Latest Poll: Dean Down by (20 or 12) To Bush, Clark Down by 7 (Best)

[DoveTurnedHawk]

<...>

The Democrat who would give Bush the toughest run for re-election would be retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark (news - web sites), according to the survey's results. Even so, Bush would defeat Clark 49 percent to 42 percent, according to the poll.

Bush would best former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean (news - web sites), the Democratic who has raised the most campaign money to challenge the president, by 59 percent to 39 percent of those polled.

<...>

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=584&e=1&u=/nm/20031123/pl_nm/politics_bush_poll_dc

There is a conflict with respect to the correct number, unless Yahoo is citing different numbers or a different poll, the gap appears to be 12, rather than the 20 listed in the article.

If it's 20, this is probably an outlier poll, as the gap is so much larger here than in any other poll I've seen. But as I have always maintained, I believe Clark will do the best out of all of our candidates against Bush, especially when you factor in electoral voting (with Clark faring better in the South, as a Southerner with a military background).

A Bush re-election would be an unmitigated disaster. Can we really afford to take a chance? Shouldn't we be putting forward our most electable candidate?

DTH

[Zynx]

1. That's not what the Time poll shows. That's a misprint.

Bush beats Dean 52-40%.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

2. Really? That'd Make Me Feel a Little Better. Do You Have a Link?

There was no link to the actual poll in the Yahoo article. Thanks!

DTH

[Zynx]

4. Here it is:

http://pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm

That's it.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

7. Weird, That Would Be a MAJOR Screw-Up by Yahoo

It's not just one number, it's both. That's not a typo. I'd like to know where Yahoo is getting their info.

DTH

[Zynx]

10. Can you change the title to be more accurate?

[Jerseycoa]

17. That's it?

Do we know which one has the misprint? Polling Report or Reuters?

[Zynx]

21. CNN had the number on TV several times. Bush leads Dean by 12.

[Kahuna]

73. Notice how they showed Kerry and Clark.. the two guys ...

who fared the best against bush,last. Things that make you go, hmmmm.

[blm]

76. Exactly. Keep Kerry and Clark's profiles down while boosting Dean's

as if Dean is the face of the Democratic party. Oh sheesh. What a horrid turn.

[AP]

99. CNN loves Dean.

[slinkerwink]

101. *snarf*

Judy Stupiduff sure doesn't love Dean...

[dkf]

67. My response: Check out Drudge "Iraqi Teens Savage American Soldiers"

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=540&u=/ap/20031123/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_630&printer=1

I'm sick. Bush needs to go along with all the enablers who got us into this mess.

And YES, I am including your man Clark who advised Katrina Swett to support the IWR.

I knew from the beginning this would be a fiasco. Howard Dean knew it. We should have only gone in if SH was an imminent threat and he wasn't.

AAAAAGGGGGGGHHHHHHH.

I could spit nails!

[FrenchieCat]

82. Yes, but you are conveniently not mentioning

What resolution clark advised her to vote for:
Retired Gen. Clark supports Swett, raises concerns about Iraq policy
By STEPHEN FROTHINGHAM,Associated Press Writer
MANCHESTER, N.H. (AP) — Retired U.S. Army Gen. Wesley Clark said Wednesday he supports a congressional resolution that would give President Bush authority to use military force against Iraq, although he has reservations about the country's move toward war.
----------------------
The general said he had no doubt Iraq posed a threat, but questioned whether it was immediate and said the debate about a response has been conducted backward.
"Normally in a debate, you start with a problem and consider possible solutions. Instead, the president has presented us with a solution before the problem has been fully articulated," he said.
"As far as the information we have now shows, there are no nuclear warheads on missiles pointed to America," he said. "You can't wait 10 years to act, but there is time on our side."
He said al-Qaida remains the largest terrorist threat against the United States, and the connection ----between al-Qaida and Iraq is unclear.
------------------------
After endorsing Swett in Nashua, he visited Manchester West High School and reassured history students that the threat of terrorism should be kept in perspective.
-----------------------
He said he shares the concerns he hears from many Americans about whether the country should act against Iraq without United Nations support and about how the United States will deal with Iraq after a successful invasion.
He also met in Portsmouth with the Democratic nominee in the 1st Congressional District, state Sen. Martha Fuller Clark.
A spokesman for Clark said the two were meeting to discuss foreign policy.
http://www4.fosters.com/election_2002/oct/09/us_2cong_1009a.asp

[wtmusic]

85. Clark always has a long-winded answer

but the bottom line is he supported it. Period.

[robbedvoter]

91. Oh, you decided, huh? Let's see, October 2002:

10/7/02

CLARK: FIGHTING WITH IRAQ COULD BE OVER IN TWO WEEKS; AMERICA CAN'T BE 'NEW ROME' WITH VOLUNTEER ARMY
http://www.digitalnpq.org/global_services/global%20viewpoint/10-07-02.html
snip
CLARK: The sentiment seems to be, ''We are so powerful we don't have to ever let anyone threaten us ever again.'' It's as though we were a new Rome.

To some, it seems that there is a kind of arrogance about American power. Perhaps it comes from our military experience. In the first Gulf War, in Panama, in Kosovo and in Afghanistan, we have been incredibly effective against these other countries. Some people seem to believe that with our unmatched might and modern technology, we can handle Iraq -- or anyone else who doesn't get the message.

It is a new demonstration of American power, and though it may look to others like arrogance, it is actually motivated by fear. The attacks of 9/11 made a significant impact.

Certainly, I understand the concern for American security. But we don't want to be so aggressive that we simply stir worldwide resentment and antagonism. If we do, we'll simply make more enemies.

But there is something else that must be understood in Washington. However good the American armed forces are today -- and they are very good indeed -- they are essentially a peacetime force. Young, largely married with families, all-volunteer, they are not designed to accept the extended deployments and high casualty rates associated with prolonged conventional war.
Moreover, the armed forces are increasingly unrepresentative of the society they serve. And so we are beginning to hear some talk about the reintroduction of the draft, if fighting were to continue intensively.

Those who want to wield this sword must understand that while it may be as hard as diamonds and sharp as a diamond drill, it is a fragile instrument if put to a use for which it is not prepared.

Somehow we have to overcome the legacy of fear and anxiety from the events of 9/11. While we must remain strong, and occasionally take actions to anticipate and eliminate immediate threats to us, we must also recognize that our greater security will be achieved not by killing our opponents and destroying their regimes but by supporting our friends and reinforcing those who share our values.


(c) 2002, Global Viewpoint. Distributed by Los Angeles Times Syndicate International, a division of Tribune Media Services.
For immediate releas

[mikehiggins]

107. Clark has thoughtful answers

He doesn't think in newsclips or 30 second blurbs.

The bottom line is that YOUR guy, whoever he might be, was no more effective at stopping this war from happening than anyone else was, no matter what side they were on.

The bottom line is what do we do now?

[Bread and Circus]

92. If Dean was so against it, why would he have been for it...

if they gave Saddam a 60 day waiting period?

Bottom line: I am tired of the IWR vote/perspective being the
litmus test for "all things". Frankly, I don't care who voted
for what. Most of them were just covering their political
asses anyway...including Dean. Yes, Dean!
He's got everyone fooled that
he is some sage on this. He would have went right along if they
had waited 60 days longer. Hell, I was against the Iraq war
without any qualifiers, does that make me worth being President?

I want our party and our Country to be more than just about
"soundbites" and divisive bickering. It needs to be about
vision and solutions.

As one of many who follow this closely, I am here to say
Dean has said little to prove he can actually get us safely
and successfully disentangled from Iraq. I am also very tired
that Dean and his followers have become a "one issue" contigency
-- the Iraq War Resolution vote.

Guess what?

If that is all we are about and the Iraq War does (or is spun)
one iota better, we can all kiss election 2004 good bye. That's
why we need to be about something more.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

103. because Dean wasn't all that against it

at least not when he's in a room full of hawks. (e.g. most Americans).

[Gloria]

3. An article in my paper today said that Bush had bumped up because of

the economy!!
But Pew head Andy Kohut, my former boss, didn't think it was any big deal.
I hope he's right!!

[AmericanDem]

5. This is no shocker to me

The shock is that Clark is down by 7%. Give itsome timeor so and Bush will be leveled flat.

[Julien Sorel]

41. Clark is still working on name recognition.

He just started running ads last week. When he has a more clearly-defined image with the public, he should poll even better. I just hope we don't have a repeat of 1984, when Mondale (a guy I like, by the way, but he was not presidential material), was able to use the party machinery and personal loyalty to squeeze out the nomination against a clearly superior candidate in Gary Hart.

[MoonRiver]

95. Clark IS presidential material.

I've said this before but each time I watch and listen to him I just can't help but smile. He is so charasmatic. Everything he says makes me feel I can trust and rely on him. I absolutely believe he can not only win the presidency but turn our country around.

[joeybee12]

6. What people miss about these polls is that right now Dean ISN'T running

against Bush.

He's running against the other 9.

And Clark is running against the other 9 as well.

The whole dynamics of the campaign changes once the Dem nominee wins.

Polls and predictions right now are pretty much worthless.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

11. I Don't Think That's Entirely True

While the current national polls are of limited value vis-a-vis the nomination, and while the current head-to-head polls against Bush are of limited value vis-a-vis the general election, they nevertheless demonstrate important trends.

I think these polls bear out the general thesis that Clark is more electable than Dean. I am NOT saying that Dean is unelectable. Just less electable than Clark.

DTH

[joeybee12]

15. You see, I don't agree with you on the electability thing...

...on paper Clark looks good, and that's what the Dem leadership wants.

However, the climate each election cycle is different--hence different issues resonate with voters some years, and some years they don't.

That said, I think Dean is more in touch with what people are feeling right now, and just how bad things are. And I think he will take on Bush much better and more aggressively.

Anyway, as to polls and predictions being worthless, about this time in 1999, Dumbo was up against Gore by about 20 points. Again, the election itself had not started.

[Zynx]

19. Dean is only down 12. DTH and Yahoo somehow got the number wrong.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

22. Dean Is More in Touch With the Base

But Clark is more in touch with the middle.

This election, the base will turn out almost regardless (maybe not for Lieberman), because we're desperate to eject Bush. Especially with Dean as VP. But I don't think the middle will turn out as easily for Dean.

DTH

[joeybee12]

40. Politics 101--secure your base, then reach out to others

All candidates do that--it's basic during the primary.

Gore and Bradley seemed to be fighting for that core in 2000.

You have to get them first and build on that.

I think Dean is a much smarter politician than given credit because he seems to be the only one (who has a shot at the nom) who is doing this.

Plenty of time to get the center later.

[FrenchieCat]

83. There won't be plenty of time later

Once you've got a nominee with no foreign policy experience who want to raise taxes on the middle class. If anything, the Dean v. Bush gulf will get even wider.

Duh!

[Kahuna]

77. Clark takes votes from Bush. Dean doesn't. That's what...

the polls are saying. Some of the people that would vote for Bush if he runs against Dean would vote for Clark over Bush. THAT'S what the polls are saying.

[bearfartinthewoods]

but the depressing thing is , bush isn't running yet either

[joeybee12]

20. No, but he's on CNN all friggin day--the other candidates don't garner

nearly as much media attention. However, once people start dropping out, they'll become more recognizable. The media doesn't see the election as starting, they see the Dem primary as starting.

[blm]

74. and Dean gets all the oxygen from the media for the Dems

so his numbers should be better than anyone else's.

[Kahuna]

75. And neither are the other guys. So?

nt

[retyred]

100. The difference is that Clark

doesnt believe he IS running against the nine others, in his mind there is only one man to beat and that's bush, which is why he has said almost nothing against the other nine but nails bush every chance he gets.

dean is so worried that one of the others will grab first place, he misses the point of it all, which is to dethrone bush.



retyred in fla
“good night paul, wherever you are”
read the book

[bearfartinthewoods]

8. how is this shocking?

a lot of people here have been trying to warn ya'll for months.

[Zynx]

9. He isn't down by 20. That's a misprint. He is down by 12.

[bearfartinthewoods]

78. give him time.........he'll hit 20

[Kahuna]

79. I tend to agree. The worse things get in Iraq the least likely

people are to turn to Dean who has zero national security bona fides.

[wtmusic]

87. Wrong

the worse things get in Iraq the more people are likely to gravitate toward a man who has been *unwavering* in his criticism of the war.

[slinkerwink]

89. It's been proven that Dean has consistently been against the war.

[FrenchieCat]

81. I'm not taking the gamble....

12 or 20, it's too many points for me comparatively calculating.

[JanMichael]

12. Please edit the mistaken subject line! You know it's a misprint!

Why leave it up?

And if it's too late to edit it yourself then please request a mod to do it.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

13. Dude, RELAX

This thread has been up for all of five minutes. You can stop panicking.

DTH

[JanMichael]

26. Hey, not panicking, just tired of mislead crap.

By both sides.

I notice you half assed edited the subject line after I made my comment. No enough.

It isn't 20% period yet you leave it there:-)




11/03 Bush (Retarded) 52% Dean 40% Fence sitting fools 8%




11/03 Bush (Retarded) 49% Clark 42% Fence sitting fools 9%

[slinkerwink]

30. It's alright---I asked for this thread to be locked unless he changes the

headline ;-)

[DoveTurnedHawk]

42. I'm Not Going to Be Intimidated by You, Certainly

I'm reporting what BOTH Yahoo and Reuters are reporting. It is unclear whether it's an error or not. It's possible this is the number after removing the undecideds.

Feel free to Alert all you want, though. It's not misleading to report what major news outlets are reporting.

DTH

[DoveTurnedHawk]

36. I'm Not Convinced It's a Yahoo Error

That is not a typo, it's wrong on both numbers. Maybe it's a different poll or (more likely) it's a previously unpublished part of the poll forcing the undecideds to choose one or the other.

Regardless, I've qualified the potential discrepancy. Reuters also confirms the same:

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=FLSZBIQ3YKJKICRBAEZSFEY?type=politicsNews&storyID=3877875

People can make up their own minds until Yahoo and Reuters correct themselves.

Here is the link to complain to Reuters (couldn't find a link for Yahoo):

http://reuters-com.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/reuters_com.cfg/php/enduser/ask.php

DTH

[Zynx]

43. It is a Reuters article quoted by Yahoo.

Reuters is wrong.

[Zynx]

14. I would wait until people know more about each of the candidates.

Polls at this time are pointless when most people across the country don't even have an opinion about the candidates.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

16. Again, Disagree

They are relevant with respect to trending and proportional breakdowns for those people who DO have an opinion.

These are warning signs. I personally believe we should heed them.

DTH

[Zynx]

27. These aren't polls of those who do have opinions one way or the other.

That's just a bunch of BS. Most people polled don't have a clue as to what each candidate stands for.

[Bombtrack]

18. ex- friggin- actly

the lions share of Dean's supporters care so little about electability it's disturbing.

You can just look at the polls on his positions and find similar numbers

60/40 for regime change being the right decision, 60/40 against civil unions, 50/10 stricter/less strict gun laws,

And of course nobody is polling the issue he'd lose most on, his mondale..make that middle-class tax raise.

[Zynx]

23. He isn't down by that margin. DTH and Yahoo have the number wrong.

In fact he is down by 12 and Edwards and Gephardt are the worst being down 13.

[Bombtrack]

29. What is Edwards name recognition?

First of all it hasn't been established whether you're right about the poll being wrong and second, I doubt Edwards has half the name recognition that Dean has, due to Dean's corporate media saturation.

I've said all along that Gephardt is probably almost or just as much a likely loser as Dean is

[Zynx]

31. It's actually about the same from things I saw in the past.

It has been dropping recently, but it is about the same.

[Bombtrack]

39. which is????????

you're answer is really helpful? what's his name recognition? It's the same, oh thanks

[slinkerwink]

24. please take the 20 out of your post title-----it's misleading

by the way, the polling report has a poll that shows Clark down by 13 points, same as Howard Dean in the fox news poll from Nov.18-19th

In the CNN poll, the margin of error is 2.7, so Dean being down by 12 points in comparison to Clark being down by 7 percent is well within the margin of error. It's a stastical dead heat. I wouldn't boast so loudly that Dean's doing badly vis a vis Bush yet.

[slinkerwink]

32. Please re-edit your subject line----again, it is misleading

[Zynx]

35. He's doing this intentionally to attempt to hurt Dean.

No question about it. He knows full well what the data actually is. For that matter, I don't know where yahoo got its stuff either.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

44. Sorry You Don't Like the News

Might I suggest you take it up with Yahoo and Reuters?

As for me, I'm just trying to spark discussion. I hear that's what we do here.

DTH

[Zynx]

47. Well, start with the correct facts first.

The data is quoted wrong.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

50. So YOU Say

I think that'd be a huge error for a respectable agency like Reuters to make. Again, my theory is that that's the number minus undecideds.

Maybe my theory is wrong. But we won't know until Reuters issues a correction, I suppose.

DTH

[Zynx]

52. I saw the data on CNN today and on their website yesterday.

Not "so I say". It is the truth. You would just like to believe that Dean is down 20.

[Jerseycoa]

53. ..attempt to hurt Dean

Yahoo is getting it from Reuters. I'm willing for it to be a misprint. But I sure would like to see a link to the polling data and not a report on the polling data.

[Zynx]

55. It was CNN too. They showed that data on CNNHN all day yesterday.

[Bombtrack]

33. maybe you need to take math again

in dead heats you can't add the margin error to your guy and subtract it from the other.

They are separated by 5, which is more than 2.7

Not a dead heat

[Zynx]

45. It is Zero sum meanind Dean can have plus 2.7 and Clark can have minus 2.7

more than overcoming the five point difference.

[dsc]

63. No

The MOE works both ways. If Smith has 45% and Jones 40% with an MOE of +/- 3 then Smith could be as high as 48 and as low as 42 while Jones could be as high as 43 and as low as 37. Hence they are statistically tied. That still works using two polls conducted by the same people.

If Smith has 45 to Jones 40 while Smith has 47 to Doe 38 with the same MOE that means that Smith could be as high as 48 against Jones while he could be as low as 44 against Doe. That would still make this a statistical tie. The first poll would be 8 points apart and the second 6.

[tritsofme]

25. Polls mean nothing today,

Both Glenn and Mondale were beating Reagan by about 50-42 around this time, and Reagan ended up winning in a landslide. The only thing polls are good for now is trying to idenify trends.

[Zynx]

28. Besides the fact that this data isn't accurate.

Dean is not polling the worst. Edwards and Gephardt are.
http://pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm

[slinkerwink]

38. that's true, so fess up, DTH

[DoveTurnedHawk]

46. Take It Up With Reuters/Yahoo

I took out the "worst" part of the header some time ago, and I also clarified the conflicting info. More than that, you'll have to ask Yahoo and Reuters.

DTH

[Zynx]

49. Why don't you put up the actual poll data rather than what the article say

s it is.

[_Jumper_]

61. Edwards?

Edwards is only 1% behind Dean versus Bush. Given his lack of name ID and lackluster campaign that should raise some red flags.

[jsw_81]

34. Polls at this stage are meaningless

At this point in 1999-2000, Bush was beating Gore by twenty points. As we all know, Gore went on the win the popular vote by over 500,000.

[Zynx]

37. Besides Dean isn't trailing by that much. He trails by 12 which is not the

worst.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

48. It's Worse Than Clark

That's my point, sorry you don't like to hear it.

DTH

[Zynx]

51. That I concede, but you are being misleading.

There is a big difference between 12 and 20.

[_Jumper_]

54. n/t

n/t

[farmbo]

56. BOGUS... Dean's behind 39 to 52...with only 58% name recognition

...versus 100% for Bush

<snip>
Bush would beat any of three other Democrats, 52 percent to 39 percent, in a direct match: Missouri Rep. Dick Gephardt, Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman, or Vermont Gov. Howard Dean. Against Bush, North Carolina Sen. John Edwards would lose, 38 percent to 52 percent.
<snip>

And among Democrats, Dean beats Clark 14 to 12%.

[slinkerwink]

57. oooh, good point

;-)

[Zynx]

58. Link please?

[farmbo]

72. Ohio Poll Nov 10th

http://www.ipr.uc.edu/PDF/OhioPoll/op111003.pdf

And btw that's among Dems and independents... name recognition is probably LESS among all registered voters.

[_Jumper_]

59. How much name ID do the other candidates have?

?

[oxymoron]

62. well within the margin of error. n/t

[Donna Zen]

60. 12-20 makes a difference

but the real importance here is the trend.

In each poll, regardless of the statistical spread, the movement that makes Clark more competetive against bushco, is reflected in the undecideds. This time the difference is 8 vs 9. It has been higher. When people are asked Clark or juniorbush, they might say they don't know, meaning they would consider Clark or god forbid satan. However, when asked the same question about Dean and bush, they blurt out bush. That is what the difference is. Why? Because Dean is a more polarizing candidate. Accept it--embrace it--figure out ways around it, but denial is a river of lost elections.

[oxymoron]

64. spot on. (nt)

[slinkerwink]

65. how's this for polarizing?

BOGUS... Dean's behind 39 to 52...with only 58% name recognition versus 100% for Bush

<snip>
Bush would beat any of three other Democrats, 52 percent to 39 percent, in a direct match: Missouri Rep. Dick Gephardt, Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman, or Vermont Gov. Howard Dean. Against Bush, North Carolina Sen. John Edwards would lose, 38 percent to 52 percent.
<snip>

And among Democrats, Dean beats Clark 14 to 12%.

[_Jumper_]

69. How much name ID do the other candidates have?

?

[Donna Zen]

94. Okay, let 's put it this way

Clark suppresses the repub vote.

[madfloridian]

66. He has wrong figures, need to change before the hour is up. Alert on it.

n/t

[slinkerwink]

68. I already alerted on it.....it's obviously a misleading title

[shrike]

70. As I said on the LBN thread, I've seen other polls with Clark doing much

better against Bush. One of them had Bush at 44, Clark at 43, believe it was a Newsweek poll.

Anyway, there's no sense getting upset about one poll.

[Kahuna]

71. Yet, people in NH and MA think Dean would do the best..

against bush. Where are they getting their information? One guess. His initials are, HD. ;eyes:

[Snellius]

80. Considering most people have never heard of them

and Bush has had the bully pulpit and 24/7 cable news and Limbaugh and all the radio talk troopers, unremittingly, FOR 4 YEARS, not bad.

[madfloridian]

84. You may think you won, but you did not.

A lot of us just plain lost respect for you on this thread. You won because the hour is up and the alerts did not work.

You lost a lot of credibility by doing this.

That is called a pyrrhic victory.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

102. Christ, What Is WITH All the WHINING?

The subject remains accurate: Dean is down by either 12 or 20, depending on whether Reuters/Yahoo is accurate or not. I'm not going to take the word of some poster over Reuters/Yahoo. If it ends up they're wrong, then I'm sure they'll post a correction.

If it turns out they're right (such as if they have information we don't so far, like a sample where undecideds are forced to choose), then all of this whining will be proven for exactly what it is.

I'm not going to be intimidated by anyone, least of all thin-skinned posters with an agenda. And you know what? I'd actually be THRILLED if Dean is only down 12 and not 20, as I said earlier in the thread.

Hell, I'd be thrilled if it showed Dean UP by 10 and all of the other candidates down by 10. You know why?

BECAUSE I WANT TO BEAT BUSH.

DTH

PS: Alerts "did not work" because there is NOTHING MISLEADING ABOUT THIS POST.

[spooky3]

86. I have yet to see a single TV ad from any of the Dem candidates

I missed Gen. Clark on Letterman--have there been any other "general audience appearances" by other Dems? (I'm not talking about Sunday morning or evening political shows seen only by small numbers of persons, most of whom are much more interested in politics than the average citizen).

In contrast, I see Chimpy's mug and his point of view expressed DAILY on all leading news and broadcast networks.

I would imagine there is a similar disparity in most localities' newspaper coverage.

Given this huge disparity in exposure, how can anyone possibly expect that any Democratic candidate would elicit the same response as Chimpy at this stage?

[slinkerwink]

88. here's Dean's TV ad in response to Bush

http://images.deanforamerica.com/media/ad_misled_large.wmv

[[e-mail]]

90. Clark should play a prominate role in 2004

If Dean wins the nomination, the smartest thing he could do is have Clark as his running mate.

[robbedvoter]

93. Wow! How very generous of you! We're so flatered!

Sick and tired of your patronizing crap! have you ever stopped and think about the Clark movement? Did we draft a VP for your Mr Boo-Boo?
The more you do it the more you turn off people. many come to us disgusted by your attitudes. reminds me of Poppy Bush telling Geraldine Ferraro: "Let me explain to you how it works...
If I liked arrogance, I'd stick with W!

[adadem]

96. Zogby says

Latest Zogby poll: Bush 45% Kerry 41% margin of error 3.3%. Every other Dem trail shrub by at least 8%. I trust Zogby over other media outlets...at least they are independent.

[Renew Deal]

97. You trust them

when it is in your favor to do so. You don't trust others because Kerry isn't leading there. I bet you would trust Gallup if Kerry was leading.

[Bread and Circus]

98. Whatever the numbers are now, it doesn't take a rocket scientist

to know that Dean will struggle in the GE.

He's running a highly partisan campaign promising
to raise taxes with very little (if any) foreign policy
experience. He is also not a very unifying speaker (unless
you are part of the choir). I don't see in god's name
how he could beat Bush given what I have seen of the media
and the American electorate, not to mention BBV.

The polls (especially the national ones) mean little right
now, but people need to wake up, open their eyes, and see
the writing on the wall.

I am not asking for folks to vote for Clark out of fear.
Actually, there other alternatives I encourage people to
explore (in addition to Clark). I just want a lot
of folks to take a damn hard look at Dean and see if:

1.) Can he beat Bush? (he is electable, but can he really
beat Bush? -- they are 2 different things)

2.) Is he really what he says he is? His whole IWR thing
is some sort of testament to his "vision" and not being
a "pandering politician". It also makes him the "embodiment"
of true liberal frustration. But this Dean guy is just as
much of a "politician" as the rest--nor is he visionary.
Really, what does Dean propose that is any different than
any of the others? Internet fund-raising you might say?
Big f-ing deal. Clark's done it, Kerry's done it, even Bush
has raised money on the net. Anyone can do it. Who says
it's Dean's idea and not Trippi's? Maybe it wasn't either
one's idea. Maybe they got incredibly lucky then flogged
the cash horse. Who knows, but outside of that I have not
heard Dean say one thing that impresses me about his vision
of the future. Furthermore his record in Vermont seems to be
a DLC'ers dream so I am not sure how he can be construed
as the embodiment of the "liberal" agenda.

3.) Is Dean the guy you want to unify and heal the country?
Really, can he bring us together for a greater good? I have
a darn hard time believing that. I am waiting to see.

People are gonna be angry with me but this is how I see it.
I think Dean is a bad choice and not because I support Clark.
If Clark were to drop tomorrow I would have serious issues
with Dean. Dean may represent us and if so, then I guess I
will just have to fall in line and try to help him win it but
right now, if we still have a chance, we need to look very carefully
because the media is rapidly trying to end this before it begins.

I am not sure why but it seems obvious that they have gotten it
in their collective consciousness that Dean is the guy we are gonna
post vs. Bush. I can't tell the chicken from the egg at this point but
I can tell a lemon when I see one.

[Gringo]

104. Dean ***IS*** the most electable.

And I trust a CNN poll only marginally more than a Faux one.

[Renew Deal]

105. Clark ***IS*** the most electable.

And I trust the May pole more than the foul pole. :silly:

[NewYorkerfromMass]

106. I believe Dean does better in these polls now then in an actual campaign

when all his soft spots are laid bare.