Clark's strategic GE advantages over Dean

[jumptheshadow]

When we get to the general election, Clark will offer the following strategic advantages over Dean:

1) We can hammer the Bush administration's secrecy on the 9/11 prequel and the Patriot Act aftermath without having our criticism deflected back to our candidate.

(Yes, the Republicans are hypocritical. But Dean must release those records, while editing out the personal data on AIDS patients, of course. If he doesn't, he'll be hounded by the press and we won't have the credibility to criticize Bush on this issue.

There's also an ethical situation here. Dean is running on his record as a governor. Yet he's unwillling to give access to the very information that enables us to evaluate his record. Just open the records. If you're the straight shooter you claim to be, then they will be above reproach.)

2) We can dramatically contrast Clark's military service with Bush's lack thereof. And, yes, this matters a great deal when we have two ongoing wars, continuing desperation in the Mideast, Korea and Iran on the brink, and a pack of alienated or suffering allies. We will lose this strategic advantage with Dean.

Many conscientious, rational men I knew found a way to avoid serving in Vietnam. This is not a debate about the ethics of that issue. This is a pragmatic look at the way we have to beat Bush. Who will American voters believe is more qualified to lead this nation in the current environment?

3) The geographic and sociopolitical advantage. Bob Graham as VP just won't draw swing voters to the degree that Wes Clark at the top of the ticket will. And believe me, people are tired of rich Ivy Leaguers. Nothing against them. I know a few of them myself. It's just that it's time again for somebody from the middle class to carry our standard. Somebody who knows how it is to survive from paycheck to paycheck. There is very real suffering out there. The average voter is going to relate much more to Clark's background than to Dean's.

[MIMStigator]

1. yeah but Dean's limited solid 20% are REALLY solid! n/t

n/t

[tjdee]

2. Also, Dean will be a polarizing figure.

He's a polarizing figure right now, for chrisssakes. The 'establishment' in his OWN PARTY isn't crazy about him (or professes this to be the case)--and he antagonizes HIS OWN PARTY.

The general election will devolve into how you feel about Dean rather than how you feel about Bush. Dean is a very....i don't know...figurish kind of figure. He's like a pitbull. Some people like pit bulls, some people don't. Some of that is his fault, some of it is not.

Clark APPEARS to be more easygoing and more "we're all in this together". Also, he appears affable and all that. I really laugh my head off when people try to tell me this doesn't matter.

S C H W A R Z E N E G G E R.

[Eloriel]

46. No, he THREATENS his own party establishm,ent who

aselfishly do not want to give up power. The people behind Dean are, well, The People. He doesn't play by their rules. He isn't bought. He doesn't aver from criticizing them when they err.

He's dangerous to the Establishment and they know it.

Eloriel

[jumptheshadow]

54. The People?

You have been talking to different people than I. I've been chatting with uncommitted Democrats lately. They are worried as heck that Dean will lose. (And the Times article, which marginalized Dean supporters, isn't going to help.)

The people want to defeat Bush. They are not interested in internal Democratic politics. And as important as the discussion about corporate control is, that's not going to be an issue that sways them.

[CWebster]

55. Hey, who needs Republicans

When you have Democrats echoing Republican talking points. Why not try driving home the fact that bush is going to lose?

The Democratic contender will have everyone who voted for Gore, most likely everyone who voted for Nader, more Independents, Swing voters and traditional Republican conservatives dissatisfied with Bush's poor performance. Bush will have the top 10% who pull all the strings and the corporate media mouthpiece.

The times has always been an elitist North-Eastern plutocratic rag, out to preserve the status quo with an establishment candidate who meets their criteria. Kerry is their man.

[billbuckhead]

3. Dean's just another Ivy league ex-drunk. When is enough?

It's time for real change. Everytime this Cato insititute addressing, NRA endorsed, Confederate flag pandering son of Wall Street says he wants to change things, I want to :puke:.
Doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result is a definition of crazy and more "leadership" from the Ivy League will not solve middle America's problems.

[Closer]

5. Another LOVELY

post from BillBuckhead. Man, have I told you just how much I look forward to reading your absolute and utter TRIPE! :hi:

[Jim Sagle]

18. Don't reply to this shit, just alert on it like I did.

[La_Serpiente]

6. Hmm

Dean's just another Ivy league ex-drunk.

Bit respectful there ay?

[Closer]

4. Yeh

When letting BushCo. and the Republicans set the parameters, Clark's a good one to put up.

But see, the Dean campaign is about something different. It's about offering a NEW message, about taking our Party BACK, not succumbing to the Bush Cabal's paramters and putting a moderate Republican as the representation of the Democratic Party.

If Clark wins the nomination, the Democratic Party will OFFICIALLY be D.O.A

[tjdee]

8. The fatalism that comes from the Dean supporters, I really don't get it.

Dean is not the Democratic party.

The Democratic Party IS the big tent party. Nominating Dean will not change this. The Democrats in Alabama and Mississippi have to win elections too, you know.

If we are no longer to be the big tent party, then that is a separate issue.

In fact, to my thinking, Dean is just as much of the status quo as anybody else. He's just more animated about it.

What is this amazing new message he's got? That Dennis Kucinich, Russ Feingold, etc. haven't already been spreading for DECADES?

[Eloriel]

47. tjdee

Im too tired with my broken right hand to go into it tonight. I've written often and at length about the Dean difference, tho.

May I suggest you check it out for yourself? You're way off base and it's for lack of knowledge (I'm hoping). Here's a hint: it's not just a campaign, it's a movement. Go check it out for yourself, over a week or so at least:

http://www.blogforamerica.com/

Be sure to include reading the Comments (click on that under each blog entry).

I'm not saying Dean is or should be your guy -- just that you don't understand what the campaign is all about and until you do the kinds of remarks you've just made are way off base, ill-informed.

Eloriel

[jumptheshadow]

9. I thought this was about the American people

They are setting the parameters. This is about our best strategy for defeating Bush while taking a sober look at our electorate.

[tjdee]

13. Who cares about them?

/sarcasm

This is the MAJOR problem with the Democratic Party as I see it.

They fail to look objectively at the people they expect to vote for them. They have an almost disturbing rosy image of the American people.

Schwarzenegger! I just want to scream it from the rooftops.

[jumptheshadow]

30. The lack of logic gets to me

If you are pitting one heavyweight fighter against another, then you strategize based on that guy's strengths and past performances. You don't tell your guy to watch for the left hook when the other fighter has a powerful right-hand punch. You plan pragmatically.

George Bush's approval ratings are still relatively high for a guy who has perilized the world and driven this country into the ground. There are swing voters out there who would still vote for the man. It's unbelievable, but true. You have to strategize for it.

[slinkerwink]

10. I agree with you!

[JohnKleeb]

14. Its interesting you mention it

Being I have felt as of late, there's been something very interesting I am seeing, many Clark supporters say they wont support Dean or DK I guess too because they think he will get trounced, and I think Dean can win honest, and I also remember hearing Dean supporters have said same about my guy. Its rather an interesting thing honestly, I cant explain it honestly but its something I have noticed.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

24. It is important that Dems support Dems

Right now, we argue over the merits of our candidates. But when the nomination is over, it is vital for all of us to pull together and get whoever is nominated elected. Any supporter who says "If my candidate doesn't win, I'm not supporting that other candidate" is giving aid and comfort to Bush and Company.

[JohnKleeb]

50. I meant in the primaries

*groans* I am a dumbass.
Sorry yea we will unite. I am sorry if I offended but I meant in the primaries juding by what I see, and in the papers and stuff too. Dumb me.

[mikehiggins]

27. John, that is simply not true

Clark supporters will support Dean if he gets the nod, despite the fact that we beleive we have a better chance of winning with Clark at the head of the ticket.

There is a debate as to whether we would support a box of jelly pudding over a ham sandwich that was running against Bush but that's as far as it goes.

We'd support Sharpton if it came to that.

Don't be misled by the loudest voices on DU. They represent only a miniscule percentage of the DU membership and a statistically null percentage of the general voting public.

I'm for Clark and I'll support Dean or anyone else nominated by the Democratic party because I beleive George Bush to be a clear and present danger to the security of the United States.

Can I be any clearer?

[JohnKleeb]

49. No you didnt hear me

Sorry Mike. I meant in the primaries.

[KittyWampus]

17. Dean IS A MODERATE RIGHT Poliotician

he changed positions immediately prior to running for office.
he seeded his Presidential campaign with money from Vermont Yankee/Entergy (Koch Brothers)
he won't cut Pentagon Funding but WILL rescind the small Middle Class tax cut.


We have a very small window of opportunity to retool our economy for Green Technology.

Dean's past reliance and coziness to the Nuclear/ Big Energy groups gives me NO confidence that he would move ahead aggressively nor would he stand up to the Energy interests already dominating Washington.

[Auntie Bush]

38. Clark Xmas card

Hi Cryingshame...I love that picture. Is that really Wes? Looks like him.

[meow mix]

7. my republican WW2 grampa

is gonna vote clark!!!!!!!!

sorry, i just find that completly astounding.
he is the most conservative, die hard republican i have ever known on a personal basis.

normally peeps like that disgust me, and i wouldnt know them...
but hes my grampa so theres not much choice.

and even he is gonna vote clark!!!! wow wow!

[JohnKleeb]

20. Good for him but

My democratic Korean war vet grandfather feels uneasy about the General. Just sayin, kudos to your grandfather for voting dem this time round. Thats better than nothin. BTW my grandfather supports Dick Gephardt as far as I know.

[KittyWampus]

11. Clark Projects A Moderate Image But Has Left Liberal Policies

Clark would enable us to move further to the Left...

[tokenlib]

33. Ironic isn't it???

Just don't say it too loud. This is the major reason I support Clark. This is one general I'd love to see get his hands on the defense budget as Commander-in-Chief.

The General said it best.. "Republicans care about weapons systems--Democrats care about the people."

The General is to the left of Dean --yet Dean is going to be labeled the extremist northeast liberal by the republicans.

[Bombtrack]

12. Clark could win 300 electoral votes , 100 is a stretch for Dean

Clark is just a likable, pleasant person.

His career and life are to be admired, no matter what your politics.
Unlike Dean, who has an unimpressive blue-bloods life.

And whether you want to admit it or not, his area of expertise, foriegn policy is more paramount of an issue than it's been since Vietnam or maybe even world war 2.

And
He's smarter than Dean

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

25. Interesting interpretation

Where would the 300 electoral votes come from for Clark, and where for Dean? Please give a breakdown of states, as this could be important for Democrats when they plan their strategy once the nomination is made. Do you think that the other states are unwinnable for either Democrat (or any of the other Democrats)? Do you think time/energy should be put into trying to win those states or should they be written off?

[Frances]

15. It does not matter who the Democrats put up

the Republicans will attack his character the same way that they attacked McCain's character. So McCain was a war hero, then he must be loony. So McCain adopted a black child, then it must be his love child.

We would be stupid to pick a candidate that we think the Republicans cannot attack. They would attack Jesus Christ. I can hear it now. Jesus is friends with a prostitute and a tax collector. Jesus lies--he says he fed a bunch of people with a loaf of bread. Jesus is ridiculous. He says he walked on water. Jay Leno would make jokes about him. Paula Zahn would have Democrat Lies as the graphic on her show.

[meow mix]

19. lol

theyd just send ol JC down to guantanamo in a real hurry

[Bombtrack]

21. then why even have a primary, why not have a lottery

and then maybe the comptroller from Topeka can get the nom

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

26. I think Frances' point was

that whoever is nominated will wind up having a bunch of lies and spin thrown at him. I hope that people in all the campaigns are working right now to come up with ways to counteract this, because it is inevitable that it will come.

[milkyway]

48. That's great!

And Jesus would be ridiculed for being "soft on terists."

[FrenchieCat]

16. Give up on the Deniacs...

and just concentrate on the undecideds or the 80% of Democrats that don't support Dean. You go to remember that is why Dean is in the lead...not because he is so right or so popular, but because it's a nine person race....and he's got 18% of that......

The rest is an allusion like a snowball effect that the media whores are trying to get as a result....

Dean's popularity is actual on thin ice....not at all solid.

So a candidate that only pulling 18-20% of his party...now thinks he can win an election..based on no one knows exactly....

energized voters....18% is not as great as is being portrayed.

I just think that this is an ARNOLD all over again...where the media's deciding and hoping it will have a bandwagon effect.

[chimpymustgo]

22. Great point, Frenchie. 18% ain't kicking...

It sure as heck won't win the general, and it probably won't get the nomination. And especially since Dean has alienated the other campaigns, if their supporters defect, they won't go to Dean.

[retyred]

31. I couldn't have said it better

if dean get's the nod, not only will he have to maintain what he has but latch on to what the others have and that ain't gonna happen. The swing voters for the others are there for a reason, and it's not for what the Dem party has to offer but what the candidate is offering, dean ain't offering anything that will reach the support of the others. With most of them it's not ABB but ABB that they can except.



retyred in fla
“good night paul, wherever you are”
So I read this book

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

23. These are Clark's strengths

and that is to the good. But if the economy goes south, which it could very well do in the next year, and seniors wake up to the scam inherent in the Medicare bill, these will become important topics that must be addressed by the Democratic candidate. What do you see as a plan to turn these issues into strong ones for Clark? Adding experts in these fields to his campaign, or deciding in advance upon a person for VP who will be strong on these issues?

[hey2370]

28. Problem: Dean is running Down/Up, Clark is running Top/Down

I had this conversation with my wife after seeing Dean's Florida speech on Cspan last night. I told her that I thought that if Dean was assassinated (Gawd forbid), the Dem party would have no one to take his mantle and run with it. Dean's consistent message has been the powerless public versus the powerful corporations now running things.
Clark's message is not that. Clark seems to want Bush's position, not to return the Presidency to the people, but to run the government from a more liberal perspective. He seems to be willing to maintain the status quo of our current political system (money talks, lots of money talks the loudest) as long as he is the one in charge. Thus he is much like the Senators who are running, all of whom owe their current positions to their ability to work within the current political financing system.
What Dean represents is a reawakening of the public to their responsibility for their own lives and government, instead of trusting some competing groups of financial giants to choose a father-figure to decide what course is right for America.

[jmaier]

29. My problem with that thesis

is that Howard Dean has equated "People Power" with putting Dean in office. The outcome, either Clark or Dean, is that one of these two men could become President so you should be more attentive to their leadership qualities and their stands on the most important issues than their particular political style or stump rhetoric. I sincerely doubt that Dean will govern through blog polling. His "people power" message is a good one for energizing a sector of the electorate that feels disenfranchised. That's good.

But the motivation is about winning the Presidency for pete's sake NOT about "empowering" people in some nebulous fashion.

[hey2370]

32. What sector of the electorate doesn't feel disenfranchised?

The vast majority of Dems and Repubs voters no longer have representation in our nation's government when our representatives look to powerful monied interests for guidance on critical governmental decisions.

"Empowering people" means making the government work for the common good, not just the good of the few. How? By getting people to believe that they have the power, through their ability to vote, to kick the guys out who work for the few against the good of the whole.

[andym]

45. What about Jerry Brown

If something happenned to Dean, there is one man who
could step in for him: Jerry Brown. Perhaps his star
is in decline, but he is for the bottom up.

He originated the "We the people" campaign/movement
11 years ago. The idea was to take back government from
the special interests and that the little guy counts. Maximum $100 contributions. Reduce corporate power.

Several problems: he's not well known; dean's popularity might not be transferable; he has an underdeserved reputation as a flake.

[slinkerwink]

51. that's the difference with clark---he's top/down

and won't change the Democratic party.

[w4rma]

34. Clark isn't going to get the support of IT folks with this attitude.

Clark: "Let them do the software in India; we'll do other things in this country"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=770078

[jumptheshadow]

35. My partner is in IT

She says it's a realistic assessment. IT jobs have been going overseas for some time now. She gets calls from India every work day. Other countries caught up to us a while ago and are now doing competent work for lower prices. Clark is saying that we should renew our supply of good-paying jobs by focusing on new technologies.

He's being pragmatic and insightful.

[Jerseycoa]

36. There's really no question about it

Everybody I talk to is saying the same thing about where the phones are being answered when they have to call for tech support. Those jobs are simply gone from here.

[Auntie Bush]

41. IT explanation

That's a perfect accessment of what he said and what he meant. I've heard so many people misinterpreting his words. Thanks for making that clear.

[WillyBrandt]

39. He has the full support of this IT guy

[tom_paine]

37. Yes, I favor Clark for much those same reasons

[depakid]

40. How does Clark's decision to accept matching funds affect

his ability to compete against Bush's hundreds of millions in the event he gets the nomination? It seems to me that's the elephant in the living room with respect to most of the arguments on this thread.

[WillyBrandt]

42. Arrrghhh!

He has spending limits in the primaries. He has not agreed to -- or rejected--fed funds in the general, should he get there.

[depakid]

44. It seems to me that any candidate

who accepts matching funds not only has to adhere to state by state spending limits during the primaries (which BushCo. doesn't) but that once the primaries are over in May, he's vulnerable to constant attack until the fall. This is problematic, no?

[CTLawGuy]

43. I debunked the military = electable myth in another thread...

and remember George McGovern flew 35 combat missions in WWII and won the Distinguished flying cross.

[slinkerwink]

52. kick that thread up again or repost it, please

[CWebster]

53. During Clark's speech at the Fla Democratic convention

while he was recounting his bio, he mentioned something to the effect of "They told me it was time to retire and off I went..."

Clark's speech wasn't bad but his military career is the extent of his political experience and his encouraged retirement from the pentagon is an enormous liability. Once they discredit his credentials what has he got left to fall back on?

[jumptheshadow]

56. This is how they'll respond

1) They'll have Bill Clinton say, "I was his commander in chief and he was one of the most gifted and effective military men I've worked with. Clinton will defend him in any way possible."

2) They will make a commercial based on the glowing reviews he got while he was in the military -- including the one from Colin Powell.

3) They will work with some of the more intelligent reporters and get to the core of what the conflict was really about: A) Clark's contention that NATA had a moral duty to stop genocide, B) Clark's insistence that ground forces needed to be used. It was an opinion that was later proven correct.

[CWebster]

58. Not so sure that a Clinton defense would be a good thing

in the general, especially since it was Clinton who signed off on firing Clark. Clark was fired. That is enormously significant and not easy to spin.

[Auntie Bush]

60. Clinton did not fire Clark!

That snake William Cohan wanted his buddy Ralston to take Clark's place and he told Clinton that Clark was retiring. Clinton was hoodwinked and lied to and he later wrote Clark a letter of apology.

The whole thing was political, Clark was too intellectual for the Army...the other Generals et al didn't like to feel inferior. Talk about jealousy! And you say Clark has no political experience!
He was "let go early"...to make room for someone else..not fired for lack of job performance.

[NicRic]

57. Clark offers moderate choice !

Just as Hillary stated yesterday that the middle is where most Americans are and that the current white house ran on being moderate ,however its turned out to be extreme right ! We need to give the voters that are informed enough to realize this,a moderate to vote for .I see that person in Clark !

[CWebster]

59. Really depends on who is defining the Middle

The Clintons were willing to move the perception of the middle to the Right to preserve their own political skins. They are not particularly ethical politicians and they are not especially good fighters for democratic issues. The yuppie era of the Democratic party.