Momentum Forces Dean to Shift to Higher Gear (DEAN & CLARK TALKING!)

By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, August 23, 2003; Page A01


MANCHESTER, N.H. -- Howard Dean, who had planned to run as an insurgent on a shoestring, is adjusting his campaign to befit his new lot in life: the well-funded, emerging front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Recent polls show the former Vermont governor leading here and in Iowa, the first two stops on the road to the 2004 nomination, running strong in vote-rich California and surging nationally. To build on the momentum, Dean is expanding operations in key states such as Washington and Michigan, and increasingly reaching out to centrists by talking up balanced budgets and gun rights, an issue with broad appeal in key southern states. Today he will embark on his first presidential-style, multistate trip with the national media in tow.

The race remains far too close and volatile to consider any of the nine candidates a true front-runner in a contest much of the public is ignoring, but several rival campaigns now privately talk of the Vermont Democrat as the man to beat. Several challengers are adjusting their campaigns to prepare for a one-on-one showdown with Dean.

"I see ourselves as someone with a big surge, but I don't think we have cemented our position as the front-runner at this point," Dean said in an interview. Still, "we're prepared for all of the attacks we're going to get. Clearly, now, that shoe is on the other foot, and they are going to come after me."

more...........

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34389-2003Aug22.html

"He has also had several private conversations with retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark, the former NATO commander who some Democrats see as an attractive running mate for Dean if Clark does not join the race himself."

:toast:

:beer:

:dem:

I hope that Dean and Clark supporters will learn how to do the same.

:-)

Thank you!

:-)

I like both of them for the same reason. The both call Bush* on his abundant mountain of bullsh*t.

A Dean/Clark or perhaps even Clark/Dean would be incredible, our best shot at trimming the Shrub!

When it wasn't safe to make them is ok with me, and Clark rests firmly in that camp.

:-)

When Clark came onto the fore-front, I thought he would be the decisive addition to complete a winning democratic team ticket. I sure hope Clark finds it a smart move as well. I am assuming Dean already knows...

Dean/Clark 2004

Clark is hanging around the scene, not endorsing, not declaring, but saying very safe, populist democratic things, waiting for the leader to emerge. He will then approach, and sign on.

I will bet anyone $100 that Clark

a) will not run on his own (already been told no by pollsters)
b) will run with the lead Dem as his VP, so long as it is not Lieberman, Sharpton, or Kucinich, or some other long shot.

Good ticket

DEAN/CLARK

sounds american doesn't it?

don't particularly like are a lot better than Bush. A whole lot better!

I have no idea what the chances are of this, but that'd be as good as it gets... Unless a Kucinich/Dean ticket happened, but there's no chance of that happening.


For Democrats, and most Independents, a Dean/Clark ticket would be hard to pass up. :)

with a more diverse running ticket for Dean- Richardson or Landreau. But, of course, I'll defer to the Doctor :)

It means *something* that the press has this tidbit.

Dean's stance on Iraq is an easy win. It will only become more clear that Bush's idea of "security" is endless war. Pax Americana is endless war. An aggressive oppressor breeds enemies and violence.

But we need him as the Secretary of State. He is so well versed in foreign policy issues and is so respected, the only person I can think of who would be a better Secretary of State would be Clinton.

Can you imagine? He would get off the plane at peace conferences around the world, unencumbered by the presidency and all the PC crap that goes with it, and would just kick ass!

God I miss Clinton. The good old days, when I made six figures, something other than Israel was on the news, and a blow job was a scandal.

If he doesn't run on the top of the ticket, that is. I do feel his talents would be wasted on the bottom of the ticket.

- Jennifer :-)

"caricature" of an anti-war candidate."

I don't think Dean is a "caricature". He is a Presidential Candidate who didn't think attacking Iraq because bush said so was viable.

Of course, Dean isn't weak on defense! Don't let the repukers call the shots!

And I'm glad they're prepared for "all the attacks we are going to get". But there will always be surprises! Cause they play so low down and freakin' dirty! Stopping at nothing. No boundaries.

are those created by Limbaugh et al, and his comment about being 'prepared for anything we're going to get' is, I bet, a direct result of the MTP interview when Dean was NOT prepared for everything he got.

It's not a game with Dean. It's about doing what's right, regardless of what people say about it. That seems to be striking a big chord in America right now.

strong/weak on defence issue, and he needs to start start doing it now because it is not solely an interlectual position, it is also an intuitive/instinctive/emotional position. They say there is nothing so reactionary as culture, so likewise it is going to take longer for Dean's message to sink in than with other issues. He needs to get his message out and let events prove him right, re-inforce his message, which they will do.

Something like 'Is a mindless foreign policy ever a strong foreign policy ?"

It's stressing 'smart' over 'strong'.

on this issue and he is saving it for six months down the road for bush*, then that is a mistake he needs to get the message out now, in fact the perfect time was when Lieberman was opening his mouth on the subject.

To repeat it is a semi-cultural change Dean has to effect, not an interlectual change that can be done in couple of days with a few facts.

Think how long it would take to convert everybody at FreeRepublic to our position.

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_speech_foreign_cfr

And 2/17 at Drake University: http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_speech_foreign_drake

:-)

But in a way it makes my point, because you should not be having to post links for me, I should have had it rammed down my throat so often that I am gagging. I mean how many times here have we heard bush*'s effing 'lawsuit joke'.

But what "Lawsuit Joke" are you talking about?

If you want this stuff rammed down your throat, just Google Dean in the news, watch Trippi on cable news, listen to a Dean speech, go to a MeetUp.

The mainstream press is starting to figure it out too.

been reading the cfr speech which is a goodie.

Lawsuit joke:
"What did the terrorists think we would do after 911, file a lawsuit ?"

(something like that anyway. It wasn't funny the first time)

to campaign on the theme of cleaning up the mess Bush has made in Iraq and Afghanistan? Would it help to have Clark as the point man for the job?

You got Dean who has a solid background in bringing a state out of defict and Clark who has a solid military background.

If it's a fair election, they will beat out the studdering chimp and the grumpy old man anyday by a good margin...

That's hard to resist.

I mean, Dean is excellent. And Clark is excellent. And salsa is excellent.

If Dean and Clark ate more salsa, they would become an unstoppable force of excellence!

Don't ya just love how the Dean campaign has ads right under the article!


ADVERTISER LINKS What's this?

Howard Dean for President
"We have the power to take the White House back in 2004."
www.DeanForAmerica.com

A thousand times yes!

The Doctor and The General. Sounds really friggin' good to me.

Time for more Dean money! Don't forget to pony-up!

www.deanforamerica.com

nice ring to that if it happens...

Nice, fair & balanced article. That a Dean/Clark ticket is now openly talked about in the press is pleasing to this Dean supporter.

Question: anyone know anything about retired Marine Gen. Joseph P. Hoar? His name is in the article as someone counseling Dean on foreign policy.

Where in the article is a Dean/Clark ticket mentioned?

"He (Dean) has also had several private conversations with retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark, the former NATO commander who some Democrats see as an attractive running mate for Dean if Clark does not join the race himself."

:)

makes cheney's name seem downright... foreign. 8^)

I'm very undecided and ambivalent about Clark. I've read a lot of good things about him here. However, someone I know and trust says he's a "chameleon" and a "political animal" who will do anything to survive, and that he'd be a disastrous choice.

:shrug:

I'm not sure what to think at this point... except that I trust Dean to make the wisest choice possible.

I am telling you now, Dean/Clark will be the best rock'in New Years Eve this country has ever seen. Dick Clark has nothing on that.

"He has also had several private conversations with retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark, the former NATO commander who some Democrats see as an attractive running mate for Dean if Clark does not join the race himself."

I have goose bumps at the thought of this ticket. I think any of the Dems running will make a good VP except Liberman. I would like to see all of the Dems running with cabinet positions, except Liberman. With Clark as a running mate this would trump the strongest thing Bush has going. I still like the thought of Al Sharpton as Press Sect. He would be out there every week spanking that Donkeys ass till kicked.

Goosebumps all over --- Dean/Clark or Clark/Dean - either way - Bush* would be out.

OMG... I'm already picturing November 2004 ~ the thought of me screaming and dancing in the streets at the ousting of Bush*.

With Dean's phenominal grass roots support and Clark stealing Bush's* thunder as a "War President"... we are IN LIKE FLINN.


Oh, please, please, please let it happen.

Clark/Dean or Dean/Clark in 2004.

I'm not sure that I'd want to see Kerry, Edwards, and Graham in the cabinet. Aren't there Republican governors in all three states? We can't afford to lose three Senate seats. There are plenty of people out there that will be well suited for cabinet posts. Let's keep the Senators in the Senate.

is to fend off the inevitable "family values" bushit

With Vermont having civil unions - you know that AWOL inc. will try to use this against him - ala GOPers are the only party that has family values...

Dean will need to turn this to his advantage - flip it around to show that the "family value" rhetoric is just that - rhetoric

He can do that by asking if GOPers value families - When you value something you take care of it, help it, and nurture it...

sooooooooo - how does unfunded education mandates help families? How does cutting veteran benefits help families? How does cutting military pay help the families of those fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan? How does cutting programs such as head start help families? How does giving taxcuts to the one-percenters help families? How does energy bills and health care bills written by corporations help families?

yes, GOPers have family values - but they do not value the family

You want a character debate? Bring it on!

if anyone from dean's campaign is reading this list they should definitely be taking notes on radfringe's campaign suggestions about family values.

du is an incredible resource. dean needs to use it.

He isn't even a Democrat, let alone a Proud Democrat. Hamlet was a dynastic prince, not a candidate for vice-president. Clark is untested in a campaign; what if he breaks down and makes a mistake, causing Dean to lose? The country can't afford the risk; the campaign is too important! Besides, it's too late for him to make that decision -- he's being unfair to all the other people who made it known early that they want to be vice-president. He can't even make up his mind that he wants to run; how can he make decisions as vice-president? He's a killer, not a healer! I don't want a trained killer a heartbeat away from the presidency! What the country needs is someone to heal it, not someone who kills it! He'll use his position of vice-president to enrich the military-industrial complex! What about his ties to Axciom? Besides, he's a Republican plant. As soon as he's in as vice-president, he'll start undermining everything Dean does, and he'll spy for the freepers! I just wouldn't feel comfortable and safe with a military man near the center of power. And then there are all those war crimes he's responsible for. He couldn't travel as the U.S. representative to other countries, because they'd immediately arrest him and try him as a war criminal! I don't know what he stands for. How can he make a good vice-president, when no one knows what his positions are?


Need I even post a definition of the word 'hypocrite' here?

I will also point out that there were a couple of threads attacking Dean posted recently; not one Clark supporter showed up on them, but on literally every Clark thread, pro and con, Dean supporters show up to attack him without fail, as they do on every thread for every other threatening candidate. But he'd make a hell of a VP, as long as it's for Dean!!!!!

Some of us Dean supporters have absolutely no problem with Clark, and we've been saying as much. Stop stereotyping an entire group of people.

And as for us wishing for him as a VP, well, sorry to break it to you, but Dean is the only one of the two who is currently running, so allow us the pleasure of actually daydreaming about a winning ticket.

Sheeeesh...us Deanies aren't even saying something bad about Clark and we still can't even win.

And btw, it's bullshit that Clark supporters aren't attacking Dean supporters. There's a few poster names that I could easily supply here from the Clark camp.

But I'm trying to abide by the spirt of Dean and Clark here--they're talking, not fighting right now. So that's what I'm doing.

some of the inveterate Clark bashers have shown up in this very thread, eager to see Clark as Dean's running mate. But to judge by what they say in other threads, Clark is the devil with his horns surgically removed.

I'm not aware of a single remaining Clark supporter who habitually bashes Dean, by the way. But the list of Clark bashes I made above is something that is guaranteed to show up on every Clark thread, most of them posted by Dean supporters.

and pointing your finger at Dean supporters how?

:shrug:

I don't bash Clark, and I never have. This thread is nice and friendly and let's keep it that way, ok? You have problems with Dean supporters who are bashing Clark then take it up with them when they're doing the actual bashing, ok?

But this was an ideal opportunity to point out some rather overt hypocrisy, and as a result, perhaps it would put an end to some of the candidate bashing that goes on.

Frankly, I'm tired of defending Clark against some of the absurd attacks some of Dean's supporters make. To have spent so much time doing it, and then see some of these same people in absolute rapture at the thought of Clark running as Dean's VP is a little galling.

hypocrisy

n 1: an expression of agreement that is not supported by real conviction

2: insincerity by virtue of pretending to have qualities or beliefs that you do not really have


Hmmmmm...I guess you're not a hypocrite then.

Then I guess what you're saying that you're just someone who is bashing the supporters of another candidate who knows full well that they're no better than the people they're accusing of doing wrong?

That IS what you're saying there, you know.

No, it isn't. What I'm saying is, I'm tired of defending Clark against some ridiculous attacks by people who then run off and talk about how much they'd like to have him on their side. I'm also tired of the candidate bashing that people do.

You brought up the 'you're no better' nonsense, which had nothing to do with it, since I wasn't bashing Dean, but pointing out rank hypocrisy; in other words, you were making an apples to oranges comparison, and then making a judgment based on it. Instead of pointing out the irrelevance of that line of illogic, I simply denied trying to be better as a way of disposing of it. If you wish to continue dragging this out, however, I can turn into a true hypocrite and light into Dean for a while. Then I really would be 'no better.'

And we'll end it at this. I'm not interested in a long debate on Dean vs Clark supporters today...really ever, since I think we both have more in common than not. Kucinich supporters too.

Maybe that's why we all often have been getting at each other's throats? We're all a little bit too similar? :shrug: Dunno about that one. I'll have to think on that.

I think he's got a point. What qualifies this guy? I've ALWAYS been against having a military man as pres or VP. They can run the army, but what qualifies them to work in politics and run a country? Maybe he'd be a good Sec of Defense, but I'd never want a guy like that as a VP. From my recollection, he seems to be move devisive than anything (forgive my ignorance - somebody please fill me in on his general attitudes).

I will also point out that there were a couple of threads attacking Dean posted recently; not one Clark supporter showed up on them, but on literally every Clark thread, pro and con, Dean supporters show up to attack him without fail, as they do on every thread for every other threatening candidate. But he'd make a hell of a VP, as long as it's for Dean!!!!!

And yet, here you are...a Clark supporter, attacking Dean supporters in a Dean thread.

Gee, I thought you just said that never happens??? "Not one Cleark supporter shows up on them" were your words, were they not????

of it, shouldn't they, AWD?

:evilgrin:

there's a difference between bashing supporters and bashing the candidate. As I, and several other people have said, I like Dean himself, but to judge by his supporters, I'd sooner vote Green.

You can also see my response to Kephra above, who makes the same claim.

I'd like to know, as I'm not sure about what you mean from that.

That there's a difference between bashing supporters and bashing the candidate? Not really. I think bashing is bashing, but critical comments about policy or their actions are cool. That's about technical differences of policy, so that's not in the realm of bashing. The target of the bashing isn't important to me. It's the technique that is.

Or is it that you're claiming I'd rather vote Green than for Clark based on his supporters? Because if that's what you're saying then you've got me wrong there too.

"...I don't think we have cemented our position as the front-runner..."

Every candidate, even for dog catcher, seems to use the pronoun "we" with contortions like this one. "Front-runner" certainly has to be a singular noun, right? Am I the only one that finds this language strange? I know the various political consultants teach their candidates to use "we," but why do they insist on its use so much?

This sentence was easily repairable, though. Something like: "...I don't think we have cemented our position as the leading campaign organization..." Or even: "...I don't think we have cemented our position as the front-runners..." Well, OK, you see the problem with "front-runners" plural. :-) Maybe "front-running campaign"?

(Note: I don't plan to tear apart any more grammar this election cycle, except perhaps George W. Bush's once in a while. Just thought I'd comment on something that strikes me as funny in every election.)

But I think it's pretty clear in this case that he's talking about the Campaign and not using the Royal "We" here.

I've been active in two campaigns this cycle -- one is Dean, the other is my husband's. I'm not running for any office at all.

I use "we" for both. My husband's, I get, because I do a lot of legwork, I show up at speaking engagements, I post here and on my blog about it (and annoy the snot out of everyone) and it's taken over my brain. "We're looking for volunteers and for a farm-policy adviser" is an accurate statement, since I'm actively looking (and more volunteers means less work I have to do personally).

The Dean campaign is stranger -- I go to MeetUp, I attend in-between meetings, I'm volunteering at the MKE Sleepless Summer rally. This is not my campaign, although I'm a part of it. But I'll still say, "we've got more than 600 people registered so far," even though I've done zip, zero, zilch for registration.

It seems natural to use the royal "we," if you've got a solid core group on the campaign.

He wasn't the Queen of England referring to Herself.

When Dean says "we" he means "me and my supporters".

A "Democratic We", not a "Royal We"!

and Clark would be a plus.

...on Dean is very interesting. Especially it's write on him personally, which basically claims that he is far less liberal than he is making himself out to be. I don't agree with his position on gun rights, I don't agree with his position on gay-marriage (because it anything less than a full throated defensive of the rights of gay and lesbians is obscene to me, and Dean supports a "separate but equal" approach to the marriage question), I don't support the way he balances the budget (while Governor his approach to budget balancing was the conservative approach of cutting spending and not rasing taxes - he called it bein frugal, but what it really did was cut all kinds of programs for the poor, according to TIME) -- so what's left? What exactly makes him a real Democrat?

Right now my feeling is that he is a big poser, riding the backlash wave against Bush and trying to appeal to the largely untapped resource of the left-wing youthful vote by basically lying about who he really is. Who he really is is an extremely moderate democrat, not really all that far to the left of Leibermann.

It's sad when the difference between Lieb and Dean is seen as the different between "center" and "left." It is actually the difference between "RIGHT" and "CENTER." We haven't seen Left yet, and that's part of the reason why the country is in such horrendous shape and has been on that declining path for 30 years.

I'd really need to see some evidence of this. I've seen Dean say "I am the center, Larry". And while I have seem him discuss the political reality that both parties have skewed right, I don't think any of his supporters are unaware of his positions.

I'll take a Doctor and a General over two Oilmen any day!

... is some good ol' American thinking! Exactly. People who have actually *done* something.

Even though I think Kerry still has a shot at beating bush id say a dean/Clark ticket would be our best shot at getting the worst pres in HISTORY out of the white house

attractive, intelligent, well-spoken.

no taint of washington insider

no war votes

............................

I would love to see Clark run. I would love to see him as a presidential or VP candidate. I can enthusiastically support anyone who opposed this infernal war.

One think I think that Clark does very well is Strong Daddy. He's utterly reassuring. People would feel very safe with him and I think that would help attract the votes made by people who don't use their brains in their political decisions. I think Dean will learn how to do that too, but its something he has to work on.

A weakness of Clark as a VP is that Dean has said that it would be helpful for him to have a partner with Washington experience. It's true enough. If he chose Clark as a VP, he would need the most experienced staff. He'd need to hire Leon Panetta to be Chief of Staff again or somesuch.

Mostly, I needed to post to see if I can see my DU star!