Gen. Clark Challenges Fellow Candidates to Abide by N.H. Spending Limits

[wndycty]

He raises a good point because those who have opted out of public financing have said it was necessary so that they could spend it against Bush not other Democrats.

-snip-
"The issue is not just how much money you raise, but how much money you spend. All Democratic presidential candidates ought to abide by the spending caps in New Hampshire," said Clark. "Those who have more money should use it at the end of the nominating process against George W. Bush, not against their fellow Democrats who are playing by the rules. This nomination should be decided based on leadership, issues, and character-not money."
-snip-

http://clark04.com/press/release/084/

[chimpymustgo]

1. He is absolutely right. At least abide by the spirit of the caps.

nt

[Dookus]

2. He's entirely correct....

I'm still disappointed Dean and Kerry opted out.

Public Financing of campaigns is an important issue to many progressives, and I don't see how Dean or Kerry could support it if elected without appearing like hypocrites.

[Romberry]

48. No candidate who accepts matching funds...

...is going to get elected. It takes money to fight back. Taking on Bush's 200 million with a mere 45 million that will be exhausted by the time the nominee is decided is like taking a butter knife to a gun fight. Not smart.

[sangh0]

57. Not true

Clinton got elected with matching funds. So did Gore, despite being outspent two-to-one. And the $45 million limit applies to the primaries, if I'm not mistaken

[Eloriel]

72. 2 to 1 is a little different from 4 to 1 in a pimary where Bush

has NO opponent other than all the Dems.

Further, the spending limit won't cover the whole primary season. Most campaigns will have spent that by the end of March, which means they can't spend another cent, on ANYthing, and also can't raise another cent, until after the convention in late July -- meanwhile Bush has the rest of his $200 million to spend.

If you don't see a serious practical problem with that, you're either naive or just looking for ways to diss Dean (as usual).

Eloriel

[sandnsea]

3. Kerry called for this at the time

He will abide by the caps if Dean does. No word yet from the Dean camp that I know of.

[killbotfactory]

29. Kerry won't abide by state caps, just primary caps

Which will allow him to sink all his money in NH.

[killbotfactory]

32. I think they should abide by spending caps

But if the other campaigns are going to coordinate attacks on Dean (like they've been doing), they'll be able to spend much more against Dean in each state.

I want as the winner to have as much money as possible to go against Bush.

[sandnsea]

47. There's no agreement or discussion

So you really can't say that. It's just your opinion, unless you've got a link where Kerry actually said that.

[sangh0]

58. He made it up

The facts aren't important to some.

[killbotfactory]

85. I've only seen Kerry say he'll abide by the 45million dollar limit

And challenged Dean to only spend that much.

And he's about to run up against the state spending caps in NH.

If you have an article where Kerry says he'll abide by state spending caps, please show me.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

4. ooh good one Clark

He's 100% correct in my opinion. If Dean (and Kerry) use their big bucks to attack other Democrats, instead of using it against Bush like they said, we'll know they were totally full of shite.

[Pastiche423]

5. Where are all of his supporters

that claimed he was going to burst on to the scene and fly by all or the other candidates? It's all I heard for months on end.

They couldn't support him w/their small donations? How come?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

7. if Trippi could make Dean the frontrunner ...

... imagine what he could have done for Clark. Dean got a headstart of 9 months organizing.

[Pastiche423]

9. But but but...

Everyone said clark was going to fly by Dean as soon as he entered the race! He din't need Trippi! He was THE STAR!

Amd now, he can't raise enough money from all of his millions of supporters. He has to have matching funds.

So sad. His star did not shine like his medals.

[AmericanDem]

11. enough with your rambling what about....

the issue of the subject heading. Since he isnt going against Bush, shouldn't he cap his spending while competing against fellow Dems?

Just answer the question!

[Pastiche423]

14. It no longer is a matter of should

Now, it's a matter of must.

[teevee]

30. you know...

mrn sdfnjkf asjkfbhiauwjjfjafkzbncvjkzbnvfhjksdbgkj jsdgksdjg
and further more
nasdjklvgnaskldjgnlksdgnlksdnoihqwkletrn!!!!!

[sujan]

86. yep

Now go back to your cave.

[TLM]

37. I would say no... Dean has one big disadvantage.

He's got 4 or 5 guys all ganging up on him because he's the front runner. So there is basically 5 guys who are all going after Dean with their combined spending, yet Dean has to split his resources 5 ways to respond to attacks coming from 5 different directions.

I will say Dean should not spend any more money against the dems than the combined total they spend attacking him.

[sangh0]

59. Dean hypocrisy

Dean said he needs the money to fight Bush*, but some people don't mind if he makes his reasons into lies by using the money to fight other Dems.

[Shakespeare]

12. From what I understand...

Clark is raising money at an impressive clip. That's a bit of a non-sequitur from the challenge, though. I think all the candidates should honor that challenge.

[Pastiche423]

15. Why?

[Shakespeare]

20. Why what? Why do I support the challenge?

Because I think it's the honorable thing to do, for all of the candidates. Why do you NOT support it?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

13. I guess they were wrong

I bet Dean's support is pretty solid - but 20% probably won't win it for him. Clark's campaign sure seems weaker and slower than *I* expected, for one. I'll be disappointed, but not surprised, if Dean decides to ignore spending limits in the DEMOCRATIC primary, and that all of his excuses for wanting the extra money to attack Bush was so many campaign promises, like his promise to "revisit" trade agreements to add in the environmental and labor protections he didn't want the first time.

I'm sorry to interrupt your gloating, please continue :)

[Pastiche423]

17. Howard Dean is a very frugal man

He has proven such during his years of governing. I have no doubt he will continue to be.

;-)

[Lefta Dissenter]

67. pastiche

[Larkspur]

70. My thoughts exactly

I'm smirking at Clark, who thought that it would be a cakewalk to the Dem nomination, like Ike's was to the Republican nomination in 1952. Clark totally expected us Dems to bow down and pay homage to his 4 stars so that he didn't have to work for the nomination. My how surprised he must be that his fantasy didn't happen.

[Shakespeare]

77. Please tell me where you get this information.

I'd really like to know where Clark--or even one of his spokespeople--has ever said or implied that he thought getting the nomination would be a cakewalk, or that he expected anybody to "bow down and pay homeage."

You know, if you you don't like Clark, that's just fine--but to project that kind of nonsense onto him or his candidacy when nothing of the sort has ever been implied, is just a tiny bit much.

[Shakespeare]

82. Kick - waiting for an answer

Any of the anti-Clark types can feel free to jump in here. I've seen this BS thrown about a lot, and it's just baseless. The PUNDITS expected him to make a big splash, and he did, and he's held pretty good ground in all of the polls, while fluctuating a bit--just as all the top-tier candidates have done. But I am sick to DEATH--and I say this as a Kucinich supporter, for chrissakes!--of the kneejerk vitriol directed at this man.

If you choose not to support Clark, that's just dandy--but don't clutter up the boards with bullshit comments that have no basis in reality (and I'm not talking about the fair critical questions that are asked here).

[Shakespeare]

87. Anybody? No? Yeah, I thought not....

:eyes:

[neuvocat]

8. Do you remember who they were?

Ya got any links?

[Pastiche423]

10. It is against DU rules to call out people

But they were and are right here on DU.

[Bertrand]

22. You were calling them out.

Hence the "Where are all of his supporters" subject line of your initial post, unless youre arguing that you can call people out just not by name which would mean, if correct, that youre exercising a loophole to antagonize people.

Also, i remember when Clark first entered the race and eveyrone was amazed by the first Newsweek Poll that showed him at the top of the pack, considering many here thought he would slowly rise if he were to win the nomination.

But that doesnt matter. What does matter is that a few Dean zealots are scared by the Clark media push, so they are out in full force to attack him. Clark is tied with Dean in the National polls despite Deans tremendous advantage in name recognition, and is going to turn in a great quarter despite lacking the time and organization of Dean. With Dean continuing to turn off supporters of other camps with his attacks and his flip-flopping fake popularism, they should be scared.

[Pastiche423]

25. Uh huh

[neuvocat]

26. Or...

Pastiche just can't back up what he's saying.

Which is it?

[Pastiche423]

28. Back up what?

[neuvocat]

46. Your accusations that you just made..

oh I dunno, a few posts ago about all the Clark supporters bragging about how well he was gonna do.

Sad.

[sangh0]

61. It's just more of the "attack the critics, ignore the issue"

some Dean supporters make a habit of. Pastiche hasn't addressed the issue, and instead criticizes others for making a prediction that has nothing to do with the subject at hand in order to distract attention from Dean's lie about how the money was going to be used to attack Bush* when the truth is Dean will use it to attack Dems.

[neuvocat]

23. But you'll call out Clark supporters all the same.

Seems like the rules don't bother you too much.

[Bread and Circus]

18. Weapons of mass distraction, Pastiche?

Just answer the question.

[AmericanDem]

6. notice how no Dean supporters are chiming in here

Every other subject heading I seen here showing Clark in a good light Dean supporters are always chiming in with negatives hoping to slow the momentum.

On an issue such as this, nothing but silence. I expect nothing less.

[Bread and Circus]

19. That always happens...

it seems as if the flame Clark threads get incessant
bumping of one sort or another but the one's where
Clark looks good actually discussing the issues (seeing
as how he doesn't waste his time with the politics of
personal destruction) seem to drift down without a peep.

I think Clark is making a good point here, one I hadn't
thought of. That is, if you are opting out of public
financing to beat Bush, shouldn't you stay w/in spending
limits during the primary season vs other dems.

Like he said, this campaign should be about the leadership
qualities and positions of the campaigns, not just about spending
the most money.

If the other candidates have pointed this out, kudos to them.

[AmericanDem]

21. Bingo

and like i said, I expect nothing less from what we are seing now in way of responses from Dean people. This is A typical behavior of their candidate and they then follow suit.

[ScotTissue]

16. This is like the unarmed man

This is like the unarmed man who says, "Fellas, what say we put down the guns."

Nice try, General.

[Tom Rinaldo]

24. Absolutely false

First, Clark's fund raising is picking up nicely, he is expected to raise the second highest war chest for the current quarter (behind Dean of course), and he is just starting to run those costly edia adds.

Clark makes no quarrel with those candidates who use Bush as their reason to opt out of Public financing, which is exactly the reason that both Dean and Kerry have given for reluctantly not participating in the public funding system. They talk about needing money to use against Bush's "200 million" after the Democratic primaries are over but before the race for President officially begins. Fine, use all the extra money against Bush after the Democratic primaries are over. Or go ahead and use the extra money now agaiinst fellow Democrats. But don't be two faced about it. Don't blame it on the Bush machine. Say you can raise tons of money and you will spend as much as you can to win the Democratic Party nomination. Be honest about it, don't blame it on Bush when Bush hasn't spent a dime of his war chest yet. Hypocracy drives me crazy. All of the Democrats in the past made a big deal about the need to support public funding of Presidential elections.

[Pastiche423]

27. Show me the (clark) money

[Tom Rinaldo]

33. From MSNBC embedded reporter filed today:

SHOWING THE MONEY
With the news out that the campaign expects to rake in no less than $12 million by the end of year, it seems to be the time to start showing everyone the money with their New Hampshire media buy of $1.1 million for two months. Reaching out to voters who very well may not have heard of him, odds are good that your average New Hampshire TV watcher may get hit with a slick look at the general’s military credentials. And South Carolina and Arizona ads buys are not far behind.


They even seem to have prepared that headline just for you lol

[Tom Rinaldo]

34. Satisfied?

I deserved a free kick on this one I figured. Soon as I gave the answer requested the thread sank lol.

[Pastiche423]

36. EXPECTS to rake in?

How is that showing anyone the money?

I can EXPECT a lot of things to happen, that doesn't mean they will.

[TLM]

38. Clark has to have more $2000 a plate fundraisers...

to get the donations for his campaign.

I do wonder how many of those donations came from folks connected to his lobbyist work. Hard to say since Clark doesn't really think enough of his supporters to keep them involved in the process.

Wall Street Journal, 9/18/03

IN ANNOUNCING his presidential campaign, Wesley K. Clark promoted himself as the candidate best qualified to prosecute the war on terror. As a businessman, he has applied his military expertise to help a handful of high-tech companies try to profit from the fight Since retiring from a 34-year Army career in 2000, Gen. Clark has become : chairman of a suburban Washington technology-corridor start-up, managing director at an investment firm, a director at four other firms around the country and an advisory-board member for two others. For most, he was hired to help boost the companies' military business. .


After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Gen. Clark counseled clients on how to pitch commercial technologies to the government for homeland-security applications. One is Acxiom Corp., based in Gen. Clark's hometown of Little Rock, Ark., where he formally launched his campaign yesterday. He joined the board of the Nasdaq-traded company in December 2001, as the company started to market its customer-database software to federal agencies eager to hunt for terrorists by scanning and coordinating the vast cyberspace trove of citizen information.

"He has made efforts at putting us in contact with the right people in Washington ... setting up meetings and participating in some himself," says Acxiom Chief Executive Charles Morgan. "Like all of us around 9/11, he had a lot of patriotic fervor about how we can save our country."


<snip>

While he was originally hired as a consultant by WaveCrest Laboratories LLC, Dulles, Va.,to help find military buyers for its promising new electric motor, Gen. Clark became the company's chairman in April, and has also focused on selling products in the commercial market. But Gen. Clark's knowledge of and ties with, the military and government markets have been a large part of his appeal to potential employers.

Stephens Inc., the large, politically connected Little Rock investment firm, hired him to boost its aerospace business shortly after he gave up his NATO command. He left Stephens last year and opened his own consultancy, Wesley K. Clark & Associates.
While Gen. Clark was at Stephens, the firm also marketed him to clients such as Silicon Energy-in which Stephens held a stake - "as a good person to help us understand the federal procurement process," says Mr. Woolard. The company was trying to enter the government market, and Gen. Clark explained the process "and contacted people at the Navy and Air Force and told them what we had," Mr. Woolard says. (Silicon Energy was acquired earlier this year by Itron Inc., and Gen. Clark no longer advises the firm).

Time Domain Corp., a Huntsville, Ala., advanced wireless-technology company, recruited Gen. Clark to become an adviser in February 2002 through one of its chief operating officers, who had been a colonel under his NATO command during the Bosnia campaign. Gen. Clark has counseled the company on how to answer Pentagon concerns that its low-power radar system might interfere with global positioning and communications systems, as well as to better craft that technology for military use. board of Entrust, at the request of CEO William Conner, who had served with him on a Pentagon advisory panel.
At Entrust, Gen. Clark has provided advice on how to sell to various NATO governments, says David Wagner, Entrust's chief financial officer. He has also helped emphasize the firm's product securing electronic networks for new homeland-security applications.
_________________________________________________________

[Myra]

40. First TLM, Clark keeps his supporters informed

I'm one and therefore I'm in a position to know
firsthand. Are you in the position to know firsthand?
He sends almost daily email status reports.

Second, ohmygod, could you possibly pick
a more whorish right wing rag than the
Wall Street Journal to quote from? Maybe next
you'll source the Washington Moonie Times
as gospel, or, what the hell, something from
Free Republic!

Their mission is to trash our best candidates,
the biggest threats to Bush. Clark and Dean top
that list.

[Pastiche423]

41. So, how much does clark have right now?

[Myra]

43. If you're interested in Clark's fund raising info Pastiche423 you can:

Either:

1) Donate to General Clark's campaign and be
kept well informed by regular email newsletters.
:)

OR

2) Keep an eye on http://www.clark04.com/,
which is frequently updated.

Right now he's focusing on raising money
specifically for NH TV ads, and he gives
to total collected ($67.706) versus total
needed ($220,000) at the top right:
"Clark04 Ad Blitz."
There's also a link to view his first TV ad.

And he gives precise details of the NH Ad Blitz here:
http://www.clark04.com/story/23/

[TLM]

45. Why doesn't he tell you how many doners there are?

[TLM]

44. Really where on his website can I get this info?

"I'm one and therefore I'm in a position to know
firsthand. Are you in the position to know firsthand?
He sends almost daily email status reports."

Really where on his website can i get this info, or sign up for the e-mails?


"Second, ohmygod, could you possibly pick
a more whorish right wing rag than the
Wall Street Journal to quote from? Maybe next
you'll source the Washington Moonie Times
as gospel, or, what the hell, something from
Free Republic!"

Are you going to despute the facts stated? THe WSJ is rather conservative, however they are very comprensive when it comes to business. I quote this piece because it lists a lot of the companies he was working for to get defense contracts. Do you claim Clark did not work for and advise these companies?

I can site other sources, they're just not as comprehensive and tend to focus on acxiom.


http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20031013&s=jones

Acxiom, one of the nation's largest data-mining companies, has actively sought federal contracts related to homeland security in the past two years. In December 2001 Acxiom hired Gen. Wesley Clark, now a Democratic presidential candidate, as a lobbyist and board member to help procure government contracts.



"Their mission is to trash our best candidates,
the biggest threats to Bush. Clark and Dean top
that list."


Oh well look at what this from the CLark bio on the site.

http://extremecampaigns.com/draftwesley/about_clark.htm


"Now in the private sector, General Clark is chairman and CEO of Wesley K. Clark & Associates, a strategic advisory and consulting firm, serves on the boards of several private corporations and non-profit organizations and comments regularly on politics, diplomacy and public affairs."

<snip>

"General Clark is also licensed as an investment banker. He joined Stephens Inc. as a consultant in July of 2000 and was named Managing Director – Merchant Banking of Stephens Group, Inc. from March 2001 through February 2003."


http://www.arkansasnews.com/archive/2003/10/02/JohnBrummett/15073.html
That December, Acxiom arranged a $300,000 contract through Stephens for Clark's services, and Clark joined the Acxiom board. This year, with Clark on his own, Acxiom entered into a $150,000 contract with him directly. The contract was canceled upon Clark's announcement of his presidential candidacy, though he remains on the firm's board.

Acxiom has several government contracts to help develop a data-based airline screening system, but development has been hampered by concerns about funding and privacy.

These are worthwhile press reports that should properly force Clark to state his position on issues of privacy and security. But perhaps we can avoid this time the assertion of a political and business incest in Arkansas that is in any way peculiar.




http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1103/111103t1.htm

Acxiom's data was not only vast, but also particularly valuable following the Sept. 11 attacks. Personal data on 11 of the 19 hijackers reportedly resided in the company's systems. Clark was able to arrange a number of meetings between Acxiom executives and senior administration officials, including Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta and Vice President Dick Cheney, The New York Times reported Monday.


<snip>

Acxiom wasn't the only technology contractor willing to pay for access to Clark's Rolodex. The former general also helped market a product from Time Domain, an Alabama defense contractor that makes a vision system for soldiers that lets them sense objects behind walls. Clark also worked on behalf of WaveCrest Laboratories in Virginia, promoting electric bicycles to military special operations forces.


Before officially launching his presidential bid in October, Clark resigned positions on four corporate boards, including information security company Entrust Inc., a contractor for the Treasury and Energy Departments, as well as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

[Myra]

89. "Really where on his website can i get this info, or sign up for the e-ma"

Gee TLM, if you actually took the time to read
my post you'd see the answer to your question
before you even asked!

---

"2) Keep an eye on http://www.clark04.com/,
which is frequently updated.

Right now he's focusing on raising money
specifically for NH TV ads, and he gives
to total collected ($67.706) versus total
needed ($220,000) at the top right:
"Clark04 Ad Blitz."
There's also a link to view his first TV ad.

And he gives precise details of the NH Ad Blitz here:
http://www.clark04.com/story/23/"

---

If you're truly so helpless that you can't find such
prominently displayed financial info after someone
gives you the links and exact location on the webpage,
and you can't find the equally prominent link to sign up
for his newsletter, then you're hopeless.
I'll post the info; I won't make a house call and guide
your little hand onto the little mouse and click the links
for you. You'll have to at least put in some minimal effort
for me to play along.

If, as is more likely the case, you're determined to flame away,
oblivious to info and facts already presented, and depending
entirely on the ultra right wing ultra whorish Wall
Street Journal for your ammo (the publication that applauded the
coup2k Miami-Dade rent-a-mob as a "bourgeois riot"), then this
isn't a good faith discussion, and there's no point taking time
on it.

So either learn how to navigate the web or troll elsewhere.
You're not worth wasting anymore time on so I won't.

[Bread and Circus]

49. Spot on...

The question Dean and Kerry supporters have to ask themselves:

Is opting out in order to fight Bush or is opting out in order
have the biggest gun in the Dem circular firing squad or is
it both?

What's the answer?

Straight talk only please.

[Bread and Circus]

51. No, this is like an honest man saying:if that money's for Bush..

like you said it was, then why don't you save it for him....

I love this issue, because it really challenges where Dems
stand on public financing and campaign finance reform.

Is it really for all dems or once you have as much money as
Republicans, you don't need to adhere to the system.

Even Clinton, whom I like but some here would call a DLC'er
and "Republican-lite", kept with the public matching fund
system.

[slinkerwink]

31. I don't think Dean should do this...

because as the frontrunner, he has the other candidates spending money about (45 million combined) to defeat him, so Dean can't abide by the spending limits in order to stay on top...

[wndycty]

35. Kick

:kick:

[retyred]

39. I expect Clark to do the right thing

it's what he does, he's the only one so far that refuses to trash another candidate, as he said: This nomination should be decided based on leadership, issues, and character.

Those that find it nessessary to attack the others in order to win lack leadership, issues, and character.

I would rather Clark lose with dignity, and integrity than to roll in the mud doing KKKarl Rove's work for him.



Retyred In Fla
So I Read This Book

[Adjoran]

42. When Dean opted out

he said nothing about needing the money because other Democrats were "ganging up" on him. He said it was to counter the huge amount Bush is expected to collect.

If he spends all that he collects over what the matching funds would have been on winning the nomination, he will be back to the same place vs. Bush after the primaries, won't he?

Holding to the spending caps should not be a problem if he was sincere in his explanation of opting out of public financing.

[Bread and Circus]

50. Not only did Dean say the money was earmarked for Bush...

I can remember a great number of DU'ers here, and some
on this thread, that said Dean was opting out to "Beat Bush".

Clark is calling them on it.

Where do they stand.

[Justice]

52. Very Valid Point

Clark is correct.

If Dean and Kerry are opting out of public financing because of Bush, then they should have no trouble with this statement, and no trouble abiding by the funding caps for each state in the primary.

They are free to reject the suggestion, but by doing so, they undermine the campaign finance reform and prove that Bush is not their only reason for opting out. Simple as that.

On the flaming side thread that has appeared (yet again by the same usual posters) - I have seen a surge of support for Clark on this board in recent weeks, which I believe will be showing up in the polls in the coming weeks. Clark is a legitimate candidate, a credible candidate - and someone who has done remarkably well in the short time he has been a candidate. Yes, his numbers fell off after first announcing - but a big part of that was that he disappeared from the airwaves for almost two weeks due to losing his voice. Even supporters of his in NH said -- where did he go? He has regained that momentum and is moving up in polls, is bombarding the airwaves with interviews and appearances.

[Barbara917]

53. Opting out to compete against Bush is a partial truth

I haven't seen anyone in this thread discuss money already spent. If one compares money spent to where the candidates stand in the polls (at least on a national level) there is a distinct argument to be made that Clark is the superior candidate. It demonstrates also that it takes A LOT of money to defeat a superior candidate.

All these rationalizations for not staying within the spending limits during the primary season are simply that - rationalizations. This thread is proof of the desperate need we have for campaign finance reform. When push comes to shove losing candidates don't have the discipline to remain on an even playing field and will throw more money at it to "prove" they are the best candidate for the job.

[returnable]

54. Excellent post

Very well said :toast:

[tsipple]

56. Gotta Call You On This One

If one compares money spent to where the candidates stand in the polls (at least on a national level) there is a distinct argument to be made that Clark is the superior candidate.

First of all, we don't have a national primary. Why? Precisely for the reason you've bumped into inadvertantly. If we did, every four (or eight) years the Democratic Party would nominate a media celebrity. A CNN analyst, for example.

We have state-by-state primaries precisely to toughen up our candidates. Voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, and perhaps a couple other early states give these candidates the equivalent of a full body cavity search. It certainly helped in 1992, with Bill Clinton, when most of the skeletons came out of the closet before the general election season. (It also made Clinton's campaign that much stronger.)

Clark is undergoing that process now. The early signs are that he hasn't run a very good campaign. Since the ability to run a good campaign so thoroughly swamps any other factor in getting elected -- ask Bill Clinton -- it's healthy that we're testing that talent.

There's also one other basic reason why Clark hasn't spent any money: up until recently he didn't have any and couldn't raise any! On that metric, though, Dean looks pretty darn good. He was the only major candidate in 3rd quarter to spend less money than he raised. (You can't really count Clark on that one. We have to wait until 4th quarter to get some idea of "burn rate" for him.) Kerry, Edwards, Gephardt, and Lieberman all spent more than they raised in 3rd quarter.

Finally, there's this. In many (goofball) national polls, Hillary Clinton, who's not even running, outpolls Dean (running #1 in most national polls), Clark (running #2 in most national polls), and the rest of the field. You're not suggesting that Hillary Clinton ought to be the Democratic nominee, are you? She hasn't spent a dime running for president, and yet she's still more popular than anyone in the race. (Well, supposedly.)

[returnable]

60. Getting back to the point of the thread...

...do you think Dean should honor spending limits in the primaries?

So far in this thread, I've read Dean supporters use this challenge to ridicule Clark's fundraising. Fine. Ho ho. Your guy has raised more money. Whoopee.

But that's just dancing around the real issue here:

If Dean's rejection of matching funds was to help better arm him against Bush, why shouldn't he honor spending limits in the primaries, where Bush's bankroll isn't a factor?

[returnable]

64. kicking for an answer n/t

[sangh0]

65. don't hold your breath

I'm not optimistic.

[Tom Rinaldo]

62. I agree on some of your points

I think the importance of State races to test campaigning ability is fair and true for example. However while the post you responded to put the best spin on Clark's fund raising vs. time in the race, yours put the worse spin on it. For the last funing quarter Clark filed having raised 3.5 million. That was three weeks into his campaign. Saying that "up untill recently he didn't have any (money) and couldn't raise any" is misleading at best (if you are saying Clark had no funds in early September - when he wasn't running, of course not) or flat out wrong if you are discussing his campaign after he declared. Currently they say they expect to raise 12 million by the end of the year. Dean is outpacing Clark, but Clark seemingly has more of a war chest now than the other candidates.

Regarding his campaign, getting on the ground and up to speed had to happen in a compressed time frame relative to other candidates, who had a year to tune up to the point where they (hopefully) would hit cruising speed. I think it is fair to say that Clark has to hit a winning stride starting now or he won't have time to pull it off, but there are signs that he is starting to do just that.

[Barbara917]

63. Clark is a media celebrity? You are mistaken.

First of all, we don't have a national primary. Why? Precisely for the reason you've bumped into inadvertantly. If we did, every four (or eight) years the Democratic Party would nominate a media celebrity. A CNN analyst, for example.

A CNN analyst is a media celebrity? Are you typing that with a straight face? Clark is a media celebrity? Have you looked at the polls with regards to name recognition? The notion that Clark’s position in the polls is due to celebrity is stuff and nonsense.

Clark is undergoing that process now. The early signs are that he hasn't run a very good campaign. Since the ability to run a good campaign so thoroughly swamps any other factor in getting elected -- ask Bill Clinton -- it's healthy that we're testing that talent.

Not a very good campaign? This remains to be seen. Basing the success/failure of a candidate on how they fair in Iowa and New Hampshire is a mistake as Clinton’s campaign proved in ’92. If you look at the state by state polls you will find that Clark is very competive. Clark can only be considered in 2nd place if you look at the raw percentages and ignore margin of error. If you are going to base the superiority of a candidate on superior campaigning why isn’t Dean miles ahead of all the others? By that metric he looks pretty mediocre.

Finally, there's this. In many (goofball) national polls, Hillary Clinton, who's not even running, outpolls Dean (running #1 in most national polls), Clark (running #2 in most national polls), and the rest of the field. You're not suggesting that Hillary Clinton ought to be the Democratic nominee, are you? She hasn't spent a dime running for president, and yet she's still more popular than anyone in the race. (Well, supposedly.)

No. I am not endorsing Hillary. I am for Clark. Unlike the rest of the candidates, Hillary and Lieberman are the only candidates in which name recognition comes into play in their poll standings.

[returnable]

55. Kick!

[ArkDem]

66. Well it would really help Clark

but I don't think Dean and Kerry are that stupid.

[returnable]

68. You think honoring spending limits is "stupid"?

That's very interesting.

And remember, this isn't about competing against Bush's war chest. This is about limiting spending in the primaries.

But I guess for all the lipservice about campaign finance reform, Dean and Kerry are really just interested in buying elections.

How refreshing.

[ArkDem]

83. Interested in winning....

just like Clark but with fundrasing skills he will never have.

[returnable]

84. Ah, I see...

...so by your logic, Bush is the most "skilled" campaigner out there cuz he can raise the most funds.

Thanks for clearing that up :eyes:

[ArkDem]

88. I was only speaking off democrats

not corporatists. Come to think of it that would exclude Clark. Never mind.

[returnable]

91. The principle is still the same

If you think it's OK for Dean and Kerry to buy the nomination, you must think it's OK for Bush to buy the election.

You're either for spending limits or you're not.

You obviously aren't.

That's fine.

But you better not whine about Bush's $200 million warchest and how he spends it, cuz you can't have it both ways.

[ArkDem]

92. Sure I can.

I just did.

[Spazito]

69. It's interesting that there has been NO response from the other...

candidates regarding this issue. They have not come out saying one way or the other. Wonder why?

[sandnsea]

73. Yes they have

I just pulled up the first one that popped up in Google, but I read others at the time.

November 8, 2003 -

Washington, DC – Dick Gephardt's campaign manager, Steve Murphy released the following statement on Howard Dean's decision to forgo public financing.

"Forget all of the gimmicks and rationalizations, the plain truth is that Howard Dean wants to outspend his opponents in the early states and has therefore violated his pledge to stay within the public financing system. Just like President Bush, Howard Dean has effectively undermined campaign finance laws for his own personal, opportunistic political advantage."

[Spazito]

75. Thanks for that...

I should have been more specific though, sorry about that. I was wondering where the responses were, specific to Clark's point, from the candidates that had opted out based on their claim they needed it to compete against Bush.

[Eloriel]

71. Yeah, I'd do that too if I were in Clark's position and thought

I could get away with it.

Clark is skipping the N.H. debate because he has a fundraiser at which he expects to raise $1.5 million. I think that shows something about him -- and money.

And he doesn't need to worry. Money isn't all there is, at all. Time and again Dems are overspent (often by a lot) by Repugs, for example, and the people still get it right and put Dems in office. Arianna Huffington's former husband couldn't buy his way into office, for example.

Money does matter, but not all that much. Clark needs to worry less about how much Dean spends and more about getting his own house (and campaign structure and volunteers) in order.

Eloriel

[Tom Rinaldo]

76. They changed the debate date

Clark scheduled that fund raiser on an open night and had planned to attend that debate. The debate got changed at the last minute and I never have heard an explanation for why that was done. Seems amateurish to screw up and have to change an arranged debate date without an assurance that all the major participants could make the new date. I wouldn't even do that when planning an important meeting. Clark lined up a lot of major committments for that fund raiser prior to the debate date being changed to create a conflict. He's making the right choice, and it's not fair that he had to make one, but hey, life's not fair...

[Demobrat]

74. Dean is a fool if he agrees to this.

And Dean is no fool. The second he does the others will mount a coordinated attack against him and he'll be outspent 4-5 to one. That's the reality and there's no reason he should walk into that trap.

[Tom Rinaldo]

78. The reason is

Dean had a position in favor of public financing, and the limits associated with it, when that was convenient to him. As soon as money was no issue to him, he backed out of that position, with Bush as the excuse. Now that he has backed out, it's no longer about Bush. It's just about doing whatever it takes to win, and having no limit on the money he can spend in the primaries when he is raising more money than any other Democrat makes it easier for him to win. There is a lot of logic to that of course. Trouble is, that's the same logic George Bush is using running around the country building up his war chest, and it is completely inconsistent with Deans earlier principled position. They are both acting to undermine public fianancing of campaigns, only Bush never claimed to support it in the first place.

[Demobrat]

79. So Dean is Bush, Bush is Dean

and we should all vote for (insert your candidate's name here), but we won't because we're all stupid, brainwashed cult members who don't care that our candidate has no principles. Must suck to be up against that.

[Tom Rinaldo]

81. huh?

I think you have been at the receiving end of way too many attacks. Actually I mena that sincerely, Dean and his supporters have been. I personally supported Dean pulling out of the campaign financing limits as a way of building a war chest to use against Bush when Bush starts spending freely in the Summer. Made sense to me. Clark has no problem with that and said so (specifically he said it is George Bush who created the circumstances that are forcing some Democratic candidates to consider opting out of public financing- don't blame them, blame Bush) when I saw him speak recently in NH.

I back Clark, but not only would I vote for Dean, I would campaign for Dean if he gets the nomination. I think Dean's movement is great stuff for the Party, and I congradulate Dean for having motivated it to form behind him. Having said that, I haven't heard a reply from Dean to this "challenge" and I hope he accepts it. I think Kerry would if Dean did. I think public financing is an important principle for the Democratic Party to stand for, for many reasons. And I stand by my statements about Dean's potential inconsistency, which you did not comment on in your reply.

[theboss]

80. I like Clark a lot . . .but . . .

This reeks of desperation. He is going to lose in NH and lose badly. He should try to figure out how to minimize the damage, not play games.

PS: I would vote for Clark tomorrow if a primary were held in my kitchen.

[SahaleArm]

90. Disagree

If Dean's gonna call Clark a Repug, it's time to hold waffle boy accountable.