Was it a mistake for Clark & Lieberman to pull out of Iowa?

[tsipple]

Please choose the biggest (most significant) reason why it was or was not a mistake from the choices below.

[IndianaGreen]

1. Clark is competitive across the country

He may have been too quick to write-off Iowa.

[SahaleArm]

3. Too expensive - The Iowa caucus system is an insider game...

where every county wants a visit (all 99) and the threshold is 15%. If he started 3 months earlier then Iowa would have been doable but not with a mid-September start.

[IndianaGreen]

5. Thank you for explaining that.

I wonder how well Clark would stack up against the other candidates in Iowa, I would assume he would be way up front.

[SahaleArm]

6. I think he would have battled it out with the current top-3...

Iowa and NH are the publicity states but Feb 3rd and later are the money states; the election can be won or lost on that date. Depending on Iowa, NH could put Dean in the driver seat for feb-3rd, but primaries never cease to surprise.

[DuctapeFatwa]

2. Their mistake is not starting a department store

Gigli - the Fragrance

Available exclusively at Clark & Lieberman

This week only - All Ralph Lauren bathmats 50% off!

[IndianaGreen]

4. That's funny, ductape!

Gigli - the Fragrance
Available exclusively at Clark & Lieberman


Cruel, but funny! LMAO

[CalebHayes]

7. Nope

[Pale_Rider]

8. Yes, it was a mistake since ...

... Iowa was a Blue State in 2000. Being a Democratic state, Clark and Leiberman pulling out signifies that they may be more appealing to people in Red States. Though if they lost heavily in Iowa, it could mean that they would be closer to shutting down their candidacy.

[Deesh]

9. Not a mistake --

-- on their part, but a problem with the Primary calendar. If Lieberman became the nominee, he might well carry Iowa against Bush, especially if Harkin or some other strong VP were on the ticket. But in the caucuses, he does't translate as well.

I think General Clark jumped in too late to win in Iowa, so it was smart of him to skip it. Also in a general election, Clark would probably carry Iowa against Bush.

The primary calendar is a rigged mess. After this year, Democrats ought to insist on a better system.

[Kathleen04]

10. No, I don't believe it was a mistake.

At least not for General Clark. Because of his late start, he didn't have the organization necessary to be competitive in Iowa. I think a poor showing there would look worse than opting out. Clark still has volunteers trying to garner support for him there, so he may exceed expectation.

However, for Lieberman--who has name recognition and has been in the race quite awhile..I think it shows some weakness in not having a broad enough appeal. But, if he thinks his resources can be best used in NH, then I guess it's not a terrible move on his part.

[Tom Rinaldo]

15. You said what exactlywhat I was going to say.

The time Clark might have spent doing intensive ground work in Iowa was time he then could NOT have spent in New Hampshire, Arizona and South Carolina. There are only so many days and Clark has to introduce himself to all voters, he is the new face. Lieberman, on the other hand, already was on a national ticket in 2000. For him to need to skip Iowa was a sign of weakness.

[maddezmom]

11. perhaps for Clark because he might have done ok in IA

but I guess we'll see if his stategy pays off in NH and some of the later primaries. :)

[Torgo4]

12. Clark DID Error!

He passed up a possible AFSCME Union endorsement, ceding it to Dean!

He could have phoned it in with a skeleton crew.

[KittyWampus]

13. No, Clark Will Be In NH While Everyone Else Is In Iowa

Clark needs third in NH and this seems likely... although now some have moved the goal posts on Clark and said he needs second
there. But then the mediawhores are determined to either ignore Clark or belittle him as much as possible.

[Scott Lee]

22. No worry for Dean - he leads there by double digits.

In other words, Dean did his early homework in NH while the others were figuring out ways to slime him.

[poskonig]

14. It was not a mistake.

When they get their butts kicked in Iowa, they now have a convenient excuse/spin.

Which is smart politics, naturally.

[TexasSissy]

16. Clark didn't pull out. He never entered there.

[littlejoe]

17. Was it a mistake for Clark to pull out of Lieberman?

[revcarol]

18. Yes, it shows a lack of respect for our primary system and voters.

Hell, I dislike the primary system as much as the next person, but this tells voters,"You don't count.You're not as important as the other voters." A little strong, maybe, but Iowans don't like being dissed in this way. They want to actually MEET the candidates and MAKE A CHOICE.

Politically, Clark was smart. He has to keep his 2nd place image intact to be viable later, and he didn't have the time or organization to do it in Iowa.
Lieberman was just dumb.I guess he knew defeat when he saw it and decided to go for the crumbs he could get elsewhere.

[shivaji]

19. No democrat has ever won a nomination by bypassing Iowa

I read this in a national media source, and am assuming it is correct. If so, it was a strategic mistake by Clark & Lieberman to bypass Iowa.

Iowa being the FIRST official voting state, it gets a huge media exposure and may be the reason no one has ever recovered to get nominated after bypassing Iowa.

[Scott Lee]

20. "Resources better focused elsehwere" = "Who cares what you think"

Bad move on both of their parts.

Come to think of it, as a Dean supporter, I would say thats a good move. Keep it up, Mr. Liebmeman and Mr. Clark.

[maxanne]

21. dumb move

imo. Clark was so late to the party, he should be working his ass off in every single state to make up for all the lost time.

As for Lieberman - :boring:

[jpgpenn]

23. well its been about 16 hours since you posted this

and we have 50% saying that it was the right thing to do concerning money. Will you have the answer soon to your question?

btw, I'll keep track of this poll for ya and kick it back after a few days if need be, so you can have the answer most agree with, ok?