Dean Supporters Afraid of Clark: Ask him not to run

DUers,
Somebody emailed this to me from a web-site. I think it is funny that Dean Supporters would actually ask Clark not to run for office. I guess they are realizing that Dean can't win the nomination if Clark is in the race :)

http://folkbum.blogspot.com/
"Dear General Clark,

On the off-chance that you stumble across my site (or, if you're like me and Google your name pretty often to see what people are writing about you), I would like to explain why at this time I do not support your entering the Democratic presidential primary race.

Let me get the basics out of the way: The invisible primary we are in the midst of--as you probably have read in my archives--is for donors, endorsement, and activists. You know, organization stuff.

By mid-August, when you say you will announce, the good staffers will be taken (the ones Lieberman's letting go aren't that good), as well as volunteer networks and big-name endorsements. If you wait until then, you face a big battle for name recognition, campaign structure, and, in a serious way, money.

But wait, you say, Bill Clinton didn't enter the race until late 1991. Jimmy Carter didn't break out until well into the primaries themselves.

This is true. But the primary season is a different animal now. We will know who the candidate is (unless there's some monkey business with superdelegates and whatnot, leading to a brokered convention) by March 3. That's only about eight months from now.

This front-loaded primary season makes it essentially impossible for anyone to start slow and gain momentum. You have to start strong and stay strong. You could maybe win in Washington, DC if you campaign there--many other candidates are skipping that one, at least officially--but that might anger Iowans the next week and the New Hampshirese the week after that for undercutting their primacy (which is why the others are skipping DC). But DC's vote is mostly symbolic; the big prizes are elsewhere. Will you have time to be strong in IA, NH, and SC?

I know you've got a growing group of Meetuppers, who, as I know from first-hand experience, can really help a campaign. But the five months between Labor Day and Iowa will go by very quickly. No amount of people can make up for lost time.

But there's more, Gen. Clark. I also think that if you jump into this campaign as late as it seems you might, you will anger a whole lot of people who might be wondering why you have been avoiding it. Why, they might ask (and, heck, I've heard it asked already), should you be allowed not to have to campaign like the rest of them?

I know this is historically early yet. And if you announced your candidacy tomorrow, I think a lot of people could forgive you. But to wait until September? Some will get tired of waiting for you; others will just be offended that you took so much time.

And I personally worry about your being seen as the "savior," as I don't think Democrats need to be seen as people who need saving. We have nine great candidates right now, all of whom would be far better than the Whopper. But the pundits and especially the right-leaning cable and radio folks will see this as another opportunity to bemoan the quality of candidates that Democrats can field. Even if their statements are designed to contrast these candidates with how formidable you are instead--and I do believe you would be a formidable opponent to the Whopper--the overall impression the audience is left with is what a bunch of losers Democrats are in general.

One of the key reasons I support Howard Dean (so, yeah, okay, take this all with a grain of salt) is that Dean is partisan. He stirs up this opposition party to actually go out there and offer some opposition. That helps to restore my faith as a member of this opposition party. I think it's good that Dean is firing up Democrats, especially the disaffected ones who had given up politics or who had avoided politics altogether.

Unlike a lot of people who worry that Dean at the top of the ticket would be bad for Democrats down-ballot, I think Dean's ability to energize Democrats--not just independents and former Greens--will be very helpful to Democrats down-ballot (and you have to admit that former Greens won't vote for Republican Senate candidates or even dogcatchers).

But you, General Clark, have a very non-partisan appeal. That means a lot of Republicans might vote for you. This could work in your favor, but what does it do for Democrats down the ballot? I actually think this is an issue many Democrats will face, as a whole lot of Republicans may vote "D" at the top of the ticket as an anti-Whopper vote. But without a candidate who does a good job mobilizing the base, a la Dean, will there be enough Democratic voters to elect Dems to other offices?

Take Wisconsin as an example. We elected Democrat Jim Doyle as governor in 2002. But many of his votes came from Republicans who did not like or trust the incumbent Scott McCallum (who inherited the job from Tommy Thompson) because, frankly, he was not very good and that was widely acknowledged, even in Republican circles. But the state Senate was taken by Republicans, and Republicans strengthened their hold on the Assembly. Doyle--unlike what either of his primary challengers Tom Barret and Kathleen Falk might have done--did not energize the base, and those other races fell to Republicans. I worry that the same will happen nationally with a Clark candidacy.

Finally, and this is perhaps my most important point (as a regular reader of mine, Gen. Clark, you must know I always save the best for last), as I said above, right now you are seen as non-partisan and impartial. Your criticism of the Whopper and his policies is therefore laden with credibility and regarded highly by the public and, more importantly, the media.

The second you declare a party affiliation or candidacy for president, all of that goes right out the window. Immediately. You lose a great deal of your current appeal just by declaring.

You are a vital and necessary voice of reason against the Whopper and the pack of liars he has working for him. People listen to you and trust you. But once you start playing politics, your attacks will be seen as partisan. Your opinions will seem politically motivated. Your credibility will be diminished.

Don't believe me? Look at what they're doing to Bob Graham. His experience as a governor and senator are unparalleled and his tenure on the intelligence committee gives him, of all our candidates, a great deal of credibility and stature when it comes to the intelligence issues currently in the news. The media, though, preface every statement of his with "Graham, who is also running for president," as if to say, "grain of salt, please." And the Wurlitzer ignores every point he scored against the Whopper on Russert this weekend instead to focus on his calling "deceit" a five-letter word instead of six (as opposed to the three-letter "lie"). It's partisan and petty, but it's what you, too will be reduced to.

General Clark, I implore you to retain your current status. You are valuable and needed by Democrats, but that value would be seriously undermined were you to become Candidate Clark instead of General Clark."

is you taking one person's word to assume what a whole group think.

We are over the "a DEAN SUPPORTER said". Give us a break. Which Dean supporter? I know you guys are big on the 'tell a lie long enough and it will become true', but this one is getting old.

Leave it be and learn to play fair. No true Dean supporter wrote this and you may even know it. Any true Dean supporter wants the best of all candidates to shine and bring forth the truth, which is what Clark is doing and certainly what Dean is doing. More POWER TO THEM BOTH.

So, if this is a true Dean supporter, show us the goods, or stop trying to spread false rumors. Its so "Republican" sounding.

If most Republicans can only win by buying elections and computer equipment to falsify results, then they are liars and anti-American.

That is shameful and if Republicans REALLY believe in morality, they will take a look at the unbelievable epidemic of immorality taking place in their party. No win is worth ANYTHING if it isnt fair and square. Look at the election of 2000 and the aftermath coming from it.

Shance,

can you come clean and please tell me where
you got the notion that Clark people are advocating
"tell a lie long enough and it will become true"?

That's a hell of an allegation and I'd like to know
where you got it.

Furthermore, folkbum admitted
the letter was for real so you might as well print a
retraction and an apology to the original poster while
you are at it.

Calling Clark supporters liars is not particularly
useful or progressive.

It has been equated alot with our current Administration and their quest to invade Iraq.

If you read my post again I think you'll see my point, however charged, was I believe voteclark's post was not beneficial information, in fact I think it was devisive and pretty agenda-driven. Its great to support Clark, as I said in my post. He exudes some much needed courage and conviction to get the truth out on what is ocurring with this Iraq debacle. He is one of the few speaking out in a time when there are seemingly too few truth seekers. HOWEVER, what is not okay is to pull a third party stunt he said/she said stuff which does nothing other than attempt to divide Dems even more.

PLEASE NOTE I would say the same if I saw a Dean post that was spreading unfair rumors and was seeking to divide and distract.

There is constructive criticism backed by facts and then there is cheapshot flamethrowing information that is only useful to create unecessary doubt and distract from our real issues at hand, namely working to unify the Democratic party and coming together to oust the Bush Administration in 2004.

Folkbum came out and said his post was for
real. The original poster wasn't lying.
Can I get at least a little acknowledgement of that?

:)

except of this article. We have copywrite rules here. Edit down to 4 to 5 paragraphs.

As to the article. Clark does owe it to us to make up his mind (I mean us citizens not us Dean supporters). He shouldn't pull a Cuomo he needs to announce well before September both to run a decent campaign if he chooses to run and to let other run them if he chooses not to.

As for the size, sorry, but I didn't write it.

I don't Clark owes anybody anything. It anything, we owe him. He served this country his entire life.

I honestly think it is silly to announce a candidacy in June, that is like way too far ahead. People will get tired of you quickley. Why not annouce in the day after the election for President! LOL. Come'on, how many people have won the Democratic nomination that was not a sitting president, and won the nomination and election that announced in June. I think none.
If Clark can't get past at least 8 of the 9 contenders, he should not even enter the race in my opinion. This is what he needs to find out. Most polls place him near Dean and Kerry. Which is good. He should announce officially in mid-August. But I think the week before August is the appropiate time to announce.

J4Clark

both planned their runs for years. Carter ran from 73 on. He also announced very early. Clinton wanted to run in 88 and decided at the last minute to wait.

Gore announced his 2000 run in June of 99 you can look it up.

Also this is almost August not June and Clark wants to wait until September. If he waits he hurts every candidate. He needs to decide.

... who has never even run for public office. that makes him even less qualified than Ralph Nader and Al Sharpton.

in Clark we have a man who apparently wants to be chief executive, but is too wishy-washy to make up his mind.

or maybe he has made up his mind, but is playing some kind of cowardly game by not publicly declaring.

I don't support Clark because he is a General. I support Clark other reasons.

1) He graduated first in his class and is a Rhoads scholar and has degrees in political science, economics, and philosophy.

2) He is right on the issues

3) He has the knowledge about how to use the military to best defend the people of the United States

4) He has excellent connections with leaders all over the world which helps in promoting economic security interests in the United States

5) He has and respect by all members of society. Including even some Republicans which can move legislation and promote education, women and minority rights, enviromential legislation, and economic reform.

6) He speaks well and clearly. This adds respect and helps others work together within the country and with the world to promote the general interests of the nation and people everywhere.

7) He adds credibility to the United States which has been badly damaged by the current adminisration.

8) He has experience in the White House. He served as second in charge of the Office of Management and Budget, which sets the United States Budget.

9) He doesn't just shoot his mouth off and say stupid things for political reasons that serve no purpose but self promotion

10) He can weaken Bush on the two most important issues that the voters vote on. 1) National Security 2) The Economy. Clark has 20 years of experience on national issues, Bush has four years. Clark has written a balanced budget for the United States and the economy stinks and is getting worse under Bush.

J4Clark

I don't care if he waits until Super Tuesday. He is not more electable than Al Gore. Draft someone who has won an election. If he wins the nomination, I'll vote for him. If he can't win the nomination, stop pushing this tripe. Either run or get the hell out of the way.

He also has less political experience than Bush. I tire of posters here disqualifying Clark because he's never been on a ballot.

I don't see anything on his site giving people permission to use his stuff they way you did. I also don't see a copywrite symbol but don't you usually have to assume no permission unless it is given?
On edit. I just checked the Daily Howler site and it has no copywrite symbol either but I know that is copywrited. You need to check this out and get real permission I think. DU can be sued over this.

I have to be in some of the things I do. Copyright laws are designed to protect someone from using intellectual property for profit. Since it is not intended by the user to make a profit off the material, it is not in violation of copyright laws. Further, it is a public site. DU can not be sued. That has already been decided. Go ahead and try to sue me, lol. It will not hold up.


J4Clark

I am not trying to be a jerk here but I also don't want the rules to be violated. As rules go this is big. I will say this. I alerted your post and nothing has happened so you may well be right in regards to this article.

On edit. For those of us with dial up the size is also a problem. By posting the whole thing you make us scroll down all that text and download all that text each and everytime we check this thread for replies. If you have DSL or its equivalent that isn't a problem for you but it is for us.

By making false claims and reports about people for other candidates and putting flames on anyone that has another candidate?
Why are you so negitive all the time. Let things be. We should not choose a candidate based who is most negitive candidate. I don't have much hope for Dean if that who supports him.
It doesn't take anyone very long to see the pattern that when someone says something positive about another candidate other then Dean they get flamed. That is so wrong!
J4Clark

that I get some sort of an apology from you on this? You accused me of spreading false stories in regard to this thread and I was correct. I was correct that this was copyrighted material, I was right that you didn't have permission to do what you did when you did it, and I was right that those combined to violate the rules.

thus needs no link.

If this letter is from elsewhere, please provide a link. That way, the original site gets credit for the info.

. . . mdmc, I actually did write this letter, not the guy who posted it.

Oh, forget it. I should know better than to feed the trolls.

But, dude, he really did attribute it. And it's all here on my site:
http://folkbum.blogspot.com

Something smells here......

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

...which means you aren't supposed to cite it in its entirety.

That is bad in an English Paper, I agree. But not illegal unless I am selling it. IS this really why you come to DU to debate proper format and copyright laws? Why don't you promote your candidate?

J4Clark

...it's the board rules, perhaps you need to go review them.

in case you haven't noticed, we DO support our candidates. You come here with no posts, a fake letter, and support for a guy that isn't even running!

Free Republic, which could be thought of as DU's conservative counterpart, almost lost everything because they used the same BS "logic" you employ concerning copyright laws. The rules are there to keep the site alive.

these sites are "rated" by the number of visitors. If this letter was not created by you, please link where you "copied" it from. That way, www.dumbletter.com gets credit for this tripe.

but like they said, we DO have copyright rules here. This letter IS copyrighted.

IF he wants to be elected.

You can't win it if your not in it.

Learn to campaign. Politically, that is.

Dean is a great candidate. Let the others run also. Democrats are not the status quo (roll back) party of the GOP. Bush would just McCainize anyone in the GOP who dared speak against him. He would label their wives addicts and their kids miscreants and his wealthy globalist backers would steamroller over them. That's not what the democrats are about. Thank God.

Come one come all.

I'm for Edwards, but I'm not afriad of the competition. I also think Edwards/Clark would be the ticket of a lifetime.

As the author of the above, I will attest to the following:

1. The letter is real. No, I haven't printed it and put a stamp on it and sent it on its way to Arkansas, but it's real.

2. It is copyrighted. But I, like most bloggers, am okay with the use of work as long as it it not for profit and with proper attribution. I have a general dislike for people who quote entire articles on discussion boards (I don't know how common that is around here; this is my first time posting at DU) and would rather everyone just link and quote the juicy bits of any article.

3. I am a real Dean supporter, not some Republican troll. If you don't believe me, read my whole site, not just the letter. But I do not claim to represnt the Dean community as a whole.

4. I am in no way trying to diminish Clark's stature as a public figure (as I said, he is is critical to our success in beating back the Whopper's claims of superiority on defense and security issues), and I am well aware of his Rhodes-scholar education and executive experience. But the man has never run an election campaign, and a bunch of exuberant supporters in cyberspace does not a campaign committee make. I have a hard time going ga-ga over a guy without even the faintest notion of how he will run. I have real concerns as well that a Clark run will damage both his public image and the Democrats in general (don't ask me to eplain how again, as it's all explained in the letter).

5. I am not scared of a Clark run because he will draw off Dean supporters or somehow hurt Dean. If anything, Dean's supporters are more committed to their guy than anyone else's supporters, and no one's entering the race will change that.

6. There's a very good reason to start your candidacy early: Front-loaded primaries. My point about Carter (and it holds true as well for Clinton, who lost NH in 1992, if not Iowa, though I don't have time to double check--I'm sure I'll get spanked if I'm wrong) is that he was able to start slow and build momentum in the primaries. No one has that advantage this year. Period. And Clark has missed, by the time he declares, eight months of fundraising time.

Gotta leave for work, but I will check back in later, see where this is going. It's kind of fun being the subject of rampant speculation . . .

:hi:

just sick of hearing about Dean who cannot beat Bush and is more conservative than Lieberman if you look at his RECORD. We have 9 candidates and its sad that people like Kucinich, Braun, and Sharpton TRUE liberals are passed over for Yale blue blood

but you gotta serve somebody. Support your guys (and gal!); I'll vote for any of them in the general. And welcome to DU!

I read your reply and visited your site, but what do you think of Dean/Clark? I fused a couple images together of Dean/Clark into an image (seeing is believing). How do I insert the image here? I'm thinking of sending it to the Dean hdqtrs.

I would love to see Clark hand Cheney his big-time ass on a platter.

But I hesitate for two reasons:

1. As I outlined in my original letter, the moment Clark becomes political, his credibility plummets. He's no longer objective but partisan.

2. Dean needs to do two things with his VP choice: He needs to show that he can play with the beltway crowd while not choosing a total insider (he's got to maintain that outsider feel somewhat); and he needs to strike a delicate balance between hawkish and dovish on defense. If he takes another anti-Iraq war pol as his running mate, he opens himself up to a world of hurt. But if he takes a hawk (or someone perceived as such, as Clark might be given the title "General"--remember, it's the perception that's the key) he could lose too much of his base and prompt a Green run. Tricky, I know.

Me, I like John Edwards right now. But if it's to happen, Edwards needs to start some contrition soon on his pro-Iraq war vote. If he does, he should be just about right for the spot. (Additional Edwards advantages: $, a great economic plan, $, southern balance to the ticket, $, and a youthful-enough appearance to suggest that it could be a 16-year administration.)

If not Edwards, try Bill Richardson. Bob Graham on the outside. And I have no idea bout posting pictures; if anyone with that knowledge is still reading . . . ?

as I know him thru the meetups, as does a couple other Dean volunteers here. I will let them identify themselves if they choose to do so. folkbum in fact signed on to Dean campaign as a volunteer very early on, and is doing a great job while holding down a full time job. DU is lucky to have him respond, and I look forward to see any future posts by him. I hope people realize his blog letter to Clark was written soley by him, and doesn't represent the views of all Dean volunteers even though it was very well written.

Love the name and the song.

<<5. I am not scared of a Clark run because he will draw off Dean supporters or somehow hurt Dean. If anything, Dean's supporters are more committed to their guy than anyone else's supporters, and no one's entering the race will change that.>>

See my post below with letters from Dean supporters who would bolt if Clark declares.

:dem:

person who may have appealed for Gen. Clark not to run. I, as a Dean supporter, welcome him running. I think he could add a lot to the race. And by the way, I don't think he would hurt Dean as much as he might hurt Kerry (only my opinion) who has been running on his military background. I also think that Clark would appeal more in the south which hurts Graham and Edwards. He may take a few from Dean but as a whole I think our supporters are pretty committed.

You are right in thinking that his campaign will hurt Kerry. He will affect all the insider candidates. There support will collapse as the technocrats rush to support their new mini-Dean.

This is partly what is keeping Clark out of the race. Much of the support he needs to run in the primary is currently tied up with, or aligned to, other insider candidates.

for 2002? Oh yeah...it was one of the DLC establishment insiders. What was his name again...the guy from Vermont?

I don't speak for the Dean supporters, but I know that I would be happy to see Clark run if 3 of the Democrats currently running would drop out. Granted, the field was crowded in 1976...but one has to raise a hell of alot more money now than in 1976. I even heard Carter state on an interview that if he had to raise the amount of money needed to run the campaign needed to win today, he would not want to run even if he was as young as he was in 76.

It was easier to break out of a crowded field as the little known underdog in the 70's and 80's than it is today.

a lot of Dean supporters are ready to switch their support to Clark if he runs. Don't take my word for it. Read the letters on the draft Clark petition. They are very enlightening..
http://www.draftwesleyclark.com/supporters.htm
snip:
What I've read about you so far has gotten me excited and hopeful. I'm looking for someone to run for President who has socially liberal values but who will bring common sense back to our domestic economy by reducing the deficit and balancing the budget. I also value and have pride in your military service, since I am tired of the old (false) saw that Democrats are anti-military and weak on foreign policy. I agree with the stance you outlined in The American Prospect on the importance of multilateralism in fighting terrorism. I have been a Howard Dean supporter and donator, mainly because of his ability and willingness to directly confront Bush; but I like what I've seen of you even more. If you will join the field of Presidential hopefuls, let America see you and know what you stand for, I will switch support and donate to your cause. If I weren't going to be busy with a new baby, as well as a 4-year-old son, I would enthusiastically volunteer to work on your campaign, the first one I've ever felt this strongly about.

snip:
What I've read about you so far has gotten me excited and hopeful. I'm looking for someone to run for President who has socially liberal values but who will bring common sense back to our domestic economy by reducing the deficit and balancing the budget. I also value and have pride in your military service, since I am tired of the old (false) saw that Democrats are anti-military and weak on foreign policy. I agree with the stance you outlined in The American Prospect on the importance of multilateralism in fighting terrorism. I have been a Howard Dean supporter and donator, mainly because of his ability and willingness to directly confront Bush; but I like what I've seen of you even more. If you will join the field of Presidential hopefuls, let America see you and know what you stand for, I will switch support and donate to your cause. If I weren't going to be busy with a new baby, as well as a 4-year-old son, I would enthusiastically volunteer to work on your campaign, the first one I've ever felt this strongly about.

snip:
America needs a new president. One who is up to the challenge of our uncertain times. One who can be a voice for common sense and moderation in these dangerous, uncertain times. One with the unquestionable leadership and foreign policy credentials necessary to win in 2004. General Clark, America needs you. Please run for president. I am currently a Dean supporter, but if you decide to run I will switch allegiances, and my main reason for doing so is I know the current media will not be able to desroy you no matter how hard they try. You are electable. I have also seen you many times on TV, and I like your positions on the issues. Please if you do run, make sure the elimination of the estate tax does not take place. That measure will kill the US as we know it.

snip:
Gen. Clark, I'm writing to ask you to run for president in 2004. Just so you know who your supporters are, I am a 22-year-old student, married and expecting my first child. And I have real doubts about raising my child in the United States, if the trends that I see in our government continue. I first caught you on a television appearance and was so impressed that I cut class to hear you speak at the University of Central Florida. You have a firm grasp on world affairs that no one else can offer us. While I am currently giving time and support to Howard Dean, I would like much more to work hard on a campaign to elect General Wesley Clark to the presidency. Please help your country out! Sincerely

snip:
America needs a new president. One who is up to the challenge of our uncertain times. One who can be a voice for common sense and moderation in these dangerous, uncertain times. One with the unquestionable leadership and foreign policy credentials necessary to win in 2004. So many people are despondent because they don't see anyone who can beat George W. Bush. After reading your resume on your website I was thrilled to think of you leading our country and I know you can win. As of now I am supporting Howard Dean but if you became a candidate I would definitely switch to you. General Clark, America needs you. Please run for president.

snip
General Clark, I'm supporting Howard Dean at the moment, but I fear his inability to get the party establishment behind him. I think you could do that, while inspiring pragmatic liberals like me just as much as Dean does. I honestly think that if you get the nomination, you'll give Karl Rove nightmares more than anyone in the current crop. You'd take all the Gore states, and put the South and Mountain West in play not only because you are a Southerner, but because of your refreshing gun-control stance. Once you throw your hat in the ring, you've got my immediate support. Please run for president, General Clark, and announce your candidacy soon. I don't want people thinking you're arrogant, or playing spoiler, because you joined so late.