Dean weak on Foreign Policy? What about Clark on Domestic Policy?

[worldgonekrazy]

It seems the current favorite attack against Dean is that he is weak on foreign policy because he has no experience in such matters. First of all, in defense of this charge, I would point out that:

1) Many presidents did not have foreign policy experience before coming into office. One of them, Bill Clinton, ended up enacting the best foreign policy this country has had in a LONG time.

2) In terms of a supposed liability in the general election, this is bogus because George W. Bush couldn't even name major world leaders when he was a candidate. If Bush tries to make it an issue Dean can point this out AND, to really embarass Bush, make it known that he STILL doesn't know shit about foreign policy, even after four years in office!

Okay, so that was Part One.

Part Two, and this is for the Clark supporters here, is that Clark has no Domestic Policy experience. He hasn't even so much as held office for City Council. This is, IMO, way more of a liability than Dean's lack of foreign policy experience because voters are much more concerned with domestic issues when it comes to who they vote for. Foreign policy is a confusing thing for most voters so they tend to just tune it out. Plus, there is this sense of "well that doesn't really effect me" (even though that is wrong of course, but they don't know that) so they don't care about it.

Dean has experience delivering health care to people. Dean has experience balancing budgets. Dean has experience creating jobs. Dean has experience with environmental regulations. Those are the issues voters are going to care most about and Clark doesn't have squat when it comes to that.

Let me be clear here: I think Clark is a viable candidate (though not my favorite). I am trying to point out that the "Dean is weak on foreign policy" argument is stupid.

[IndianaGreen]

1. I don't care! Clark is one of the antiwar candidates, so he is okay!

We should not be attacking the antiwar candidates, which seems to be a standard practice by supporters of the prowar candidates.

I will support Clark, Dean, Kucinich, Mosley-Braun, and Sharpton against the four pukes that voted for war!

[worldgonekrazy]

3. I agree

I don't know if Clark is really an anti-war candidate though. It sure seemed to me that he supported the war until it was clear it was a bad idea and/or when seriously considered entering the primary race. Having said that, Kucinich is the only candidate that can really truly claim to be anti-war as he actually voted against the IWR (something Dean and CMB were not in a position to do) and rallied others to vote against it as well.

[Dookus]

2. In response to your second point...

I will argue that Clark, as SACEUR, was responsible for the "domestic policy" of taking care of hundreds of thousands of people. He was responsible for schools, stores, health care, etc.

It's not exactly the same as being a governor, but he WAS responsible for a lot of people and their welfare.

[Bombtrack]

4. apparently it's much harder to mediate between ski-resort owners

than between governments and factions of dozens of countries.

Yeah, Howard, a couple of Balkan states don't compare to Killington and Sugarbush

[Myra]

5. I appreciate your attempt to bring some balance to this topic worldgonekra

However, Dean didn't do himself, or the voters, any favor by
blurting out that foreign policy was a hole on his resume
that he'd plug with his running mate.

That was just a terrible thing to say.

I actually think General Clark has years of experience in the
military, looking out for the needs of thousands of military
families, that help him immensely with domestic policy.
Either way though, thank gawd he didn't make the kind of
comment that Dean made about hole plugging.

"LITCHFIELD, N.H. — Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean, who has been vigorously defending himself against charges that he lacks the foreign policy experience needed to be president, said Sunday he would want a vice president with such a background.

"I need to plug that hole on the resume, and I'm going to do that with my running mate," Dean said."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-dean22dec22,1,2428575.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

[worldgonekrazy]

6. I am talking about the perception more than reality

I am not concerned that Clark would majorly fuck up Domestic Policy. He would have tons of people around to support him on that, just as Dean would with foreign policy.

However, in terms of the perceptions of uneducated voters (which, you must admit, are most of the people that still even bother to vote), Clark's lack of domestic policy is a liability, IMO. Just like Dean's lack of foreign policy only worse because elections focus on domestic policy.

[ochazuke]

9. Experience no big deal

Americans have proven time and again that they don't give much weight to experience. Think of it: In our presidential elections, the guy with LESS experince usually wins.

But this time, experience might count for something, especially in foreign policy, and especially since the 'thuglicans have such a big polling advantage in the national security area.

That's a major reason why Clark was drafted and now seems to be a major contender.

[worldgonekrazy]

11. Clark's strength does not necessitate a Dean weakness

Yes, I agree that Clark does have strength on the national security issue and can match up on that particular issue better than any of the other Dem candidates (despite what Lieberman likes to think).

But that doesn't mean that Dean is weak in the area. He'll have to cede the "national security" issue to Bush (which pisses me off because 9/11 happened on BUSH'S WATCH GODDAMMIT), but so would ANY other dem candidate besides Clark.

[Myra]

13. I do appreciate that point worldgonekrazy

And at first glance it seems clear that foreign policy is
more of an area of strength for Clark.

But once they listen to him, and realize how much thought
he's put into his well-defined domestic policies, and how
well he understands them and how passionate he is about the
need for them, I think they'll be extremely impressed.

By contrast, once uneducated voters get concerned about Dean's
lack of foreign policy experience and listen to him, they'll
hear something even more alarming:

"I need to plug that hole on the resume, and I'm going to do that with my running mate."

At that point I would expect a voter to conclude that Dean has
three liabilities:

Lack of foreign policy experience, terrible judgment, and
a tendency to blurt out things that greatly damage him and
his chances of beating Bush.

[mikehiggins]

7. Okay, no bashing here, allright. Just an answer.

Part One; we are at war, at least in the hearts and minds of our countrymen. If you want to replace the Commander-in-Chief, even if it is the "Invisible Airman", you have to put up a candidate who can beat him at that game. That means foriegn policy experience, military experience and, yeah, a couple of wounds and medal won't hurt either. Otherwise, what you are trying to do is convince someone that he should abandon Bush in the middle of the War, without presenting the voter with a credible reason. Another professional politician is just another talking head like the ones the vote has seen on his tv screen much more frequently than he wants to.

In Clark you have a candidate who has done all of that, is truly cosmopolitan in outlook and has the appearance and persona to sell the idea that the average voter would not be buying just another Democrat but actually "trading up" to someone with the skillset the times call for.

Part Two; this is the one that is actually shakiest among the two points. This equates running in a political campaign with Domestic Policy experience. That is not actually the case. To take just one example, Planned Parenthood has to deal with all sides of the domestic policy issues concerned with its mission. Its officials, none of whom are elected, have to work to get legislation passed or anti-choice initiatives halted, work with politicians and elected officials and appointed officials and grass roots activists to advance its program. By the litmus test implied by Part Two, none of the people involved in public service organisations would be considered experienced in Domestic Policy, even though it is the meat and bread of their everyday lives. Similarly a union leader, who has to deal with Domestic Policy issues everyday but is rarely an elected official in his own right. (Brian McLaughlin, current President of the NYC Central Labor Council, for example, is also a NYS Assemblyman representing a district in Queens. His example is remarkable, and not only because it is so rare. There is presently serious talk of him running for Mayor in the next NYC election cycle)

A friend of mine has been appointed to a Local Community Development agency. He has never held elected office but has been an activist in his community for decades. Now he is involved in dispurseing a hundred million dollars or so in CDC money.

So, if you redefine Domestic Policy to include working in a system to obtain the resources you need to fulfill your mission in competition with other factions with an equally legitimate case to be made, then the idea that Clark is deficient in this field is revealed as a straw man.

The ability to negotiate, compromise and implement programs for the people you are responsible is a better definition of Domestic Policy than winning elections, and if you accept that definition, then Clark has been at least as successful as any other candidate, and in a much less forgiveing arena.

So look at that. I was able to post a reasonable (I hope) reply and not resort to bashing anyone else's candidate.

Anyone else want to try?

[worldgonekrazy]

10. I take issue with your definition of domestic policy

I am talking about things like enacting job-friendly legislation (hopefully without being too corporate friendly of course) and health care. Those are the kinds of things that Dean (and any other governor) has dealt with but Clark has not. The point is that these are also the very issues that concern most voters. The conventional wisdom is that foreign policy does not win elections, and I don't see any evidence to contradict that.

[dd123]

8. Being in the military doesn't give much experience in

bottom up solutions if you ask me. I understand that Clark has been rapped in the past for looking up the ladder rather than down the ladder.

That is what is really special about Dean...in the past he has tried to do a lot of problem solving by listening to people on the front lines of the issue.

This is why he picked up early on the stupidity of no child left behind.

This is why he realized people like me were really pissed at the Democratic party for their pink tutu-ness.

This is why he realized that people feel Corporations do not act in the best interests of the public, their own employees, or even the United States.

Dean listens well to little guys like us...that is his political gift.

[Dookus]

12. Also remember...

that Clark served as a White House Fellow as a Special Assistant to the Director of Management and Budget. A Domestic Policy position.