Here's Why I'm Concerned About Dean's Chances in the General Election

George W. Bush will have close to $200 MM with which to absolutely smear Dean with everything under the sun, including the kitchen sink. Just off the top of my head, here are some of the things that Bush will use to attack Dean:

1) Typical New England liberal;
2) Anti-patriotic;
3) Complete foreign policy novice;
4) Tax-and-spend liberal, wants to raise EVERYONE'S taxes;
5) From a lily-white state, out-of-touch with people-of-color;
6) Rich patrician, out-of-touch with the poor;
7) Anti-family, he supported civil unions;
8) Anti-elderly, wants to cut Medicare and raise social security age;
9) What an angry, unpresidential man;
10) Soft on terror, Uday/Qusay/Hamas;
11) He destroyed the Vermont environment;
12) He dodged the draft, then went skiing and did construction;
13) Flip-flopping, hypocritical opportunist.

And again, that's just off the top of my head. Now, I think EVERY SINGLE THING up there is COMPLETE BS except for MAYBE certain aspects of 12 and 13.

The problem is that many of those attacks will resonate with the voters, simply because they are caricatures of the left that have been floated by the Thugs for decades. Another problem is that for quite a few of these attacks, you need a VERY HIGH degree of voter education in order to defend against them, and that is incredibly difficult in today's sound bite society.

These are my concerns. Don't get me wrong, if Dean wins the nomination, I will vote for him, and I will probably even work for him and donate to him. I also think it would be possible for Dean to win, although it would require a good confluence of events and it would probably be pretty tight. But I can't shake the feeling that these perceptions are going to be a big problem for him.

DTH

Luckily, I don't think it will come to pass. Dean has too many candidates with his number, he won't beat them all.

and I say..May the best person win!

I applaud your enthusiasm for your candidate. We need all of our folks energized for our eventual nominee, whoever that may be.

DTH

But, that wouldn't be enough to convince the contested middle. What Dean heading the ticket would mean is a Bush landslide. The House and Senate would become even more GOP-controlled. And America would probably end up looking even more like a J Edgar Hoover NAZI nightmare than it's already become.

BTW: I've listened to Dean and read his "position" papers, there's no "there" there. Do you really think he would do anything about the BFEE and its tentacles from Wall Street to Switzerland? I don't think so because the guy is all talk. And he DOES have a Napoleon Complex.

Trying to get them to see the light is like trying to convince hard core Bush supporters that Bush is anything less than the "best president this country has ever seen."

Our country is in a mess (on both the foreign and domestic front). We need someone of substance to pull us out of this mess.

Dean has all of Kerry's numbers...including 13 of them in the most recent NH polls.

you were thinking of Clark when you typed #13.

But please, I would be interested in a substantive comment on my post, rather than snide throwaway slams on Clark.

DTH

Your second lovely Dean quote was made BEFORE it was known that Clark fundraised for Republicans, flip-flopped on his stance on the War, and voted for Bush, Reagan and Nixon. You wouldn't find Dean making those comments any longer. And you CERTAINLY won't see a Dean-Clark ticket now. Thank god.

Do try and stick to the subject at hand, dear.

DTH

Dear.

I wouldn't rule out a Dean/Clark or a Clark/Dean ticket if I were you.

as if you give two shits about Dean's chances.

If he is our nominee, I want him to be as strong as possible. I'm ABB. Aren't you?

DTH

n/t

Exactly!


Actually, it's obvious that for someone who spends the time to post something like this AND have quotes from another candidate in his sigline that he's worried. I would be too.

Dean and Clark are the big two, as far as I see it. I want our party to nominate the most electable candidate, which in my view is Clark. That's not to say Dean CAN'T win, I think he can; I just think it will be harder, and that he won't have coattails if he does, especially in the South. Clark might very well have coattails, as well as a margin of victory large enough such that Bush won't be able to steal it like he did in 2000.

You can feel free to continue pretending these attacks won't happen; I note with great interest that despite all of your snide comments, you haven't addressed my point in the slightest.

But ignoring the problems won't make them go away.

DTH

<<11) He destroyed the Vermont environment>>

You think Bush is going to convince people that he's better for the environment?

But it doesn't have to be fair for the mud to be thrown.

DTH

about how pollster Frank Luntz was advising Bush & Co. how to "spin" stories on how he's an environmentalist. Rememeber, the American people have fallen for ALL kinds of b.s. from this admin. Nothing would surprise me.

Next they'll be telling us the sky is green - and ya know what? 50% of Americans will believe it.

"never underestimate the stupidity of the American people"-- Samuel Clemens

I hope they get brought up during the primary to see how Dean deals with them because they will be brought up in the general. I like Dean but I do think he has some vulnerabilities that he has to address in his campaign.

That's why I think Dean has a good shot.

Face it, most of the other Dems would get all whiny about it.

Look at california--that bodes better for Dean than many people think.

It was an election due to anger at how f**ked up things are.

Most candidtes don't understand how angry people are at the sorry state of affairs in this country.

I think about 1/4 to 1/3 of the country is pretty mad, 1/2 to 1/3 is pretty apathetic, and 1/4 to 1/3 is pretty satisfied, right now.

The key is moving those apathetic voters into our column. The inevitable attacks levied by Bush that I describe above will make that more difficult to do, especially when it's being blared from a $200 MM air horn.

DTH

The economy is going to get worse.

The Iraq debacle will get worse.

Things in general will get worse.

Again, I point to California--the only difference between that state and the other 49 is that they have a recall mechanism, and the Nazis exploited it.

Find a way to focus that anger on Dumbo (where it should be) and we're on easy street for '04!

What if the economy recovers? Then we get a bunch of fat, apathetic Americans again, busy watching their 401(k) plans and the stock market, rather than the election.

What if Bush pulls an 11th hour rapprochement with the UN on Iraq?

DTH

There's the lag time to consider--the election is about a year away, and I really think the dems are safe to hammer home Dumbo's crony capitalism policies long and hard.

As for Iraq, he might do that, but if it's 11th hour--and the Dems have any sense whatsoever--they will nail him for all the unnecessary deaths when he could have done this months ago!

There are signs that the economy is starting to pick up now, and even the "jobless" aspect of it has started to turn around as of last month.

Regarding Iraq, maybe it won't be 11th hour, but maybe it'll be early next year. I have little doubt Shrub will swallow his pride with the UN if he thinks it will win him another term.

DTH

true, this might have been from that funky gallop poll (I think it might have been) but even anything close to that number shows you what kind of "numbness" we're dealing with.

they can say whatever they want...it's the "ighting Back" that counts and Dean is soo Good at that!

If I had to pick whose ideas I agree with more, it would be Kerry, or gephardt, or even Clark.

However, I really believe that things have gotten so bad, and many people realize this, that issues and platforms won't matter so much.

How many times have the dem candidates put forward a healthcare plan?

And where have those ideas gone?

n/t

Everything, except the specific Dean references (Vermont and Vietnam), can and will be said about any Democratic candidate.

How will they pull this off? I honestly don't know.
But I do know that somewhere along the way in 2000, they managed to convince other Republicans that John McCain was a cowardly, adulterous, anti-American traitor.


Nevermind that Bush is a rich, yuppie, cocaine-using, drunk-driving, alcoholic fratboy moron who presided over the biggest terrorist attack in history; and rather than bringing those responsible to justice he decided to cut taxes for the rich, go on two monthlong vacations in two years, protect his big business buddies, and lay the groundwork for the beginnings of fascism.

Doesn't seem to me that a wreckless, drugged up, moronic drunk would be a very strong candidate either.

If only the Dems would play dirty... Just once...

My point is that it will be harder to make these charges stick against certain candidates, than it will against Dean. Never overestimate the American voter's ability to process complex electoral concepts.

DTH

I don't see why that is so.

The managed to tar straight-laced Gore as a "liar"; they managed to tar war hero Max Cleland as "unpatriotic".

No candidate is immune from slurs.

Why is Dean more vulnerable than other Dem candidates? I don't see why that would be.

When the GOP can get away with complete and utter fabrications like the ones on Gore and Cleland, I don't see how "vulnerability to slurs" means anything anymore.

Everyone is vulnerable. And everyone is equally vulnerable when the GOP has $200M+ and a compliant media to throw its lies around.

--Peter

EDIT: I see others have a made a similar point to mine, but I still don't see any compelling reason given why Dean is more vulnerable than other candidates. :shrug:

But I've only read about half the responses in this thread.

I am undecided about the Dem nomination now (Graham was my top choice until last week).

of the draft, then hit the ski slopes and did construction. They've already labeled him Deanie Weenie http://www.brianpetty.com/show_topics.php?id=14 and it will only get worse if he wins the primary.

The Repubs are so in your face I can see them wearing Deanie Weenie T-shirts with the slogan "Americans eat weenies, they don't elect them to commander in chief."

If the Repukes can't find anything substantial on our candidate, they will make stuff up, just like they did on Gore.

If you doubt it, just take a look at the RNC "Democrats Indepth" page, where they have multiple smear articles prepared on the various Dem candidates:

http://www.rnc.org/Newsroom/DemsInDepth/

And, no, they don't have Wes Clark listed there... yet. But you can bet after they finish doing their research and creative writing, they will go after him just as ruthlessly as they would Dean, Kerry, or anyone else.

DTH

of the population. I think things could go a couple ways.

Lost of Dean supporters think that Dean is going to take hold of the imaginations of everyone they way he has taken hold of their own imaginations and those 13 factors will be as inconsequential to the race of the America as they are to the Dean supporters.

The other way this could go is that, indeed, several of those factors will play out to create a scenario in which it is impossible for Dean to win.

I guess we have no idea how this will really play out.

I agree with you - and hope that Dean supporters really read and take to heart the first part of your post.

I wish that it were not so, but really believe the civil union law will be featured prominentally in any RNC campaign against Dean. He will get blasted with this - and he will lose blocks of people just because of this. I don't agree with people taking that position against Dean, but believe it will be a huge factor.

:eyes:

Unpatriotic, anti-patriotic, whatever parsing you prefer. If you disbelieve Bush will do that, you don't really understand the Republicans or politics.

Unfortunately, Bush will have an easier time doing this to Dean than with certain other candidates, IMO. Even if it is, of course, complete BS.

DTH

and you concede that the truth is no obstacle for the bush cabal. It doesn't matter who the candidate is, the same "charges" will be made (if they can be made against Max Clelland, they can be made against anyone).

That's precisely why we need a candidate who can bypass traditional media channels. Dean has shown that he can raise at least as much if not more money than any other Dem. But, more importantly, he (and perhaps he alone) has shown the ability to inspire huge numbers of people who haven't been involved in politics before. They'll write letter for him, they'll print flyers at their own expense, and, when the time comes, they'll make phone calls and go door to door like nobody's supporters have ever done before.

Dean (and I think Dean alone) can run a national grassroots campaign. A door to door, neighbor to neighbor campaign, based on mousepads and shoeleather, that can bypass the bought-and-paid for media.

I realize that some people don't "get" what the big fuss about Dean is. That's fine. Different strokes for different folks. But, you can't deny that many, many people (over 100,000 meetup volunteers so far) *do* see that certain something that they find hopeful and inspiring. *That's* why Dean has the *best* chance to beat bush. (on edit) Because *these* people will work very hard to increase turnout and get the Democratic message across.

I agree, Dean will absolutely need to depend on his grassroots supporters in order to have any hope of pulling this off. It's a huge advantage, and typically one associated solely with Big Labor and the Black community (who, incidentally, have not yet signed on with Dean).

I honestly hope it's enough, if Dean is our nominee.

DTH

Together, what a powerhouse! Dean' ability to excite progressives and liberals, with, as you pointed out, the ability to raise money outside the normal channels. CLark, with his background, and all the very obvious things that brings, especialy at this point in our history, with Bush on the war path.

The more I think about it, I just don't see how they could lose. There's something for everyone. Not counting Clinton/Gore, I can't remember the last time we've (we Dems) had such positive early season "buzz" on a possible pairing like this, in a very long time.
I am actually starting to feel as though we may kick some serious Repuglian butt next year.

Nice feeling.

I still think either would be a good ticket. I just hope they keep it clean during the primaries.

I really think they can, especially since Dean will have his hands full of Gephardt and Kerry, while Clark will have his hands full of Lieberman and Edwards.

DTH

later.

kind of a "twenty-something" thing with young idealists carrying the Dean banner. One one hand - I think it's great that all of you are so "revved up" - it's kind of like the Bobby Kennedy thing all over again. But most of you seem to looking at Dean with "rose colored" glasses on. Almost as if he's some kind of "saint." You can see no flaws.

Please realize that a lot of us "old fogys" have "been there done that." Anyone over the age of 35 grew up through Watergate, the Nixon era and 3 assasinations. Sorry - but many of us tend to be quite cynical about politcs and politicians. We're (or at least I'm) just NOT going to go completely ga-ga over some candidate and throw caution to the wind. I admit I did go a little ga-ga over Clark for a few days - but then reality set in.

I have to have someone appeal to my sense of logic. You all need to talk about hard facts, issues - not some pie-in-the-sky ideas.

I don't see Dean as appealing to too many people over the age of about 30.

In Dean I see another McGovern. Idealogically pure, and a loser. By defination, the majority of the people in America are in the center, that's why it is the center. When you leave the center and go to an extreme,you give the other side the opprotunity to court the center, and believe me, they are doing it.

I am well out of my 20s and I don't think that Dean is a saint. I do think that he has inspired a bunch of people who will work very hard for him and help him bypass traditional media.

I understand that you don't see what the big deal about Dean is. But, if you refuse to recognize that, for some reason, he attracts crowds to the degree that no one else does and has managed to take advantage of some excellent timing and technological opportunities, then I have to assume that your cynicism is blinding you to reality.

If you go to a Dean MeetUp you will see that his supporters are wide-ranging in age from 18 to senior citizens.

They don't GO to Dean MeetUps. They've HEARD of them, though, and it sounds a little something like the McCarthy or Kennedy or McGovern campaigns they either vaguely remember or maybe read about in a book. And of course, as we all know, all presidential candidates are exactly like SOME presidential candidate we ran in the past (except for , who's an exciting fresh face in politics/experienced political battler, and the only guy who can defeat Bush, even though we're all ABB, right?).

I was at a meeting tonight with about 45 other Dean supporters and at 36, I was one of the youngest there. There were a small handful of young folks, but they were vastly outnumbered by the older people. Many of these people were in their 50s and older. I'm not buying that anymore.

On the Dean Blog, which could be expected to skew younger (more techie crowd), the average age based on an informal poll, is somewhere in the mid-30s.

The youngsters you see in Dean's camp are a lot of new people he's bringing into the campaign, and I applaud this -- this may be what makes the difference for Dean.

ANY and EVERY candidate will have boatloads of negative ads and press thrown at them by Bush and Co. If you rule out candidates based on possible negatives, then we might as well not run anyone.

I'm just trying to focus on the realities. And point out that some candidates are more viable than others.

DTH

1) Typical New England shithead (Pretending to be a Texan);
2) Anti-patriotic;
3) Complete foreign policy novice;
4) Spend-and-spend conservative, wants to drain the treasury and give it all to Halliburton and Bechtel;
5) From a lily-white state, out-of-touch with people-of-color(execpt the 100 or so he executed);
6) Rich patrician, out-of-touch with the poor;
7) Anti-family, he opposed civil unions;
8) Anti-elderly, wants to cut Medicare and privatize social security ;
9) What an idiotic, unpresidential man;
10) Soft on terror, 25 year business partner of the Bin Laden family;
11) He destroyed the Texas environment;
12) He dodged the draft, then deserted the Texas National Guard during wartime;
13) Flip-flopping, hypocritical opportunist (can we say "Nation Building" and "Humble Foreign Policy"??).


I don't think he's got any grounds to bitch about Dean :evilgrin:

Another pathetic and transparent attempt to piss off Dean supporters. Do you think that people that you offend will gladly embrace the candidate you support if he were to become the nominee?

I don't think that Wesley Clark would stoop to such tactics!

I'm trying to discuss (as I hear that's what we do here) certain political realities. Except for with one person who has been uniformly rude to me, I have also been very polite and responsive to everyone participating on this thread.

I'm disappointed you feel this way, IG.

DTH

<<<<Do you think that people that you offend will gladly embrace the candidate you support if he were to become the nominee?>>>>

Maybe we should send him out to build up Bush - if that's the case...

Dove - head right out to the freeper site NOW...

Despite you Dean lunkheads I (and probably everyone else here) will support Dean with 110% if he becomes the nominee.

Calling fellow DUers by an offensive term is a violation of DU rules, don't you know?

That's no way to win converts. Tsk, tsk, tsk...

"lunkhead" was said in an exasperated - but sort of kind of "affectionate" way. I just don't feel like you guys hear us sometimes.

about a 2004 Dean Debacle. This one is to important to lose. With unending war looming, more rigged voting machines being installed everyday, and media control by the right wing republicans increasing as I type this, the window of opportunity for turning this mess around is closing.

I realize that this your hypothetical list of things Dean might be accused of, but what were you thinking? I happen to be a Vermonter and an environmentalist, so clue me in.

Also, he is a fiscal conservative. He wants to balance the budget. This is a positive, after having Bush create the biggest deficit of all time.

Also, rich patrician sounds like Bush. Dean wasn't part of Skull and Bones like Bush and Kerry, but chose to not be part of the fraternity scene (I heard that he had an African American room mate at Yale). He sent his kids through public school. Did any of the other candidates send their kids through public school?

He is not anti-war, but anti-Iraq war and anti-Vietnam war (as was Clinton IIRC). I think Clark flip-flopped on his Iraq war position. I'm still not sure where he stands (like Kerry). I see that flip-flop is down there, so I don't need to cover it.

The rest of the stuff is untrue as you say, and I think irrelevant.

Again, I don't credit any of it, so I don't have the link, but it's been discussed here before. Something about nuclear waste, for one.

DTH

*

On Dean or anyone.

Suffice it to say that the attack exists, and that Bush may use it. It's not a powerful attack, IMO (since Bush is no environmentalist either), but it's one that might be levied by surrogates.

DTH

Time to turn in for the night.

Bush will be able to say he had the mettle to stay the course when wimps like Dean were too soft to make the hard decisions to engage Saddam.
At least Kerry will have something resembling credibility on this and will in many ways be immune to Bush's criticism.
Oh and it's coming, you can bet on that.

identical list of smears. Now, the assumption that you make DTH, is that Dean will be the weakest in the face of the smears. I believe the evidence is completely to the contrary. Dean has faced more smears so far in his time as gov. of vermont and during this race. All the while his support has grown steadily. He turned public opinion on Civil Unions in Vermont completely around, and subsequently won re-election.
He has been painted as an out of touch queer-lovin, big-spendin liberal by the media so far, but people from republicans to greens still think he's a great alternative to Bush. I believe 464,000+ have signed up on his website, and 150,000+ have donated to his campaign. With dedicated supporters and huge fundraising, he'll be the best prepared to combat any untruths told by bushco and the "liberal media".

on edit: split into a second paragraph.

I do think that he is more susceptible to the attacks I list above than others, however.

"Tax-and-spend" liberal is part of our nation's psyche, sadly. "New England liberal" is as well. The anti-war thing, coupled with the lack of foreign policy experience, is potentially dangerous. Etc. etc.

I've already agreed that grassroots support will be critical to a Dean victory. My question is whether that support will be enough. If he is our nominee, I sure as hell hope it is.

DTH

I can assume that Clark is at the top of your list. Has he been the strongest? Is it not just as bad to be seen as indecisive in getting into the race, wishy-washy on issues (war resolution), undevoted to democrats? I know in the NH poll (a state where candidates are well known already) posted here earlier Dean has a much better favorable/unfavorable ratio. Is that not telling? I'd like to see many more of these types of polls for more states (especially swing states, though I guess NH is one).

Note to candidate bashers- if you're going to post negatives about candidates, please do it the way I did here, within the context of the conversation. Don't bring up unrelated topics out of nowhere like "Clark loves the republicans" or "Dean has no chance!" without any discussion of how you came to that opinion. This is definitely not directed at you DTH, btw.

In the general election. I say this because he is a Southerner with a military background, which destroys the "New England liberal" avenue of attack. I say this because Clark's plan to only raise taxes on people making $200,000 or more (and btw, this was a nice innovation, IMO, to break it down by dollars rather than "richest 2%" or whatever) will be a much easier sell than raising taxes on everyone (even if it's pitched as merely rolling back the entire Bush tax cut), and that it will be harder to paint him as a tax-and-spend liberal. I say this because Clark's status as a general will make it a LOT harder to paint him as "weak on defense," although they will certainly try to paint him as "weak on terror," just like they did with Cleland. I say this because his past non-partisan history and willingness to work with Republicans, while being a liability in the primary, is actually a benefit in the general election.

Dean is doing a fantastic job mobilizing in NH, and they were already somewhat familiar with him, being from over-the-border in Vermont. I think he really does impress people, especially when he has the resources and the time to campaign intensively in an area, like he has in NH. That said, I still believe he'll be easier to smear than some (such as Clark, Edwards, maybe Gephardt but I'm sketchy on him), and that it will be harder and harder for him to educate voters in larger states, especially as the clock starts to run down and the money advantage Bush has starts to make itself felt.

This is definitely not directed at you DTH, btw.

Thanks. :-)

DTH

but I still think you underestimate them. I see the Clark campaign's seeming dismissal of the Draft Clark people is a huge mistake. Who do they think are going to gather all the petition signatures they need? Who's going to go door to door canvassing in every town in the country.

"I think he really does impress people, especially when he has the resources and the time to campaign intensively in an area, like he has in NH."
" it will be harder and harder for him to educate voters in larger states, especially as the clock starts to run down and the money advantage Bush has starts to make itself felt."

I think that the Dean campaign's plan to have 2 million grassroot volunteers by next years election (which I see as completely possible, I have learned not to doubt their ability to meet goals) Will be so much more important than any number of TV ads Bush will be able to throw our way. Think about it. 2 million people working for Dean. ~250 million people in america. How many people will they(we? you seem to be willing to work for Dean if he gets the nomination) be able to reach on a personal level. 125 people each isn't a crazy proposition. How many of those people didn't vote last election? Sure I'm idealistic, but isn't that what being a democrat is about? Sticking to our ideals, and working towards them? I hope a more engaged electorate is an ideal of everyone here.

They're heavily integrated into his campaign. The media just bit into the bitter stories of two or three people jealous that they weren't involved at the level they wanted. I think Clark will have plenty of grassroots support...we had huge Meetups yesterday.

Obviously, he's not in Dean's league yet in terms of grassroots. I think the potential is there, however.

If Dean gets the nomination, I really hope he does get 2 MM volunteers. I will volunteer for him and donate to him myself, assuming he didn't go nuclear on Clark on his way to the nomination. He will have my vote regardless.

DTH

As boring as I personally find him :)

http://slate.msn.com/id/2089813/

And know- KNOW- that there is not a human being alive that Bush/Rove will not try to slime with everything under the sun. Dean has as much chance as anyone else of escaping said slime.

--because Clark will overtake Dean and, I believe, will become the Dem candidate (and President). There is know way that the Democratic powers that be will allow Dean to win the nomination, and get easily defeated by the BPF (Bush Propaganda Forces).

With Clark, we don't have that problem. They've already thrown everything they can at him, yet nobody can deny that he is Presidential. He commands respect--Dean doesn't, at least Presidentially.

and otherwise! Dean is very well respected by many who want him
to become our President!

it's bush who is not respected.

who needs Republicans?

Shall we proceed to shred Clark?

You love making baseless accusations against Clark. You would know.

Never, not once have I started a thread with the sole intent to bash Clark - not once. But in your estimation anyone who asks any questions or doesn't worship the ground Clark walks on is bashing.

Clark was involved in our dirty work in Haiti, in Latin America at Waco--his actions at Pristina are enough not to entrust him with the presidency--he was fired from the Pentagon for christ sakes. This is who is is, this is what we know about him. He can be coached in all the proper buzzwords and recite the right dialogue, but he has no political history in the Democratic party and it is our responsibility to know what we can and not be dazzled by his military status as if showing up the Bush tard's juvenile chickenhawk antics are all that matters.

I believe the only thing Bush has to do is emphasize Dean's desire to raise taxes on everyone.

Do you honestly believe that Dean can convince my friend, and independent, that taking away his $2000 child tax credit will benefit him? C'mon!

has a lot of People on Board who care about this Country and the services she provides.

And Dean didn't say he would "raise taxes"...whose talking point is that?

Then he'll run thru w like crap thru a goose.

His Temper"

thanks for the humor. Too bad it is not that simple.

He needs an apparatus in place similar to Clinton's "War Room." Every time the Repugs trot out another "northeast Democratic candidate" cliche, the War Room can counter with instant rebuttal. That's how Big Dog won...

On top of the traditional Democratic states. He also carried MT and CO, which are tougher now.

The 2000 census also did us no favors.

I can see Dean maybe taking WV, and MAYBE taking MO, but the others will be extremely difficult for him, IMO.

DTH

Where on earth did you get that? The question can be asked about his stance on medical issues.

John

DTH they are gonna do that to any of the candiates believe me, we havent had the type of situation with your type of candiate though. You know how sick they are.

Although he'll have to substitute the "New England Liberal" for everyone else but Dean, Kerry and Lieberman.

Get use to it - we pretty much heard the same things when Clinton ran for President and he still won!!

:D

is that NO candidate is "safe" from mischaracterizations, smears, plain lies and dirty tricks.

IMO Dean is the best suited to stand up to all that shit, both in the campaign and after the election.

Eloriel

been around forever. That's why I hope they stick around - as insurance policies. Much as I like Clark - i have to admit that both Clark AND Dean are somewhat "dangerous" but exciting candidates.

Please point to where I said any candidate would be "safe."

That said, it is possible to draw a line regarding what candidates would weather attacks the best, and/or what attacks are least likely to "stick."

I would like to know why you believe Dean is the best to weather the attacks, and the least likely to have the attacks stick.

DTH

1) Typical New England liberal -- To those in the South and Midwest - YES

2) Anti-patriotic -- He is not unpatriotic, but those who supported the war and many others will fall for the ads that say he is.

3) Complete foreign policy novice True

4) Tax-and-spend liberal, wants to raise EVERYONE'S taxes No, but his open desire to repeal the tax-cut will not sit well with alot of the middle class and most of the upper class

5) From a lily-white state, out-of-touch with people-of-color No, but BushCo. will try to paint him as out of touch with Hispanics

6) Rich patrician, out-of-touch with the poor He is from a very wealthy background -- Should not be too big of a deal though since all Presidential candidates are rich

7) Anti-family, he supported civil unions -- I am glad he did, but this could cost him many, many states

8) Anti-elderly, wants to cut Medicare and raise social security age Again, not true. But... he has made comments in the past that will be brought up and played in ads

9) What an angry, unpresidential man This one could play in his favor. If things don't improve

10) Soft on terror, Uday/Qusay/Hamas This is a point that will be hammered on and will hurt him

11) He destroyed the Vermont environment He did not. But.... Many Vermont Greens have criticized him and BushCo. will turn that into a weapon

12) He dodged the draft, then went skiing and did construction Ouch -- This is going to make for some very nasty anti-Dean ads

13) Flip-flopping, hypocritical opportunist Not that much, but one of Bush's likable point (from the average American perspective) is his determination and stubborness. Dean will come off as unsure, while Bush will appear forceful and sure of his decision

----

I am supporting Clark, but I do really like Dean. I just don't like his chances against Rove and $200 million.

they'll be calling Clark a dsiagrace to the military, mark my words.

If they believe that junk, then they'll believe junk about Clark, too. There is no candidate who is unRovable.

1) Dean's campaign has demonstrated plenty of talent in controlling the conversation. He can demonstrate conservative credentials with his gun positions, balanced budgets, the fact that he cut personal income taxes in VT twice, and that the progressives were so angry at his moderation that they ran a candidate against him in his re-election race.
2) Anyone we run will be smeared with this.
3) So is Bush. A good VP can innoculate him to a large extent.
4) Again, anyone we run will be smeared with this, no matter what the nuance of his/her policy may be. If taxes go up on anyone at all, they will be labelled this way.
5) It'll be up to the Democratic Party to decide of they want to close ranks around our nominee. He's making efforts, and with the help of his primary opponents to unify the party, I don't see african americans fleeing to Bush.
6) Same for Bush.
7) If Dean is an extremist on this issue, so too is Cheney, who claimed (in a debate with Joe Lieberman) that states should do whatever they can to accomodate same-sex relationships. Dean's camp will stress that this isn't marriage, and that it's an issue of fundamental fairness. These lines of thought, combined with Cheney's position, can dampen any negative effect from this issue. I can see the Dean campaign running the clip from the debate in TV ads.
8) This is distortion from the other campaigns. "Desperation" comes to mind. To "consider" a policy proposal is not the same as to "advocate" that policy proposal.
9) Bush won't have much room to criticize on "unpresidential-ness." Coke, drunk driving, the image of not taking things seriously.. these didn't impede him.
10) Admittedly, this issue will require some skillful communication with the voting public. Dean will need to point-out that the GOP has sunk America into a fiscal black hole in Iraq, rather than adequately funding security measures here at home.. where people actually live. When voters learn that public venues, bridges, power plants, etc (things that impact their lives in a very concrete way) are not protected adequately, and when Dean proposes policies to remedy these defensive soft spots, he can gain the public's confidence. His prophetic Iraq position, combined with an appropriate VP selection, can also add to public confidence.
11) haha.. I don't think that Bush will want to bring-up the environment. His record is even more dismal; his strategists would be downright stupid to want to play ball on a field slanted in our favor.
12) And Bush will bring-up this topic.. riiight..
13) This will require some explanation. This is kinda related to #8 in some cases.

One other thing to note: George Soros's ACT is going to put together $75 million for an unprecedented GOTV operation in Democrat-strong districts. I don't recall where I read it, but $75 million is several times more than what we're ever spent on GOTV in one election season. Whomever we nominate, that's a HUGE help. Considering the new campaign finance laws, this is perfectly legal, and frees-up our nominee's funds to go to other places.. like the TV ad war.

Another thing to note: Dean's campaign is relying on getting new voters to participate in the process. Thus far, all signs point to this strategy working. At any MeetUp, anywhere from 1/2 to 2/3 are people who are new to politics. Dean's campaign has raised thousands from people who have never donated to political campaigns ever. And at most Dean rallies, many of the people there are also political novices. If the election comes-down to another 50-50 death match (and I think it will), having an additional turnout of a mere 3 million voters (about a 2% increase) would give our ticket a serious edge in the electoral race. Dean's the only one I see so far bringing so many new voters into the process. The true test of this ability will come in the primaries and caucuses. If Dean wins Iowa and New Hampshire on the basis of tons of new voters, he might very well be onto something major here.

Having said all of this, if February comes around and polls show that Clark is consistently beating Bush while Dean is consistently losing to Bush, I will switch in a heartbeat to Clark at the TX caucus. I want that idiot out of the White House, and ANY of our candidates would be far superior to the chimp in chief. Given Clark's GOP past and my related mistrust, I am still more than willing to take a gamble with Clark in order to topple the chimp.

As a Dean supporter, I am more than willing to admit that Clark could turn-out to be a very, very fine candidate for our party. In fact, if I could combine the grassroots force of Dean with the supposed electability and credentials of Clark, we'd have the perfect candidate. Instead, we may have to settle for a near-perfect ticket. Dean-Clark or Clark-Dean would be excellent.

But part of the presidency is about electability, I don't think Dean has it.

"When confronted with a dedicated band of right wing ideologues, too many Americans have stopped participating, stopped voting, and stopped believing that they can change America.

And we in politics have not given our people a reason to vote or a reason to participate. We have slavishly spewed sound bites, copying each other while saying little. We raise millions of dollars and each year make lofty promises, while every year the struggles of ordinary Americans increase and fewer Americans vote. Our politicians, many of them good people, have been paralyzed by their fear of losing office. Our leaders have developed a vocabulary which has become meaningless to the American people.

There is no greater example of this than a self-described conservative Republican president who creates the greatest deficits in history of America. Or a President who boasts of a Clear Skies Initiative which allows far more pollution into our air. Or a President who co-opts from an advocacy organization the phrase "No Child Left Behind," while paying for irresponsible tax cuts by cutting children's health care.

Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."

The history of our nation is clear: At every turn when there has been an imbalance of power, the truth questioned, or our beliefs and values distorted, the change required to restore our nation has always come from the bottom up from our people.

And so, while the President raises $4 million more tonight to maintain his agenda, we will not be silent.

He calls his biggest fundraisers Rangers and Pioneers.

But today, we stand together with thousands in Burlington, Vermont and tens of thousands more, standing with us right now in every state in this nation. And we call ourselves, simply, Americans.

And we stand today in common purpose to take our country back."--- Gov. Howard Dean

AND CLARK WOULD MAKE AN EXCELLENT VP.

just two or three issues.

I wouldn't expecta barrage like that.

I'd rather expect just a few items that Bush repeats endlessly until every voter knows what he stands for.

Governor Dean and I just have some honest disagreements. He's a good man. We just disagree.

1. I think I was right to cut taxes. He thinks it's right to raise them back up again.

2. I think a marriage should be between a man and a woman. He supports civil unions for homosexual folks.

3. I think it's important to keep medicare strong, and I urge congress to finally pass my prescription drug plan. Governor Dean once called medicare the worst government program ever.

I'm not saying he's a bad man. He's a good man. We just have honest disagreements.

I think you're right on every one but the unpatriotic thing. I don't think he's unpatriotic. All the others were dead on.

I really didn't know Dean grew up filthy rich. Since I hate rich people, he'd never get my vote. I prefer guys who are self made, were number one in their class at a prestigious school and a Rhodes scholar.

"I really didn't know Dean grew up filthy rich. Since I hate rich people, he'd never get my vote."

*The Bush smear*

1) Typical friend of Bill and Hill aka Clintonian/DLC plant;
2) No experience in Politics;
3) Complete Political novice;
4) No clear agenda on Taxes or anything for that matter;
5) From the confederate states-out of touch with people of Color;
6) His recent praise for Bush and company;
7) Anti-family, he supports gays in the military;
8) Anti-elderly, history of voting for Republicans;
9) What an angry, unexperienced man;
10) Soft on terror, wants to cut pentagon budget;
11) He used DU and targeted civilians, involved in WACO;
12) He voted for Bush 1 and Reagan;
13) Flip-flopping, hypocritical opportunist.

IN fact, they'll use Wes's own words of praise for Bush in campaign commercials to show what a 'phony' he is. They'll paint him out to be an opportunist who ran 'for the hell of it' and didn't even know what political party he belonged to until recently.

The Rethugs will trash them all...

They will try to besmearch his military record since THAT is what they would consider the most threatening aspect of Clark.

I agree with most of your points about Dubya versus Dean, but not all. But I do think that Dubya will attempt to use his 200 million to take the good Doctor apart, piece by piece, and he has a reasonable chance of getting away with it - especially with the conservative talk radio and cable TV hosts also in his back pocket.

John Kerry has far fewer holes than any candidate in this field, and wins any character test between Dubya and himself in a rout. He's also the candidate most prepared at this point to actually serve as President, and move the nation out of harm's way while rebuilding our alliances around the world.

I didn't buy the outsider critique from Arnold, and I don't buy it from Dean or Clark. Hell, Bush ran as an outsider. What America needs in 2005 is extensive, wide-ranging experience, and time-tested character. Nobody in this field brings that mix together in quite the way that John Kerry can.

From the RNC website:

Who Is John Kerry? A Massachusetts Liberal Out Of Touch With America.
http://www.rnc.org/Newsroom/RNCResearch/Research012303.htm

Missed Votes - Kerry 61%
http://www.gop.com/newsroom/rncresearch/missedvotes100303.htm

Kerry at Odds With AARP on Social Security?
http://www.rnc.org/Newsroom/RNCResearch/research081403-1.htm

Kerry Whopper Watch
http://www.rnc.org/Newsroom/RNCResearch/research081403-3.htm

Kerry's "Gore Problem"
http://www.rnc.org/Newsroom/RNCResearch/research061203.htm

Bush is the definition of the word. He wouldn't dare take that position, considering what a mess he's made of our foreign relations and policies.

But if Rove can't be taken down for his leak or some other illegal actvity....then count on the dirtiest of the dirty campaigns.
But the media may not be with them this time, which will make a HUGE difference.

I think Dean should worry about getting the media on his side. That has all but stifled good people like Kucinich and raised others to the heights. The media will make the difference I'm afraid to say.

I see the media and the e-voting fraud potential as being the main obstacles to any candidate.

whole Democratic field. And most of all that is hypocritical and hypothetical bullcrap that is nothing but smears.

Also, if the Clark campaign expects that Clark's resume is going to protect or inoculate him somehow, then I don't want that campaign to be running the show. The campaign against Sen. Cleland in Georgia proves you guys wrong.

Also, I noticed some folks talking about McGovern. I'll tell you right now that Dean is nothing like McGovern. McGovern is a liberal idealist. Dean is a moderate realist. Clark is whatever Bush wants to paint him as unless he paints himself. McGovern's campaign was impoverished. Dean's campaign has broken all fundraising records for Democrats. Clark's campaign just started raising money and is currently impoverished. McGovern is a war hero and then a Senator. Dean had a back condition that kept him out of Vietnam and instead got his medical degree. Clark is a war hero and then a General.

The only similarity I see between Dean and McGovern is that they both were able to motivate the troops to fight. I hope Clark can, also.

I see most of these easily dismissed and I am hard pressed to believe the right-wingers will even approach Dean's upbringing in an affluent family. :-)

The thing I wonder about though, and I'll be amazed if you hadn't thought of this DTH--being one with clear vision and all---do you think if Clark were to win the nom they wouldn't be providing footage/clip of him praising Bush Co? I think that would be brutally devastating.

I think if we got both of our candidate on the ticket each of their perceived weaknesses would be covered. It is what I am hoping for.

Sure we've got some purists one way or the other that would loathe such a ticket but, frankly, I am not worried about the fringe purists, I want the bulk of American voters.

Just my thoughts. Success to all our Dems!!

Julie

Do you actually think they will not make up similar s**t about Clark?, Kerry?, Gep.......

The charges will vary by the candidate but the number and strength with which they assert them will not.

Better to look for who is fiesty enough to stand up to the assault. It is comming anyway you go.