Warning: If Clark wins the nomination, he is finished in GE...

[Hawkeye-X]

There are more than enough reasons for the RNC to hammer Clark with enough ammo to make him look extremely weak.

Reason #1 - RNC folks will supply footages after footages of Clark praising * and his cronies. They can point out one of Clark's early mistakes by showing that he was an Independent after declaring his candidancy.

Reason #2 - Clark's maximum public funds is 45 million vs *'s 200 million warchest. How can Clark defend himself? Clark will be outspent on a 5 to 1 margin.

Reason #3 - All fluff and no real substance. Most of you like to argue that Clark has political experience because he's a General. That part is partially true. Yes, military is politics, but his dabbling is severly limited. Many will wonder about his truth on Kosovo campaign. What else can Clark offer that has true experience besides his military and foreign experience? Teaching cadets economics isn't experience. Applying economics are, and Clark has no experience whatsoever.

Reason #4 - His being on the board of most right-wing thinktank and defense boards questions Clark's truth on being "left". My opinion based on those is that if he's a Democrat, he's a DINO.

I am pretty sure that there are more reasons, but I won't get into them, since I want a debate. Convince me why Clark is your man. Why isn't Dean any different?

Hawkeye-X

Edit: Added a new link as more reasons to why Clark will be weak.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=51344#51455

[slinkerwink]

1. let's not forget that for three months after the dem nomination.....

clark can't spend any of his own money since he opted in, so he's a huge sitting duck for Bush's $200 million dollar negative ads campaign, and cannot even defend himself!

It's puzzled me as to why he didn't opt out, when faced with this inevitable event of being destroyed for three entire months without being able to respond back.

[giantrobot_2000]

6. 527

527s 527s 527s.

I can't stress that enough.

527s.

527s.

[LoZoccolo]

9. I don't know what a 527 is.

The reason that slinkerwink brings up is something I'm concerned about as well, so if there's a way around it I'd like to know.

[giantrobot_2000]

13. ...

527 groups are unregulated organizations that are not subject to Federal regulations.

Democrats have a huge advantage in terms of the number of 527s they control. Republicans, as usual, are playing catch up.

MoveOn.org is probably the most famous 527. George Soros just donated a shitload of money to MoveOn.

These 527s can counter all of Bush's bullshit with ads and not violate any laws.

[wndycty]

23. Exactly. . .MoveOn.org and Co can aid Clark or whomever the nominee is

. . .by throwing money around to go after Bush. We can really attack from the angle.

[dsc]

24. Only hard money

can be used if they are going to run ads within 30 days of an election be it primary or general. That means no ads till June 6th or so out of soft money.

[Walt Starr]

26. And that concedes the Month of October to Bush

Damn, piss poor strategy if you ask me!

Dean was brilliant to forgo matching funds. Absolutely brilliant. Under the current system, I see no way for a candidate to win the general election if they DO accept matching funds.

[wndycty]

29. In October they are both spending federal $$$

. . .and Dean would have the same disadvantage as Clark and that would be that the Democratic convention was so early and the Dem had to start using General Election funds.

[dsc]

34. It isn't all advantage

Since the amount is the same but the number of months is higher for Democrats the Democrats will have less money per month. Thus Bush will have more money than any Democrat in those last three months. The difference is that only Dean and Kerry would be able to have kept pace with Bush in the preceeding months.

[Walt Starr]

39. That's *Assuming* They both accept matching funds in the GE

I doubt seriously if Bush will. He can do much better without it.

[wndycty]

41. Its not matching funds. . .

. . .it is a flat $73 million that cannot be co-mingled with other funds. Bush will blow through is $200 million before the G.E. and accept the federal funds, as will whomever the Democratic nominee is.

[HFishbine]

103. Question

I had heard the limitations were 30 days before a primary and 60 days before the general. Is that wrong?

[billbuckhead]

18. It's funny how the Dean camp worships money so much.

Ironically, Dean couldn't win if he had more money than Bush.

[Walt Starr]

19. That one's the biggest for me

Dean was brilliant for not taking the matching funds. He saw what he was drawing in via small donations and knew he could do much better without the funds.

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

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

[WillyBrandt]

2. I'm not going to convince you that Clark is the one

It's a pointless exercise. All of these issues have been gone over on GD a million times. Your list is a litany of cheapshots: it's not laying down the gauntlet to an open debate.

Rather, it's a cheap rhetorical trick to ask supporters of your candidate's opponent to convince you of his worthiness or viability.

Whatever the response is, you can go "Pff! It doesn't convince me" and claim a spurious victory.

If there is no resposne, you can claim that there is nothing that can be said, and claim a dubious superiority.

It's immature.

[dsc]

5. I have yet to hear any explanation of what he is going to so

for those months. Can you link that discussion. I have asked that question directly and haven't gotten an answer.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

10. Here's your link

http://www.americansforclark.com/

Any further questions?

[dsc]

17. Yeah

this is a link to his website and nothing is labeled as to where he intends to get money at the end of the primary season. If you intended this as a link to that it isn't.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

3. Yawn

Hawkeye, you have greatly disappointed me with this post.

See ya.

DTH

[CivilRightsNow]

81. Yay!

Hawkeye, you greatly invigored me with this post.

I remember reading a post about how you were speaking with shipmates and educating them.. in it, you had seemed Clark leaning.

Im glad to see that you arent.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

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

[wndycty]

7. In the General election it's $73 million vs. $73 million. . .

. . .take some time to learn about election law.

-snip-
The Republican ticket might also benefit from a unique dynamic produced by federal election law.
It's accepted by Democrats that President Bush may benefit from the changes to the law most likely to survive court challenges.
Already a record-setting hard money fund raiser, he'd be able to collect $2,000 (instead of $1,000) from every person who supported him in 2000, potentially padding his campaign account with more than $175 million for the primary cycle alone.
Bush is expected to once again, as he did in 2000, refuse federal match funds in 2004, and with no major nomination opposition expected, he'd have a tremendous amount of money to spend wherever he wanted, with no state-by-state limits that shackle those candidates who accept matching funds.
Chuck Todd, editor in chief of the Hotline , a daily political digest, has noted that a later convention would allow the president to spend his money in concentrated increments until he was nominated. Bush could then announce his intention to accept federal money for the general election campaign. According to figures adjusted for inflation, the Democratic and Republican nominee will receive anywhere between $70 million and $73 million for the final few months of the election.
According to statute, they can spend the money the moment they're nominated, but they can't transfer any money leftover from their primary account.
The likely Democratic candidate, taxed by a competitive primary, would begin to spend his $73 million grant much earlier — when he was nominated on July 22 or 23.
Bush would get to spend the same amount, but since he'd be nominated much later, he'd have comparatively more to spend pro-rated over time.
-snip-
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/Conventions_020510.html

[dsc]

14. that actually makes hjis point

Bush will have 200 million to spend just before Sept and then 73 million for the time from Sept to November (that is 2 months) which is 36.5 million a month. Clark would have no money until July 22 and then 73 million from July to Nov. In his case three months since it is so late in July. That is 24 million a month. Bush will have one and one half times as much money to spend plus he will outspend Clark 100 million to nothing for the months of April, May, June, and most of July.

[Walt Starr]

40. Please, read what you posted:

Chuck Todd, editor in chief of the Hotline , a daily political digest, has noted that a later convention would allow the president to spend his money in concentrated increments until he was nominated. Bush could then announce his intention to accept federal money for the general election campaign. According to figures adjusted for inflation, the Democratic and Republican nominee will receive anywhere between $70 million and $73 million for the final few months of the election.

I do not expect Bush to accept matching funds for the GE since he could rais so much more without accepting them.

[dsc]

42. No on that you are wrong

He will accept them if for no other reason than to deny them to the Democrat. If he didn't accept matching funds the Democrat would get the whole 146 million. But by that time the race will be lost due to the dark time.

[mouse7]

8. Y'all would be pounding tables if Dean supporters replied like that?

You guys demand immediate response to your statements.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

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

[Bread and Circus]

12. You gotta be nuts!

Just kidding...

Seriously though, Clark is doing pretty darn well for
running since 9/16/2003 -- And that is with the Democratic
Base.

Now, just imagine what "mainstream America" would be thinking
come 11/2004.

You may have an argument in saying that he is a longshot to
beat Dean now but he would do better vs. Bush than Dean hands
down.

Here's Why:

Swing States
Southern States
The military vote
Soccer moms worried about Nat'l Security
Men in Uniform are displayed as heroes
4 stars vs awol
straight arrow vs former coke user
all class vs the smirk
brilliant mind top of class vs c- student

--

Anyone will get skewered by the GOP, but in the general
election the General would have the most teflon.

We will see won't we.

[Cheswick2.0]

92. FD

people just do not worship the military or the military image the way you would like to believe. What you are seeing is a lot of media support for those images.
You seem to want a cartoon cutout nominee who will solve all of your perceived weaknesses in the democratic party. You sell us out before we have even started by imagining that they only way to beat the repukes is to give them a reconstituted republican of our own to vote for.

[Bread and Circus]

102. Bah!

People have been impressed w/ men of battle since
societies began to form. It's innate. We are a tribal
species. Sorry if you can't see it.

[Northwind]

15. Absolutely, Hawkeye!

I hear Clark supporters talk about Clark yelling at some Fox News guy and how that means they won't be able to bully him in the GE, and I just have to laugh. If he reacts like that when he is on their shows, they simply won't invite him on. They will just hammer him when he is not there to defend himself. Other networks will do like wise.

They keep saying Clark is tough. Tough on what? Hair care products? Speedos?

The man has had it easy so far. In contrast, Dean has shit lobbed at him daily (maybe hourly) and it just rolls off, proven teflon! Clark isn't even galvanized! He'll rust like a cast iron skillet somebopdy forgot to oil.

[billbuckhead]

21. Dean only has teflon cause the media wanted it that way

That's how it worked for Reagan and that's how it works for Chimpy.

[MR. ELECTABLE]

35. Help me, Mary!

n/t

[Dookus]

43. He's down 8 points in two weeks in NH...

SOMETHING's sticking to him.

[TLM]

77. According to the one poll with the lowest sample size.

sample 244 and moe of 6 points.

[hope42mro]

58. Shot 4 times, I'd say that makes U tough!!

I'm just assuming but....

I'd think spending 30 years in the military, being shot 4 times, and commanding a multi-national military force would make someone pretty tough...tough enough to take on a sniveling TV pundit.

Which is scarier Vietnam or Fox Studios? Hhhmmm.....

www.clark04.com/about/

[BigBigBear]

16. Most of those sound like

enticements to the middle, or disillusioned near-Right. I think if Rove tries to paint Clark as slightly less conservative than Bush, Clark gets a lot of votes in the middle (that Dean CAN'T get, at least not with his hate-Bush profile as the media paints it now.)

Anyway, that's my $0.02.

The minute Dean supporters show some consciousness that most of the nation isn't as mad about Bush as they are, his GE campaign has a chance.

Until then, plan on losing 40 states.

[FreakinDJ]

20. I still think a Clark / Gephart ticket would be the strongest

Because people trust Clark. They like his strength, his character. And Gephart like unions and unions like him and that my friends means they can have enough money to do battle with Bushit

[MR. ELECTABLE]

30. But I bet a lot of unions don't like Clark

Clark's a free-trader. Unions typically don't like it when all their jobs get sent to China.

[Gloria]

52. Check out Clark's specific positions on unions and workers--he's not just

a "free trader"---inform yourself.

Clark's proposals for America's workers


*Raise the minimum wage

*Empower workers to organize--supports a "card check" law, requiring employers to recognize unions once a majority of workers have indicated their intent to unionize

*End union busting--prosecute such illegal activity

*Retain Federal wage provisions for workers (Davis-Bacon, Fair Labor Standards Act, including protection of overtime pay

*Protect workers on the job (Increase funding for OHSA and its companion research agency; enact ergonomics rules that are real

*Promote free trade--include labor rights in all new agreements; improve enforcement of labor provisions in exisiting agreemnts. Pursue fair practices outside of the treaty context (ie, Bush failed to prevent China from manipulating its currency, hurting American workers)

*Increase access to health care--for workers without employee sponsored health care, propose open access to the same federal health care plan provided to members of Congress, a new, low-cost insurance option.

[Hawkeye-X]

55. Clark's gaffe will haunt him

"Send software jobs to India" or something like that..

I'm an IT professional, and Clark hurts people who are also IT professionals like myself.

This is another reason why I won't support him.

Hawkeye-X

[CivilRightsNow]

82. He sits on the board at Sirva, what do you expect?

http://www.sirva.com/

From their web page:

Wherever you move, chances are SIRVA is already there. SIRVA has been redefining the relocation industry with superior service, innovative programs and customer-centric technology. The company offers consulting services, program management and fulfillment of the entire relocation process to global employers, consumers and military/government entities. SIRVA supports their network with value-added products and services such as insurance and fleet services. Transportation Solutions enables corporations to manage inventory through innovative solutions to reduce costs.

With a long history of relocation management, SIRVA has garnered a reputation for outstanding customer service: SIRVA's Relocation division was rated #1 in client satisfaction among all major relocation suppliers in a 2002 independent survey of corporate relocation managers*.

[DFLforever]

22. No. 1 will be the only ad the Rethugs will have to run against Clark

The General would never be able to get out of the gate...

[pocoloco]

25. "My opinion based on those is that if he's a Democrat, he's a DINO"

Of course opinions are like assholes,
everyone had one and they all stink!

[John_H]

27. Shouldn't this be retitled, "Why Clark can whip the Chimp?"

They'll hit Clark for talking nice about Bush? They'll whack him for being "independent?" Isn't this child's play compared to what they'll do to Dean? How many times can you say Osama in three months? KKKarl will say it ten times more. Daily.

2) I'd have to take 45 million bong hits before I could figure out how any candidate--including Kucinich--would have only 45 mil.

3) I guess it takes no substance to compile a resume like Clark's. Or does it? True, Dean also has substance and a record--unfortunately it's completely different from his campaign rhetoric.

By the way, Dean's political resume looks like this:
Elected State Sen.
Chosen (not elected) Lt. Gov.
Assumed governorship of one of America's least populous states thanks to death of elected Gov.
Compiled a centrist record. Re-elected a bunch of times (divide by two for "terms" served since they have two year terms in VT.)
Ouch.

4) Priority 8,876,34 for American voters: checking to see what think tanks candidates associate themselves with.

Certainly the GOP will do several dozen times better than this plan. But first Dems should face the facts. In this time, in this election Clark turns a 10 pt dem loss into a horse race.

[hope42mro]

32. Amen!!

You said it brother! Clark doesn't have to PROVE he's "Liberal"! That's bogus. Anyone who actually listens to him speak, and actually reads hs policy papers knows he criticizes Bush's policies quite thoroughly. And since when is offering advice to a think tank bad? I thought thinking a good thing? I talk to Republicans and they openly admit Clark has some serious skills that might win them over; so, tell me again, why is it bad to appeal to Republicans as well as Democrats, we want their vote too right?

[MR. ELECTABLE]

28. Even more reasons...

Clark has ZERO domestic experience.

Clark has NEVER deal with passing an agenda through legislature.

Clark wants to take people's guns.

Clark thinks supply-side economics is a good idea. He won't garner any votes for sticking to failed economic theories which were proven wrong 10 years ago.

Clark has no problems with free trade. He'll send all our software jobs to India.

Clark served in the upper echelon of the military. Many people are suspicious of abdicating absolute power to the military, even those who have served. We're electing a civilian president here, not a military commander-in-chief.

Clark looks even more suspicious because he looks like an opportunist, who has been documented praising republicans and never bothered to register as a democrat until after he joined the race.

Clark likes school vouchers. That kills any support he might get from teachers, or anybody who really cares about the state of education in this country.

[Hawkeye-X]

31. Thanks.. Editing my post to add a link to your post..

:thumbsup:

Hawkeye-X

[hope42mro]

48. Clark: I am a gun owner and a hunter

"I am a gun owner and a hunter, and I believe that law-abiding adults have the right to own firearms.But like all rights, gun rights come with responsibilities. And we need responsible gun laws that are designed to keep guns out of the hands of criminals without unduly infringing the rights of legitimate gun owners." -Wesley K. Clark

Source: www.clark04.com/issues/gunsafety/

[digitstatic]

51. vouchers?

"Clark likes school vouchers."

Not from anything I've read. Where did you get that from?

[Crunchy Frog]

65. "Clark likes school vouchers. "

I think you may have gotten Clark confused with Lieberman on that one. I'm not aware of his ever saying anything in favor of school vouchers. He has spoken very passionately in support of the public school system, with concrete plans for improving it. He has come out very strongly against NCLB, which is unpopular with teachers. I think he will get very strong support from teachers, especially when his platform is up against W's.:)

[Cheswick2.0]

94. Clark likes school vouchers?

Please tell me that is not true.

[Crunchy Frog]

99. It's not true. eom

[Renew Deal]

33. The desperation is oozing.

Dean must have had a bad day. lol

[Cheswick2.0]

96. yeah right

Clark should even one such bad day! LOL

[ErasureAcer]

36. Clark stands a better chance than Dean

Dean will get walloped by Bush co.

[democratreformed]

37. Here's my response:

:) Nice try.

[dogman]

38. Your points are weak

This was a person who was earning a living giving speeches. He has explained it to my satisfaction. Do you know the law in Arkansas? Where I live you are whatever primary ballot you have drawn. You declare at the next primary all over again. He has way less to spend defending himself because he has less baggage. Where on earth is Dean going to get all the money? These donors will get their money in the game. Don't worry.He had a fellowship in the OMB. That's hands on experience. The Nato force he commanded consisted of troops from 19 nations each of which had veto power from their individual government over his command. That is one hot political kitchen. Isn't it amazing that he dropped positions with sources of good income to save this country from B***.I'm a Yellow-dog Democrat and I'm convinced he is a Democrat or he would have continued a career that had earned him about $3 million in 3 years. Dean has compiled Lies on Lies. We already have that in the WH.

[Crunchy Frog]

68. Bye the way

3 million dollars in 3 years is chicken feed compared with what he could have made if he had been really serious about working in the defense industry, after his retirement, with his experience and credentials.

[Turkw]

44. Why? OK, here's why

1. His background on education- he taught at Westpoint, he looked into complaints about the education of children at base schools- then helped create an updated curriculum, then he had to go out and acquire the financial resources to enable the upgrade for the schools.

2. His background as a trouble shooter- he was one of the guys that would be assigned to troubled posts to turn them around, he stayed in the military after the Vietnam war when the military realized that there were major problems and was one of the problem solvers.

3. His background with foreign leaders and contacts- He made it a point to know more that just the officials and diplomats that his position normally dealt with. He is respected and liked in several countries. He can be tough when he needs to be with them, but does not alienate them like Bush does.

4. He is a war hero, has put his life on the line to defend our country, kept his head in a bad situation when wounded.

5. His education- Military Academy at West Point, where he graduated first in his class in 1966. Clark studied at Oxford University as a Rhodes Scholar from 1966 to 1968, receiving a Masters Degree in Politics, Philosophy, and Economics.

6. His grassroots support- from the Draft Clark to now, there are a lot of us.

7. His experience in the capitol- he was a White house fellow, worked in the pentagon, worked with individuals in congress.

8. He has demonstrated that he is extremely quick when it comes to learning and is very competitive. For a novice to do what he has done in the race and how well he is campaigning is very exciting.

How's that for a start

[drfemoe]

45. Sorry can't help you..

I'm more terrified of what would happen if Clark actually won the GE.

[hope42mro]

50. Wait, what are you afraid of?

I'm puzzled. How is he scary?

[democratreformed]

57. Trust me

Don't go there. The arguments are ludicrous.

[drfemoe]

67. yes ..

secrecy and cover-up are the best policies when dealing with Clark's campaign.

[Crunchy Frog]

70. If you go through

the archives of this board you can find every possible piece of dirt, smear, innuendo, and conspiracy theories that will make your head spin. All of the dirt that could ever be found on Wesley Clark has been laid out here too many times to count, and guess what, we Clark supporters still support him. We must all be incredibly thick headed.:shrug:

(This post is not directed at you, it is directed at all the people who will "answer" your question.)

[kodi]

46. & dean in charge of a state with 600,000 people makes him qualified?

christ, there must be 30 mayors in america who run larger municipalities than dean's vermont, pick apart anything you want about clark, kerry or even dean's meager credentials to be president, but all it shows is some sort of wierd fetish on your part.

clark will appeal to more people in the general election than dean, and you seem to willfully ignore the 2,000 pound elephant in the room by not even mentioning the rapid increase in grass roots activism and soft money advocacy groups rallying to the democrats this year that can offset bush's $ advantage.

there is no place/state that is in serious doubt as to which way it will vote in the scheme of things where clark will be weaker than dean come november 2004.

the northest and california are locks for the dems, clark will do every bit as good as dean in the rust belt-mid west tier, would probably do better in the border states of the central part of the US, the south and rocky mountain states, so just what advantage has dean over clark when the real fight for electorial votes commences?

dont let your advocacy for a candidate blur your vision and objectivity.

[Hawkeye-X]

53. Clinton was a governor of a state of ~2M

Your point being????

Hawkeye-X

[BobbyJay]

79. Full of minorities and people more representative of America.

One can argue.

[Cheswick2.0]

97. is this state size bigotry I am seeing?

hmmmmm....... your state isn't as big as my state. Odd argument

[Cheswick2.0]

98. .

.

[Tom Rinaldo]

47. I'll take on #1

Don't have time for your whole list tonight.

What you suggest the Republicans will use against Clark, prior praise for some Republicans, is NOT something they will use, for two basic reasons.

One, it is always the unexpected that wounds, the dirt dug up against you that you are ill prepared to respond to, never the obvious stuff. High level national campaign staffs are highly skilled at what they do. They will have a hundred possible retorts prepared for Clark, all focus group tested for the killer "Clark praised Bush" attack response.

Two, those quotes by Clark about Bush expose Bush's greatest weakness, and further establishes Clark's sincerity and standing as Bush's opponent in the eyes of the public. They polish Clark's reputation, not tarnish it. Clark may actually use some of that footage himself, that's what I expect. If he doesn't he at the very least will be the one to point out how willing he was to give Bush a chance, and how fair he was about giving praise where praise is due, which perfectly sets Clark up to make the kill. It wasn't partisan fueled politics that drove Clark into the race, no it was the high hopes dashed, the opportunities squandered, the good will wasted, the wise council rejected, and 40 years of an essentially bipartisan approach to foreign policy unexpectedly thrown out the window by George W. Bush.

The strong majority of the American people have not forgotten what they were feeling about George W. Bush immediately after 9/11, or after the fall of Kabul when America wrested control of Afghanistan away from the terrorists who attacked America. You can even go back further. There is always a honeymoon period for a new President after he takes office. 95% of the Cabinet and Sub Cabinet appointments are met with bipartisan praise. Americans like to feel hopeful, they want to think things will go well. The opposition party picks a few fights carefully during that honeymoon period. The Democrats picked Ashcroft in 2001, Rumsfeld got the praise treatment along with almost all of the rest of Bush's administration (there was a love fest for Colin Powell).

So here comes a candidate, Wesley Clark, who is able to say, I understand how you felt then. We wanted Bush to succeed in the fight against terror. We pulled together behind him, all of us, myself included. We left partisanship behind at the waters edge, and we believed Bush was up to the job. Sadly we were mistaken.

That's really how most American's feel about it. A third flat out love Bush, a third flat out hate Bush, those votes will break expectedly. And the final third initially rallied to Bush's leadership in a time of war. That third can relate well to Clark. They understand his initial instincts to support our President when America was under real danger from attack. Sure, now we have lived through two plus years without another major terrorist blow, and we have calmed down somewhat, but then we thought it might all happen again tomorrow. People weren't in the mood for dissension then, they wanted unity. Clark won't look like a shrill Democrat looking for ways to attack our President for political advantage. It casts Clark more as "the reluctant warrior", stepping forward for the good of the nation one more time after a lifetime of bipartisan service. Real events and mounting concerns compelled Clark to oppose Bush, not a predisposition to hate him. That will resonate in Clark's advantage with that middle third.

It is the perfect lead in for Clark to talk about the Draft Clark movement he responded to, and why. Take my word for it, or at least keep an open mind, Clark will not run away from earlier positive statements made about Republicans, he will turn them to his advantage establishing credibility with the public. Clark's problems with the statements is with Democrats who feel like you do during the primaries.

[hope42mro]

49. Dear DU: Make Tome Rinaldo one of your article writers

His posts are so thorough. They're insightful and thoughtful. I love reading them. Thx

[pocoloco]

59. Right on tom, wish you had more time!

[Crunchy Frog]

76. You hit that one

out of the park Tom. You always manage to say what I'm thinking, but don't have the eloquence to put into my own words.
:toast:

[delete_bush]

80. Great post! Very eloquent and well thought out!

Not much left to say, but regarding #1 will add my $.02 (or .03 in Euros.)

Clark has a huge advantage over Dean among several of the voting
blocks, especially the southern white male that voted for * in 2000.

It would seem to me that for a former shrub supporter, voting for someone other than the chimp would be more of an emotional vs. intellectual decision. The guy let me down, maybe Iraq could have been handled better, I'm concerned about my job, etc.

An angry, former Dr. who was governor of a small Northeastern state, changes religions on a whim, and thinks he can go to the south and essentially tell them they were wrong to vote for dumbya is not going to have anywhere near the chance of getting this vote when compared to a quietly confident military man from Arkansas who feels (at least in their mind) the same sense of betrayal they do. They can identify with Clark, not with Dean.

Clark is in a much better position to deflect criticism from bushco; it could even backfire. Not so with Dean.

Bush has to go, and Clark has the best chance of ridding us of this menace. I do not want this disgusting regime to have the opportunity to select 4-6 Supremes, or anything else they might have in mind.

[Auntie Bush]

54. Clark can win the GE

He is an experienced negotiator and we need that.
He's a great strategist and we need that.
He's knowledgeable about the military and we need that.
Dean doesn't have any of these qualities.
He has gravitas and world wide recognition and respect.
He has everything that's needed to be a GREAT President.
And he IS going to be a GREAT president!

[Vermont Roots]

56. Clark won't get support from anyone in IT

Nobody in the American InfoTech industry can support Clark.
One major problem in IT is the fact that American companies outsource software development, database administration, and other responsibilities at all skill levels to India. As a result, hundreds of thousands of American IT professionals are unemployed and unable to find comparable new positions.
During the Iowa debate, Clark was asked about the collapse of the IT industry in America. Among other things, he commented, "Let them do the Software in India. We'll do other things."
He's willing to stand by and watch a major American industry go down the drain. That's unacceptable.

[WillyBrandt]

61. Well, Jeez, I'm in IT and I support Clark wholeheartedly

As do others in IT that I know. But you said that Clark wouldn't get any IT support. But he has some.

This makes no sense: how could it be!?

[democratreformed]

64. Thanks, Willy

I wanted to say that Clark does have support from people in IT but didn't know any specific examples. Clark has support from a variety of people.

[hope42mro]

69. Clark embraces challenge of Free Trade

Clark's comment shows me that he believes the U.s. can afford to embrace Free Trade. It's kind of like this:
If the T-shirt-making jobs go to Thailand, the U.S. will make suits
If the suit-making jobs go to Brazil, we'll start making telescopes
If the telescope-making jobs go to Mongolia, we'll make computer software
So if the software jobs are going to India, we'll just have to start making something better/ more advanced.
(See where I'm going...They'll all make the sneakers/T-shirts, etc, while we'll make the jets/the cures for cancer/the alt.fuels cars)
Clark sees America stepping up to the challenge of Free Trade and and in the meantime moving technology ahead for the benefit of the future. Why not have America be the forefront of technological innovation, and then reap the benefits of it?

That's probably what Clark meant, but don't quote me, I'm just assuming afterall.

[Lobo_13]

60. Clark supporters refuse to accept certain things

Not the least of which is the absolutely catastrophic strategic blunder he made in accepting matching funds. He traded the ability to spend more than 45 mil for less than 4 mil in matching funds. His total fund raising for the year is less than 20 mil, minus expenses to date. He's going to have to expend every dime of that and then some to secure the nomination, if he can.

The nom is going to be wrapped up by the middle of March. That leaves half of March, April, May, June, and most of July where the only story being told is Rove's version. Even with 527's, that's going to put Clark at a tremendous disadvantage, and most likely too far to recover in the weeks between the conventions and November.

Don't count on 527's saving the bacon either, because the door swings both ways, and the Republicans already have a cadre of those organizations. They also have the resources to fill those up on short notice. Also don't forget that 527's are fairly easy to set up, Gep did it in less than a month. You'll be seeing alot of anti-Clark ads from 527's.

The biggest problem I see is that Clark supporters are apparently convinced that angels and fairies are going to come down at night and whisper in the ears of the electorate that Clark is a great guy. They don't seem to understand that Bush will simply outspend him and his campaign strategy is not really going to be based on the truth. So Clarks qualifications won't mean anything when Rove is telling the story. He's more than comfortable with making it up as he goes, and without money, Clark won't be able to counter-attack. He'll have BushCo and 527's pounding on him mercilessly for months and won't be able to do anything except take it.

I've raised this point with Clark supporters at other times and they just refuse to acknowledge it.

[hope42mro]

63. Bush=$$$$$$, Clark=QUALITY

It's too early to say Clark will run out of money by July. There are still an enormous amount of people out there who don't give a rat's ass about the election yet, who when May, June, July rolls around will donate money to the Dem. nominee.
And...
How can you say his campaign is doomed because it doesn't have enough money and then say he is doomed to be outspent no matter what he raises? As far as I can see, BushCo is going to outspend the Democrats if they have to sell their children to do it. BushCo has tremendous financial investments in Bush's presidency and no amount is too large to secure them.

Clark won't win by the QUANTITY of his propaganda like Bush, he will will by the QUALITY of his speeches/ campaign.

[Lobo_13]

66. Apparently you aren't up on the matching fund rules

Clark cannot spend more than $45 mil under any circumstances. He will have to stop fundraising when he hits that mark, because he can't spend it. That includes matching funds.

To win the nomination, he's going to have to spend most what he raises, and probably all of the $45 mil.

Even if he stretches every dime and gets the most out of his remaining funds, he'll still be outspent by more than three to one, and he's still going to run out well before July.

When I say he can't spend more than $45 mil, I mean it. He won't even be able to buy a ream of copy paper once he hits that threshold. He won't be able to pay for venues to give these wonderful speeches. After $45 mil, there will be no campaign. No travel expenses, no food expenses, no copying expenses, no expenses period. He will be completely at the mercy of free publicity, and relying on this media atmosphere to cover your ass is unrealistic, to say the least.

[hope42mro]

71. I'll carry him on my back if it comes to that

I believe in this man too much to let any lack of money deter me from supporting him. I believe in his vision, his principles and his potential too much. I know I'm not alone when I say that his supporters will not abandon him if he runs out of money. We'll use our own money, draw our own signs, make our own pins, write our own letters, etc. If you really believe in a candidate you volunteer every once you can, every resource you can donate. With support like that a candidate won't need to spend alot of money. That's the kind of candidate Clark is. He inspires people so much that they will give everything they can to him. Time, paper, paperclips. We'll find it for him. This man is our hope for the future. You can't put a price on fighting for hope.

[Lobo_13]

73. Good luck tilting with that windmill

Those limits also apply to "in kind" donations.

[CivilRightsNow]

84. Where do you people come from?

All you Clark supporters?

It's like you come here in droves straight out of a meetup/tupperware party.

It's fascinating to watch you guys change the whole climate of DU and the people who used to post fade away...

[Hawkeye-X]

85. No [CENSORED] sherlock

A lot of my favorite posters got banned or just left DU because it's been going downhill. It's as if DU has become CU.

Hawkeye-X

[SahaleArm]

89. Don't worry Dean Underground is holding strong...

;)

[Crunchy Frog]

100. Well

speaking as one of "you guys" ie a recently registered Clark supporter. I found this place last March as the war was starting. It seemed like the only sane place on the internet. I lurked for many months. I became a Dean supporter on the basis of information that i found here. I then switched to Clark, also on the basis of information here.

I am a very shy person and it took me a long time to get up the nerve to actually register, let alone start posting.

One thing that I've noticed is that there are many many new people from all camps. The fact that it is primary season is probably what is bringing in so many new people, as well as the fact that the site is becoming more well known.

By the way, I was lurking here when the Dean supporters were viewed with suspicion and people were asking why so many of them had such low post counts. You may not remember that, but I do, and if you checked the archives you could probably confirm it for yourself.

[SahaleArm]

88. Money? Repugs will double or triple any and every Democrat...

Up to a billion dollars if need be, don't bet on anyone out raising the Bush-Rove machine. That's the biggest fallacy of any. A strong candidate, combined with GOTV, and a widely appealing platform will be beat Bush, not money.

[shivaji]

72. Clark can't win in GE unless he finishes very close to Dean in..

the primaries. If Dean beats him by 10% or more in most primaries, it only means Clark can't excite the base voters.

[Lobo_13]

74. That's another thing

Coming in second doesn't mean much if it's a distant second.

[TLM]

75. Saddam's capture took away CLark;s only advantage.

The capture of saddam is like Bush's "Get Out Of AWOL Free" card. The whole "I'm a general and you were AWOL so I should be president" play is blown all to hell by Bush saying he caught Saddam and CLark got fired from his command.

Take away his military status and Clark has NOTHING to run on.

[Cheswick2.0]

93. yup, just as Clark makes Kerry irrelevant

Saddam captured makes Clark irrelevant.

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

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

[w13rd0]

78. I think that Reno...

...would have given Jeb a far more challenging gubenatorial race than Bill McBride did.

[xultar]

83. Why be concerned...according to everyone even all the pundits

Dean has already won.
So your post doesn't matter.

[CivilRightsNow]

87. Heh...

Or actually, some of us think that Clark has already been choosen and it's all just a big dog and pony show until the Rovites can get a handle on if the people will actually fall for another rigged election in Bush's favor.

If not, they got their trusty backup..

It's the same beast with the exception that Clark comes with military industrial complex written on his forehead.

[BobbyJay]

86. Replace "he" with "Bush"

[sandnsea]

90. These are plusses in the GE

For #1 & #3, alot of people out there will be hopeful that we can get past this petty partisanship, more will be relieved he's not a leftest, and even more won't care one way or the other and will just vote for the man. People underestimate how much a General has to deal with legislation and politics. They also forget that the General has managed a budget, bases, theatres, equivalent to Vermont. He didn't just sign laws, he had to implement policy and make sure it worked. He has hands on experience. And as for money, we'll just have to replace money with grassroots work. They both get the same thing accomplished, so nothing to fear. Clark has so few negatives compared with the positives. And he'd be a great President too.

[CreekDog]

91. Dean Issues

Dean's been running as the angry liberal, attacking the Democrats (largely unfairly) for not being Democrats and not being liberals.

Meanwhile, Dean's been the very type of Democrat (as governor of Vermont) that he is attacking now. Perhaps it is sheer brilliance on his part that he can get away with this, but I can't see that it can last very long.

Imagine the audacity of Dean who advocated cuts in medicare and social security, excoriating Democrats for not being Democrats. I tell you, in the summer of 2002, I was a Dean supporter. It wasn't his attacks on the rest of the party that bothered me, it was that it was hypocritical for HIM to make them when he is the poster boy for moderate Democrats. Hell, look at his record, he might as well be Jim Jeffords or Lincoln Chafee.

Nevertheless, he has managed to craft an image as a stark liberal, which while winning the primary race, is harming his ability to run in the general election.

[maddezmom]

95. thanks for posting

your opinion, just don't happen to share it. :)

edit: spelling

[Eurobabe]

104. sophist

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=49923&mesg_id=49923

[Moderator]

105. Locking.....

1. If you start a thread in the General Discussion forum, you must present your opinion in a manner that is not inflammatory, which respects differences in opinion, and which is likely to lead to respectful discussion rather than flaming. Some examples of things which should generally be avoided are: unnecessarily hot rhetoric, nicknames for prominent Democrats or their supporters, broad-brush statements about groups of people, single-sentence "drive-by" thread topics, etc.


DU Moderator