It's unfortunate that Clark has made Edwards his top opponent early on

[Bombtrack]

I guess it started when Farbiani decided to leak Clark's candidacy confirmation in the same 10 minute period as Edwards official announcement speech, resulting in Clark getting 4 times the news coverage as Edwards.

And now that he's dropped out of the race in Iowa, he's made the battle for third place in NH, and first place in SC between he and Edwards for a large part.(both areas and ranks that Clark has gotten almost as much as Edwards in recent polls)

I assume he's also going after other states where Edwards usually leads or gets second in polls, like Oklahoma, Virginia and Tennessee.

Of course it's impossible to accurately predict what the situation will be when we get into the end of Feb, beginning of March, but it's obvious they've made a concious decision that Edwards is the one they want to knock out most.

The reason I'm upset about is that I think Clark is a great candidate, either him or Kerry jockeying for my secondary preference, and I would hope that those 3 would be the last one's standing no matter what, but his campaign sees things differently.

[chimpymustgo]

1. Bombtrack, I agree 100%. Clark/Edwards/Kerry - the best we've got.

Something's got to give. Maybe 2 of the 3 can get through.

[SahaleArm]

2. In 4 or 8 years...

Edwards, assuming he doesn't win, will be able to run again. He's only 50.

[aldian159]

10. I would love a Kerry/Edwards ticket,

or even vise versa...

[Bombtrack]

16. vice versa would work, but not Kerry/Edwards

It would be moronic for Kerry to chose Edwards over certain other potential veeps. The only southern state Kerry has a decent shot at making competative for himself against Bush is Florida, and he would probably need Graham, not Edwards to do so. A longer shot of a case could be made for him choosing Landrieu for a shot at Louisiana AND a slight jump in the female vote, because Kerry being Catholic is an advantage in Louisiana.

Edwards on the top of the ticket would need sort of an anti-Cheney much more than a geographic choice, someone with experience and Gravitas, because Edwards is the anti-Bush

At the top of the ticket Edwards could win southern states such as NC, VA, TN, AR, LA, and maybe even GA.

But none of those would be in play for Kerry.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

43. Yep!

n/t

[TacticalPeek]

3. Not necessarily agreeing your premise,

but, yes, I would not be surprised to see some Southern elbows thrown.

In a gentlemanly manner, of course.

[librechik]

4. funny--I thought it was the other way around

didn't Edwards attack him in a debate and then name Clark's old enemy as a campaign advisor?

I haven't picked a candidate yet, and that's the way it looked to me as an uncommitted voter...

I like Edwards--and we could apparently use a good lawyer on the ticket.

I like Clark too

[AP]

8. Edwards was consulting Shelton long before Clark got in the race

They're both from NC, went to the same college, have been talking for years.

It's hard to contrue that as an attack on Clark, especially since Edwards has never really attacked Clark on anything.

[Bombtrack]

9. when did Edwards attack Clark

The only real thing you could call an attack coming from Edwards was when he slammed Dean for his ignorant stereotyping of southernors in the Rock the vote debate.

Edwards didn't even respond negatively when asked about Clark's campaign cockblocking his official announcement in an interview.

[59millionmorons]

14. let me explain

The reason he is going after Edwards is because to most, the primaries start in Iowa and NH. But Clarks campaign really doesnt start until SC and other Feb 3 primaries. He like I likely feels that Gep will win IA nd Dean will win NH. Then Clark will swoop down and take SC and he hopes that will toss him into the lead.

[Bombtrack]

17. I understand the mechanics of it,

I just think that it's not wise to turn supporters of democrats who probably would otherwise get along best against each other. Most of the fellow Edwards supporters I know would rather chew into Dean and Gephardt than Clark.

[bryant69]

5. It does take the heat off of Dean as well.

I like Dean, but I don't think he's the best candidate. Some of his recent misstatements as well as his inability to track on foreign affairs and national security have me concerned.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[AP]

6. Smart money knows that the real race is vs Edwards.

What you see from Clark is an acknowlegment of what this race will really come down to.

Of course in the short term, it's race for 3rd place in NH for everyon except Dean and Kerry.

But, once you get past NH, who really doesn't think it's going to be a race only between Clark and Edwards?

[dfong63]

28. i don't think so

But, once you get past NH, who really doesn't think it's going to be a race only between Clark and Edwards?

a race for what, least qualified presidential candidate? between them they don't have even one full term in elected office.

[AP]

37. "dfong63" -- when I see that name I know I better get ready for

a thoughtful post bound to give me something to chew on.

I'll grant that this post is mild, compared to others you've posted.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

38. Funny, I Don't See That

All I see is "Ignored".

:evilgrin:

DTH

[AP]

39. Oh right. What's taken me so long?

I'll do the same...

[DoveTurnedHawk]

7. Is This a General Observation, or Did Something Specific and Recent

spark this post? Just curious. I don't think Clark's been targeting Edwards at all. Edwards has made a snide comment or two about Clark, and I'm concerned about Edwards making dishonorable Shelton an advisor, but I don't think he's been particularly negative towards Clark, either.

DTH

[Bombtrack]

11. why can't you be specific, what comment(s) ?

I give Clark credit for not being a negative campaigner overall, and I think Edwards deserves the same credit, they are the only serious candidates to make this a major characteristic of there campaigns

[AP]

13. It seems like the Clark posters are confirming the allegation

in the original post. "Why is Clark targetting Edwards?"

Well, we have a couple Clark posters replying with vague, unsubstantiated allusions to Edwards attacking Clark.

Sort of proves the thesis, and begs the quesiton, "why is Clark targetting Edwards?"

[59millionmorons]

15. oh stop

Clark and Edwards both need SC. The loser is out. End of story.

[AP]

20. No shit. But to win it, you talk about why your candidate is better.

You don't make up lies like, "Edwards attacked Clark first."

Remember when Clark started running? Yeah? You remember all the liest the press told about him? Yeah, you remember that? You remember how stupid it was?

Is that how you think Clark should win the primaries? By telling stupid lies?

[DoveTurnedHawk]

18. Why Can't You Answer My Question?

So I take it nothing specific and recent sparked this post?

As for the instances where Edwards attacked Clark, I didn't give specifics because to be completely honest, I don't really think about Edwards all that much. No offense. But I distinctly recall two instances, the first in one of the early debates, where he slammed Clark for praising Bush, and the second involving a policy position that I am not remembering immediately...maybe involving the $87 billion?

DTH

[Bombtrack]

21. they have the same position on the 87 billion

It's unfair for you to accuse Edwards of antagonizing Clark if you have no reason to.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

24. No More Unfair Than for You To Read Into Clark's Announcement

Edwards had already been running for months. And the big hurricane limited Clark's options. For you to claim it was a deliberate tactic is a stretch, IMO. If you have a beef with Clark, IMO you have more of a beef with the media. And Mother Nature.

As for me, I remember what I remember, and there were two instances that stuck out in my memory.

DTH

[Bombtrack]

27. I don't have a beef with Clark,

I'm sure that there are some people here that can confirm that I always defend Clark here whenever I can and I frequently post positive articles about him. I was the person to post both parts of the great Boston Globe article about him. I said that I thought he had the best performance on MTP out of any of the candidates

I don't lie to myself and say that Edwards did better than Clark. And Clarks supporters shouldn't lie to themselves and say that it wasn't low for WHOEVER made the decision to deny Edwards of his deserved moment in the sun, which Kerry, Leiberman, Gephardt, and most of all Dean all got.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

30. I Think Edwards Did WAY Better Than Clark at the First Two Debates

I even posted that very thing here.

As for it being a "low" decision, I have to disagree. What alternative did Clark have? He needed to officially announce and start raising money. The hurricane limited his options later in the week. This was a decision based on necessity, not one based on slamming Edwards.

Peace.

DTH

[Bombtrack]

34. he had months to do it, and he chose the same 10 minute-window

as his announcement, so that Elizabeth Edwards moving indroduction was literally talked over on every cable news network.

The hurricane lasted 2 days, and he didn't do it in the several months before or after it.

And I thought Clark did better on MeetThePress, not the debates if that's what you were talking about.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

35. BT, He Had Only Decided Two Days Before His Announcement

That has been verified by many people. It wasn't months or even weeks before.

DTH

On Edit: I know you were referring to MTP, I was just pointing out some of my own praise of Edwards as well.

[Bombtrack]

40. then he should have leaked it then, not when Edwards was

announcing at the exact same time. Doing in the same day was lame, but doing it in the same quarter hour was as lame as you can get, and it's rediculous to say it wasn't deliberate

[DoveTurnedHawk]

41. I Guess We Have Different Definitions of Ridiculous

I really don't think this was deliberately targeted at Edwards, but obviously YMMV.

Personally, I've found that it's better not to dwell on things like this, because all it does is piss you off. I was furious at Dean for his "Republican until 25 days ago" comment, but for the most part I let it go, and I'm happier because of it.

Edwards' ultimate fate will not be decided by Clark's announcement, just like Clark's ultimate fate will not be decided by Dean's comment.

DTH

[Very Good Dem]

44. Sounds more like a double standard

When Edwards criticizes Clark - an accusation for which you've offered no proof - you call that "a snide comment or two" but when Clark, by your admission, purposesly overshadows Edwards' announcement, he's just doing what he had to do.

You sound like you've been learning at the feet of the "my candidate can do no wrong and you'd better not even look at him funny" Deanie cult member.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

46. I Admitted Nothing of the Kind

What is with your hard spin, fella? I said exactly the opposite, that Clark did NOT purposely overshadow Edwards. Please read more carefully.

As for your insulting Dean implication, sorry, I'm not bitin'. I'm not particularly interested in efforts to rabble-rouse by people I don't know.

Welcome to DU!

DTH

[DoveTurnedHawk]

48. You Are Misremembering, BTW

Edwards announced on Tuesday. Clark announced on Wednesday.

DTH

[AP]

22. I pay very close attention to Edwards, and to Clark.

And I can honestly say that I don't remember either events.

Do you think you might be mischaracterizing events?

I thik we all know what a slam is. I don't think Edwards has slammed Clark at all. The worst thing he has done towards Clark is the thing with Shelton, which, at the most, could be considered "baiting" perhaps. He dangled out his relationship with Shelton, and Clark took a snap at it.

Clark, on the other hand, annouced at the same moment Edwards was having his coming out party. Clark snapped at the Shelton thing. And there was one other thing -- he made some allusion to Edwards's polling that was phrased really critically, like "who's this guy to talk, is he even going anywhere in the polls?" or something like that.

[chimpymustgo]

23. Same here. Edwards has never attacked Clark. Never.

In fact, he's never attacked any other candidate. He took issue with Dean a couple of times over Dean's aggregious statements (he's the ONLY one talking about race, and the Confederate flag stupidity).

Maybe Clark and Edwards should just announce they're a team - and take it to the HOUSE!

[DoveTurnedHawk]

25. It Was Definitely at a Debate

I remember thinking, "I am disappointed that Edwards went after Clark like that!" Mostly because I'd expected it from some of the others, but not Edwards.

See above on my opinion on the announcement. As for Shelton, can you blame Clark for being pissed off about that?

Finally, I remember the poll comment. That wasn't Clark, that was spokeswoman Kym Spell. Or should I say FORMER spokeswoman Kym Spell (a move I was pretty happy with, since I felt she was pretty lame).

In fact, even that comment was in DIRECT response to one of the Edwards slams I'm remembering, I'm pretty sure.

DTH

[chimpymustgo]

26. Hey Dove, you've got to bring more than: I'm pretty sure

if you're going to make that kind of allegation. But save yourself the time and trouble of looking for a link. You know AP and Bombtrack and I are Edwards' posse!

(though we are also Clark likers!)

[DoveTurnedHawk]

29. It's All Good

I have respect for all three of you. I was just curious what sparked this post.

If I can find the time, I'll try to track some of these things down. I remember them pretty well.

I will say this: I like all of our candidates, but I think Clark/Edwards or Edwards/Clark would be two tickets with some of our best shots at the Presidency (another strong one is Clark/Dean...Dean/Clark a bit less so, due to the fact that Dean is not a Southerner and IMO our tickets are strongest with a Southerner at the top).

DTH

[chimpymustgo]

32. Agree Dove - and I was just tweaking you, you know.

Gee, how nice to have a little disagreement that doesn't turn into a death match.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

36. LOL!

Gee, how nice to have a little disagreement that doesn't turn into a death match.

A-MEN!

DTH

[AP]

31. Obviously, this was a very traumatic event for you.

You can't remember when it was, and you're not entirely sure what it was over.

As for Shelton, I understand why Clark was pissed, but it still wasn't an attack on Clark. Clark was taking issue with whom Edwards was consulting, but not what Edwards was doing with the consultation information. In fact there was no allegation that Edwards had done anything other than talk to the guy.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

33. Not Traumatic at All

Was it a nuclear bomb? No. But it stuck out in my memory as an attack. I didn't dwell on it because I wasn't all that worried about it. And I was more pissed at Dean back then for his "Republican until 25 days ago" comment.

For everything else, see my post #29, above.

DTH

[Dr Satan]

12. you arent exatcly

an objective observer.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

19. Neither Are You. Neither Is Bombtrack.

Next?

DTH

[Very Good Dem]

42. What "snide comment or two" has Edwards made about Clark?

Please be specific.

[chimpymustgo]

45. There were no snide comments. The end.

John Edwards doesn't do snide.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

47. Here They Are

The first was in the Arizona debate, when Edwards made a snide (or dismissive, if you prefer) comment about not working with Bush even in 2001, when some (obviously referring to Clark, despite the effort to genericize it) had hope for him.

"Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean and Sens. John Kerry, Joe Lieberman and John Edwards took turns criticizing Clark, saying he was speaking warmly of Mr. Bush as recently as 2001, and more recently switched positions to oppose the war with Iraq."

<...>

"Edwards spoke dismissively of Clark, saying that he opposed Mr. Bush from the start — even "when some on this stage had hope for" him."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/09/politics/main577411.shtml

The second was on FAUX Sunday, when he criticized Clark for the stupid Acxiom thing. This one was mild, I grant you that, and the FAUXers were practically begging Edwards to attack Clark, I will also grant you that. But this was not Edwards taking the "high ground" by any means. And I was also right in my recollection, that Kym Spell made her lame statement about Edwards' poll numbers in direct response to Edwards' Acxiom criticism.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,98539,00.html

So to those of you who doubted my memory or implied I was deliberately trying to misstate the record...well, I'll put it politely: you can just go ahead and rethink that.

Please note: I do not really give a shit about Edwards' past, mild criticism of Clark now. I liked Edwards before, and I like him still. I am just tired of people telling me I didn't hear what I heard.

DTH