agree with that sentiment

[creativelcro]

19. Or that being in the army actually disqualifies you to be Prez

[dajabr]

7. How many points is Maddona worth? (nt)

[Justice]

8. Doing Very Well

For someone who has been in the race since September.

Again, positive posts for your candidate are great - but these negative posts trying to bring down the other guy are lame.

Didn't you read the memo?

[helleborient]

11. He's gone nowhere but down since he entered the race nationally...

CNN/Gallup/USA Today once had him over 20%...he's at 12 now.

[dajabr]

12. I think the original poster is truly concerned...

About why the Wesley Clark Kent Miracle is not quite the phenomenon we all expected.

[janx]

21. Just wait until after Iowa

when he grows a pair, pulls out the military hardware, and goes after Kerry.

Edit: HU-AH!

[eileen_d]

23. Uh, no - the original poster could bashes Clark frequently

I can't wait to hear when he stopped beating his wife.

[gristy]

9. That's what scares me

Or does this mean 90% of Democrats are uncomfortable running a candidate with no political experience?

That and the fact that since he has not held office before, I don't have a political record to judge him by.

I mean, I like many things about Clark, including his potential electability, but he doesn't have the track record that most of the other candidates have.

[dajabr]

13. Yep, that's why I see Kerry as a "safer" #2 Candidate choice (nt)

[Demobrat]

18. Kerry is my #2

even though I don't like him that much, because he's the only one besides Dean with an ice cubes chance in hell of getting enough money together to take on Bush. Clark lost when he took the federal funds. Sure, the matching funds might get him through March, but after that...pffffft.

[GobGoober]

14. I think it means he's not taking enough votes away from Kerry to beat Dean

Kerry and Clark are keeping each other from being able to beat Dean, so it looks to me like Dean will win by default.

[blm]

15. Clark doesn't get that much coverage.

Dean's coverage seems like 10-1. Remember when Lieberman was ahead in all the polls thanks to name recognition? Well, if you pay attention to the media, Dean is all you hear about for most of this past year.

[slinkerwink]

16. I'd take number two

[gristy]

17. has anyone polled negatives for each of the candidates?

That is, for each candidate, what % of voters have an unfavorable impression. That would be very interesting.

[jmaier]

20. Gov Dean

polled in the single digits until July '03 according to most of the polling sources reported at pollingreport.com. Let's see, when did he start his campaign again. I know he was pretty active in Jan '03 so it took him 7 months to get "fired up."

What a laggard.

[eileen_d]

22. Well, when did you stop beating your wife?

:eyes:

[Patriot_Spear]

24. Wow. That's pretty harsh. What makes you think Clark's a phoney?

I like Clark. What makes you think he's insincere?

[Moderator]

25. Locking............

This is inflammatory.



DU Moderator