The other candidates are driving me towards Dean...again.

[WilliamPitt]

I began this whole campaign thing deciding between Dean and Kerry. Clark's arrival shook things up, but by the time that happened I had already put my chips on Kerry. I still think, on most of the issues, that Kerry is very solid. But ye gods and little fishes, his comments in the last couple of weeks have made me insane. The others aren't doing me any favors, either. A recent example:

===

In a first, Dean says he'll reject US funds

By Sarah Schweitzer, Globe Staff, 11/9/2003

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/11/09/in_a_first_dean_says_hell_reject_us_funds/

BURLINGTON, Vt. -- Howard Dean became the first Democratic presidential candidate ever to opt out of the federal public funding system yesterday, and cast the move as a preemptive strike against the fund-raising prowess of President Bush.

(snip)

Kerry, who could tap into assets he shares with his wealthy wife if he departs the federal financing system, sought to pin blame on Dean. "I'm disappointed that the campaign finance system on the Democratic side is now going to be coming apart," he said.

Senator John Edwards of North Carolina said that he was "very disappointed that Governor Dean has reversed himself and decided to abandon this important piece of our election system. I intend to stay within the system." With Dean's decision to opt out, Trippi said the relinquishment of federal funds would not mean a change of course from collecting small donations, but instead would mean seeking more -- as in, say, $100 donations from 2 million people.

...more...

So OK, Dean broke the campaign finance system on the Democratic side? Give me a break, John. Clue Phone calling: The Bush campaign is going to bury every Democrat combined on fundraising. This system was broken a long time ago. You don't walk into a gunfight against a guy with an M-60 while packing a .22 with half the bullets gone.

I thought Dean handled the flag flap admirably, and I thought the other candidates piled on in an embarrassing attempt to derail or distract those incredible union endorsements. Now, this.

Beyond the fact that imho this is Dean's nomination to lose right now, he has also made pretty much all the right moves. I worry that he has no foreign policy experience, and that will wound him. I worry that 'Gay Marriage' will replace 'Gun-Grabber' in the lexicon of Southern gotcha politicking next year. But given the steel this guy has displayed, I am really beginning to believe that he has the ability to overcome pretty much anything and everything thrown at him.

I'm still a Kerry guy, because I like him and because I'm not going to bail out on my support this early. But Dean looks damned good.

[hlthe2b]

1. right now, it seems to me...

Dean/Clark or Clark/Dean would be most competitive...

Still undecided though... and a committed ABB voter.

[GR]

8. That's Where I Am Too...

I really like Clark but don't think he has the organization of political experience...Dean has the organization but is sometimes to quick to shoot from the lip...

If you could roll both of them into one candidate, I'd really be happy.

[slinkerwink]

2. I agree and I'm a Dean supporter

With the expected double endorsement of the AFSCME and the SEIU next week, Dean is going to be looking extremely very good to the Iowan and New Hampshire voters.....I was surprised that he was able to bring together those unions, given their past history, but since he was able to work out a compromise so that the AFSCME would do the "king-making" endorsement and having the SEIU echo that....that shows me that he can unite, instead of divide.

[VelmaD]

3. I'm in touch...

which is why I still haven't really really been able to pick a candidate despite the Kucinich, Kerry and Dean bumperstickers on my car. (Me indecisive - nah. ;-)) They're all doing shit that drives me nuts.

I think you're dead on about the money. Considering how much money shrub has raised, any Dem who stays within the spending limits is cutting their own throat.

on edit: Happy Birthday btw!

[mdmc]

67. me too!

I have a bunch of local bumper stickers on my bike rack, including a kerry, kucinich, and Dean stickers. Only Dean and Hinchey on the back bumper.
:dem:

[tjdee]

4. I'm having the opposite reaction, how curious.

I used to think he could win in the general election, now I'm not so sure.

He used to be my distant second, then third, now he's dropped off to right above Lieberman.

Ah....you say potato, I say potahto...

[NewYorkerfromMass]

74. Nice to see some good sense on here tjdee

very nice. I'm glad Kerry's in a fight. It will bring out his best.

[NashVegas]

5. LMAO Will

Should we start a DU betting pool on the Will vote in the Mass. Primary?

Ain't nothing wrong with keeping your mind and options open, and I salute you for it. The great thing about sitting on the fence as long as possible is you get to see who's got the best barbeque.

[WilliamPitt]

7. ...and I wind up with a big pole up my butt

:)

[VelmaD]

9. You say that...

like it's a bad thing. ;-)

[Closer]

6. It's always been

a mystery to me, Will, why you aren't a Dean guy. You see, because the most intelligent and political folks I know are for the most part backing Dean. Everyone's freakin' crazy about him. The more you read, the more you talk with folks, the more you spend time being part of this phenomenal campaign, the more you fall in love with the guy. He's not the frontrunner for no reason. He hasn't raised the most money for no reason. He hasn't created a GROUNDSWELL of grassroots support for no reason. He won't be getting the two biggest labor endorsements next week for no reason. He and Trippi have literally TRANSFORMED modern day politics, it is no understatement.

After this week, Dean will surge ahead of the others. I know you said you're still in the Kerry camp, but we'd LOVE to have someone with your passion and wit in our court.

Dean is the real deal. It's as simple as that.

[Upfront]

11. Man

that was well said. I could not agree more.

[Pavlovs DiOgie]

14. I know some very intelligent people

who are not backing Dean. I don't think you meant your comment to be negative at all, but it kinda sounds like you think people who back someone else aren't intelligent.

[Closer]

15. Umm

of course I didn't mean that.

My point was that many of the most intelligent/insightful/political folks I know ARE, in fact, backing Dean. Moreover, the Dean folks I have met in the last several months, too, are some of the brightest and most passionte people I've ever encountered.

That speaks tons no?

[Pavlovs DiOgie]

16. Don't get me wrong...

...I just thought that someone could take your comment as a bit arrogant.

The people that I have met at Dean events are as you suggest...they are informed and feel passionate about the same things as me. When people agree with me I tend to think they are intelligent. :)

[WilliamPitt]

18. And to elaborate further

The people I've met all across the country who are working for Dean, Kerry, Clark, Kucinich, Edwards and the rest are uniformly extraordinary and dedicated people. I don't think your intelligence is defined by your support. I think the people who get out this early and get to work are almost always going to wind up being pretty damned cool.

[VelmaD]

23. Been trying to figure out how to respond...

and I think you hit the nail on the head that the comments about Dean supporters being intelligent come off as a little arrogant. It's one of the things that has kept me out of the Dean camp (along with the fact that he's a little too centrist for my tastes). I get really tired of being told that there must be something wrong with me for not supporting Dean. That it reflects on my intelligence or means I'm politically naive. It's as if some of his supporters cannot fathom the thought that I might actually support a different candidate because he more closely reflects my own poitical views. I get tired of the implication that just because my decision is different that it is therefor wrong.

[LiberalTexan]

34. There's nothing wrong with you, Velma

It's this crazy Dean bug that bites people.

I was curious to see what the bug was, so back in July when Dean came to Dallas to speak in front of city hall, I went to see the speech. And, I took my Republican friend (yes, I have one) so I could see what her reaction was. I know it was hhhhhaaaarrrrddd for her to swallow. It was about 105 degrees out there in the Texas heat. She had to listen to speakers before Dean who rammed Bush and the policies, etc etc. She disagreed with most of them of course.

But, I brought her for the main event which was to see Dean as an outsider (I didn't tell her ANYTHING about him beforehand) and give me her opinion.

She said that she found him well versed, dynamic, outgoing and that he knew his stuff. She was impressed with all the things he had done in Vermont and she liked what he had to say about the environment.

Over dinner afterwards we talked a little about it. I didn't push her about what she liked. She was forthcoming. She has mentioned him to me several times since then. And, I think she could really warm to his policies (she's a "social liberal" as she calls it).

What I saw that day was two thousand people bit by the Dean bug. Some of them were there for the first time. Some of them at their first political event. I can't describe it. I went to several meetups and saw the same phenomenon. Newcomers would show up and then I would see them out at some event in the neighborhood fully throwing their support behind Dean. It's something about him that really inspires people. I still don't know what it is.

He inspires me. I won't tell you you are crazy for not supporting him. Surely some of your beliefs may be different than his. But, I'll tell you that those that are bitten are pretty biased. Once you've gone to hear him speak and shake his hand and see what he's all about....I don't know. People just get smitten with him.

Yes, even independents and some moderate Republicans-- and hopefully white guys in the south! ;-)

[VelmaD]

43. You are SO not the Dean supporter I was talking about LiberalTexan.

:-)

If they were all like you I wouldn't get so frustrated. Then again I could say that about the rabid supporters of any of the candidates.

Thanks for trying to reassure me. I appreciate the effort. :-) You're one of the good guys. I just haven't gotten the Dean bug and I don't think it's gonna happen. I just want someone farther to the left. However, if he gets nominated I will jump on board - I'm the Vice President of the ABB club after all. :-)

People need to remember that we don't all think the same. That we don't all share the same political beliefs. That's the good part about this field of candidates - there's someone for everyone in it no matter how far to the right or left they are within the Party. My fervent hope is that once the primary season is over people can forget all the nasty infighting and work together. That's the thing about the condescension that worries me - the thought that some Dean supporters are alienating people within the party that they are going to need in the General election.

[cally]

96. So happy that I am now not intelligent and,

not politically informed because I don't support Dean as my number one choice. What a way to win supporters--not.

[TLM]

106. Well perhaps if you read the quote you would see that what was said

was that the most intelligent folks that this person knows are for Dean.

There was no coment about you, or other candidates' supporters being less than intelligent or uninformed because you don't. SO why act like it was an attack on you? If they said that the tallest folks they know are basketball players, would you cry that they called you short because you play football?

You folks simply have to, as ususal, try and spin anything said into an attak so you can get all huffy and play the poor abused victims of the big evil Dean machine.

[_NorCal_D_]

82. Nice comment:

You see, because the most intelligent and political folks I know are for the most part backing Dean.

Yet another reason why Dean is at the bottom of my list. :eyes:

[KittyWampus]

10. Sounds Like Dean's Supposed "Teflon " Some Mentioned

"I am really beginning to believe that he has the ability to overcome pretty much anything and everything thrown at him."

Teflon is pretty much a function of how the media is compliant or not.

And as far as the candidates who piled on- don't remember Dennis or Clark or Carol getting in the act.

Kerry's got the stuff to go long distance... let's see if he can come from behind :)

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

12. Kerry does have substance.

Gravitas. Burnin' Mojo. Smarts. But the problem is, so does Dean. Where Dean has the edge in this is that he IS the outsider. I am afraid that senate collegiality has soaked too far into Kerry and he cannot or will not take on Chimpy to the degree that people want and Dean seems to be delivering to a lot of people.

Once again: I ain't made up my mind on whom I will support, and I have no clear fave rave.

[KaraokeKarlton]

17. You can't "come from behind" when you run against Dean

This "catch-up" plan of Kerry's has probably been his biggest mistake of all. He should have done the research on how all the other candidates campaign. He obviously didn't or he never would have waited so long to get going. You CANNOT bide your time and "pace yourself" when you run against Howard Dean. Dean starts out sprinting, keeps sprinting and then makes a mad dash at the end. Dean has the energy of about 100 high strung ADHD 8 year olds all bundled into one powerful package. I've honestly never seen anything like it. He's all over the place all the time. He's giving this campaign EVERYTHING he's got. There is no way any of the other candidates will ever be able to catch up with Dean because he won't slow down one bit and will actually kick things up into hyper-space towards the end game.

[KittyWampus]

20. When It Comes To Substance- Dean Is Outweighed

By several candidates. I appreciate your enthusiasm and account of Dean's energy... but wonder if you think ENERGY should be the deciding factor in nominating a candidate. NONE of the candidates are moribund.

In fact, there's a great difference between unbridled energy and focused energy. The latter being more efficient and ultimately effective.

Frankly, Dean seems to generate Anger and gives off HEAT rather than ILLUMINATION.

[KaraokeKarlton]

36. Dean isn't at all "outweighed" when you really think about it

Let me start by saying that I am probably more familiar with the kind of leader Dean is than most of the people who post here because I live in Vermont. With that being said, take an honest look at what the country needs from a president right now. First and foremost, we NEED someone with executive experience. We NEED someone who has experience balancing budgets, allocating funding for programs and understanding how to get this stuff done as quickly and cost effectively as possible. (Dean has the most experience on thi.) Our next president NEEDS to have experience cleaning up fiscal disasters and most importantly, that president NEEDS to be strong willed, independent thinking and have a commitment to making the tough choices and not backing down just because others would try to use influence and pressure. (Again, Dean has this experience and a proven record of doing this consistently.) We NEED someone who is entirely outside of the influence of special interests in Washington. (Dean doesn't owe anything to special interests, but he owes EVERYTHING to the people.) Anyone who has been in DC for a long time is apt to "owe" someone something and right now we can't afford that nonsense. We NEED someone who is able to look at the facts, understand where the problems are, look impartially at all the different choices and probably outcomes, plan a course of action and follow through with that course of action. (Dean's background as a doctor gives him this edge, and it's a big part of why he was such a successful and effective leader of Vermont. He accomplishes a lot because of this trait he has.) Foreign Policy doesn't require someone who has a lot of foreign policy experience. It requires someone who has the trait I just eluded to. Anyone can get foreign policy right if they approach the problems in the same way a doctor approaches diagnosing and treating a patient. Dean is a natural for Foreign Policy.

Above all, we NEED someone who won't play to the fear and who actually has the ability to reach and connect with people in a way that makes it both easy for voters to "get" what he's talking about and interesting so they will actually pay attention.

To be perfectly honest with you, I think Dean is the only one who has both the traits AND the experience necessary to follow the debacle that is the Bush presidency. Clark has the traits to a lesser extent, but he lacks the all too important executive experience. I think he'd probably make a decent VP and an even better head of the military or something similar in a Dean administration, but I just don't think he's able to cut the mustard in this particular presidential election.

[brava]

60. The first out of the gate rarely finishes first

My bets are on the longshot, Kucinich.

[newyawker99]

70. Hi brava!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Cleita]

13. Kerry's fine with me if he's the nominee, but

I have two reasons for preferring Dean. First, it's a fact that America is way overdue for universal health care and Dean will be the guy most likely to deliver it. Second, his campaign for small donors keeps him out of the corruption loop of big corporate donors.

I know he isn't perfect, but he does deliver two out of three reasons to be my candidate.

[AP]

19. I remember a thread here months ago, maybe a year ago, when people hashed

out ideas about how Democrats can make up for not being able to ever outraise Republicans.

The consensus opinion was that Democrats should make an issue of the campaign finance system. That was, people thought, the only way to address it. It's like karate. Make your enemy's stregth his weakness.

At least that's what we thought back then.

Wonder what changed.

Does anyone really think Dean's going to raise anywhere near as much as Bush? If Dean raises 100 mil, Bush will go to his donors and raise 400 million.

It'll be a big transfer of middle class wealth from Deaniacs to AOL-TW, Viacom, Fox, and whoever else sells advertising time.

Or maybe it will work. But I doubt it.

[Rose Siding]

30. But Dean has made campaign finance a central issue

A year long telethon-type ransom of the US presidency by the people from the....aristocracy or corporations or whatever.. is NEWS.

There's the potential for the whole election to be like a remake of the last scene in It's A Wonderful Life. That *does* make Bush's strength his weakness. He's POTTER.

[AP]

35. Every dollar Dean raises will encourage Republicans to raise another 3.

I don't see how he's going to catch up. He will be outspent and outraised, and won't be able to make an issue of it.

I could be wrong.

[LiberalTexan]

40. Who cares?

With all due respect, it's votes that put someone in the White House, not money (I'm optimistic we won't see another Florida, but who knows). What I'm talking about is the funding to advertise.

What Howard Dean has is people like us out there talking to other folks about him. I wear a Dean button in public and tons of people ask me about him. They are really curious. I've never had a bad comment about him. And, I live in a county voted one of the most conservative in the nation.

People keep coming to me and my husband asking us about Dean because they know we are supporters. I can't tell you the number of people who voted for Bush and have changed their minds just from talking to "normal" middle class people like my husband and I. That is one HUNDRED times stronger than any 30 second add Bush will put out in 2004.

It's a populous revolution. Mark my words! Rove is scared shitless.

[AP]

42. You can win without having the most money,

however you better have a pretty coherent meta-message so that when the Republicans start buying opinion, something substantial innoculates the public in a way so that it doesn't cost a zillion dollars to counterspin it. That's what Clinton was able to do.

[SEAburb]

135. I don't think Mark Green would agree with you.// nt

''''''''''''''''

[PVnRT]

78. And how would Kerry raise as much as Bush? Or Clark?

Or anyone else for that matter? It seems people are just using this as another excuse to criticize Dean without showing how their preferred candidate is going to raise that kind of money.

[FrenchieCat]

21. As a Clark Supporter , May I ask

Why in your comments do you mention Clark only to say he shook things up, but by then you had already been in the Kerry camp quite deep, but leave it at that? My question specifically; now you are coming out of Kerry's camp, and you do not cite Clark has having said anything about the Campaign finance issue, nor has he made any other attacks, you are leaning to Dean.

I have no problem with the Dean part, however I find your post to be incomplete (in reference to Clark) and would love some additional information so that I can understand your logic. Also, I would like for you to read this opinion piece, because what has been evident for weeks is now coming out to the press. http://www.arktimes.com/max/110703brantley.html
If you could, I would then appreciate your opinion on the piece. Thanks.

[WilliamPitt]

26. If Clark had gotten in three months ago

the others would have been dust. I think he's amazing, and I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. I am still waiting for the full picture to be fleshed out, but I really like what I've seen so far.

[Woodstock]

51. I really don't know why Clark waited so long to get in the race

Oh, I know he had reasons, I know people have gotten in late and won before, yadda, yadda, yadda.

But I just wonder if it's too late for him, now that Dean has all the cards in place.

I like both candidates, BTW. Kerry, on the other hand, has always left me cold on a personal level - too much whining about Dean, instead of being on fire about his own thing.

[Tom Rinaldo]

88. Clark's reasons for late entry

I am sure there were several reasons also. As has amply been pointed out and used against him, Clark has not spent a lifetime as a Democratic party activist. He couldn't just start pulling strings, he had to find them first etc. But you know what? I just met Clark's sister-in-law at an upstate NY meetup. She told me he waited as long as he did because he had promised his wife he would not run if she opposed it, and it took her that long to sign off on it (she had been very reluctant). Clark is simply an honorable man who kept his word to his wife of 36 or thereabouts years. Honor in the White House. Might take some getting used to...

[joshan361]

90. good point

and that i why we need a man like him as prez

[Ellen Forradalom]

22. Thank you for complimenting my candidate.

I don't dislike Kerry, I just like Dean a little better; but I do think Kerry has some special qualities, in particular gravitas. I wish he were showing better taste in his comments.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

24. Will...

Few Dean endorsements would mean as much to me as yours. I was disappointed when you came out for Kerry, but I understood your reasoning. Kerry was my #2 for a long time -- he's so smart, and has fought long and hard for causes that I care about. But he's run a terrible campaign, and while I know it's just politics, I've lost some respect for him.

I've always felt that we needed a major shakeup to beat Bush. I know his poll numbers are dropping, but they are still surprisingly strong, all things considered. His support among college age voters is especially troubling. And his fundraising ability is as powerful as ever.

We are not going to beat Bush with just another Washington candidate. We simply will not get the people to the polls. Dean has proven that he can bring both people and money into this race, and we need oodles of both to win or even compete.

The message I hear from people I talk to who aren't political junkies is that they want to support "anyone who can beat Bush." Outside of those of us who have already chosen a candidate, this is the prevailing plea: Beat Bush. Only Dean is proving that he has the broad appeal, the fortitude and the organization to do that.

The union endorsements this week and the decision to forgo public funding should further solidify his lead, and momentum should do the rest.

Get on board, Will, we need you.

[WilliamPitt]

28. Well, to be fair, my Kerry 'endorsement' really means nothing beyond DU

truthout is a non-profit. I can neither endorse nor work for any single candidate while working for truthout, so I tend to push all of them as best I can. My Kerry endorsement was a DU thing only.

[FrenchieCat]

38. as to you Muhammad Ali Avatar....

He is a relation (by marriage to his current wife) of mine, so when I address you, it feels personal. However, I am still curious whether it just the sheer campaign organization and the money that attracts to Dean or what? He and Kerry are so different that I find it somewhat hard to digest your leanings.

[FrenchieCat]

44. and of course being a person of color,

I have a great big problem with Dean's entire approach to race enlightment. Considering that many who attend my church were not at all happy about the entire broohaha, considering the boycott happening in South Carolina and all, I see a polar opposite in diplomatic nuance and what I saw exhibited last week. So again, without knowing you as a person, I am somewhat surprised....But maybe I shouldn't be.

[Eloriel]

89. Dean's approach to race enlightenment

I hope you're considering that in light of what he's actually said, and done, rather than just what you've heard, or seen during that appalling spectacle during the debate:

1. He's been giving his stump speech for going on a year, wherein he says in each one I've seen (and I've seen a bunch):

"I intend to talk about race in this election in the south because the Republicans have been talking about it since 1968 in order to divide us. And I'm going to bring us together, because you know what? White folks in the south who drive pickups trucks with confederate flags decals in the back ought to be voting with us and not them, because their kids don't have health insurance either and their kids need better schools too." (big applause)

2. He got a standing ovation at that point at the DNC Winter Meeting, which obviously included a lot of African Americans in the audience.

3. Maynard Jackson and Donna Brazille (the latter of which I don't much care for) both praised him for his appearance that day.

4. His Deputy Campaign Manager is Andi Pringle, an African American woman (whom I met briefly -- she's beautiful too) who had been Carol Moseley-Braun's Campaign Manager. If his approach is so offensive, why hadn't she stopped him from using that reference long before this?

5. He also says in pretty much every stump speech that he's going to go to the South and talk about race with WHITE people (whereas most of the politicians talk about race with black audiences). And when he came here in August (here = Atlanta), he did just that. He spoke at some length, with great sensitivity and straightforwardness. I was moved to tears.

6. Less important, but as long as I'm enumerating here, two of his college roommates (at Yale) were black -- they introduced him at the fundraiser in Atlanta. He had specifically asked for African American roommates, and according to one of them at the fundraiser, they spent a lot of time during the 60s there at Yale, amongst themselves, hashing things out and learning about Civil Rights, etc.

7. If you just give Dean the benefit of the doubt for just a moment (given that his typical stump speech message is intended as one of healing and unity, not division), and take another look at how the other candidates performed during the debate the other night, you'll see that they piled on, practicing wedge politics for the whole spectacle. John Edwards, in particular, was especially offensive, IMO, because all Dean did in his comments was try to appeal to a segment of the Southern population to VOTE Democratic, yet Edwards twisted it by telling him, "We don't need someone like you telling us what to do." That statement is nearly word-for-word what they old segregationists like Wallace, etc., told the Federal Govt and Northerners during the Civil Rights era. Edwards doesn't want any Dem candidate asking for votes -- THAT's telling people of the South "what to do"?? Shameful. Absolutely shameful. It would be one thing to tell Dean his remark was "insensitive" (which some well-meaning people have), it's another thing entirely to misrepresent the remark and divide people on raceas the other candidates did -- purposely turn off black voters while appealing to racists.

Whether Dean's comment was insensitive or not (and in truth, I've always cringed a bit at the mention of the flag, BUT his larger point was important and I saw the entirety of the message as unifying rather than divisive), it was NOT an appeal to racists on the BASIS of racism. Not at all, in any shape or form. It was an appeal to voters (who may also be racist), who are average working people voting against their own self-interest, on populist and economic grounds.

BTW, I never watch the guy, but I didn't get the channel changed in time the other night when Joe Scarborough led with the Dean flag flap. One of the things he said, and I found it quite interesting (esp. since he's from very redneck FL panhandle, was: "There are millions of Southerners who vote GOP and don't feel very good about themselves doing it. But it's a lot better than voting for someone who calls you a bigot."

Eloriel

[WilliamPitt]

54. I'm from Massachusetts

Kerry's work has been a daily part of my life for 19 years, if that helps explain things. He is a man to be honored for his work, and would make a magnificent President.

[FrenchieCat]

56. I can understand Kerry of MA....

I don't understand Dean though......that was what my post was about.

[economic justice]

41. Truthout is incorporated as a non-profit?

Why?

[LiberalTexan]

25. I met Kerry last April

I also gave money early to many of the campaigns. I still receive e-mails from most of the campaigns. However, I picked Dean in July after months of internal debating with myself.

The thing that pushed me over the edge: each of the candidate's e-mails had a link to their webpages. So I visited them. And, most of them bash Howard Dean on their webpages. I don't want to read about that. I want to read about how the said candidate is going to squash Bush. Sure, they've got to beat Dean first, but how about keeping some focus, here? The prize is B-U-S-H.

If you go to Dean's website, it's more upbeat, talks about taking back our country, bringing in new members to the world of politics. It's inspiring, bright, at times witty (read the blog). Very rarely did I ever even see mention of other candidates. Even during this whole flag thing. I like that. The focus there is against the administration. All of them. And, I like that.

I could have gone any other way even after picking Dean. But, I'll tell you what... after chances time and time again, I've been distraught by the negativity of others (Kerry will opt out too, but he's bashing Dean-- go figure) I keep gravitating closer and closer to Dean.

Who wouldn't?

[FrenchieCat]

27. I am Also curious

as to what your strategical plan is in generating as much as possible coat-tails for the 4 Southern Senate open seats Edwards/NC, Hollings/SC, Graham/FL, Miller/Ga) that will also be on the various ballots during the General election?

[WilliamPitt]

29. Get Clark involved somehow

If Dean wins, Clark needs to be his VP pick. The Arkansas roots and military background, coupled with Dean's NRA status, will be a great help. We need to win every state we won last time, plus one more, and it's in the bag. Arkansas or West Virginia strike me as the prize.

[frank frankly]

32. right-o about Clark

this is true. I like the way you think, Pitt.

Clark as VP means Dems win big.

[FrenchieCat]

33. But when casting your vote

in the primary, you are casting your vote for Clark as a VP? I am somewhat surprised as a Former Kerry supporter to another. I supported Kerry for the main purpose of wanting my top ticket to have National Security and foreign relations experience. I switched to Clark because I felt that he could offer most of what Kerry offered in a more attractive southern manner and without the partisan baggage. In addition, I feel that the more moderate tax plan offered by Clark is closest to Kerry's as opposed to Deans? Again, I find Dean's tax position to be perilous.

[WilliamPitt]

37. I think I made it clear that some of Dean's policies concern me

but I can't help but be impressed to this point. I'll be voting Kerry in the MA primary...if he makes it that far. If John loses in New Hampshire, the chariot will turn into a pumpkin faster than you can spit.

[VelmaD]

45. What you said...

it's hard not to be impressed by the way Dean has run his campaign even if you don't agree with him on issues. I'm in that boat myself.

I can't say who I'm gonna vote for in the Texas primary. I don't think Kucinich will last that long and I'm afraid Kerry won't either. I remember this same feeling in 1988 when there was no one left my Texas except Dukakis. *sigh*

Just imagine my angst when primary time rolls around and I have to choose between Dean and Clark. Eep. I'm warning you all now that I'm gonna drive you all nuts begging for help with that decision. :-)

[KaraokeKarlton]

47. Kerry's as good as done in NH now

I don't know if his campaign is just being run by total idiots or if Kerry himself is so obsessed with Dean that he screwed himself out of any shot he had there. It's all about guns. NH is VERY pro gun. SO much so that Democrats there will go to great lengths to avoid talking about it if at all possible. There's only one issue in NH that is bigger than gun rights and that is moving heaven and earth to avoid any state income or sales tax. Initially I was very concerned that Dean's position on Bush's tax cuts might hurt him in NH but it hasn't. He's framed his position beautifully by pointing out the connection between the federal income tax cuts and the rising property taxes in NH. Since that's the only tax NH residents pay, they have shot up over $100 million state wide this year alone. People are SO mad. One of their school districts not far from where I live only have $1 in their budget for the NCLB testing. They are going to fail and lose federal funding. For the first time, NH politicians may actually be forced to make a hard push for a state income tax because of Bush's policies. NH will gladly pay what they used to in federal income taxes to keep their state consistent with the "Live Free Or Die" state motto.

It was a huge mistake for Kerry to start praising any kind of gun control in NH. It's all through the local papers up here, and I've already heard people complain about it.

[virtualobserver]

48. Chief Idiot Bob Shrum, who also ran Gore into the ground.

Kerry should have walked to the nomination, Gore should have won by a landslide.

[SeattleRob]

101. Watch the Rove Spin Points....

I think it's too bad that we democrats repeat Rove spin to voice our concern about candidates we don't support. Dean is a governor and thus has no foreign policy "experience." What foreign policy experience did Clinton have? What experience did Carter have? These presidents were also governors with no foreign policy "experience."

I think a candidate's intelligence is what is important. Clinton, being highly intelligent picked smart people for his foreign policy team. Carter, for a man with no "experience" was able to broker a middle east peace settlement between Eygypt and Israel.

I think Dean, as with all the Democratic Candidates, are intelligent enough to pick good people to for their foreign policy team.

[Skwmom]

113. Once again, even Clinton has said that he doubts even he

could be elected commander-in-chief during these times of uncertainty.

[LoZoccolo]

39. I strongly think this will happen.

Notice they don't really attack each other that much. Hmmmm...

[Skwmom]

62. Dean has attacked Clark.

Clark hasn't attacked anyone.

[TLM]

107. Unless you count journalists in kosovo...

Clark sure as hell attacked them...

[Skwmom]

53. I see you are buying into the Dean spin that Clark

can prop up Dean. If you'd sudy it further I'd think you'd realize that is not the case.

On edit: Forget it. If you can't see how Dean has been propped up from day one by the Republican machinery I don't know what to say. I don't think you can be a stupid man so are you just naive, is it the jump on the winner bandwagon mentality, you don't want to hurt future books sales???

If you are so turned off by the conduct of the other candidates over the last couple of weeks what about the conduct of Dean and his campaign members. You don't have any problem with that?

[PVnRT]

80. If I'd "sudy" it further?

Do you have evidence that Rove wants Dean to win? No, you don't. This is your opinion, and you only have it because of your burning hatred for Dean.

Tell me, are you going to pout and vote for Bush if Dean wins the nomination?

[Skwmom]

115. Burning hatred?

I think your burning hatred of Bush is prohibiting you from making an honest, logical assessment of the situation.

There is an avalanche of evidence which supports the proposition that Rove is salivating for Dean (which has been discussed again and again and again on this board).

[TLM]

122. Yet with all this evidence, all you ever post is your opinion

and the insistance you are right.

Why not cite this burning evidence that Dean can't win?


Would that evidence be found in his record breaking fundraising, his lack of special interest ownership, his half million campaign volunteers and 130,000 meet up volunteers?

Where's the part that says he can't win... Dean is already polling neck and neck with Bush and the election is a year away.

Gore was like 20 points behind Bush in 2000 at first and he pulled that out to a 50-50 by election time. Dean is already showing numbers against Bush that Gore didn't have until election day.

And Dean's campaign makes Gore's campaign look like a snuff film.

SO how is it that Dean can not win?

[RevolutionStartsNow]

123. "An avalance of evidence"?

Do tell!

The only thing that's been discussed again and again on this board is YOUR OPINION that "Rove is propping up Dean!" and that his campaign contributions come primarily from Repubs.

Yes, Rove cheered for Dean at a 4th of July parade. We all got a good laugh out of that. Yes, some jokers bragged that they donated a few bucks to the Dean campaign and/or voted for him in a on-line poll. What a riot.

Saying it over and over and over and over (and over? how many posts do you have now?) doesn't make it "an avalanche of evidence."

[PVnRT]

150. Evidence?

If there is evidence, present it. If not, be prepared to be disagreed with. If you can't handle that, then leave.

[lastliberalintexas]

100. This is one of the things that bothers me about

some Clark supporters. You and Frenchie4Clark have posted things in this thread which, at the very least, imply that you think someone who doesn't support your guy must have a screw loose, must have not looked at the issues, or must have not given your guy a chance. No matter who they support, too, since Will has indicated he's still a Kerry guy.

Convince someone to vote for your guy by pointing out the good things he has done and his positions on the issues. You don't have to attack another candidate or their supporters to do that.

And yes, it isn't just Clark supporters who do this- it just seems to be more prevalent among certain Clark supporters than supporters of other candidates. The majority of what I see from Kerry, Dean et al supporters is my guy is the best candidate to Beat Shrub, or has the best chance, etc. What I see from some Clark supporters is my guy is the ONLY one to beat Shrub, and if for some crazy, mixed, up, goofy reason you aren't supporting him, then you must want Shrub to win. Almost all of our candidates have a very good shot at winning in 2004.

But then, you'd have to put your Dean hatred aside to see this. And given the posts of yours I've seen, I doubt that can happen.

And on edit- the personal attack against Will was uncalled for. I may disagree with much of what he says myself, but you can disagree with someone without having to resort to calling them stupid or naive.

[Skwmom]

124. My response.

I strongly disagree that Dean has a strong chance of beating Bush. Dean = 4 more years of Bush and to me that is unacceptable.

I want to back the strongest horse in the race. If someone entered the race tommorrow who was a better candidate I would back them in a heartbeat because there is too much at stake to allow my like or dislike for a certain candidate to lead to for more years of Bush.

Regarding Will Pitt - I expected more of him. When you make statements like we only need one more state to win - that is putting a false impression out there and from someone like him I expect more. I'm use to Dean's supporters on this board blindly repeating the latest Dean spin without question. It's a really sad day when the supposed leaders on this board do the same.

I remember watching CNN during the 2000 election debacle. The Republican talking points would be debunked and five minutes later CNN would allow them to be repeated without question. I expected more of the Democratic party. I can now see why people say there is no difference between the two parties.

[Skwmom]

59. Plus one more?

There's been some changes since the last election due to the census results.

[Eloriel]

93. Will, I'm surprised at you

Clark is a very attractive candidate in many ways.

But his "unattractive" qualities and history are real killers. Jackson Stephens, Acxiom, fired from NATO, etc. Not to mention praising Bush&Co. at a Republican fundraiser and not being able to quite figure out if he even was a Democrat.

There's some real bad stuff in there. Karl would have a field day.

Eloriel

[TLM]

109. THere's the whole journalists thing....

which frankly I figured would be a make or break issue with Will. I know it is with me.

To think that Clark thinks that journalists are valid military targets is very much a big problem with me.

Add that to his being a lobbyist, and his ties with Carlucci and Kissinger... and I really want that man nowhere near the white house.

[Darranar]

31. They'll fight the leaders...

if Kerry took the lead, they'd criticize him, too.

Such is part of the nature of politics.

[Zomby Woof]

46. It's hopeless! I quit! I am voting for Bush!

;-)

[FrenchieCat]

49. Don't do it.....

Just don't. Your vote will counts. We will beat bush. I seriously don't think we can do it with Dean, but this is early November and I certainly have energy to save my children from a F**ked future. So I will be campaigning for my choice candidate and writing letters these mediawhores till I no longer have fingers. Keep in mind if Bush wins, the world will really really hate us. We can't let them down!

[_NorCal_D_]

91. LOL

I'm almost certain that he was being sarcastic. :)

[WilliamPitt]

55. LOL ROFL!!!

Zomby = God. :)

[eileen from OH]

50. I'm an ABB girl first, a Dean supporter second

But my #2 choice has fluctuated between Clark, Kerry, Gephardt, and Edwards.

I do not take offense if anyone goes after Dean on the issues, on the theory that it makes him stronger and also prepares him for what may be thrown his way by Rove & Co.

So, going after him is what it's all about and Gawd knows Dean has stuck out some pointy elbows as well.

But all that being said, I've been really turned off by the weirdly obsessive way that Kerry has been going after him in the past few weeks. It's not the content or the context but geez-oh-pete, he can't answer a flippin' question anymore without turning it into an anti-Dean diatribe. I mean, it's really kinda freaky.

Anyone else besides me notice this, or is this just politics-as-usual?

eileen from OH

[Nlighten1]

68. Me too sort of

but that doesn't include Lieberman, Gephardt or any DLC'ers

[Skwmom]

52. Why do you think Dean has been able to overcome

everything thrown at him? Could it be because the media and Rove are working overtime to prop him up?

The Democratic party - it's like watching lambs being led to the slaughter.

[KaraokeKarlton]

57. You're missing something important

The media is reacting to the way Dean handles himself. They aren't propping him up. A lot of the reason that nothing sticks to Dean is because he just brushes it off and moves on to something else. He doesn't let things hold him down. He doesn't sit and wait to see what the reaction is going to be to decide how to deal with it. He just deals with it and moves on to a more compelling subject. So, while Kerry is still talking about what happened last week, Dean is talking about what's happening today and what's going to happen tomorrow. The press has figured out that Dean isn't the least phased by criticism, so they don't harp on it. He stays on the offensive rather than getting trapped into playing defense.

[Skwmom]

58. I'm stunned that you think this. e/o/m

[KaraokeKarlton]

73. You shouldn't be shocked

I've known about how Dean deals with criticism and the press for at least a decade now.

[FrenchieCat]

61. I don't really see it that way....

Between the Media ignoring Clark as much as possible....meaning even when pundits discuss the South Carolina poll in which Clark is leading, somehow his name doesn't come up in the conversation.

When the administration start using words like troup mix, etc... in their language after Clark's big foreign policy speech where he uses the exact same phrase. Or when Biden (Mr. Plagiarizer himself) uses the NATO idea with not attribution today....after Clark's speech which includes the NATO angle. Or when Clark talks about the Chinook helicopters that shouldn't be regular about taking off and landing patterns....and then the admin announces that they are deregulating the Chinooks patterns???

Clark writers wrote to C-span to request having his speech televised, or else I doubt it would have been.

Or when newsweek shows a poll where Clark is the closest at beating Bush (today's issue) their headline is saying that Dean comes closest to beating Bush. Clark was at a 3% diff, while Dean was at a 4% diff. We wrote to request a correction today...No, I don't think it's just an accident. Sorry.

Or when TRN in their "writers grade the candidates" has one of the writers give Clark a "D" in Foreign policy. When we wrote to ask how was that....he printed a "correction" and changed the grade to a "B"...said he hadn't read the speech, just read the wire reports on it. Reason he got a "B" he said was because none of these international organization would want to do any of this. Well Yea......I responded, not with Bush still on board that's for sure. But like hel-lo....Clark's speech was not made with Bush still on board in mind. duh....

so it figures, that somethings up. But that's ok, cause Clark is going through it in his own way.....via local coverage...and he is getting plenty of that.

So everyone watch your rear flank, cause the Clarkies, they are a coming!

This writer agrees that it's the media stupid (not you)
http://www.arktimes.com/max/110703brantley.html


--------THIS IS JUST INTERESTING...CLARK ON ART--------
Question: Most politicians either ignore or attack funding for the arts. If elected president, would you use the weight of your office to increase the budget of the National Endowment for the Arts to $250 million and direct that more funds be given to individuals, rather than just to institutions?

Wesley K. Clark: I believe that the arts are very important to the future of our America,. A country has a soul, and we have to continually find and examine our own. Arts help us do this. .So I believe in restoring funding for the NEA. I haven't fixed any given level, except that I want to raise the prominence of the arts in our daily lives, and I want to reopen the idea of giving grants to individuals. We just have to create the right mechanism to find merit and promise.

[KaraokeKarlton]

75. Clark had his chance to steal the spotlight

And he did for a few days...but ultimately, he blew it by not being prepared and he did come across poorly and somewhat weak as a result. That doesn't mean he is a bad candidate or weak, it only means that he didn't take full advantage of the chance he had. Dean has worked very hard to keep the attention on him. The press isn't just talking about him for no reason. Dean is giving them things to report. Oh, and with several of the other candidates attacking Dean all the time, they help keep the media focused on Dean, too. The press doesn't just report on someone campaigning. They report on things that interest people. That means the candidates need to be organized to inform the press of every event, be innovative in what they do and say, and stand out from the crowd. Dean has done that from very early on. He's doing the right things and that attracts the attention of the press.

[Tom Rinaldo]

108. National Spin

I would agree that Clark got a chance to be in the spotlight. They gave him about 10 days. "Got to be in the spotlight" is a very different phrase than "had his chance to steal the spotlight". The unspoken implication of the latter is the meaning usually associated with "had his chance", and that meaning is is "he blew it". That is the pre programmed national spin, part of the "Clark will be in single digits in two weeks" then "Clark is fading", followed by "let's talk about everyone else" script that played out. The only patt of that script that reflected reality was the last part, about talking about everyone other than Clark as a serious candidate.

Since when does any candidate (of substance) for President get one and only one chance to be taken seriously, that one chance being when they announce several months before the first primary vote is even cast? Do you remember that even in the 1998 National election when Reagan/Bush trounced Mondale/Ferrara, Mondale surged ahead of Reagan immediately after the Democratic Party Convention? Same thing happened right after the Democrats nominated Dukakis. Why is that? Simple, there is always a big bump up in the polls after a political candidate gets major direct coverage of their message. That is ALWAYS followed by a slide in the polls. It is absolutely predictable. The National media spin machine had their trap set and ready. "Oh look, Clark is starting to slip in the polls. Well I guess he's not viable." Candidates slip because the favorable spotlight always moves on to something else. It's the "new" part of "news" dynamic. Then of course there is the predictable counter attack by opponents which inevitably pulls polling numbers down. That's the way it works, even when there isn't a hidden agenda at work.

The trouble is, Clark hasn't faded, not after you factor out the artificial "bump" part of the initial polling. He's in a statistical dead heat with Dean Nationally. Next to Dean, Clark has the second largest base of activist supporters, and his supporters are at least as fervently committed to their man as Dean's are. What does that mean? It means that Clark can bring out the passion that Democrats will need to retake the White House. Everyone acknowledges that Dean excites a core group of Democratic Party activists, but that part is conveniently neglected about Clark. Kerry, Gephardt, Edwards, Lieberman, Sharpton, and even Braun and Kocinich, have been players on the National political stage longer than Clark. The first group of men obviously so, and everyone other than Clark has been running for over a year. None of those candidates has shown the ability to excite a broad cross section of Democratic voters (though Kocinich Sharpton and Braun have their hot spots). Clark is all upside, much like the Dean campaign at a much earlier stage, and he is VERY MUCH still in contention. Just watch Clark's NH numbers start to climb now that he is on the ground meeting voters in NH (something all the other candidates have been up to for many moonths).

I honestly believe that Clark is getting better as a candidate every week, which can't be said about anyone else. Kerry and Edwards are starting to sound a little too shrill. Lieberman has established that too many Democrats see him as too close to being Republican. Gepharde is the same old known quantity, no hidden upside there. Dean obviously has stayed on course, but the Confederate Flag flap exposed some vulnerabilities, and he showed weakness in how he initially responded. Remember the part about Clark not having specifics to offer? That's old news, he has 'em, and is adding specifics every week. Remember the part about him not being an experienced campaigner? Check out the response Clark generates on the campaign trail, even look at the Rock the Vote debate. When the 2004 election is underway, Clark will have a lot more experience under his belt, plus he won't be stifled by a 9 person debate format ill suited to someone who hasn't spent his adult life perfecting 10 second sound bites.

Bottom line. Pay attention to the reality, not the spin. If Clark is given half of the respect that he legitimately deserves based on the current strength of his campaign and the merrit of the positions he's taken to date, he should be thought of as one of only two candidates positioned to win the nomination. If you factor in his strong appeal to voters outside of core Democratic voters, he should rightly be judged as the Democrats best chance to regain the White House. There are way too many self fullfilling fallacies being propagated about Clark's campaign. Don't be part of them.

[KaraokeKarlton]

167. He did blow it because he wasn't prepared

I don't dislike Clark at all, so I'm not bashing him by saying this. He DID have a chance to hold onto the spotlight and make it harder for Dean to regain it. When he entered the race he hadn't put enough thought into how he would react to questions on issues. He got caught in a few "gotchas", avoided taking some positions and just didn't have a prepared position or statement on other things. He was thinking about running for quite awhile, and it would have been wise for him to have all that stuff sorted out before jumping in. He didn't and that is why he didn't capture the spotlight. Running against Dean, none of the other candidates can afford to make any mistakes. His campaign is being run about as close to perfect as any candidate could hope for. Combine that with the fact that whenever he makes a minor misstep and gets criticized for it, it only makes him stronger and he's going to be pretty much impossible to catch, let alone beat.

[Tom Rinaldo]

168. "There you go again". (only kidding).

I don't find your post to be a bash at all. I do have trouble with your title for it though. It's sort of back to the "he had his chance" type of quick dismissal. Unlike candidates who hold political offices, Clark hasn't had a personal staff of political aids for years, which compounded his difficulty in preparing to enter the race, but every campaign shakes out bugs in its early stages. Rarely is that the point when the spotlight is most focused on it though, which unfortunately was the case for Clark. The point I was making is that it was entirely misleading for anyone to have concluded that a dip in Clark's polling numbers, after that initial glare of publicity, is proof that he was a "flavor of the month", which is exactly the type of put down that was trotted out immediately, and unfairly, about Clark. The Facts have proven otherwise.

Yes he could have done better back then had he been more experienced and had his team had more time to hit its stride. Nonetheless every candidate "blows it" more than once in the course of a campaign. Dean has done remarkably well in that regard untill the flag flap, which he did blow. That by itself doesn't blow Dean's canidacy. I have never watched any campaign where there wasn't talk about whether a candidate was having a "good" or "bad" week. My main point is Clark has only been in the race for a couple of months and he is more than holding his own and getting better at it. It is a lot earlier in the race than a lot of people are willing to conceed. Gary Hart and Ed Muskie didn't get the nomination, remember? Clinto got 3% in Iowa in 1992.

By the way, other than your praise for the Dean campaign, who has run a perfect campaign? Kerry? Lieberman? Gephardt? Edwards? Kocinich? Who? Or is it your point that no one has a chance against Dean, which I would disagree with.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

63. Oh my gosh...

can this be repeated any more times?

Dean's success is NOT a "vast right wing conspiracy." Yes, there may be some very silly Repubs who laughed at Dean early on as the "anti-war" candidate who would get crushed in the General, but I bet it's not so funny to them now. They are living the "be careful what you wish for" nightmare, as Dean picks up support and steam and maybe even the DU endorsement of William Rivers Pitt! :)

[FrenchieCat]

64. But wouldn't it have to make sense to

first. Sorry Pitt, I don't see the logic still. Maybe there is none, but I tend to doubt it. In reading your answers to my posts you have been diplomatically dodging each question.

Kerry & Clark = foreign policy experience needed to beat bush
Dean = none

Kerry & Clark = moderate tax policy
Dean = whole tax enchilata/talking point for repugs

Kerry & Dean = attack each other & others
Clark = attacks no one (although that is your reason for your
disenchantment with Kerry)

Clark = South
Kerry & Dean = New England/North (although we need 4 southern
seats if we don't want to leave in true hell for just about ever)

Dean = Shoots off at the mouth
Clark & Kerry = Nuanced diplomacy

Clark = Charismatic, charming and appealing
Dean = Cute (to some), Arrogant, loud and abrassive
Kerry = funny (sometimes), serious, historic and French looking

Kerry & Dean = politicians
Clark = Leader & public servant

Kerry = insider
Clark & Dean = Washington outsiders

Kerry = Wilson and Feinstein endorsements
Clark = Holbrook and Rubin endorsements
Dean = Union endorsement (not yet confirmed)

Kerry = Rep Ford
Clark = Thurgood Marshall Jr.
Dean = Jesse Jackson Jr.

Kerry = Campaign going nowhere fast - not polling well nationally
Clark = campaign started 7 weeks ago - polling frontrunner status
Dean = Campaign over 1 year - polling frontrunner status

Kerry = no where to go if loses in NH
Clark = Newbie.....hanging tough with media ignoring him, after
smearing for 3 weeks since day after he announced.
Dean = growing ever so slowly with much media attention since
August

Kerry = Weak Grassroot support to speak
Clark = Draft movement/internet site traffic growing/
surpassed Dean's last weekend (you can check by going to Deans
traffic map and typing in Wesley Clark for comparison)
Dean = Large tight grassroot support

Kerry = has money of his own to fund campaign
Clark = doing good considering how long he's been in.
Dean = Losta money $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Kerry = Liberal, Democrats, older votes...maybe military, maybe
not
Clark = Southern, men, blacks, hispanics, Asians, military,
moderates, independents, reformed republicans, young people &
senior voters
Dean = Confused Liberals, moderates, libertarians, anti-war,
Women voters, +$70,000 voters

Kerry = could beat Bush
Clark = should beat Bush
Dean = may or may not beat Bush

So what makes you lean Dean? That is my question.

[WilliamPitt]

65. You make a good chart

and I'm still a Kerry guy. I 'lean' to Dean because his campaign has impressed me. Clark is impressive, and Kerry is impressive, and Dean has all but erased them. People can call it a BFEE scam if it comforts them. I'm looking at a stud.

Clinton sucked on a lot of the issues in 1992, and no one gave him a chance.

[Skwmom]

71. Would his campaign really be that impressive

if it wasn't aided by the corporate media determined to crown Dean the nominee? The Repubs have had their hand in making the Dean campaign successful (by giving money, talking down the other candidates, etc).

In the general election it's going to be a totally different game. Let's see how well the Dean machine can hold up once it comes up against the Rove machine. They'd have a much better chance if they had a better product (candidate). I think many people are going to be faced with voting the lesser of two evils and in that case I think the majority will favor the incumbent.

[TLM]

102. Have you ever posted anything not attacking Dean?

And where have you been? The media went after DEan at first, trying to lump him in with kucinich as a fringe leftist nut.

But Dean built a grass roots army, tens of thousands of people sending letters, e-mails, faxes, and making calls. Not only did Dean get his message out by going around the media, his supporters made the media take notice.

You can keep whining about some vast media conspiracy to keep your guys down... but the fact is the media tried the same crap with Dean, but Dean was able to turn it wound throught he efforts of his supporters.

I'm sure if Kerry or Clark or Lieberman had 130,000 people meeting every month to write letters and organize and raise money, they'd be getting coverage like Dean.

[lastliberalintexas]

104. Good Gawd!

Do you just cut and paste, or what?

[_NorCal_D_]

94. Outstanding chart Frenchie4Clark!

Once again you have impressed me! B-):thumbsup:

[JackRiddler]

66. Figure it out already...

For starters the media was laughing Dean off as a cute also ran, "potentially the Lamarr Alexander of the 2004 Democratic primary."

His breakthrough since has come almost entirely on the war stance, and the success in mobilizing a couple of hundred thousand people via Internet - something that someone was going to do sooner or later, but no one ever did until now. TWO THIRDS OF THAT CASH IS COMING IN BITS OF $200 OR LESS! During this success, the mass media had little to say, for him or against him.

And he did this by daring the straight talk and tapping the anger against Bush. Face it, NO ONE with a real shot was going after Bush in early 2003. It was a no-brainer to do so, but all potential top-tier Demo candidates proved at the time to have no brains. (Sorry, Kucinich dreamers, K. did go after Bush, but he's never had a chance, and not only because the media are nasty, but because Americans are never going to accept K. as their leader for entirely unfair reasons of personality, and you all have my sympathies, and I'm down with you on 90 percent of the issues, but...)

The media is always bad news but real-live media people often do have a bit of "liberal bias." How could they not?! They're often very well-informed! Dean's simply won a lot of them over, for good reasons and bad. They also see that Bush is going down, so they're also willing to give the Democratic frontrunner more of a slide than usual.

He wins the activists and he makes activists. (Not me, yet, but who cares, I'm merely the ornery "Lamarr Alexander of the DU GD forum."*)

And his campaign has a handle on the techniques of alternate media and mainstream media alike.

Just face up that he's totally outmaneuvering the rest, and this is why he's on top.

And stop worrying about what Rove thinks.

(*All that really matters in this universe is Will Pitt's endorsement.)

[Skwmom]

72. Rove doesn't do my thinking for me, neither does the Dean spin

machine. It's amazing how easy the masses are mislead, both Democrats and Republicans. Dean has pulled a page out of the Rove play book. You repeat something often enough and people take it for the truth.

[PVnRT]

81. Kind of like what you're doing, eh?

"Rove is propping up Dean!" "Rove is propping up Dean!" "Rove is propping up Dean!" "Rove is propping up Dean!" "Rove is propping up Dean!" "Rove is propping up Dean!" "Rove is propping up Dean!" "Rove is propping up Dean!" "Rove is propping up Dean!"

Maybe after another thousand posts of that tripe you might get someone to actually believe you. Good luck.

[CWebster]

84. Looks like you are closing in on 1000 posts

every single last one of them a venomous attack in your personal crusade against Dean.

[PVnRT]

79. Whatever

Another smear from a Dean-hater. How original.

Yeah, Dean is the Rove-approved choice and all who support him are really Republican plants sent in to divide the Democratic party. Kerry, however, is the true liberal who can do no wrong and is always right and has the only chance of beating Bush.

As much vitriol as is put out around here, only the Dean-haters seem to want to throw around the "Rove-approved-candidate" bullshit to smear their opponents. Sad, really.

[returnable]

85. You obviously haven't met the Clark bashers here...

...who insist that Clark is a PNAC/neocon plant :hi:

[PVnRT]

95. An equally idiotic claim

The only candidate in this race that the right-wing would be pleased to run against is Lieberman.

[_NorCal_D_]

97. Unfortunately

that is not true. Take a look at this:

http://www.sf.indymedia.org/news/2003/07/1624957.php
Karl Rove Wants Dean Against Bush for 2004

<snip>
Rove told a companion, " 'Heh, heh, heh. Yeah, that's the one we want,' " according to Daniel J. Weiss, an environmental consultant, who was standing nearby. " 'How come no one is cheering for Dean?' " Then, Weiss said, Rove exhorted the marchers and the parade audience: " 'Come on, everybody! Go, Howard Dean!'
<snip>

This article was from July. After the flag fiasco, you can bet that Shrub n' friends are even more hopeful that Dean is the nominee. :scared: :(

[TLM]

130. After the flag fiasco... you been asleep?

the flag thing happened last week, not 3 months ago.

And are you seriously saying that because someone claimed that Rove made a joking remark about wanting the guy that this crowd wasn't cheering for, that somehow is proof of some elaborate conspiracy to get Dean good press coverage?

[JNelson6563]

148. You fall for that

and your impressed with a Dean bashers rants? Wow. Another member of the DU brain trust.

Julie

[TLM]

128. WHich one... Clark or Dean... has worked as a defense contractor lobbyist?

Which one said they'd vote for the IWR, then said they wouldn't then said they would?

Which one wouldn't even say if he was a democrat?

Which one said Reagan and Bush Sr. were great leaders to whom we are all greatful, at a republican fundraiser?

Which one thinks it is OK to target and bomb journalists?


I do not know if Clark is neo-con or PNAC, but he is most certianly NOT what he claims to be. His record proves that.

[blm]

163. Haha...Dean is the one playing dressup as a populist

when he never GOVERNED as anything but a compromising centrist.

BTW...One of Dean's advisors is Toby Moffett who works with Bob Livingston (R-pervert). Moffett WAS a Monsanto VP and now lobbies for defense contracts for firms wanting Iraq business.

[_NorCal_D_]

103. That is nonsense

As much vitriol as is put out around here, only the Dean-haters seem to want to throw around the "Rove-approved-candidate" bullshit to smear their opponents. Sad, really.

Accusations of a candidate being 'Rove approved' are abound on DU. And this is not just directed towards Dean.
Here is a perfect example:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=79539#79563

[flpoljunkie]

86. Skwmom, my sentiments, exactly. Rove and Rethugs must be ecstatic

that the Dems seem to be rushing headlong to nominate Dean.

[mdmc]

69. WPitt, Does your personality ever change your politics

Or your mood?
When I feel bad, I tend to withdraw my support from Dean and tend to resort back to Braun / Kucinich.
Dean has given me a lot of hope, and when I feel good I really can't think of anyone better that Dean (I like Kerry, but he is slagging).
Does mood or personality ever change your political posistion?

[xJlM]

76. Don't do it, Will

Don't go over to the dark side... :)

Seriously, I read your article on truthout about the American casualties in Iraq and how they are accelerating, and I can't see how anyone can read that and feel we need to keep our soldiers in Iraq. We're quickly approaching 400 killed in Iraq, do you think we'll hit 500 by Christmas?

Dennis Kucinich is the only candidate with a serious, thought out plan for getting the U.S. out of Iraq. This might involve humbling ourselves before the very people we've been insulting for going on three years now, but it makes more sense to me than pouring more money and lives down the black hole we're currently feeding. Of course, who knows what the situation will look like in a year. I think everyone agrees that the Tet Offensive has yet to occur.

[Walt Starr]

77. That's kind of funny, Will because Saturday I went to Kerry

over the medical marijuana issue. To me the Ware on some Drugs is the biggest waste of taxpayer money ever conceived and Kerry was the first to get halfway sane about this issue (outside Kucinich).

Of course, my brain usually takes over on these things and I'll be a Dean or Clark supporter in the primary.

Honestly, if I were to vote my heart, I would have to vote for Al Sharpton, and I would have never beleived I would be saying that.

[TLM]

132. Walt... we have more important issue than pot...

Yeah the drug war is a waste, and DEan has strong positions on reforming the durg war with a focus on treatment, not prison.

I settle for progress on the drug war, not perfection, because we have bigger fish to fry.

[Desertrose]

83. yer jus' funnin' wit' us right ,Will??

I mean really...you are aren't you???

Your last sentence really is chilling....:scared:

but I know yer just foolin with us...

besides...Zomby ( who does after all, equal god) would severely frown on that you know ...

:evilgrin:

Peace
DR

PS I have a very nice candidate for you if you are looking

[Guaranteed]

87. Will-

I'm seeing a shift in Bush's strength, from foreign policy and domestic security to (maybe) the economy. It seems to me that the Democrats will make the war and terrorism their main front in the campaign. I think this "paradigum" shift may determine the election, and, unfortunately, as a Dean supporter, it makes me want to change my support to Clark. What do you think?

[WilliamPitt]

92. I think you may be on to something, but

Dean was against this war sooooooooooooo long ago. That means he had more foreign policy smarts than Bush, Rummy, Wolfie, Perle, Rice and Powell combined. That's a campaign ad right there.

[blm]

98. He "admirably" lied in that flag flap.

He references the Con flag to defend his NRA support and then said he was starting a discussion about race relations. Since he was kind enough to repeat this lie a few times on camera Rove has it all on tape.

[TLM]

134. More lies and distortions...

I see you stopped quoting the piece because those pesky quote marks proves you're lying.

Dean was interviewed on several issues about the south and dems reaching out to the south, as the author noted. The author was the one who put the Dean quote about the flag in a piece where he focused mostly on the NRA, not Dean.

Dean did not write the piece, and the way the statment is quoted shows Dean said nothing about the NRA in his comment about the flag.

So why continue to ignore the last 11 months of Dean using the statment in reference to race and the southern strategy, and ignore the way the statment is quoted in the piece, in order to lie and claim Dean said this about the NRA?

[blm]

160. Wrong. The reporter said Dean said it ON THE PHONE

when he was interviewed about the NRA.

[sangh0]

99. CLue phone calling for Will

Clue Phone calling: The Bush campaign is going to bury every Democrat combined on fundraising. This system was broken a long time ago. You don't walk into a gunfight against a guy with an M-60 while packing a .22 with half the bullets gone

And Dean knew this when he first spoke so strongly about his commitment to staying within the system. Aside from the fact that Dean now has the potential to raise more money than the limits allow, what changed?

[WilliamPitt]

105. I have no beef with this change of rhetoric

It is very probable that Dean fundraising prowess surprised even him. He changed his position based on new facts. If more people did this, we wouldn't be in Iraq right now.

[Skwmom]

110. Hmm.. wonder why the fundraising surprised even Dean.

Could it be that Bush supporters (for example, a BOD for Haliburton) have donated to the Dean campaign. Oh no. The Republicans would never think to do something like that. They're not smart like the Democrats.

[TLM]

136. Dean funds are from 200k people who gave an average of 75 bucks

They had no idea they'd get this level of support, and now that they have it, they'd be fools to limit it.

If anybody else running was raising money like Dean is, they'd drop public funding in a heartbeat.

[RetroLounge]

161. I have proof the Republicans donated to Dean!

The Repugs gave me a Tax Cut / Tax Rebate thingy, $400 for each of my 2 Kids = $800.00.

I in turn took a chunk of that money and donated it to Dean.

I later took another chunk and Donated it to Dean.

I will soon give another chuck to Dean.

So I guess the Republicans *are* donating to Dean.

What's your point?

[Skwmom]

111. I see you bought into the Dean spin hook line and sinker.

Dean isn't another smarmy politician without principles, one who will say and do anything to get elected. No Dean just changes his position based no new facts. They can repeat this mantra until the cows come home, once the voters get a laundry list of Dean's "change of positions" they won't believe a word he has to say.
Comparing him to Carter is laughable. I TRUST Carter. Dean, I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him (expect to hear this mantra a lot in the general election - it plays really well with the common folks who still care about integrity).

[sangh0]

118. What are the "new" facts?

I keep hearing about them and their effect on Dean's opinion but no one seems to know exactly what these new facts are. Does anybody know? Does Dean?

[TLM]

138. The new facts are that Dean is breaking fundraising records...

with small contributions from hundreds of thousands of people.

They did not think they would do this well and now that there is a fundraising system in place than can fight Bush, it would be foolish to cut it off at the knees.

But as ususal you attack anything Dean does because that's what you do. If Dean has stuck with the spending limits and took matching funds, you'd be attacking him for hurting the campaign and saying that such bad decisions are proof he can't beat Bush.


So what you say at this point really means nothing.

[sangh0]

116. Of course, but you ignored the point

You say Dean changed his position "based on new facts". What were those new facts? Didn't Dean know a long time ago that Bush* was not going to limit his spending and that Bush* would have a lot of money?

In my earlier post, I asked "What changed?", and your response was basically

1) I agree with the new position
2) It's based on new facts

Umm, yeah, I got that part. I asked "What are the new facts?"

[WilliamPitt]

117. The new facts

are all the dollar bills that came flooding into the campaign, millions of new facts, each of which motivates a new perspective on how to run the campaign.

[sangh0]

125. That's a new fact?

When Dean first promised to abide by public financing limits, he said nothing about his inability to raise so much money. He did speak about principles. Now that he can raise the money, he talks about pragmatism, and is silent on his supposedly sincere principles.

[sangh0]

126. Here's a new fact

http://www.deanforamerica.com/index.html

A Declaration of Independence
by the People of Dean for America
in Burlington, November 8, 2003

"...Today our government has become overrun by special interests. Working with President George Bush, they have turned our government into a system that works for the profit of the few not the benefit of the many.

They have in the last two elections flooded our politics with over 5.1 billion dollars in contributions...."

And now, Dean is going to combat the selling of our govt by accepting even more of their money

[WilliamPitt]

139. I don't think that's accurate

Dean's war chest hasn't come from corporations, but from lots and lots and lots and lots abd lots of regular people.

[sangh0]

141. Bush*'s war chest comes from individuals too Will

Corps are no longer allowed to contribute to candidates. People who work for corps are "regular people" too.

[WilliamPitt]

145. So what's your point?

Are you actually saying Dean and the other candidates should avoid being competitive in this thing?

[sangh0]

147. C'mon Will

"should avoid being competitive"?????

Have you ever heard of "begging the question"? I'm sure you have. Portraying the side you disagree with as "avoiding being competitive" shows that your mind is setteled on this. Please don't insult me by pretending you are asking for info when it's clear "new facts" won't change your mind about this.

BTW, Gore had no trouble beating Bush* while staying in the limits. Your assumption that keeping to the limits will cause Dems to "avoid being competitive" is, IMO, just so much bullshit.

I'd also like to point out that Bush*'s fundraising "advantage" is not quite as clear as you might think. The Dems have raised as much money as Bush*. The only problem is that it's been split amongst 10 candidates.

[WilliamPitt]

149. "Gore had no trouble beating Bush"

You're kidding, right? You've been on the planet for the last three years, right? Gore won, but not by enough. You can't eek out a victory against these guys. You have to stomp them.

Nader required Gore to spend precious campaign money in Minnesota and Washington. One might argue that this provided the margin of defeat in West Virginia and Florida. One might further argue that, had campaign spending limits been eschewed, Gore would have had the financial horses to fight a war on two fronts.

[sangh0]

153. Gore won by thousands of votes

unfortunately, many of them were stolen from Gore. However, I don't see how breaking the limits is going to help anyone prevent the theft of elections and the disenfranchisement of votes. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I just don't see how it helps with that.

And while you could argue that second point (about Naders impact) it's a bit of stretch. Though there might be a connection to funds, the main problem wasn't one of spending limits.

But none of this addresses the point I was trying to illuminate at the beginning which is that when Dean committed himself to those limits, he only spoke of his principles. At the time, these principles clearly placed him on the side of staying within those limits. Now, he has abandoned those commitments on the basis of political pragmatism. So what happened to those principles? What other principles might Dean abandon once political pragmatism makes doing so appealing?

If it turns out that the public will not elect a politician that opposed the IWR vote, will he abandon that in order to "stomp them"? Why is Dean's decisions "pragmatic" while others are "politically motivated"? Isn't this decision just as politically motivated as any decision made by any of the other candidates, including their yes votes on IWR?

Dean called his opponents "Bush-lite" for voting for IWR. Is Dean "Bush-lite" now that he is doing what Bush* does, and what Dems do not?

Basically, your argument is "That's what we have to do to win". For one thing, I don't think we HAVE TO do that. For another, it raises issues that go directly to Dean's stated reasons for why people should vote for him.

[WilliamPitt]

155. I guess that's where you and I part ways

I believe we do HAVE to do whatever we need to do in order to win, including crack a few principles if need be. Bush Inc. will have three quarters of a billion dollars to spend on this race (between the campaign fundraising and the RNC fundraising. That number looks like this: 750,000,000.00

We HAVE to do that.

[blm]

164. Dean is doing this WITH teflon granted by the media for now.

What happens when that teflon goes back to Bush? Dean's rhetoric and record do not match, and it will be more difficult a path once that teflon is stripped. The scrutiny will then begin in earnest.

[sangh0]

165. "crack a few principles"???

Like Dean's opposition to the Iraq invasion?

What if Dean's opposition to war, like his support for CFR, is just one more principle the needs to be abandoned in order to win? Even worse, what if Dean's opposition to that war was NEVER based on principles, but instead based on Dean's seeing a political advantage in differentiating himself? What if that pragmatism extends to the principles he speaks of in opposing Bush*?

[WilliamPitt]

166. Then he'd be a politician like all the rest

Since Jesus, Buddha, Vishnu and the rest don't sem available to run, we're stuck with the politicians. If we're smart, we back the ones who can win.

[sangh0]

169. "Then he'd be"

Why do you put that in the future? Why do you seem so adamant on avoiding the points I'm making?

The only thing that differentiates Dean from his Dem opponents is "what"?? To ask it another way, "What is so different about Dean that made him appeal to Dem voters?"

Now ask yourself "Does Dean's decision to go with pragmatism over principle threaten that appeal?" IOW "Has Dean's success had anything to do with a perception concerning his principles?"

[Snellius]

112. I feel your pain

One issue that doesn't get enough consideration in this quandary is not just who can beat Bush or who would be the best for the office but who, even if all else fails, would revolutionize the Democratic Party in the most promising direction for the future. And here, not only because of his forward-looking organizational techniques, but also because of his distance from the DLC/DNC crowd, Dean seems the most likely to shake things up.

[dave29]

114. I just wish

the Primaries were over already. I'm ready to focus my fire on Bush - and Bush only.

[curse10]

119. That's too bad Will

I, for one, don't think Dean has ever looked "damn good." His angry rhetoric and flip flopping is not something I would ever support.

This campaign choice may not be a big issue for you, but you have to admit, he flip-flopped (very blatantly, I might add). And, for many non-Dean people, this issue is huge. And, Dean's hubris on this issue is not going to make me give money to his campaign, ever (even if he does win the primaries). If he thinks he can get the big bucks, he can do it without mine.

I do hope you stick with Kerry- he is the best choice for the candidacy. Feel free to change your mind, but like the other Dean supporters on this board, you'll have to go on my ignore list :-)

[RevolutionStartsNow]

120. All Dean supporters are on your ignore list?

Well I suppose if that's true you can't even see this message.

Weird. Maybe you were just kidding. Hence the smiley. :)

[blm]

121. You shouldn't ignore them curse10...

if you don't correct the perceptions sitting out there that you know are false, they are spread even further.

[TLM]

143. LOL!!!!! Speaking of correcting false perceptions...

Where's your post attacking Kerry for his very misleading claim that Dean embraced the confederate flag?

[curse10]

162. Yeah, but my blood pressure is more important

I've said it before and I'll say it again. My refuting falsities spread about Kerry on this board isn't going to make anyone change their mind about Dean. Nor is any Dean supporter spewing said falsities going to make me change my mind and support Dean. I feel like it's a lose-lose battle we've got goin' here.

I'll support Kerry until he drops out, then I'll either support who he says to support or go down my list. Next in line for me? Edwards. Unless Kerry comes out with full support of Dean (which we all know isn't likely) I won't be supporting Dean unless he wins the candidacy, as Dean is number 9 on my list.

And it's not like I hate Dean. I don't. I just fundamentally disagree with many of his stances on issues. And, I don't like the attitude coming from his campaign. I have to stick with my gut. And my gut says, Dean ain't a good idea. There are things I might be able to point to, but I still can't pinpoint why I feel this way. However, if he does win the nomination I'll vote for him. I'll hold my nose and do it. But he won't get anything else from me. I can't give my money away like that. I've never given money to an individual candidate, until now (I recently gave to Kerry's campaign). If Dean wins the nod, I'll go back to supporting the non-profit orgs promoting issues I agree with.

I guess what is most sad about this whole issue is that many non-Dean supporters have left this board as a result of the attitude coming from his campaign and supporters. I too have felt a little disenfranchised on the board. I love this board. I give 5 bucks a month since 2001. I've moderated for three terms. And never once thought about leaving until the Dean frenzy started. I just think it's sad, and if putting people on ignore gets rid of the sadness, I'll do it.

[boilerbabe]

133. Angry Rhetoric? Who wouldn't have some anger these days?

Hey, Hunnie!

I don't necessarily think Kerry's such a bad guy, as a matter of fact, I would support him if he got the nomination. He is just not my first choice. My first choice happens to be Howard Dean.

As far as his "Flip flopping" as you say...I really don't see much evidence of that so much as a media "twist" so to speak. It is obvious that Dean is not a media groomed person, who sometimes puts things in a way that many people can either misinterpret or view any kind of way. Maybe I am biased because I am working on his campaign, but i wouldn't be doing so if I thought he was a total dork. Maybe you are right, and he changed his mind on some issues. OK what issues are they, I would like to know so I can also be better informed. If you are working on someone's campaign, of course you are not going to get exposed to the negative aspects of it, unless you are like the speechwriter...

I actually admire him for his piss and vinegar and forthrightness, which some people take just as bombast. He ain't no Rush Limbaugh. This guy makes sense. Howard Dean is not afraid to make his case even if it is not what others agree with. At least you know where he stands. So I don't really see where this common accusation of equivovating comes from. So if you can fill me in, I am more than happy to listen!

XXXOOO

[welshTerrier2]

140. But But But But But But ....

i was an early Dean supporter and have since switched back to undecided ...

i wonder how i can get off your ignore list ???

actually, i don't agree with the other posts ... i think you should ignore anybody you want to ignore ...

[curse10]

158. Okay, not all Dean supporters are on the list

only the ones that are blatantly Dean supporters are. So, you aren't. Although I see a ton of -ignored- coming up in this thread. And, on occasion, I take everyone off ignore just to remind me why I have people on ignore. It's a wonderful tool and I suggest everyone use it.

[TLM]

142. Dean didn't flip flop in this, he gave his supporters the choice...

and we opted out of matchign funds.

Dean said he's take matching funds, but that was before he had any idea that we would create a grassroots movement strong enough to raise enough money to compete with Bush.

You would have Dean ignore the fact that he can raise enough money to effectivly compete with Bush, and cut the campaign off at the knees just to stick with a statement made before they had any idea they'd be able to raise this kind of money.

And you say Kerry is the best choice, yet Kerry did exactly what you're accusing Dean of flip floping on. Kerry said he would take matching funds... and now says he'll probably opt out.

So will that be HUGE when Kerry does it... will that too be hubris on Kerry's part? Or is that only when Dean does it?

[KC21304]

156. Do you know exactly what Kerry has said from the beginning

about matching funds ? I didn't think so.

[PVnRT]

152. Well, then

put me on ignore. Nice that you are too partisan and hateful to accept anyone who disagrees with you about who should be the party's presidential candidate.

Feel free to vote for Bush if Dean wins, I know that's what you ABD people are going to do anyway.

[boilerbabe]

127. I am a Dean supporter, and voted against the matching funds

I have been working on Howard Dean's campaign since August, and he asked his supporters to take a vote as to whether he should opt out of the matching funds option.

His rationale was that in order to go up against the evil Bush, he would not want to have the constraints that would apply with matching funds. So he pretty much asked his supporters if they would commit to a certain amount of contributions so that it would not make him beholden to special interest groups, or any other restrictions inherent with the matching funds program.

I really believe in this guy, I think Kerry is OK, and I also like a lot of things that the other candidates stand for, but for a cohesive, comprehensive picture, I do prefer Howard Dean, so therefore I have and will continue to work to make him the next president.

I think Clark may have been ok, but you are only as good as your supporters, and from what I have seen and heard, his supporters are obnoxious and are a detriment to anything he might try to accomplish. They are not reality based, nor do they seem to have a CLUE. They are not really looking at the issues. Though I must admit, Clark is somewhat of a hottie. And that, apparently is how a lot of people vote.

Anyway, go to Dean's website if you want to hook up with people in your area to find out what's going on...We have meetups (I am in CT), but they are not really a forum for issues so much as strategy meetings, though there is a little of both, and I welcome conflict and love the disruptions!!! From what I know of you, Dean is right in line with what you seem to value most, and I guess Kerry is also...But when it comes down to it, one or the other will ultimately get the nomination. I am betting on Dean. If Kerry gets it, I will back him, too. I would also love to see Kucinich in the mix, if even just to have him in some sort of office, since he is a very good man, and the more like him the better off we ALL are.

I am glad to see that you are actually vacillating, since it's hard to change loyalties mid-stream, but like a very nice DUer I met in DC said, "Vote your heart", She is right, since i also like Kucinich, though I figure he will not get the nomination, he will still be a player in our government one way or another.

XXXOOO
the Boilerbabe

[liberalcapitalist]

129. don't dismiss Kucinich

http://www.godhatesbush.com

[TLM]

146. Kucinich is polling worse than Sharpton...

He may be a nice guy with some good ideas, but he is not charaismatic, he is not a leader, and he can not win the general. Hell he can't even pull more than single digits in the primary.

This is not the time for dreamy idealistic failure... but real pragmatic progress.

[liberalcapitalist]

151. not charismatic??

Wow.. And Dean is? Dean is THE WORST public speaker of all the candidates. Kucinich is second only to Sharpton.

Kucinich is polling last, but he has 17,000 meetup members. There are a LOT of people who are supporting Dean only becuase they think Kucinich can't win the nomination-- I WAS ONE OF THESE PEOPLE.

Dean is a phony liberal to the right of Al Gore. A leftist third-party candidate will emerge and take votes away from him. Furthermore, he can't possibly rally the support of Black Americans.

Don't settle on the lesser of two evils until you have to.

[David Zephyr]

131. Excellent!

You know that I also admire Kerry, but it's too late now. His firing of his campaign manager should have happened at the beginning of the year. He is reorganizing now? Some sixty-odd days before the first contests begin?

Howard Dean, like Bill Clinton, has shown how to put a campaign together that actually works and Dean, like Clinton, punches back immediately and with lethal fury. This is what it takes to win.

John Kerry, as much as I truly love the guy, just seems so goddamned mellow. Maybe it's because he knows it already over. Coulda, shoulda, woulda...but didn't.

[welshTerrier2]

137. the candidates and the process

we are constantly forced to balance the individual candidates, including their knowledge, their experience and their hearts, against each candidate's skill as a politician ...

to the extent that our system encourages us to place more focus on "campaign style", we must then place less focus on the issues ... we have only so much "focus" available ... it is no small thing that "marketing" plays such a substantial role in our political process ... that "kucinich" is "ugly", or Gore is "boring" diverts our attention from the issues at hand ...

and that's too bad ...

I have no disagreement with the assessments, allegations really, that you've levelled against some of the non-Dean candidates ... they're in a competition with Dean and they have selected a "petty, sniping style" to get at him ... i don't think this helps our cause at all ... to some extent, I feel some of the non-Deans have been politically naive ...

still, I hate to see bold pronouncements of a shift towards Dean based on such shallow premises ... surely there must be far more robust reasons to support him ...

i'm afraid our country will never approach its real potential as long as "slick campaign tactics" carry so much influence with the voters ... the real problems, and the real solutions, become too easily obscured ...

[GalleryGod]

144. Sorry to hear that,Compadre.

Will,you should spend LESS time listening to these Dog N' Pony Shows and more time at the People's Republik!

[ElementaryPenguin]

154. Will, Clark/Dean Dean/Clark Clark/Dean Dean/Clark is THE ticket!

I really used to like Kerry, and his terribly disappointed when Gore did not choose Kerry for his running mate in 2000 - opting instead for Holy Joe. (What was Al thinking??) Anyway - I still think Kerry is a good man (and of course I would vote for him in a heartbeat if he got the nod) - but I was really, really disappointed when he voted for the Chimp war - and both Dean and Clark seem to have a better chance of ousting the Bushiviks (the NUMBER ONE consideration, of course!)!

[SEAburb]

157. Will, you're taking to superficial a view of Dean's Confederate flag

comment. You need to look deeper at what Dean's strategy for using the phrase "the candidate for guy's with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks" is to understand how sleazy he is. The use of the Confederate flag was a calculated move by the Dean team, because he only has one policy that sells with southern whites. Dean was using the Confederate flag as a lure to get the attention of southern whites and leaves the impression he supports the Confederate flag issue, to the unwitting.

[WilliamPitt]

159. See post #155