Reply #19: I understand your position

[Tom Rinaldo]

Like I said, I believe that Clark hurt Dean. By now I am ever so firmly of the belief that virtually every career politician has layers of overt and covert agendas behind every single move that they make, and Clinton certainly qualifies in that regard. It is the nature of the game, of interlocking shifting alliances and loyalties and constant positioning to never be left with the short end of the stick. I'm sure you believe that Gore had multiple agendas also, or at the very least that many of those who fell into line behind Dean after Gore's endorsement did.

All of the candidates are grown ups. They know that each and every time they gain prominent backing it is not always because those new backers are personally smitten with their personal charm, wisdom, or integrity. If you spurn the support of all but your true believers, you can never get elected President in this system in this country.

For me the question never was why are those who are backing Clark backing him, it was why am I backing him? In my thread opening post I tried to make the case that Kucinich, Dean, and Clark all, at least at one time, had a valid reason to think they could really win the nomination. By definition that means that none of them were "spoilers", or to put it another way, none of them were Naders. I chose Clark over Dean for two reasons. Ultimately the most important is that I came to truly admire the man, his vision, his priorities, his ability, and his commitment to America. I thought he would make a great President. The other is that I always have and still do think that this year a Democratic Party candidate with substantial foreign policy experience, and ideally military service also, will be much better able to defeat Bush than one without that. Obviously that point can be argued, and I am NOT saying that I would back any Vet over a good man like Dean simply because a Vet served and Dean didn't. In Clark, however, I felt I did not have to compromise.

The case can be argued that Clark supporters were right in thinking that a National Security credentialed candidate was important this year, and that Democratic Party primary voters are responding to exactly that thinking by backing Kerry early and strongly. I thought Clark could carry our values and priorities into the White House. He came close to getting the nomination in my opinion. So did Dean, regardless of the revisionist political history that the pundits are already so busy writing.