Echo Chamber
by Stephen Burzio

As a candidate, Clark is an imposing figure: first in his class at West Point, Rhodes Scholar, director for strategic plans and policy for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and NATO supreme allied commander. At a time when struggling US military operations in Afghanistan are, and those in Iraq soon may be, under NATO command, Clark would bring a swagger-free "been there, done that" sort of credibility to a Democratic Party sorely in need of a foreign policy image boost. Some Democratic leaders even think that a Clark nomination could turn the tables on a Karl Rove GOP spin machine seeking to Dukakis-ize the next Democratic candidate; it could even turn President Bush's May 1 victory speech/music video on the USS Abraham Lincoln into the kind of political boomerang not seen since Dukakis poked his head out of a tank.

But it won't be that easy. While the flurry of articles on Clark's Hamlet-like performance prior to announcing gave a quick nod to the campaign realities faced by a new entrant, they gave almost no time to the fact that, as a political novice, his decision could have its own unintended consequences. A Clark campaign could actually worsen the chances of seeing a centrist candidate win the nomination, giving victory to Howard Dean without a party mandate. All while damaging Clark's own reputation in the process.

Although Clark is often mentioned along with Dean as a staunch critic of the war in Iraq, and while Clark has received some kind words from progressives like Michael Moore, Clark is a moderate to conservative Democrat. Not only did he vote for both Nixon and Reagan, he didn't become a registered Democrat until a few weeks ago. It's an inconvenient fact that Dean and others are already exploiting, and there's a good chance it will quickly limit his support to the party moderates, squeezing out the others. You can almost feel the moderate candidates shudder. John Edwards and Dick Gephardt, candidates with small numbers who saw initial high hopes dashed by their own timidity, might as well fold up the revival tents and pack up the political snake oil. Joe Lieberman, still riding relatively high in national polls as a result of his 2000 White House run, will have a hard time selling his New Haven tough-guy pose with Clark in the room. As for John Kerry, a candidate who has spent a lot of time selling his history of admirable military service, a Clark candidacy so late in the game is going to pit two competing versions of the same theme, confusing primary voters and weakening the Democratic contest overall. Not good news.

That leaves Dean. For all the journalistic cheap shots concerning Dean supporters (white, middle class, young and inexperienced) one thing is certain: They know what they're doing. His campaign's pioneering use of the Internet to attract donors and galvanize supporters has produced a following beyond the throngs who attend his rallies and socials. Just look at the poll numbers in the crucially important primary states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. For good or bad, it will be these Democratic loyalists in the early primary states, not the voters of the nation as a whole, who will decide who will be the next Democratic candidate.

To think that these supporters will flock to Clark is to misunderstand the reason people have supported Dean in the first place. While many Dean supporters came to his camp for his strident criticism of Bush's mishandling of foreign policy, they will stay with Dean because of his experience in areas such as reshaping health care and fiscal responsibility. Clark lacks this experience. Add to this the fact that many supporters of the liberal demi-candidates Braun, Sharpton and Kucinich would likely choose firebrand Dean over Clark or any other centrist, and you have the makings of a no-win political confrontation for the Democrats.

A worst-case scenario would see either Dean winning the nomination from two or three other candidates as a result of a divided middle, and therefore without a party mandate, or a Clark victory with a credible position on foreign policy but not much else, which could alienate the Democratic base. Either result would produce a candidate without the clear support of a large segment of the Democratic party and could mean an easy victory for George W. Bush next year.

For now, the focus is split. While the mainstream media continue their honeymoon with Clark, the Democratic candidates are piling on Dean. Lieberman and Kerry have both gone below the belt by suggesting that Dean's position on Israel (that we should be balanced negotiators) was a betrayal of 50 years of American policy. And last week, Dean was assailed by Gephardt as a friend of Newt Gingrich and his Medicare cuts. For the leader of the pack, it comes with the territory, but they'll turn their sights on the general if his newfound poll dominance continues.

In the end, Clark supporters such as Clinton may see the political whipsaw a Clark campaign could create and urge him to step aside. Not that Clark should leave politics — like him or not, Dick Cheney may have done a great service to the Democrats by making the office of vice president more than a vanity seat for presidential also-rans. As a candidate for vice president, Clark would still bring military credentials to the 2004 Democratic ticket, without sacrificing an opportunity for someone experienced in domestic policy to put a hex on Bush & Co.'s voodoo economics.

E-mail Stephen Burzio at stephen@flakmag.com.