I'm in NM too. I hope they all come here. Where are you getting this, basso? I find it impossible to believe Clark will concentrate on SC. That's the worst possible place for him to try and revive his hopes. And I guarantee you he'll be hitting Oklahoma, where he's currently leading. You can count on Kerry running everywhere or at least everywhere but SC. Edwards will have to seriously work at least one other state as well -- winning in his backyard won't get him over the hump.
you just moved, right? saw some interviews on fox w/ susan estrich. sorry, left out OK. yeah, Clark will have to go there as he's currently leading and it may be his best (only?) chance to pick up a state. don't underestimate the Sharpton factor in S.C.. it may keep clark from really competing. Here's the latest delegate count: also, fox asked in an exit poll if the Iraq war made the U.S. safer and 70% said NO. no huge surprise since these are democrats, but it is surprising that dean only narrowly won this group w/ Kerry a very close second.
Clark being third in the race overall is another story. Right now, that looks like a distinct possibility. But I strongly disagree that he is "weird". What is weird about Clark is that he's not a politician. Usually, when a candidate says that, it's complete BS. With Clark, it's an unfortunate truth. He was talked into running, and when he announced, and before that, everyone knew that his biggest problem was a late start and inexperience... not inexperience regarding being able to run the country, but inexperience as a politician. The learning curve is incredibly steep when you haven't been involved in public politics almost your entire life. He's been up to his ears in military politics... far different, as he and we are finding out.
I don't have that much against Clark, but he seems oddly indecisive, especially for General. He couldn't decide to run until after the race was well under way, and that possibly cost him Iowa which might have cost him NH etc. Then there were just some goofs on his position as to whether he would have voted for the war resolution. I think most of that is his lack of political experience and nothing serious, especially compared to the negatives attached to the current President. His corny jokes sometimes fall really flat, and I can see where that might make him seem strange or like he doesn't relate. Anyway I think he'd be a great VP to somebody's ticket if he would accept.
Deckard: We'll have to agree to disagree here. I was chomping at the bit for Clark to run and, before he started running, I thought he would be the strongest candidate. But I think he's downright weird. His stump stuff (and debate performances) are rife with banal, trite, bumper sticker slogans (I've said before he reminds me of Bush's "That's what a leader does -- a leader leads..."), he tells awful, unfunny, cornball jokes and insists on laughing at them when no one else does, he looks like he's wearing shoulder pads or his dad's suit and his eyes look positively vacant. More than once I've heard people recommend he learn how to blink. All that's superficial, but extremely important. The presidential race is more of a personality contest than any other political contest and to many, many people he just comes off weird. But worse than all that, he just does not seem to have the conviction of his beliefs. He seems so intent on proving his Dem credentials as to make hard-left, virtually unbelievable (like, I actually do not believe him) statements on the issues. His abortion stuff was more extreme than any pro-choice candidate for president EVER. It was also unnecessary and would have been laughable if it weren't an issue so serious to so many people. And his war stuff has been more confusing than anyone else's. I was a huge Dean fan and what's happened with him has been a great disappointment. But no one in the race has disappointed me more than Clark.
FOX Exit Poll: How The Late Deciders Voted 08:50 PM EDT | Posted By Alan The breakdowns on the NH voters: Late Deciders (last days of campaign) * 31% Kerry * 27% Dean * 18% Edwards * 13% Clark Young voters 18-29 * 35% Dean * 33% Kerry * 10% Clark * 9% Edwards Independents * 34% Kerry * 26% Edwards * 13% Edwards * 12% Clark And this: “Did iraq war make US safer against terrorism?” * 70% No * 30% Yes
FB: Clark would have been a good VP choice for Dean if he hadn't awkwardly and unnecessarily made such a point of distancing himself from that possibility. Moot point now, anyway. But I don't really see him on a Kerry or Edwards ticket. Kerry doesn't need him and probably does better with Edwards. Edwards needs to combat the lack of experience rap and Clark's the last guy to help him with that. On the other hand, I think he'd be alright as Sec. of Defense or Sec. of State. p.s. With 50% reporting, he's less than 200 votes behind Edwards for 3rd. Could still happen.
man, listening to Kerry's speech, this doesn't sound like to a call to class warfare? "The Economy of privilege?" He sees Haliburton as a bigger threat than Hussein.
more Kerry: “I have spent my whole life fighting for what I think is right and against powerful special interests … and I have just begun to fight.” “I have a message for the influence peddlers … big oil … special interests that now call the White House home: We’re coming, you’re going, and don’t let the door hit you on the way out.”
Command-Post, instant analysis: http://www.command-post.org/oped/2_archives/009949.html -- January 27, 2004 Who's Out, Who's Not: Instant NH Analysis If the numbers hold up, it looks like Kerry could have another impressive victory in New Hampshire. With 71% of Districts reporting CNN has called the race. Kerry appears to have won by around 15% of the vote. So the question now is who still has a chance and who doesn’t. Kerry Okay … so its obvious Kerry is now beyond a shadow of a doubt the “front runner”. But there is still much to be decided. Dean The only thing more certain than Kerry’s frontrunner status is Dean lack of status. Dean needed a win in New Hampshire, not just because he lost Iowa, but also because he isn’t really polling well in the states that are to vote in next week’s primaries. Even before tonight he was polling fifth in both South Carolina and Oklahoma, fourth in Arizona. No fresh poll data is available for the other states participating … but I wouldn’t expect much there either. The question mark left for Dean is who will he endorse. Important: Dean technically still has a delegate lead, although that should change very fast as the primaries move on. This is possible because not all delegates are tied to the primary elections. For instance, New Hampshire has 27 total delegates but only 22 tied to tonight’s primary. How these other delegates are assigned is extraordinarily complicated but you can read more here. So even if Dean loses he migth still play an important roll in Boston Edwards While Edwards only received about 13% of the New Hampshire vote, he’s still in good position for the long run. He has a respectable 5 point lead in South Carolina with 18% still undecided. He’s running 2nd in Okalahoma, only 5 points behind Clark who will probably maintain that lead due to the state’s proximity to Arkansas. Edwards is also polling pretty well in Arizona. While he may not have the energy to win the nomination, he can certainly rack up enough delegates to be a factor in the nomination. Clark While Clark is certainly weakened by his performance in New Hampshire, he’s not dead yet. He’s doing well in South Carolina, Okalahoma and Arizona. He might just be able to hang in long enough to benefit from some infighting between Kerry and Edwards. Yeah, I know they’re both brandishing their happy faces at the moment, but once Dean is beaten (if he isn’t already) they will have to turn on each other. Unless, of course, a backroom deal is struck to secure a Kerry-Edwards ticket. Lieberman There isn’t much to say here except … oh, poor Joe. Probably one of the most fair minded of all the candidates, he unfortunately lacks the ability to get voters excited about taking on Bush. Perhaps he lacks the temperament as well. Lieberman can play an important roll on the stump however, if he picks up the banner for either Kerry or Edwards. He would brings an air of establishment support to either. By dropping out sooner and supporting Edwards he might even earn himself a cabinet position, were Edwards to win. But I wouldn’t expect Joe to do anything but what he thinks is right for the party or the country. Sharpton and Kuncinich Well … nevermind. All this being said, I have a feeling that most everyone will hang on until next week at least. Now that delegates are assigned porportionately, any candidate could rack up a hand full of delegates that he could then hang on to until the convention. Doing so keeps them in the process even if not as a viable candidate. If the race turns out to be close going into the convention, those delegates could then be traded for something of value (whatever that means).
No need to apologize, Bats. I thought Dean would come in a strong second and that would allow him to live on through Feb. He came in a weak second, so he's done. And I was wrong! No apologies necessary. Where's that crow thread anyway ... I'm not entirely sure that Kerry doesn't just put this thing away in the next few weeks. I could even see him running the table on Feb 3 -- yeah, even South Carolina. (Not likely, but possible.) He's going to have more money than God pouring in the next 72 hours -- all the big donors who gave to Dean are going to have to make nice-nice. Bats, as soon as you see an ad on TV in NM, let us know. I'm really curious to see who's going to play in what state over the next week,
khan: Saw two Clarks and one Edwards tonight on network television (just moved into apartment - no cable yet). Edwards ad was the Two Americas thing. Couldn't rightly tell you what the Clarks were about. I just don't remember. As of now though Clark's edging Edwards in NH by 865 votes. 78% reporting. Wonder how much 3rd's worth when it's that close.
link? Edit: Never mind. Found it. What a freaking loser. He's been nothing but a spoiler since the start. Exceeding expectations?? Three way split?? Lieberman rented a damn apartment in NH. His neighboring state of Connecticut wasn't enough -- he ******* moved to NH. He skipped Iowa to focus exclusively there and wound up with less than 25% of Kerry's votes, around a third of Dean's and three to four percentage points behind Clark and Edwards. This was not a tie for third. Lieberman came in a convincing fifth after spending more time there over the last month than any other candidate. According to exit polls, he only does even marginally well among voters who agree with Bush's positions. Did 2002 teach him nothing? Did Iowa teach him nothing? Did his incredibly disappointing showing in NH teach him nothing? Does the fact that he's polling no higher than fourth in any major contest and can't raise money to save his life teach him nothing? Is this the "integrity" he's always talking about? Lieberman needs to be a man, drop out of the race that long ago left him behind and endorse the only candidate that shares his views and has a chance of winning: Bush.
It's what he's claiming, but it's at 13% for Clark, 12% for Edwards, and 9% for Lieberman. It's close, but hardly a 3 way tie. Kerry's on CNN now, it's hard for me to not just say I'm behind him 100%, but I think it's only fair to let the others court my vote as well.
Lieberman is pissing me off. He was going on and on about being a mainstream Dem. He was asked why Kerry isn't a mainstream and instead of listing any actual reasons, he just says "Look at what the Republicans are saying about him. The Republican play book doesn't work on me." I imagine using the same playbook as your opponents would make it hard for them to beat you. Why should Republicans decide what is mainstream? And how can he keep talking about defense when bringing up Iraq as there has been now hard evidence pointing to any danger from them towards us? Is that really defense?
Clark will tie or win third. That's a little better than I thought he'd do, though it's a severe drop from his dead heat with Dean before Iowa. That said, there's no doubt he should stay in with Southern states looming. But that said, this is about the silliest bit of spin I've seen through the whole campaign: "Four months ago, we weren't even in this race. We had no money. We had no office. All we had was hope and a vision for a better America," he said. "We came into New Hampshire as one of the Elite Eight. We leave tonight as one of the Final Four." - Wes Clark Okay. Four months ago he wasn't in the race. That's true. What's also true is that no one had money or an office before they were in the race. But the really silly part comes next. The Elite Eight? One of them's dropped out (after doing in Iowa just about exactly what Clark did in NH), two of them are Sharpton and Kucinich (one who's never broken 1% in NH and another who's never broken 3 by the most generous estimates -- yeah, real elite) and the other one's Lieberman who, despite never hitting double digits and despite relentless espousement of Republican ideology in a Democratic primary, finished only three points behind him. "The final four?" Don't make me laugh. George McGovern finished in the "final two" in 1972. I guess he was twice the success story Clark is.
No problem, Batman. Like I said, Clark simply isn't a politician. Giving a speech to several hundred sevice men and women is so different from addressing a political rally and making it look good on TV. He just doesn't know how. At this point, I can't see him making a serious national run, given this liability. About the other candidates tonight: Kerry- Really has improved his ability to speak both to the crowd and to the voters watching on TV. I thought he was much better than he had been when he won Iowa. You were dead on about Dean forcing the others to "find their voice". I don't think this is any more evident than with Kerry. He's making his points much clearer and with more passion. If he can keep improving as the primaries go on, then he's going to give Bush a huge challenge I don't think he can meet. Dean- I finally "got" what people have been seeing in Dean. I thought his speech tonight was the best of the evening. He really sounded strong and articulate. If you could somehow morph his speech making ability to Kerry's, we would have a truly outstanding candidate in November. It's a shame that Dean did himself in during the Iowa concession speech. I think he could have stood some chance after Iowa if he hadn't had his "Muskie Moment". There is no way he can win now, but at least I understand what made him attractive to so many Democrats. Edwards- He doesn't grab me at all, not as a speaker. He was very effective on CNN talking to Bob Dole and Larry King, however. When King asked him if he had to win South Caolina to have a chance, he flatly said yes, without hesitation. Dole was impressed by that and so was I. But his accent (a South Carolina thing?) and youthful appearance doesn't translate to the head of the ticket persona... not to me. I'm not hung up on accents, being from Texas, but something about his was jarring to me. Maybe I'll get used to it. He could make an excellent 2nd banana. Lieberman- I was hoping he'd drop out, but his "three way 'tie' for 3rd place" line was absurd and he's clearly in it until next week, at the least. Dole thought he should drop out, and I agree with Dole. He's just another guy taking up valuable air time in the debates. Clark- I really addressed him at the beginning of my post. I don't think he has a chance now, unless he suddenly learns how to be a politician. His speech tonight didn't help.
Thanks for the reviews, Deckard. After months of motel rooms and the cable TV that comes with them, on NH primary night I'm consigned to the internet and waiting for Nightline (which doesn't air til around midnight here). Anything you guys can convey from the pundits or the candidates' speeches is much appreciated. Couple other notes: Dean is apparently coming to Albuquerque. See you there, rimrocker? I'll be the too-sexy bald guy in the back going, "I don't know, man... I love the stuff you're saying, but I don't know...." Matt Drudge is a major *******. He's leading with three extreme closeups of Kerry intended to present him in an unflattering (read: French looking) light. This is about as dumb as Rush making "Chelsea Clinton's ugly" jokes. Since, as I mentioned, I'm stuck on the internet with no cable, in the interest of generating more discussion, let's talk VP's. Give me your picks for running mate for Kerry, Dean, Edwards, Clark and even Lieberman. Hell, give me your picks for Kucinich and Sharpton too.
