You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #139: It doesn't matter if it is discredited. [View All]

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
JHBowden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-14-05 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #110
139. It doesn't matter if it is discredited.
The Republicans can and will use it. You guys need to recognize this. All I see is spirit, but the mind and body of Team Clark aren't completely here yet.

I learned from the last election that having a good bio, and even military experience, won't win us elections. Bill Clinton and W. Bush have less than superlative bios, but they did well because of they way they play the political game. Given the events of the last primary, I'm not convinced Clark has *any* game.

Let us take the mind. For starters, when I was supporting Dean, I told the hordes of Clarkies here that winning Iowa and New Hampshire are worth millions in free advertising a piece and winning Iowa was especially important. No no no, Clark was the greatest thing since sliced bread I was told, and I was just believing people who hated Clark, despite the rationality of winning these two primaries. Well, Kerry won Iowa, used the momentum to win NH, and steamrolled his way to the nomination.

By the body not being here, I mean that mechanics matter. Election 2000 was close because Gore gained a few points at the end because of the way Team Bush handled the DUI charges. They had Bush out in the middle of the night in front of a brick building being interrogated by reporters -- he looked like a criminal instead of a statesman. Most Deaniacs refuse to acknowledge that he toasted his candidacy in part by the wild-eyed scream -- they think it was a media conspiracy, voters should be rational, the DLC was out to get him, blah blah blah.

Similar behavior exists within the Clark camp. Clark's concession speeches were crap. The best way to go is to have the candidate behind a raised podium significantly in front of a massive crowd in the background. It gives the candidate stature and makes it look like everyone loves him. Edwards did this well losing in Iowa, which partly why he had continued success. Clark, however, had a very small amount of people behind him in NH compared to the other candidates, and wasn't sufficiently in front of the crowd nor was raised on a tall enough platform. He looked diminutive.

There are good reasons not to be excited about Clark, and I'd wish you guys would stop trying to ram him down everyone's throat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | 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