Clark campaign kicked off by complete weasely asshole move

[Bombtrack]

before about 2 hours ago I didn't have a real bad thing to say about Clark, but what he or his handlers did today was beyond selfish.

They chose, out of this entire year, to burst there story on to the scene, not just in the same month, or week, or day, but within 10 minutes of when John Edwards was scheduled to formally announce his candidacy and perhaps pick up a microbe of the free press saturation that Dean, or Dean vs. Kerry, or Clark, or Arnold for that matter has been getting.

So instead of actually hearing Elizabeth Edwards introduce her husband, instead it was talked over on the cable channels by a lengthy discussion about the general, information that anyone who had been watching the news in the last few weeks knew anyway.

Edwards has been getting a raw deal in the media, particularly cable, and the Clark campaign just couldn't help themselves from, or just not care if they do, reduce his anouncement to page 19.

unbelievable

[Racenut20]

1. Why not tell us

How you really feel?

[tjdee]

2. I don't think it was Clark.

I think it was bigmouth who obviously had access, but Clark has no reason to mjove in like that, unless he's a major asshole.

I've not seen any evidence that is the case.

From what I've heard, it's "sources" say he's in. This is further speculation from his gathering people to meet. There's no way for him to have done that without making news.

Today, looks to me like someone was trying to make hot news and in the media ho excitement to do that, Edwards got lost in the shuffle.

I will be interested to see what Clark has to say for himself this afternoon, as he's on with Woodruff again.

[TLM]

55. Isn't major asshole the rank one holds before being a general?

Come on, of course this was a political move and it was a smart one.

Dean and Clark are taking out all the other dems.

Either Dean or Clark will win the nomination, and tap the other for VP.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

60. Misunderestimate your opponents

at your own peril...:hi:

[Blue Adept]

3. Edwards announced monday night

On the Daily Show, due to a promise made to Stewart some time back. So he was already announced.

[CMT]

4. I have to agree

with you on this. I think the Clark people could have handled this better--at least waited until after Edwards made his formal entry--or even waited until tomorrow. Edwards deserved his moment in the sun.

[PurityOfEssence]

19. Hard to tell, but thanks for saying that...

It could easily be media creeps deliberately trying to score a double hit: screw Edwards out of the moment and make Clark look like a creep. I have yet to hear any of the genesis of this little faux-pas, but I would be sincerly shocked were Clark to have had a hand in it. Whether it was one of his people is another question.

As far as I can tell, Clark's a well-meaning guy, but that's admittedly based on scant information.

My paranoia has always been more from the skewed media: they've sandbagged and mostly ignored Edwards from the beginning; this would fit the pattern.

Gotta say, though: it's mighty frustrating; our guy just can't get a break.

I've been a bit rough on you for a couple of things of late--and they're not resolved, as far as I know--but you were right on this, and thanks for stepping forward to mention it.

[WoodrowFan]

5. If Edwards can't get enough attention on his own...

:nopity:

Counter-scheduling an announcement is child's play compared to what Rove and his gangsters would/will plan. If Edwards can't handle THIS, he can't handle the repubs in the Fall of 2004.

[msmcghee]

48. Good observation.

Scheduling a press event to interfere with a dem public announcement is probably the mildest form of treatment we can expect from Rove et al. Edwards (his media folks) should have contemplated this and had a backup plan.

[WoodrowFan]

75. Thanks, and I am not convinced it was planned

Thanks, and I'm not convinced it was planned by Clark or anybody in his campaign. I thought Edwards announcement was page 5 news anyway, at least anywhere outside NC. Edwards has been openly runnign for months. I suspect the press simply ran with what seemed like a 'hotter' story.

[Starpass]

6. Wake up and see what's going on in the news right now

by tomorrow EVERYTHING is going to be the hurricane. He had to get this message out now. They are already doing so many pieces on the hurricane that by this afternoon, God could announce and no one will cover it.

[phillybri]

15. Dead-on....He had to get word out before Isabel hit....

Wake up, people!

[MidwestTransplant]

21. Exactly....

I have been worried about this exact thing since last week.

[calimary]

44. That is undoubtedly why he announced today.

The hurricane will bigfoot everything. I used to be in the news business. This is what happens. BESIDES, Edwards was already running. That he "announced" today was as much of a non news story as when Kerry "re-announced." Wesley Clark was a bigger story, especially since it had quite a build-up, lots of momentum, and he's a "sexy" candidate (in terms of news appeal, not just how he looks). Besides, Wesley Clark was not in the race before. Edwards, and Kerry and Dean and Gephardt and everybody else was already prominently in the race.

It wasn't vindictive at all. It was to beat the hurricane coverage.

on edit -

By the way, I hope I didn't sound cavalier about it. I'm sorry Edwards had to get big-footed. He seems like a pretty okay guy. And he's young. He has miles and miles ahead of him. I think this was unintentional on the part of the Clark people. On the other hand, if bush/Rove did it, it would be ANYTHING BUT unintentional. EVERYTHING they do is calculated, and in the most mean-spirited way.

[uptohere]

7. its particularly trashy given that they had said they would go Thursday

but who wants to compete with a hurricane and then theres the bonus of pissing on a "fellow dem". Clark is a snake. Maybe he's more of a pol than I gave him credit for...

[Eloriel]

33. ANd, not only that, but I just turned on the TV

And from what I heard, Clark was announcing that he'd be announcing -- tomorrow.

NOT classy. Not at all. ANd yes, I do think it goes to his character, which is looking a little tarnished right now.

Eloriel

[dave29]

57. I like Clark, but this reminds me of the Green party at Dean's Anncmt.

I agree this was uncool. Edwards deserved his moment. No matter whether there was a hurricane or not.

Reminds me of the Green party guy at the Dean announcement. That seriously pissed me off.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

62. Eloriel....

on this one...... we agree!

[mkregel]

8. Please....

ANYONE BUT BUSH. If Clark can unseat Bush, then SO BE IT!!!!

I'm a Dean man myself (Edwards was always second for me tho) but if we had a Clark/Dean or Dean/Clark ticket Bush would be history.

[PA-DEM]

9. oh come on

Any time you participate in a Presidential debate you have already declared you are running. For all of these candidates who have already participated in these debates to keep on announcing is silly to begin with.

[Catherine Vincent]

25. That's how I feel.

There are nine guys running but not officially? How silly.

[LTR]

10. Big deal...

John Edards 'formally' announcing his candidacy is a non-story. Hsn't he been campaigning heavily for the past few months?

And Kerry formally announced a couple weeks ago.

Of course, Clark gets shredded on this board for 'not being an official candidate'.

Huh?

Welcome to the race, General Clark!

[dave29]

66. Then why should Clark's formal anncmt be a big deal

he should just show up at the debates

[robsul82]

11. 'TWAS better weaselly...

...I'm a Dean guy, I dig Clark, but I also dig John Edwards. I just don't think the Clarkites realize how much Rove's going to pounce on "you've never been elected to ANYTHING before!" and ram it down the people's throats via the media, I just don't.

Later.

RJS

[Richardo]

17. the comeback to that is: "Neither was Ike - next?"

[TLM]

58. Yeah but the average american is not going to know who Ike is...

they'll be thinking... was Ike Turnner ever elected to anything?

[Clark Can WIN]

52. So what, Bush was only elected to one office

paper mache governor of Texas.

I don't really see many people caring about elective office under the belt as opposed to leadership ability.

Non-politician could be a big plus for a lot of people.

[Pastiche423]

12. To those of you

that know how I feel about Edwards, this may come as a bit of a shock. I agree w/Bombtrack.

I also believe this is a sign of things to come regarding clark. That is not "a good thing".

[PurityOfEssence]

I cannot properly express my affection for this remark

Having tangled with you on the subject many times, and understanding--as well as a biped can--your perspective on this, that was a truly honorable thing to say. I'm torn about this, but it will be interesting to see how Clark handles it; whether asked or not, he should address the issue. If he doesn't address it, it will be a serious failing in my book: he's either un- or semi-scrupulous, or tone-deaf.

Ceremony is important. Politeness is important. One of the problems I have with military and business types is that their world is one of mandated control in clearly defined power structures. That ain't politics. You can issue orders all you want as a politician, and even republibots won't necessarily obey you. Diplomacy, negotiation, engagement are all huge elements of statesmanship. As you're aware, I'm very charged up on Edwards for just these traits--I won't irritate by too much praise here--and I'm frustrated at Dean for the lack of them. We need a healer for the world come next November. Whoever we rally behind needs to apologize to the entire world and go out to bridge the divides we've made and made worse. Heavy-handed tactics are destructive.

There are ethics and morality that still need to be in play in a rough pursuit like politics; the measure of a person is by how he/she does in both the joyous times and in times of adversity. Geez, this guy just can't get a break. (I've never been a sports fan, but I can feel for the ones whose teams are star-crossed...)

The tone-deafness issue is something I keep harkening back to, because our administration has that in spades. Junior does an Earth Day event ('02) dressed up like a lumberjack and with an ax over his shoulder. They use the term "compassionate conservative", when it's not only an oxymoron, it shows that the essence of conservatism is selfish and brutally cold. They use the term "jobless recovery", presumably to soothe the investors, who are the only ones about whom they truly care. They have spat dictates and demands at the rest of the world and bellyache that few will fall into line as our willing slaves. With a history of not allowing our own troops to be under foreign control, we demand the same. Let's not even talk about all the treaties they've either broken or blocked. And on and on and on. I don't want this kind of imperious unawareness to be our norm.

Once again, thanks for the comments; we'll see how it all sorts out.

[Pastiche423]

86. You are most welcome

I call it traditional, political courtesy. There has always been infighting amongst the candidates during the campaigns and there always will be.

In times past, each candidate has allowed other candidates their shining moment when they announce. It was known that Edwards would announce today, no secret there.

Whether it was the media or over zealous supporters, clark should have made it known that he did not support an announcement of his run on the very day Edwards did.

If he has made a comment and I missed it, that is a point for him. If he hasn't, it shows he has no control, is a prima donna, and cares only for his spotlight, not for the good of America.

P.S. Thank you for the biped comment. Some may not understand, but I appreciate the acknowledgement and the consideration of my feelings.

[Clark Can WIN]

56. to those of us who know how you feel about Clark

It is old news. I just wondered what took you so long to climb on this wagon.

[tokenlib]

13. Blame the media, not the Clark people...

The Clark people do not make the decisions for the media. I was pissed too at how CNN and MSNBC almost in lockstep cut away from the Edwards announcement. It is rude not to carry an entire announcement speech. But the news networks have done this before--and they will do it again. If they didn't have Clark to talk about, they would have found another excuse to cut away.

[Gloria]

20. Jeez, they cut away from Gore the minute he opens his mouth,

if they even get that far....his speeches have been ignored except for some choice clips they can use against him...

Edwards has been running for months....announced he wasn't running for Senate, why the hell didn't he do his announcement then??? They knew all this stuff with Clark was going to come to a head sometime around now...

I like Edwards, but I don't think his campaign handled it as well as they could have either.

On the other had, I've been more than a little bugged by the little Clark game over the past couple of months. He should have limited his visits to cable, made up his friggin' mind, and been at the Steak Fry and all the other Harkin forums.....

[blm]

14. It's pathetic. The media will NOT cover substance AT ALL!

They gave all the oxygen to Dean for most of the year, while ripping at Kerry the whole time ala Gore. They ignored Edwards, Kucinich, Graham and Gephardt, and treated Braun and Sharpton as amusing side stories.

[dsc]

22. How many times

have we seen Dean blamed for every story that quotes sources close to him or meetings he has attended. Now it is everyone but Clark's fault that this happened. It would be nice to see the same standards applied but that is way, way, way too much to ask evidently.

[Cha]

29. Dean is the man! And he's going to continue to get "oxygen"

because he makes Oxygen! And it's very very Fresh, too! :-)

[PurityOfEssence]

45. Enough already

Do you mind if we grieve a bit? Jesus fucking christ, must you people own the entire world? Let's just declare the place Deanville and be done with it.

Admittedly, blm brought it up, but this is ridiculous. Try to show some respect for others in their time of frustration.

deandeandeandeandeandeandeandeandeandean

And you guys wonder why you get heat. Can't you spend you time starting another few dozen other Dean threads? This was to have been a big day for the Edwards camp; now it's devolving into wound-licking, anger and frustration--all of which are JUSTIFIABLE, I might add--so let us at least have a moment to ourselves in our rained-out parade and take your bandwagon superiority-of-the-validated-majority and skip merrily off to some meet up somewhere, okay?

[TLM]

64. Oh come on... be honest. It isn't exactly a long fall for Edwards.

Edwards has not been doing well for the whole campaign.

Did you really think this announcment would suddenly change everything?

[PurityOfEssence]

74. That's despicable

So a guy's a little weak, that's reason to dispense with all morality? That's Republican thinking: some people (successful ones) are to be treated with respect, while nobodies are fair game.

It's a question of fairplay.

Whether his announcement is a movie moment that has crowds pouring out into the streets is not an issue; this is a question of manners and decency.

[Vis Numar]

82. Clark is the leak himself

Clark leaked his meeting with Gov Dean himself, he has too many friends that talk.

[TLM]

68. Sorry but I think Clark is substance...

And the fact is that the media has been following the guys who the people have shown the most interest in, namely Dean and Clark.


You want more media attention, then do something worthy of attention. Simply wanting to be president is not enough.

[RetroLounge]

16. Clark campaign kicked off by complete weasely asshole move

by the media...

You're fighting the wrong fight, if you're not fighting the Media...

[DoveTurnedHawk]

18. I Don't Think This Was Clark's Fault, BUT

Whenever you pull one of these "official announcement" stunts, you are in effect taking a big risk. The fact that you've already made your intentions clear make it so that the media views this as "hardly news." Accordingly, you run the risk that ANY big story will knock you off of the front page, which in turn potentially makes you look weak.

In my view, Edwards actually got a BOOST from this story, because otherwise he would have been behind Isabel and potentially other stories today. As it is, he is mentioned in connection with Clark at the front of the news, and higher in people's minds than if he had been backchannelled.

Besides, Edwards also announced last night, and many months ago.

DTH

[Bombtrack]

27. You people are really reaching, a Boost?

oh, Edwards should be so lucky to be mentioned in todays Clark articles.

I never said Clark made this call. But I really doubt it didn't originate from his campaign. They made the decision to leak TODAY. At 10:30? Who knows, but that's when it happened.

This is what is done in presidential politics. Speeches, followed by announcement of exploratory committee, followed by debates, fundraising, followed by formal announcement.

Gephardt, Leiberman, Kerry, and Dean have all done it all. This was Edwards turn.

Clark, or the Clark team, didn't care.

[LTR]

32. CNN just had something about it

Quick sound byte about Edwards.

Would anyone have even paid attention otherwise?

Plus, Clark's officially announcing tomorrow.

To reiterate what I posted elsewhere, Edwards has been running for awhile. He's been to all the debates and events. He's been making speeches. I thought he had already declared. Excuse Gen. Clark for announcing inside the six months or so that Edwards took to finally make the official announcement.

The timing is mere coincidence, no matter how much spin the Clark-haters put on it.

Finally, these guys are still being upstaged by Isabel and the California recall. So there!

[Eloriel]

39. IT's real cheesy of the Clark campaign to have done it, but

it's even cheesier for people to be dismissing it and trying to explain it. It was PURPOSEFUL on SOMEOne's part, and the reason was to steal some thunder from Edwards.

I'm not an Edwards supporter, but I'd be mad as hell if I were. Clark is announing TOMORROW. There is absolutely no reason to have done this little publicity stunt except to steal some thunder.

Shame, shame, shame.

Very disappointing. I can't wait to see what doublecross he (or his campaign)has got lined up for Dean.

Eloriel

[DoveTurnedHawk]

42. Please Stop Being So Divisive

It's really very clear what you're trying to do.

:eyes:

DTH

[PurityOfEssence]

51. Thank you for that

I'd like to think his camp had nothing to do with it; at this point I haven't heard any direct link. It's easily explainable as a Rovian move by the right or a sneaky plant by the divisive media.

My take is more to rail at the universe at this point than at Clark or his people, but we'll see: if he makes no comment--whether asked or not--then he's either clueless, a weasel or lily-livered.

Once again, especially from your strong affiliation, this is a welcome moment of cameraderie amid a tempest of frustration.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

43. Just My Belief

I don't think this was orchestrated.

Also, NPR's story order was: Clark, Edwards, Hurricane. If Clark hadn't announced, I feel quite confident it'd be Hurricane, maybe another story or two, and Edwards.

Obviously just my opinion, though.

DTH

[flpoljunkie]

67. Here's Your Leaker, Mark Fabiani, partner to Chris Lahane.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/16/politics/16CND-DEMS.html?hp

Mark Fabiani, a California strategist and adviser to General Clark, confirmed that "he's made his decision and will announce it tomorrow" in Little Rock, the general's hometown, but Mr. Fabiani would not say what the decision would be.

The news from General Clark's camp came as Senator John Edwards of North Carolina was trying to energize his own campaign by formally announcing his run for
president.

(Mark Fabiani previously worked for Al Gore in his 2000 campaign.)

[PurityOfEssence]

76. He's got some 'splainin' to do...

He should have known better.

[TLM]

72. Edwards' turn?

Damn maybe everybody should have agreed to only cover Edwards today since it was his turn to get media coverage.

Sorry but that's not how it works. You get coverage by having the most people interested in you or doing somethign that people want to see.

Edwards announcing now wasn't news. It was stupid, since he's already been in the debates. We know he is running.

[quinnox]

23. Strange timing by Clark campaign

I agree it was poor timing, Edwards announcement date has been known for weeks, and Clark chooses this week? Clark could have announced last week with no conflicting attention.

[AP]

24. Another way to look at it: it tells you who Clark thinks is his biggest

competition.

I agree that there are many attempts by the media to prevent Edwards from gaining access to the public conscience. He gets no free publicitly.

Clark definitely was trying to steal some of Edwards's thunder (in the same way that Dean tried to steal Clark's thunder last week by trying to make it seem like Clark seriously considered being Dean's VP -- which tells you whom Dean thinks threatens his candidacy the most at this stage).

The thing about trying to cut off Edwards from the public is that you can't do it forever. Edwards has a very coherent, logical and powerful meta-message which takes root in the minds of people who hear it. That Edwards has to rely more on retail campaigning one on one, and less on wholesale campaigning at this stage, doesn't mean that the media can shut him out forever.

I'm sure that Edwards will make it to the final four (along with Kerry, Clark, and Dean). When he's guaranteed 25% of the coverage, I think he'll start to soar -- especially in that group of four. Among those four, he has the best message, I think. Kerry, Clark and Dean are going to be fighting over the national security question and will leave the economy issues for Edwards to clearly attach himself to. If half of Democrats feel that the economy is more important than national security and foreign policy (which is probably a conservative estimate), they're all going to flock to Edwards, while the other three fight over the other 50%.

[Sagan]

26. Who didn't know Edwards was running?

I like Edwards, but he shouldn't have waited this long to announce. In effect, he announced a long time ago. He has been attending debates, going to NH and Iowa, etc.

[Bombtrack]

28. So had Kerry, Dean, Gephardt, and Leiberman respectively

when they did the same thing after debates, fundraising etc.

how can you possibly say that the practice of formally announcing, however silly, is in some way an excuse for what Clark did. He could have done it any other time.

that's right it's no excuse.

he and/or they should be ashamed

[Sagan]

31. I just think it's a tempest in a teacup..

Everyone knew Edwards was running. How dramatic could the announcement be?

People wondered about Clark, hence the media melodrama.

It really makes no difference. I'm an ABB man, but Edwards is in my top 4 choices. I like him. LOVE him for the VP slot.

[Bombtrack]

38. Under who? I'd really like to friggin know

Edwards does not make political sense as a vp for any of the other potential candidates. He is the perfect candidate to take on Bush and the only official candidate who doesn't come in as a longshot for 270 electoral votes.

He is the right man to take on George W. Bush. Because he is everything Bush's PR people want Bush to appear to be.

He is not and will never be a logical choice for Kerry or Dean, or Clark.

Cheney got the job done for Bush, any number of experienced dems(Kerry, Graham, Clark etc) could get the gravitas job done for Edwards, and some.

[Sagan]

50. sorry, I don't get into flame wars about Dem candidates..

I like Edwards. You'll have to accept that I don't revere him as God.

I think several candidates have equally compelling match-ups with the Chimp. If you want to back Edwards as an all-or-nothing proposition, it is certainly your right to do so.

I have no intention of arguing about it.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

46. You've Already Admitted That You Don't Know CLARK Did Anything

I don't think he did, either.

DTH

[HPLeft]

30. How stupid do these candidates think we are...

Look, Edwards, Kerry and every one of them, except Clark, have been running for months. These announcements, including my guy's announcement, are nothing but publicity stunts.

[indigo32]

35. I dunno

it's still free publicity that he needed... and that the others got. I'm not sure if Clark is to blame or not though... I would lay at least 1/2 in the medias lap. They love anything they can do to tear our candidates down... including creating bitterness between the camps, ala Dean Kerry baiting.

[AP]

36. Is this the first presidential election to which you've paid attention

The announcement is very ceremonial, and the candidates generally let the other candidates have their moment UNLESS they're afraid of them.

[HPLeft]

41. My bottom line is...

...that this kind of facade is so emblematic of why Americans often distrust politicans. I'm not suggesting that Clark should have stepped on Edwards' moment. That wasn't my point at all. I am suggesting that having candidates appear in Presidential Debates and Forums all through the spring, each telling audiences that "I'm running for president" (using those specific words), and then formally announcing their candidacy months later, contributes to the huge credibility gap that leads many people to avoid participation in the electoral process.

[AP]

49. If that were true, they wouldn't do this.

And it isn't true. Millions of dollars and tons of talent and genius go into managing (some) of these campaigns. Do you think that all that genius would have missed something that you've picked up upon?

And the fact is, the surveys all show that 60 to 70% or more of voters either haven't picked a candidtate or don't know who's running at this point. These announcements aren't geared at you, they're geared at some of those people.

[HPLeft]

65. An Example

I'm watching Kerry on the CBS Morning Show the other day, being interviewed by Harry Smith. Smith seriously asks him if the fact that Kerry took so long to "announce" was the reason that he trailed Dean so badly. Smith is clearly an idiot, but the kind of disconnect between reality and the illusion that these campaigns are looking to create is so typical of everything else that is happening in our world today. Just consider the way the Bush Administration has completely fooled 70% of Americans into believing in Iraqi involvement in 9/11. Illusion is completely obscuring the simple truth in so many ways - and in this instance, it's so unnecessary. These candidates should just come up with a new excuse for a big campaign event. Be creative but tell the truth.

[DealsGapRider]

34. I think you make a fair point.

Hadn't thought of it that way, but you're right. Not a very classy move.

[msmcghee]

54. I've never managed a campaign . .

. . but I suspect there is great pressure to get the most mileage out of the limited funds available. The candidate that shows that his team has this figured out and knows how to use every trick is probably a better bet to send out aginst *Bush's 200 million in campaign war chest. We need every advantage we can muster - and then some.

I give Clark credit for this (if it was done purposely). His job is to beat Edwards in the primary after all.

Maybe Edwards' team will get stung by this and come out a bit smarter - and better able to help him get his message out.

[davsand]

77. Exactly! They call it a race for a reason!

I'm not anti-Clark. I'm not anti-Edwards. I'm somebody who has done some strategy work politically, and I can tell you that media use is a BIG deal. It totally sucks for Edwards, but it does give Clark more free media time. He "outmanuvered" Edwards with this leak, and as a result he cut into the air time Edwards will get from his announcement.

It is a primary race and that means somebody has to win it. Nobody gets into a race to be "nice" or to be a good guy. You get into a race because you want to win. You sure don't spend money at that level just to drink tea and hang out... Make no mistake, these guys are serious and they'd probably sell off a kidney to be sure of winning.

I am NOT advocating mud slinging or negative campaigns. What I'm talking about is strategic use of media hits and making the most of your 60 second sound bite.

Frankly, I'd be worried about any candidate who didn't understand the necessity of working the media as much as possible. Knocking off the chimp in the General election will not be an easy job to begin with, and every bit of stratgey will have to be applied.

My guess is that it was a calculated "leak" and a calculated response.

Laura

[alfredo]

37. As i remember, this was a date mentioned by Clark. He had a speech

scheduled for today. He had hinted that he would announce yea or nay at that time.

I watch Edwards announce last night. Liked it very much. I wouldn't mind a ticket of Edwards and Clark. Clark the front man, Edwards doing the Gore thing by doing the nuts and bolts government work. Edwards intelligence and humor would be a real asset in either the number one or number two on the ticket.

This might seem shallow, but it isn't, my wife thinks both are hunks. She also thought that of Clinton and Gore. Much better than the smirking chimp and the leering shark.

edited for speling.

[Bombtrack]

40. actually it was the 19th

and whatever way you want to spin it, he could have chosen a half-hour that didn't correspond exactly to the announcement.

[Jackhammer Jesus]

63. Not the 19th...

He had a speech the 19th but was going to announce his candidacy - guess when - TOMORROW, in Arkansas. So all's gone according to plan in that regard.

And what's more, he DID "choose a half hour that didn't correspond exactly to the announcement." Edwards' event began within a half hour of the news about Clark, but it was about an hour before Edwards himself spoke - and parts of that speech WERE shown on cable news (they wouldn't show the whole thing - they'd cut out of it no matter what, it just happened that Clark was the hot topic at the time). Anyone looking for coverage of Edwards could turn on C-SPAN and see his entire event without having to worry about any Clark-related interruptions.

Besides, it's not up to Clark OR Edwards who gets coverage on cable news. Don't get all sour just because Clark's hype beat out Edwards' today.

[calimary]

61. Your wife has a point.

And you do, too. It's shallow. BUT: it IS the way a lot of voters think. I remember how many people didn't vote for Nixon - NOT because of his record or how he handled himself, but because of that five o'clock shadow and those eyes and eyebrows, they thought he LOOKED shifty. Later on, Richard Gephardt actually lost votes because some people complained that he had NO EYEBROWS. I am not kidding.

Unfortunately, in this day and age, if you're not telegenic, you're not a viable candidate. It's wrong. It's not a bit fair. It's stupid. It's insulting. It's shallow as hell. And it's the absolute, unrefutable truth. It's why, for all his merits, Dennis Kucinich doesn't have a chance (and I like quite a bit of what he has to say). It may be why Kerry hasn't completely caught fire. Why do you think Ann Coulter has gotten as far as she has? The minute the rightwing got wise to not having many women speaking for them, and saw her, they figured they'd hit the jackpot. Wouldn't even have mattered what she said or how she said it. She looked good.

TV makes your looks an essential and extremely significant component to your success. If you're good-looking, you have an edge like nobody's business. I even have heard, heaven forbid, of somebody's wingnut grandma (a post here on DU, in fact) where the old lady said "there's my handsome George" when The First Dog Dropper appeared on her TV.

Looks are everything. And it's good that we've got some hunky guys on our side. We need all the strong cards to play that we can get.

FACE cards, that is.

edited for grammar

[Clark Can WIN]

47. When you show up for the debates

Isn't it pretty safe to assume you've "announced"? Edwards is an excellent man, but he's been campaigning for NINE MONTHS now and gotten almost nowhere. I don't think you can blame "the media". For whatever reason, he hasn't really caught people on fire this go around. Maybe next time.

[roughsatori]

53. it reinforces the "Clark is a spoiler" message

That he will enter hyped to the hilt--but spoil any real chance the Democratic Party now has of winning.

[Julien Sorel]

70. And how, pray tell, will that happen?

[roughsatori]

84. by losing the more progressive base of the party

I know Clark supporters promote him as so progressive but I don't see it. I read all the links and get vague positioning. On health-care I know he has said: forget it, we can't afford it now. That may be good enough for you--it is not for me.

Notice moderates love him. That is great. But do you really think Republican swing voters will abandon their party? I don't.

I will vote for Clark if he wins the nomination. But I have to be honest, I don't think he can win the election.

A good definition of a spoiler would be someone winning a primary who can not win the election. I hope I am wrong. But Clark supporters have trumped Dean supporters in attacking any questions regarding their man.

BTW: I am not the only one, I receive PMs from members who feel the same way but are waiting to see......

[jumptheshadow]

59. One possible scenario

Or this could have happened:

A political reporter was on the phone with a "high political source" doing background work about the Democratic candidates. The source says, "Oh, by the way, word is that Clark is in."

With half a dozen or more Dem movers and shakers meeting in Little Rock, isn't it plausible that somebody told Democratic leaders what was happening there?

Who knows, this *could* be a Clark leak. Or it could be one of many Democratic politicos, senators or, for that matter, ex-presidents who had inside information and was considered a good source by a reporter.

[retyred]

69. This was not Clark

or his campaign, this was the Arkansas Democratic Party chairman and the media.

I had said here on Sunday night after our draft Clark meeting that Clark would announce on Wednesday, the media picked up on it and trounced on Edwards.

< Ron Oliver, the Arkansas Democratic Party chairman, told Reuters Clark met with about 75 to 100 local activists and national party figures in Little Rock on Tuesday.


Oliver cited Clark as telling the group, "I think this crowd is going to like the announcement tomorrow." http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&ncid=578&e=2&u=/nm/20030916/ts_nm/politics_clark_dc>

There is also a reason both Edwards and Clark waited till the 15th or after to announce, so to announce officially before then by either would/could have hurt their chances.

If your candidate can't take the heat from within his own party, he surely won't stand to the pressure of the repugs.


Retyred IN FLA.

[CentristDemocrat]

71. This might be the dumbest thread ever (nm)

[Myra]

81. Agreed

Geez, when Clark was in the process of deciding
and gauging support, he got criticized
on these boards for being coy.

The fact is he's a great candidate to have in
the mix. He might actually have what it takes...

I think I have more interest in toppling an
illegitimate fascist regime than I have in this
thread.

[Starpass]

73. Unwad your undies----latest update

Been watching CNN and MSNBC for about 2 hours now. They are covering several times an hour Edwards event. They show clips and sound bites. The ticker simply says that two Democrats announce: Edwards today and Clark tomorrow. So this is all fuss about nothing.

[PurityOfEssence]

78. That's ridiculous and immoral

A guy throws a brick at your head, you duck, and only wrench your back a little. No big deal. Hugs and kisses. Joy and light.

When somebody tries to fuck you, the fact that he was only partially successful doesn't absolve him of TRYING TO FUCK YOU. This Mark Fabiani needs to do some public dancing, and so does Clark or this is pure shitheadedness.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

79. Thanks for Keeping It Real, Starpass!

:-)

DTH

[DoveTurnedHawk]

80. Thanks for Keeping It Real, Starpass!

:-)

DTH

[Rowdyboy]

83. Edwards is running for President?

I had no idea...

This entire thread is much ado about nothing. I hope Edwards catches on. He's a good guy and I like his chances. But the whole idea that this is some sort of "plot" to "get" Edwards is simply absurd. You get the press coverage you have earned. So far in this race Edwards hasn't gotten (or earned) much coverage.

This "announcement" of his should not require all other Democrats to sit down and shut up. It's quite alright to dislike Clark but please do so for reasons of policy, not this silly crap.

[returnable]

85. The irony...

...of course, is that Edwards' supporters are focusing all their attention on this issue instead of using this day to help spread their candidate's message.

If you really think the Clark team leaked this story to subvert your candidate's alleged momentum, guess what? You're playing right along.

[okieinpain]

87. cool, one down and 8 to go. edwards knows he does not have

a chance. he should be working on his senate run.