Deep In The Roots Of The Clark Campaign
I attended a Wes Clark campaign function last night with Loyal Pipeline Reader Brad T. The emphasis of the group was to spread the word among University of Minnesota students. Brad is involved because he is a grad student at the U, and he knew a friend who was involved. This is not the "official" Wes Clark campaign organization here in Minnesota, though this group was led by a woman who apparently was in charge of that operation. This was really just a splinter group.
And that's a good thing. Why? Because there were only seven of us who showed up last night at the Town Hall Brewery--Three of whom were already involved, one of whom was the daughter of the organizer. Which means they roped in three new people: Me, Brad, and the boyfriend of the daughter of the organizer.
Is this what they mean by "Grass Roots"?
Our goal, which was divulged to us in between the organizer's bites from her massive plate of chili fries, was to try to think of ways to enlist participation from U of M undergrads. Think about that for a moment: In your experience as an undergrad in college, how fired up did you get about Presidential Primaries? Not the general election, mind you; we're talking about the Primaries. You'd have better luck finding undergrads who taped last week's "Touched By An Angel".
Brad immediately took on the role of wet blanket by telling the group how little he had cared for primary politics when he was an undergrad. We all nodded or ate chili fries in agreement with his dour forecast. Then, the organizer's daughter said that she thought a lot of campus activities were learned about through fliers placed in the girls' restrooms in the dorms. Brad and I volunteered to post that material.
In the midst of this discussion, the organizer began to explain Minnesota's hybrid caucus/primary system, a direct manifestation of my great ignorance come home to roost. Unfortunately, her explanation only deepend my confusion. I looked at Brad to see if he was getting any of it, but his eyes were glazed thicker than a Hostess Honey Bun. I pulled a nod and smile, alternated with the nod and furrowed brow with finger on chin, folllow by the obligatory scribble-on-paper-as-though-you-are-taking-this-all-down, and capped off with the non-committal, "I see". (Which pretty well describes how most of my workdays go, too.)
Then, we decided an email newsletter would be a good idea, so that we could send out updates on the Clark campaign, as well as positive press from places like Talking Points Memo or Donkey Rising (two names I didn't hestitate to drop to show everyone what a liberal smarty-pants I was). Yes, yes, we all agreed that was the answer. This newsletter would have them rolling in!
One problem: How do we get email addresses? Brad asked, "Does anyone at the table already have a list?" This sentence came in response, verbatim: "There was a student by the name of Jared, an undergrad. He disappeared, but he had gathered some email addresses, and we're just trying to carry that forward..."
The meeting ended roughly around the time the organizer polished off the chili fries. Brad and I filled out a form highlighting which tasks we would be willing to volunteer for, and as we got up, Brad said, "Keep me posted," to which I nodded in agreement in such a way as to say, "Yes, also keep me posted through Brad. Do not contact me directly," though now as I think back I realize I gave them my name and number and email, and so now I'm roped in.
I don't know what I expected, really. I know this isn't the "real" Clark organization (which is here nationally, and here for Minnesota) but this is how it gets started, I suppose. It's early, especially considering that Minnesota's caucus/primary is in March. (See, I was taking notes!)
Still, I have to admit that I felt odd, walking out with my Clark 04 buttons and bumper stickers. It feels odd to me to support. I don't know why. Maybe it's that part of me that stays Agnostic, or that part of me that followed the Vikings for 10 years before finally admitting that, yes, I do have a bit of an emotional letdown when they lose. I think I'm just a naturally neutral person. Or maybe I just don't like to commit. I don't know.
Regardless, I'm signed up now, and I will continue to try to stay involved at whatever level feels right to me. Brad's friend at the meeting was explaining why he was involved, and he said that he has never really participated before, but he just got so pissed off at what happened in the 2000 election, and everything that has happened since, and he just figured he needed to participate in some way to help make things better. That summed it up for Brad, and it does for me, too.
Finally...I remember a lot being made of Clinton's appeal to women based on his attractiveness. I think Bill Clinton was a reasonably attractive man, but I always thought it was his demeanor, his smoothe manner and Southern accent (and reputation as a Bad Boy) that really drew women to him. I think Wes Clark, by most objective standards, is a handsome man. Not only that, but he's a freakin' Four Star General, in addition to being an intellectual badass. But I just don't get the sense that he has that same power over women that Clinton had. Now, that could just be because he doesn't have the Arkansas State Patrol trolling for him (shout out to you, Sean), but still, I just am not hearing the buzz. Is that because he just isn't well-known enough? Is it because he hasn't played his sax on Arsenio?
So, let's hear it, ladies: Does General Wes Clark do it for you? It's vitally important that I conduct this field research, because my contribution to the next Clark meeting I attend will be a plan to rock the "horny, lonely women" vote.
12:46:28 PM 
|
|
