|
Iowa primary precinct caucus and caucuses news">
Iowa primary precinct caucus and caucuses news, reports
and information on 2004 Democrat and Republican candidates, campaigns
and issues Iowa
Presidential Watch's
IOWA DAILY REPORT Holding
the Democrats accountable today, tomorrow...forever.
THE DAILY
REPORT for Sunday, September 21, 2003
... QUOTABLE:
morning quotes:
… Among the offerings in today’s update:
morning offering:.
* CANDIDATES/CAUCUSES:
Morning
… Two of the original presumed frontrunners –
Gephardt and Lieberman – scheduled in Iowa today.
Lieberman to participate in Harkin-sponsored forum
in Cedar Rapids while Gephardt – the anticipated IA
favorite back in 2002 –has campaign stops from
Newton to Marshalltown to Amana and Coralville.
Basically, it’s just another caucus cycle Sunday in
the state. Tomorrow, Gephardt is scheduled to
deliver an agricultural policy speech south of
DSM.
… “Clark jumps in: Will he make a splash?” –
headline on editorial in today’s New Hampshire
Sunday News. Excerpt: “Retired General Wesley
Clark has entered the race for the Democratic
Presidential nomination. That makes an even 10 major
candidates. Provided no one else throws his or
her hat into the ring before the filing deadline,
which is at the end of this month, we can finally
get on with finding out which Democrat President
Bush will beat next November. OK, we jest. It is
not certain that Bush will win re-election. He has
low poll ratings on several points of domestic
policy, most importantly the economy, and a year is
a long, long time in the life of an election
campaign. But Bush is positioned well at this point.
Though the American people question some of the
President’s policies, they personally like him, and
most of them still think he’s done a good job
managing the federal government. Clark enters the
race as a blank slate. Americans admire their
military heroes, and Clark’s resume is very
impressive. Too bad for him that resumes count
for little in a Presidential race. The people
want to know what a President will do for them,
especially on the economy and other domestic issues
such as health care and federal entitlement
programs. The public has no idea what Clark
thinks about these issues, assuming he thinks about
them at all. With four months until the New
Hampshire primary, and with South Carolina’s primary
following about a week after that, Clark has
a tremendous amount of work to do in a very short
span of time. There are undecided Democratic donors
to be hit up and plenty of undecided voters to be
wooed. Is it possible that Clark could win
either the New Hampshire primary or the Iowa caucus?
Our Magic 8 Ball says ‘outlook not good.’
We don’t get the feeling that too many Democratic
voters are all that excited about Clark’s candidacy.
Even now they still seem to hold out hope that some
other knight in shining armor will stride in. He
doesn’t have to win either of these contests to wind
up as President, of course. All he has to do is
make a respectable finish. And he did get off to a
good start last week by stealing John Kerry’s New
Hampshire campaign spokesman. If he is to make
it to Super Tuesday, Clark must hope for many
more Kerry supporters to switch sides. With
all that is a mystery about Wesley Clark, one
thing is certain. He is highly ambitious. If he
makes a serious, energetic run at the nomination,
this race will be all the more interesting, and
entertaining, to watch.”
… Newsweek poll: Clark gets early
support, but could it be that it’s because he hasn’t
been around as long as the other wannabes? Or maybe
they haven’t heard about his indecisiveness on
whether to join this week’s debate – or his
flip-flop on the Iraq war resolution. Report by
Newsweek’s Laura Fording: “Retired Gen. Wesley
Clark may have only entered the presidential race on
Thursday, but he is already the Democratic
frontrunner, according to a new Newsweek poll. Clark
won support from 14 percent registered Democrats and
democratic leaners, outpacing former Vermont Gov.
Howard Dean (12 percent), Connecticut Sen. Joe
Lieberman (12 percent), Massachusetts Sen. John
Kerry (10 percent) and Missouri Congressman Dick
Gephardt (8 percent). Meanwhile, as Americans
focus on the fiscal realities of creating a stable
Iraq, President George W. Bush's approval ratings
continue to slide, the poll shows. The
president's approval rating now stands at 51
percent, down 1 point from last week's poll and from
65 percent on May 1, when major hostilities in Iraq
ended. For the first time in a year, Bush's
approval for his handling of the situation in Iraq
has dropped below 50 percent to 46 percent, a
5-point drop from last week. Fifty-six percent
of Americans say they think the amount of money
being spent in Iraq is too high. And 57 percent
of Americans now disapprove of how Bush is handling
the economy, an increase of 6 points from only
one week ago. The Newsweek poll was conducted by
Princeton Survey Research Associates, which
interviewed 1,001 adults by telephone on September
18 and 19. The margin of error is plus or minus 3
percentage points. Americans are divided on whether
Clark's military background gives him an edge in
national defense and security issues--40 percent
said it made them more confident in his abilities to
handle these areas while 42 percent said it didn't.
And more than half--52 percent--said it didn't
matter to them that Clark had never held
political office. Despite Clark's strong
entrance, the Democrats remain less than
enthusiastic about their choice in candidates. If
former Vice President Al Gore or New York Sen.
Hillary Clinton were to enter the 2004 presidential
race--both have said they will not run--loyalties of
Democrats would shift dramatically, with 33 percent
saying their first choice for Democratic nominee
would be Clinton, and 28 percent saying their first
choice would be Gore. Others in the race look
especially weak. The Rev. Al Sharpton polls
at 7 percent among registered Democrats and leaners,
while North Carolina Sen. John Edwards
received 6 percent, Florida Sen. Bob Graham 4
percent, and former Illinois Sen. Carol Moseley
Braun and Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich
received only 2 percent each. Nineteen percent of
Democrats and democratic leaners are still not sure
who they will vote for in the upcoming primary.
When registered voters were asked who they would
vote for if a general election if President George
W. Bush was pitted against Clark, Kerry or Dean,
none of the candidates were able to beat the
incumbent, although Clark fared better than the
others, polling at 43 percent to Bush's 47 percent.
Kerry was next, polling at 43 percent to Bush's 48
percent. Dean fared worst, with Bush beating him by
a full 14 points (52 percent to 38 percent).”
… Des Moines Register: Iowa Poll:
Headline from today’s Sunday Register: “Iowa
support for Bush tumbles” From copyright story
by Jonathan Roos in this morning’s Register: “President
Bush's popularity in Iowa has plunged as more Iowans
have become disenchanted with his handling of Iraq
and the economy. A new Des Moines Register poll
shows that 49 percent of Iowans approve of Bush's
overall job performance, a drop of 18 percentage
points from May. That's his lowest approval rating
in the Iowa Poll since taking office in 2001.
The president's highest mark was 84 percent
following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Changing
fortunes in Iraq have hurt the Republican's
popularity. In mid-May, after Bush's declaration
that major combat had ended, 71 percent of Iowa
adults approved of how he had dealt with the
conflict that drove Saddam Hussein from power.
Four months later, 47 percent applaud the president
as American forces try to rebuild the war-torn
country amid almost-daily guerrilla attacks. The
poll, taken Sept. 12-16, has a margin of error of
3.5 percentage points. Domestic problems are
taking their toll on Bush's popularity as well.
Fifty-eight percent of Iowans disapprove of his
handling of the federal budget, and 56 percent are
critical of his handling of the economy…Also,
related sidebar headline: “Bush vs. Democrats”
Report says Iowans “divided down the middle” on
whether to support GWB or the Dem nominee: 41% would
vote to re-elect the president, 41% would vote for
the Democratic candidate, 4% would vote for someone
else, 14% are “not sure.”
… Now, the Newest Wannabe faces another test –
raising money this late in the game. Headline
from yesterday’s New York Times: “Fund-Raisers
Greet Clark Warmly, but Not All Purses Open”
Excerpt from report by the Times’ Glen Justice: “Gen.
Wesley K. Clark has met Democratic fund-raisers from
California to New York in recent weeks in an effort
to finance his presidential run and has drawn a
mixed reaction of curiosity and caution. General
Clark had lunch with the film director Steven
Spielberg; received a call from Steve Kirsch,
founder of Infoseek, the Internet search engine, and
a major donor; and then went to a party where he was
the guest of honor at an event given by Jann Wenner,
publisher of Rolling Stone, efforts that yielded
varied results. Although Mr. Kirsch said he would
most likely support the general, Mr. Spielberg and
Mr. Wenner held off from raising money for the
primaries. ‘We recognize the challenge is to
convert all this unbridled enthusiasm and turn it
into meaningful contributions of money and time,’
said Mark Fabiani, an adviser to the general's
campaign. Strategists who have worked on
presidential campaigns said that as a fresh face in
the race General Clark could expect a burst
of contributions in the coming weeks. Maintaining
such support will depend on attracting established
fund-raisers and using the Internet to draw large
numbers of small donors. ‘The key is not the
first couple million,’ said Anita Dunn, a Democratic
consultant who worked on Bill Bradley's campaign in
2000. ‘The key is sustaining it.’ General
Clark is the 10th candidate in the Democratic
field. Most of the other candidates have cultivated
fund-raisers and gathered money since 2001. Some
will probably raise $20 million or more this year.
Whether a latecomer can attract enough cash is a
question that will turn on how Democrats receive
General Clark. The books close on third-quarter
financial reports on Sept. 30, and General
Clark's supporters hope that his meetings with
fund-raisers will energize efforts. ‘It's difficult
for people to make a commitment without having met
somebody or spending a bit of time,’ said Susan
Patricof, a fund-raiser in New York who supports the
general. ‘I'm confident that when people do meet
Wes, many of them will be very enthusiastic about
supporting him.’ Sarah Kovner, another
fund-raiser supporting him, said she was fielding
offers of money and help after she held a 70-person
reception for the candidate at her home in New York.
Jordan Kerner, a film producer in California, said
he had noticed great interest since holding a
200-person reception for the general. Mr. Kerner
said, ‘A lot of people made large commitments to
him, in the millions of dollars.’ One question
is whether General Clark's ties to former President
Bill Clinton will translate into money. ‘He's
from Arkansas, so he shares many friends with
President Clinton,’ said Skip Rutherford, a
fund-raiser who is president of the William J.
Clinton Presidential Foundation. Still, many
fund-raisers say they are waiting for a clear
Democratic front-runner to emerge. Battered by
requests, they are interviewing presidential
hopefuls to gain a sense of who can beat President
Bush. Melvyn Weiss, a lawyer who has assembled a
group of 25 donors and fund-raisers who hope to
identify the best candidate, said General Clark
had been well received by the group. ‘We've been
throwing money away in the past without thinking
about electability,’ Mr. Weiss said.”
… When he’s not battling Kerry (and the other
wannabes), Dean’s fighting city hall back home over
a $76.01 tax late fee. The Boston Herald’s Sarah
Schweitzer reported yesterday: “Democratic
presidential contender Howard Dean is battling the
city of Burlington, Vt., over a $76.01 fee for late
payment of his property taxes, a fee that he says
was unfairly assessed. Burlington city officials
are expected to take up the matter Monday night at a
hearing. A campaign spokeswoman for Dean said
he does not plan to attend. Earlier this month, a
subcommittee ruled against the former Vermont
governor, ordering him to pay the penalty. Dean
says he paid his quarterly tax assessment on time,
and at the same time, prepaid three other quarterly
assessments in a lump sum because, he wrote in a
letter, ‘my campaign keeps me so busy.’ The
payment was due Aug. 12, but the city says it
received Dean's check for $6,080.20 on Aug. 21.
Dean's Burlington home is assessed at
$221,300, according to city officials. Dean's
campaign released a statement yesterday saying: ‘The
Governor is exercising his right, as a citizen of
Burlington, to appeal the $76.01 in interest and
penalties and will abide by the decision of the
Board. This will come as no surprise to
Vermonters, who are well aware that Howard Dean is a
tightwad.’ Other Democratic presidential
contenders have also made been late paying their
taxes. North Carolina Senator John Edwards
said he was delinquent on more than $11,000 in
property taxes due on a house in Washington's
Georgetown section. A lapse by a Pittsburgh bank
caused a late payment of more than $10,000 in
property taxes owed on a vacation home overlooking
Nantucket Sound shared by Massachusetts Senator John
F. Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry.”
…New York Times report this morning says that
Clark, Edwards and Graham getting hard look as No. 2
on the Dem ticket. Lieberman discounted because he’s
done that already. Headline: “Looking out for
No. 2…If You’re Baffled by the Presidential Race,
Consider This” From report by Times political
ace Adam Nagourney: “These days, there is plenty of
action in the Democratic presidential nomination
fight: 10 candidates as of noon on Thursday, when
Wesley K. Clark joined the show, ensuring one of the
most mixed-up nomination battles either party has
produced in years. But just in case that is not
enough for Democrats who enjoy a good fight, a new
contest is rising out of the mist of this one. It
is the race within the race, an unstated competition
for the No. 2 spot on the ticket. No one running
for president would ever say, at least right now,
that they are actively campaigning to be vice
president. As an aide to one of them noted, the
candidates in question probably do not recognize
that they are conducting what might eventually turn
into dual campaigns: one for the presidential
nomination, the other for vice president. But at
least three presidential candidates are being
increasingly measured by competing campaigns and
party leaders for their vice presidential talents, a
trend that seems certain to continue. This
reflects both an early assessment of their
presidential prospects (generally speaking, perhaps
not so good) as well as an appreciation of the
geographic and biographical assets they would bring
to a ticket. No one is writing off anyone for
the presidency yet. That said, the emerging vice
presidential field includes General Clark, who would
fortify a Democratic ticket with a military uniform
and a Southern background; Senator John Edwards of
North Carolina, another son of the South who has
impressed Democrats with his keen campaign skills,
and Senator Bob Graham, who comes from Florida (if
you have to ask). ‘They are all in their heads
running for president -- you don't get in this game
to be No. 2,’ said Paul Costello, a longtime
Democratic consultant. ‘But that has got to be the
hidden context for a lot of these people.’…‘I
think that it is very likely that one of them will
be the vice presidential nominee,’ he said,
referring to Mr. Edwards, Mr. Graham or General
Clark. Two other Democratic presidential
candidates -- Howard Dean of Vermont and
Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts -- are,
as liberal Northeast Democrats prone to the campaign
misstep, not exactly what party officials would
describe as attractive vice presidential candidates.
Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut has
done his time in the vice presidential candidate
seat. Since there are actually some Democrats in
the land who are not running for president, the
speculation about No. 2 possibilities extends beyond
the field. Some names being mentioned are Gov. Bill
Richardson of New Mexico, for example (though Mr.
Richardson said in an interview he would not accept
the position); Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana and
Senator Dianne Feinstein of California. But as of
today, Democrats think the No. 2 nominee will come
from the cast seeking the No. 1 job — speculation
that, not surprisingly, does not delight the
candidates. General Clark scoffed at the
No. 2 position, saying that he is not embarking on a
career in politics to win a post that has no
discernable authority. But asked if that meant he
was ruling out the vice presidency, General Clark
shook his head no. ‘I'm not saying that,’ he said.
‘I'm saying for me there was only one decision, and
that was whether I would run for the presidency or
not. This is not about positioning.’ Jennifer
Palmieri, a spokeswoman for Mr. Edwards,
said, ‘Anybody who thinks that John Edwards is
running for vice president doesn't know him very
well.’”
… “Problems for John Kerry” – headline on
editorial in this morning’s Washington Times.
Excerpt: “The presidential campaign of Democratic
Sen. John F. Kerry, the Boston Brahmin who once
fancied himself as the heir apparent to JFK's
political legacy, had a mixed week. Winning the
endorsement of Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the most
popular politician in California, was good news for
the foundering campaign. Part of the bad news was
the entry of retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark, who
now doubles the number of wounded Vietnam War heroes
in the Democratic field, effectively eliminating
Mr. Kerry's monopoly of the one area that he
has heretofore exploited. In what may signal the
beginning of a campaign implosion, Chris Lehane, who
served as Mr. Kerry's communications director,
resigned last week. Mr. Lehane, who directed the
Clinton White House's pit-bull communications
operations during the Monica Lewinsky scandal and
served as press secretary for Al Gore's
ill-fated 2000 presidential campaign, reportedly
urged Mr. Kerry to more aggressively
counterattack Howard Dean's campaign for the
Democratic nomination. A Zogby poll in New
Hampshire illustrates Mr. Kerry's problem. By
late August, Mr. Kerry's 13-point February
advantage (26-13) over Mr. Dean had turned
into a 21-point deficit (38-17). Unless
corrective action is taken soon, Mrs. Feinstein's
endorsement may prove to be meaningless. Meanwhile,
money has been flowing into the campaign coffers of
Mr. Dean, who raised $7.6 million in the
second quarter, compared to Mr. Kerry's $5.8
million. (The Dean campaign fully expects to
reach its goal of $10.3 million for the third
quarter. In fact, unless it shatters it, it will
fail to meet the expectations it has set.) Imitating
New Hampshire poll data, second-quarter fund-raising
figures represented a massive reversal of fortune
for Mr. Kerry, who, during the first quarter,
raised more than $7.5 million while Mr. Dean
pocketed less than $3 million. Speaking of
fortune, the political strategists are busy devising
scenarios about how an increasingly desperate Mr.
Kerry could get his hands on his wife's $550 million
Heinz-ketchup inheritance. According to the
consensus interpretation of campaign-finance law,
Teresa Heinz Kerry is limited to contributing $2,000
to her husband's campaign…In June, the Kerry
campaign told the Associated Press that it had
concluded that the Massachusetts senator could not
legally use any of his wife's fortune for his
presidential race. Today, there is speculation
that Mrs. Kerry may try to transfer Heinz trust
assets into a joint account, half of which he could
divert to his campaign. Such an action would
certainly be challenged in court by his competitors.
Another possible loophole would be an
‘independent expenditure’ campaign waged by his wife,
who in the past has indicated she would open her
coffers if she felt she and the senator had come
under personal attack. With donations gushing in,
the Dean campaign has been considering forgoing
matching funds during the primaries, a strategic
decision that would allow it to spend far more than
the $44.6 million limit that comes with matching
funds. Amid the possibility that Mr. Kerry's
third-quarter fund-raising might be about half of
the Dean campaign's take, Mr. Kerry
last week unloaded in an interview with the Boston
Globe, which described his demeanor as bristly. ‘If
Howard Dean decides to live outside [the
federal spending cap], I'm not going to wait an
instant,’ Mr. Kerry told the Globe.
‘Decision's made. I'll go outside. Absolutely. I'm
not going to disarm.’ Asked if he would use personal
funds, Mr. Kerry replied, ‘Whatever's legal
under the law.’ If his foundering campaign tries to
take the loophole route, the self-styled
campaign-reform advocate will surely find himself in
court. Unlike his political hero -- JFK, whose 1960
campaign was financed by his father's bootlegging
fortune -- at least Mr. Kerry can take solace
in the fact that ketchup is less unseemly. On
second thought, there is something delicious about a
Boston Brahmin desperately clinging to his wife's
ketchup dough to bankroll his political dreams.”
…
Columnist Novak: Clark off on “wrong step” by hiring
Fabiani. Under the
subhead “The General’s Aide,”
columnist Robert Novak wrote in today’s Chicago
Sun-Times: “Gen. Wesley Clark
began his campaign for president on one wrong step,
in the opinion of President Bill Clinton's former
aides, by hiring ex-Clinton and Gore adviser Mark
Fabiani. Fabiani got low marks from Clinton
insiders as deputy campaign manager for
communications and strategy in Gore's 2000
presidential campaign. They complain that Fabiani
relied too much on polls and not enough on the
issues. A footnote: Clark picked up two
early important supporters in Congress: Rep. Charles
Rangel of New York, top Democrat on the House Ways
and Means Committee, and Rep. Rahm Emanuel of
Illinois, a former Clinton White House aide.”
… “Kerry says Bush sold out true conservatives”
– headline from this morning’s New Hampshire Sunday
News. Excerpt from coverage from Keene by News
correspondent Stephen Seitz: “A crowd of about
150 greeted U.S. Sen. John Kerry as he brought his
campaign for President back to New Hampshire
yesterday. ‘I stand before you as one of 10
Democratic candidates for President. These are the
only jobs that George W. Bush has created,’ Kerry
said. The talk soon became more serious as Kerry
outlined the case for making him President and
answered audience questions. ‘On every single
voting issue, George Bush has taken this country in
the wrong direction,’ the Massachusetts senator
said. ‘I intend to reverse it. It will take a new
President to create jobs, improve health care, clean
up the environment, and restore America’s position
in the world.’ Claiming that 3.1 million jobs have
been lost during the Bush administration, Kerry
said he’d clean up the tax code to prevent further
erosion. ‘The tax code used to be 14 pages,’ he
said. ‘Now, it’s 17,000 pages. Do you have your own
page? No, but plenty of industries do. I will go
through every page of that tax code and close every
loophole that allows a company to leave Keene, take
$400,000 off the tax rolls, and move its jobs to
Bermuda.’ At one point, Kerry also accused the
administration of selling out traditional
conservative Republicans in favor of an extreme
right-wing agenda. ‘There is nothing conservative
about driving the deficit up as high as the eye can
see,’ said Kerry. ‘Traditional conservatives don’t
want to erase the dividing line between church and
state. That’s not the direction to take for our
country.’ Several in the audience wanted to know
what Kerry’s Iraq policy would be. The
senator replied that restoring American prestige in
the world would be one of the toughest parts of a
successful Iraq policy, and that a new President
would be needed to do it. ‘When I am President, I
will go to the United Nations,’ Kerry said.
‘I will stand in that well, where so many great
initiatives, like the non-proliferation treaty,
began, and I will pledge a new chapter in America’s
relationships with the world.’ President Bush
should have brought in allies before the war, rather
than offending them and going it alone. ‘Now the
President has to go to them hat in hand to Jacques
Chirac, to Germany, even Chile and Mexico, the whole
host of countries he’s alienated and convince them,’
Kerry said.”
… Edwards’ statement on PAC and Washington
lobbyist support draws criticism from Team Gephardt.
In yesterday’s Washington Post, Dana Milbank
reported: “Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) unveiled a
television ad in New Hampshire last week, promoting
his presidential candidacy by vowing: ‘I've never
taken a dime from PACs or Washington lobbyists, and
I never will.’ That gave Steve Elmendorf an
idea. Elmendorf, who runs the rival presidential
campaign of Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.),
dashed off an e-mail Thursday to several Washington
lobbyists. Its subject line: ‘John Edwards
doesn't like you.’ Gephardt, clearly,
would not turn down all the lobbyist money
Edwards refuses. On the other hand, Edwards
isn't entirely pure himself. The Center for
Responsive Politics reports that of the $11.9
million his campaign has raised, $6.7 million comes
from lawyers and law firms. Gephardt
spokesman Erik Smith said the e-mail to lobbyists
was ‘one in a series of irreverent and insightful
observations that Steve Elmendorf shares with his
friends.’”
… Kucinich: Wannabes will race all the way to the
Dem convention. Headline from today’s New
Hampshire Sunday News: “Kucinich in Manchester:
Convention will pick nominee” Excerpt from
coverage by Pat Hammond: “Under a tent in sun-baked
Veterans Park, site of the Rolling Thunder Down Home
Democracy Tour, a lady laughed as Ohio Congressman
Dennis Kucinich swamped her in an impassioned
embrace. ‘Please join me in welcoming one of the
great Americans — Granny D,’ said Kucinich of
the woman who has walked across the country to draw
attention to campaign reform and other democratic
issues. The Presidential Roundtable attendees
cheered, as they had been throughout Kucinich’s
upbeat talk in the Manchester park. All
Presidential candidates, including President Bush,
had been invited to the Roundtable; only Kucinich
came, the participants were told. Clad in a
light red shirt, tan slacks and brown shoes, the
candidate held the attention of some 50 to 75
listeners, his microphoneless delivery offsetting
speeches and songs spoken and sung over a microphone
on the nearby platform where members of New
Hampshire progressive groups pressed their messages.
‘In two Presidential debates, I have emerged as
the single voice saying it is time for the U.N. to
go into Iraq and the U.S. to get out,’ Kucinich,
56, told a cheering audience. He called for ‘no more
Halliburton sweetheart deals’ and no more using
political influence in deciding who governs the
contractual process in Iraq. ‘...The U.S. never
had a pre-emptive interest in going into Iraq. It
was based on a lie,’ he said. ‘This administration
is seeking $87 billion as a deposit for more
involvement in Iraq.’ Kucinich answered
questions on how to pay for health care, trade, the
death penalty, and the nuclear power industry. He
favors universal health care with a single payer
plan, he opposes U.S. involvement in the World Trade
Organization (WTO) and the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA), he opposes the death penalty, and
considers the nuclear power industry a ‘danger to
America.’ Of the 10 Democratic candidates for
President, Kucinich’s numbers have been at the tail
end in polls. A man asked, ‘What do I tell someone
who says: Why waste your vote on Dennis Kucinich?’
‘You tell him, because he’s the only one that can
beat Bush.’ Kucinich told a reporter he doesn’t
believe any one candidate is going to amass 51
percent of the delegates; the party’s candidate will
be determined at the convention, he said.”
… “A Candidate Who Answers His Own Phone?” –
headline from today’s Washington Post. Report by the
Post’s Dana Milbank: “Wesley K. Clark: NATO
commander. Presidential candidate. Receptionist?
Everybody knows that Clark, the latest
entrant in the Democratic presidential primary
competition, is scrambling to assemble a staff
because of his late start. But Peter Wallsten
found out just how much Clark is scrambling when the
Miami Herald political writer tried to call the
nascent Clark campaign headquarters last week after
Clark signaled his entry into the race. Wallsten
had heard that Clark was planning a trip to
South Florida, so he telephoned Little Rock for more
details. He called every 10 minutes, encountering
only voice-mail messages, busy signals and endless
ringing, until 6:30 p.m., when somebody finally
picked up the phone. ‘Hello?’ an excited Wallsten
inquired. ‘Hello?’ replied a male voice in Little
Rock. ‘Who's this?’ Wallsten asked. ‘General
Wesley Clark speaking,’ the voice said. Wallsten,
not expecting the candidate to be working the
switchboard, identified himself and asked about the
Florida trip. ‘I don't know -- we're still trying to
figure that out,’ Clark replied. ‘Call back in 15
minutes.’ Wallsten tried to ask more questions
of Clark, but the candidate quickly
extricated himself from the conversation. ‘There
was no time to inquire about his economic plan,’
Wallsten said.”
… Clark – initially uncertain about whether he’d
debate this week – now prepares to meet The Original
Nine for the first time. Headline from
yesterday’s Boston Globe: “As new
Democratic contender, Clark crams for debate…Campaign
seen as a work in progress” Excerpt from report –
dateline: Iowa City, where Clark gave
a speech Friday –- by the Globe’s Joanna Weiss: “Retired
Army General Wesley K. Clark has committed to taking
part in next week's Democratic debate, and he knows
full well what to expect when he faces off against
his nine rivals for the party's presidential
nomination. He knows he will need well-formed
policy positions on a range of issues he has not
begun to study. He knows the candidates will be
training for his jugular. And he knows that,
with only a week to go, there will not be time to
learn everything. ‘There are prime ministers I don't
know, and there are economic facts I don't know, and
I'll get stuff wrong,’ Clark said on a
turboprop yesterday, en route to a one-day visit to
Iowa. ‘Everybody does.’ Clark and his staff plan
to spend all weekend studying the issues and
devising positions. In two days on the road,
Clark has been grappling with the demand for
sound bites and quick responses. He has seemed more
comfortable with multipart answers and long-form
discussions -- and he has given far more thought to
foreign policy than to a range of domestic issues
that many voters consider priorities. This is the
challenge of starting a presidential campaign from a
standing start, entering a crowded field of
candidates who have been prepping, primping,
fund-raising, planning, and spinning policy
statements for months. And this is what a
campaign looks like when a candidate decides to run
on Monday, calls in staff on Tuesday, announces on
Wednesday, and jets to Florida on Thursday to meet
voters and potential donors. So far, the Clark
campaign has no cellphones, no e-mail addresses, and
no formal headquarters to speak of -- just dozens of
staff and volunteers in his tiny consulting office,
seizing space for laptops wherever they can find it,
four to a desk and two to a dresser. There is no
system for collecting money at campaign events;
when supporters mobbed a deli in Fort Lauderdale to
greet Clark on Thursday, many walked straight
up to the general's surprised aides to hand them
checks. Clark is still in the process of
assembling a staff and an organizational chart, as
his aides determine which members of a disparate and
sometimes warring ‘Draft Clark’ movement will
join the official campaign. He is getting used to
the already grueling schedule, determined to get in
a swim every morning and grab cat naps when he needs
them. He has met with notable enthusiasm; in
Fort Lauderdale, a crowd of hundreds gathered at an
event the campaign had set up with less than a day's
notice -- and moved from early morning to late
afternoon, after a debate about whether to fly to
South Carolina while Hurricane Isabel approached the
East Coast. But while the Florida crowd seemed
satisfied with handshakes and autographs, the press
and pundits are looking for specifics, and Clark
is trying to strike a balance between the two.
Yesterday, he bounded onto his plane with a stack of
editorials about Iraq that he wrote for the Times of
London, which he printed to combat what he called
‘gotcha’ stories and take control of his
still-forming public image. ‘I'm the guy who
understands this stuff,’ he said.”
… Washington Post headline on South Carolina
Report: “Dean Faces Uphill Battle in Courting S. C.
Blacks…Democratic Presidential Contender’s Claim
About Race Meets Some Skepticism in Key Primary
State” In yesterday’s Post, Darryl Fears reported –
an excerpt -- from Columbia, SC: “When a waitress at
Bert's Bar and Grill slipped a plate of spareribs
between Thomas Dameron's thick forearms, he barely
seemed to notice. He was already trying to digest
something Howard Dean had said. It was the former
Vermont governor's claim that he is ‘the only white
politician that ever talks about race in front of
white audiences,’ made at the Sept. 9 debate among
the Democratic presidential candidates. The
debate was sponsored by the Congressional Black
Caucus Institute and Fox News. ‘Did he really say
that?’ Dameron asked. Then his face went blank.
‘If he has to ring his own bell, then his bell must
not be very loud,’ the 44-year-old technical
engineer said. In the campaign for the Democratic
nomination, the reactions of Dameron and other black
South Carolinians will become increasingly important
through the fall: The state's Feb. 3 presidential
primary will be the first in which African Americans
vote in significant numbers. Dean's Internet-fed
campaign has led the pack in fundraising and had
buoyant poll numbers. But his support has come
overwhelmingly from white voters in a race in which
African American votes are essential for victory.
In a recent nationwide poll taken by Zogby
International, only 10 percent of likely black
voters favored Dean. If Dean's insurgent
candidacy for the nomination is to succeed,
Democratic strategists say, he will have to make
inroads among black voters, who have been one of the
party's most reliable constituencies. That will mean
winning over skeptics such as Dameron and others who
voiced similar feelings in interviews this week at
Bert's. ‘I'm sure he's trying to get ahead of the
other candidates in the South,’ said Jim Felder, the
African American president of the South Carolina
Voter Education Project. ‘He knows he has to do well
in South Carolina. He's trying to get our
attention.’ John Kenneth White, a professor of
politics at Catholic University in Washington and a
consultant to Zogby, agreed. Dean's advisers, he
said, are ‘looking around and not seeing too many
black faces. If Dean can make inroads in South
Carolina, it seems to me that will broaden his
coalition.’ But Dean's deputy campaign
manager, Andi Pringle, said the candidate was only
speaking from the heart. ‘He was only making a
point,’ Pringle said. ‘He doesn't talk about race
only among African Americans, as white candidates
tend to do,’ she said. ‘White people tend to be a
little nervous when talking about race and the
history of race in this country. It happens to be a
very passionate point for Howard Dean.’ It
proved to be a point with which his opponents took
issue, too. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.)
fired off a statement on his chats with audiences
about marching with Martin Luther King Jr. Sen. John
Edwards (N.C.) released a statement about growing up
in the segregated South, watching black people get
shoved aside for jobs, education and health care.
Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (Ohio) appeared to be more
upset than the rest. ‘We hit the roof when we
heard that,’ said Jeff Cohen, Kucinich's campaign
spokesman. ‘I think Dean's deluded.
Representative Kucinich brings up racial
issues that Dean hasn't even touched. He
talks about the racially biased death penalty at
campaign stop after campaign stop. He talks about
the drug war and the racially unjust 'three strikes
you're out' law. I don't think Dean goes near
those issues.”
… For the Record: Although yesterday’s Iowa Prez
Watch update included a report on Clark’s appearance
in Iowa City, additional coverage is featured below
from two Iowa newspapers – the Des Moines Register
and Quad-City Times: Headline on the front page
of yesterday’s Register: “Clark says he wouldn’t
have voted for Iraq war” Excerpt from report by
the Register’s Thomas Beaumont: “Democratic
presidential candidate Wesley Clark, in his first
Iowa campaign visit, backed away Friday from a
comment that he would have supported the
congressional resolution giving President Bush power
to order the war in Iraq. ‘I never would have
voted for war,’ Clark, a retired four-star
Army general, said during an interview with The Des
Moines Register. Reports published Friday quoted
Clark as saying he probably would have supported
the resolution. ‘I would have voted for a resolution
which gave the president leverage to seek a
diplomatic, non-military solution to the problem in
Iraq. I would have never voted for war,’ he said.
‘I'm a soldier. I know what war is like.’ Clark,
the former NATO commander, has been a vocal critic
of the war, but had kept other policy positions a
mystery for months as speculation mounted about
whether he would seek the 2004 Democratic
nomination. Clark began fleshing out his
candidacy Friday, promising to propose a health-care
plan built on existing programs, rather than a
government-run, single-payer system. He also
said he favored repealing income-tax cuts for the
wealthiest Americans but leaving in place all other
cuts enacted under Bush. ‘I think we have to
protect especially the tax cuts for middle-income
and ordinary people across the country,’ he told the
Register. War, tax cuts and health care have been
the main dividing issues of the Democratic field,
which reached 10 with Clark's entry into the
race Wednesday. Campaigning Friday in Iowa City,
Clark was making his first visit as a candidate
to Iowa, where the Democratic precinct caucuses mark
the opening event of the presidential nominating
season on Jan. 19. On his second full day as a
candidate, Clark sought to clarify his position on
the war after press reports Friday quoted him as
saying he probably would have voted for a resolution
giving Bush broad war-making authority in Iraq.
The resolution, which authorized Bush to order the
attack in Iraq without United Nations approval, has
been a dividing point among Democrats seeking to
challenge the president next year…And from the
Quad-City Times: An excerpt from report by the
Times’ Ed Tibbetts. Headline from yesterday’s
Times: “Clark fills lecture hall in first Iowa
appearance” The excerpt: “Retired Gen. Wesley
Clark urged a greater embrace of the United Nations
in a speech here Friday that afforded a host of
contrasts between the 10th candidate for the
Democratic presidential nomination and President
Bush. Meanwhile, Clark also moved Friday to control
damage that arose from remarks he made the day
before on a campaign flight when the candidate said
he ‘probably’ would have voted for the congressional
resolution last year that authorized the use of
force in Iraq. Clark, the former
commander of NATO, has been a severe critic of the
war, a stand that ignited much of the support for
his candidacy. His appearance here has been
anticipated for months, and his speech at the
lecture hall drew more than 1,000 people, some left
standing in the aisles. The speech was said to
be nonpolitical, but Clark, on a number of
fronts, contrasted himself with the president, not
only the handling of the Iraqi war but also the
general tenor of the way the country is dealing with
foreign countries. He also took a stab at some
domestic issues such as Republican tax cuts. It was
foreign policy, however, that dominated his remarks.
Clark said that instead of being scornful, the
United States needs to support the United Nations.
The United Nations has become a target of some
conservatives who say it has become irrelevant.
‘This is an organization that is ours. We’re the
leaders of it,’ he said Friday. ‘We have to use
international institutions, not abuse and condemn
them.’ In his address, and then in response to
questions, Clark added that the United
States should not close its borders to foreign
immigrants, that it should more tightly embrace the
United Nations and that it should retain the threat
of force but use it only as a last resort. He
also implicitly challenged the president’s assertion
that Iraq is the central front in the war on terror.
Instead, it is the individuals in foreign countries
who are stoking the flames of terror that should be
the target, he said. ‘Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and,
to a lesser extent, Egypt, those are the central
fronts in the war on terror.’ he said.”
* ON THE BUSH BEAT:
…
Novak: Conservatives upset by Bono visit.
Columnist Robert
Novak reported in today’s Chicago Sun-Times:
“Social conservative activists who have been
unable to see President Bush for a year were enraged
Wednesday when he met with left-wing Irish rock
singer Bono, who demands greater funding against
AIDS in Africa. Louisiana Republican State Rep. Tony
Perkins, newly named as president of the Family
Research Council, has not seen the president. Bono
repaid Bush by blasting the pace of U.S. AIDS
spending. While pollsters advise Bush to take a
centrist posture for re-election, social
conservatives say he is risking their support.”
… “What the $87 Billion Speech Cost Bush…Polls
May Indicate That TV Address Eroded President’s
Support on Iraq” – headline from yesterday’s
Washington Post Coverage – an excerpt – by the
Post’s Mike Allen: “President Bush has often used
major speeches to bolster his standing with the
public, but pollsters and political analysts have
concluded that his recent prime-time address on Iraq
may have had the opposite effect -- crystallizing
doubts about his postwar plans and fueling worries
about the cost. A parade of polls taken since the
Sept. 7 speech has found notable erosion in public
approval for Bush's handling of Iraq, with a
minority of Americans supporting the $87 billion
budget for reconstruction and the war on terrorism
that he unveiled. ‘If Bush and his advisers had
been looking to this speech to rally American
support for the president and for the war in Iraq,
it failed,’ said Frank Newport, editor in chief of
the Gallup poll. He said Bush's speech may have cost
him more support than it gained, ‘because it
reminded the public both of the problems in Iraq and
the cost.’ Since the speech from the Cabinet Room,
headlines on poll after poll have proved unnerving
for many Republicans and encouraging for Democrats.
‘Bush Iraq Rating at New Low,’ said a CBS
News poll taken Sept. 15 and Sept. 16. ‘Americans
Split on Bush Request for $87 Billion,’ said a
Fox News poll taken Sept. 9 and Sept. 10. A Gallup
poll taken Sept 8 to 10 pointed to ‘increasingly
negative perceptions about the situation in Iraq’
and found the balance between Bush's approval and
disapproval ratings to be ‘the most negative of the
administration.’ A Washington Post-ABC News poll
taken from Sept. 10 to Sept. 13 found that 55
percent of those surveyed said the Bush
administration does not have a clear plan for the
situation in Iraq, and 85 percent said they were
concerned the United States will get bogged down in
a long and costly peacekeeping mission.”
* THE CLINTON COMEDIES:
…She keeps saying no, but the Hillary faithful
keep up efforts to recruit supporters for 2004 prez
bid. Under the subhead “Beating the
Recruitment Drums,” Dana Milbank reported in
yesterday’s Washington Post: “The Democratic
field's getting more crowded by the day, but a
Virginia college student is pushing for yet one more
entry: Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.).
Adam Parkhomenko has started VoteHillary.org, a Web
site that's aimed at recruiting the former first
lady to run for president in 2004. He said he has
enlisted between 5,000 and 6,000 volunteers and they
have just registered with the Federal Election
Commission so they can collect pledges online.
They're also holding a rally across from the
Senate on Nov. 1. Although Clinton has said she
has no intention of seeking the presidency next
year, she has not convinced Parkhomenko. ‘We
don't think she has fully made up her mind,’ he
said. ‘We haven't heard the last from her yet.’ But
Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines said, in fact,
they have, and that Parkhomenko would be lobbying in
vain. ‘Senator Clinton has repeatedly said that
she will serve out her full six-year term,’
Reines said. ‘She loves her job, and is working on
being the best senator she can be for the people of
New York.’”
… Team Hillary – in an apparent effort to curtail
speculation about a presidential bid – pulls
run-for-president e-mails from website. Coverage
in yesterday’s New York Post by Deborah Orin: “Sen.
Hillary Rodham Clinton yesterday abruptly yanked all
the run-for-president e-mails off her official Web
site in a bid to stop speculation that she's leaving
the door open to a 2004 White House bid. The
move came the day after The Post reported a fresh
wave of the e-mails had been posted on the Web site
and Clinton defended them as ‘freedom of
speech’ even while saying she wouldn't run. But
Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines said
yesterday: ‘We don't want anyone to be confused’
about her plans. Asked what happened to the First
Amendment and ‘freedom of speech,’ Reines said he
would plead the Fifth Amendment. But overnight,
Clinton's Web site, friendsofhillary.com, was
purged of a slew of messages like this one, signed
Kim C: ‘I would love nothing more than to see you
in the White House - the sooner the better.’ The
e-mails had all been selected for posting by her
staff and their removal was approved by the former
first lady. Clinton has repeatedly insisted she
won't run in 2004, but has left the door open to a
presidential bid in 2008. Her husband, former
President Bill Clinton, fanned the speculation this
week when he said she was getting pressed by New
Yorkers to go for the White House even though she'd
pledged to serve out her full term, which ends in
2006. Bill Clinton talked up his wife and Gen.
Wesley Clark, the latest Democratic 2004
entry, as the two stars of their party, sparking
speculation that Clark might be a stalking
horse for a late Hillary entry. But
skeptics questioned whether removing the e-mails
really changed the situation.”
… “Clinton on a Visit to Kosovo, Warns Against
Getting Even” – headline from yesterday’s New
York Times. Excerpt from report – dateline: Pristina,
Kosovo – by Nicholas Wood: “Former President
Bill Clinton was welcomed with acclaim here today,
more than four years after NATO troops first entered
this province, effectively ending two years of
conflict and placing it under a United Nations
mandate. The visit was arranged so Mr. Clinton
could receive an honorary degree and visit American
soldiers serving with the United Nations
peace-keeping force. Hundreds of people lined the
roadside and waved flags in greeting the former
president on the four-and-a-half-mile journey from
the airport to the center of the city. Few other
politicians could expect the same reception. Mr.
Clinton, who last visited in 1999, is seen by the
province's ethnic Albanian majority as being
responsible for ending Yugoslav rule in the
province, and taking it effectively a step closer to
independence. The city's largest boulevard is named
in his honor. While four years of United Nations
rule have brought comparative peace to the region,
ethnic violence remains a problem. Attacks on the
Serbian minority have increased in the last three
months. Mr. Clinton used his visit to warn
Albanians that those seeking revenge for atrocities
committed by Serbian and Yugoslav forces during the
late 1990's could hinder the prospects for
independence. ‘Do you want to get even?’ he asked an
invited audience at Pristina University, ‘I hope
not. My Bible says that vengeance belongs to
God.’ He added that reconciliation was ‘the only way
you can achieve a secure, stable and prosperous
Kosovo.’”
* NATIONAL POLITICS:
… DeLay takes Kennedy and the Dem Wannabes to the
political woodshed over Kennedy’s anti-Bush comments
on Iraq. DeLay draws reply from Kerry. Headline
from report in yesterday’s Washington Times: “DeLay
chides Kennedy over Iraq remarks” Excerpt from
Associated Press report by AP’s Lolita C. Baldor: “House
Majority Leader Tom DeLay lashed out at Democratic
Sen. Edward Kennedy for his criticism of President
Bush's Iraq policy, describing the comments as a
‘new low’ and calling on presidential candidates to
repudiate the remarks. In an interview with The
Associated Press Thursday, Kennedy said the case for
going to war against Iraq was a fraud ‘made up in
Texas’ to give Republicans a political boost and the
money for the war is being used to bribe foreign
leaders to send troops. Those words drew the wrath
of Texas Republican DeLay. In a statement released
Friday, DeLay said Sen. John Kerry of
Massachusetts and other Democratic presidential
hopefuls should ‘have the courage’ to repudiate
Kennedy's remarks…And he said it was ‘disturbing
that Democrats have spewed more hateful rhetoric at
President Bush then they ever did at Saddam
Hussein.’ After a day's silence on the matter, the
White House also responded to Kennedy's comments.
‘This is the kind of charged political rhetoric here
that obscures the real policy debate, which is how
we make America safer in a post-Sept. 11 world,’
said White House spokesman Scott McClellan.
‘Sept. 11 taught us we need to confront new threats
before they reach our shores.’ Responding to
DeLay's call for Democratic presidential candidates
to disavow Kennedy's comments, Kerry fired back - at
the Texas lawmaker. ‘Tom DeLay is a bully,’
Kerry said. ‘He tried to bully Democrats in
Texas and we're not going to accept his shrill
partisan attacks or allow him to suggest that
patriotism belongs to one political party.’ Kerry
was referring to DeLay's role in redistricting the
state's congressional boundaries to benefit
Republicans. Kennedy dismissed DeLay's comments,
saying that once again GOP leaders are avoiding
questions about Bush's policies ‘by attacking the
patriotism of those who question them.’ Kennedy
also elaborated on his comments in an interview on
CNN Friday, saying the administration is announcing
an $8.5 billion loan to Turkey, and that country
will then provide military assistance in Iraq.
‘It didn't have to be this way,’ he said. ‘We
wouldn't have to be providing these billions of
dollars to these countries to…coerce them or bribe
them to send their troops in, if we'd done it the
right way, if we'd gone to the United Nations, if we
had built an international constituency.’
McClellan called the funding charges ‘more political
rhetoric that have no basis in fact.’ DeLay
didn't defend the administration's policy,
preferring to put the responsibility on Democrats to
take sides. But the Democratic drumbeat against the
Bush administration's Iraq policies has only
intensified in recent days.”
* MORNING SUMMARY:
* WAR/TERRORISM:
* FEDERAL ISSUES:
click here
Paid
for by the Iowa Presidential Watch PAC
P.O.
Box 171, Webster City, IA 50595
privacy
/ agreement
/
/ homepage
/
search engine |
