Howard Dean Cannot Beat Bush

[Jr_Samples]

Normally I am not an alarmist, but I'm up, and I think it's time to yell a bit.

DEAN CANNOT BEAT BUSH. WESLEY CLARK CAN.

If you don't know who Bartcop is then you have a lot of catching up to do.

www.bartcop.com

If you pay him a couple bucks a month you get access to his radio shows - and they've become damned fine over the past couple of months.

On his latest show Bart expresses an opinion I think a lot of us "older" liberals share: DEAN CANNOT BEAT BUSH. WESLEY CLARK CAN.

The reason is simple: Clark takes Bush's biggest fake asset away. Even if he faces Kerry, George Bush will manage to come across as the guy to fight terrorism. Fear will be the prime motivator behind next year's election.

If Dean is our candidate next year, Bush gets another four years. We can't stick our heads in the sand and pretend the politics of smear and corporate-funded deception don't work in these matters.

Phil
www.fauxnewschannel.com

[aquart]

1. Name one person you know who didn't vote for Bush last time

Who IS voting for Bush next time. One.

I don't appreciate panic-mongering. You do Rove's job for him.

How about this? Let the Democratic voters go to the polls and decide their own candidate. Think you can handle that?

George Bush has gained NO new votes. He's lost a lot of old ones. His dependence is on Diebold.

It matters very little who the Democratic candidate is. The vote will be against George, not for the Democrat.

The sky is falling, Chicken Little. It is. But it's falling on George.

[Jr_Samples]

3. Your response is fifty times as panicky as my original post.

Thanks for the name-calling. That does a lot of good for your argument.

Don't be naive. Most of America's voters are somewhere between you and Shemp Hannity. They're called "moderates," and they make a big difference.

Most political polls are surprisingly accurate, and these days they reflect Bush's approval rating is soaring - by historical standards, at least.

Don't run away from this idea.

DEAN CANNOT BEAT BUSH. CLARK CAN

[G_j]

16. Jr_Samples, next time could you please post

candidate threads in the "General Discussion, 2004 primary" forum. That is what it was created for,
thanks :-)

edit, correction of forum title

[HFishbine]

25. Actually

most voters are not moderates. Not any more. The country is more divided between left and right. Aiming for the shrinking center is a losing proposition. Witness 2002.

[Clark Can WIN]

39. Witness 2002 INDEED!

In 2002 only 34% of the nations electorate identified themselves as Democrats. You propose to win on just 34%? It's time for a little reality check for all of us. We NEED center, independent and even a few <choke> republican votes to get back the white house. Dean will not deliver those votes with his "play nice with Osama, Saddam in jail doesn't make us safer, Saudis told Bush about 9/11" gum flapping.

God almighty, they'll have Dean looking just as dangerous for the country as the 19 hijackers themselves.. Count on it.

[HFishbine]

46. You make an unfounded assumption

You assume that those not registered as democrats or republicans are "in the center." I'd need some proof of that. The 3 million who voted for Nader would suggest otherwise.

Furthermore, I'm not choosing a candidate based on the fear of how "they" will portray our candidate. The boogey man doesn't sacre me.

[Clark Can WIN]

55. You are making equally unfounded multiple assumptions

A. You assume last elections Nader voters will not vote for Nader again.

B. You assume Nader voters will vote for a Democrat.

C. You assume that greater numbers of Independent and other voters are far left (i.e. greens and socialists) as opposed to being closer to the center. I'd need some proof of that. The 2002 election DISASTER would seem to suggest otherwise.

The boogey man doesn't have to scare you, Dean is already doing himself in, with vigor and gusto.

[HFishbine]

58. Oh, boy.

Okay, we'll let the readers decide.

[Clark Can WIN]

73. No we won't

we'll let the voters decide. If Dean gets the nomination and we lose in one of the biggest effin landslides of all time......... I get to serve your cold plate of crow.

If fish ride unicycles and hell has an ice age I'll put my bib on.

[bearfartinthewoods]

56. i'd like some proof of your assertion that the middle is disappearing. n/t

[HFishbine]

61. I'd be happy to

But, I prefer not to answer questions from people who ignore mine. Do your own research if you want to be informed, or give up the one-way demands.

[Clark Can WIN]

74. Pretty convenient way of

backing out of supporting your shaky assertions.

[formernaderite]

35. call me naive

Call me naieve, but voting for Clark seems like voting for another Republican. He may be able to beat Bush, but isn't that the same as having a democrat in name only in the White House? How does that redefine the democratic party?
Those of us who voted for Nader in 2000 were adamant that we wanted change within the democratic party. I happen to be very left wing ideologically, however I do recognize that even Kerry and Lieberman have been democrats longer than Clark. Clark's views on the war, cannot be his only mantra as a progressive. Heck, I know plenty of Libertarians that are as far right as they come who principally did not support the war as an option. They still wouldn't qualify as democrats.

[LiberalBushFan]

44. I'm calling you naive

because it's agreed even among most Dean supporters that Clark is more liberal. Though I'm sure you'll figure that out soon enough. I'm not faulting you since you only have 3 posts.

[Clark Can WIN]

48. Do D's and R's by your name make you good Democrats and Republicans?

Look at my State of Nebraska. Our senators, Ben Nelson(d) and Chuck Hagel(r) might well as often as not switch their letters according to their votes. Ben is a much better Republican than Chuck.

If you are suggesting that Clark is a Republican because he voted that way a couple times I would also point out that he also voted for Clinton and Gore.

If you look at what he tried to do for the people working under him, you get a better idea of where his ideological heart has been for some time. Better pay, better education in the schools including lower teacher/student ratios, better vocational and continuing education opportunities for the whole family, improved housing standards, improved health care, expanded domestic abuse programs, expanded sensitivity and human/civil rights training. He also worked to move the military off of it's dependency on oil and stopped enormous operations in Texas out of concern for some turtles. That one really gave his superiors the red ass but he did it anyway because he cares about the environment. Sounds like a Democrat to me.

[LiberalBushFan]

42. too many!

I could name the ones I know but obviously you wouldn't recognize the names. If you look at the Dean vs Bush polls, clearly there ARE people who would vote for Bush against Dean. Dean will improve in Dean vs Bush polls as his name recognition improves, but he's been getting tons of coverage already. If the majority was definitely anti-Bush, and if all Gore voters were definitely still Dem voters, Dean would beat Bush in the head-to-head polls already.

[bearfartinthewoods]

51. my brother in law and probably his wife

and he has my wife's parent's ears although they have never voted for a pubbie on the national level, so i still have hope there.

[Melodybe]

2. This is just flamebait. Any of the democrats can beat Bush.

Sorry we won the vote last time and I have personally seen plenty of my VERY republican friends jump ship. Bush is going down no matter who the nominee is. You are just buying into the propaganda lies. Calm down, we are all in this together. Americans do not like being unemployed, at war, mad cow in their big mac, and oppressed. Bush will soon be an unpleasant memory. All of over candidates can and will win.

[Jr_Samples]

5. Bartcop.com is not propaganda.

Hope is a good thing. But in this case a bit of wisdom holds much more value.

Dean is a super candidate, but Bush is going to be campaigning with a quarter of a billion dollars at his disposal.

That'd pay for a lot of propaganda.

DEAN CANNOT BEAT BUSH. CLARK CAN

[w13rd0]

6. And you think what?

That he's going to donate it to charity rather than use it against Clark to make Wes look like the long lost cousin of Stalin? Get real.

[Jr_Samples]

9. I think it is you not being "real" here.

I can handle the dozen or so Americans dumb enough to believe Clark is a long lost cousin of Stalin.

[w13rd0]

12. Still haven't answered the objection...

...how are ANY of the candidates immune from the slander Bush will sponsor? Tell us, please, because you are the one who seems to be having utopian fantasies about a neutered Bush-Rove that would refrain from using fear and propaganda to manipulate the US voter.

[Jr_Samples]

14. Yes I did, but you didn't catch it.

So I'll spell it out in more detail.

There is a negative correlation between the military experience of the (D) candidate and how many Americans will fall for the "anti-military" propaganda BushCo will put out. That is to say, with Dean there'd be millions of Americans who'd fall for it. With Kerry it'd be a million. And with Clark it'd be a dozen.

So, as I said before, I can handle a dozen Americans actually fooled by the propaganda.

[HFishbine]

27. Then what we need is a candidate

who:

1) Knows how to win elective office
2) Has the support of his party
3) Can raise money

Dean beats Clark.

[Clark Can WIN]

75. How does Dean have party support when he keeps calling

fellow Dems cockroaches and deriding the chairman and anyone with a Washington mailbox?

Course AlGore had one for 8 years, doesn't matter now right?

You think Clark can't fight? Or negotiate? Hasn't had to be answerable and produce results? Of course he has.

The money? Let's look at Howard first 3 months.......... Clark BLOWS HIM AWAY. The ability is there, much as it may bother you... it is there.

[CTLawGuy]

47. do you have a crystal ball?

Ask Max Cleland if military service is a ticket to elected office.

[w13rd0]

4. No Democrat HAS or WILL take away Bush's "biggest asset"...

...(that is: use of fear). NONE, how would they take it away? Why would they then, when they can't or won't now? Either Bush can be beaten, or he cannot? No magic fairy is going to emerge from the bottle, no matter how hard you rub it. None of the candidates have shown themselves able to wave a magic wand, and have the media do its job. None of the candidates have demonstrated that they can muster more support of X demographic in the primaries, where candidate Y cannot. How is ANY candidate going to take ANY issue "off the table", when Bush can outspend even his strongest opposition 3:1 at this point? I don't care if you get Jesus to run, Rove will slander them, and fear most certainly WON'T be "off the table".

It's a stupid tactic, and self-defeating.

[Jr_Samples]

8. Bush's money

I disagree with you. You say, "None of the candidates have demonstrated that they can muster more support of X demographic in the primaries, where candidate Y cannot."

This is where you're dead wrong. Strong liberals, like you and I, will vote for whomever is running. But a vast majority of the moderate American voter base is likely to succumb to a constant "Dean is an anti-military leftie from an anti-heterosexual state" crap that the Bush camp will put out in every way they possibly can. Technically, Bush served in the military, and Dean avoided the military. These are things the truth of which you and I appreciate (i.e., one is a deserter, and one is a good man who honestly refrained from joining), but too many of our fellow citizens do not.

Clark is virtually immune to the type of propaganda that will defeat Howard Dean.

[w13rd0]

10. Nonsense, absolute nonsense...

...first, you say "This is where you're dead wrong. Strong liberals, like you and I, will vote for whomever is running." Don't make assumptions in an attempt to patronize. Bush went AWOL from the military, so don't pull RW talking points with me.

And you say Clark is immune, how? He has said he wants to cut the military budget, and frankly, if he's not for equal rights, what use is he in the Democratic party? How is he immune? Furthermore, he's vulnerable to all kinds of different propaganda, as well as being not at all immune from the type of propaganda you are referring to.

Since when has the Bush administration told the truth? Or allowed a record of accomplishment to come between them and an opportunity to slander someone?

Your base assumptions are completely erroneous.

[Jr_Samples]

17. Maybe you need some sleep.

Four, non-erroneous responses:

(1) Nothing in what I've said so far suggests Bush did anything but desert his military obligations. In fact, I mentioned it first. Yet somehow, to you, my case is nothing but "RW talking points."

(2) Yes, Clark is immune because, well, something about a 34 year career in the military, four-star general, etc.

(3) You mention Bush's history of lying, as if my argument denies that. There is nothing in my words hinting that Bush is a truth teller.

(4) You say, "Clark is vulnerable to all kinds of different propaganda," yet ten minutes ago Bush's biggest asset, according to you (I think you're correct) is fear-mongering. Unless you meant something besides fear from terrorists, you have made my argument: Clark takes away Bush's biggest asset.

So, it is not my argument that is erroneous here. However, your complaint that I'm working from "completely erroneous assumptions" is baseless, and probably rooted in a very tired mind.

(Benefit of the doubt)

[HFishbine]

28. Shaping our choice around expected propaganda

is a losing strategy.

[bowens43]

7. That's a moot point

because Clark's not going to get the nomination, Dean is. If you don't want 4 more years of Bush you should stop trashing the nominee and start working your ass off to ensure that he DOES beat bush.

This 'older' Liberal wouldn't vote for Clark if you held a gun to his head. The last thing we need is a product of 30 years of military indoctrination in the oval office. Clark was trained to develop military solutions to political problems. I am not willing to sell out the party just to win. It's not worth it. There are worse things then 4 more years of bush.

I can't believe so many people are willing to put a general in charge of our country just because he has a (D) next to his name , and a bright , shiny , NEW (D) at that.

[Jr_Samples]

13. Stop panicking.

For instance, when you say I'm "trashing the nominee." Force down those tears, buddy, and show me one instance where I've "trashed" any Democrat.

You can't, of course, but your sense of panic has kept you from looking at what I'm saying here.

You'd do yourself a lot of good to open your eyes, and start acting more like a liberal. The world is not black and white. The U.S. military is not some robot-factory wherein men and women get "indoctrinated." That's fairly shallow and foolish of you.

I'd happily vote for the man. As for "military indoctrination," I'd say you're being just as narrow minded as most conservatives who automatically label liberals as "commies" and "fags." I can go into any major PX or BX today and buy a copy of Al Franken or Joe Conason's latest book, and while I served I had many discussions with other military folks about politics.

[bowens43]

32. Did you even bother to READ your own post?

Trashing is definitely what it was. I'm not panicking, you are. You are the one jumping up and down shouting 'Dean can't win! Dean can't win!'. Unlike you, I'm no chicken little and I am not willing to sell out my values just to beat bush. As far as indoctrination goes, there is a HUGE difference between a serving for a few years and spending 30 years rising to the rank of general .

You don't become a general by being a liberal. Look at Clark's record of support for republicans and their ideals (there is no such record for support of democrats or liberals), the man is either a liar (lying then or lying now) or he's an idiot; and we know he's not an idiot. Please bY all means , go ahead and vote for him. I don't think he will get the nomination, if he does , I vote third party as do many, if not all of my acquaintances and family members.

[joanski01]

11. I agree with you.

I believe that General Clark can beat bush*. And, yes, I also believe that Clark can expel and lot of the fear that the bushies like to throw around. He has natural leadership abilities and will attract way more voters than just the liberal grassroots. We shall see. I don't believe that General Clark will let bush* get away with stealing another election. He WILL fight back. He has a spine.

[Melodybe]

15. The point is that any of the candidates can and will beat Bush!

Literally no one I know that voted for Bush* will be making that mistake again! Even my diehard repub father in law is wavering in his support for shrub. He called me the day they caught Saddam to gloat about it and months of progress seemed to fly out the window. After a few days of arguing about it and pointing out exactly why * is the worst president in US history he started to see the light. I told him last time we talked that I would have him voting democrat in Nov. He laughed and said I was probably right. By the way Dean is the ONLY democrat that he would vote for. He likes Dean b/c he is smart, b/c he says whatever the hell he wants, b/c he is not a Washington Dem, b/c he was good with money, and b/c he wants to break up the media monopolies. While I would happily support Clark if he gets the nomination, you are the one being unrealistic if you think that Bush* can win the election fairly. The American people are being hurt by this adminstration, they are beginning to realize that the cause of their pain is sitting in the White House right now. The dem will win, no mater who it is.

[Jr_Samples]

18. I hope you're right. But hope is not enough.

We'll all be depressed next November if you're wrong. And I know your friends are all as anti-Bush as I am. But, realistically, you could be the most popular guy on a large college campus, intimately knowledgeable of 2,000 voters' intentions, and still only know 0.01% of America's voters.

As for anyone who automatically rules out "all the other candidates" - that's extremely irrational and hopefully won't be the case once we get a candidate.

Hell man, I'd even vote for ass-munch Lieberman if he turns out to be the (D) candidate next year. Anything to send Bush back to Crawford, TX.

[bitchkitty]

26. Please let your father in law

know about the fact that the Kurds drugged Saddam and stuck him in a hole for the soldiers (with their embedded media persons of course) to 'find'. Point him toward the truth and step back - you have a fine opportunity here. I wish my baby sister and her husband would have such moments of truth, but I fear that cause is lost.

[ima_sinnic]

19. wrong

"Bush's biggest fake asset" could be The Economy--and also the fact that he is EXPERIENCED as a chief executive.
And you think someone with absolutely no experience managing a budget and working with legislators could be competitive with the Chimp In Charge? Clark has much background baggage that can be slandered and distorted--and you're dreaming in lala land if you don't think so.
I like Clark very much--as a Secretary of Defense or State or possibly VP.
To say that *only Clark* can beat Bush is nonsense.

on edit: btw, you might think Bartcop's opinion is somehow influential, but ever since he knocked Bev Harris, way back when, as a conspiracy nutcase I have lost all respect for him. He acted like a little spoiled brat when she announced she had some damaging goods on Diebold but wouldn't tell His Holiness Bartcop what the details were. He sent his forum goon squad over here to denigrate her. screw bartcop, his opinion is s**t to me.

[Jr_Samples]

20. Not even close

Actually, now that I read the forum description I see that I messed up - sorry about that! Should have posted this in the "Election 2004" forum. I really should slow down and pay attention.

As for the rest of your argument, you're not even close. For starters - Bush's biggest fake issue is not going to be the economy. How in the world is the shitty economy a "fake" issue?

No, the fake issue is America's fear and misunderstanding of terrorism.

As a military man Clark is more than sufficiently familiar with budgets and bureaucratic red tape.

I'm especially moved by your "lala land" argument, but need one clarification: is that the Rush Limbaugh version of the "lala land" defense, or the Sean Hannity version? Just want to be clear on that.

As far as your efforts "alerting" the mods - that's hilarious! I'm flattered someone is actually intimidated by my humble opinions.

;)

[ima_sinnic]

22. oh right, bring in Rush/Sean

--actually, that is the ima_sinnic version. your concept of reality is, um, a bit warped, to say the least.

"intimidated"? hardly. no more than I am "intimidated" by a mosquito. it does irritate me when people don't follow the rules though.

as far as the economy goes--it could be at the worst it's ever been in the history of the U.S. but if Bush gets out the spin (as he is doing now) that it's in great shape, the people can be made to believe it, even as their own paychecks bottom out or disappear. that's just the way he operates. I've heard plenty of r-w spin against Clark and it's not pretty. Right now they don't consider him a threat so they're not talking much about him. But get him up front and the attacks and distortions will be vicious, ruthless and without end.

Dean will announce members of his staff as well as his VP by the time of the GE and we can all guess that any shortcomings in his own experience will be more than adequately made up by well qualified people.

[CWebster]

21. Clark can not even beat Dean

might as well lay down and die then, because with all this naysaying, it is bound to herald an arrogant Bush punk landslide.

[bitchkitty]

23. Bartcop is a good site and he's

been around awhile, but I disagree with much of what he says (or more often, how he says it). He's not the voice of the Democratic Party, and he's just plain wrong in this case.

[artr2]

41. I'm a subscriber to Bart's site

and I think he is wrong in this case. I feel that Clark is just the big moneys boy to replace shrub. So in my opinion if either bush or clark win the big money boys win because it's just different sides of the same coin.

[Padraig18]

24. Pure, unsubstantiated speculation.

No one--- n-o o-n-e --- 'knows' what the political landscape will look like 10 months from now, so any prresumed omniscience on anyone's part about who can or cannot beat GWB is pure meadow muffins.

:eyes:

[janx]

43. "Meadow muffins"! LOL!!!

!

[Padraig18]

69. Hehe!

I'm making an effort to stop saying 'bullshit', like I used to do. :P

[Bozola]

29. Four legs good, two legs better.

[polpilot]

30. Clark cannot beat Dean. Kerry, Joe, Gep cannot beat Dean. Bush cannot

beat Dean.

Dean '04...

[Clark Can WIN]

76. you may have once been right

But Dean is now beating Dean on a regular effin basis. Will we go with him? Not me.

[poskonig]

31. I stopped going to bartcop a *long* time ago.

All that was on the site were conspiracy theories about the "BFEE," vicious hatred, and uncritical worship of Clinton. Bartcop's choice of candidate is not surprising.

A student of physics, I'm trained to be skeptical of things. I also like visionary Democrats who expound what they are for, not reactionary Democrats who define themselves in terms of what they are against. Lastly, while I'm not the most liberal person in the world, I find the populist Al Gore wing of the Democratic Party more appealing than the gross whoring ourselves to special interests we saw in the 1990s.

To summarize, bartcop lacks my political depth and therefore does not command my respect.

[CMT]

33. wonderful, so if Dean is the nominee we might as well not

vote since you already said he won't win.

[Nashyra]

34. No Cmt we have to still vote

but you will probably have very few moderates if any working or raising money for Dean. I've been gone for Christmas and nearly got into about 50 fights with realatives of who are all Democrats and their concensus was that Dean was going to get the nomination and that * was going to win and they all said the same thing while "patting me on the head and laughing "if Clark get's the nomination then we will help you" if Dean gets it we are toast and it is over. No matter hard I tried to tell them that you can not think this way it only brought tears and frustration. They are from Ca and Kentucky. Sorry but most moderates I know are already settling for the inevitable, my voice was lost on them, my strongest argument became "Dean can win but it will be much more difficult than if Clark ran against *" That drew some agreement but the prevailing thought was what this post was all about.

[rucky]

36. Why didn't you title your post: "Clark Can Beat Bush"?

Just a suggestion for the future.

You'll get different responses. More constructive.

[clarknyc]

40. Shortsighted?

[Jr_Samples]

72. You're correct

Regardless who runs I'll vote and stump for him/her with everything I've got. I'm not exactly quiet on political issues, and I've never felt this strongly about an election. But I've watched politics for decades now and my "seasoned" opinion is that the safest bet would be General Clark.

It is, after all, my opinion. It must have hit a nerve with a few folks; lots of irrational/non-argument type posts in response.

Certainly, I wasn't trying to create any "flamebait." But in retrospect the title I used was probably a bit too compelling for the actual content within. You're absolutely correct that I should have thought more about others' emotional reactions to it while giving it a title.

Not to mention I originally placed it in the wrong forum. Duh! I'm lucky the site didn't dump my message altogether.

Sorry for the mix up. I'll go lick a frozen telephone pole now.



Phil
www.fauxnewschannel.com

[mermaid]

37. I Call Bullshit

n/t

Where's your PROOF Dean can't beat Bush?

Or are you so blinded by your support of Clark (who was a lifelong Repuke) that you desperately HOPE people think Dean can't beat Bush so that your guy gets the nod?

Take off your blinders, dude...I'd love nothing more than a Dean/Clark ticket.

[Jack_Dawson]

38. You Are Correct, Sir

Dean has no shot whatsoever against Bush.

Listen...this isn't rocket science. Bush will play the "war on terror" card and Dean has no answer for that. Clark does, Dean doesn't. Game over. It is not an opinion, it is fact. And it's certainly nothing personal against Dean or his supporters.

[killbotfactory]

45. Bush is weak on national security

Anyone who points that out will win, because it's true.

[LuminousX]

49. No proof Dean can't or Clark can

so pointless speculation like this does nothing that affect the reality. Dean is winning right now.

If Clark wants to win, he needs to do something more than claim Dean can't win, because... Dean is winning already.

[MIMStigator]

50. Dean = 4 more years of *

eom

[CWebster]

53. The part I don't get about this whole Dean will lose thing

Is that it is coming from supporters of other candidates who aren't doing as well as dean. that is hilarious.

[Jack_Dawson]

54. you're right - in the primaries

but in a GE Clark would do much better. By then he will have name recognition and mo.

[LuminousX]

60. Too bad that isn't how the nomination is decided

Clark has to convince me to support him. He hasn't. And seeing that I believe any candidate who gets nominated will win against Bush, the whole electability argument falls flat.

[Capn Sunshine]

62. So even though he trails in the Primes, he'll do better in a GE?

Oh YES. THAT is highly logical.

[CWebster]

63. Gosh darn Democrats

Gotta get through the Democratic primary first, and well, those Democrats ain't nothing but in the way, considering who the Republicans prefer.

The idea is not to pitch a candidate who appeals to Republicans, but to promote the candidate who can pitch the Democratic message effectively and counter Republican lies and spin. It has been so long since the Democrats have had a strong and effective leader championing the Democratic issues - which resonate with the vast majority of the population, that they have little faith in the powerful effectiveness of their own worldview. I am not interested in voting for a candidate who echoes Republican priorities to represent me, just to compete with republicans. I want a candidate who has a record as a Democrat and stands up strong for Democrats.

[MIMStigator]

57. Primary is no indicator of who can win general

bad logic

[Cheswick2.0]

52. so sad too bad

I guess we are stuck with bush then. :cry:

[Clark Can WIN]

77. If Dean gets the nom

I guess we will.

[White Mountain]

59. Clark is our Ross Perot

He is simply a spoiler for the McAuliffe cabal. We don't need a johnny-come-lately democrat dividing us.

Clark is our Ross Perot

[Jack_Dawson]

64. Very astute (not)

LOL c'mon now. Have you done any homework whatsoever on General Clark?

[Zomby Woof]

65. I was thinking Al Haig myself

The last general to run, and dropped out with little support.

Clark would have to get 15-20% or so of the vote to reach Perot status. Besides, that is unfair to Clark, who isn't a paranoid, wild-eyed nutcase like Perot.

[tedoll78]

66. What's really sad:

There's a TON of dirt out there on Dean, and the other 8 aren't scoring any real hits on him. If Clark is such an effective candidate, why can't he take Dean out? With all of the targets Dean has painted on himself, that paints a pretty pathetic picture of the other campaigns' abilities.

[Hep]

67. Dean can not eat 3 pints of Ben and Jerry's in one sitting

Let's just face it!

[JaneQPublic]

68. Newsweek Poll: Clark & Dean in a statistical dead heat vs. Bush

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm

Newsweek Poll conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates. Dec. 18-19, 2003. N=828 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 4.

Bush - 53
Dean - 40

Bush - 53
Clark - 41

[OrAnarch]

70. 15 Million a quarter says he can...

:)

Be cool if Kucinich, CMB, or Sharpton could also come up with that type of money and support.

[ClarkGraham2004]

71. Agree wholeheartedly

Clark-Graham 2004