Why I will support Clark

Despite all the rantings from the right, I don't think there's been a better group of candidates running for the nomination in a while. I would think if anything all the nominees would make excellent cabinet choices. Whoever gets the nod should seriously consider that possibility.

In the case of Wesley Clark, I will have to admit some biases, given that his military background appeals to me after serving in the Army. Many would regard such background plenty of reason for suspiscion (sp?) but I'll get to that later.

No one would argue that Clark would be worse than Bush. That much is obvious. Clark has also endorsed a number of positions after analyzing them thoroughly and coming to a sound conclusion-remember, he didn't just graduate from West Point, he taught there also. Whether it is with courtroom procedures or combat operations or economic issues, Clark shows a great deal of thought in what he takes a stand on.

Certainly he would gain the support of the voters in uniform. One important point is that he would have a plan to have the U.N. assume operations in Iraq and get our troops back home. All other candidates appear to have some sort of plan to do the same but not all of them have voted against sending them over to Iraq in the first place.

Clark also cannot be intimidated and won't back down from the likes of whiners like Matthews or Hannity, much less any right-wing blowhards in Congress. He also has shown that he isn't afraid to take badly needed stands so often needed in our society.

Clark has also criticized the Supreme Court's partisan stance in Selection 2000 and is not afraid to point out just how Bush got into the White House. This is not something you'd ever hear from some sort of PNAC'er or some sort of mole for the repukes. Keep in mind that Clinton also said Clark would make a good President.

That being said, should Clark not get the nomination, I still feel that Howard Dean would be an excellent nominee to confront Bush. We've all heard the argument that Dean isn't "electable", a phrase that is already getting its meaning worn out by the conservative pundits who bring you the daily news. Those who voted him in as governor however will disagree.

And there's my two cents.

And Dean is only electable in our microcosm, which, to my great distress, has shown itself out of sync with reality (the great American public) for the past couple years.

I agree with you all the way. Clark is our best hope. But he has a lot of work to do to have a chance at the nomination.

I started out with Kerry, became interested in Dean and then soured on him somewhat, and now am beginning to think that Clark represents our best shot at ousting Bush.

All the balls of Dean and twice the electability!

Now we need to get the message over to the mediawhores who have received their memo from Rove to put Clark on ignore......

I refuse to let them pick our candidate for us....which is what is happening currently.

Clark is the man who will win.
"IT'S YOUR ECONOMY AND YOUR WAR, STUPID!"
A REAL MILITARY HERO TELLS A GENUINE INTELLIGENCE FAILURE

I like everything Dean has to say...but he's fodder at DU and beyond. Dean is good at shaking up the estabishment, getting people worked up, and spurring debate that we need to be having.

Problem is, America isn't ready for a Dean revolution. I am, but obviously everyone's not as eager to hop on that steam engine. So there's something about him that connects with me, but evidently repels others. Alot of it has to do with his use of language: he makes both blunt and provocative statements that can easily be diced up, taken out of context and inevitably spun to put him on the defensive. In some ways, he's almost too smart for his own good, IMO. He keeps making the right moves and still ends up having to explain himself. He's either misunderstood, or viciously attacked with intellectual dishonesty. Out of those two choices, I hope it's the former when it's coming from fellow democrats.

I remain undecided, and have that luxury due to a late primary. I'm waiting to see if Clark can regain some momentum. There's no doubt in my mind he has the skills to make a great Prezzie, but if he can't run a campaign that gets him there...

For backing the General. Let's all hope--and do what we can--to make sure that he gets the opportunity to run against Dub, and win (which he WILL do if he's nominated!) next year. :D

How do you think he did in the "Rock the Vote" forum last night?

:kick:

B-)

We don't have a chance of winning back the White House on 04.

however I think that he will be just as valuable if Dean gets the nod and has Clark as his Veep. I think those 2 would be landslide material, they would be Rove's worst nightmare and with the sound of the draft whispering I think most voters would believe Clark when it came to what to do about avoiding reinstatement. I have spent the morning spreading the word to the Repuke friends I have that sons and DAUGHTERS about the possiblity of a draft with no deferments, When they hear that they are all ears.

Repectfully CMB and Sharpton should be in the administration, DK, Kerry, Gephart and Lieberman should hold on to their seats in the congress and senate. I wish Edwards would not have declared he would not run for re-election.

have a decent chance, but you're right, Clark definitely has the best chance to win.

I think you're right. I support Clark as much because I think he can beat * and unfortunately I think he is the only one of the 9 who can beat *.

He appears to be very sincere and knowledgable. He's a military guy, yet he isn't overbearing.

I was leary in the beginning because of his taking so long to decide that he was indeed a dem but he is proving himself everyday. I love his rapid response team approach, not letting any of the unpresidents action go by without a stance and I like that he hasn't criticized any of the dems. He could bring in the independents vote, the south and the military. How could we lose?

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

Although electability is important to me, it is not the reason I am supporting Clark. I am supporting Clark for the following reasons (in order of importance).

First, I am supporting him for the policies that he has endorsed.

Second, I am supporting him because, in my opinion, he is likely to be the most effective at advancing those policies after he wins the whitehouse. I think that this is a point that has not been raised as adequately as it should be.

Third, I am supporting him because I have fantasies of seeing W wear the flightsuit to a debate with Clark.

Fourth, I am supporting him because I think it would be hilarious to see Shelton crap his pants on election day.

Finally, I think he is the most electable candidate. Note that I think the other candidates are also electable, but I think it would be riskier if we nominated another candidate.

in 2004 is what I've started to think about. Russ is a great liberal who could keep some of the folks from voting green - and he rocks. Only US Senator to vote against PATRIOT ACT I.


just my 2 cents.

Kidding of course. Feingold would be great, but do we really want to risk losing a senate seat? The Rs may be headed for a filibuster proof senate. And I think the Supreme COurt is headed for major turnover. One before 11-04 and several after if Bush gets elected (for the first time).

crowd. I'd love to see them on a ticket

We could run Jesus Christ himself on our ticket and right wing hate radio would say:

Jesus wants to take your money and give it to the poor.
Jesus is soft on crime.
Jesus is weak on defense.
Jesus is anti-business.
Jesus is a socialist!


So any ranting from the right wing about our candidates needs to be taken from with a grain of salt.

On edit: They would also be attacking his character because you know Jesus has been seen hanging around with hookers and people of questionable moral integrity!

He's got a lot of charisma. He's attractive. His Rock The Vote commercial shows he knows how to be playful and connect with the young people. But not only that, he connects to with just about everybody.

These are the posts I like to read. I am now leaning toward Clark and your post helped "push" me in his direction. I like him. He's pro-choice which is a MAJOR issue for me. He's anti-war. He would get our soldiers HOME. I trust him as a Commander-in-Chief. I love the fact that he's not intimidated by ANYONE, especially the administration. I need to read up on his Health Care plan, haven't read that yet. I think I read the other day that he will "open up the Patriot Act" and let the American people read it and decide what portions to repeal. I LIKE that tact. Being an Economics Professor, I think he has a good shot at doing something to fix the mess Bush has created. He's highly educated, a successful businessman and he is DAMN good looking! :7

Also, with all the right wingers pulling for Dean? Makes me very, very suspicious! I know it's because they think he's THEIR best chance to win but, what if they have some garbage up their nasty freeper sleeves? I put nothing past those people. IN FACT, as I type this, Tony Blankley, a RW pundit, is on Crossfire DEFENDING Dean on the Campaign contribution issue. Sorry, I don't like that. Something isn't right with that picture.

:)

As a Clark supporter, I want to say briefly that initally the fact he was career Military turned me off.

My Dad was in a NCO in the army and it showed in his personality. Overbearing, disiplinarian, authoritarian control freak.

However, as I observed Clark on tv, heard him speak and read up on his background... I found him to be a "Leader " in the best sense of the word.

He stuck up for what he thought was right in the Kosovo War and got canned for it.
He worked for the good of his troops and their families while Base Commander.
He critiqued the PNAC'ers and their handling of Iraq- while being diplomatic about it.
He strives for perfection and yet doesn't seem pompous.

He is certainly subjecting himself to alot of hardwork and crap that he really didn't need to....

He is certainly subjecting himself to alot of hardwork and crap that he really didn't need to....

Hits it home. It tells me that Clark really is concerned about the direction Bush has taken this country. I do think he's very sincere when he makes that statement. Otherwise, why the hell would he want to be prez?

Thanks for pointing that out up thread; I've been on that issue for sometime. That Clark has spent more time working in the WH than any candidate including bush (subtract vacations) means a great deal. Also, Clark was part of the permanent government for years and years. If we are going to change this country, having someone who knows how the intellegence pipeline--all 24 of them--works or doesn't work, is important. But most of all, we will to access money if there are ever to be programs that benefit the citizens of our country. That money is in the Pentagon budget, and only one of their own can get it out, can revamp a nonfunctioning system, and can evolve the cultural within the top brass by promoting the "good" people rather than the "get-along" people.

After listening to the evening news, I'd given up all hope of anyone seeing through the bs that's filtering down. I suggest we stand together and refuse to let them chose the Democratic candidate. Thanks for posting this hopeful thread. And one other comment: people don't vote for the VP, they vote for the top of the ticket.

One day last fall I heard some guy on a talking head show making sense. I remember thinking "who is that guy?"

I like that Clinton likes him. (Sometimes you just have to take it from people who know the guy.)

What the h*ll would it take to get Carville down there working for Clark? If he can put his campaign together he could win. That's all that's important to me.

I find Dean abrasive with a bad temper. I don't know how well he'll last another year without putting lots of people off. I admire Kerry perhaps the most. But then I remember him from my Vietnam protest days. He's too elite Eastern snobbish to win (there was a day. . . .) Edwards hasn't lit my fire (the born in a log cabin stuff is getting old). The rest are too far out to win. (I DO like Carol!! and Sharpton's in your face rhetoric and Dennis is probably the guy who best represents my views.) Lieberman just plain makes me sick.

My dream ticket as of today is Clark/Kerry.

I'm going (for the second time) to see the general speak tomorrow. Can't wait. If you haven't seen this man give a talk or speech where he can speak at length, you haven't see the general. I hate to say it, but he's still learning how to do this "debate" thing (these are not debates, they're a bad joke, and may hurt us (the party) more than they help), and frankly he's not that great at it yet. He is awesome when appearing alone though. Don't miss the opportunity to see him in person.

I'll report in tomorrow on his appearance. He's working SC. He will win SC.

We must hear everything. The reports from the field have been the best, and keep me going in spite of Paula von Zahn. That skin-crawler has the nerve to play gottcha with Clark. Of course she went into a regular swoon for Dean.

Chaska_glad you're back!

new thread when you report on Clark's speech. I'll be eagerly awaiting it. I just love General Clark.

And did Paula ever get General Clark on that weed question. That was painlful to watch. The general should have said "no, I didn't", and more less laughed it off. Nobody could possibly think that General Clark ever smoked pot. It'd make a great halloween costume for him. What's the thing you could least imagine General Clark's deep dark secret to be? Pothead. LO freakin' L

His military career never was a turn-off for me. I was excited that he entered, but still have a nagging feeling about his lack of experience as an elected official with domestic issues. So I went back to Kerry as my #1 pick, but if Clark gets the nod I'd line up enthusiastically behind him as a supporter.