Reply #70: You Think Landrieu Won By Running Left?!?

[DoveTurnedHawk]

I'm not sure what planet you were on, but if Landrieu had put herself any closer to Bush during her re-election campaign, she would've been hugging him. It was all over the news, her ads touting how much she voted with Bush, etc. etc.

1) Your claim that Democrats have never won by turning out the base is false.

First of all, I didn't claim that "Democrats have never won by turning out the base," since that would be a ridiculous claim. What I *did* say was that Democratic presidential candidates historically have not won solely by energizing the base.

2) Your claim that military credentials are a necessary, but not a sufficient condition for victory, is also false.

Boy, you're 0 for 2 so far in terms of what I've said.

You have my sincere condolences on the death of your reading comprehension skills, however.

3) Taking 2 and 3, we can conclude it is possible a Democrat can be competitive in the south by turning out the base without military credentials.

I have always said it's POSSIBLE. It will just be HARDER, as any remotely honest political observer would indicate. That's all I've been trying to say, is that Clark is more electable than Dean. I never said Dean couldn't win.

Even you seem to imply a concession to my point that it would be harder for Dean to win, taking your choice of words "it is possible" into consideration.

Secondly, you are left with Clark's massive 5 point polling advantage compared to Dean head-to-head with Bush. This is not very big, you must admit, especially being at the critical 14 month point before the election.

This is true, but early indicators are all we've got. It shows a trend that will continue to be problematic for Dean as the campaign wears on, it's a deficit he'll have to trim, and considering the inherent difficulties he has in the South, I suspect it would be a long, hard road.

Secondly, given poll numbers change, and Dean has the fundraising, organization, message, tactics, and experience to win nasty campaigns, Dean appears to be the candidate that would do better against Bush, not Clark.

Clark will outraise Dean in Q4, mark my words.

As for organization, those can be built. If anything, your "14 months before the election" argument works in favor of Clark here, more so than Dean, because Clark can build his organization during that time, while Dean's fundamental messages and weaknesses to attack will be much harder to deal with. And it's impossible to change the fact of Dean's geography and lack of foreign policy credentials and military service, whether it's 14 months or 14 years from now.

Tactics and experience, we'll agree to disagree.

DTH