Those are my two as well. I think you can pretty well cede Iowa to Gephardt and New Hampshire to Dean, but I don't think either win means much, since they are tiny amounts of delegates and those victories are already factored into the price of the stock, as it were. The 3rd of February is going to be a big make-or-break day for Edwards and Clark, with SC, OK, AZ, and NM. If either man emerges from those with a clear lead, I think they roll into the TN and VA primaries a week later with sufficient momentum to cement themselves as the Dean alternative.
I like Dean. I try not to be reflexively anti-Dean. But I just can't believe that he's the guy to reassemble the coalition.
Dean's comment was offensive and seemingly born in ignorant condescension. His focus on the anti-war stance seems fundamentally weak -- it has no affirmative, positive core that would let him seize the agenda; and any good news from the Iraq, Afghanistan, or overall al Qaeda front will significantly boost Bush's standing against Dean.
So like you both I've flirted with Clark. But so far I haven't been convinced that he has any strong affirmative positions. And he lacks the poltical genius to win the election on talent alone.
Does he have a stance on the issues that attracts you, or do you see him first as an electable candidate and have faith that his positons will develop favorably over time?
I really do trust him on foreign policy. Apart from that, I figure he's a moderate, basically inoffensive, New Democrat. The rest, as you say, is perceived electability.
Those are my two as well. I think you can pretty well cede Iowa to Gephardt and New Hampshire to Dean, but I don't think either win means much, since they are tiny amounts of delegates and those victories are already factored into the price of the stock, as it were. The 3rd of February is going to be a big make-or-break day for Edwards and Clark, with SC, OK, AZ, and NM. If either man emerges from those with a clear lead, I think they roll into the TN and VA primaries a week later with sufficient momentum to cement themselves as the Dean alternative.
I like Dean. I try not to be reflexively anti-Dean. But I just can't believe that he's the guy to reassemble the coalition.
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 11- 8-03 2:13 PM
Dean's comment was offensive and seemingly born in ignorant condescension. His focus on the anti-war stance seems fundamentally weak -- it has no affirmative, positive core that would let him seize the agenda; and any good news from the Iraq, Afghanistan, or overall al Qaeda front will significantly boost Bush's standing against Dean.
So like you both I've flirted with Clark. But so far I haven't been convinced that he has any strong affirmative positions. And he lacks the poltical genius to win the election on talent alone.
Does he have a stance on the issues that attracts you, or do you see him first as an electable candidate and have faith that his positons will develop favorably over time?
-Magik
Posted by Magik | Link to this comment | 11- 9-03 12:02 PM
I really do trust him on foreign policy. Apart from that, I figure he's a moderate, basically inoffensive, New Democrat. The rest, as you say, is perceived electability.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 11- 9-03 12:34 PM