Howard or Clark - an outsiders view

[Djinn]

Without wanting to start yet another candidate bashing thread I thought I'd give a non US perspective.

If almost all Democrat voters will vote for anybody but bush presumably it's the swinging and non steadfast Republican voters that need convincing are the only ones that need targetting

Given Dean is regularly painted as the "far left" candidate (seems fairly centrist to me but that's missing the point, swinging voters and freepers don't listen to lefties they listen to Faux) - the kind of people who think social welfare = satan are going to view him as a loony leftie and even if they have misgivings about Dubya they wont vote for a "socialist"

Clark - who I'm no particular fan of - does seem to have the edge in countering the predictable (even more so now Saddam's been captured) "Bush is a hero - Bush saved America, Dem's are a cowards who'll give in to the terr'ists" media onlslaught that is surely building up as we speak. People who can think for themselves will see through the crap(picture: Bush in flight suit - fluttering flag background - some nice inspiring music swelling then a shot of Saddam in chains, and a voice over waffling something about corageous george) and all the bullshit but they wouldn't vote for Bush anyway most would presumably vote for a inanimate object over shrubbie.

I can't express an opinion on who would be a better president or who has the best policies as I don't have the info but I don't see how anyone could argue Clark wouldn't be a better bet for catching non dem voters - surely the 4 star general/war vet/Rhodes scholar stuff looks pretty good to a flag waving freeper (admittedly maybe not the Rhodes scholar most'll be asking why anyone needs to study roads)

How would Dean attract more votes than Clark - is there a fear that hard core dem's wont vote for him and the Nader effect comes into play again?

[mjv135]

1. Good point

These are very compelling reasons.
The differences between these two candidates are very apparent, Whoever we send against Bush, we will get what we deserve.

[FrenchieCat]

2. Dean wont attract more votes....

That's why the repubs want him so.

After what happened in election 2000, the repubs want Bush to go against someone that Bush can beat by a landslide. Result, is a push by all to present us with Dean. Here's my letter (again) to Bill Press who recently wrote a column defending Dean:

http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/democrat/news/opinion/7479063.htm
Dear Mr. Press,
In your column entitled , Attempts to 'McGovernize' Howard Dean won't work, you sound mildly defensive. Howard Dean is no McGovern, but the result of this election, if Dean is the nominee, will be the same as it was then; Howard Dean will lose.

It is an established fact, whether you believe it or not, that Republicans donors have been contributing to Howard Dean since March of this year. Original reason was to keep Kerry off as the top contender. When General Clark entered the race, the GOP's generosity continued for Dean to counter Clark (You can verify that via www.polipundit.com see details below my signature). That Right Wing site is only a of several dozens that have links within their own text directly to the Dean contribution page. They have now switch their game plan and are attacking Howard Dean. They hope that the left will coalesce around Dean in his defense and make his followers ever more loyal.

The egg of money, became the chicken of Media attention (note chicken and egg being interchangeable) Dean's campaign energized by money became respected by the media. The media, played their part, and started publicizing everything Dean. Whether Howard Dean is made of Teflon, or the Cocoon media is giving him a pass (my theory) is a question. However, it does seem odd that sealed records, draft dodging accusation, Enron connections, his own acknowledgement that he did indeed support "a" war resolution, the issues raised on his Medicare stance, his agreement to ship nuclear waste to be buried in minority communities in Texas (and a lousy environmental record), his flip flop on public financing; none of these issues were truly jumped on by the media (I won't even mention the confederate flag issue), but rather he has being given a pass. He wins the debate when he clearly does not win debates (reminds me of another recent candidate). Howard Dean's statement at the last debate that's "it's ok to lie to the American People under reasons of National Security" were not even brought up, let along discussed by the any in the media.

Why is it so evident that Howard Dean is being forced on the Democratic party? You must know the answer to why, so please answer that one for me. The man has been running for 2 years, and the most that he polls is 25% (after the money, and publicity and the endorsements). That's 75% of Democrats who don't see Dean as a winner, and does not include Independents. He will not help any members of congress running in the South, and he has no foreign policy experience, gravitas or charisma. Heck, he doesn't even look presidential at 5'7" and has no neck to speak of. He speech is fast and he stumbles through much of what he is saying, until he gets to his canned Tony Robbins mantra of "you've got the power". His following is supposed to be "college educated", but I am starting to rather doubt that they have done their homework. They have all forgotten to read the chapter on winning a General Election.

I note, as I have watched you on television that your own bias has come through loud and clear. It's unfortunate that you would try so hard to dispel the subject myth in your article, when you have ever bother to talk up any other Democratic candidate.

Admit that you are on the Dean bandwagon, Mr. Press, and like the rest of your crew, backing a loser and heading over a cliff. You may not have heard what Hillary said, but it's not the pundits that pick our candidates, it's the people. That would mean sir, that Democrats should not be paying attention to you.

Dr. Dean wants to take America back, but most Americans want to take our country forward. At the end it will not matter, as you see, Howard Dean will not win. I'm a Democrat and even I know that.
Respectfully,

Here is the post from www.polipundit.com:
Give, Give, Give

To everyone who took up my call to donate to Howard Dean in June, here's your new assignment: Give all you can to John Edwards and/or John Kerry.

The rationale is simple:
1. We still want Dean to be the nominee so that President Bush can crush him and have long coattails.
2. The biggest threat to a Dean nomination is no longer Dick Gephardt, John Kerry or John Edwards. It's Weasel Clark, for all the reasons outlined below.
3. To help Dean, we have to bring down Clark's vote totals in the crucial states of New Hampshire and South Carolina.
4. In New Hampshire, donating to neighbouring-son John Kerry will help ensure that Clark won't surpass expectations by finishing ahead of Kerry.
5. In South Carolina, Clark can be stopped by neighbouring-son John Edwards.

Donating online is easy. Just click here to donate to Kerry or click here to donate to Edwards.
posted by PoliPundit at 7:07 AM Link to this post

[Djinn]

3. the "non politician" thing

may also work in Clark's favour - if Americans like many in the developed world - have become completely scornful of career pollies.

Personally I don't think you make it to 4 star general without being a politician but not coming from the womb of the party structure could be a plus

[Bread and Circus]

4. Hey wow, you're for real....

I went to polipundit and surfed around, here's what
I got:

Dean

I've been saying for several months now that John Kerry is the front-runner for the Democratic nomination and would make the most formidable opponent to Bush; but that Howard Dean could upset Kerry.

Now Dean is close on Kerry's heels in polls in Iowa and New Hampshire, despite the fact that Kerry's name recognition is much higher. On Saturday, Dean won a much-anticipated Wisconsin straw poll.

Liberal blogger Jerome Armstrong has been a strong Dean supporter for a while now and says that Dean can win the nomination largely by turning out his supporters in early caucus states.

Dean's candidacy is gaining momentum. On June 23, he'll hold a big event to formally "announce" his candidacy. The idea is to create buzz so that he can raise plenty of money by the June 30 FEC fundraising deadline for this quarter.

A Dean candidacy would be a dream come true for Republicans. Imagine a Democratic presidential candidate who's rabidly anti-war and promises to repeal all of the Bush tax cuts. Imagine such a candidate so wrapped up in a cocoon of liberal activists that he believes he can win by being more stridently liberal than any other presidential candidate. Ever.

Now imagine Southern Democratic senators having to run for re-election with such a candidate at the top of the ballot.

If you're a conservative, you're probably saving up some money to donate to the president's re-election campaign. Might I suggest donating it to Dean instead? Republican candidates, especially the president, will raise large quantities of money anyway. To them your donation will be barely a blip on the screen. The Democrats are having a much tougher time raising money. Even a small contribution to Dean will help propel his campaign along.

Don't you think that a good use of your money is to help the Democrats select as their presidential candidate a combination of Mondale and McGovern? You can donate to Dean's campaign by clicking this link.
posted by PoliPundit at 5:51 AM Link to this post | Comments (0)

posted June 21st, 2003

___

Also, there is a bunch of anti-Wesley Clark propaganda there.
The Freeps really are scared of clark.

[Clark Can WIN]

5. Clark is our best bet to win by far

pure plain and simple

[dand]

6. Clark is the one,

He is best equipped to take care of the two remaining war criminals, Bin Laden and Bush.

[ResistTheCoup]

7. Everybody's worrying about rallying the Democratic vote

The way I see it the Democrats (and Greens for that matter) will have no where else to go but ABB. And I think that the rank and file dislike of Bush will turn the Dems out in droves. I don't know if that will be enough to guarantee a Dem win.

I've been doing a lot of phone banking and there are a lot of Independents/Moderates/Swing voters who don't like Bush and are looking for an alternative to vote for. Most all of them said they would vote for Clark if he gets the nomination but quite a few said that if Dean ran against Bush that they would probably not vote at all. Between those folks and the Bush fans who turn out in droves to vote against a 'liberal NE Dem' I see a very tough road for Dean if he gets the nom.