Clark's Bastion: The South? Dean trumps Clark 3-1 in Georgia

[Patriot_Spear]

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/1203/19dempoll.html

"Buoyed by a surge in publicity -- including former Vice President Al Gore's endorsement -- Dean moved into a solid lead in the survey of 277 likely Democratic Georgia voters, conducted Monday and Tuesday."


Howard Dean
DECEMBER: 18.8 percent
OCTOBER: 7.4 percent

Dick Gephardt
DECEMBER: 7.5 percent
OCTOBER: 11.5 percent

Someone else
DECEMBER: 6.8 percent
OCTOBER: 1.6 percent

Wesley Clark
DECEMBER: 6.5 percent
OCTOBER: 13.1 percent


Popular sentiment on this board has Clark as seemingly unbeatable in the South. I am officially declaing that a myth. Clark is currently losing 3rd place to "Someone Else".

...By the way- I'm a Southerner, ya'll!

[HFishbine]

1. But, But, But

republicans will vote for Clark.

[slinkerwink]

2. lol!

:hi:

[Patriot_Spear]

4. I forgot. Thank you.

Maybe we should poll 'Republicans for Clark'?

[shivaji]

27. republicans will vote a repug over repug LITE everytime...

famous words of wisdom from president Truman.

It is delusional to believe Clark will get repug votes.

On the other hand Dean will by ALL ACCOUNTS energize the dem base heckuva lot more than Clark ever can.

[bearfartinthewoods]

35. maybe you should check out this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=8620

it seems i wasn't the only person who was flumoxed by dean's resorting to having white people holding signs that said Afican Americans for dean.

what a farce...

[BillPhi]

40. My First DU Post

OK, let's get this straight once and for all:

Wesley K. Clark is a Democrat. Yes, he has voted for Republicans in the past (ever heard of 'Reagan Democrats'?). Yes, he spoke well of the current administration in the months immediately after 9/11. So what? It's called patriotism over politics. Interesting that Howard Dean's statements about Medicare and his initial statements on Iraq are 'in the past', but Clark's votes of 15-20 years ago disqualify him from the party.

Do Democrats never vote for anyone other than Democrats? If that is the standard of purity, then I submit that anyone who voted for Nader in 2000 is merely a mole, not a "real Democrat". That's ridiculous logic when applied to Nader and it's just as ridiculous when applied to Reagan.

I am proud to support a real Democrat with a real chance of defeating Bush:

Democrat Wesley K. Clark!

[VolcanoJen]

41. Welcome to DU, BillPhi!!

DU Welcomes You!!

[BillPhi]

42. Thank you!

Great to move from lurker to member. :)

[newyawker99]

43. Hi BillPhi!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Hep]

3. But but but

Dean hates southerners!

[HFishbine]

5. Sssshhh

Some of those Georgia voters are still sleeping:

"I would like someone to speak strongly on health care, someone who is a fiscal conservative," said Christie, a Covington resident. "Nobody is talking about that."

[teevee]

6. no one has voted yet.

duh. these polls are reckless, redundant, unreliable and ridiculous, no matter who they "say" is winning. why waste your time?

[HFishbine]

7. Why?

Because they carry more weight than completely unsubstantiated opinion such as "Clark will do better in the south." That's why. They are by no means an indication of who's going to win, but they can support or put the lie to speculation.

[jmaier]

8. technically

you cannot put lie to speculation. It's ... um ... speculating.

[HFishbine]

12. Ha!

Yeah, but then what can you put the lie to? The truth? Nope, because it's the truth. A lie? Redundant, no need to put the lie to a lie. An assertion, perhaps? Maybe I should have used the word "assertion."

[Gloria]

9. 277????????/ I think that's the lowest sample I've ever seen!!

What's the margin of error on this thing???

God, for the good old days when I worked at Gallup in the late '70's and the old man's techniques were still in use....1000, 1500 and more ...
door to door interviews, with cards handed to people with names on them, the same question asked the same way for years....

[CMT]

10. conducted monday and tuesday?

after Saddam's capture destroyed Dean's candidacy--he still leads in Georgia??

[BootinUp]

11. I vote for Not Sure 42%

Not Sure that this poll means anything that is. Seriously 42% undecided, there is much to happen here in georgia before georgians make up their minds.

see ya

[Patriot_Spear]

14. I agree, Got to watch those polls...

Nothing is infallable, or above tampering.

[Tom Rinaldo]

13. Still too early to care in Georgia

Dean is the front runner period. He has been running for two years, and he has been running very skillfully, to his absolute credit. Dean has tons of money now, to his absolute credit, so he can afford to run a national campaign. Other candidates would love to but they really can't. That's part of what being a front runner is, but the actual competition in Georgia has not yet begun. The early polls in NH were not so favorable to Dean once upon a time.

The fact that Dean is ahead is some Southern states is by no means meaningless. That too is a credit to him. However the fact that he is ahead by a plurality doesn't prove he is overall popular there. In a state like Iowa or New Hampshire, I am willing to grant that many of the voters who back other candidates now would not have much trouble shifting to Dean if Dean wins the nomination. I am by no means as confident about that dynamic in the Southern States. And I am even less confident about Dean winning over significant numbers of Southern voters other than the minority of politically oriented Democrats who participate in the primaries.

Clark is competing with a number of other well known National politicians in the South who to varing degrees all have appeal there. They are currently dividing up the majority of southern voters between them. However soon that field will start narrowing, before Georgia as a matter of fact. South Carolina is the first Southern battle field state. Results coming out of South Carolina will scramble the current picture in ways that can only be know then.

[Patriot_Spear]

15. Tom, I understand your postion...

But as a Dean supporter I think this is good news. Yes, it may not mean anything, or it might be a bellweahter for the nomination.

That's all.

[mot78]

16. I'd like to see them do a Dean vs. Bush and Clark vs. Bush poll

[Patriot_Spear]

17. Polls CAN be tricky...

I'm like you, I take them with a grain of salt.

[baronvonbryan]

18. Article on Clarks Chances

http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/talking_politics/documents/03435275.asp

General dynamics
Democratic presidential contender Wesley Clark is gaining support among both traditional liberals and more independent centrists. Can he bring them together, especially now that Saddam is under arrest?
BY ADAM REILLY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


THE BIG MO: Wesley Clark's campaign has momentum. Is it enough to make him competitive with Howard Dean?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




EVEN BEFORE Saddam Hussein’s capture this weekend, buzz was building among the political cognoscenti that Retired General Wesley Clark would emerge as the anti–Howard Dean. Al Gore’s surprise endorsement of the former Vermont governor last week solidified Dean’s status as the candidate to beat — and, in a weird way, may also have helped Clark. An Associated Press analysis of the race after Gore’s endorsement noted that Dean is now saddled with the burden of increased expectations. Therefore, if Clark finishes strong in next month’s New Hampshire primary, he can claim victory even if Dean wins. Also last week, Chuck Todd, editor-in-chief of the Hotline, pegged Clark as the candidate with the best chance of stopping Dean, arguing that Clark, as the field’s only non-politician, can present an outsider message that surpasses Dean’s. And in the blogosphere, Talking Points Memo’s Joshua Micah Marshall argued that Gore’s endorsement will help Clark by making it harder for Dick Gephardt and John Kerry to win in Iowa and New Hampshire, respectively, hastening the advent of a Dean-Clark race.

Now that Saddam’s post-capture dental exam and lice check have replayed endlessly on television, Clark’s ascent to the number-two spot seems even more likely. While this high-profile victory for Bush doesn’t help any of the Democrats who’ve criticized the war, it should have less of an impact on Clark, who has stellar military credentials, than on Dean, even though both candidates aggressively opposed the Iraq campaign. And, with Saddam in custody, Paula Zahn of CNN turned to Clark for his opinion on What It All Means. After all, the retired general was at The Hague this week testifying in the war-crimes trial of former Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milosevic. (In 1999, as supreme allied commander of NATO, Clark paved the way for Milosevic’s ouster by leading the bombing campaign that drove Serbian troops from Kosovo.) Who better to talk about what the future holds for Saddam than Clark? On CNN, Clark argued that the process by which Saddam is brought to justice will be tremendously important — "It’s not only that justice has to be done, it has to be perceived to have been done" — and touted Milosevic’s ouster as proof that Saddam could have been deposed using a more multilateral approach. It all adds up to a nice media bounce for the former NATO commander, who is more likely to benefit from the flurry of excitement associated with Saddam’s capture than any of the other Democrats running for president. And that would make Clark the strongest contender to challenge Dean after the latter steamrolls over everyone else in Iowa and New Hampshire next month — as most expect he will.

OF COURSE, we’ve heard that before. Even before he officially declared his candidacy on September 17, Clark was being touted as the anti-Dean, the one candidate who could halt the former Vermont governor’s march toward the Democratic nomination and give the Democrats an advantage on national-security issues in 2004. To anyone who’d heard Clark critique the war in Iraq or deconstruct the Republicans’ presumed monopoly on patriotism, the suggestion was plausible. Clark was intelligent and articulate, capable of criticizing President George W. Bush and his administration just as effectively as Dean, but without Dean’s shrillness. His biography — first in his class at West Point, Rhodes scholar, decorated Vietnam War veteran, former four-star general — was icing on the cake. There was only one caveat: Clark couldn’t afford to falter. "He’ll need to hit the ground running, with the finest pair of sneakers you’ve ever seen," Donna Brazile, who managed Al Gore’s campaign in 2000, told Salon just before Clark declared.

But Clark did falter. Again and again. One day after joining the Democratic field, he tarnished his anti-war credentials by admitting that he "probably" would have voted for the congressional resolution authorizing President George W. Bush to use force in Iraq. In the same in-flight interview, conducted en route from Clark’s hometown of Little Rock, Arkansas, to Florida, the candidate mentioned that he’d "probably" voted for Richard Nixon in 1972, definitely voted for Reagan in 1980, and only started considering himself a Democrat in 1992. In his first debates, he looked nervously earnest rather than charismatic or commanding. Like Joe Lieberman, another candidate failing to live up to high expectations, Clark decided to bypass the Iowa caucuses. And, for good measure, he voiced support for a proposed constitutional amendment banning flag-burning.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

[Patriot_Spear]

19. Funny they should entitle it "General Dynamics"- get the hint?

No irony there, oh no.

[HFishbine]

20. "gaining support among both liberals and independent centrists"

And yet the article provides zero evidence that *lark is doing either.

[BootinUp]

21. Welcome to DU baronvonbryan!

Nice to see another Clarkie onboard.

That is a very interesting article, I read it yesterday. Seems like the author did quite a bit of research before writing it.

Note:
I could be wrong, but you might want to edit your post to show a max of 4 paragraphs from the article and then have a link to the article for the rest. That is a DU rule I believe.

[Moderator]

28. Please do not post more than 4 paragraphs of copyrighted material

per GD posting rules

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html#copyright

Thanks:

DU Moderator

[Moderator]

29. please keep pasted articles to 4 paragraphs or less with a link

to the original source.

Thanks

[bearfartinthewoods]

36. ooopps...dupe

[catherineD]

22. If all Dean had to do to become president was beat Democratic voters

then he certainly does look strong in the south right now. Though maybe that's because about half of the 277 people contacted hadn't heard of anybody else yet, since Dean has had the press in his pocket recently. But do you think Georgia would go for Dean against Bush?

[SahaleArm]

23. What's the MOE on 277 voters? n/t

[tameszu]

25. I think like 7%+

Based on my stats textbook, it's 7.3%, which means that Dean's lead over Clark is actually within the MoE.

Not exactly what I'd call a terribly useful poll.

[SahaleArm]

34. As expected - useless n/t

[Jerseycoa]

24. 277?

I can't believe anybody is touting this thing. What's the MOE?

[Rose Siding]

26. Dean also leads in Virginia

In Mason Dixon's Dec 10 poll:

Dean 21
Lieberman 13
Clark 11
Gephardt 8
Kerry 7
Sharpton 6
Edwards 5
Kucinich 1
Moseley Braun 0
Margin of error: +/- 6%

http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=63387&ran=220195

[mikehiggins]

30. 308 voters MOE: 6% eom

[mikehiggins]

31. Same poll

Clark leads Dem field, losing to Bush 48-33
625 voters polled MOE 4%

[MGKrebs]

32. The only real significance

is that Dean has gained 11% in 2 months, Gep has lost 4%, and Clark has lost 6%.

[DFLforever]

33. Thank you, MGKrebs

For pointing these out - I easily drown in all this stat evidence.

[robbedvoter]

37. Why 277? What did the 278th respondent say to make the pollsters go

Aw, F* that, we're done here?

[GOPBasher]

38. Well I know that your guy is dominating right now.

But I think there's still time for Clark to turn it around. I'm going to repeat something I've put in every post lately that deals with primaries: Let's be civil to each other; regardless of who we support in the primaries, we all need to come together for the general election.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

39. Can't win kick.

:kick:

[retyred]

44. Why am I not surprised dean takes Georgia?

Oh that's right, Zell Miller!


retyred in fla
“good night paul, wherever you are”
So I read this book