Clark poses an immediate threat to Sen. John Kerry

That is not the original title of the article. The original title is "In short run, new candidate hurts everyone", but since there is a similar thread without the original name of the article I though "why not?".

In short run, new candidate hurts everyone


WASHINGTON — A crowded race for the Democratic presidential nomination was further muddied Wednesday when retired Gen. Wesley Clark threw his helmet into the ring.
George Thien, 65, signs a petition during a gathering of Wesley Clark supporters at Fatso's Sports Bar.
Jerry Lara/Express-News

<snip>

Clark could pose an immediate threat to Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., a Vietnam veteran running as a war hero in opposition to President Bush's foreign policy, political scientists said.

<snip>

http://news.mysanantonio.com/story.cfm?xla=saen&xlb=180&xlc=1056729

You could have at least quoted the article and said "could pose a threat" instead of "threatens," since that's what the article said. Not that I'm mobilized to flame about it -- too late in the PM / early in the AM for that ;)

I did it to make a point... the other thread's title is "Dean is the most vulnerable to Clark candidacy", while the article said "the candidate who might be most vulnerable to this 10th Democratic entrant is former Gov. Howard Dean of Vermont."

Might be / Is = two different things.

So, don't worry... no flames here, I agree with you. :hi:

I wholeheartedly support the title in that case. I'm from the "backatcha" school myself from time to time ;)

n/a

Kerry has greater depth than any of the candidates, especially on resume. They may come to the door for the war hero, but they stay because he wins the war of ideas.

People go to Dean's door for his anti-Bush anger, but they stay or leave because of how much they identify with him. Balancing the budget of a small, rural state with no city to speak of is impressive in a way, but on the scale of things it's, well, it's Vermont.

While people want to register an official complaint, I think in the end Americans want to take America forward, not back.

I haven't seen Kerry's resume, and would be interested in seeing what he has done in the way of balancing budgets and providing health care and getting and keeping jobs. All I know is that he has been a senator from MA. Has he held other offices?

As for dissing small states-seems to me that we had a president who balanced the budget even though he was from a small southern state that is mostly rural.

Thank you for reinforcing the differences between Clinton and Dean. If you missed it, the balancing the federal budget is just a wee bit more impressive than that of Vermont. I could also say that I balance my own budget, but that doesn't mean I should be President.

As for Kerry, he broke with his party to support Gramm-Rudman Deficit Reduction, he's also the ranking Democrat on the Small Business Committee. Not to mention being on the Finance Committee, including Subcommittees on Health Care, International Trade, and Social Security.

Kerry has a much more extensive knowledge of how the federal budget works, and has long been a passionate advocate of cracking down on corporate - the McCain-Kerry subsidy commission alone is a model of how to cut government pork.

And I think Dean would take America forward. Maybe not as far forward as I think some others would, but how can we go backwards from where we are now???

I guess we will find out if Bush wins.

"Take America Back," an anti-Bush stance, but not very indicative of much beyond that.

that they are supporting Kerry instead of Dean because of the military record and that supposedly will make him appear tougher on homeland security and defense. Clark is clearly stronger than Kerry on the military issue. Clark will likely take those supporters away from Kerry who liked Dean better but thought he would not look strong enough on defense and national security. Clark's positions are closer to Dean's than Kerry's. Anyone who was going to bail on Dean over fearing he'd be too weak on defense would have already done so. This is why I think Kerry is going to be the one to suffer from Clark's entry most of all.

Because although Kerry has been severly handicapped by political miscalculation - he is a superior product and a more substantial Democrat of merit compared to Clark--who is little more than a construction for consumption.