"Kerry Surges Ahead In Swing State, Clark As VP Begins To Look.......

This is from a couple of weeks ago, but I have never read it and thought I'd share it with DUers.


ELECTIONS 2004

Kerry Surges Ahead In Swing State, Clark As VP Begins To Look More And More Likely

by Betsy R. Vasquez

MAY 17, 2004 – A new American Research Group (ARG) poll shows Democratic presidential hopeful Senator John Kerry (D-MA) surging ahead in the key bellwether state of Ohio.

Ohio, which went Bush in the last election and is deemed to be one of the central battlegrounds in the upcoming election, is now breaking hard for the Democratic challenger.

According the ARG’s Dick Bennett, "John Kerry leads George W. Bush in Ohio 49% to 42%, with 2% for Ralph Nader. Without Nader on the ballot, it's Kerry 50% and Bush 43%. "

That is an enormous surge in a state that just a short while ago had President Bush leading.

Bennett says the surge is due both to weakening support for the President among Republicans and increasing support for Kerry among independents.

"Kerry is running stronger among Democrats than Bush is running among Republicans and Kerry leads Bush 48% to 43% among self-described independents," says Bennett.

According to this poll, taken May 10-12, there are far more Democrats who have an unfavorable opinion of Bush than Republicans who view Kerry unfavorably, by a 17% margin. This is despite the Bush campaign having spent $70 million on largely negative ads trying to paint an ugly portrait of the Massachusetts senator.

In national polls, Kerry has moved ahead as well. A May 13 Time/CNN poll has Kerry leading Bush 51-46% in a two way matchup.

This is especially phenomenal as challengers are rarely leading at this point. Even Reagan, when he was running against Carter, and Clinton, when he was running against Bush, Sr., were not leading in the polls at this point in the race. However, Both Carter and Bush, Sr. had similar unfavorable ratings and low job approval ratings at this point to the younger Bush. So while the bad news for President Bush is as bad as it was for Carter and Bush, Sr., the good news at this point for Kerry is even better than it was for Reagan and Clinton at this point.

This is likely because Kerry is viewed more moderately than Reagan was and his war hero credentials make him less of a national defense worry than the unknown Democratic Governor from Arkansas - Bill Clinton - was.

As for the looming question about who Kerry will pick for VP, General Wesley Clark is the place to put smart money at this point.

Earlier we had suggested in this article (www.moderateindependent.com/v2i4runningmate.html) that Senator Kerry would only benefit from someone who could solidify his foreign policy gravitas, as, thanks largely to his Vietnam era protesting, that is the only area he is vulnerable to attack which a VP choice could help solidify - ie. two never-foughts (Bush/Cheney) might be able to impugn one decorated soldier, but going after two would make them simply seem to have something against people who fight for their country.

While previously we had suggested that former Georgia Senator Max Cleland might be the most likely pick for Kerry, as he is a war hero, southerner, and a good friend of the Sentaor, events seem to be pointing much more toward former presidential hopeful General Wesley Clark.

When the prisoner abuse scandal broke, again and again it was Clark - not Cleland - who Kerry and the Democrats turned to. Clark delivered the Democrats' Saturday radio address, with the prisoner abuse scandal as the central topic. The next day, Clark was tagged to appear on NBC's Face The Nation to tackle the topic. And just a few days later, Clark and Kerry stood arm in arm in the battleground state of Arkansas, with Clark again playing the heavy in taking the Bush administration to task over the prisoner abuse scandal.

Clark, more than anyone else, represents the American military at its best, and is a man who has shown he knows how to plan things - and execute them - correctly. With Clark as VP, the Kerry ticket will be able to directly contrast the right way and the wrong way to deal with horrible dictators: the successful, effective way Clark dealt with Serbian butcher Slobodan Milosevic vs. the mess President Bush has created with his unilateral approach to dealing with Saddam Hussein.

In addition to this, Clark is a southerner who hails from a winnable battleground state - former President Clinton's home of Arkansas - and who formerly leaned Republican, having voted for Reagan and Bush, Sr in previous elections. While the media is gushing over how a Kerry/McCain ticket could unify the country and would be the Democratic "Dream Team," a Kerry/Clark ticket would bring the upside for the candidate without the downside, bringing in someone who has voted on both sides of the aisle but doesn't bring the anti-abortion and hard core conservative streak McCain does on certain issues. And Clark's military experience is far more relevant to the current situation than McCain's.

Still, if McCain was willing, Kerry might choose him as he is the more seasoned political veteran, and Clark could be included on the team as a potential Secretary of State - truly the role Clark may be most suited to.

But in reality, Clark would do just as much to make a Kerry ticket palatable to formerly Republican-leaning independents as McCain without upsetting the base, and Clark has in fact shown himself to be an adept fundraiser and established a solid grassroots network of supporters.

So while the rest of the media is largely ignoring Clark's existence, a number of factors make it appear that he is the most likely choice to round out Kerry's ticket at the moment. And as for the rest of the media's success in gauging the political winds, remember, they were saying Iraq would be the strong point for the Bush campaign this election and that Howard Dean would run away with the nomination, things we here at M/I discounted early on.

If your stockbroker had such a record, you'd probably fire him, huh?

http://www.moderateindependent.com/v2i4poll.htm

many-many lost manufacturing jobs. He would not be my first choice, but if we win Ohio (I grew up there), we will win. Clark would be an excellent Sec of Defense.

because he hasn't been out of the service long enough. :shrug:

would be good if Clark doesn't get the VP nod. I really want him somewhere in the higher echelon of Kerry's administration. It would be such a waste to not use such a brillant and knowledgable man.

Clark has been on the tube quite a bit lately. I never see or hear anything about Edwards anymore, or Gephardt either. I'd like to think that means something as far as Clark is concerned.

MzPip
:dem:

CLARK CANNOT BE DEF. SEC.
One of the first qualifications to be secretary of defense is to have been out of military service for 10 years or more.
I really wish there was some place we could post this so that EVERYONE could read it - including journalists who don't get it right, either.

And, if it's Geppy :boring: wake me up when I can vote again in 2008 - that is if we have the right to vote after four more years of the Shrub.

I like Gep - but his picture is next to the definition of "bland."

but if he gets nominated, I will back him. Kerry has a great big staff of strategic thinkers and more years in the political limelight than both of us put together.

eligible to be Secretary of Defense because he hasn't been out of the military long enough. He retired in 2000, and he would have to have retired in 1994 or 1995 (10 years) to qualify.

So while the rest of the media is largely ignoring Clark's existence, a number of factors make it appear that he is the most likely choice to round out Kerry's ticket at the moment. And as for the rest of the media's success in gauging the political winds, remember, they were saying Iraq would be the strong point for the Bush campaign this election and that Howard Dean would run away with the nomination, things we here at M/I discounted early on.

M/I has been right about so many things. I hope their right about this too!

However, he is not as adept at deflecting attacks as Edwards. A trial lawyer has a thick skin. And they are going to pull out every nasty trick they ever heard of and then some. We need a VP that can think on his feet...Clark as Secretary of State...

Edwards hasn't endured any, as far as I can tell.
This is my biggest problem with him: he's never been vetted. I think, however, once he is (and that would only happen if he's the VP pick), then we'll see an avalanche of charges that I don't think he will deflect.
Blame it on the media, if you want, but I don't think his record will stand up to the scrutiny.

...going to deflect the attacks when it comes to his complete lack of experience in running a war or diplomacy?

He can't. Period. Cheney would eat him alive.

If we are to win in November, we need the double-barreled military ticket to do it. That ain't Edwards.

Thanks for posting Incog. :thumbsup:

Everything that Vesque says...is absolutely true.

We could have used many of the comments in this article in many of our DU debates defending Clark as our choice for VP.

I just wanted to give everyone a quick update on the Senate race in Ohio. Last month, I asked you all to help us in slowing down the Republican incumbent, George Voinovich, by contributing just $10 to the campaign of up-and-coming Democratic star, Eric Fingerhut. (Fingerhut, as many of you will remember, was the one who cast the deciding vote in the House of Reps in ‘93 that gave us the longest period of economic growth in our nation’s history. It also cost him his seat in Congress.)

Well, things are starting to happen. In a big way.

Just last week one of the local news outlets reported a poll showing our work is paying off. Voinovich has now dropped below 50% approval for the first time in his Senate career. We’ve also closed the poll gap considerably over the last month and are feeling confident that we are now within striking distance of this once “unbeatable” Senator. Eric’s name recognition is stronger statewide and the campaign staff is now building grassroots contacts in places that haven’t voted Democratic in a generation.

Folks, we’re knocking on the door! HELP US KICK IT IN!!!

I know I’ve come to you before, but today I ask again. Especially to those who couldn’t help before or thought they’d wait a bit to see what happens. Please consider making a small contribution to our cause. “Ten Bucks for Change!” has been our cry over the last few months, but we’ll even take $8, or $5! Whatever you think you can spare will go a long way towards helping us chip away even further at the GOP lead and also pave the way for a John Kerry victory here in the Buckeye State!

Help us keep it going --> http://tinyurl.com/22ksa
As I mentioned before, even a very small contribution makes a big difference.

$5 helps us with Meetup materials
$10 helps us with House Party invitations
$20 helps us cover parade route with Fingerhut t-shirts
And so on...

Thanks for taking the time to read my pitch. I’ve never asked for money until this Presidential season and don’t really enjoy doing it, BUT as you all know, when you find a great candidate, you’ll do almost anything to help them get elected. That’s what I’m doing this summer and fall for Eric Fingerhut. Thanks again.

Anthony Fossaceca
Cleveland, OH

PS – If you are a former Ohioan and want to find out how you can help us from your new home, please email me at afossaceca@fingerhutforsenate.com We’re actually planning on starting Meetups across the country in major cities with former Ohioans who want to help make a difference. Care to help? Sign-up today at http://fingerhutforsenate.meetup.com – We’ve already got some folks in Washington and Chicago and are looking for more!

we don't need? </sarcasm>