Are all of the pundits and experts just full of it? I hope so...

[kerry-is-my-prez]

Please tell me that is the case because I'm very depressed after hearing what they've been saying. Are even the Democratic pundits really secretly rooting for the Republicans?

First, they all say (Reps and Dems alike) that Clark (my #1 choice) has NO chance of winning the Dem nomination. Never mind that he is leading or in only one or two points behind Dean in the National polls and is 7 points ahead in the S Carolina primary. THIS despite not having even run any ads or having spent any money.

They all say that the race is between Kerry, Gephardt and Dean and even Edwards. I have only seen 1 article that says that Clark could win it:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56352-2003Nov3.html
"We now have polls showing Clark in the lead in South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, California, Illinois (among those closely following the race), Wisconsin and nationwide. He's in second place in Arizona and third in New York, where Dean leads."

"It's hard not to draw the conclusion from these state polls that Clark is the only one of the candidates banking on making his first strong showing in the Feb. 3 and later primary states who currently looks well positioned to do so, even if he does not yet have state infrastructures and boots on the ground."


NEXT....

I hear all of them say that Dean (my #2 choice) is going to run away with it and that no-one can possibly catch him. BUT he has no chance of beating Bush. Stu Rothenberg (Independent) and many other experts are saying that Dean will be a disaster. Not only will he lose against Bush but he will cause us to lose all kinds of seats in Congress. Also, according to Rothenberg, the war in Iraq will not be that big a factor (which means that EVERY Dem is now screwed).

THEN I hear that Kerry (my #3) is toast and that there is no way he can win.

Gephardt and Edwards (tied for my #4 spot) are also hopeless. Gephardt is just "washed up and old" and Edwards is in the same boat as Clark either no-one even mentions him as being in the running or they say he has no chance of winning the nomination.

And I won't even bother mentioning Kucinich (who I also like) because he can't win either or Sharpton.

[robsul82]

1. Experts thought...

...Clinton couldn't win either. NO ONE could possibly beat Poppy back in '92.

The thing with a popular opinion being "Clark can't win" is probably the "experts" you quote on Dean ALSO being wrong on Clark. They can't see beyond Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. They keep figuring on Edwards pulling a miracle out of his Mouseketeer ass. That isn't going to happen.

Don't believe the "experts" on one thing and bash them on another.

Later.

RJS

[kerry-is-my-prez]

4. I don't want to believe them on anything actually....

Thanks for the Clinton and Poppy examples - made me feel better.

[bobbieinok]

2. ALL TV media presents only the republican line

DO NOT believe any of it.

And HOW DO WE GET OUR MESSAGE OUT to those who do not live on the internet and get all their info from TV and radio talk shows???

We better figure this out.

I think Clark is probably the only candidate who can FORCE the media to cover him and who can ATTACK THEIR LIES AT ONCE and force their coverage.

Remember 2000. They had NOTHING negative on Gore. So they wrote this story that he was a serial liar. People still say this today.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. THey are starting the line

to try to convince you NOT to go to teh Polls

Stop paying attention to some of these people

They really want one particular interest to win.. yep BUSH

[kerry-is-my-prez]

8. These ARE the same ones who called the Senate wrong in the last

election.

[LittleDannySlowhorse]

5. The pundits say that everyone "can't win"

Dean "can't win". Clark "can't win". Kerry "can't win". And so on.

As they say, those who can't do, teach. In this case, those who have no ideas or anything to say become pundits. If you can remember any of these assholes ever coming through with some kind of trenchant insight, I'd love to hear about it.

It's important to remember that the pundits are the political equivalent of Joan and Melissa Rivers at the Oscars --- they're there to basically talk shit about people and contribute nothing.

Don't let it get to you.

[glarius]

6. I've said this before and I'll say it again...Clark will appeal to the

Republicans who don't like Bush but will like Clark's military credentials....I'm not American and I know I'm sticking my nose in, but watching from afar, it seems to me that the Republican "pundits" are afraid of Clark running against Bush and that is why they keep trying to convince the Democrats that Clark wouldn't have a chance!...:)

[mmonk]

7. I believe experts also said

the Dems had no chance against George H. W. Bush either.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

9. I think the Dem pundits are just being negative because of all of the

losses we've had lately.

[dofus]

10. Several thoughts here.

First of all, the absolutes (Dean can't possibly win, Clark is the only one who can beat Bush, Kucinich is the only true savior of the Democratic Party) are wrong. While I'm a strong Dean supporter, I think that any of the top five or six Dems not only could get the nomination, but could readily beat Bush -- but only in a fair and honest election. And that's the sticking point.

Bush did not win in a fair an honest election. He came to power in a coup, and those who come to power that way, do not readily surrender their office. They certainly don't hold fair and honest elections. But knowing this, I still don't know what we can do, except support our candidates, and stand firmly behind the eventual nominee.

I do recall all to clearly how everyone seemed convinced well into March of 1992 that Bush senior could not possibly be beaten, certainly not by that Southern ignoramus Bill Clinton. It's too bad NPR's archives don't seem to go back before 1996, because it would be worthwhile to listen to what Cokie Roberts and Kevin Phillips were saying that year. I remember being quite amused listening to them change their tune as the year wore on, and as Bill Clinton emerged first as the front runner, then as the nominee, and finally as President-elect.

I'm going on at too great a length to say you should support your favorite with your whole heart and mind, so long as in the end you (and all the rest of us) unite behind the nominee.

[the ether]

11. bump

bump

[newyawker99]

12. Hi the ether!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast: