Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Clark Tied With President Bush in Poll

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Duncan Grant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 03:42 PM
Original message
Clark Tied With President Bush in Poll
Edited on Mon Sep-22-03 03:44 PM by 94114_San_Francisco
By WILL LESTER, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Democrat Wesley Clark, in the presidential race for less than a week, is tied with President Bush (news - web sites) in a head-to-head matchup, according to a poll that shows several Democratic candidates strongly challenging the Republican incumbent.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030...

edit: link

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Ashcroft Kutcher Donating Member (108 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
1. sweeeet
I am a Clark guy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
2. YES! Now pair one of the other strong candidates up
Edited on Mon Sep-22-03 03:52 PM by rmpalmer
with Clark (either side of ticket IMHO) and you can be standing outside the WH and VP residence day after election offering to help AWOL and Uncle Dick to pack.

I just beg Dems any candidate in this group except Holy Joe.

And please not Hillary - too polarizing at this time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidinalameda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
3. cool!
wonder how long it will take the Deanies to start spinning this
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vikingking66 Donating Member (402 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Dean's within 4 points of Bush 14 months till the election
that's a great place to be at.
Only 4 points behind Clark, that's within or almost within the MOE.
Seriously though, that's great for Clark, and I wish him well.

I feel kind of like a McCarthy supporter in 68 - I like my guy better, but your guy is an honorable substitute. If Clark wins, I won't feel that the party curbstomped someone who threatened their power and gave us a lameass instead. All the same, I look forward to a "gentlemanly" competition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zekeson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. Thanks for a nice and reasonable post
:yourock:

I'd like to see more of that. I want to see any candidate in line to beat Bush* - and I am happy its Clark. When Dean puls ahead, be it briefly or permanently, I will be happy its Dean. I'll support whomever gets the Dem nod. Ok, anyone - even Lieberman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Duncan Grant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #6
17. I share your thoughts on this.
Dean is my personal favorite but I don't begrudge the Clark campaign anything at all. Considering the 'big picture', I think this is all a plus!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
diplomats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #6
26. Dean's actually within 3 points among registered voters
that's within the margin of error. That's very, very good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RetroLounge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #3
33. wonder how long it will take the Deanies to start spinning this?
I am a Dean Supporter, and I think this is great news for Clark and his supporters and for Democrats in general. And also for Dean and his supporters. With Dean at or within the MOE it shows he is definitely electable, don't you think?

and it is bad news for bush* as it shows he is not only beatable, but will get spanked by one of our incredibly talented and qualified and electable candidates.

and whomever wins the niomination will get my support.

(I wonder how long it will take a Clark supporter to be condescending and call me a Deanie? Oh, never mind...)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slappypan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
4. 5 Dems within striking distance!
"In the head-to-head confrontations, it was Kerry at 48 percent to Bush's 47 percent; and Bush's 48 percent to Lieberman's 47 percent. Bush held a slight lead over Dean, 49-45 percent, and had a similar advantage over Gephardt. "


Excellent news!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ozone_man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #4
24. My guess is that Dean is still not that well known nationally,
while the others have name recognition. In New Hampshire, Iowa, and California, Dean is ahead. We have time to build national name recognition. It's early still.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orangepeel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 03:54 PM
Response to Original message
5. good. Plus, this is a poll of the general public
bush usually does worse in polls of registered voters and even worse in polls of likely voters.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 03:58 PM
Response to Original message
7. Tied? Nah, he's leading. Rate the story anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. 4 are "tied" with W I think this is an "Anyone but Bush" statement
Kerry and Lieberman are 48-47% ahead

Dean is behind ("tied" as this article puts it)by 3% and Clark leads him.

Either way it doesn't look good for W.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarface2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 03:58 PM
Response to Original message
8. let the smears begin!!!
he s a child molester, he s committed incest, he fucks dead animals, he killed jfk, he s pee wee herman s bitch, he eats his boogers, bluto from animal house is based on his college daze, yadayadayada!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidinalameda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. yeah and?
oh you mean those are bad things

:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. I think Clark's record speaks for itself
He is not the white knight in shining armor some people want hims to be. Clark is the Democratic version of Ross Perot, sounded real good at first, until one really got to know him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StephNW4Clark Donating Member (547 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Sorry - what?
He's been in the race for what...5 days, and you already know him? Have you read his book? Have you listened to his speeches?

You seem to be of the opinion that Clark supporters are a bunch of blind desperate people looking to be saved. We weren't and we're not. We looked at his views and found them to match ours closely. If he doesn't pass your personal litmus test, fine. But don't throw out inaccurate representations wholly unsubstantiated by facts. And don't make the assumption that any of the journalists know him either. They've been tagging him for 5 days looking for a sensational story, not an accurate character sketch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HR_Pufnstuf Donating Member (782 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #12
19. Well, it looks like the journalists have JUST found one story (DRUDGE)
GENERAL CLARK WORE BOSNIAN WAR CRIMINAL'S MILITARY CAP


http://www.townhall.com/columnists/robertnovak/printrn2...


I say VOTE ANTI-NWO whatver u do this go-around imho, or terrorism will continue cuz the big corps will continue to try to stick more McDonalds and Sbarros in the Middle East.. While BPExxonShellUnocal continue to pillage oil.

Is Dean NWO?

Is Clark NWO?

Hillary and Bush are. Anyone have thoughts on this? I *might* vote for one of the above, IF i can clarify either of them is Anti-NWO. thots?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HR_Pufnstuf Donating Member (782 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Educate-yourself.org NWO link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wabeewoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #19
25. Ummmmmm
1. Drudge and Novak aren't journalists
2. The general in any hat trumps the AOL desserter
3. Is dean ngb(not george bush)? Is clark ngb? Ok good enough for me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
diplomats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #19
27. Josh Marshall has a good response to this:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #27
32. Would you believe Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch?
In rapid sequence, WSWS article on AI's charges against NATO, 2 AI press releases, and part of HRW report on NATO's bombing:

Amnesty International charges NATO with war crimes
By Julie Hyland
19 June 2000


The human rights organisation Amnesty International (AI) has accused the NATO alliance of committing war crimes during its bombing campaign against Yugoslavia last year. Its report, Collateral Damage or Unlawful Killings? Violations of the Laws of War by NATO During Operation Allied Force, concludes that NATO violated international laws governing warfare during the campaign, resulting in the deaths of Yugoslav civilians. The NATO action, led by the United States, involved the use of long-range cruise missiles, cluster bombs and depleted uranium munitions.

The AI document was released on June 7, almost one year after NATO ended its bombardment. AI reports that during the 78-day campaign, NATO aircraft flew over 38,000 combat sorties against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Although NATO has not released official estimates of the numbers killed during the campaign, detailed accounts by the Serbian government range from 400 to 600 Yugoslav civilians. The New York-based organisation Human Rights Watch has estimated that 527 civilians were killed. No NATO forces died in combat during the air war.

AI explains that the laws of war, particularly Protocol I (dating from 1977) to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, prohibit direct attacks against civilians or civilian objects, as well as attacks that do not distinguish between military and civilian targets. The latter are unlawful even if, while aimed at a legitimate military target, they have a disproportionate impact on civilians.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/jun2000/nato-j19.shtm...

June 7 2000

YUGOSLAVIA

New Amnesty International Report Says NATO Committed War Crime During Kosovo Conflict

(Washington) NATO forces violated the laws of war leading to cases of unlawful killing of civilians during the Kosovo conflict last year, Amnesty International said in a new report released today, one year after the end of Operation Allied Force against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY).

In the report, "'Collateral Damage'" or Unlawful Killings? Violations of the Laws of War by NATO during Operation Allied Force", Amnesty International examines a number of attacks indicating that NATO did not always meet its legal obligations in selecting targets and in choosing means and methods of attack.

"The bombing of the headquarters of Serbian state radio and television, which left 16 civilians dead, was a deliberate attack on a civilian object and as such constitutes a war crime," said William F. Schulz, Executive Director of Amnesty International USA (AIUSA). "Civilian deaths could have been significantly reduced if NATO forces had fully adhered to the laws of war during Operation Allied Force."

The laws of war include prohibitions on any direct attacks against civilians or civilian objects, and on attacks that do not attempt to distinguish between military and civilian targets or which, although aimed at a legitimate military target, have a disproportionate impact on civilians or civilian objects.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/2000/fry06072000.html

"Collateral Damage" or Unlawful Killings?

Violations of the Laws of War by NATO during Operation Allied Force
From 24 March to 10 June 1999 the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) conducted an air campaign against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY), codenamed Operation Allied Force. NATO aircraft conducted over 38,000 combat sorties, including 10,484 strike sorties, against targets in the provinces of Kosovo and Vojvodina, Serbia proper and the Republic of Montenegro. Yugoslav media have stated that thousands of civilians were killed in NATO air raids. However, the civilian death tolls given in detailed FRY government accounts range from 400 to 600. NATO has not released official estimates of civilians or FRY combatants killed. No NATO forces were killed in hostile action during the air campaign. (07 May 2000)

http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/intcam/kosovo/index.html

With respect to NATO violations of international humanitarian law, Human Rights Watch was concerned about a number of cases in which NATO forces:

conducted air attacks using cluster bombs near populated areas;
attacked targets of questionable military legitimacy, including Serb Radio and Television, heating plants, and bridges;
did not take adequate precautions in warning civilians of attacks;
took insufficient precautions identifying the presence of civilians when attacking convoys and mobile targets; and
caused excessive civilian casualties by not taking sufficient measures to verify that military targets did not have concentrations of civilians (such as at Korisa).

One disturbing aspect of the matter of civilian deaths is how starkly the number of incidents and deaths contrasts with official U.S. and Yugoslav statements. U.S. officials, including Secretary of Defense William Cohen, Deputy Secretary of Defense John Hamre, and Gen. Wesley Clark, have testified before Congress and stated publicly that there were only twenty to thirty incidents of "collateral damage" in the entire war. The number of incidents Human Rights Watch has been able to authenticate is three to four times this number. The seemingly cavalier U.S. statements regarding the civilian toll suggest a resistance to acknowledging the actual civilian effects and an indifference to evaluating their causes.

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2000/nato/Natbm200.htm#P39_9...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ignatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #19
30. Screw Robert Novak. He is the mouthpiece for this
administration and I for one can't believe he is not under the gun to release the name of the WH official who ratted out a CIA agent.

He is a bought and paid for Right Wing whore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemExpat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. He looked real good to me.....still does.....
and I'm looking forward to seeing if he develops into the candidate I think he can be to wipe out Bush....

:kick:

DemEx
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mackay Donating Member (538 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. I agree completely
great correlation

Still... Bush is going down in flames and that is something to celebrate about!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #8
16. "This is not a President who leads by polls" Rep.Ose on Crossfire
Uh-huh this is a "President" who is told what to say and to read the highly polled and focus grouped message shrunken for mass consumption.

As always W's LEADERSHIP and DECISIVENESS is fine how about the quality of those decisions and leadership. The lead lemming is a leader too and LEADS the others over the cliff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Racenut20 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
18. Bounce Bounce
Jimmy Carter had a 22% lead on Ford at the beginning of the Republican convention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
21. Hey I found the perfect bumper sticker


http://www.cafeshops.com/irregulargoods.6909001

Glad you DU'ers suggested magnetic backing so I don't get my car keyed or damaged.

Now am I wacky if I also display a sticer for Clark and one for Dean?

I like them both.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 06:10 PM
Response to Original message
22. Let's play spot the trolls...
Edited on Mon Sep-22-03 06:18 PM by onehandle
Can you spot the trolls in this thread?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 06:15 PM
Response to Original message
23. Poor Drudgie can't admit it
His headline has Clark beating other Dems.

Can't admit yet that Clark is leading AWOL.

:party:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pale_Rider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #23
29. Simple denial ...
... of what was so high is now sooooo low!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pale_Rider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #23
35. And now the news story has been changed to ...
... Clark (49%) ties with Bush (46%).

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=694&u=/ap/20...

Clark, a retired Army general, garnered 49 percent support to Bush's 46 percent, which is essentially a tie given the poll's margin of error. The CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll was conducted Sept. 19-21, beginning two days after Clark announced he would become the 10th Democratic candidate for the party's nomination.

Drudge must be suffering hard since even with a margin or error, Bush is starting to lose badly. Hopefully this doesn't mean that Bush will try some tactic to improve his ratings. Drip, drip, and drip!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robin Hood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
28. And as usual, The freepers are in a state of denial.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissouriTeacher Donating Member (476 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 08:24 PM
Response to Original message
31. Pardon my French...
but given that he's been in the race a week, and the fact that he has yet to state his positions on several major policy issues, that's pretty f*cking amazing. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evanstondem Donating Member (306 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. Its a sign that people aren't satisfied with Bush
and Clark, having no voting record, has not yet offended any voters. It's good to see that several leading Dem candidates are very competitive with Bush in this poll.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Oct 22nd 2014, 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC