Daily Kos

Yummy poll goodness

by kos

Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 05:58:24 AM PDT

In California, the ever-excellent Field Poll has released its latest numbers (PDF). (early September numbers in parenthesis)
Other/Undecided 32 (30)
Clark 17 (4)
Dean 14 (23)
Lieberman 14 (15)
Kerry 9 (11)
Gephardt 5 (8)
Sharpton 4 (3)
Braun 3 (4)
Edwards 1 (1)
Kucinich 1 (1)
Looking at the male/female split, it looks as though Clark may have taken a great deal of Dean's male support.

Regardless, that whole silly issues of "electability" is overblown, as all the top candidates are within MoE of beating Bush in California:
Clark 45
Bush 43

Dean 42
Bush 46

Lieberman 41
Bush 45

Kerry 42
Bush 46

Gephardt 43
Bush 45
Meanwhile, an ABC News/WP national poll essentially shows a five-way tie for first (September results in parenthesis):
Dean 17 (14)
Gephardt 13 (14)
Clark 12 (6)
No Opinion 12 (8)
Kerry 10 (14)
Lieberman 9 (22)
None 9 (3)
Braun 6 (4)
Sharpton 4 (5)
Edwards 3 (3)
Kucinich 2 (2)
13 points down for Lieberman in a single month. Ouch. Recent Gallup and Newsweek polls, on the other hand, have Clark up top.

Gallup's 10/10-12 results (10/6-8 results in parenthesis)
Clark 18 (21)
Other/No Opinion/None 15 (15)
Dean 13 (16)
Lieberman 13 (13)
Kerry 11 (14)
Lieberman 11 (13)
Gephardt 10 (8)
Edwards 6 (2)
Sharpton 6 (6)
Braun 5 (4)
Newsweek's 10/9-10 results (9/25-26 results in parenthesis)
Don't Know 20 (20)
Clark 15 (16)
Lieberman 13 (9)
Kerry 11 (10)
Dean 10 (12)
Gephardt 8 (10)
Edwards 6 (6)
Sharpton 5 (4)
Braun 5 (2)
Kucinich 1 (2)
Remember, national polls aren't predictive of anything. Only early state contests are. However, national polls are good at gauging candidate momentum.

[Poll attached]
  • ::
Poll

Who's your candidate?

0%5 votes
22%126 votes
63%359 votes
3%20 votes
0%4 votes
2%15 votes
1%6 votes
0%5 votes
0%4 votes
3%21 votes

| 565 votes | Vote | Results

Tags: (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 273 comments

  •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.00 / 3)

    Ooh, I like that you can include polls now.  It makes the Cattle Call a whole lot easier, no?

    by EightBall on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:03:52 AM PDT

  •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.50 / 1)

      It'll be interesting to see how Clark's numbers hold after a month of campaigning. I'm not sure, at the moment, whether Clark's going to steadily rise in the polls, or whether he's going to remain stable after his big entry, or whether he's slowly going to decline.

      Why are the fun parts of politics (finding out what happens next!) always so slow?

    by Morat on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:07:23 AM PDT

  •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.50 / 1)

    Good to know that they all do well in CA.

    I'm too disgusted right now to think of a sig.

    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:07:54 AM PDT

  •  Nationals all over the place (2.71 / 7)

    The only thing that is conclusive is that LIEberman should quit now.

    It is also no surprise that Clark and Dean lead California, as they are the two candidates most suited to the state.

    Every good Christian should line up and kick Jerry Falwell's ass. - Barry Goldwater, 1981

    by Doug in SF on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:08:58 AM PDT

  •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (3.80 / 5)

    Electability is SO not an issue, even for Lieberman, it seems.

    We're all doing a lot of hand-wringing about electability, but the fact of the matter is that the Democrat has captured a plurality of the popular vote in the last three Presidential elections. And all we have to do is hold the states that Gore won, while adding...any single state that Bush won. We hold the blue states and get West Virginia back = we win.

    That math doesn't even take into account states that are in play for us this time around. Call me crazy, but I'm thinking Ohio is the big prize here (yes, I know the state Dem organization resembles Ringling Brothers right now). If we add Nevada, and perhaps Missouri, then it becomes a pretty nice victory.

    We have our nominee. Now it's time to drink John McCain's milkshake.

    by Devin on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:08:59 AM PDT

    •  Elector Calculator? (2.50 / 1)

      That reminds me... Kos... put up the electoral calculator link on the new site.

      cheers,

      Mitch Gore

      Wanna win in '08...?

      Put your money where your mouth is.

      by Lestatdelc on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:14:26 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.50 / 1)

      The Dean supporters have an attitude toward risk that I don't share. The argument that Dean could win if he wins all the Gore states AND adds e.g., West Virginia is true but doesn't ask about the probability of that scenario. Here is a better way to think about the problem that incorporates some uncertainty into the mix. Which states is Dean more likely than Clark to beat Bush? I can think of only one: Vermont. Which states is Clark more likely than Dean to beat Bush? All the southern states and throughout the midwest.  Bottomline. Electability is a huge issue and is a strong argument at this point for Clark.

      by Cogito on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:46:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (4.20 / 5)

        Cogito,

        Maybe.  But your argument seems to based on an assumption that Clark is/will be a dynamic campaigner.

        As I wrote in another thread, the folks running Clark's campaign all claimed to be geniuses after helping to elect Bill Clinton twice.  The DLC crowd is still crowing about their "kingmaking" abilities.

        But the truth is, they were much "smarter" when they had Bill Clinton as a candidate than they were with Al Gore as a candidate.  Clinton was one of the all-time great campaigners.  Gore wasn't.

        The more Clark allows himself to be shaped by the poll-happy DLC acolytes handling his campaign, the more he resembles Al Gore, general or no general.

        Clark neds to grab hold of his campaign himself or he risks fading away and becoming yet another poll-driven, milquetoast creation of the DLC.

        by Bob Johnson on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 07:56:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.50 / 0)

          as much as i hear this "DLC handling" meme repeated over and over again, i just don't buy it. why would the same people who told gore to chase right-wing votes be fine with clark's progressive views? and if they are "behind" his liberal platform, why can't clark get some credit for supporting issues like affirmative action well before he was running?

          the handling meme makes sense if clark were mouthing centrist positions like gore attempted. he isn't, and remains relatively free of DLC fingerprints.

          Purple Hearts and Bleeding Hearts Unite!

          by josh in chi town on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 01:24:45 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.66 / 3)

        you've got it exactly right. dean has next to no edge in winning significant electoral votes over southern candidates like clark or edwards. one of the most valuable things he'd bring to a dem ticket is the devotion of his web'd and wired supporters, and the green vote.

        Purple Hearts and Bleeding Hearts Unite!

        by josh in chi town on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 08:15:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (3.50 / 2)

        How well Dr. Dean does in the South is going to depend on two things:  1) His VP running made, and 2) how much attention he pays us.  Democrats have a tendency to not pay much attention to us southerners, and we like attention.

        Republicans don't like me. I don't like Republicans. We're even.

        by Len on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 08:28:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (4.33 / 3)

        Cogito:

        It may seem to be a greater risk now to nominate Dean, who lacks national security experience.  There is certainly risk involved in nominating Dean.

        However, I see a far greater risk in ignoring the grassroots groundswell that already supports Dean.  If he does a better job of exciting our base and brings in more new and/or disaffected voters than Clark, then I believe we risk far more by ignoring that appeal.  Clark now has at his helm the same people who ran Gore's dreadful campaign.  I think there's terrible risk in trusting that team.

        Also, while national security issues are more important today to more people than they have been in years, current polls continue to show that, for a clear plurality, concerns over the economy and jobs are paramount.  Dean is a proven fiscal conservative with an excellent record in Vermont.  Clark, though he taught economics, has zero governing experience to show us how he would handle the economy.  If he's the nominee, he'll be hit endlessly by claims that he knows nothing about governing or handling the economy.

        by deminva on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 08:42:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Separating the Dean Campaign from Candidate Dean (4.00 / 2)

          Deminva [DiVa] wrote: However, I see a far greater risk in ignoring the grassroots groundswell that already supports Dean.  If he does a better job of exciting our base and brings in more new and/or disaffected voters than Clark, then I believe we risk far more by ignoring that appeal.  Clark now has at his helm the same people who ran Gore's dreadful campaign.  I think there's terrible risk in trusting that team.

          Having been part of the grassroots swell for Dean I strongly believe that the grassroots has earned a place on the ticket. The most obvious way to do that would be to put Dean on the ticket as VP. The second way is for the Dean campaign to stay alive even if Dean is not on the ticket. They could support the Dem ticket for President but, perhaps more importantly, redirect their energies towards key congressional races. The Dean campaign and Dean the candidate are seperable in my mind. People power is going to be a factor next year with or without Dean.

          by Cogito on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 08:57:30 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Re: Separating the Dean Campaign from Dean (2.50 / 1)

            The Dean campaign and Dean the candidate are seperable in my mind.

            ummm, I definitely disagree with that primarily because Dean has attracted a lot of non-Democrats to his campaign. If he bows out, many will probably return to their party's candidate rather than support a Democrat that they are not interested in.

            Will Kerry get my vote? No. Gephardt? No. Lieberman? No.

            Edwards? Yes. Clark? Maybe.

            by Ray in TX on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 10:09:49 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Re: Separating the Dean Campaign from Dean (2.50 / 1)

              ummm, I definitely disagree with that primarily because Dean has attracted a lot of non-Democrats to his campaign.

              Okay.  And what have you read that supports this suppostion on your part?

              Look at the numbers in New Hampshire and Iowa and tell us all where you come up with that claim.

              by Bob Johnson on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 11:12:32 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Re: Separating the Dean Campaign from Dean (2.50 / 1)

                Well, my evidence is that everyone else has tried to replicate parts of Dean's campaign, but no one has replicated the Dean grassroots.  Maybe it's not the blog or the signature lines or even the criticism of Bush that makes Dean popular.  Maybe it's Dean.

                And if it's not Dean, it's still a mystery to the other candidates.  If some other candidate could crack the "what is it?" mystery, you'd have the solution to your electability crisis.  Don't blame Dean or his supporters, blame your candidate for not figuring out how to beat him.

                Disclaimer: This comment was made partially just to marvel at the skinny little column it would form.

                Prof. McCain
                By Iraq, is Pakistan near,
                While Czechoslovakia's here.
                Sunnis are Shi'a,
                Sudan is Somalia,
                and Putin's the German premier.

                by Michael D on Thu Oct 16, 2003 at 01:26:57 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

    •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.50 / 1)

      And all we have to do is hold the states that Gore won, while adding...any single state that Bush won.

      Well that's not really true.  You have to remember that the distribution of electoral votes has changed since the 2000 election.  If the results were exactly the same as 2000, the Repubs would win 278-260.  We'd win everything Gore won plus 10 more votes which could be a combination of 1, 2, or even 3 states.  

      Jake

      by asearchforreason on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 11:05:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.50 / 1)

    I'm actually surprised at how low Kucinich ranks in the California poll. CA Dems must really want to "win" at all costs, so they're factoring in "electability" as one of the highest factors. Odd.

    by Azrael on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:09:53 AM PDT

  •  Seems the pols are in full flux (3.50 / 4)

    Seems that Clark is pulling more of the white male over 40 vote more than Dean is, whereas Dean holds more of the female vote.

    But I think both candidates have their strengths in the demographics.

    I have very disturbing feelings about Clark however, which I have voiced before on the old forum. How anyone who is considering running for the Dem nomination who less than 2 years ago was raising money for the GOP is.. to put it mildly... incredible.

    Though I am still ABB even if Clark gets the nomination.

    I do however think that as more people become aware of Dean's record, he will gain more.

    cheers,

    Mitch Gore

    Wanna win in '08...?

    Put your money where your mouth is.

    by Lestatdelc on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:10:30 AM PDT

  •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.50 / 1)

    Am I the only one that's sort of frightened by the numbers in CA?  They aren't much different than the national numbers and Gore beat Bush in CA by a lot.  

    by Jefe Le Gran on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:10:57 AM PDT

    •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (3.50 / 2)

      Am I the only one that's sort of frightened by the numbers in CA?  They aren't much different than the national numbers and Gore beat Bush in CA by a lot.

      We are a bizzare breed out here. I wouldn't worry too much if I were you though. We spent so much time thinking about the gropenator the most people don't even know there is an election.

      Last night someone posted a NH poll in old Kos. It showed Dean with a 0/20 lead ovr Kerry. Any one have it? I can't find the old Kos.

      by Mike S on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:18:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (3.50 / 2)

    Yes, but can we agitate for instant poll runoff voting?!

    It's as if we had gone to war with starfish, and decided the way to win was slice off their arms and toss them back into the ocean. - Devilstower

    by Austin in PA on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:11:02 AM PDT

  •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.50 / 1)

    Wow, it took me forever to get the cookie to work in here. IE5, win2k, FYI ;) Had to force it to prompt for a cookie, and then always allow cookies. It just kept logging me out every time I went to link and discuss, then I would log in, and would kick me back out to the main page. Lather rinse and repeat.

    The campaign is heating up. I dig it. Do you have the latest Granite State poll? If this is Clark's chosen battle ground for his opening volley, and his numbers dont change radically, he's going to lose some serious momentum. Isn't he totally skipping Iowa?

    Either way, Dean's lead has widened, and Kerry looks like he can't get any MO againt Ho-Ho.

    The good news for the stragglers is that that if the undecideds are any indication, there's still alot of room for flux.

    The bad news, electoral strategies don't favor any running behind right now. A compacted schedule, and a crowded field ensure that this will be a problem for almost everyone.

    I have dreamed a dream, and now that dream has gone from me. - Nebuchadnezzar

    by Marius on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:14:20 AM PDT

    •  Front loading might be good (3.50 / 2)

      It allows the party time to unify behind whoever we nominate.

      I agree that the sooner that happens the better, but I see the flux now as a good thing, which defuse the GOP Wurlitzer for the time being. That the front loading and compacting of the primaries, will allow the party a quicker decision gate to reach, and then allow a quicker unification behind the nominee.

      Not sure how much this will be a factor (the quick decision aspect) but it can't hurt.

      cheers,

      Mitch Gore

      Wanna win in '08...?

      Put your money where your mouth is.

      by Lestatdelc on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:19:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Front loading might be good (4.00 / 2)

        As far as the party as a whole goes, I'm not sure it matters a great deal. The opposition has enough money to plant the seeds against all of the viable candidates.

        What it means from a strategic point of view is that you either need to lock up key states early on and have enough money to use that momentum to get through Super Tuesday, or have a huge organization and lots of money in many many key states, and alot of time already spent there.

        We shall see how this impacts various plans. If Lieberman were more likeable, his "marathon not a race" strategy could work.

        It hurts anyone who doesn't win the key states that they have staked out, and ,IMHO, Clark, unless he starts becoming really really dynamic. This isn't due to any part of his politics or persona, but because of his late entry into a crowded field with a compacted schedule. Its feasible, but really damn difficult given the competition at hand.

        I have dreamed a dream, and now that dream has gone from me. - Nebuchadnezzar

        by Marius on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:25:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Front loading might be good (2.50 / 1)

        In response to your comments: Will Clark eschew matching funds if his momemtum picks up and he can pull in a 15-20 million dollar Q-4?  I believe that Dean will be passing up on the matching funds as he should be able to meet his Q-3 numbers and that puts him pretty close to the federal limit if he takes the funds.  I ask this because the shorter primary schedule should let the unlimited candidates goldmine the hopefully unified party after Super Tuesday to go after Bush until the convention.  

        by fester on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 10:14:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  How predictive are Iowa and NH? (4.28 / 7)

    Remember, national polls aren't predictive of anything. Only early state contests are.

    Article by Shapiro in USA Today on this topic today... Democratic nominee could be a N.H.-Iowa loser

    "Historical precedent has given rise to two Iron Laws of presidential politics. Since 1976, when Jimmy Carter put the Iowa caucuses at the center of the political map, no candidate has been nominated for president without winning either Iowa or the New Hampshire primary. And the candidate with the most money in the bank on Jan. 1 of the presidential year invariably wins the primaries... But these arbitrary rules may well be rendered obsolete by the impossible-to-handicap Democratic race"

    He's wrong actually about that first part. In 1992, Clinton finished fourth in Iowa with only 3% of the vote, and finished second to Tsongas in New Hampshire 33% to 25%.

    by Southerner on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:14:32 AM PDT

    •  Re: How predictive are Iowa and NH? (4.50 / 2)

      I do recall a recent study, reported on NPR among other places, showing that 9 out of 10 of the most recent primary winners had the most money in the prior 12 months of funraising (before the first primary) and that 9 out of 10 were tops in the Gallup poll last conducted before the first primary.  Iowa, it turned out, was a not very useful predictor of the outcome and New Hampshire had some impact, but was less important that money or national poll numbers.  So, I have real doubts about the accuracy of frequently repeated Kos wisdom on this point.

      In any case, I don't think we are going to get a consensus on these measures.  Dean is going to have a lock on the money.  Clark is going to have the national poll numbers.  Gephardt may well win Iowa.  And NH alone doesn't necessarily take the others out of contention.

      The national polls are fluky and close.  This batch of three national polls has three different rankings and some dramatic poll to poll changes (like the big Lieberman drop -- also, what is up with Lieberman having two different ratings in the same poll, I can't confirm which is real without a link).  Different regions seem to be swinging different ways.  This could easily be the first brokered convention in thirty years -- making the late primary states important for once.

      "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities" -- Voltaire

      by ohwilleke on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 09:23:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (3.66 / 3)

    The ABC poll was in the field at the same time as the Gallup and Newsweek.  So what accounts for the big difference?  I mean, there's a ten-point difference in Dean's results here.

    But, the question it begs, as I posited on the Open Thread below, is whether or not Clark's initial appeal is wearing off and he's settling into the pack as just another one of the nine?  Not neccessarily whether he's peaked, but if it's clear now that he's not unquestionably the annointed one.  What did the WSJ say yesterday, "man of destiny"?  Is that less likely to be his epithet now?

    blog | -6.13, -5.95 | Live every week like it's Shark Week.

    by folkbum on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:15:52 AM PDT

    •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.50 / 1)

      Folkbum:

      I would chalk the 10-point swing you cite in Dean's numbers up to methodology, possibly with a bit of sampling quirkiness thrown in for good measure.

      We have our nominee. Now it's time to drink John McCain's milkshake.

      by Devin on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:19:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (3.33 / 3)

      What it sounds like to me is that the media is desperately lazy, and wanting to sound prescient when it comes to who's going to win.

      "See we said all along Kerry was the frontrunner!...Err, duh, its totally Dean, which we totally knew all along...Hey hey, this Clark guy is really, honestly and truly the front-runner; Has been the whole time. Uhh..yeah, check back when there's few damn candidates, what's the Kobe guy up to?"

      I have dreamed a dream, and now that dream has gone from me. - Nebuchadnezzar

      by Marius on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:20:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (1.78 / 14)

        I guess Dean wants to be a Washington DC insider now....

        Lobbyists Boost Dean in D.C.
        October 15, 2003
        By Chris Cillizza,
        Roll Call Staff

        Despite regularly bashing his opponents in the Democratic presidential race as Washington insiders, frontrunning former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean is relying on a group of seasoned lobbyists and other Washington political operatives to help guide his own inside-the-Beltway efforts.

        The group, which meets every two to three weeks, was organized by former Clinton administration official Maria Echaveste and Nikki Heidepriem, a former staffer to Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.). It includes roughly 25 people who assemble in an informal gathering of Capitol Hill staffers, lobbyists, lawyers, and employees of nonprofit and advocacy organizations. Heidepriem would not provide a full list of attendees, citing confidentiality concerns.

        "We try hard to let people know what is going on with the campaign and the candidate and that can have an effect," said Heidepriem, who is now a partner in the public affairs shop Heidepriem & Mager. "We try to be messengers of why we can win."

        Among those who regularly attend the meetings are former Rep. Toby Moffett (D-Conn.), now a lobbyist affiliated with the Livingston Group; former Democratic National Committee vice chairwoman Lynn Cutler of Holland & Knight; and Christine Varney, a Hogan & Hartsen attorney who served as the general counsel on the first Clinton presidential bid and as a Federal Trade Commissioner from 1995 to 1997.

        Terry Lierman, a former Hill staffer, lobbyist and House candidate who now serves as Dean's national finance co-chair, is also a regular participant.

        Jay Carson, a spokesman for the Dean campaign, praised the efforts of the group.

        "They were with Howard Dean in Washington before being with Howard Dean in Washington was cool," said Carson. "They recognized that he has the vision that we need."

        Dean's beachhead in the lobbying community led several of his opponents in the Democratic primary to question his credentials as an "outsider" candidate.

        "Once again, Howard Dean's message is, `Watch what I say, not what I do,'" said Steve Elmendorf, a senior adviser to Rep. Richard Gephardt (Mo.).

        Heidepriem said the group was initially formed in February as a vehicle to help Dean court superdelegates to the Democratic convention -- specifically House Members and Senators.

        Drawing on her experience as the Congressional liaison for the 2000 presidential candidacy of former Sen. Bill Bradley (D-N.J.), Heidepriem began to conduct informal meetings to update interested parties on the progress of the Dean campaign.

        As Dean began to receive Congressional endorsements -- Rep. Zoe Lofgren (Calif.) was the first House Member to get on board -- the group quickly became an information clearinghouse for the Dean campaign.

        Echaveste, who also serves a senior policy adviser for Dean's campaign, noted that "running for president is unlike running for anything else because you have to develop policy and have something to say about a whole bunch of issues that you might never have had to address as governor of Vermont."

        "If there is a need for a particular policy expertise we try to be useful to [Dean] when we can," Heidepriem added, who explained that Lofgren, along with Sens. Patrick Leahy (Vt.) and Jim Jeffords (I-Vt.), are now heading up efforts to recruit their colleagues.

        Despite his status as the unquestioned frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, Dean still badly trails Gephardt in the chase for Congressional endorsements.

        Gephardt, a former leader of his party in the House, now has 32 Member supporters. Dean's 10 backers trail the totals of Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry (18), Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman (13) and retired Gen. Wesley Clark (12). Clark's Congressional supporters have claimed that he will end up with upwards of 50 Member endorsements.

        The Dean group regularly meets with campaign manager Joe Trippi when he travels to the city and is in regular touch with the fundraising operation in hopes of helping to swell the governor's coffers.

        "There is a lot of income in this area," said Lierman. "This is a place to cultivate financing for a campaign."

        Through June 30, Dean received more than $500,000 in contributions from the District, Virginia and Maryland. He brought in more than $25 million in the first nine months of the year, putting him far in front of his eight rivals for the nomination.

        Varney, who heads up the Internet Practice Group at Hogan & Hartson, said she has held several fundraisers on behalf of Dean and has also set up some small-group meetings with "opinion leaders in the public affairs community."

        Varney added that she primarily advises Dean on economic issues with a New Democrat bent but would never categorize herself as a member of Dean's "kitchen cabinet."

        Cutler, who twice ran unsuccessfully for Congress from Iowa in the early 1980s before moving on to work in the Clinton White House, said she told Dean in January that she was supporting him after seeing him speak to a conference of Democratic mayors.

        Since then Cutler has made numerous calls to the Hawkeye State on Dean's behalf even as the former governor has emerged as the co-frontrunner in the state's first-in-the-nation caucus scheduled for Jan. 19, 2004.

        Cutler has also used her experience working with local government during the Clinton administration to help organize mayors and other locally elected officials for Dean. "Truth be told, these are the folks who have the ground operation," she said.

        Cutler is also one of a handful of advisers to Dean on tribal issues.

        Each of the members of the Dean group admits that he or she has run into some skepticism when it comes to pitching the former governor's candidacy to colleagues.

        "There's a lot of chatterers," said Cutler. "People are having trouble believing he can do it."

        But, they counter, most Washington-based strategists have seen Dean only in televised debates ("Not his best forum," argued Cutler) and not out on the stump in early primary states.

        "It is harder when you are inside the Beltway to connect with the passion Democrats feel," said Varney. "There is a difference when you are coming from outside of Washington."

        Still, many Democrats -- especially those who closely monitor House and Senate races -- remain concerned that Dean at the top of the ticket could hurt them in the South and other key battlegrounds in 2004.

        Many observers float the idea that given Dean's momentum the race will come down to him and an "establishment" candidate who at this point appears to be Clark.

        Cutler warns that an organized "stop Dean" movement among Democratic Party regulars could have long-term deleterious effects.

        "If at the end of the day it doesn't work out for the governor, if it is seen in any way, shape or form that he was forced out by the leadership of the party, [Dean's backers] are gone," she said. "They will not come back for someone else."

        Copyright 2003 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved.

        Never separate the lives you live from the words you speak. -Paul Wellstone

        by jmiller on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:21:20 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.50 / 0)

          Was that really intended to be a response to me?

          I have dreamed a dream, and now that dream has gone from me. - Nebuchadnezzar

          by Marius on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:34:59 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.50 / 1)

          You know it really is a violation of copyright laws to copy and paste entire articles. Can't you say something like: "Oooooooh, Dean has people working for him in Washington. What an evil bastard."

          Every good Christian should line up and kick Jerry Falwell's ass. - Barry Goldwater, 1981

          by Doug in SF on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:37:41 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.50 / 1)

            Unless this is considered campaign information, but for the most part, I agree with you. Please stop with the copy+paste stuff. Even if it does fall under fair use, it irks me to no end.

            by dpk on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 08:02:43 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  And learn how to link (2.50 / 0)

          nm

          Every good Christian should line up and kick Jerry Falwell's ass. - Barry Goldwater, 1981

          by Doug in SF on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:39:15 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Re: And learn how to link (2.50 / 0)

            OT: Doug, I would email you this, but your email is (wisely) hidden: I've stolen your tagline, so I hope that's ok.  Imitation, flattery, and all that.

            Prof. McCain
            By Iraq, is Pakistan near,
            While Czechoslovakia's here.
            Sunnis are Shi'a,
            Sudan is Somalia,
            and Putin's the German premier.

            by Michael D on Thu Oct 16, 2003 at 01:08:46 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (3.66 / 6)

          Let me get this straight: a very small number of insiders and lobbyists decide that they like Dean. Then, without pay and without promises of favors they decide to stump for the guy. Dean is grateful for this show of support, which is never suggested to be based on anything other than wanting to get Dean elected because he is best for the country, after all, these people are said to have supported him when he was a blip on the national polls.

          And this shows hypocrisy on Dean's part? Please. The person who posted this (next time use a link) used a quote from Wellstone at the bottom. Did Wellstone never enjoy the support of a Washington insider of lobbyist while he railed against lobbyists and Washington insiders? Wellstone wasn't a hypocrite about it, and neither is Dean. Not everyone in Washington deserves to get painted with the same brush.

          "We're borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the planet." Al Gore

          by jd in nyc on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:51:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.50 / 2)

          (Dean Supporter)
          I am so tired of all the "Dean is unpure" comments I see in here.  Yeah, he does want to be a Washington insider.  He wants to be President!  He is -- by definition -- working within the system.  If you want a candidate who never engages with the system, it's a sure thing they ain't never gonna get elected.

          by Ivy on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 07:07:36 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (3.50 / 2)

            And let's not forget that after the election is over, the guy has to govern for four years. That includes working with the Congress, the civil service lifers, the NGOs and, yes, lobbyists and interest groups. That's the system. Those of us old enough to remember the Carter administration know that outsider "purity" makes for ineffective government. And as fine a man as Jimmy Carter is, he was largely an ineffective president because of his refusal to engage the system in all its imperfect reality.

            Stupidity kills more Americans each year than terrorism, lightning, and bad gravy combined. -- Hunter

            by jmart on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 07:58:04 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.50 / 4)

          So much for the idea that registering will keep out the trolls!

          Dump Bush!

          by dave on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 07:09:10 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.50 / 1)

            Well, not immediately...

            by kcavness on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 07:09:57 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (3.16 / 6)

              First of all...that wasn't intended to be a response to you Marius....apologies. i'm still trying to get a handle on this new format.

              Secondly, the posting of that article from Roll Call was simply tongue and cheek.  No need for everyone to get defensive....I also posted the whole thing because I wasn't sure how many people had an account with Roll Call.

              Cheers

              jmiller, a humble Clark and Kerry supporter.

              Never separate the lives you live from the words you speak. -Paul Wellstone

              by jmiller on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 07:21:33 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (3.33 / 6)

                "Secondly, the posting of that article from Roll Call was simply tongue and cheek.  No need for everyone to get defensive...."

                That does not compute, I'm not even sure what you're trying to say. The article wasn't intended as a joke by Roll Call, and you, as a Clark/Kerry supporter didn't mean for the joke to be at anyone's expense except Dean's. If it's a pot shot, why shouldn't we defend against it? I thought we responded with a degree of restraint. I know I restrained myself.

                "We're borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the planet." Al Gore

                by jd in nyc on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 07:39:10 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (2.50 / 1)

          You really should just post a link to articles, and not the entire article. Copyright concerns aside, not everyone may need 3 screenfulls of article ;)

          Always be sincere, even if you don't mean it.

          by justinb on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 07:22:43 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Calling George McFly...? (2.50 / 0)

      You mean "man of destiny" as the memorable quip by George McFly?

      ;)

      cheers,

      Mitch Gore

      Wanna win in '08...?

      Put your money where your mouth is.

      by Lestatdelc on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:23:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (3.50 / 2)

    I still say when all's said and done it will be a Dean/Edwards ticket.

    by Jim J on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:23:11 AM PDT

  •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (3.50 / 2)

    For some reason, I really don't think we will see much movement in these polls for the rest of the fall. There's only about another 6 weeks or so until we get to holiday time, and I believe that most of the early adopters have made their preliminary (or, in the case of many here, final and irrevocable) choice. Unless there is some kind of major event or scandal involving one of the candidates, I think we're at  the point were the politicking gets real, and that means watch the early states for the action.

    And, I'd just like to say that the more I use Scoop, the more I love, love, love it. It's like a bar I used to really like hanging out in was refurbished to re-capture the ambience . . .

    disclaimer: I'm John Kerry's Internet Director

    by BriVT on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:24:37 AM PDT

    •  Re: Yummy poll goodness (3.00 / 3)

      I am a Dean supporter, active in my city/state.  Clealry, his momentum slowed/stopped in late Septmebr/early October givent he constant attacks, some slow and indirect repsonses the campaign made to those attacks, and the entry of Clark.  I find this latest batch of polls interesting because it indicates that any bleeding has been stopped.  Dean looks pretty solid in most of the polls.  New Iowa poll and latest NH polls confierm prior (pre-Clark) data.  Field poll shows how CA favors the outsider with CLark/Dean dominating as a tandem.  I'd also note that the Dean campaign is getitng more aggressive on attacks and policies.  I have gotten numerous emails formthe cmapaign of late outlinging specirfic positions and alos direclty repsonding to Kerry attacks in a timely manner.  So my point is that the race has stabilized somewhat with no one showing great momentum but with Dean still on top.

      Anyone seen the official fundraising numbers yet?

      Is there anyway to sort the comments purely chronologically?

      Once in awhile you get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right

      by Direwolf on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:32:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Electability (4.81 / 11)

    Ruy Teixeira (who would be cited much more often if his name wasn't so difficult to spell) breaks down the electability index from the recent Gallup poll.

    It shows Dean beating Clark among liberals and very competitive among women but no measurable advantage among groups that Deaniacs claim to own, the youth vote, for example (Clark 21, Dean 16). Clark also beats Dean in every income group under $75,000 a year.

    < 20k       Clark 26, Dean 5

    1. k - 30k   Clark 17 Dean 15
    2. k - 50k   Clark 18, Dean 10
    3. k - 75k   Clark 21 Dean 18
    4. k +       Clark 25, Dean 26
    Clark also has a stunning advantage among male voters (29 to Dean's 17) Moderate Dems ( 24 to Dean's 11 with Kerry and Lieberman tied at 12 each) and conservative Democrats (23 to Dean's 7, Lieberman's 13 and Kerry's 9)

    Teixeira literally wrote the book on Democratic electability in the general election, he claims that women, minorities and professionals are reliably democratic and even a poorly run campaign (i.e. Gore) can carry the states and the 267 electoral votes where they dominate.

    The real concern is that the very groups where Clark runs strong (Moderate to conservative dems, young people, males, working class voters) are more likely to go Republican or not at all if Clark is not the nominee. Barring a third party challenge, Dean's supporters are fare more reliable in the general.

    There's a case to be made for Dean's electability, on gun issues, fiscal discipline and the like, but the center of the party isn't hearing him make it. Until he does, electability is a serious concern when the lines get drawn ntext year.

    by JonnyAction on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:25:13 AM PDT

    •  Re: Electability (2.50 / 1)

      Seems to me that the opposition in 2k4 will charge up the base no matter who is running. He's been the most divise President since Nixon, and for policy reasons, not impeachment. One can dream though.

      I have dreamed a dream, and now that dream has gone from me. - Nebuchadnezzar

      by Marius on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:28:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Re: Electability (3.00 / 3)

      Clark does not poll well among young people.

      The CA poll breakouts show that his appeal is predominately over 40 white males. A good thing mind you, but he does not do as well as Dean or several other candidates in the under 25 demographic.

      Also, given that Generation Dean is going to be having a real impact on the 18 - 24 vote on campuses across the country, I see Dean pulling away there as things progress.

      cheers,

      Mitch Gore

      Wanna win in '08...?

      Put your money where your mouth is.

      by Lestatdelc on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:29:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Electability (2.50 / 1)

        I thinking you're jumping the gun on this one. According to the CA poll Clark is polling at 8% while Dean is at 9% for the 18-39 age group, not statistically significant. Futhermore Lieberman is leading the pack with 23% of the 18-39 group. I'd discount this to lack of name recognition.

        by suresh on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 08:47:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Re: Electability (4.00 / 3)

      The problem I consistently have with these analyses is that the general election is over a year away. The strategy for the nomination fight is to sew up the reliably Democratic voters first because those are the ones that vote in the primaries. The fact that Dean has done so simply means that he has done a good job sewing up the base. It is not predictive of his ability to garner those voters against Bush next year. It doesn't mean he won't; it doesn't mean he will. It just means that right now, in comparison to the other candidates, Dean does better with the base of the party.

      National poll reading at that detailed a level is really not a very fruitful exercise this early in the game.

      disclaimer: I'm John Kerry's Internet Director

      by BriVT on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:35:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Re: Electability (2.50 / 1)

      Ruy Teixeira (who would be cited much more often if his name wasn't so difficult to spell)...

      And who would be cited much more often if he didn't write a totally idiotic book fantasizing about an emerging Democratic majority...

      Not that there would be anything wrong with that.

      by Jim J on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:43:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Re: Electability (2.50 / 0)

      Ruy Teixeira (who would be cited much more often if his name wasn't so difficult to spell)

      ha! nice

      +++

      also- while we're talkin' electability, does anyone know where to find that breakdown of each candidate's potential strategy?  it was a state-by-state outline for all the primary dems that was written (i think) by either kos or ruy.  if anyone remembers what i'm talking about and could point me in the right direction, i's be much obliged...

      We declared war on terror--it's not even a noun, so, good luck. After we defeat it, I'm sure we'll take on that bastard ennui. (jon stewart)

      by jb in nyc on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:45:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Re: Electability (3.50 / 2)

      So many Clinton/DLC folks are piling on Dean daily that one of them is soon likely to suffocate at the bottom of the pile.

      What I find humorous about these "electability" and "he-hates-Medicare" attacks from the DLC mouthpieces is that they give themselves way too much credit for electing Bill Clinton.

      They perceive themselves as some sort of "kingmakers" yet they weren't such geniuses when it came to running Al Gore's campaign.

      What they had during the Clinton campaign was Bill Clinton, a great campaigner.  Gore was no Bill Clinton.  And Clark appears to be much more akin to Al Gore as a campaigner.

      We'll see if the poll-happy DLC crowd turns Clark into yet another DLC milquetoast candidate. Maybe Clark will grab hold of his own campaign.  He hasn't shown signs of doing that yet and unless he does, I believe he'll fade.

      by Bob Johnson on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:53:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Electability (2.50 / 1)

        A big agreement on them having Clinton, Bob. Personally I dont think any of the Dems have that Clinton aura, but hopefully what they will have  , whoever  the nominee is, is Clinton by their side. The big dog would still win an election in a heartbeat. The dems need to pound home the fact they presided over a WH that balanced the budget, and created the most prosperous expansion of the American economy ever.That alone can probably win it for them. Are we better of now then we were 4 years ago?  If they can show the links to the neocon agendas, and sucking up to special interests at the expense of the taxpayers, I think that could clinch it. To ignore Clinton, as Gore found out, would be a big mistake.The man still has it.

        by mickey on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 07:17:19 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  DLC is flat out deluded (4.00 / 5)

        They also had Perot pulling future McCain GOP voters.

        There have been many statistics showing how Perot pulled more away from Bush I than from Clinton.

        I agree that Bill was dynamic enough to stand on his own, but what you are pointing out, about the DLC deluding themselves that their milquetoast crap has been a success is flat out bullshit. They have consistently framed the rhetoric away form the parties positions, which are time and again shown to be favored by the general populace.

        The DLC in less than 10 years has handed the White House and both chambers of Congress to the GOP by moderating the rhetoric and not hammering constantly on the party position on the issues. The Democratic position is a constant winner in poll after poll, yet the DLC tactic of sounding like milquetoast centrist (i.e. GOP lite) while far-right hyperventilate on the attacks, and the GOP candidate press releases "stay above the fray" and co-opt the language of the left.

        Sounding like milquetoast GOPs, while the Dem position on the issues is a winner, and not hammering that home is a fault that rests squarely on the entire DLC and their lame nonsense that their spin is responsible for wining (when the record shows the exact opposite).

        cheers,

        Mitch Gore

        Wanna win in '08...?

        Put your money where your mouth is.

        by Lestatdelc on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 08:20:57 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Re: DLC is flat out deluded (2.50 / 1)

          Mitch,

          You won't get any argument from me on that.  That's why I question Clark's staying power.

          The mood this year seems to be "anti-Washington" and the DLC can't stake out that position. It doesn't fit with their agenda.

          Clark's "outsider" status may fade as he is poll-managed into oblivion by his handlers.

          I'll wait and see if he stands up for himself.  But if yesterday's announcement of a new volunteer service corps is any indication, he won't have the bite needed to grab the Dem electorate.

          Those DLC guys will overmanage and overproduce him until he is nothing but an amorphous blob.

          I hope he doesn't let that happen.

          by Bob Johnson on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 08:29:18 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Re: DLC is flat out deluded (2.50 / 1)

          There have been many statistics showing how Perot pulled more away from Bush I than from Clinton.

          No, there haven't. Polls at the time indicated an equal split.

          by Shawn on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 08:41:04 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Wrong (2.50 / 1)

            Sorry, you are talking out your backside on this.

            Perot DID hurt Bush more than he hurt Clinton in 92.

            Perot clearly hurt Bush in 1992.  Perot's voters outside the South  tended to be White Conservatives from somewhat lower income districts.   These voters were part of Ronald Reagan's base of support.

            In 96, Perot's support shifted (and was reduced significantly) to lower wage earning voters. And in 96 was a wash and did not hurt Dole more than Clinton. However Clinton had a re-surging economy, and the incumbency to help him. Also Dole was/is not a great campaigner and his previous failed attempts and Senatorial record did not help him establish himself as an instrument of change in DC and certinaly failed to connect with his lame attempts to cast himself as "an everyman" crap.

            cheers,

            Mitch Gore

            Wanna win in '08...?

            Put your money where your mouth is.

            by Lestatdelc on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 09:00:44 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Re: DLC is flat out deluded (2.50 / 1)

            yeah, there was even a perot guy here who worked on his campaign and posted about the nearly equal divide between dems and reps who supported perot.

            Purple Hearts and Bleeding Hearts Unite!

            by josh in chi town on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 09:03:00 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Correction: (2.50 / 0)

          I agree that Bill was dynamic enough to stand on his own, but what you are pointing out, about the DLC deluding themselves that their milquetoast crap has been a success is flat out bullshit

          That was worded wrong.

          I was trying to say that I agree that Bill was dynamic enough to stand on his own, but what you are pointing out, about the DLC deluding themselves that their milquetoast crap has been a success, is the flat out bullshit that's killing the party.

          cheers,

          Mitch Gore

          Wanna win in '08...?

          Put your money where your mouth is.

          by Lestatdelc on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 08:46:44 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Everyone already knew this (2.75 / 4)

      Dean's base is rich ($75,000k and up) urban voters...way to "expand" the party. We've just been killed in the big cities of late...

      Peace, freedom and a few less fat bastards eating all the pie

      by JPP on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 07:38:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Everyone already knew this (4.33 / 3)

        While a Gephardt supporter I must say that Dean has done a great deal expanding the base particularly among young people 18-24 (read: College Kids).  Republicans have made amazing inroads among this group with the Coulter/Carlson/D'Souza crowd but on the whole they would be good Democrats until many of them start making a lot of money and become Republicans because they want to keep their money.  

        Dean has been very effective in getting these normally apathetic folks very active and for the Democrats to boot.

        Sí, ella puede. Las abuelitas y las tías will decide this thing in the end - si no, somos chingadas.

        by TX Dem in DC on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 08:04:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Actually, I don't agree (2.50 / 0)

          I'm a bit more skeptical of that than I had been for some time. Being in Seattle I feel as though I've got a good feel for what the Dean campaign is about nationally and I just don't see much value added. The reason is that these "new" younger voters are merely younger voters who would normally gravitate towards Dems anyway (rather aside from the issue that young people have been the lifeblood of campaigns for a while). It's only my impression, but I don't think Dean is or can deliver what his backers are promising.

          Peace, freedom and a few less fat bastards eating all the pie

          by JPP on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 08:26:09 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Everyone already knew this (4.60 / 5)

        There is no doubt that Dean is pulling in as activists lots of people who, if they make it to the polls, would have voted for the Democrat anyway, and among the $75K+ crowd, most probably would have voted anyway.

        But, there is more to politics than voting.  What Dean is doing is turning a lot of Democratic voters into Democratic activists.  This is crucial for the party.  Activists provide money, labor, endorsements and buzz for campaigns and for the party.  They are the people who get signs in yards and create conventional wisdom.  Once in the system, they often stay there.

        Reagan was important to the Republicans because he rebuilt the Republican coalition.  Dean is important because he is activating people by bringing them into the party and may also expand the Democratic coalition.

        The big gap in American politics is a lack of clear home for fiscally conservative, socially liberal people.  People like Howard Dean.  In the California recall, Schwartzenger won with their support.  In Denver, Colorado, Hickenlooper won the Mayoral race over traditional Democrat Mares, with an unprecedented majority with the same base of support.  The national Republican party has given a big razzy to social liberals regardless of their economic intents, but there are a lot of Republican governors who have been more moderate on social issues.    

        Mainline Christian church members, Episcopalians, ELCA Lutherans, Presbyterians, United Church of Christ members, despite socially liberal theologies and moral values, now vote their pocket books rather than their morals in overwhelming numbers.  A person like Dean allows those people to enter the Democratic coalition.

        Our society is becoming far less blue collar.  For better or worse, a third of the manufacturing jobs in the U.S. has gone overseas in the past three decades, and the number of people in farming has declined almost every year since the country was founded.  There are few people in the private sector, on a percentage basis, in unions than at any time in the history of the U.S. since the 1920s.  

        Dean Christians could be just as important in the long term politics of the U.S. as Reagan Democrats were.

        "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities" -- Voltaire

        by ohwilleke on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 09:43:35 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Re: Electability: foolishness or hucksterism? (4.00 / 6)

      I appreciate Ruy Teixeira's work, but let's not fall into the trap of mistaking one man's theory for an immutable law of physics. It's one interpretation of the ever-changing voting patterns of the electorate. It's a theory, that's all. And I'm not impressed that he "wrote a book" on the subject. I have read scads and scads of bad books. The fact that he wrote a book only means that he is diligent and industrious in the promotion and dissemination of his work. He's entitled to his opinion, and I want to hear it, that's for sure, but the powerful conclusions - the "Dean won't win the swing-voter youth vote" and the "Dean can't win the under $75k vote" rhetoric - are foolish at best and deceptive at worst.

      You can't predict the outcome of a race with any dead-sure precision so far in advance. Predicting the outcome of the 2004 general election is no less complicated than predicting the weather for a specific place on that first Tuesday of next November. Will it be above or below average temperature if Dean is the nominee? If anyone is ready to plunk down good money and support a candidate on the basis of this spiel, they can give me a call. I'll give you ten reasons why the Rams are a "stone-cold lock" to beat the Packers in St. Louis next weekend. And you take it to the bank.

      To argue that these theories are laws is foolishness or hucksterism. I wish the DLC and the highly educated, elite Clark supporters would stop cloaking their promotion of their man in this pseudo-academic science-babble. Tell it to us straight. You like Clark, and you have enough Ph.D. training to interpret poll data in such a way that might persuade others to like him too.

      In the meantime, anecdotal evidence is more compelling to me. Dean won't poll well with young people? Dean won't poll well with people from households that make less than 75k? Then why are a group of students at my university holding a meeting in a quarter-hour to figure out how they can best promote Dean? These students are hard-working and hail from middle- to lower-middle class homes. Compared to students at other schools, they don't have time for clubs, fraternities, sororities, or even much of a social life. No trust funds, little sense of entitlement. I'm surprised they're organizing for anyone, and I've yet to see any kind of student organization for any other candidate. I am a Dean supporter, but I'm not totally blind. We have Dean posters on every bulletin board. No other political candidate has even a single poster. When I start seeing groups of self-starting Clark supporters holding their own meetings, then I'll be more inclined to believe this interpretation of poll data which you're hawking with a disingenuous academic objectivity.

      In the meantime, Dean's rapid ascent from nowhere to front-runner is proof enough to me that he can beat Bush as well as any other Democratic candidate.

      by ten nights on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 07:54:19 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Electability: foolishness or hucksterism? (4.00 / 3)

        I'd suggest you read the internals upon which RT's conclusions are based before dismissing it as the product of crystal ball gazing.

        There's alot of navel gazing that goes on here (have to include myself at times as well) about Candidate X or Y or Z, but the discussion here concerns something a bit more substantive than the usual speculation. I will concede it is only a snapshot, but any honest Dean supporter should be worried about the picture this poll paints of who his supporters are - rich coastal liberals. There is more to it of course, but that's not good news...

        Peace, freedom and a few less fat bastards eating all the pie

        by JPP on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 08:31:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Re: Electability: foolishness or hucksterism? (none / 0)

          I appreciate that JPP, as an alternative to being called foolish at best and deceptive at worst.

          What is it about blog comments pages that bring out the masturbatory posturing?

          Insanity is attempting regime change in the same region twice and expecting a different result.

          by JonnyAction on Sat Nov 01, 2003 at 03:14:32 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  So lonely . . . (2.50 / 0)

    Am I really the only Gephardt supporter who posts here?  I always knew I was in the minority, but sheesh . . .

    by Trapper John on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:30:44 AM PDT

    •  Re: So lonely . . . (2.50 / 0)

      Take heart Trapper, its early yet ;)

      I like Gep, just isn't my horse this time around.

      I have dreamed a dream, and now that dream has gone from me. - Nebuchadnezzar

      by Marius on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:32:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Re: So lonely . . . (2.50 / 0)

      Come to the dark side, Trapper J: Join with the LaRouchies! LaRouche for President! Your Gephardt stands no chance against the likeness of him.

      I wouldn't worry about the whole being-the-lone-supporter thing. Gephardt hasn't been spending a lot of time trying to get Internet support, preferring instead to focus on the unions, so it's unsurprising that he's not captured that much of the fringe sports-viewers like DailyKOS readers.

      by kcavness on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:34:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: So lonely . . . (4.00 / 3)

        I'm trying to understand the supposed "Internet Monolith" that is being talked about. Are we really to expect that people on the internet take candidates who use the internet as a tool to be our primary candidates? I mean, if Lieberman had an awesome blog, and used the internet for all his organization, fundraising, and information dissemination, would he be the weapon of choice for the "internet community?" I think the fact that there are sites like DKos, and Freeperland in the same "community" should blow away any notion of a monolithic community, lurching around waiting to be talked to via palm pilots and instant messengers. It seems like we would take our offline biases online. The medium doesn't change the message, does it?

        I have dreamed a dream, and now that dream has gone from me. - Nebuchadnezzar

        by Marius on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:38:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Re: So lonely . . . (3.00 / 2)

          I think that it's just that if attention is paid to a group of people -- bloggers, say -- those people will focus on them. Clark and Dean paid attention first to bloggers, and thus got a lot of support by simple fiat.

          First impressions really do count, and I don't think it has to do with the internet exactly so much as it does who noticed whom first.

          Lieberman had a lot of support just about everywhere until fairly recently; he has run a rather bizarre campaign to this point, at least from my perspective. But if you look at the people who post here, the vast majority seem to be divided into the Dean/Clark camps, and I don't think that's an accident.

          Were Kerry, Gephardt, and Edwards to start paying real attention (rather than lip service) to the Internet, I think they'd have a lot more online supporters.

          by kcavness on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:48:59 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Re: So lonely . . . (4.50 / 4)

          if Lieberman had an awesome blog, and used the internet for all his organization, fundraising, and information dissemination, would he be the weapon of choice for the "internet community?"

          I think it's possible.  Look at someone like Ezra Klein, who really doesn't like Dean but has supported him (until recently, at least) because of his understanding of the participatory possibilities afforded by the internet.  Without the 'net, Dean (circa late 2001, before his leftward lurch on issues like trade) would have been an obscure New Dem governor from a small state.  Dean's 'net usage brought him the support of a number of people who may have been to his left, but who were genuinely impressed by Dean's netroots movement.  Kos, who never seemed that impressed with Dean's politics, might fit in that camp.

          Could Lieberman have done the same thing?  Who knows.  It's too weird to contemplate.  But I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility.   Because for at least some of Dean's supporters, the medium is in fact the message.  And for someone like me -- who doesn't like Dean's states'-rights, balanced-budget-fetishist New Dem politics at all -- the medium, and the way he's mastering it, is the most attractive thing about an otherwise unattractive candidate.  

          by Trapper John on Wed Oct 15, 2003 at 06:51:09 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Re: So lonely . . . (4.00 / 2)

            I won't deny that the way Dean is using the internet is the reason a great many people are supporting him. His organization, and the fact that I'm ABB, is the reason I like him. Its not his fiscal conservativism, federalism, or looks, I'll put it that way.

            But I think a distinction between medium and message is getting blurred with posts like this. His (at least pseduo) grassroots,