It seems like only two weeks ago when Howard Dean announced that now that he’s the frontrunner, the Democratic presidential candidates should stop criticizing one another. He argued that the campaign needed “a little character transplant,” and insisted, “It’s not necessary to tear down the other opponents.” He even appealed to the DNC to stop the other candidates from being mean to him.
Oh wait, that was only two weeks ago.
Dean has apparently changed his mind, at least in part. He’d still like the other candidates to stop going after him, but Dean doesn’t see any problem going after others. For now, that means going after Wesley Clark, who appears to be closing the gap a bit.
A reporter with the Arizona Republic was accidentally invited to participate in a conference call in which Dean staffers were speaking candidly about campaign strategy, thinking they were only talking amongst themselves. Oops.
Dean campaign officials explained that the day after Dean received Bill Bradley’s endorsement, the campaign would use Dean “surrogates” to “hit Clark” on a variety of points, including accusing Clark of being “indecisive,” and highlighting Clark’s non-partisan background, including having voted for Republican presidential candidates in the past.
Clark’s campaign seemed more than pleased by the report, and issued a release responding to Dean’s “secret strategy disclosure.”
“The Dean camp’s secret back-room plotting to have Bill Bradley and others attack Wes Clark isn’t a bit surprising,” said Matt Bennett, Clark’s communications director. Bennett added, “The fundamental difference between Governor Dean and General Clark is that Howard Dean is a politician, and Wes Clark is a leader. Wes Clark has run a war, making life and death decisions every day. If the Dean Campaign wants to have a debate about decisiveness, we’re ready.”
And, just as the Dean staffers had outlined, the attacks began the day after the Bradley endorsement.
Yesterday in New Hampshire, Dean staffers distributed anti-Clark fliers at Clark’s campaign events. There was little question about where the fliers came from; the words “Dean for America” were printed at the bottom.
As the LA Times noted today, “In Peterborough, a man who identified himself as a Dean campaign staffer handed out the leaflets to people attending a Clark speech. And Clark campaign staffers said they found the fliers on windshields at an event in Bedford late Tuesday night.”
Jay Carson, Dean’s national spokesman, said the campaign was simply “pointing out facts that the American people should know about.” He declined to elaborate on the timing.
That’s pretty weak, guys. When other campaigns “point out facts” about Dean, it’s internecine warfare that helps the Republicans. When Dean does it to Clark, it’s information the public deserves to know. Hmm.
Not surprisingly, the Clark camp actually seems pleased to be on the receiving end of Dean’s attacks. Clark said of the fliers, “I guess that’s what professional politicians do.”
Indeed, Dean’s campaign is telling the world that they’re afraid of Clark’s sudden momentum. Frontrunners who enjoy comfortable leads over their rivals don’t need to go on the attack. To do so would be risky and unnecessary.
As Slate’s Chris Suellentrop noted yesterday, Clark’s campaign has a “sense of pride [now] that it has arrived as a serious Dean rival. No campaign has ever been happier to have a target on its back.”
Suellentrop added that the anti-Clark fliers Dean’s camp is distributing “demonstrate that Clark has become a big enough irritant [to Dean] to merit a swat of his own.”
“The Howard Dean campaign is starting to get a little nervous,” Mo Elleithee, the Clark campaign’s New Hampshire communications director, crows at a conference call slapped together to gleefully respond to Dean’s “negative attack flyers.” “They’re hearing our footsteps.”