Clark.....Gaining Momentum

This is a great article from the Clark04 web site. He's gaining momentum! He's on fire! :bounce!

<snip>
"General Clark understands the power and potential of the United States and the opportunity to use that power for good," said Smith "Moreover, he has the experience, rarely found, in working with allies and opponents to try to find common ground despite significant differences."

Former South Carolina Governor Jim Hodges has also endorsed Clark, saying he fits Southern voters specifically "like a nice little shoe." In Tennessee, Congressman Lincoln Davis has endorsed Clark.

Clark's nationwide appeal is also evident in the support he's received from members of Congress. Senators Max Baucus (D-MT) and Mark Pryor and Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) have endorsed Clark.

In addition to Congressmen Rangel and Davis, Clark has been endorsed by Representatives Betty McCollum (D-MN), Steve Israel and Anthony Wiener (D-NY), Rahm Emanuel (D-IL), Mike Thompson (D-CA), Jim Matheson (D-UT), Gene Taylor (D-MS), and Marion Berry, Vic Snyder and Mike Ross (D-AR). <snip>


There's more here:http://www.americansforclark.com/story/53/

And after I spent hours on the phone during the 2002 campaign promising seniors he wouldn't touch their medicare and then he turned around and HELPED CRAFT the recent medicare "drug benefit" abomination, making a liar out of me, his endorsement means diddly-squat to me.

and I'm 172% behind Clark all the way.

I just think Baucus sold out on the medicare thing big time, and to quote a famous Democratic pundit: "Cap'n, I dunna know why!"

Most other Democrats in the race opposed this...does Clark support it?

He thinks it's an abomination.

But considering how pissed off at Baucus seniors in Montana are, I'm not sure how helpful it would be.

After Q4 numbers are released it will become clear that this is a Dean/Clark or Clark/Dean(whichever order you prefer) race, which is excellent in my opinion because I like them both and I won't have to fear the outcome. The very idea makes me warm and fuzzy inside.

I think Dean has already hit his numbers and will likely break $20 million with Clark at $10-12 million and the rest of them similar to last quarter.

momentum in the opposite direction.

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/12-22-2003/0002079944&EDATE=

someone may actually read it. Puhleeeeze! I have some nice info on Dean that I could post in every thread, if you would like?

If we wanted to follow the lead of Dean supporters.

I must be getting old but I couldn't seem to pin down who was putting that article on the wire, and who the company is.

Has anyone had any experience with them and are these results reliable?

This is new to me.

Clark supporters seem to get testy when confronted with the reality of most polls...Clark is holding steady or headed downward.

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04dem.htm

Newsweek Poll, Gallup, and CBS were all done later and show similar results...

How dare you ask questions like that... LOL!

You're only counter to the Clark momentum claim is some obscure Republican polling firm's sample of 350 Democrats!!?? Why not take a look at Newsweek which shows Clark up 3 to 15%, with everyone else but Dean in single digits? Every political discussion on TV now has someone mentioning Clark coming on strong, and there is a growing concensus that Clark is emerging as the anti-Dean. This can't be good news for Dean, as Clark is a VERY appealing candidate who is poised to take off like a cruise missile. Be afraid, little man, be very afraid!

They need help.

993 people is, without a doubt, the be all and end all of the polls. :eyes:

Just curious. Seems to me like the Gore effect (on both).

at all. :shrug:

If you can't show it, the conclusion Clark is holding steady or downward seems a firm conclusion.

Clark got a big artificial bump as the poster boy perfect American exotic new entry who no one had said anything negative about, when he first entered. That was then. If you want to say Clark "polled" better then than he does now, it is an accurate statement. "Polled" is a past tense word. "Downward" reflects a present tense evaluation of a dynamic current trend line. That is a different measure. I am more concerned about trends than past data, and I am much more concerned about results than about polls. If Dean starts scoring in the mid 40's in reputable National polls, I would sit up and notice. Untill then Dean has a moderate plurality. Everyone else is competing to emerge as the major alternative candidate to Dean. I am more interested in those dynamics prior to any votes being cast. Clark is looking good there from what I can see. And he still has money to compete with.

I prefer to remain positive, so I enjoyed the headline. :)

Thanks in_cog_ni_to and my Clark supporters! :hi:

I support our future President until he's elected! :hi:

sure hope this thing evens out soon!! =)

i admire you clark supporters, wanting something better and very willing to struggle for it - against the odds.
(instead of just hopping onto the koolaid kid-train)

I can understand why it makes sense to consider which democrat has the best chance against bush in the general election. That is important.

I cannot understand why polls as to which dem is ahead should influence my vote. It would be different if I were betting on the election, but, I vote for the best candidate.

It's nice to have you here! :hi:

With Steve Martin? I prefer the roller coaster, you get more out of the ride. Thank you for seeing why we do this, beause we do want something better. It may seem like the odds are against us, but we know our candidate and he has beat the odds hands down over and over again throughout his whole life. If he's willing to do this for us, we sure aren't going to let him down.

"We can do better, we will do better, and we will do it together"
- General Wesley Clark

Dean will be loseing a good deal of his support now.

What do you mean? I think I must have missed something. :)

I see big drop and barely holding his own if that.

I am not comparing now to October with the artificail bounce Clark got on entry. You can if you want, which makes your position easy to understand. I am not even basing my feelings on polling data per se. However the first three polls listed at pollingreport have Clark up 10% to 25% in one week. Still the numbers are small. It is more the sense that the media is now taking Clark seriously. Crowds are warming to him in person. Clark is now almost always on message when he speaks. His fund raising and endorsements are picking up. His progressive positions on issues are finally being spelled out. His opponents other than Dean are not catching fire and more and more activists are looking towards Clark as the only feasable alternative to Dean, if they should want one.

almost all the time.

But I'm not sure I find that to be a ringing endorsement for the general.

I was immediately attracted to Edwards because of his early detailed grasp of things and since then his consistancy, no need to alter stances as they were all based on principle, his encyclopedic ability to speak on any level of detail and always thoughtfully and statesmanlike.

I really don't understand anyone being able to say no to that. This is mostly why I believe that at the end of the day, people will say yes.

On a Clark blog poll, I voted for Edwards for Clark's VP lol (I do realize thet Edwards is going for all the marbles, but it's true, I did pick Edwards there). My point about Clark staying "on message" was a simple one really. I think Clark also has an "encyclopedic ability to speak on any level of detail and always thoughtfully and statesmanlike". If you saw either of the two most recent events CSPAN showed of Clark in NH, taking questions from the crowd, that would be apparent.

My point was that this is the first time Clark has been on any campaign trail. Functioning within that unique set of circumstances is, like most things, something that becomes easier and more natural with practice and familiarity. It would not come naturally to me to speak off the cuff for half an hour with a minde eye constantly focused on which twelve words that I utter might end up snipped and thrown on the evening news. But hopefully if I am bright enough, over time after getting burned enough, I would start to figure that one out. I am amazed at how quickly Clark seems to be "getting it" for a political rookie.

I did not doubt that General Clark would improve given practice but this is a pretty serious playing field to be ramping up on.

His recent inability to recall how he intended to fund his AIDS program down at the Florida Dem-a-thon thing I found to be of concern. I think that put me off thinking that he was doing his homework as is required.

I would really like to see him run for Gov first and earn his stripes there first. I'm afraid that we just can't afford the risk of learning on the job this time especially.

Of course being a governor doesn't necessarily prevent you from putting your foot in it but I think General Clark can avoid this.

It is not without merit. I think usually I would agree with you. But these are not usual times and Clark is not a usual candidate, let alone a usual person. All that stuff about first in class, Rhodes Scholar, three Masters, self made man, all that stuff counts. It counts for Edwards too, that's part of why I like him. Edwards got flack for jumping right into a Senate run, and now a Presidential run as a freshman Senator. Clark brings different career and experiential credentials to the table than any of the other Democratic candidates. Depending on how highly you regard Clark's credentials at this historical time in this political context, to a large part will determin whether the advantages one thinks he has outweighs disadvantages of the sort you note.

One thing that can be said for Clark, he has more hands on Executive experience than any other Democratic Party candidate for President with the possible exception of Dean. A General, by definition really, is essentially a leader, not a legislator. Though there are some back room Generals who run out the clock untill retirement, Clark was not one of them.

and you are quite right describing it where many on this board are not.

But it is a different sort of leadership. Political leadership requires you to mix oil and vinegar and have both parties smile. From what I've read of the NATO experience there is a lot of dealing with bickering but more significantly, the resolutions seemed to come from the political side. I take that to operate at a different level than the strictly military one and this concerns me.

Its good to discuss this with a reasonable Clark supporter. I've been round with others less so. Thanks

And I enjoy this one with you. Actually Clark's NATO experience has a lot to do with why I support him, and it wasn't the stars on his shoulders that got my attention. NATO operated by consensus. Clark had to get the Dutch and the Italians and the French and the British and the Germans etc. etc. to agree about everyting, and he had to sell the common vision to the Pentagon and the civilians back in Washington, and of course vice versa. He made a few American enemies, but mission accomplished. I also understand that Clark was deeply involved in the political side of the negotiations that ended the Bosnia conflict and resulted in the Dayton Peace Accord.

I don't know why Edwards hasn't caught on more than he has, I really don't. Every time I hear him speak I like what he has to say. Anyway, off to bed. Maybe we'll "talk again" somewhere.

the trend has been good, for reasons other than polls.
but hopefully they will follow!

its too bad you people,
cant stand to see the poor little underdogs havin a little joy.
eesh!

:hug:

LOL Endorsements or no, he is gaining momentum. :bounce:

:kick:

Terrific and he is going to keep gaining all the way to the WhiteHouse!:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: