Wes Clark: One DU-ers opinion on his campaign.

[mzmolly]

I am weary. I hear over and over again that Clark has run a "clean campaign," yet he has claimed on several occassions that Dean *can't win*

There isn't one poll or any shred of evidence to back up that paranoid thought. And, some of Clarks supporters are tauting *the Dean can't win meme* as one of the primary reason they support Clark? :shrug: Wha???

Additionally, let me shed some light on Clarks refusal to get *personal* and or *specific* about his criticizms on other candidates. *This is only my opinion of course.*

1. He encouraged some in congress to support Bush's war prior to the war itself. *There goes any criticism of those that voted for the war*

2. He has no indepth knowlege of domestic issues so he doesn't want to be critical of others on the domestic front. If Clark is critical of the particulars, he'll be forced to answer questions, and he doesn't seem to want to do that? Hence the lack of participation in the debates. How on earth can we size him up against Bush in a debate if he wont debate his fellow dems? Clark has disapointed me in the debates, I don't feel he addresses questions, and he goes off on lofty tangents. He needs the experience, and I as a voter need to be able to size him up in a debate setting.

I've heard time and time again HERE, the "I really like Howard Dean , but "he can't win" stories, which are being spread without any evidence to that effect what so ever?! It would appear Clarks unfounded opinion on this matter, is effective in garnering him support, despite a total lack of evidence?

Not only can Dean win, but he can change politics as usual, forever. And, we've got one chance to do this folks, it's the highly electable Howard Dean.

You all know I'm ABB and Clark will have my vote should he compete against *. But any such vote would be cast with great sadness at what could have been.

[poskonig]

1. Clark probably does have a handle on domestic issues.

I'm not defending that he believes issues of his campaign, but the guy does have degrees in philosophy, political science, and economics.

I agree on your take about the "Dean can't win" bs, but since the Dean campaign is already taking a pounding on all sides, I'm pretty numb to it. I'm more suspect about who Clark really is as a human being, and less worried about minor campaign tactics.

[mzmolly]

2. I'm concerned about who Clark is also, but I don't think his education

in political science, philosophy are relevant to our domestic agenda personally speaking. His economics backround could be? But, I prefer someone with practical experience balancing budgets etc... over a degree. ;)

Thanks for chiming in. :hi:

[Bush loves Jiang]

4. Hmmm...

Nobody will care.

I guarantee I'm one of about 10,000 Canadians who actually knows that NDP leader Jack Layton has a doctorate in political science.

Most just think he's some popular inner city activist who won only on image. :-P

[mzmolly]

8. I am thinking Clark is *image* more than substance.

Again, just my humble opinion.

[KittyWampus]

68. That's Why He Is So Successful? His IMAGE?

Please stop spreading LIES about Clark. He NEVER said Dean can't win.

Why do you need to be deceitful to make a point?

One would think if you had a valid point, I don't think you'd have to invent the story about Clark saying Dean Can't Win.

KERRY might have uttered the words Dean Can't Win but I can't verify that.

[dogman]

3. But Dean can't win.

Clark did not encourage some in Congress to support Bush's war. He told a candidate for Congress to vote for a resolution to be used as a bargaining chip and would have required Congress to approve a final resolution of war, similar to a bill Dean supported. Dean is only solid with slightly over one third of Democrats. Unless he can come back to his original centrist position he cannot beat Bush. Then he risks his new found far-left base. I know solid Democrats who will not vote for Dean. This is unfortunate because this helped Nixon in 72. I had no opinion of Dean until Clark entered the campaign and inspired me to pay attention. I was resigned to the inevitability of four more terrible years since no candidate inspired me. All the candidates are better than Bush but that does not mean they can beat Bush. If Dean is the nominee I certainly hope he wins but I believe it is more likely he will drag down the whole Party.

[mzmolly]

5. Your belief that Dean can't win is totally unfounded.

However, I'm glad Clark inspires you. Dean is inspiring people across all political spectrums.

Clark seems to be playing to the Bush agenda, *I'm more patriotic than you are* I'm Commander and Chief material* *I'm macho* none of which is inspiring to me personally.

[Capn Sunshine]

6. If you "know solid Democrats who will not vote for Dean"

they are either lying because you scare them

Or, more likely they are far from solid.

Anyone who won't vote for the democratic nominee is light years from "solid"

[Padraig18]

9. Exactly.

in Chicago, we call that sort of 'solid Democrat' a 'Republican'. :eyes:

[dogman]

12. Not true

They fear the permanent damage to the Party from a failed Presidency. I love Carter but his Presidency set back the Party nationally for years. We must elect a solid leader to carry this Party forward. This is not about where I am personally, but where America is. You cannot make changes looking in through the window from outside. That should be obvious now. Our only saving grace has been the filibuster and we are in danger of losing that.

[mouse7]

10. *smack* You're wrong.

All 9 candidates can win. I'm tired of hearing this bullshit mantra that Al From and the DLC has put in Democrats heads.

The Democratic Party can win with a Kucinich, a Braun, a Sharpton, a Dean, a Clark, any of them.

All we have to do is get OUR BASE something to vote for. Only 20% of the voters in the US is in the center. 40% of the voters are our base. It is statistically stupid to be spending all our resources on swaying the center when our base has SO MANY MORE POTENTIAL NEW VOTERS.

[dogman]

19. Once again, do the math.

If you add one vote you have gained by one. If you take away one vote you have a net gain of two. How can you win with 40% of the vote when we couldn't win with over half the vote. Building the base is fine if you are solid like Harkin but if you are overcoming an incumbent you can gain more by eroding his base. A case in point is Deans' solid base. It is much harder to beat him without eroding his base. that is quite obvious.

[mzmolly]

21. You do the math. Prove that Clark is more electable than any of the top

Dems in the running. Dean is in the lead NATIONALLY against Bush. And, as you know Dems are all polling well against him.

[dogman]

30. Statistical tie with Clark.

These polls are far from accurate and the only proof is in an election but show me where the math is wrong.

[mzmolly]

33. I'm not claiming Clark can't beat Bush, you claim Dean can't beat Bush

thus I have nothing to *prove* you do.

[dogman]

41. You asked for proof.

As I read the thread this was about opinion, and that is mine.

[mzmolly]

44. Thanks, I thought so

;)

[Cha]

31. What you said, mouse!

A Democrat should be able win against this monstrous sham we have running our Country now.

I just want the best person to be able to win to lead us out of this Disgrace and on the road to a really Great America!(Such Potential)

[no name no slogan]

58. Exactly

ANY ONE of our candidates could mop the floor with Shrub.

Look how close 2000 was. The Repubs one by ONE LOUSY STATE. All the Dems have to do in 2004 is win the same states Gore won, plus a populous state like Ohio, and the presidency is OURS.

However, running as a Repub apologist/"centrist" is not the way to do it. If people want to vote for a Republican, they'll vote for the real thing, not some pale Democratic immitation.

We've ALWAYS won when we ran on ECONOMIC issues. Most people really don't give a damn about the social issues (like gay marriage, abortion rights, etc)-- they're more concerned about their pocketbooks. The Dems can easily WIN if we preach a message of economic populism: no more tax cuts for the rich, protection for their jobs, taking power away from the mega-corporations.

THIS is the message that resonates in places like West Virginia, Ohio, Missouri, Pennsylvania, etc. These places have been economically devastated by so-called "free trade" policies that place profit over people. And most Americans still agree that corporation hold way too much power in this country.

ANY of our nine can win this-- if they hammer the Repubs where they are weakest. NAIL THEIR ASSES on economics. ASK THEM, "where are the jobs?". QUESTION THEM about why it takes two full-time workers to support a family these days.

If our Democratic nominee fights on these issues, the race is ours to lose.

:toast:

[Eloriel]

13. Like he's dragging down the party now?

Bringing new voters and formerly apathetic voters back into the process? Empowering supporters to get involved, organize and run a volunteer campaign in all 50 states? Bringing Dean Republicans in, and Libertairans and Independents and Greens?

At a training session on Saturday -- organized, presented and attended by over 100 of the thousands of Dean supporters in Georgia -- we learned about at least 3 different Dean County Chairs who are pushing their moribund County Dem Party organizations back to life, one of whom even went so far as to go recruit people to take their places if they couldn't rescusitate themselves.

And oh yeah, there are Clark MeetUps in Georgia (a few), but there is no other campaign doing any canvassing or phone banking, which we've been doing for months now, let alone anything approaching an "organization" -- ours is very well organized, well-staffed (all volunteers), and very effective. Our primary is March 3.

Yeah, I say let's drag the party down some more.

Eloriel

[mzmolly]

17. Reminds me of Jesse Ventura in MN. Not that Dean is like JV

but the polls showed over and over again that JV was behind his compitition in the race. We were shocked when he became our Governor because there were so many young voters that he inspired. I wonder if Deans polling numbers are even stronger then they appear?

[ThomWV]

52. I agree

You mirror my feelings.

Thom

[mzmolly]

60. Your entitled to your opinion(s) but there isn't one shred of evidence to

bolster that opinion. In fact, there is much to the contrary.

[mermaid]

62. Better Than Nominating Kucinich...

who would not be able to land the swing voters, because he's too far left.
Pity.
I like Kucinich, but I can't support him, because, the reality is...he CAN'T beat Bush. We myst drag our country BACK to the center before we can start bringing it back left where it belongs.

Kucinich right now would represent too radical a change from the status quo, and mainstream America won't support changes that radical.

Pity.

[Rowdyboy]

7. I too am ABB and I will vote for Dean if he's nominated

But threads like this make me sadder and sadder at the prospect. The difference between us? I don't post threads that attack Doctor Dean nor do I respond positively to them. As a matter of fact, I have spoken up in defense of Dean on some of those anti-Dean threads.

I doubt I'll be doing much of that anymore. Too many Dean supporters I respected have gotten unnecessarily nasty, two new one just this morning.

[mzmolly]

11. I don't feel I attacked anyone here. I shared my opinion in a candid

manner. I am sorry if you are discouraged by the thoughts I posted here, I meant not to cause any strife.

I am very concerned about all the issues I noted above, it's not meant as an attack in any way.

Once again, I will add, if Clark is the nominee, he's got my vote.

[Rowdyboy]

15. How would you feel if I posted a thread on Dean

attacking him for his remarks in the newly released tapes, and a rehash of the rebel flag remarks, an in-depth exploration of his newly-found religion including how shallow it obviously is (What's your favorite New Testament book?), his hidden records in New Hampshire, his fiery temper, the minuscule size of his state (city?), how fiscally conservative he is and the fact that he has not a single instance, anywhere, of foreign experience (except, probably skiing in the Alps)?

And, most of all, how HE CAN'T WIN!!!

Would that be an attack?

Well I haven't done that. And I won't. And I won't respond positively to people who do. It's counterproductive and damages our chances and the party as a whole. If you're REALLY ABB, then you won't spend time giving Republicans added ammunition to throw back at us.

And that too, is just one DUer's feeling.

[mzmolly]

20. Rowdy boy that scenario crops up here daily.

Generally with a new DU-er who has supposedly "switched from Dean to Clark" because no matter how much they like Dean ... "He can't win".

Dean is the devil incarnate on DU. You know that.

Also, with Clark climbing in the polls, your going to see more scrutiny here and elsewhere.

I have seen the issues you note above, again and again and again. I've not seen the concerns I raised about WC here however.

Please hide this thread if it's troubling to you. Again, I apologize if it is.

[Rowdyboy]

26. I don't want to hide any of your threads because

I like you Molly and I generally enjoy your posts. I haven't seen you do this before. And I have seen the issues you raised frequently. I'm just disappointed this morning by what I'm seeing in general. Makes me want to start responding in kind.

[mzmolly]

32. Im so sorry if I've become part of the poison that I despise here

myself. It is not my intention to do so. I have taken part in some things that I am not proud of and, I would never want to damage the most important goal *ousting Bush*

But I feel saying Dean can't win is damaging to our long term goal, and it deserves an answer.

This will be my last thread on this subject FWIW. But, I felt compelled to share my concerns.

~Peace

[democratreformed]

16. Rowdyboy, they try very hard to draw us into it

Sometimes it is really hard, but it is best not to join in. I think that is the strategy - draw us in and let us be the ones that look bad. Also, the new one is to divide - Kerry said this, Lieberman said this - why don't you get mad at them.

It helps if you put the ones that are the most vile and nasty on ignore.

[mzmolly]

24. I'm not trying to draw anyone in. I simply refuse to hear Dean can't win

Clark can, with out proof anylonger.

Additionally, I think I raised some valid points. But do feel free to ignore me and or this thread.

[democratreformed]

64. I agree that you shouldn't have to hear that

That's why I have never said it. I don't believe it either. Yes, there are many threads and replies on threads that are just plain nasty and are designed to get stuff started. I merely picked this opportunity to point that out to a person who was fretting over it.

On edit: I also don't think that DK supporters should hear that about him, or Al Sharpton, or John Edwards, or anyone else. I don't say that about them either. But, I sure read alot of other people saying it and it disturbs me.

[Bombtrack]

14. 2 thirds of Americans continue to think war was right choice

a foriegn policy novice from the most stereotypically left-wing state who also proposes a middle class tax-raise to pay for new federal spending is going to have a much harder time being anti-war and selling the opposition to the Iraq war to the country than a foriegn policy expert from middle america who will cut middle class income taxes in addition to restoring the Bush services cut.

People in Pennsylvania and Michigan are unlikely to look to Howard Dean over Bush, Cheney, and Powell, whether things in Iraq are chaotic or we see grand democracy and justice blooming

[mzmolly]

18. The polls show Dean doing the *best* against Bush. We can

manufacture fears all we like. That is the evidence as it sits today.

Additionally, Clark opposes the war as of now, so I don't get the war argument at all. Is this ok simply because he's a General from Arkansas?

Additionally, Dean is considering a payroll tax relief package, which removes the tax issue from consideration, and makes a ton of sense.

Lastly, your making unfounded claims about Michigan and Penn, any proof that Clark would do better then Dean in those states?

[Mattforclark]

22. This far out, polls of dems v. Bush mean nothing

Because:

There are big differences in name recognition among the candidates.

You get supporters of one candidate saying they would not vote for another candidate because they want their favored candidate to be nominated.

I would love to see an analysis of how many Dean supporters said they would vote for Bush over Clark, how many Clark supporters said they would vote for Dean over Bush, how many x supporters said they would vote for y over Bush, etc in one of these "x democrat vs Bush polls". It would be a tangled mess.

[dogman]

23. A poll that shows differently.

The new AP IPSOS poll shows Clark within 7% and Dean at 15%. All pretty meaningless at this point because their are too many variables for average people to concern themselves with.

[mzmolly]

29. I'd be interesting in seeing it as I watch the trends. However,

there is no evidence that Clark can beat Bush and Dean can't. Not one shread. If Dean was polling well with the base, and not against Bush with the General public, I'd think you were on to something. But the claim as it sits now is paranoid speculation. I find it sad that so many Clark supporters are supporting Clark out of an unfounded *fear* that Dean can't win?

It's baffling.

[Mattforclark]

35. In that sense,

there is no evidence that anyone can do anything. If we are comparing football teams to predict who will win the superbowl, we might as well select one randomly, because they all have the same chance of winning.

There are some things about Clark that might make him less likely to win. There are some things about Dean that might make him less likely to win. There are some things about Clark that might make him more likely to win. There are some things about Dean that might make him more likely to win.

You analyse what these are based on past experience and other knowledge and extrapolate. It is not perfect, but that certainly doesn't mean it is worthless either. And it is the best we have got.

There is a reason that I didn't pick the Dallas Cowboys to win the superbowl. That reason was Quincy Carter.

It is not paranoid to think that one football team has a better chance of winning the superbowl than another. Neither is it paranoid to believe that one candidate has a better chance of beating Bush than another.

[mzmolly]

38. It's paranoid when the evidence is otherwise, and when were talking

an election here. It's perpetuating a fear based on myth, for the sole purpose of getting votes.

I dont liken this to a football game personally.

[windansea]

25. the "polls" do not show Dean doing best

some do...and some don't

Who Did it When Bush Dean
Fox News Jan 7-8 54% 33%
Ipsos-Reid/AP Jan 5-7 54% 39%
CNN/USA Today/Gallup Jan 2-5 59% 37%
Rasmussen Reports Jan 2-4 51% 37%
CNN/Time Dec 30-Jan 1 51% 46%
CBS/NY Times Dec 21-22 55% 35%
ABC/Washington Post Dec 18-20 55% 37%
Newsweek Dec 18-19 53% 40%
CNN/USA Today/Gallup Dec 15-16 60% 37%
Insider Advantage Dec 15-16 51% 34%

[mzmolly]

36. I am comparing him to other Dems against Bush.

www.pollingreport.com

As I said, I am not the one claiming * can't win, others are doing so, and with out any proof.

[windansea]

57. that's one poll

most of the other national polls have other dems doing better that Dean vs chimpler

[DancingBear]

34. Please stop with "polls" this and "polls" that

Initial primary polls show how ACTIVE one candidates base is - that's all. Dean's base is active - hence the numbers.

We'll never convince you that this activist base is a finite number and represents nothing more than the "X" percent of people who yell "Oh, Howard Dean - he speaks to me!" and then work really hard for him. That is what you have right now - don't think it is anything more.

This is why we discount the "wow! - look at the newest poll from X" posts, and instead look for trends. It is also why we are saddened at Dean folks refusal to look at ALL of America, instead of just extrapolating Dean meet-up numbers and silly pre-pre-pre primary polls vis a vis the GE.

Look at his negatives, look at the press, stop the silly shoot the messenger comments every time someone injects a note of "pessisism" ("bashing", in Dean speak), and fer crissakes stop apologizing for his foot-in-mouth disease. Help fix it!

Right now you're got a really flawed candidate, and it is going to be very tough to defend/support him in the GE unless you start listening to those outside your circle, and stop pretending you're leading some kind of "revolution.'"

[mzmolly]

39. I'm not talking primary polls, I'm talking polls with the general public

I am looking at ALL of America.

As for the rest, I won't discuss Dean specifically here and now. There have been many threads that address concerns about Dean.

[Cha]

27. "The Dean can't win" meme is pure and

simple hogwash! It could be said by anyone who doesn't believe..about anyone. they have nothing else so why not repeat this mantra over and over again so maybe it will stick.

It won't! The momentum of something Good coming out of Politics with the Dean Campaign is too Strong!

[Mattforclark]

28. Clark = Clean against Dems, vicious against Bush

If you think that Clark will run a 'clean' (meaning not attacking Bush, not doing anything dirty or illegal) campaign against Bush, all you have to become disabused is go look at the press releases on his website or watch him talk about Bush for a few minutes.

[JVS]

42. Vicious=Helped raise funds for? No way!

[xultar]

37. YOO HOO!!!! Clark has never said DEAN CAN'T WIN...

He's always said, let the voters choose and If you want a Dr then elect a Dr. If you want a Leader, someone with foregin policy who's done that before then Elect a Leader. I'm a Leader.

Even when baited by CM on Hardball. He's never said that.

Please produce LINKS to QUOTES where Clark as said DEAN CAN'T WIN.

[Padraig18]

40. I seem to recall...

... someone failing to raise their hand when asked 'Who here thinks Gov. Dean can beat George Bush?'... *cough, cough*

[xultar]

48. That again doesn't count...because he's saying he can...

It isn't a direct quote. I need a DIRECT QUOTE.

If you ask me to raise my hand if I think the woman next to me looks better than me.

I'm not saying that she's ugly if I don't raise my hand. I'm saying that I think I look better.

He's not saying that Dean can't win. He was saying that HE WILL.

I need a DIRECT QUOTE. That's all I'm asking for...

A DIRECT QUOTE!

[Padraig18]

49. It 'doesn't count'????????????????????????

Pretty fine distinction there, my friend. I suppose if I fired a .38 at you and the bullet didn't actually hit you, that you'd immediately assure the authorities that I wasn't trying to shoot you? :eyes:

[hellhathnofury]

54. That's an enormous weasal out.

[mzmolly]

43. Here's one for you. He has said it.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/12/15/clark/index_np.html

Google it. I've seen it a few times.

"Democrats can't win with Dean as their presidential candidate."

It's the meme coming out of the campaign, and it's trickling down to Clark's supporters who say it here in testimonials on a regular basis.

[xultar]

46. My sincerest apology but it isn't in quotes. It's a headline! n/t

[mzmolly]

56. Like I said, it's in the quotes too.

Google it. He said it. I'm at a different PC right now, so I don't have the link(s) to the other stories I saved.

"Democrats can't win with Dean on the ticket." Sounds crystal clear to me. He's also said it in other places/interviews.

[FubarFly]

51. "Above the fray",

my unmentionables.

That was a sick statement for any Democrat to make about another. If Clark and his supporters continue this strategy of trying to win by spreading fear through the Democratic ranks, I want no part of Clark. That was a demoralizing and divisive statement, and I was disgusted when he made it.

I am still ABB. I will still support Clark if he get's the nomination. But with statements like that, he's pushing me in a bad direction. Dean is arguing that he is the best man to go against b*sh, and in reference to Clark, the better Democrat. Clark is arguing that he is the ONLY one who can win, or rather only a candidate with foreign policy experience can beat b*sh- as if b*sh was some kind of foreign policy guru. That is complete and utter horseshit. I sincerely hope Clark changes his stripes on this issue soon.

---


"I don't think the Democratic Party can win without carrying a heavy experience in national security affairs into the campaign," he told Salon in a phone interview last week. "And that experience can't be in a vice president."

[mermaid]

65. Right Now, We Need A Doctor, Because....

America is tragically sick these days, and needs a healing hand!
GO DEAN!!!

Need a Bushectomy??
Call DR. DEAN!!!

[mzmolly]

45. Out for today folks, again just wanted to share my humble opinion.

:hi:

[xrepub]

47. What about the polls

You write:
<<There isn't one poll or any shred of evidence to back up that paranoid thought. And, some of Clarks supporters are tauting *the Dean can't win meme* as one of the primary reason they support Clark?>>

There are a good number of polls out there that show Dean doing very badly in the GE.

If Dean is the candidate, I will support him. I do not agree that he has no chance in the GE, but, I believe it will be a tougher fight than necessary. There are other candidates that appear to have a better chance.

[mzmolly]

55. There isn't ONE poll that shows Clark has a clear advantage over Dean in

the GE. In fact recent polls show him with in 4 points of Bush! That's amazing for a candidate who hasn't even been nominated.

I do not agree that he has no chance in the GE, but, I believe it will be a tougher fight than necessary. There are other candidates that appear to have a better chance.

Appear? Where? There isn't one poll that shows any Dem has a clear advantage over * other than perhaps Dean.

[stickdog]

50. Clark is a political cipher who has proven himself adept at taking orders.

Some would have us believe that these qualities make him a strong candidate.

[Walt Starr]

53. I just plain don't trust Clark

He is a Democrat of opportunity, and that just stinks to high heaven.

[slinkerwink]

59. the more I've learned about him on SOA has made me trust him less

[jonnyblitz]

71. same here for that reason.

:puke:

[mermaid]

66. Me, Either!!

I do not believe a leopard changes his spots.
This man supported Repukes his whole life, and now I'm supposed to suddenly believe he is on OUR side? Not likely.

More to the point...I think Clark is a paper tiger, supported by the Establishment in the DLC (Clinton et al) and I really think Dean scares the crap outta the DLC, BECAUSE he is from outside the Establishment. Hence the demagogue of "Dean can't win."

Furthermore, I believe the DLC WANTS * to win this time out, clearing the way for Hillary to run in '08, and not against an fairly popular incumbent.

Hillary DOES NOT WANT TO WAIT TILL '12 to run for Prez. And, the Establishment (Clinton et al) wants a Hillary Presidency. Enter the paper tiger that is Wes Clark...to tear down and scratch away at Dean...who REALLY CAN WIN...THE DLC KNOWS IT...AND IT SCARES THE CRAP OUTTA THEM... because they know the Party will spin out of their control if Dean does get the Presidency.

I truly believe Clark is INTENDED to cause a Dem. loss in November, ckearing the way for Hillary in '08. That's what I think.

And, much as I might welcome a Hillary Presidency...NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF FOUR MORE YEARS OF WHISTLE-ASS!!!

[Bread and Circus]

61. He's upfront and saying what he thinks...

what's not clean about that.

By comparison to many of the others, Clark's campaign is very clean.

It's not perfect, but it's pretty damn good.

[mzmolly]

63. Noting wrong with saying what you think at all. I just prefer that we

we are honest in our *claims* about our candidates :)

Also in the latest national poll *according to newsweek*

And if a general election were held today, Dean would grab 43 percent of the vote compared to Bush’s 51 percent. This eight-point spread has held steady over the past couple months. In an election today Bush would also beat Clark (50 percent to 41 percent), Kerry (52 percent versus 41 percent) and Gerphardt (50 percent to 43 percent) by similar margins.

Dean fairs better nationally than the General in a Bush match up. And, Clark hasn't been put through the media ringer *yet*. Clark is wrong in his assessment. Though, he's entitled to his opinion, I prefer he have something to back it up. Right now Clark's claim would appear to be nothing more then psychological warfare.

Also, I wish he would show up and debate. I can't possibly get to know him under these circumstances. His education/credentials/uniform will only carry him so far in this race. I want to see more.

[KittyWampus]

67. Clark NEVER SAID DEAN CAN'T WIN

Why do you continue to spread that LIE?

There was an article in Slate, I think, where the AUTHOR choose to use the words "Dean Can't Win" but do NOT contribute it to Clark.

[mzmolly]

69. Slate is not the only place Clark has said it...

But he did say in the Slate article "Democrats can't win with Dean on the ticket."

No matter how you slice it, that means "Dean can't win" like I say cryingshame, it's psycological warfare. And, it's bogus.

[Padraig18]

70. Well.....

... while that MAY be technically true, I distinctly recall his hand staying down when asked 'Who thinks Howard Dean can beat george Bush?' at a debate. I'm funny that way, remembering little things like that...

[PatrioticOhioLiberal]

72. I'm old enough

that I'd actually like to see "lofty" once again.

It's been a long time. :-)