Warning: If Clark wins the nomination, he is finished in the GE

[Hawkeye-X]

Mods: this is a repost of a locked thread, but I've removed the inflammatory part out.

There are more than enough reasons for the RNC to hammer Clark with enough ammo to make him look extremely weak.

Reason #1 - RNC folks will supply footages after footages of Clark praising * and his cronies. They can point out one of Clark's early mistakes by showing that he was an Independent after declaring his candidancy.

Reason #2 - Clark's maximum public funds is 45 million vs *'s 200 million warchest. How can Clark defend himself? Clark will be outspent on a 5 to 1 margin.

Reason #3 - All fluff and no real substance. Most of you like to argue that Clark has political experience because he's a General. That part is partially true. Yes, military is politics, but his dabbling is severly limited. Many will wonder about his truth on Kosovo campaign. What else can Clark offer that has true experience besides his military and foreign experience? Teaching cadets economics isn't experience. Applying economics are, and Clark has no experience whatsoever.

Reason #4 - His being on the board of most right-wing thinktank and defense boards questions Clark's truth on being "left".

Reason #5 - Clark has ZERO domestic experience. All of his experience is with the military.

Reason #6 - Clark has NEVER deal with passing an agenda through legislature.

Reason #7 - Clark wants to take people's guns.

Reason #8 - Clark thinks supply-side economics is a good idea. He won't garner any votes for sticking to failed economic theories which were proven wrong 10 years ago.

Reason #9 - Clark has no problems with free trade. He'll send all our software jobs to India. That was a big sticking point for me as an IT professional. No wonder why US is bleeding jobs or exporting them to third would countries for cheap wages.

Reason #10 - Clark served in the upper echelon of the military. Many people are suspicious of abdicating absolute power to the military, even those who have served. We're electing a civilian president here, not a military commander-in-chief, despite the fact that Clark is a retired general. Think Pakistan's President General Pervez Musharraf.

Reason #11 - Clark looks even more suspicious because he looks like an opportunist, who has been documented praising republicans and never bothered to register as a democrat until after he joined the race.

(Reason 5-11 is credited to TacoUnderpants on a locked thread)

I am pretty sure that there are more reasons, but I won't get into them, since I want a debate. Convince me why Clark is your man. Why isn't Dean any different?

[Renew Deal]

1. Show me where Clark says he likes School Vouchers.

I do not remember seeing this. I think I remember him being opposed to it.

[Jack_Dawson]

2. Still an inflammatory post

Nice try.

[Hawkeye-X]

5. Point to me where it's inflammatory

Inquiring minds would like to know...

Hawkeye-X

[Jack_Dawson]

9. The whole thing

It's more hysterical speculation backed up by zero facts...beginning w/ the title of the post. Doesn't leave room for intelligent discussion. But keep beating the Dean drum and ready yourself for another four years of Shrub.

[Hawkeye-X]

13. OK.

So, in your own words, you don't like the post? That's fine by me. You don't have to like it, but I feel that is the truth. The post in itself is non-inflammatory. I posted a similar thread last night, but was locked because I inserted an opinion that was inflammatory. That part has since been removed.

Hawkeye-X

[Scott Lee]

31. Why to supply specifics there, Mr. Dawson

[Green4Dean]

3. The funding is the most important...

Please wake up everyone...the Candidates that opted to take public money surrendered to Bush...I support public financing as long as the playing field is level. Dean raised 40 million with only a quarter of democrats supporting him nationally...imagine what he will do when we unite behind him...

[Rowdyboy]

4. There's so much wrong here...

I could get banned just for what I'm thinking. I'm going away now before I get stupid.

Happy New Year and may we get a new president before the next one rolls around!

:beer:

[MR. ELECTABLE]

6. I was WRONG about the school vouchers

Please remove it from the list you posted. Several months ago, I think it was about the time when school vouchers for DC was in the news, someone mentioned he was supporting vouchers in one of the threads I read here on DU. Nobody rebutted it at the time and I assumed that the statement was factual. I've checked into this personally by visiting his website and checking around the web.

Clark does not support vouchers.

My humblest apologies to all Clark supporters.

[maddezmom]

10. thanks :)

[Hawkeye-X]

15. And mine too.

I've corrected the post.

Hawkeye-X

[democratreformed]

21. Endorsed by AEA

Arkansas Education Association

Link: http://clark04.com/press/release/113/

[mmonk]

7. Wake me up

when posts like these and others (whether against Clark or Dean) become out of fashion.:boring:

[JI7]

8. musharraf was not elected, clark would have to be elected

i think clark would have to be elected as a civilian who happens to be a veteran, not active military. i think this is true of all military people who would run. you may correct me if i'm wrong.

[lancdem]

11. Hawkeye, there will be plenty of ammo for ads should we run Dean

or anyone else. You need to be realistic about that.

[Hawkeye-X]

17. Like what?

He's too ultra-liberal? - Easily refutable

Civil unions is gay marriage? - Easily refutable

I'm being realistic. RNC doesn't have much ammo vs. Dean, but will have tons vs. Clark.

Hawkeye-X

[democratreformed]

12. ??????

Reason # 7 is blatantly false. From his gun safety policy: "I am a gun owner and a hunter, and I believe that law-abiding adults have the right to own firearms. But like all rights, gun rights come with responsibilities. And we need responsible gun laws that are designed to keep guns out of the hands of criminals without unduly infringing the rights of legitimate gun owners."

Link: http://www.clark04.com/issues/gunsafety/

[Hawkeye-X]

20. I looked at that policy a minute ago

Comparing to Dean's gun policy, I don't see anywhere where it says that the gun control law should be left up to the state (as it should be, which is more reasonable), vs. Clark's gun control laws.

Hawkeye-X

[democratreformed]

22. I guess I could agree

that certain parts of gun control should be left up to states. I can also see where some should be at the federal level. You can probably see that I haven't given a whole lot of thought to the matter.

Owning guns is certainly important to by hunting-crazed family members (including my husband). My pistol has made me feel more secure when my husband was away from home. (I live in a very rural area).

Still, I can see where a ban on assault weapons is appropriate at the federal level. Also, the process one must go through (registration) in order to purchase a gun, I think, should be administered on a federal level so that there is continuity in guidelines and sharing of information.

[xultar]

14. I thought it was already decided that Dean won the nomination? n/t

[eileen_d]

16. Thanks for the laugh.

Seriously, this post may be good reference when Clark gets the nomination. That's WHEN, not if. :D

If your point is that the RNC will attack anyone who gets the nomination, not just Dean: Yeah, we know. I heard the sky was blue too.

[CMT]

18. Well I think Clark is no guarantee in the GE either

Despite what his supporters say. I have yet to see any poll--except for one when he just got in and was getting a lot of press--that shows him beating Bush. Most of the polls have him running about as well as Dean, a few have him a point or two better than Dean or a point or two less than Dean vs. Bush.

This is another interesting number--women voters. There is a large gender gap with Clark as reflected in the NH tracking polls.

Clark is doing pretty well with Democratic/democratic leaning men--in second place behind Dean 32-20.

But he is not doing well with Democratic/Democratic leaning women--he is polling 6% behind Dean's 41% and Kerry's 16%.

http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/nhpoll/demtrack/

[eileen_d]

19. NH is not the USA

So we'll see how that goes.

[democratreformed]

23. I don't think anyone is a guarantee

Whoever wins the nomination and his or her supporters will be faced with many many hours of long hard work.

[stinkeefresh]

24. oh for jeebus' sake

Clark would cream Bush in the GE. And I say that as a Dean supporter. The idea that we have to choose the best person or we lose is insane. Bush is the most precariously balanced incumbant I've ever seen.

Clark would cream him. Dean would cream him. Personally, I think Carol would give him a damn good run for his money.

[Tom Rinaldo]

25. I think your thread is inherently inflammatory also.

Technically, since you are stating your own opinions, it is left up to the reader to decide how "fair" and "objective" your observations are. In my opinion you take an extremist read on a situation, and then present it as a major problem or weakness in Clark.

Sometimes you are blatant (#7 "Clark wants to take people's guns" - Clark favors some stricter national gun controls than Dean, but he is not advocating a search and seizure of weapons from law abiding citizens). Sometimes it is subtle (#5 "Clark has ZERO domestic experience. All of his experience is with the military" - Clark worked extensively in Washington interfacing with Congressional and Executive branch officials of both parties regarding appropriations, national security, benefits for military families etc.)

Ah well, how I would love to have no other responsibilities to attend to so that I could spend full time responding to posts like yours. Unfortunately other duties beckon right now. Might as well do a quick cut and paste though and move my reply to your first concern off of the previous locked thread over onto this one. Think I'll do that as a separate post directly below this one.

[Tom Rinaldo]

26. Reply to Number One

Lifted from the old thread by me. Posted late last night, I would have gone on to other points then also but I needed some sleep...

What you suggest the Republicans will use against Clark, prior praise for some Republicans, is NOT something they will use, for two basic reasons.

One, it is always the unexpected that wounds, the dirt dug up against you that you are ill prepared to respond to, never the obvious stuff. High level national campaign staffs are highly skilled at what they do. They will have a hundred possible retorts prepared for Clark, all focus group tested for the killer "Clark praised Bush" attack response.

Two, those quotes by Clark about Bush expose Bush's greatest weakness, and further establishes Clark's sincerity and standing as Bush's opponent in the eyes of the public. They polish Clark's reputation, not tarnish it. Clark may actually use some of that footage himself, that's what I expect. If he doesn't he at the very least will be the one to point out how willing he was to give Bush a chance, and how fair he was about giving praise where praise is due, which perfectly sets Clark up to make the kill. It wasn't partisan fueled politics that drove Clark into the race, no it was the high hopes dashed, the opportunities squandered, the good will wasted, the wise council rejected, and 40 years of an essentially bipartisan approach to foreign policy unexpectedly thrown out the window by George W. Bush.

The strong majority of the American people have not forgotten what they were feeling about George W. Bush immediately after 9/11, or after the fall of Kabul when America wrested control of Afghanistan away from the terrorists who attacked America. You can even go back further. There is always a honeymoon period for a new President after he takes office. 95% of the Cabinet and Sub Cabinet appointments are met with bipartisan praise. Americans like to feel hopeful, they want to think things will go well. The opposition party picks a few fights carefully during that honeymoon period. The Democrats picked Ashcroft in 2001, Rumsfeld got the praise treatment along with almost all of the rest of Bush's administration (there was a love fest for Colin Powell).

So here comes a candidate, Wesley Clark, who is able to say, I understand how you felt then. We wanted Bush to succeed in the fight against terror. We pulled together behind him, all of us, myself included. We left partisanship behind at the waters edge, and we believed Bush was up to the job. Sadly we were mistaken.

That's really how most American's feel about it. A third flat out love Bush, a third flat out hate Bush, those votes will break expectedly. And the final third initially rallied to Bush's leadership in a time of war. That third can relate well to Clark. They understand his initial instincts to support our President when America was under real danger from attack. Sure, now we have lived through two plus years without another major terrorist blow, and we have calmed down somewhat, but then we thought it might all happen again tomorrow. People weren't in the mood for dissension then, they wanted unity. Clark won't look like a shrill Democrat looking for ways to attack our President for political advantage. It casts Clark more as "the reluctant warrior", stepping forward for the good of the nation one more time after a lifetime of bipartisan service. Real events and mounting concerns compelled Clark to oppose Bush, not a predisposition to hate him. That will resonate in Clark's advantage with that middle third.

It is the perfect lead in for Clark to talk about the Draft Clark movement he responded to, and why. Take my word for it, or at least keep an open mind, Clark will not run away from earlier positive statements made about Republicans, he will turn them to his advantage establishing credibility with the public. Clark's problems with the statements is with Democrats who feel like you do during the primaries.

[bain_sidhe]

29. Hey! How'd you get inside my head?

This is exactly what I've been thinking every time somebody brings up the "praising bush video" line of attack. Glad somebody else sees it that way. I didn't see the locked thread (or, to be more precise, I didn't READ the locked thread) so I'm glad you re-posted this here, or I never would have seen it.

[kodi]

27. hawk U misunderstood my other post,

it referenced the absurdity of slamming other candidates and knocking them rather than spending time boosting your own, and i used as an example an absurd and inconsequential fact about dean to illustrate it, which, not surprisingly, considering your lack of objectivity in this matter, you took as a direct attack on dean.

but you seem to have only gotten worse with this new thread.

i support dean and he has gotten money from me, but the stuff being posted by some of dean's supporters when they attack other candidates just makes them look like totally subjective goofball ideologues devoid of objectivity who drank the kool aid, because similar things can be said about dean's inadequacies for the office of the president.

this crap gets us nowhere. and none of the 11 things you posted will mean much to people who have to decide to vote for him or bush, and #s 7-11 are complete bullshit about clark anyway.

and i dont believe for a minute that you want a true debate, since you posed your remarks in such an inflammatory manner. all you want is to do is throw shit around the room.

i like howard dean a lot, but increasingly many of his supporters act like the caricatures that the right wing paints us as.

with posts like yours you do more harm than good to the fair doctor's candidacy, and that is what causes me to post in opposition to your goofball remarks about clark. it is not that i am a clark supporter.

[Torgo4]

28. Wait Until Debates

I really want to see Clark pummell GeeDubya with the simple question:

What did the Bush Administration do to thwart Al Qaeda PRIOR to 9/11?
Repeat until GeeDubya answers HONESTLY!!!

Shoot---Don't wait for debate! Start pounding NOW and don't let up until Election Day+

:spank:

[TexasSissy]

30. I don't need to convince you about anything. You're voting for Dean,

aren't you? Then there's no convincing to be done.

For those who support someone, there is no explanation needed.
For those who are against someone, no explanation will suffice.

[Scott Lee]

32. The GOP would play MaJong with Clarks teeth in the GE

He is a dream come true for the GOPers...which is why you see the baiting with the "we want Dean" crap put out for public consumption. Rule number one, you don't tip your hand.

Clark has handed the GOP an encyclopedia of material to attack him with, from his time as NATO commander to his domestic "policies".

I truly believe that the GOP would trounce Clark in a GE.

[poopyjr]

34. This might be the most desperate post I've seen

So now the rightwing media is hyping up Dean as a sort of reverse psychology/we really want Clark mind game? LOL So when Fox News altered their AP news story about Clark to make Dean look better, it was all a part of their masterplan?



LMAO

[Scott Lee]

40. Hey, it's as possible as anything else posted. You might consider it

But if you want to hide your fear behind some laughter, that's ok too.

We call it "nervous laughter".

[slinkerwink]

33. also, Clark has to sit still for three months against bush's $200 mil

after the dem nomination, Clark can't spend any funds of his own money or after the primaries, he'll have very little to spend against Bush's $200 million dollar negative advertising machine. This alone makes Clark unelectable since he didn't opt out.

[Justice]

35. Huh?

"This alone makes Clark unelectable since he didn't opt out."

That is not true.

[Hawkeye-X]

37. Its true if you stop thinking about Clark and think about Clark's $$

The Dem nomination is in June/July. Chimpy's nomination is in September (to coincide with 9/11). That leaves Clark out for three months without violating the FEC rules on spending $$ to attack *.

Dean doesn't have to do it - he can spend the money right after the nomination and blast all over the nation prior to Chimpy's nomination and people will believe it, and with little euthanism, * is nominated, and is already being hammered by Dean's ads, before GE.

GE money will be huge -- Dean can continue the hammering of * before * can even start.... or hammer each other (and waste $200M of *'s money while most of his supporter base is maxed out before GE, and more disinterested supporters will not be donating more money to * - but rather to Dean because he can attract true-blue Republicans to his side (not neo-cons or Religious Right asswipes)

Hawkeye-X

[Rowdyboy]

36. Disagree with you on that....

Volunteers and labor unions will continue to provide support. An inexpensive "whistle stop" by train across the country could gather tremendous exposure and finally, the "David and Goliath" aspect intrigues me. Americans LOVE an underdog. To see smirking Bush with his mega-bucks up against a real American hero fighting to take back the country with nothing but the people could actually inspire respect.

I can't give up on public financing of presidential elections yet. I know adjustments need to be made, but the issue is too important to just abandon.

[OKNancy]

38. Clark will have plenty of money

http://epaper.ardemgaz.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:ArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=ArDemocrat/2004/01/02&ID=Ar00103

Retired Gen. Wesley Clark’s campaign claimed Thursday that it will have all the money it needs to challenge Democratic front-runner Howard Dean this year, including $15.9 million to $17.1 million raised in the fourth quarter of 2003.

Clark’s fourth-quarter figure includes $10.4 million to $11.1 million from the candidate’s own efforts, plus $5.5 million to $6 million in federal matching funds.

Contributors had until midnight Wednesday to submit fourth-quarter contributions, and final figures were still being tabulated Thursday.

Fourth-quarter campaign-funding forms have to be filed with the Federal Election Commission by Jan. 15.

"It is a record for a Democrat participating in the public financing system," said a Clark campaign aide, adding that the final figure will surpass a one-quarter record set by Democrat Al Gore in the 2000 presidential campaign

[Jack_Dawson]

39. Dean supporters talking about GE futility is hilarious

considering Clark does much better against Bush than Dean does in every head-to-head matchup I'VE seen...but it is a good chuckle and I thank you for that.

Happy New Year Clarkies and Dean Supporters.