Did someone in Clark's campaign force his hand on getting out?

[WilliamPitt]

Losses in Dixie spur Clark to abandon quest

By Joanna Weiss, Globe Staff, 2/11/2004

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/2004/02/11/losses_in_dixie_spur_clark_to_abandon_quest/

(snip)

The news of Clark's departure was first reported by The Associated Press. Matt Bennett, Clark's communications director, hastily addressed reporters about an hour after Clark's speech, saying Clark made the decision to leave the race at about 10 p.m. after all the returns came in.

But when Bennett appeared on CNN, the news seemed to surprise much of Clark's staff, gathered in the hotel bar. Staffers rushed toward the TV set to watch, some with stunned expressions on their faces. One insider speculated that the news had been leaked to force Clark's hand. In the hotel lobby, some staffers cried; aides said there had been scattered tears throughout the night, though Clark appeared calm and collected.

...more...

[kiahzero]

1. Wouldn't be the first time

someone's leaked news about Clark leaving a position to force his hand, IIRC.

[MidwestMomma]

19. So sad but true

:cry:

[robsul82]

2. I see no reason why...

...if Clark didn't want to quit, he wouldn't hold his conference today and start off with, "I don't know how it started, but let me tell you something - we are in this all the way!"

Later.

RJS

[davsand]

3. We discussed that last night!

The early report was out of AP, and it was attributed to a Campaign person. We wondered THEN if someone had done that without his knowledge.

Clark may not have won the nomination, but I doubt that any on here would call him lacking in grit or even compassion for his supporters. It seemed out of character for him to send a campaign staffer out to deliver news like that to the campaign and the rest of the world.

Something else that made me wonder was the rumors early in the night that he was gonna drop out. Those HAD to have been fed by a campaign person other than the Clark family.

Not to slant this entirely one way, but it IS possible that this was seen as an act of mercy--done to "put him out of his misery," so to speak. Maybe it was viewed as a sort of Electoral Euthanasia...

Laura

[BurtWorm]

13. Well, we know what happens to mercy killing nurses when they're caught.

And it isn't that they get a great big thank you!

It doesn't make sense to me that Clark would be finished just now. Why wouldn't he wait till Super Tuesday? I hope he puts the brakes on this exit.

[xultar]

4. WTF!!!!!!!!

:nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke::nuke:

[democratreformed]

7. xultar, your posts like this always bring me great joy

They are a hoot. I love 'em.

[xultar]

21. I really feel like 300 nuke explosions! That was truely the only way for

me to express myself so that it is clear.

Thanks though. They are a hoot when I look back.

[Bucky]

45. Absolutely not. NObody can push Clark around. Nobody. He doesn't scare.

[Mobius]

85. that post is a bit inflammatory

:loveya: xultar

[Mobius]

86. that post is clearly inflammatory

:loveya: xultar

[BootinUp]

90. Yep, thats our xultar!

you go girl! :)

[Jerseycoa]

5. It's politics

So I wouldn't be surprised if this happened. On the other hand, the General isn't somebody to be pushed around. If he's out, it's because he's decided it's for the best. Now, if the report is true, I wouldn't want to be Matt Bennett this morning.

[John_H]

6. The world will never know, Here's why:

Since nobody likes Chris Lehane, it would be no surprise if people were to unfairly assume he would screw his boss if it helped him get in the graces of another campaign.

The reason nobody likes Lehane is that he'd be perfectly willing to screw his boss over if it helped him get in the good graces of another campaign.

The world will never know.

[janx]

47. Wait a minute...

oh man.

I just had a terrible thought when you mentioned that man's name twice.


Edit: Did Lehane have something to do with the nefarious behavior? And if he did...oh man.

[VolcanoJen]

49. Oh crap, janx.

Now you've got me shaking. Lehane....

:scared:

[janx]

56. Remember where he came from?

:eyes:

I'm too paranoid, but I can't shake the thought...

[shance]

59. Where did he come from Janx??

n/t

[janx]

64. Take a guess. Just use your imagination...

He worked for another candidate before he worked for Clark.

Given the current situation, what candidate do you suppose that might be?

(I don't think I have to tell you.)

[shance]

91. No, you dont have to tell me.......i got it.

interesting........

[West Coast Democrat]

8. Daily Kos was "predicting" Clark would drop out

because presumably he cancelled a Houston fundraiser after seeing the noon exit polls. What is sad and disturbing about this is that those noon exit polls showed Clark at 15% in TN, while his final numbers showed he performed well over 15%.

Clark had been polling quite well against Dean and Edwards in Wisconsin, so I really can't understand why he wouldn't try to give that a shot. And who knows about Nevada? Clark did very well in the other Southwestern states. Oh well....

[BootinUp]

10. polling quite well...in Wisconsin

All indications are that he would have lost that position unless something else major changed to help him. If anything his free tv coverage would have been worse. We don't know how bad he would have been financially, and he still would have been up against Kerry, Edwards, Dean with a short period to try and build momentum.

Personally I think Clark did the right thing considering the 2 3rd place finishes. On the other hand, he could have tried to shake up the campaign and replaced the losers he had running the show and tried to build some momentum that way.

[SadEagle]

26. The problem w/revamping campaign.

Is that the media spin it as "desperation"/"campaign falling apart".
And momentum is largely a media creature....

[HoosierClarkie]

9. Then the media swoop in

and aren't they so proud of themselves. NO ONE forced his hand. It was, like all of his decisions, based on what was best for his family,his country, and himself. In that order! I know for a fact that he had made this decision at noon yesterday.

[Justice]

40. Thanks Sarah

That is consistent with what I understood both in terms of timing and reasoning. Clark is one honorable person. I for one I am glad to have had some sort of connection to him.

[AP]

11. That's sort of how he got into the race. Someone else's idea.

[jmaier]

12. AP,

I think that I've been known as temperate Du'er and Clark supporter but take a hike. I don't see any evidence of the electoral strength of Sen. Edwards so if he remains in the race, it's just to solidify his position for a potential #2 spot. Show me a single state, post Feb 10th where he can hope to compete for a victory -- and with what dollars.

[DancingBear]

16. Thank you!

It is getting a bit much -but then again we're supposed to believe a trail lawyer has empathy.

Clark ran because he was ASKED - Edwards runs because he thinks he's owed. Big difference.

And all those out there who think he ISN"T running for VP, please see me about swampland. I'm the guy that "really cares about you!" - hehehehe.

[AP]

25. He wouldn't have been so successful

as a trial lawyer if he didn't have conviction about these issues.

Edwards is running because he sees that he can help more Americans than one client at a time.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

55. As a former law clerk, that's rediculous.

Conviction < Currency. (99% of the time)

[AP]

73. Take it or leave it.

I think it's pretty obvious.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

77. Leavin' it.

[Bread and Circus]

17. He shoots, he scores...

Personally I think Edwards is a phony.

[AP]

23. I personally think he has more conviction than any other candidate.

And I think Clark lost a little on the conviction issue by having to be drafted to run.

[HuskerDem]

29. What a ludicrous notion

Tens of thousands of people band together and say to Clark "We think you are great, please run for President"

vs.

"Hey, I know I'm just a one term senator that can't get reelected in my own state but I have this great Opie grin and a "real" southern accent so vote for me, I'm Mr. Fantastic!"

[VolcanoJen]

50. HuskerDem, I love your photo with Clark, and sigline.

I couldn't agree more with your sigline... "For a moment, grace and greatness held me."

:-(

[HuskerDem]

83. Thanks Jen

seeing him speak again tonight, I can't imagine what we've done.

[mmonk]

44. Actually I see that as a plus

a call to duty. That's appealing to us who are looking hard for someone that would not be in it for personal ambition but concern about the country. So that's not a liability for some of us.

[AP]

54. But he was such an unknown quantity at the time.

I understand drafting someone like lautenberg or Mondale, but someone you know nothing about?

[AP]

20. See my post about DU conventional wisdom.

[HoosierClarkie]

15. I miss the

old supporter with the nice picture of Edwards changing a diaper. Whatever happened to that person? :(



edit: grammar

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AP]

22. It's the same person. I really wanted Edwards to win then.

I really want him to win now.

This isn't about people's feelings. It's about picking a candidate who can win the general election.

[HoosierClarkie]

27. Well

if it isn't about feelings, then I will remember that you had none for us when your son of a millworker goes down and doesn't get the VP slot he has been running for. :)

[AP]

41. I have feelings for Clark. And I'll be crying too some day. (It ALWAYS end

in tears for liberals -- Tony Blair said that.)

But yesterday wasn't about feelings. It was about addressing the logic of Clark's statement about Edwards's tax policy. I made my argument about his hypocracy. If you had a counter argument, you should have delivered it.

If Edwards did the same thing to Clark, I wouldn't take it personally if you had pointed out the hypocracy in what Edwards said (if any).

Remember, this isn't about you or about me. It's about getting the best president possible.

[funky_bug]

28. Man, that's IT!

AP, you and I went round and round yesterday, and I am NOT done by a longshot.

In my opinion, your "problem" with Clark was ALWAYS that he was a threat to Edwards. What? He can't stand out in a crowd of more than two fucking people? Jesus! This career negotiator and freshman senator was outseated on more than one occassion by a first-time campaigner... a career military man with NO political experience whatsoever... and it is quite apparant that is the core of your venom, and your tasteless, classless attacks on Clark. I figured you would be jumping for joy and tripping all over yourself today, but instead, here you are, still kicking a now-dead horse.

If I get a warning for this, so be it. I would rather call you out, and tell you flaty that I think you are of the lowest class, then to sit around worrying about one mod warning.

And just so you know, I have been struggling for weeks now, trying to find ONE GOOD REASON to support Kerry if it came down to it. I tell you, I literally could not find ONE.

Now, I have one good reason, and I'm saving all my salt for the wounds some will suffer when Edwards is a frickin' footnote.

[davsand]

30. ::Stands up and begins to clap::

AMEN sister!

Wife_of_a_Wes_Freak, you rock--have I told you that yet today?

Laura

[abburdlen]

35. Thank-you

I find many of Edwards supporters even more annoying than I find Edwards.

[funky_bug]

37. Thanks!

I do feel ever so much better now ;)

[HoosierClarkie]

32. Hey

Edwards will be a footnote! And I will be jumpin for joy. :bounce:

:hug:

[democratreformed]

34. Me too

:bounce:

[BootinUp]

33. Is this Gert? :)

Tell us the truth. You rock Wife_of_a_Wes_Freak!

[funky_bug]

38. AW...

That is a high praise... a high, high praise. I'm humbled.

And no, I'm not Gert ;)

[DancingBear]

36. <stands up and begins to cheer like crazy>

Where the hell do you live, lady - 'cause I'm driving out there and buying you dinner! (with respective spouses attached, of course)

Game, set, match. Damn.

[funky_bug]

39. I live in Florida

and I'm voting for whoever can make Edwards a footnote the fastest. Hubby and I will gladly accept your generous offer... but, um... you might want to book a hotel. We're not feeling very hospitable these days :smile:

[DancingBear]

43. Hey, my brother lives on the Gulf Coast

This could be done, but right now we're really not in the visiting state of mind either.

Perhaps a "Bye Bye Johnnie" dinner soon?

[funky_bug]

51. Which one?

Or does it matter...lol?

[DancingBear]

52. There's more than one?

I am so ocean impaired. :)

Anyway, he lives about 20-30 minutes south of Sarasota.

[funky_bug]

89. LOL

You been drinking, or me?

You said, "Johnny"... I said "which one?" Not the ocean, goofus... the Johns.

[janx]

46. Bravo!

Standing ovation!

[knight_of_the_star]

60. Thank you!!!!

You said what needed being said!

[Leilani]

61. Thanks for that post!!

I have been having minor squirmishes with a few of the Edwards people for a while, & all day today, I've been doing a slow burn.

In my opinion, you were way too polite. They are like a bunch of vultures who can't stay away from the carcass, & have to keep flying in & picking away.

I will never support Edwards; how can I as a Clark supporter, support someone who is not qualified to be Commander-in-Chief.

Anyway, thanks, maybe he'll stay away for 10 minutes.

[HuskerDem]

84. She shoots.................... she scores!

It's like having someone pick at your hangnail and rub french fry salt in it.

Whaddya bet somebody won't be around after Edwards takes the big dive? Wonder who they will blame now?

[Auntie Bush]

74. That wasn't nice

and it's comments like that that make Clark supporters look somewhere else. Certainly not in your direction. Comments like that do more harm than good.

[Skwmom]

14. Did you see DTH posting last night.

Based on Dove Turned Hawk's posting last night I would say that is a good probability.

[davsand]

24. Whch one was that?

I missed it! I have to say, it makes me feel less like a tin foil hat candidate hearing that someone other than my hubby agreed with me that it felt wrong! What thread was it in? Please!!! ;)


Laura

[DU GrovelBot]

31. ## Support Democratic Underground! ##

RUN C:\GROVELBOT.EXE
 
This week is our first quarter 2004 fund drive.
Please take a moment to donate to DU. Thank you
for your support.
 
- An automated message from the DU GrovelBot

Click here to donate.

[Nashyra]

42. Thank you for that post

Yep there is not one reason to support Edwards. It frost me that the media picks our candidate so I'm not happy with Kerry but I am less happy with Edwards and his supporters. Dean for the mean time.

[tameszu]

48. The exact same thing happened with Iowa, I think

When I saw Matt Bennett on TV reporting this instead of Wes, all I could think was, "well, it seems kind of appropriate that it would happen this way, all things considered."

I love Wes Clark, and there's a lot of things the campaign did right, but I'm betting that there's also a lot of dirty stuff in there, sad to say...sigh...so very little in this world is sacred or perfect...

[robbedvoter]

53. Are you writting for DK or kerry now? I am a bit dizzy.

Why would you care anyway?

[Nicholas_J]

57. I think Clark may have been advised

To do what the democratic party leadership is leaning towards in the name of party unity and the party will not forget to advise whicever candidate that it decides it wants to support to not forget Clark when it comes down to deciding who to choose for cabinet positions if Democrats win in November. Clark is the one candidate who understands that such efforts, like military efforts, require teamwork and following orders when it comes to accomplishing goals. Clarks showing in Tennessee weas large enough to keep him in the race, but I believe that he above all of the remaining candidates understands the value of accomplishing the goals of the team, rather than seek personal goals. I greatly admired Clark before he pulled out of the race, but the fact that he did while ther was still evidence that he could still compete (after all in tow out of the latest three Wisconsin polls Clark was set to come in second place)

If you followed Clarks leadership as NATO supreme commander, in particular his strategy in the Balkans, one easily can place Clark among the best military minds of the 20th Century, up there with Rommel and Admiral Rickover. Rommel was a good war commander, but both Rickover and Clark had a firm grasp of the military tactics of maintaining peace in a hostile envoroment.

I would prefer seeing him as Secretary of Defense, rather than being wasted on a Vice Presidency, which in my opinion, he would not be best suited for. Vice Presidents rarely accomplish anything of consequence, mainly selected for some regional advantage, or more often for their ability to raise money. Dan Quayle for example was a waste of space, but was the biggest money raiser the Republicans have ever had. Only Clark could undo the mess caused by Rumsfeld, and get the military running effectively, without the continual demands for useless weapons programs. He managed the European and Balkan theater with rather limited budgets and understood that the troops and their morale is far more effective than any new weapons system which ends up being out of date by the time it has been finished.

Clark was forced into retirement because he constituted a threat to Generals with less imagination and more political agendas.

I do not think the party will be inclined to waste a talent such as Clarks, and will reward him for the recent decision to pull out so that the Democratic nominee will have enough time to raise money and formulate a strong strategy to defeat Republicans in November. Clarks support of whoever wins the nomnation will greatly lend to the Democratic strategy, and his advice will be very much needed to do so.

Whatever led Clark to his final decision is indicative of the nobility of character that Clark possesses. When he accepted retirement, he did so for out of loyalty to Clinton, to avoid the problem a fight with the rigt wingers in the PEntagon would have resulted in.

No matter what happens in July, Clark will not be left out of the next Democratic Administration.

[janx]

58. The Democratic Leadership advised him to do it?

REALLY?

[Nicholas_J]

63. I beleived he was asked to do so

In order to more quickly get a candidate up and active against the Bush administration fast. In order to beat Bush the dems are going to have to have a candidate soon, which is why the primaries were frontloaded. Winning this will be close, but not out of reach. It is neceesary to observe how the Bush adminstration is going to attakc the Democratic candidate, and to get that under control well before November, to get the Bush Adminstration to reveal its hand early.

Again, no one better understands that kind of strategy than Clark, of all the candidates. As a General, he never was a grandstander or into showboating. As a candidate, he has for the most part, shown the same coolness under fire as Kerry does, and that simply comes from both of them having had military experience, of the kind where losing your head really means losing your head.

The party wants a candidate fast, and soon, and Clark has just shown that he actually posseses the qualities of leadership that the other candidates behind Kerry still do not seem to be exhibiting.

This completely eliminates the claims that Clark was not a real Democrat, which was thrown around before New Hampshire. He has placed the outcome of the eletion in November above his own personal ambition and that, in my book is what real leadership is about. Similar suggestions are being given to the other candidates. Only Clark has respoded in a way that serves the party rather than himself and I believe that Clark weighed all of this before dropping out. He could have stayed in and dragged the selection process out, which would do nothing by harm the party and the goal of getting Bush out of office. As he said of Edwards and Kery, they are good men, and patriots. But right now, Clark has shown who is most capable of making personal sacrifices for the good of the team, which is really what party politics is all about.

No one will ever dare suggest that Clark is not a real democrat as he has shown that his loyalties lie with the party itself and not personal ambition. It is a shame that he didnt have more experience running for office, as he is the kind of leader who can inspire real following. You have to really be able to follow the orders of any group before you can ever give them effectively. I think Clark was approached first by the party leadership because they knew they could rely on his loyalty rather than self interest.

[janx]

68. Sorry, but the party doesn't get to decide.

The voters do.

And something tells me that Clark knows that very well.

[celticartemis]

95. Thanks for clarifying it, Nicholas_J

Now it makes more sense, especially after a day of mourning.

[HoosierClarkie]

62. Thanks for that post.

"Clarks showing in Tennessee weas large enough to keep him in the race, but I believe that he above all of the remaining candidates understands the value of accomplishing the goals of the team, rather than seek personal goals."

His decision to run was selfless and his decision to end was the same. It is nice to know that people appreciate that. :)

[Nicholas_J]

66. Had Clark started to run before Kerry

I would have personally been very torn between him and Kerry, and I do not switch my decisions lightly. Kerry hinted very strongly after Clark dropped out that he is looking forward to Clarks invovement in the campaign against Bush. I think he will be given an important part to play by the party.

[mikehiggins]

93. Nice thought. Never happen

Kerry has a whole list of DLC/DNC types to take care of long before he even considers Clark or Edwards. As to "wasting" a talent like Clark's, the pros don't give a rats ass about that and never have.

Clark knows when he can't win a fight, and like Sun Tsu, knows that a good general NEVER fights on when there is no hope of victory.

Kerry will be happy to let Wes knock himself out campaigning for the Party, and will maybe even invite him to a front row seat at the inaugeration. Probably won't invite him to the main reception, though.

Nobody gets forgotten faster than a losing candidate. Hopefully Clark will have too much pride to end up hawking Viagra on tv and shilling on Larry King and CNN.

[Tinoire]

65. Strange! I distinctly recall MSNBC(? NOT Fox)

reporting last night that Clark's staff was moving on whether he decided to stay in the race or not which I thought was extremely shabby of them & a way of forcing his hand.

Now I read that the news was a surprise to Clark's staff. Lehane? Acting at the behest of certain people now that they think Kerry, to whom this was promised since birth, will pull it off?

I really wish I had payed closer attention. Did anyone else hear that?

They also added that Clark declined to address the reporters and make the announcement himself. Something seems so off here.

[MidwestMomma]

67. Sounds sort of like what happened to Clark over the NATO command

I can't remember the details, but before he could resign, they leaked it to the press or something. I'm fuzzy on the details. I just remember him talking about it in an interview. Does anyone else remember the details? I'm kind of fuzzy sad right now.

[Tinoire]

70. That was pretty much it.

They leaked it to the press called him in the middle of the night (US time) & then Clark was barraged with reporters asking questions before he could get an official explanation. He was pretty shaken and upset about it and refused to comment to the reporters. When he asked for official clarification, he was told it was a fait accompli and he left gracefully but hurt.

I may be stepping out on a limb here but I never believed Clinton was "had" on that one and I believe Clark was treated shabbily here again. I hope for his sake that he was ok with it, that some deal was made because this is obscene.

====
The firing of Clark was an act of vicious bureaucratic jujitsu. In the summer of 1999, when Clark was still basking in the glow of victory in Kosovo, General Shelton abruptly informed him that he was being relieved of command--ostensibly to make room for Gen. Joseph Ralston, a favored four-star whose political rise had been stunted by a long-ago scandalous romantic liaison. Knowing that Clark would instantly try to appeal right up to the Oval Office, the Pentagon brass leaked the story to The Washington Post and made sure that top officials were "unavailable" when Clark began frantically calling in the middle of the night.

It was a shabby way to get rid of Clark, who had skillfully fought a difficult two-front war--against the Serbs and his own superiors in Washington. For the most part, Clark's tireless diplomacy had worked to bring together the 19 NATO countries over Kosovo. But Clark's battles, especially with his own commanders, were often strident and messy and too public, conducted over a videoconferencing system with a wide audience (that leaked to reporters).

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3761157/

Clark countered that he was neither “fired” nor “relieved” of his duties, but that he was “asked to retire three months early” by then-Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Henry “Hugh” Shelton.

The normally unflappable Clark grew uncharacteristically emotional as he explained Shelton’s “behind-the-back power play.”

Clark recounted that he was dining with the president of Lithuania when he was interrupted by a phone call from Shelton, who asked Clark to step down from his post.

Within an hour of the phone call, Clark said that Shelton had leaked news of Clark’s ouster to reporter Bradley Graham of the Washington Post. After the leak, Clark said, then-President Bill Clinton and Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen could not have salvaged Clark’s job without sparking an embarrassing public flap with Shelton.

“Bill Clinton told me himself that he had nothing to do with this, and I believe him,” Clark said.


http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=356717

[MidwestMomma]

81. Thanks for the details

I couldn't remember exactly. I just knew it sounded like he had gotten screwed.

One thing I admired about Clark was that for a retired General, he never threw his brass around in the campaign. I'm sure he could have dragged many veterans up on stage with him and said "Look at me, I'm a war hero" but he never did. I don't know. I took a while coming to Clark because it was difficult for this long time peacenik to actually support an ex-general. But probably the most important lesson that Clark has taught me is politicians wage wars, soldier wage battles. I was hoping with Clark as president, we wouldn't wage any more wars so there wouldn't be anymore battles. Now I'm just rambling....

Thanks for your support. It means a lot to me. And thanks for finding that story for me.

[janx]

71. See posts #6 #47 #49 #56 #59 #64

n/t

[Tinoire]

75. I am biting my tongue and refraining from saying what I think

because we are thinking along the same lines. But I am also not trusting Clinton one bit. These are his people beating to the sound of his drum. I'll be scouring for info tomorrow evening because this is TOP shabby!

[janx]

76. Notice that I couldn't exactly come out and say it either...

I feel like a conspiracy theorist.

But so very much has come to light lately that in a couple of days I might actually be able to say it. I dunno.

Thanks for letting me know that I'm not crazy though. ;-)

Edit: Note that those people are only some of the people who worked for Clinton. Dean has people who used to work for him advising him too. And I'm still of the mind that the whole "Clinton is behind Wes Clark's candidacy" rumor originated with the right wing. I saw it in freeperland many months before it ever surfaced at DU. So some (DLC types), yes--but be no means all.

[Tinoire]

78. I'd like to learn more. These are our Primaries and our candidates

should all have a fighting chance until the end so that the majority's choice will run against Bush.

If the majority's choice is Dean, Clark, Kucinich, Kerry, Edwards, Sharpton then SO BE IT. THAT is democracy.

The people behind the curtains are treating us like we only count when it comes to rubber-stamping the one THEY annoint.

This is the 3rd time I'm saying this today but I'll say it in a little more brutality here.

Dean supporters you are grass-roots but you can not win this one on your own. They will cream Dean even more mercilessly than they already have and he will be mince-meat by the time they're done. Get your heads out of the sand and quit thinking you're owed the antiwar/Leftist vote because Dean does NOT qualify for having it forked over to him. He's not antiwar enough for Kucinich people and he's too Centrist for the real Left.

Clark supporters. You got screwed big time. Clark was called in & used until they saw they might be able to pull it off for Kerry. Don't cry in out beer. Progressives go to the progressive candidates and so on, so on. He came off as a real Liberal once he got his positions out so he should have no trouble working out something with Dean and Kucinich.

Kucinich supporters. We are getting screwed too and we know it. Kucinich may be gaining steam but only by a miracle in hell will he gain enough to carry this.

===

There. The 3 grass-roots. Screwed through their own dreams. We can not possibly win unless we persuade Dean, Clark and Kucinich to join forces so that all three grass-root movements can win. I would be willing to swallow certain things for such a ticket because it would be a people's win. Between those 3, they should be able to work something positive out that we could all support if they are the men we think they are.

Sorry this is so rushed but I am running in and out of meetings...

Thoughts?

[Tom Rinaldo]

79. My honest answer?

Yes long term, no short term. There isn't the time or means to pull this off in time to stop Kerry's nomination. Too large a group of the Democratic voting public has bought into the Kerry as unifying warier theme, and of course there is the Establishment to see that nothing changes that.

I am unfortunately resigned for the coming election to a lesser of two evils. We can begin work behind the scenes perhaps just in case a staggering negative revelation comes out about Kerry, but I don't expect that.

I am not preaching this scenario, but if you ask what I really think will happen, that's it. Best case is Bush loses to Kerry. Having said that, I would love to be wrong, and I do not think it is too early to be looking beyond the Fall Election for a longer term movement strategy, nor to start work on a winning future coalition now.

[Tinoire]

82. Sensical answer & Thanks

Will catch up with you later! I have someone visiting and can't be on DU any longer tonight.

My goal isn't to stop Kerry but to make sure that our voices are heard. Actually yes, I guess it is to stop him but it's not really him- it's the DLC's mad rush to a coronation as they elbow everyone else out of the room, asking us to just concentrate on ABB, ABB and go punch their ticket. If Kerry is the people's choice, so be it but you have to wonder why there are so many shenanigans going on.

That totally galls me. Thanks for a sensical response. I look forward to it Tom!

[SadEagle]

88. You know, this makes me wonder...

... You know this whole "Dean will quit if he looses Wisconsin" thing? IIRC, Dean said that it came out w/o his approval.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

69. Last Night I Could Have Sworn That I Heard Gert

in the background when Clark was making him speech congratulating Kerry on his two wins say that "Wesley Clark is the next President of the United States". I think she said it just barely within microphone range. If that's the case, then perhaps Clark had not yet decided at that point.

[Tinoire]

72. I don't think Clark decided

I think it was decided for him once they saw that Kerry could get his crown after all. Clark was only supported by the DLC when they thought that none of their boys were going anywhere.

How that changed is beyond me... but now that Kerry is, they don't need or want Clark.

[DeepModem Mom]

87. I thought Gert introduced Wes as "the next President of the United States"

Anyone else hear that on C-Span last night? Wes seemed to have a resigned tone, but I think by saying those words, Gert may not have thought word of his withdrawal would be out minutes after they left the room in Memphis.

[AP]

96. Maybe she thinks Bush will win and Clark will run and win in 2008.

That's if Kerry wins nomination.

[andym]

80. At that moment: it's unclear, but he conceded strategic defeat

Clark's campaign strategy was built with very little room for error.

The emergence of Kerry as the front runner out of Iowa took alot of Clark's growing support from him in NH. Clark then used the bulk of his money to try to take the South and Southwest on Feb 3, but Kerry's wins in NH and IA overwhelmed Clark's campaigning and paid ads. In addition, Edward's emergence in IA helped give Edwards SC. Clark probably knew after last week that we was likely finished. His strategy, though sound under many scenarios failed under the actual scenario. It was just a matter of time before Clark would concede.

Btw, it shows the dominant power of positive national media coverage relative to modest amounts of paid advertising. Also, no matter how impressive a person may be, he/she is at the mercy of a very artificial game played by the mainstream press and media. Ideas and true personal merit don't count.

To me, Clark seems an honest and humble man. Of the remaining candidates only Kucinich appears similar. They both will tell you what they really think without political calculation. Clark paid dearly for this several times. I hope that someone of this stature with liberal beliefs will run in 2008 should the Democratic nominee not win this time. If Clark and Kucinich are not interested at that time, perhaps Russ Feingold would be.

[DannyRed]

92. I think that the whole

"the party needs a nominee faster, sooner, and Clark is adhering to the desires of the Party"

is a bunch of bullshit.

1) IF the party is saying that, then WHICH party? Which PART of the party? WHO ARE THEY to tell the more than 50% of Democrats who have not had their say yet?

2) Regardless of the philosophical concerns about democracy and voices and votes over cheap shit strategizing by inside baseball gurus....

ARE THEY IDIOTS?

Look, regardless of one's own personal preference, there is one thing and one thing only that ALL of the observers, insiders, campaigners, and strategists HAVE agreed on this cycle...and ALL were surprised by it....it is the following:

Turnout in the Democratic Primaries this cycle is HUGE, in some cases DOUBLE, and in many cases in the double digit percentages above last cycle.

Stunning, absolutely stunning.

Why is it huge?

Free press related to an exciting and broad field of candidates with distinct differences in style, form, substance, and focus.

Each and every candidate singing their own praises, playing off each other, combining and recombining in different groupings, attacking each other, to be sure, but ALL attacking Bush, day in, day out...and getting front page news all over the nation and the globe EVERY SINGLE DAY.

Those who would end the nomination process sooner rather than later are stupid, shortsighted, anti-democratic and anti-Democratic, either by design or through ignorance (or both).

The more the merrier, the longer the better, and I think Clark withdrew too early.

I think Gep withdrew too early.

I hope Dean (my fav), Edwards, Kucinich, Sharpton, and Kerry all stay in, all keep on with the Democracy road show, keep getting the free press, keep speaking out against Bush, keep pushing each other to perform better, to sharpen their message.

I will miss the General, and I certainly hope that his withdrawal was his decision, rather than some idiotic "chess move" by an insider, or a forced withdrawal based on DLC or DNC "strategies" -- these same "strategists" who were so fucking successful in 2000 and 2002 couldn't "strategize" their way out of a wet fucking paper bag.

Thank you very much.

[eridani]

94. Very good points

The more of them stay in the race, the more confused the Republican slime machine gets about which direction it should be pointing.