|
|
Get Four
|  | NOVEMBER 10, 2003
By Steve Rosenbush The Trouble with General Clark He's charismatic and commanding, but his glib and disjointed message doesn't give voters a strong reason to pick him as their leader Had you asked central casting to send over an actor to play a Presidential candidate in a 30-second commercial, they might well have dispatched General Wesley Clark -- tall, thin, handsome, and blessed with an Arkansas drawl that's as smooth as honey on a hot biscuit. The General looks like a leader. Even better, he has actually been one. No. 1 in his West Point class, the former Rhodes Scholar and decorated war hero led NATO's effort to save 1.5 million Albanians from extermination in Kosovo. In person, he has charisma and commands respect. At a recent fund-raiser in New York, about 700 young supporters cheered him like a TV star. "I never thought I'd run for President of the United States, but I never thought that the country would be in such bad shape," Clark said. "We all know how bad Bush is," he said, eliciting whoops and hollers. He's not having any trouble raising money, either. The campaign is well on the way toward collecting $1.5 million to $2 million in New York by yearend, about 10% of the national target, says venture capitalist Alan J. Patricof, co-chairman of New York for Clark. CALM APPEAL. The general seems to click with a certain kind of highly educated professional in a way no Democrat has since Bill Clinton. Like the man from Hope, he doesn't need a wardrobe consultant to improve his rapport with women. "I'm willing to make the dumb comment. I have a crush on him," says Julie Hilden, 35. Of course, with degrees from Harvard, Yale, and Cornell, she can afford to take that risk. She's a legal commentator for the Web site FindLaw and the author of two books, including the new erotic thriller 3 and the memoir The Bad Daughter. Her friends concur. Ane Roseborough-Eberhard, a self-employed marketing consultant, says she likes Clark's intellect and calm demeanor. Married with two children, she thinks his broad appeal makes him electable. As for the erstwhile front-runner in the Democratic nomination race, ex-Vermont Governor Howard Dean, she sees a man wound a bit too tight. "We need someone like Clark, who can react in a calmer manner," she says. So with all his strengths, why is Clark floundering after a strong, albeit late, start in the race among Democrats to take on George Bush a year from now? A Marist Poll released Nov. 4 found that he now lags behind the President by 19 percentage points among likely voters, putting him behind all the other leading Democratic challengers. A few weeks ago, he was running neck and neck with Bush. SAME OLD, SAME OLD. Based on my impressions from his stump speech last week in New York, I'd say Clark is learning the hard way that winning a Presidential nomination takes more than looks, glibness, and acting like a leader. He's going to have to start giving people a reason to vote for him as their leader. His obvious glibness is what jumped out at me. As he roasted Bush in New York, Clark lamented the decline of the economy. "This President claims credit for an uptick in growth but deflects responsibility for record budget deficits and massive job losses," Clark said. He especially hammered the President over unemployment, describing jobs as "America's greatest export." Clever line. The trouble is, it's the same line of attack the rest of the Democratic field is using. And this measure of the economy isn't likely to resonate amid signs that a recovery is under way. If anything, it will look more and more hollow to voters next year if the economy continues to improve (see BW, 11/17/03, "As Growth Sizzles, What's A Dem To Do?"). Three days after Clark delivered his remarks, the government released data showing that gross domestic product grew at a 7.2% rate during the third-quarter, the best in nearly two decades. OPTIMISM WINS. Critics of Bush's handling of the economy can legitimately argue that the growth might not last and that the job market is still weak. But Republicans have been feasting on such "gloom-and-doom" Democratic rhetoric for decades, turning it to their advantage by pointing to their candidates as harbingers of hope and optimism about the future. Remember Ronald Reagan's "Morning in America?" Americans are an optimistic people by nature. They don't like to be told the sky is falling. Besides, inventories are low, productivity is surging, and business spending on technology and other capital goods are up (see BW, 11/17/03, "Business Turns On The Tap"). If companies decide they need to ramp up production to fill their shelves for the holiday season, watch out. The job market, which has now expanded for three straight months, could take off (see BW Online, 11/7/03, "There's Hope for Hiring, After All"). Another staple of Clark's stump speech, his criticism of the rising deficit, might be backfiring, too. Measured in absolute dollars, the gap is huge. But as a percentage of GDP, which is a much more meaningful figure, it doesn't look quite so scary. And after a long period of growth, forecasts for the deficit are starting to shrink. One minute, we're looking at the Deficit Clock in Times Square, wondering about how our grandkids are going to pay for this mess. The next minute, the deficit has turned to surplus, and we're retiring the 30-year bond. JUST ANOTHER POLITICIAN? Clark's message has an additional problem. Not too long ago, he praised Bush effusively -- and it's all on videotape. In his New York stump speech, he casually mentioned that all the Democratic candidates -- every one of them from Richard Gephardt and John Kerry to Al Sharpton and Dennis Kucinich -- would make "fine" Presidents. "Did I leave anyone out?" he asked. Well, no, at this point, he hasn't -- including Bush. Such comments make Clark seem like just another politician. His effort to portray Bush as someone who "ducks" responsibility also came across as shallow and disjointed. He criticized the President for chopping wood at his ranch in Crawford, Tex., instead of being at his desk in Washington. I spoke to more than half a dozen people over the course of an hour before Clark spoke. None of them seemed remotely concerned that Bush has been ducking his responsibilities as President. In fact, Bush and Dean both seem to be benefiting from the perception that they're earnest guys who, right or wrong, are trying to doing what they think best for the country. Clark's message is ill-formed even when it comes to Iraq, an area where his background should help him shine. He characterizes Bush as a "reckless" leader with "no plan" -- and proposes doing what instead? Turning the mission over to NATO, with the endorsement of the U.N. No question, more international support is welcome, and the U.S. should be willing to make reasonable compromises in return. But the operation should remain under U.S. control because that's the most likely way to keep Baathists from retaking control of the situation. Clark is going to have to instill a sense among the electorate that he's a real leader who would take the country in a better direction than his Democratic rivals or George Bush. From what I saw, he's still talking as if he were straight from central casting, playing a leader on a TV commercial. Until he starts being a leader, he'll remain a bit player and end up an also-ran.  Rosenbush is a BusinessWeek editor based in New York Edited by Douglas Harbrecht
BW MALL
SPONSORED LINKS
Get BusinessWeek directly on your desktop with our RSS feeds.
Buy a link now! Add BusinessWeek news to your Web site with our headline feed. Click to buy an e-print or reprint of a BusinessWeek or BusinessWeek Online story or video. To subscribe online to BusinessWeek magazine, please click here. Learn more, go to the BusinessWeekOnline home page  | | |
 Copyright 2003, by The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All rights reserved.Terms of Use | Privacy Policy |
Printer-Friendly Version
