To my fellow Clark supporters on the Gore endorsement

[tameszu]

Simple Response: Keep working as hard as you can for what you believe. No true Democrat (or democrat) believes that we ought to short-circuit the democratic process of competitive elections based on the opinion of one man--not Wes Clark, not the Clintons, not (if they are thinking honestly and clearly) Mr. Gore or Dr. Dean or any of the other candidates in the race. This is the only way to ensure that everyone feels that they included in this process, and the only way to keep local activism and support for progressive ideals flourishing.

Longer Response: I continue to have a great deal of respect for Al Gore, although I do think that he is incredibly misguided in his argument that "we should get behind the strongest candidate <because> we don't have the luxury of fighting among ourselves to the point where we seriously damage our ability to win among the American people."

Well guess what? Both U.S. parties set up popular vote primary/caucus systems for a reason. And part of that reason is the belief that the process of a competitive primary struggle makes the eventual nominee stronger, not weaker, for having emerged from it.

You are badly misguided if you think that because one candidate has done some good work in energizing one portion of the Democratic Party and has assembled some momentum, this is sufficient justification to turn the voting process into a merely symbolic coronation. If we followed this logic in February of this year, everyone would just be watching Kerry run all by himself. And I think that Mr. Gore would agree that this would not have produced the strongest nominee for the Democrat Party.

Mr. Gore might respond--"OK, that was February, but now that Dean has proven himself, it's time to unite behind him." Well, both the national polls and the constitution of the Democratic Party beg to differ. The vast majority of Democrats nation-wide (75%-85%, depending on the poll) still seem to think they have good reason to think that other candidates in this race would be the best leader to pit against Bush, and more importantly, the best leader for America at the moment. Considering that not a single vote has been cast, there is no reason to think that they should abandon these beliefs as well as the letter and spirit of the primary system and "line up" behind someone in whom they don't have full confidence.

Purely Tactical Comment: I will not deny that this gives Dean a big boost, but it might actually help Clark, if it damages Lieberman, Kerry, and/or Edwards and more quickly sets Clark up for a one-on-one contest versus Dean, which is a situation that we want to see ASAP. Even if it only gets rid of Lieberman, that might be very helpful for dropping the centrist SW states into Clark's column. Perhaps this was why Gephardt, Kerry, and of course Lieberman were stunned and confused, whereas Clark could joke about it in a relaxed manner when Chris Matthews asked him what he thought about it on his wonderful Hardball appearance last night.

[grasswire]

1. I can see more than one scenario...

...where it helps Clark. We'll just have to wait and see how it plays out.

Who knows? Clark may decide to run as an independent. If I were in his campaign, I'd be gaming that out as a backup.

[metisnation]

2. keep going clarkies

lets not give the GOP any solid targets. Good luck and may the best person win in the primaries. Just remeber anyone but bush!!!

[Kahuna]

7. I can see where it could possibly help Clark too...

I posted a few of my reasons it could backfire on Dean last night. Mainly, Gore is tainted as a candidate who lost all southern states and his endorsement of Dean will ensure that Dean likewise not be popular in the south.

[lastliberalintexas]

17. I doubt that

I don't think that any of our candidates would run as a 3rd party candidate. I think they all realize the importance of ousting Shrub next year. If Clark doesn't get the nomination or a spot on the ticket, he'll get firmly behind the nominee and help all he can to promote the Dems. I'm just surprised you seem to think that little of him.

[xultar]

24. Yup! He'd have my vote as an independent! n/t

[MoonRiver]

33. No way, Jose. Clark WILL win. I'm psychic so you can go to the bank

on that one.

[Justice]

3. Thank you

I wanted to get it in before all the Dean people come in here and take over this thread and tell us we are all losers (but let's stick together in this...).

I also think this endorsement blurs the whole DLC thing for people. Gore was head of DLC at one point, Dean was in DLC. The people that are criticizing the DLC were once very involved in it. While ephiphanies are fine, a little humility is also nice too.

[Donna Zen]

4. I would like to think

that there is hope of fighting against this. I am more disgusted that anyone thinks that Al Gore's word replaces voters in primaries. I don't even think the republicans have that much disdain for the vote.

Al Gore was never worried about the party winning, he is only concerned about Dean winning.

[TacticalPeek]

19. Precismo.

I imagine in '00 that Shrub's gang and their running dogs considered publicly urging McCain to just give it up for the good of the party, a la 'you'll never catch us, we're too far ahead, got too much money and org", etc. But, ever aware of the importance of image, decided against it.

I just hope our fight will be cleaner than theirs was in SC and MI, etc.

This is strictly a Gore power trip, with possibly some incredibly bad advice thrown in.

[Eloriel]

37. Repugs just strongarm people in private to get them out of

the race. Or play dirty tricks.

[Bread and Circus]

5. My response: I wonder if Dean was as good of a pick as Lieberman

Lieberman 2000

Dean 2003

[lastliberalintexas]

18. Well,

Gore *did* win with his first pick, non? ;-)

[Bread and Circus]

35. Yeah, Lieberman was a real ace...

Great pick, Al.

[GainesT1958]

6. While this does give Dean a boost...

The Party's very much STILL ON, folks! And Gen Clark is very much STILL IN the hunt for the nomination! His "friendly' up-brading of Tweety last night proved it. And he'll prove it again tonight in the N.H. debate as well. If anything, Clark may gain from this by allowing it to focus his canvassing and fund-raising efforts--as well as bagging some pretty good endorsements of his own! It's like when yoiu biggest rival wins a big game...congratulate them, and move on. There are the battles still to be won--ALL of them, actually--and we will win MANY of them...maybe even enough to win that nomination ourselves!:eyes:

B-)

[DemExpat]

13. Often being "behind" spurs us on to try and work even harder....

Go, Clark!

:kick: :kick: :kick:

DemEx

[jpgpenn]

8. Of course.

Do you mean to tell me there are some that look at this endorsement, by someone that conceded his own presidency, as important? We have months left before the FIRST VOTE is even cast.

Americans are just now getting into the process. This is the time to really start getting word out about Clark. Once they see an interview or 2 the rest will be easy.

There are alot of undecided voters out there.

[Racenut20]

9. Gore inspires me today

I will work even harder for General Clark, now that Senator Graham is out of the campaign.

320,108 veterans in the TampaBay area, and I doubt if many more than me even know how to ski.

[GOPBasher]

10. It's not over.

I'm a Clark supporter, but I'll get behind Dean 100% if he's the nominee. Really, the only reason I'd rather have Clark at the top of the ticket is because I see him as more electable.

[returnable]

11. Gore's endorsement...

...doesn't even guarantee Tennessee for Dean, so I'm not too busted up about it :hi:

[Carolina]

28. well put

Gore lost southern states that Clinton had carried. Gore is tainted in the minds of the general electorate, and he could actually HURT Dean.

As for me, I'm off to work harder for Wes Clark.

[AnnitaR]

38. Totally agree!! TN has no love left for Al it seems!

I do, but it seems like a lot of people here in TN have forgotten what Al Gore has done for this state.

I actually think if anything it may hurt Dean here.

[swittersnc]

12. just for the record

"not (if they are thinking honestly and clearly) Mr. Gore or Dr. Dean"

dean said in the announcement speech about the endorsement the same thing he's been saying over and over, that not a single vote has been cast and to call anyone, including him the frontrunner is very presumptuous.

[newyawker99]

22. Hi swittersnc!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Renew Deal]

14. Welcome back tameszu

I remember when you left. I hope you stay. :toast: :hi:

[tameszu]

15. Thanks, bleachers!

Although, you do know I've always been around, at the Unofficial Wesley Clark Weblog.

I probably won't post here that much, but it's nice to at least have my account back after my computer and old email address died!

[elfin]

16. Gore is a "good guy" but he has a political "tin ear"

as evident in his last campaign. I cannot figure out why he did this thing - probably listening to Karenna again.

He is dreaming if he thinks Dean can pull in any of the south or swing voters - who we might have a chance with with Clark. A revved up "base" of angry Dems plus the Internet will not be enough electorally.

If Dean wins the nom., I will support him - but I don't think Clark will take a place on his ticket.

I only hope that an increase iun exposure for Gore will remind people of why he did so badly last time (Yes, I know he "won) - but it should have been by a huge margin.

And Clark will look better by comparison

[Field Of Dreams]

42. Agreed

My thoughts exactly!

I also think Gore is a good guy ... I think he has worked hard to develop political instincts but it just doesn't come naturally to him.

[usregimechange]

20. who is running against Bush in the primaries???

200 million just for us.

[Tom Rinaldo]

21. Time for a Sprint, Clark supporters.

Which means it is time for Clark supporters to pull out all of the stops. Of course I conceed that Gore endorsing Dean is a big plus for Dean. While I can second guess forever why Gore did it, and why now, it is Gore's right to endorse anyone he wants to anytime he wants to. And it is our right to be angry that he is openly pushing to wrap up the nomination process weeks before the first primary ballot is cast with 9 candidates still in the race and none drawing the support of more than a quarter of the Democrats who at this early stage have an opinion.

There is a silver lining to this development for Clark, though the overall cloud is gray. Clark should be hurt less by the Gore endorsement than any of the other Democratic candidates. Whether or not Gore still is a Democratic Party Establishment figure, he is perceived that way by the public. He worked with Lieberman, Kerry, Gephardt, Edwards, and Kucinich in Congress, and he found them all wanting. In an odd and diluted kind of way, Gore is a "Hugh Shelton" to the entire bunch of Washington "insiders". Gore will not support any one of them. The fact that Gore so quickly threw his support to a relative outsider like Dean, is a slap in their collective faces.

Other than Clark, the whole bunch have been hard at campaigning for over a year, and in Gore's eyes none of them can get the job done, he's not even waiting for the first votes to come in to "bury them". Of course, Gore rejected Clark also, but Clark was never a direct Colleague of Gore's, they didn't serve in the Senate together. Also, unlike the others, Clark hasn't had adaquate time campaigning to allow anyone to definatively state that he "hasn't caught on". After less than three months Clark is solidly in second place in most national polls. Clark is raising money at a much faster clip than anyone but Dean. Clark has generated an enthusiastic grass roots following. A case might be made that Clark entered too late, with too little organization, but a case can't be made that his campaign spent a year spinning its wheels with only single digit numbers to show for it.

Along with Dean, (and in fairness also a few of the third tier candidates) Clark is an insurgent candidate, an outsider. I know a few DU pundits think of Clark as some type of A) Republican trojan horse or B) Clinton stalking horse, but neither I nor the public is buying it. Clark is received as a breath of nicely seasoned but very fresh air. So now, suddenly, the campaigns of the other perceived insider candidates have taken Gore's heavey blow when they all can least afford it. None of them has generated much widespread excitement. But they all thought they could be the anti Dean, wrapped in a reassuring blanket of "I can get elected" respectability, and Gore said, "No, you can't."

That means Clark has a real chance right now to make this into a two man race. Clark still has some real momentum, and he has the resources he needs to put up a fight. Many Democrats, rightly or wrongly, are not yet comfortable with Dean. At least through the primaries following one week after NH, there will be a scramble to identify who out there might still be able to compete with and defeat Dean for the nomination. No one will believe any more that this will be a long drawn out fight running deep into the primary schedule with several candidates retaining a reasonable chance. Either one strong alternative will emerge soon, or Gore will have accomplished what he set out to do in designating Dean as the nominee apparent. And I honestly can't see many rank and file Democrats, or Party Super Delegates, thinking after having spent a whole year falling ever further behind Dean that any of the traditional candidates will now miraculously rally to defeat Deat. In my opinion it will be Clark or no one, and I don't think that will only be my opinion. Support will likely now start peeling away from most of the candidates and Clark stands to benefit by that.

So back to the header for my message. It's a sprint now Clarkies, not a marathon. It'n now or never. Clark has to seize this moment to break out of the pack. He has to be the only Candidate other than Dean whose fundraising, support base, and polling numbers are heading up. That means we have to pour it on now. Start writing letters for Clark, emailing everyone we know, show conficence in our man, and give as much money as we can scrape together, even if it will take 9 months to pay off the credit cards. If we can pull off this sprint, even take time off to travel to NH to campaigne for Clark if somehow that can be arranged, or do whatever else we possible can, NOW, Clark will break out, and in the process break through to attract new supporters who will carry him forward with a new wave of fundraising etc. So, what are your plans for this coming week?

[Tatiana]

23. It's coming down to a run-off.

Once again, I must commend you for another phenomenal post. You certainly have some keen insight. Now, as for what this Gore endorsement spells for the Clark campaign...

I think you are right in stating that Clark is also an insurgent, outsider candidate. And he consistently polls second in the national polls. Not bad for a 3 month-old campaign. However, I think this thing boils down to two key points:

#1 - The top two Dem. candidates are perceived "outsiders." This leads me to conclude that Democrats are dissatisfied with the status quo. They want change, they want to take a risk on someone outside the party because they simply cannot abide the devils they already know. This explains Dean's and Clark's popularity. That being said, I believe Dean's base is a lot more liberal than he is. Looking at his record, I believe Dean is more in line with the Clinton wing of the Democratic party than Clark. One of Clark's biggest strengths is his ability to think "outside of the box." That is what made him hated by Pentagon insiders. He didn't simply accept tradition and traditional methods. He looked for broader, more innovative solutions. So far, Clark has yet to play up or convey this strength to the masses. If and when he does, look for this race to become even closer and tighter than it already is.

#2 - As you astutely pointed out, no one has yet to garner more than a quarter of support from Democrats. Gep still has substantial support. So do Edwards and Kerry. Despite my dislike of him, Lieberman also enjoys a modicum of support. And if you total support for the fringe candidates (Kucinich, CMB, Sharpton) there are a lot of Democrats who are not getting in line behind the frontrunner, despite Gore trying to throw his political support behind Dean. We will not be going into the convention with a field of nine candidates. Most certainly the fringe candidates will drop out. Who will they support? As it stands now, nearly 75% of Democrats don't want Dean as the nominee - hence the "ABD" talk. Who is the candidate those ABDers will throw their support towards. Will it be Kerry? Or will it be Clark?

Imagine this boils down to a run-off between Kerry and Clark. Take a look at the other 7 candidates. Who will endorse Dean? The only one I am certain would endorse him is CMB. Go down the line: Lieberman, Edwards, Kerry, Kucinich and Sharpton. I cannot see either Kerry or Sharpton endorsing Dean. They would likely throw their support behind Clark. Lieberman, hawk that he is, would also likely support Clark because of his military background. We have Kucinich and Edwards as unknowns. I could see them supporting either Clark or Dean. But if Clark could secure the support of Kerry, Lieberman, Sharpton, AND either Kucinich OR Edwards... imagine those percentages again. They just might tip in Clark's favor.

[LTR]

25. The primary season hasn't started yet

And Clark is gaining fast momentum.

Come February, everyone will know who he is.

Gore's endorsement means nothing to me. I only voted for him in 2000 because his name wasn't Bush.

Personally, I wanted 4 more years of the Big Dog. But that's not constitutionally possible. He was the greatest president of the last three decades.

[Carolina]

29. ditto

Gore's support in 2000 was from diehard Big Dog loyalists (I'm in that category)and those with total antipathy to Bush. There was no groundswell of enthusiasm for Gore himself. Having just watched the endorsement replay on C-SPAN tonight, I must admit Gore did look wooden (even Frankenstein-ish) standing in the background while Dean was spoke. Then when he delivered his endorsement speech, he simply came across as trying to hard.

Clinton was a natural; he has a WOW factor. Dean is a natural too, albeit not on the level of Clinton. Clark has a natural air and master intellect that rocks especially in question-answer sessions like the Exeter and Hardball venues.

Gore should shut up and go home. His time in the spotlight is PAST.

[Gloria]

26. Hey, I just learned from the CPAN spin room that Matt Bennett,

Clark's national press officer, worked with Dukakis, through two Clinton campaigns, and was on Gore's staff in DC during the Clinton years.

He didn't want to comment on the endorsement because he was a Gore staffer.

[Barbara917]

31. Gore staffers for Clark

*Little Rock - More than twenty former Gore aides, including his
Chief
of Staff, National Treasurer, Press Secretary, Communications
Director,
Trip Director and his Director of Scheduling have endorsed General
Wesley Clark.

"General Clark has won the Gore staff primary with more than 20
former
Gore staffers throwing their support behind Wesley Clark. We know
from
2000 that in a democracy it is the popular vote that counts" said
Bill
Buck, Wes Clark's Press Secretary and Al Gore's former Communications
Director for Florida

Members of Gore staff who have endorsed Wes Clark:

Ron Klain - former Chief of Staff

Jose Villareal - former National Treasurer

Thurgood Marshall, Jr - former Director of Legislative Affairs

Mark Fabiani - former Director of Communications

Chris Lehane - former Press Secretary

Matt Bennett - former Trip Director

Catherine Grunden - former Director of Scheduling

Jamal Simmons - former Deputy Director of Communications

Jason Furman - former Senior Policy Advisor

Ian Alberg - former Domestic Policy Advisor

Rob McLarty - former Tennessee State Director for the PAC

Bill Buck - former Press Secretary for Florida

Luis Vizcaino - New Mexico Press Secretary

Jonathan Beeton - former Kentucky Press Secretary

Shelly Loos - former Political staffer

Terrill McSweeney - former Press Office staffer

Sunny Gettinger - former Associate Director of Press Advance

Marisa Luzzatto - former Schedular

Paul Neaville - former Advance staffer

Molly Buford - former Assistant to Chairman Daley

Rob Walker - former Advance staffer

Bill Burke - former staffer

[Mz Pip]

27. My take

Gore's endorsement may not matter much in the long run. Liebeman has a lot of supporters in the SOuth. Think they'll go for Dean after this? Not likely.

What bothers me about the endorsement is that it seems like the powers that be are trying to pick our candidate a month before the first votes are even cast. No wonder people get turned off to voting. IT's all decided for them so why bother to show up.

No offense to Al, I voted for him and would have loved to see him President but he's not deciding this for me.

MzPip
:dem:

[Julien Sorel]

30. Nice to see you posting.

:-)

[tedoll78]

32. I see it this way:

I've read some people being incredibly baby-ish in their reactions to Gore's endorsement. They whine about coronations, and the media electing nominees, etc.

Guess what.. Gore didn't take the right to vote away from us.

And, despite the fact that he holds wide influence in our party, Gore retains the right to voice his opinions in public. The whining here at DU for these two days has been incredible. And for each person whining, I'd be willing to bet that had Gore endorsed that person's preference, the whining would be either much more muted, or nonexistent. Sad.

[Kool Kitty]

34. That's right.

Gore has every right to endorse who he likes, when he likes. And we still have the right to vote for who we like, and let the primaries take their course. That's how it will be decided, not by everyone whining over who endorsed who and why didn't they endorse mine and all the rest. Dean is right-we DO have the power. We go into the booth and exercise it. With a little luck, it won't be subverted by Diebold and there you go.

[tameszu]

40. You are right in some ways, but wrong in others

Some are babyish, but if you don't think the media plays an incredibly influential role in electing nominess, then ask one of your friends who live in New Jersey if they are going to bother to register to vote in the primaries this year.

Do you know why Clark didn't answer the question about Clinton nominating him? It's because, while it might help Clark, it might also cause a civil war within the Democratic Party.

I don't know if I would have been happy if Gore had endorsed Clark, because we are dealing with a totally different context, but let me tell you that it would have been no way an unmixed blessing had either of the Clintons endorsed Clark. We would be fending off mass attacks about "Clinton Conspiracies." I am guessing that something similar would have happened with Gore. The "wide influence in our party" constrains Gore's "right to voice his opinions in public." He may have the same right, but due to his great influence, he also has heavy obligations. We often take the Clintons to task if they say things we don't like, and rightly so.

Finally, the way in which Gore endorsed Dean WAS totally wrong. It would have been one thing if Gore had said "I like Dean, because he stands for the same things I stand for, and his Internet movement and campaign rock, and I think you should vote for him too." If he had stopped there, then that might have been OK (although I still think there is a very good reason that there is a tradition that Ps and VPs don't endorse candidates when primaries are still 'live').

But, instead, he also added that "we should get behind the strongest candidate we don't have the luxury of fighting among ourselves to the point where we seriously damage our ability to win among the American people."

This is NOT a statement that in any way respects the primary process, especially since not a single vote has been counted. It is irresponsible, and it rightly provoked a rebuke from Hillary that Gore should let us vote. And, tedoll, I can assure that if Hillary endorses Clark or another non-Dean candidate and "changes the shape of the campaign" in same way Gore did, the kind of live-and-let-live attitude you have demonstrated will be in short supply all around.

Also, part of my response is meant to help Clarkies deflect the influence of the less thoughtful Deanies and media-types who have declared the race "over." To me, they have done more damage to the process than any whining from opponents, as annoying as the latter might be.

[David Zephyr]

36. Gore's Endorsement of Dean Narrows the Contest to Dean & Clark

All Clark supporters should be happy with this as the endorsement sucks the air out of the other candidates' sails.

I know you all know this, but I'm still watching for the Big Dawg to drop one of his famous little one-liners that indicates he's for Clark and thereby setting up the final horserace in South Carolina and Arizona.

Don't give up. Dean will need Clark...and Clark will need Dean.

And...Hello to Tameszu! Nice post and thread.

[AnnitaR]

39. Light a B-day candle for Clark!!

Inspired by, upset by, or motivated by Gore's endorsement?

Go light a candle on Clark's birthday cake! :party:
http://www.forclark.com/special/birthday_fundraiser

Show your unwaivering support for Clark by giving him a really nice B-day! I am more motivated than ever to fight harder to see that my next President is General Wesley K. Clark!

[Phelan]

41. just reached my federal limit

The Gore thing really did inspire me, to be pissed off and give more money to Clark...
hope we get this fundraiser through all the way

[Gloria]

43. Gore's appearance has resulted in exactly what I thought it would...

from CNBC, to Charlie Rose, to FAUX, non-stop talk about Dean "the nominee".

Instead of the debate....Only those actually watching the debate will have any clue about what went on, because the Gore story has taken over the air time.

What a damned disservice to these candidates!! The last debate is Jan. 4. Gore couldn't wait til then??

One of the shows reported that in Iowa, calls about Dean have jumped. Gore interjected in a pretty good horse race out there between Gep and Dean.

Tony Coehlo on Charlie Rose said that "Gore likes to be involved and he didn't know how to be following 2000." He actually said that Gore can be involved through Dean, but still do his business stuff. Coehlo said, basically, that Gore is getting his thrills about running against Bush, without actually having to do it. I am pretty darned sure I heard the gist of that correctly...Coehlo most definitely mentioned Gore's business interests and getting after Bush through Dean, in the same sentence.

It left a bad taste in my mouth. Like Gore's motives were selfish and more personal that we might imagine.


He also said that things will just steamroll, with various endorsements and that it is Dean's to lose. He also spoke about incumbency and how it is Bush's to lose. I got the feeling that for all his enjoyment of the politics of it all, he's not really sure that Dean can be a winner against Bush.


Rollins on CNBC was putting a less charitable spin on it, but maybe it was more truthful. Asked if Gore was the leader of the party, Rollins said he could have been after 2000, but he went away for a year and basically didn't want to be. Gloria Borger added that many Dems are upset because of his line about "speeding things up" and forgetting all the other candidates to get on board with Dean. They are highly insulted by this stance, just before the primaries.

My own thoughts---you might see people sitting on their hands during the general election....