Clark Candidacy Should Help, Not Hurt, Dean

[VaLabor]

If Clark announces that he's a candidate, his campaign will help, not hurt, Dean. Here's why:

Of all the campaigns, Dean supporters are probably the most energized and loyal. Clark will draw little from Dean. He'll end up drawing his support from the undecideds and those people in other campaigns who know they're candidate does not stand a chance but have been afraid to get behind Dean because of all the manufactured baloney that Dean is too radical. To the extent that he does draw from Dean, Clark will draw equally from the other candidates - who are the least able to afford any exodus of supporters. So Dean stays on top. Kerry will be hurt the most, and this should pretty much destroy Graham's candidacy and perhaps Edwards. Lieberman's hope of winning the nomination by coming back from losses in Iowa in New Hampshire through wins in the South will also suffer.

Moreover, Clark will add gravitas and legitimacy to one of Dean's supposedly weaker positions: his anti-war stance. Having a top grad of West Point and a retired general in the race who is also against the war will "de-radicalize" Dean in the eyes of many. This will help Dean more than anything.

I'm predicting a three-way race, unless Gephardt is totally creamed in Iowa by either Dean or Clark. The last two candidates to withdraw from the race will be Clark and Gephardt. Dean takes the nomination. And, Clark - by having a gentleman's agreement with Dean never to go negative with each other - is picked as VP.

[molly]

1. You guys still think Dean is the best candidate?

which indicates if Clark does not enter the race, Dean is IT? hahahaha

[KaraokeKarlton]

7. Yes, Dean is the best candidate

He has done amazing things for the Democratic Party and if it weren't for him, all the others would still have their noses driven up Bush's ass. Dean made it safe for the others to criticize Bush. (Aside from Kucinich, but I think he's much to radical to win.) None of the other candidates can stop Dean. If they can't stop Dean, they don't stand a snowball's chance in hell against Bush. Like it or not, that's the reality. Come back and tell me your candidate is better when he is able to stop Dean. If he can't accomplish that, he will NEVER be able to beat Bush.

[molly]

12. Please - this is jut the BEGINNING - we all know from years

of primaries that it has just begun. Dean is like the horse that wants to be a race horse but needs to get to the track early because he understands that he cannot get ahead if he starts at the gate with the rest of the winners. He needs the advantage of not having a job to be able to devote 100% of his time up front. He then hopes that the majority will be in such an adoration frenzy, they will forget that his platform is built on shifting sand.

[VaLabor]

16. Shifting sand?

Like voting to give Bush a blank check in the Iraq war and then complaining about how the idiot used the check?

[molly]

17. You need to get the facts

[VaLabor]

21. Ready and willing...

I'm ready and willing to get the facts. I don't want to be mistaken about anything or blindly follow any candidate regardless of the facts. So correct me if I need to be corrected. But give me the corrections.

[molly]

23. You can start here....it's about the best I've seen....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=262154

[VaLabor]

24. Okay

Thanks for this link.

But it doesn't change my view of Kerry on the Iraq issue. It's undeniable that he voted for the Senate resolution which gave Bush a free hand in pursuing war. Now he has to nitpick about the way the war is being prosecuted - because his initially principled support for the war makes it impossible for him to engage in a full critique of Bush's foreign policy. The reality is that no matter how that war was prosecuted, the war itself was going to make the world a less safe, not safer, place.

Kerry gets high marks on just about every other issue, and of course I'll support him if he gets the nomination. But only now when the polls are saying that it's safe to criticize the President forcefully on foreign policy, Kerry is finding fault with the war. It's this kind of behavior that loses elections.

The Republicans have taken forceful and principled stances since the 1994 Gingrich days, not nuancing things or hedging their bets one way or another in case the polls might turn favorably or unfavorably for your position. Look where it's gotten them.

We need the same thing from the Democrats - and Dean has been providing it.

[molly]

26. Here ya go....PLEASE read it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=33125

please pay particular attention to....

Bush always had the power to get us into a unilateral invasion of Iraq, with or without a blessing from Congress. As Commander In Chief, he can order the military to go anywhere and do anything, despite Congress’ formal power to declare war. However, because of the War Powers Act passed after Vietnam, Congress has the ability to cut funding from a military action after 2-3 months if they do not
support it.

If Congress does not pass an authorization with limits and conditions on the President’s actions, then the President can wage war and continue to wage war with essentially no restrictions. So the first important point about the IWR is that it was absolutely crucial that such a resolution be passed, outlining the Congress’ goals and limiting Bush’s ability to wage war.

The Senate and the House began drafting separate bills. The House, largely Republican controlled, created a bill which essentially gave Bush free reign to wage war anywhere in the Middle East he wanted to, with few restrictions on cause. The Senate, more evenly divided, eventually came up with the Biden-Lugar bill, which would have been a bit more exacting in geographical restriction and burden of proof than what was actually passed.

[Tinoire]

39. At the risk of having Molly kill me ;) I think you should start here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=10913

and then read this passionate plea from an old DUer:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=322925

Whoever you decide to vote for, I wish you peace and the moral conviction of your choice. There's room for diversity of opinion but there's no room for head-burying or anything other than an informed choice- this election is TOO important.

Molly, before you skin me alive ;) Kerry is currently my number 2 choice (unless Sharpton pulls up) though I am still furious about his Iraq and HS votes.

[polpilot]

33. Sure Kerry voted for the 'Iraqi Bombing Resoultion' but he is opposed

to bombing the sheperds, he understands war because 'he's been there'
but he doesn't mind dropping the bombs he just believes they shouldn't hit the ground and he's for 'winning the war in Iraq' but opposes troops dying. In summary: Stop the War, Increase Troops, Bring the Troops home, Vote for me!!!

Dean '04...

[molly]

34. Please read the previous post - what part of it don't you

understand? There are many here to help.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=322090#322701

Bush always had the power to get us into a unilateral invasion of Iraq, with or without a blessing from Congress. As Commander In Chief, he can order the military to go anywhere and do anything, despite Congress’ formal power to declare war. However, because of the War Powers Act passed after Vietnam, Congress has the ability to cut funding from a military action after 2-3 months if they do not
support it.

If Congress does not pass an authorization with limits and conditions on the President’s actions, then the President can wage war and continue to wage war with essentially no restrictions. So the first important point about the IWR is that it was absolutely crucial that such a resolution be passed, outlining the Congress’ goals and limiting Bush’s ability to wage war.

The Senate and the House began drafting separate bills. The House, largely Republican controlled, created a bill which essentially gave Bush free reign to wage war anywhere in the Middle East he wanted to, with few restrictions on cause. The Senate, more evenly divided, eventually came up with the Biden-Lugar bill, which would have been a bit more exacting in geographical restriction and burden of proof than what was actually passed.

[MercutioATC]

18. Opinions are like...well...let's say bellybuttons...

...everybody has one.


Dean '04

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

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

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

38. What an interesting concept....

Feel safe.
Ashcroft watches over us all.

[Woodstock]

41. I really don't appreciate the invasive image

that you are using, Billy_Pilgrim.

I guess it's Javascript? I don't think code like this should be allowed in the postings. I know DU is getting this info, but I didn't choose to visit danasoft.com (which I was forced to to see what you were up to.) So now they've got my info.

Yes, I know snooping happens all the time. I've got filters to protect me at home. Still, I don't see that adding to the problem is solving it.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

43. It's not invasive...

It's just sending back what you send out to play in internet land. Nothing or no one is getting/gathering info about you with this silly sig line.

see the sig line at: http://www.danasoft.com/

[Woodstock]

44. Invasive

I don't think you can speak with assurance about what information they are gathering on their site (no matter what they say.) I feel like it's invasive, you disagree, but that doesn't change what I feel.

on edit, it does appear to have the potential to be invasive/abused:

I suspected this when I tried to save the "jpg" to find out it was a "png" and found this surfing.

1) the request /vipersig.jpg is internally redirected to something like /vipersig.php per some Apache configuration setting (many possibilities here...)
2) that PHP script creates an image dynamically, see
http://ch.php.net/manual/en/ref.image.php
(probably, it loads a "canvas" from a file)
3) most likely, it writes the text (based on request headers) into the image with something like
http://ch.php.net/manual/en/function.imagettftext.php
4) it sends the image back to the browser in PNG format with
http://ch.php.net/manual/en/function.imagepng.php

And the PHP script could remotely save the browser sniffer information gathered on DU.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

45. Edited by author for being too damn mean.

[Woodstock]

46. No problem, Billy, I'll put you on ignore

You're into your own trip/not trying to see the other side.

on edit,

I've got to change what I said. I told Billy Pilgrim to put the picture back on his sig line and enjoy. After thinking about it, I don't recommend that.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

48. Thanks. I'll put you on my Buddy List.

(there is a mass of code here hidden in the text doing things that you can't imagine.... BWA-HAHAHAHAHA!)

If you have read this it's too late for you! The milk in your fridge is now sour!

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

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

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

51. I'm... I'm sorry, Woodstock. I thought you put me on ignore

and you wouldn't see what I wrote... *sniff*

Golly gee. You weally hurt my feewings.. *sniff*

I tink I'm gonna go cry now... *sniff* *sniff*

Puh-leez don't be angwy wit me, Mr. Luddite.

[TLM]

9. If Clark does enter the race, Dean is STILL IT.

Clark would pull support from Kerry and Graham and Lieberman who have been trying to bank on being the tough on national defense guys.

Clark enters the race and he'll take out Dean's main competition.

I half suspect that Dean and Clark already have a deal going that which ever one wins will pick the other as VP.

[MODemocrat]

37. I sure hope you're right about Clark/Dean/Dean/Clark

That would be a great ticket. Don't think Bush could even come close to holding his own with those two.

[Brian Sweat]

2. Your argument is based on the incorrect assumption

that a significant percentage of Democratic primary voters have made up their minds. This is simply not the case. Most potential Democratic primary voters don't even know who is running yet.

[molly]

3. You are correct - a whopping two-thirds are undecided or

don't even know who the candidates are. We've got a long road ahead and anything can happen.

[Nazgul35]

11. He made reference to the undecideds in the original post...

I have long believed that this will hurt Kerry more than any other candidate. His announcement in front of the aircraft carrier and his continued reliance on his Vietnam record has positioned him as the candidate who has the credentials in this dangerous time....Clark would offer an alternative, which, after seeing him speak a few times, would provide a much more viable alternative than Kerry...

But Kerry does have the connections that Clark doesn't...and I am concerned that Clark has missed three debates now...but you shouldn't brush off those voters in Iowa and NH, who have a much higher recognition of who's running than the rest of the nation...and it is still three-a-half moths away...but what do you think will get the other candidates noticed, their message? It hasn't kicked in yet....

[VaLabor]

14. My argument is not based on that assumption.

Read it again. Undecideds are accounted for, regardless of how many there are.

[Pepperbelly]

29. the problem with your accounting ...

for the undecides is that undecided is the most popular candidate by far. In fact, R&F Democrats aren't paying enough attention yet to even know WHO is running, much less who they actually will end up supporting with their vote.

Saying that Clark will draw some support from the undecides is like saying Bill Gates has a little money.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

4. Please See This Poll, Gauging Candidates' Strength of Support

http://www.draftwesleyclark.com/images/analysis.pdf

Based on this poll, Dean actually comes in below most of the other frontrunners, on the issue of strength of support (a.k.a. loyalty). So you might be operating under a flawed premise.

Disclaimer: I love Dean, and he is my choice if Clark does not enter.

DTH

[VaLabor]

13. You're right

That poll clearly puts Dean's strength of support below most other candidates. But the number of people volunteering for Dean is still astounding. I wonder if "strongly support" means different things for Dean supporters than it does for, say, Edwards supporters. Maybe all 23 or 24 percent of Dean supporters who say they strongly support him are actually also donating money and time to his campaign. It certainly SEEMS that way.

[MercutioATC]

19. You DO realize that it's a poll commissioned by DraftWesleyClark, right?

.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

20. Of Course (eom)

DTH

[molly]

5. P.S. reality is not DU

DU is a very small segment of the general population and most of us have a very personified interest in politics - much unlike the general public. We are not a reflection of the masses.

[Brucey]

6. It's far too soon to know

what will happen in the primaries. Caucus states usually go for the best organized candidates, but the primaries depend on name recognition and advertising, and that means money. Gephardt and Lieberman have name recognition, but who has the money? I have a feeling the Dean will do well in caucuses, but Gephardt and Kerry in primaries. DK could grab a piece of the pie, but won't do well in primaries for lots of reasons. HOWEVER, this is all pure rubbish speculation at this point. Fun to speculate, but when it's over we all have to work hard for whoever the candidate is (and work to see that it's not Joe).

[tsipple]

10. Dean Has Most Money

So would that mean strength for primaries, too?

[molly]

15. Wrong

[tsipple]

22. Right

At this moment in time, Dean has the most money.

Kerry had the most money in the bank on June 30, 2003. Notice that's "had" -- past tense.

[MercutioATC]

25. Not if you take his Senatorial war chest into consideration...

I'm a Dean supporter, but Molly is right in this case. Dean does NOT have the most money at his disposal.

And Dean only comes in above Kerry and Edwards if you count the Q3 estimates. Both were still ahead of Dean after Q2 because they had much better Q1 fundraising.

[tsipple]

28. Kerry Transferred $2M Already

That's already included in the Kerry money count ($2M from his Senate funds).

[MercutioATC]

31. If I'm not mistaken, there's plenty left...

.

[w4rma]

8. "doesn’t eat into Dean’s lead…Dean is the only one who could hold his own"

…
Under the Clinton scenario, Kerry would fall into the second tier of Democratic hopefuls, favored by just 16 percent of voters. All the other Democratic candidates would be relegated to the single digits.

Dean’s support among independent- and reform-minded voters seems intact with or without Clinton in the race while Kerry would find his base of support among traditional Democratic voters threatened, according to Herald pollster R. Kelly Myers.

"If Hillary Clinton suddenly expressed some interest in the race, the biggest potential loser is Kerry," Myers told the Herald. "She doesn’t eat into Dean’s lead at all ... As of today, Dean is the only one who could hold his own (against Clinton)."
…
http://www4.fosters.com/News2003/July2003/July_28/News/reg_pol_0728a.asp

A new Prez Preferece poll
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=190456

Clark V Dean
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=196331

[poskonig]

32. It depends on Gephardt.

If Clark takes 5-10% away from Dean in Iowa, then Gephardt will get 50-100 million dollars of free time after he wins the state. Gephardt will be poised to win Michigan, South Carolina, Oklahoma, and possibly the nomination.

[John_H]

35. Very well thought out post

If clark runs for the nomination, Lieberman's gone in about a month. Just the fact that he won't be arounfd to attack half the party will help Dean--and the party--immensely.

[Julien Sorel]

36. Clark has quite the sharp tongue, even if he uses it in a subtle way.

I have no doubt he would turn it on Dean if need be, and his attacks would likely be far more damaging that Lieberman's clumsy efforts. I'd rather have Lieberman after my ass than Clark.

[diplomats]

42. I think you have a point

I just posted a CNN poll that showed Clark fifth at 10 percent if he joins the field. What's most interesting is that the only top-tier candidate who loses support is Lieberman, who drops from 23 to 13 percent.

[Room101]

40. I agree, I posted about this last week

Clark being military and being against the Iraq war will make Dean look less like an out of the loop Dove to the jingoistic masses.
Ironic considering Dean is not a dove and is in the international loop.

[Larkspur]

47. The problem I have with Clark is that he is not a proven campaigner

He could hurt Lieberman, Kerry, Edwards, and Gephardt, but he could also screw up big time and hurt himself. He has never campaigned before and he is entering the Presidential race late when many political operatives are already committed to other campaigns. Clark is way behind in both fundraising and organization. Against Dean's juggernaut campaign, Clark's campaign won't have a chance. He will have an easier time picking off Graham, Kucinich, Edwards, and Lieberman. Braun will not pick up much steam from her NOW endorsement and will continue to be marginalized in the media. Gephardt has strong labor ties that will keep him in the race to Iowa. Kerry will still be formidable, but will have a harder time justifying his vote for the Iraq War resolution, and he will be more frustrated that Dean and Clark will be getting more of the media attention.

Clark has no elected political office experience, so his domestic policy side would be very weak. In this regard, he is the opposite of Dean, who is considered weak on defense. Also how would he handle the growing deficit, create jobs, and pacify Iraq? Dean has a solid history of governing in a similar situation in Vermont. Dean was able to guide a state from fiscal crisis to health and achieve social justice goals. Clark doesn't have that kind of history.

And while foreign policy is important for a president, most of our presidents have had to learn it on the job or during the campaign. That is what aides or experts are for. Dean has talked with Clark already about foreign policy stuff as well as with other experts. He has definitely made big improvements in that field. So I don't see Clark hurting Dean's campaign much, but Clark will give credence to Dean's anti-Iraq War stand and Dean will look brave in hindsight by newcomers to the Dem Primary race for taking that stand.

[Larkspur]

50. Another difference between Dean and Clark is

that Dean works tirelessly on his campaign. Clark is still hedging his bets.

Dean gives me the impression with his workaholic schedule and innovative thinking that he is willing to fight for John and Jane Q Public because he is going out of his way to attend as many events as possible to get his message out to them. In a sense, Dean is willing to work for every vote.

Clark has an aristocratic aire about him that makes me think he'll treat the public as generals do privates in a battle. He'll expect John and Jane Q Public to support him because he is a general, Rhodes scholar, etc., not because he will work for our support. Will Clark be willing to attend events where he will have to interact with John and Jane Q Public?

Unlike other Dean supporters, I'm not impressed with Clark. I find him more of a snob than a political leader of the people, and that's fine in a person who will be an expert in an administration, but not in a candidate I want representing me.

[CoffeePlease1947]

52. You got it backwards

Clark is the one that worked for every damn thing he has in his life. He was not handed anything in his life. He didn't even have a father. He earned every degree he got, every rank, every title, every award, every thing he had he earned with hard work and dedication to succeeding and coming in first. Dean was born rich to a previlaged family and handed everything to him up until now. Dean is only doing well because he has a brilliant campaign manager and a butt load of money.

Mike

[Larkspur]

53. Dean didn't have everything handed to him

He entered medical school on his own choice and wanted to accomplish something on his own merits. He did.

Yes, he comes from a priviledge background, but those with more have a greater responsibility than those that don't. Unlike Bush, Dean chose a path that served people. First as a doctor, where he helped people one-on-one, and then in politics, where he could help larger numbers of people.

My problem with Clark is how much of his military background shapes his logic and people relations skill? Military people, especially generals, prefer order and authroity over the unordered and freeform ways of most civilians. As a doctor, Dean developed or enhanced an empathy with the common person. Clark is a brilliant expert in military affairs, but he hasn't shown me that he is willing to attend ice cream socials and other low key events to win the support of the average American voter. Dean came from wealth, but he relates well to those who didn't come from wealth. Dean fits in well at those ice cream socials. Clark fits well in a CNN studio. Can the general step out of the studio and into a common person's world?

[Zolok]

54. Joshua Marshall makes an interesting point

If Clark gets in how then does Dean criticize the General having spent part of last week trying to entice into the Vice Presidency.
I think Dean is scared of Clark and aware his own momentum is an ephemeral thing....
But I could be wrong.

www.chimesatmidnight.blogspot.com

[Larkspur]

55. I think Dean was explaining the facts of Prez Campaign life to Clark

Remember Clark has never campaigned civilians for a political office before.

When Dean supposedly said that his supporters do not automatically transfer to the winning nominee, if it's not Dean, he was telling Clark that civilian voters are not privates in an army, who are required to obey whatever officer the military puts in charge over them. In civilian life, political candidates have to win voters support, not expect it just because they were generals once upon a time. And if Dean fails to win the nomination, the winning nominee can not expect the enthusiasm of Dean supporters to automatically transfer to the winning nominee. He/she will have to earn it. We may vote for the non-Dean winning nominee, but that does not mean that we will fiercely defend that nominee, like we have Dean.

If Clark really was popular, he would have entered the race a long time ago. His delay only makes it harder for his potential campaign to succeed. The longer Clark delays, the more I think that the stars are not lining up for Clark and he knows it.