Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Clark from Arkansas not a big help...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 04:01 PM
Original message
Clark from Arkansas not a big help...
But he may give wide national appeal. My question to you is. What VP could bring us an important battle ground state?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
1. John Breaux or Mary Landrieux.
Either would pretty well put LA into the blue column.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Josh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
18. Breaux would, Landrieu wouldn't -
you recall she won both of her elections by less than 5,000 votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
2. Who said he's not a big help. Where's the proof? IMHO I think he is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. There's no 'proof', either way.
Simmer down...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. You should have stated that it was YHO .
The title was misleading and against the rules. You gave me a scare. I thought you were quoting some poll. OK...I've simmered down now!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doosh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #2
13. the proof is in his primary performance
aka, the big thud
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. I think I just heard a thud
Was that Edwards?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Finch Donating Member (487 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 07:23 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. Edwards did well...
Clark bombed and then denied Edwards a win in TN!

The only thuds being heard where those of crashing expectations! For Clark! :nopity:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leilani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. The eloquence of your musings
never fails to underwhelm.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leyton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. He did decently in the primaries, I thought.
Edited on Sat May-15-04 06:27 PM by leyton
There was no Arkansas primary that I know of before Kerry had it locked. Clark did poorly in Tennessee and Virginia, but did win Oklahoma, came in third in NH. And didn't he win Arizona or New Mexico? Clark has national appeal, I think, even if he doesn't guarantee his home state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leilani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 01:10 AM
Response to Reply #17
24. Clark came in 2nd in New Hampshire
right behind Kerry.

Even though Edwards came in 3rd, the pundits wrote off Clark, & promoted Edwards.

Clark finished 2nd in Arizona, New Mexico, & North Dakota.

And yes, he won Oklahoma.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. That's because Clark put all his eggs in the NH basket, and Edwards
Edited on Sun May-16-04 09:47 AM by AP
clearly was focusing on Feb 3, and Clark only beat Edwards by 900 votes (.3%) in NH, which looked terrible for Clark. Edwards, in fact, was beating him all night long and only lost in the last hours.

And, by the way, Clark came in 3rd, behind Kerry and Dean.

Another thing, Clark had focussed on beating Dean in NH, but Dean beat him 26% to 12%.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #26
28. Edwards was campaigning hard in NH for many months
long before Clark even entered the race. Edwards did hundreds of town halls and the like in NH. His campaign certainly did focus on NH early, he just did not catch on there untill he came up with a good stump speech and got media wind in his sails after Iowa. Edward's neighboring state of South Carolina on Feb 3rd was always Edward's firewall state. When it looked like he couldn't do any better than 4th in NH despite his efforts there, Edwards started playing up his appeal in the South.

By the way, all the votes in NH were cast in the same period of time; while the polls were open. The order in which those votes were counted is not the essense of Democracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. This I know for a fact: Edwards put all their Jan resources in SC and IA.
Edited on Sun May-16-04 10:06 AM by AP
When he did well in IA, they decided to try harder in NH then they had planned. They had to reallocate resources, and the campaign there was really just one week. Clark had been there for weeks, and everyone knew that his strategy was knocking off Dean there. Dean got 26% (2nd) and Clark barely beat Edwards with 12.4% to 12.1%.

When you're running for president, you spend most of your time in IA and NH, but when January comes around, you make strategic decisions. Dumping a ton of resources in NH wasn't the plan for Edwards. It was the plan for Clark.

NH was a big disappointment for Clark. It wasn't for Edwards. (OK was Edwards's big disappointment.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #29
30. If Clark had entered earlier, he would have been in Iowa also
We all know that. NH voters were predisposed to support favorite sons Dean and Kerry in NH. It is remarkable that Clark closed completely on Kerry briefly in NH, that was the real race there, not with Dean. Kerry got many votes that would have gone to Clark in Iowa had Clark been there, being the only Vet with National security experience running there. Once Kerry regained his luster in Iowa, many New Hampshire voters who had long known and liked neighboring state Kerry returned to him after moving over to Clark when Kerry seemed nonviable. Still, with no Iowa momentum, Clark did marginally better than Edwards in NH. Sure NH was a disappointment for Clark. He did not count on both Dean and Gephardt collapsing in Iowa. Absolutely no one saw that combination coming. It was Gephardt falling apart that freed up so many votes for the alternate candidates besides Dean and Kerry. Edwards was there to benefit, and Clark was not. Such is politics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #30
33. It would be interesting to know if ANY candidate
could have sat out IA and won NH.

Clinton did it in 92, but that was because and Iowan was running in the primary that year.

I think Clark was looking at Dean as the equivalent of an Iowan (when in fact he was more like a NH'ite).

One of my first posts about Clark was that he wasn't in the primaries to win them. I said he was only in them to create the image for voters that you can be a man in a uniform, a democrat, and critical of Bush's actions in Iraq. (And I said that we should all embrace that, and be very happy, and that it would probably be very valuable in the long run.)

After seeing more of his strategy, I still think that's the case. But I'd also say, in retrospect, he was in the race to protect Kerry. He didn't step on Kerry's toes in Iowa, and stayed in just long enough to keep Edwards from getting a head of steam (and I'm sure Kerry's polling was telling them what the informed voter study has subsequently revealed--that Edwards was the real threat if people got to know him and hear his ideas).

Perhaps, also, Clark was the one who was running for VP, not Edwards. But I think he would have needed to have done a little better for that to make sense to people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #33
36. It's oft been stated, usually by Clark himself
Clark believed the Democrats needed to nominate a candidate to take on Bush this year who would be perceived by the public to have enough seasoning and experience to provide an alternative to Bush as Commander in Chief. The Democratic primary voters may in fact have validated that opinion. Clark said he held back on entering the race to see if any of the previously announced candidates caught on with the voters. Could be he was actually only referring to Kerry, and possibly Graham. I never bought the theory that Clark was only a stalking horse to stop Dean, or even Edwards. I am sure Clark believes he is well qualified to be President and he ran in earnest to become just that. But the bottom line is Clark wants Bush out, and he has been non wavering in his belief that in order to get Bush out, the Dems had to present a candidate who is sufficiently credible on National security. When Clark entered the race it appeared that no Democrat who met his base line criteria had a chance of winning the nomination. I don't think Clark is displeased that Kerry ended up with the nod.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elperromagico Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #24
27. No, Clark was third in NH.
Dean was second.

Of course, using Joementum Liebermania's logic, they were all in a five-way tie for first place. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leilani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #27
38. You are right!
My mistake...Sorry.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #24
31. No, DEAN came in 2nd in NH. Clark was a distant 3rd. n/t
Edited on Sun May-16-04 10:23 AM by Padraig18
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 11:25 AM
Original message
Dean came in 2nd in NH, but expectations werehigher for Kerry and Dean
in new hampshire because it was considered their backyard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
3.  your assessement
That "Clark from Arkansas not a big help...." comes from where? Can I get a link?

Also, what we need is someone that will do well in ALL of the battleground states. Kerry is in a dead heat with Bush in most of them (or a bit above, or a bit below). All we need is enough to get over the top....it's not like it's zero Kerry;100% Bush in any of them. So we just need a little push....not someone that can guarantee the whole enchilada.

I still think, however, that putting all of one's eggs in only one backet is a recipe for disaster. Example....Gephardt is selected because of the thoughts he can bring Missouri. Then the Republican attack machine only has to advertise and concentrate on Missouri and concentrate on deconstructing Gephardt to win that state. Dumb approach IMO.

That's why our best hope is someone that can do well nationally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Several can do well nationally.
Clark is one of them, but not the only one of them... :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billbuckhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. McCain?
I like Wes Clark, but would accept many good choices. We need someone to get to the bottom of all these Shrubco. messes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. I have a feeling that
choosing McCain would backfire. I have a feeling that he would be labeled a turncoat by the Repugs and would still not be accepted by the left. We would be left with a disaster........

For those advocating McCain, be careful for what you wish for......



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. You are right....
But my point was made to the original poster...who is advocating a Single state candidate....and my response is that I don't see the effectiveness of it. This election is war......and we need warriors to defeat the US Evil Administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. Well said!
Gephardt is the classic example of what is weak in 2004 in regard to limited thinking about a single battleground state. Clark is a great example of the strength of viewing the entire country in 2004.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleApple81 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 04:35 PM
Response to Original message
10. Bush. He is doing a good job to get us MAX APPEAL everywhere. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salonghorn70 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 05:16 PM
Response to Original message
12. How Can We Make This Decision For Kerry
If he doesn't turn over his internal polling to us. :) You know he has it on every VP candidate that we are talking about. Kind of surprised that it hasn't leaked out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. I can't wait to hear the sound of water dripping. n/t
Edited on Sat May-15-04 06:05 PM by Anti Bush
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Finch Donating Member (487 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 07:26 PM
Response to Original message
20. Clark lives in VA!


He is not associated with AR is the same way the likes of Bill where, he has never been elected to anything there and has never even been a political figure in AR. Edwards would be more likely than Clark to bring AR into the Democratic column as would Landrieu, Lincoln, Warner, Nelson, Bayh and a whole load of others before we even have to think about Wes and its the same nationally Clark would not help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jai4WKC08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Clark lives in Arkansas
You're nuts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leilani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #21
39. I bet the School of the Americas
has headquarters in Virginia.

And Clark really resides there, plotting world coups.

He uses the Arkansas house as a cover.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tameszu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #20
23. Here is a photo of Clark's house in Little Rock, Arkansas
http://realestate.boston.com/galleries/pres_res/4.html

And the Arkansas papers have been covering him intensely--he would definitely have a better chance of pulling Arkansas than Bayh, Nelson, or Warner, who have low name recog and have their own liabilities:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #23
40. NO!! That house is in Little Rock, Virginia
I heard it on DU


(not you, tameszu ;))
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eurobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #20
25. He DOES???
WHERE????

:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Finch Donating Member (487 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #25
34. All I know is that his voter...
...registration is in VA and he also has a home there... I am unsure if that is still the case but it was up until recently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #34
41. Link? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leilani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #34
42. Get your facts straight!!!
Do you know how many times Clark has been interviewed on TV, from his home in ARKANSAS, in front of his brick fireplace?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #20
35. You must be eating too many

NUTS!

"Edwards would be more likely than Clark to bring AR into the Democratic column" What a HOOT!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dolstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 12:08 AM
Response to Original message
22. IMHO, only Bill Richardson
I'm pretty confident that adding Bill Richardson to the ticket would gets us New Mexico's electoral votes. On the other hand, I wouldn't bet on carrying Missouri with Gephardt as VP, or Florida with Bob Graham as VP, or Arkansas with Wes Clark as VP. I'm not saying these states are lost causes, just that under the best of circumstances, these states would likely remain toss-ups through election day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #22
32. I agree about the tossups.
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU GrovelBot  Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
37. ## Support Democratic Underground! ##
==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v2.0
==================

The time now is 11:25:08AM EDT, Sunday, May 16, 2004.

There are exactly...
0 days,
12 hours,
34 minutes, and
52 seconds left in our fund drive.

This website could not survive without your generosity. Member donations
pay for more than 84% of the Democratic Underground budget. Don't let
GrovelBot become the next victim of the Bush economy. Bzzzt.

Please take a moment to donate to DU right now. Thank you for your support.

- An automated message from the DU GrovelBot


Click here to donate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Nov 27th 2014, 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

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


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

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

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

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC