Skip to main content

View Diary: Wesley Clark is the One Democrat Capable of Demolishing Giuliani's Terror Tactics in a 2008 Match Up (151 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Good to know (0+ / 0-)

    But why didn't he have a better press person?  It is really bad judgement to have a press person who has bad relations with the press!!!

    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. -- Arthur C. Clarke

    by mathGuyNTulsa on Sun May 13, 2007 at 01:34:47 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  He was with the person at HQ who (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jen, eve, mathGuyNTulsa, LAMaestra

      didn't have the 'chops' but was supposed to when he made the gaff on the first major interview. But this was the same person who ALLOWED him to be grilled for 90, repeat, 90 minutes on the airplane. That was idiocy.

      Idiocy again I say, but that was the person on the ground at the moment. Remember he made the decision on Monday at 5pm at dinner with his family and announced on Wednesday at 10am.

      That person was instantly replaced by someone who was supposed to be a solid pro...and wasn't in my opinion.

      At that time WKC didn't have the experience to best judge the staffers chosen.

      He does now.

      Give him credit for this: He refuses to this day to criticize any staffer. It was his decision, he says, and he takes the consequencs on himself.

      It would be easy to throw someone under the bus but he refuses to discuss the subject.

      He won't make the same staffing mistake twice.

    •  PS: The communications person didn't HAVE (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jen, mathGuyNTulsa

      bad relations...he created them in the course the campaign. That's two very different situations.

      Good question.

    •  It was bad judgement (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eve, mathGuyNTulsa

      and he said he learned lots of lessons from his last run. He also learned a lot about campaigning during his non-stop appearances throughout 2005 and 2006 stumping for Dems across the country.

      When I compare Clark's poor judgement of how to run a political race to the poor judgement of some of the current candidates, it doesn't seem like a deal breaker to me! (Not to mean you said anything like that!)

      Once in a while you get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right. --Hunter/Garcia

      by jen on Sun May 13, 2007 at 01:49:22 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  THanks again (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jen, eve

        And I'm not at all surprised that the General did not publicly criticize his staff.  I have personally seen the damage that an abrasive (or disorganized) press person can do.  A press person who is organized and builds good relationships with the media is golden -- I am fortunate to work with such a person in my current job (alas, she is a Republican).

        The local Clark organization was supported by some folks from the national organization.  The national people seemed good -- better than the local people, actually.   But they were frustrated by some coordination challenges.  These didn't seem major to me (a shortage of yard signs, for example).  There were good phone lists and lots of volunteers -- including a former national committeewoman from the other party, now converted to the Democratic party!

        I expect to volunteer again for the Democratic candidate, and would certainly volunteer for Clark in the primary should he run.

        Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. -- Arthur C. Clarke

        by mathGuyNTulsa on Sun May 13, 2007 at 01:57:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Late entry, fewer staff to choose from (0+ / 0-)

          Although I think Clark was MUCH more successful than he was given credit for.  I do think that if he'd campaigned in Iowa, we might have had a very different result.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site