Is The Field Finally Set?
by Chris Bowers, Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 04:51:57 PM EST
January 26th:
The thing is, it is not as though Clark has broken any of these leaked "promises." Right now, he actually is running. Like virtually every other candidate who has announced, he is going through the steps people take before announcing the creation of an exploratory committee: talking with former supporters, getting on the phone with donors, consulting with staff about strategy, etc. In short, he is surveying the landscape to determine the viability and feasibility of another run. The only reason he would have delayed for so long now--nearly seven weeks--is because he has yet to find enough support to convince himself that the campaign would be worth it. This is, for example, the exact same reason that Kerry spent so long before making an announcement, and why he eventually decided against it.
One has to conclude, based on these delays, that Clark is currently leaning against a run in 2008. It certainly does not mean that he is out. After all, he waited a long time in 2004, and extremely careful consideration of the various possibilities might just be his political modus operandi. However, to survey the field for this long, and to twice leak that he was prepared to run only to continue to delay... well, it doesn't look good for Clark supporters.
It should also be noted that the fact Gore is doing none of these things is yet another reason to indicate he is not running. Unannounced candidates typically do the things Clark is doing now: calling donors, feeling out former supporters, and generally testing the waters. Whether or not you feel it is necessary for him to do so, Gore is doing none of that. He is, instead, repeatedly making statements that indicate there is a 99.9999% chance he will never run again. And the draft movement really isn't very active either.
If I had to bet, right now I would say the field is set. It looks like we have nine candidates: Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Edwards, Gravel, Kucinich, Obama, Richardson and Vilsack. I share the sentiments of the MyDD community in wishing that Biden and Gravel would drop out. Seven would not be a bad number to start with, and it would make the stages at debates a little less cluttered (and a little less focused on Senators). It might not be the field everyone hoped for, but at least we could get on with our lives after four months of seemingly constant announcements. People are complaining that the 2008 campaign is receiving far too much attention this far out (there are two complete baseball seasons before the next Presidential election, for example), but part of the reason it has received so much attention is that 19 different candidates have announced they are running for president over the last 120 days, and another six or seven prominent names have declared they are not running. Throw in the candidates who have made double announcements for exploratory committees and then official committees, as well as beat coverage of the superstars when they make their first trips to Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, and one can see how the announcement period itself has generated this enormous amount of coverage. When was the last time there were so many well-known candidates running, or even so many candidates running at all? Throw in a weakened sitting president, increased voter turnout, and the general upward trend in political activism over the past two years, and suddenly the "excessive" coverage of the presidential campaign starts making sense.
Over the Christmas holidays, Ret. Gen. Wes Clark told a close friend that, without a doubt, he would establish a presidential exploratory committee after the first of the year. And now?That was three and a half weeks ago. Considering that we were also "promised" something in January, this makes at least two extended delays after the deadline of a semi-promised decision.
A Clark adviser says the '04 candidate is "leaning towards setting up an exploratory then taking some time to explore." Clark accepted an invitation to speak at next weekend's DNC winter meeting in DC, along with the rest of the Democratic field. In addition, a major Democratic donor said that Clark has begun to make telephone calls to party donors."
The thing is, it is not as though Clark has broken any of these leaked "promises." Right now, he actually is running. Like virtually every other candidate who has announced, he is going through the steps people take before announcing the creation of an exploratory committee: talking with former supporters, getting on the phone with donors, consulting with staff about strategy, etc. In short, he is surveying the landscape to determine the viability and feasibility of another run. The only reason he would have delayed for so long now--nearly seven weeks--is because he has yet to find enough support to convince himself that the campaign would be worth it. This is, for example, the exact same reason that Kerry spent so long before making an announcement, and why he eventually decided against it.
One has to conclude, based on these delays, that Clark is currently leaning against a run in 2008. It certainly does not mean that he is out. After all, he waited a long time in 2004, and extremely careful consideration of the various possibilities might just be his political modus operandi. However, to survey the field for this long, and to twice leak that he was prepared to run only to continue to delay... well, it doesn't look good for Clark supporters.
It should also be noted that the fact Gore is doing none of these things is yet another reason to indicate he is not running. Unannounced candidates typically do the things Clark is doing now: calling donors, feeling out former supporters, and generally testing the waters. Whether or not you feel it is necessary for him to do so, Gore is doing none of that. He is, instead, repeatedly making statements that indicate there is a 99.9999% chance he will never run again. And the draft movement really isn't very active either.
If I had to bet, right now I would say the field is set. It looks like we have nine candidates: Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Edwards, Gravel, Kucinich, Obama, Richardson and Vilsack. I share the sentiments of the MyDD community in wishing that Biden and Gravel would drop out. Seven would not be a bad number to start with, and it would make the stages at debates a little less cluttered (and a little less focused on Senators). It might not be the field everyone hoped for, but at least we could get on with our lives after four months of seemingly constant announcements. People are complaining that the 2008 campaign is receiving far too much attention this far out (there are two complete baseball seasons before the next Presidential election, for example), but part of the reason it has received so much attention is that 19 different candidates have announced they are running for president over the last 120 days, and another six or seven prominent names have declared they are not running. Throw in the candidates who have made double announcements for exploratory committees and then official committees, as well as beat coverage of the superstars when they make their first trips to Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, and one can see how the announcement period itself has generated this enormous amount of coverage. When was the last time there were so many well-known candidates running, or even so many candidates running at all? Throw in a weakened sitting president, increased voter turnout, and the general upward trend in political activism over the past two years, and suddenly the "excessive" coverage of the presidential campaign starts making sense.
Tags: Al Gore, Media, President 2008, Wesley Clark (all tags)
-----------
myDD - skin
-----------
79 Comments