Tactics and Substance in the 2004 Elections GoogleNews: Howard Dean

October 20, 2003

by V

Clark and Lieberman abandon Iowa

NYTimes: 2 Top Democrats Will Not Contest Iowa's Caucuses by Adam Nagourney
Mr. Lieberman's advisers said on Sunday that they would pull out all but one of his 17 staff members in Iowa and send them to states considered more receptive to his appeal, like Arizona. General Clark's aides said he would maintain a minimal presence in the state, which has the nation's earliest presidential selection contest.

...The decisions drew a sharp reaction from state party leaders and from other Democratic candidates. Several predicted that that General Clark and Mr. Lieberman would come to regret their decisions, noting that no one who skipped the caucuses has ever won the Democratic nomination.
This is worse news for Lieberman's chances than for Clark's; Lieberman has at least been trying in Iowa for a long time and is now having to abandon it; the Clark people can claim (as they do in the article) that they're pulling out for solely strategic reasons given the limited calendar.

What fascinates me about this story, though, is that somehow the news came from both campaigns at the same time, which makes it sting less for both of them -- a story focusing only on Lieberman or Clark pulling out of a state would have a far more negative air to it.

So how did it happen? Did both of them independently come to this conclusion on the same day? (Yeah, right.) Did one wait for another campaign to announce it so that when called for comment they could say "Actually, we're pulling out too"? Did Lieberman and Clark have discussions about doing it simultaneously? (I doubt it.)

We won't know till the campaign books are written, but I'm mighty curious. Even with all the attention this race is getting from the news media and websites of all stripes -- and I would propose that we are seeing more of the inner workings of campaigns now than ever before -- there's so much we still don't see.
Posted by V at October 20, 2003 09:50 AM
"...in the state, which has the nation's earliest presidential selection contest."

With the exception of the District of Columbia, which is actually holding the first presidential selection contest, but then, no one cares about what a half-a-million voters in the nation's capitol believe, do they?

Posted by: Glen Engel-Cox at October 20, 2003 03:00 PM

I suppose one would have to spend time in Arizona to grok this -- but no Democratic who chooses Arizona over Iowa is getting my vote. Not that I was in any danger of voting for Lieberman anyway, but, still -- it speaks volumes about who Lieberman is!

Posted by: Katxena at October 21, 2003 09:13 AM

Recommended Reading:

The Politics of Truth: Inside the Lies that Led to War and Betrayed My Wife's CIA Identity: A Diplomat's Memoir
The Politics of Truth... A Diplomat's Memoir

Worse Than Watergate: The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush
Worse Than Watergate: The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush

Against All Enemies by Richard Clarke
Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror

LIES by Al Franken
Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right

The Great Unraveling
The Great Unraveling

The Great Big Book of Tomorrow
The Great Big Book of Tomorrow

Clinton Wars
The Clinton Wars

Blinded by the Right
Blinded by the Right: The Conscience of an Ex-Conservative

Waging Modern War: Bosnia, Kosovo, and the Future of Combat

Subject to Debate: Sense and Dissents on Women, Politics, and Culture

Living History

The Hunting of the President: The Ten-Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton

John Adams

Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation

Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace

In Association with Amazon.com