Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
RSS Feed
View Profile
« September 2003 »
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30
You are not logged in. Log in
Entries by Topic
All topics  «
foolishness
gloating
jerk fellation
LEGO
politics
schadenfreude
sports
Stinktown
work
We Three Jerks
Thursday, 11 September 2003
Dean-Clark 2004?
Howard Dean, who has been meeting with General Wesley Clark several times over the past few months, has asked the retired general to join his Presidential campaign, possibly as Vice-President, sources say. This is a bold move on Dean's part, but I like it. I think it goes toward answering some of the questions I blogged about yesterday. Clark has a speech to give in Iowa later this month where his intentions will probably be made known.

Democrats seem to get excited by candidates who don't know if they want to run, (see Mario Cuomo), but all Cuomo ever proved to be was a giant pain in the ass. If you want to be president, you've gotta want it, no questions asked. It's a humiliating, exhausting, mind-bogglin experience, and if you have any kind of chance, you can't allow yourself doubts. I'd rather have a candidate who knows what he wants and is willing to get it, then a diva who needs to be assured that his ass will be kissed by everyone he speaks to before he will even consider honoring his country by running for president.

Clark isn't the only candidate who's got supporters out there, despite their unknown (or in this case known) intentions. People want Gore. (Although, Gore may have set this site up himself, I haven't heard what he's been up to lately.)

The Gore website points to a recent Zogby poll indicating that people, by a 52 to 40 margin (8 undecided) think someone new deserves to be reelected. This is a typical polling question at about this point in the election cycle, but the results are a little misleading. Americans are both leary of extended stints in power, and naturally optimistic. As long as the question is status quo versus what might be, Americans tend to lean toward what might be. Until a pollster puts a opponents name in the question. Then, the President's record can be measured against something concrete (his potential opponents record) instead of whoever the respondent has in mind at the time of the question. Also, the other candidates negatives will drive up the Presidetns number. Right now 52% of the respondents think someone deserves to be elected. Replace that with a name (Dean, Kerry, Gephardt...) and that number's going down.

Since today is the 2nd anniversary of 9/11, and I'm such a stickler for flag etiquette, check out these rules.

Tony

Posted by thynkhard at 10:14 AM EDT
Updated: Thursday, 11 September 2003 10:30 AM EDT
Post Comment | View Comments (4) | Permalink

Thursday, 11 September 2003 - 11:06 AM EDT

Name: Marc

I don't see it happening - I don't think Clark has got the guts. Maybe he'll take an advisory role in someone's campaign, with an eventual appointment to Sec of Defense, but not VP. Quick - name the last general to get the Democratic nomination!

Thursday, 11 September 2003 - 11:13 AM EDT

Name: Re: flag etiquette
Home Page: http://www.ma.utexas.edu/~lucey/blog

Thanks for the flag etiquette. I'm more of a stickler for it than I probably should be. While in Austin, I noticed more than a handful of Texans that incorrectly displayed the state flag vertically. They got the blue bar with the white star on top, yes, but to the viewer the red, not white, stripes was on the left. If you watch "King of the Hill" you'll notice that they're guilty of this error. deez

Thursday, 11 September 2003 - 1:33 PM EDT

Name: Tony's Links

I'm not sure, but i think it was Hancock

Friday, 12 September 2003 - 2:24 AM EDT

Name: Ken Shepherd
Home Page: http://kenshepherd.blogspot.com

I agree that Dean's conference with Clark is bold, but I don't think it was wise. Something tells me Wesley Clark is going to go for the gusto and run for President and that he's got some pretty well-connected Democrats, perhaps close to Sen. Clinton egging him on.

I don't think the Clintons and their lackeys in the Democratic establishment think Dean can best Bush in the general election. His rabid anti-war rhetoric, goofy looks, uneven temper, and half-baked rhetoric will scare away independent voters.

Also, Dean talking to Clark smells too much like Dean being scared of a fresh challenger who will become the new media darling and a more viable vehicle for Establishment and New Democrat elements of the Democratic party than say Kerry (compromised by his vote for the war resolution) and Edwards (failing to get traction anywhere).

View Latest Entries