Clark not Edward is the Better V.P. for Kerry. Synergies are Powerful

LET’S BE WILD AND CRAZY and assume that all the pundits were completely wrong and John Forbes Kerry becomes our Party Nominee.

If so, General Wesley Clark is the best of the candidates to join him on the ticket. I believe John Kerry could easily find others. But Clark has put enough effort into a nationwide campaign it would be easier to work with Clark to quickly focus on building a nation-wide effort to turn the nation around and remove the Bush regime.

My review shows that on foreign policy, domestic issues and their relationship to the military, there are a lot of great synergies between Kerry and Clark. These synergies do not exist with Edwards or Gephardt. A Kerry/Clark ticket would free Kerry to focus on his vision for the country emphasizing economic and environmental policy and let Clark carry the ball on attacking Bush on national security and military issues which is his strength.

Foreign Policy

Clark and Kerry are very similar and both worked in the 90’s for a foreign policy that Kerry calls “progressive internationalism” and argue for proactive humanitarian military intervention in the Balkan.

Both can be assumed to be very strong in both theory and practice. Kerry’s policy strength derives principally from 18 years on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and his stint as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Operations. At the same time he has a long history of hands-on involvement in military affairs starting with his two tours in Vietnam.

Clark’s major posts as Commander in Chief of the United States Southern Command and then as Nato Supreme Allied Commander were essentially senior diplomatic positions negotiating and implementing U.S. foreign policy objectives.

Domestic Issues

John Kerry has the highest scores among almost all democratic leaders for his environmental record and for issues affecting the working poor. For thirty years Kerry has fought for labor rights, women’s rights and campaign finance reform. Kerry’s record is solid on education and social security. Despite significant political cost, Kerry has opposed capital punishment, the NRA and all the fat-cat special interest lobby groups camped out in Washington.

Few senators have maintained a record so widely regarded as above reproach. John Kerry’s legendary indifference to special interest initiatives has been widely slammed as arrogance, aloofness and neglect of his “constituents.”

Wesley Clark’s record lack of a voting record means that it is harder for the Republicans to attack him. His views on social issues can be gleaned from his actions and statements regarding education, health-care and social relations in the military services, which appear to make him a moderate.

Clark’s stints at Washington assignments (White House Fellow and as Special Assistant at OMB) should provide him with some grasp of domestic policy issues.


Military Experience

Kerry has a storied military record with noted acts of battlefield sacrifice and bravery. His 4 years of duty included some of the most dangerous missions in the war. Kerry received the Bronze Star, Silver Star and 3 Purple Hearts for his Vietnam service.

Kerry, however, became very critical of U.S. tactics in the execution of the war even while he was in the battlefield and, after the end of his 2nd Tour, threw all efforts into ending the conflict. Some have questioned Kerry ability to make tough military decisions given his vehement opposition to the military establishment in the 70’s.

Clark served in a brief (1yr) tour in Vietman and left the battlefield severely wounded. Clark received the Silver Star and a Purple Heart. Since, Clark has serve in varied desk and senior command positions in the military, and retired from the military, after winning the brief war in Kosovo, as 4 Star Nato Supreme Allied Commander. He did not engage in anti-war activites.

Clark’s record of command appears to be stellar. His post-Vietnam awards include numerous medals and commendations including honorary Knighthoods from the British and Dutch governments, commander of the French Legion of Honor. In August 2000, President Clinton awarded General Clark with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian honor.

As you see, there are many synergies and complementarities between Kerry and Clark. Some time last spring, the always-wise Robert Reich (Clinton secretary of Labor) argued for a John Kerry and Wesley Clark ticket to go against Bush.

I agree with my friends who say that Kerry could turn over much of the campaign in the Southern States to Wes Clark. Clark has become a pretty tough campaigner and his straight-talking style could win support from his fellow Southerners. Veterans for Kerry could also work well with Vets for Clark.

Those Vets who criticize Kerry for his leading role in the anti-war movement would not be able to attack Clark. A Kerry/Clark ticket would create a very consistent grass-root patriotic campaign across every state in the nation.

I find it interesting that the "front runners" keep trying to leech off of Clark's credentials for their candidate's campaign. First Dean, now Kerry. Why not go to the source, and just vote for Clark in the first place?

abandon him now, but I liked Clark since he first came on the scene. If I had trashed Clark and then now tried to suck up, as some on here have, I could understand you point. That isn't me. I know you weren't specifically talking to me.

to fight for his country.

A "dream ticket" should be capable of winning the General Election.

Kerry has expressly written off the South, and when you do that, you can just about write off winning the Electoral College. I would not have minded if Kerry kept that thought to himself, but how is that going to drum up potential volunteers down here in the South; how is that supposed to rally Southerners to his cause; and how are candidates down here going to attach themselves to the coattails of a man who could care less about this whole region of the country.

Kerry must go. If Kerry gets the nom, we lose.

It is plausible.

Kerry-Clark may be too much testosterone on one ticket; Edwards may round things out from a positive, emotional perspective.

Dean's numbers among women voters really blow donkey-balls. Edwards may help us win this demographic by the margins we usually do.

try to compete on something else.

:)

He has stated he is running for President & nothing else. I believe if Clark does not get the nomination he will bow out all together. If he were to ever run on a Kerry ticket, I would disown him!

comes from Kerry. I will say it again, Kerry has forgot thew meaning of Officer & gentleman.

It is part of the campaign, and never means anything.

No matter how I spin it, I can't see Clark's lack of experience as a positive. No, Edwards is the guy we want.

thinks Clark is ok. I trust his judgement.

:bounce:

This is evidenced from poll analysis and focus group study:


Kerry gets the North
Clark gets the South

Kerry gets the Women
Clark gets the Men

Kerry appeals to the entrepreneurial class (Wall Street)
Clark appeals to the working class (Main Street)

And it can only help that everyone has been attacking General Clark
for being a Republican!

20% of swing voters...those who don't relish a partisan battle

he followed Dean's manic approach to campaigning.

(humor)

But it is a serious issue. Clark and his wife seem able to relate
to simple folk in the South. Great campaign assett.

How often does that happen? I think the eventual VP choice will be someone entirely new.

Advantage is that candidates get a lot of exposure during the
campaign and can bring a following into the GE

Synergy ? Sort of. More of the same but without the history is closer to the mark. If you don't need regional support and don't expect the veep to do anything then maybe you go with Clark. But thats expectng very little.

As Kerry has already written off the south, there is no point in talking Edwards. He's also already stated he's no interested.

Mid-west ? Could be a good idea. Gephardt perhaps.

Choosing a former supporter of Republican Presidents help insulate the ticket from the "Liberal" attack.

Clark insures Dems can march on the National Security issues rather than just play defense.

Synergy is factually evidenced from poll analysis and focus group study:

Kerry gets the liberals
Clark gets the moderates

Kerry gets the North
Clark gets the South

Kerry gets the Women
Clark gets the Men

Kerry appeals to the entrepreneurial class (Wall Street)
Clark appeals to the working class (Main Street)

And it can only help that everyone has been attacking General Clark
for being a Republican!

new boss, old boss, etc...

:shrug:

Why would he need a "republican" on his ticket?

Kerry strongly believes that one has to be "prepared" for the
presidency and does not believe that Edwards is -- thus not for
the vice presidency either. This may also be his view of Clark,
but he has not indicated -- main critique of Clark, whom he respects
and has worked with, is that he is relatively new to the Democratic Party and perhaps to Dem fundamentals.

although they are at a similar place now.

I think the pick is Graham.

Dont put all your money on Kerry just yet :D

Now I am wholehearted behind the dream of General Clark being my president. I'll support him all the way. However, if he doesn't win then I sincerely hope he joins the presidential ticket as vp. But because I really want him to win, I'm not seriously going there.

I've wanted the Dems to pick a candidate who can take away the national security advantage Repubs seem to have so that they can focus on the domestic isssues where we win. I think Clark can do this and I think Kerry/Clark can also. I think a Kerry/Edwards ticket is pretty formidable also.

I'm not ruling anyone out yet. I think a long primary will help us because we get the Dem message out.

Called him real-estate saleman and not credible as President.
Interesting that Imus was for Bush, but is now for Kerry.

A good solid horse-race between candidates is healthy. We need the competition to maintain the attention of the media on the Democrat's issues. This competition is healthy as long as the Democratic candidates don't start feeding on each other.

The competition also helps to refine people's campaign styles and organization. The competition gives the voters a better idea of which candidate will be able to stand up to George W.

I would be very happy with either Kerry or Clark as the Democratic nominee. I wish they would make a pact with each other that: 1) they will not criticize each other, and 2) whoever has the lead at a certain point will receive the support of the other candidate, with the other person becoming the V.P. nominee.

Edward's time has not yet come. He needs some more experience before he is ready to be considered for the Presidency. A person should not be considered as Vice-President unless they are qualified to be President. Today, Edwards is not.

work.

to play second fiddle to a Lt. Col.?

and Clinton, more than with his superiors in the Pentagon.

I want him on *his* ticket.

President Clark. That's the ticket!

he doesn't get it (sob) I think he would be everyones best choice for VP. We NEED him as a world negotiator and for world piece. He has a good grassroots organization, and will help in the South more than Edwards. He is a uniter and the Bushies FEAR him. I'll bet he knows a lot of information that will embarrass the potus and he will have the gravitas to go after Bush and get some prosecutions going. He would free the president to concentrate on domestic issues and he can take on the war on terrorism. No one can do that better than Clark. But, all the reasons stated as to why he should be our best shoice for VP are all the reasons we should vote him for PRESIDENT.

Clark for President. I can't see the former Supreme Allied Commander of Nato being vp for Kerry.

Clark has repeatedly stated that he runs for the top spot, and nothing else. I'd be disappointed if he'd buckle after all and accept a VP spot.

So, If the sky falls after all and Kerry still gets the nomination, I'll have to think long and hard about what to do next, but it'll probably be a sabbatical to the moon - in search of intelligent life forms.

The folk that drafted him and others like the "friends of Clinton" no longer see the rationale for Clark's candidacy.

Can you explain it.

Breaking news: Kerry isn't the center of the universe, he doesn't hold a patent on the "anti-Bush" epithet, and Clark and Dean supporters overall aren't shopping for an establishment representative, but someone who have a strong, independent and "credible" profile as "the alternative" to Bush.

Maybe it's time to ponder this: why bother wasting further energy on attempts to scrape off one or two converts among Dean or Clark supporters when the real electoral leverage lies outside the Democratic party?

Think about that, and then look at how Kerry and the other candidates fit in.

Kerry may be an attractive candidate to the established, old-style, loyal Democratic voter - but he's got little reach outside that. Good priest, but I'd be more impressed if he managed to work outside his own parish.

He's one heck of a re-election factor for Bush.

As a member of Draft Clark and a solid Clark supporter, I assert that you are being disingenuous and have very little knowledge of that which you are speaking of.

Clark was drafted by people (such as myself) who examined all the candidates in the summertime, including Kerry and Dean, and found them sadly wanting. That hasn't changed (and I assume other Clark supporters would agree with me), and that's why we still support him.

Clark was drafted as an alternative to everyone . . . and because he'd make an extraordinary American president.

were brought in (call were made) benind Clark -- indeed, took over the effort from the original Draft-Clark movement -- was specifically because their were doubts that Kerry could survive Dean's attacks re IWR, "Washington Insider" etc. and a significant conviction that
Dean would loose dramatically to Bush.

What an incredible insult to people who worked their butts off to put him where he is. I'm no big fan of Clark and his supporters have pissed me off many a time but this is really a very demeaning statement to make.

Hope Clark doesn't stumble too much or he may not be viable for
the GE assuming Kerry wins nod

clear in the Clark camp that this may be the best available option
to rally all resources to defeating Bush.

as any other proposed. Why not?

I'm a Clark supporter, but this is a dream team. Clark has a bunch of committed supporters. He's a smart, likable guy and he can raise money.

Whereas Cheney spent his time trying to destroy America's international reputation, Clark could spend his time repairing it.

NO THANK YOU!!! Two guys who run on military worship will do nothing to begin to steer us away from the unhealthy, downright warped nationalism that has overtaken masses in this country.
That is buying into it and saying it's okay. It's not and never will be, and I would have to throw up after voting a ticket like that.

the "strong on national security" banner away from the republicans.

All studies show that is the factor that turns the vote in favor of
republicans. If we rout the Repubs in that battle, then we can move
to the wider war on all the issues that we and Kerry care about deeply - world peace, health and welfare, the environment, jobs, social justice etc.

It's the same ol same ol letting them define the playing field. Letting them tell us and the public what is important instead of standing up with the spine he wants people to believe he has and opposing them and telling THEM what's important and running on their strengths.
Of course national security is a factor it always is. They have screwed it up. If it is at all possible for them to get away with painting anyone else as inferior on defense, the person running against him is imcompetent. Bush has screwed foreign policy up at every turn. If we can't beat him, what we need is a look in the mirror and a re-examination of our strategy for choosing candidates.

I've always thought that was the winning strategy. Have a Dem candidate show strong military credentials so that they take that issue off the table. Then focus on domestic policies.

One of the reasons I support Clark is that I think only someone who is seen as strong on national security will be able politically to reform the military/industrial complex.

That is the only way to do it. It is simply crazy to think that
one can smash the Repub on National Security without a credentialled
candidated such as Kerry or Clark.

Without winning the the Security battle the Dems will be bogged down in a loosing struggle to a narrow win at best and a total debacle at worst.

We need to recover the House and Senate. That will only happen if we
can focus some attacks into the Republican heatland rather than just
bringing out the base.

Corporations that run our government and the men who back their international interests with force and human blood.

Campaign problems may reduce Clark's luster

I'd much rather see him as Secretary of Defense than as VP, or for that matter even as president.

support a Clark/Kerry ticket or a Kerry/Clark ticket, I can't imagine that he would do that without the permission of the Clark campaign

to run for Pres.

Candidates when considering a vp always are careful about chosing someone who will not "out shine" them on a ticket. In Kerry's case he will be looking for someone with less experience and gravitas. And if one looks at the Senate as experience, well, it is both a plus and huge minus even if Kerry had been one of the Senate leaders.

No, it would seem the party leadership aided and abetted by the media has chosen Edwards for the #2 spot.

And as for Clark's campaign, I would advise anyone repeating media blather to support their case to look more carefully at past media performance before believing anything they spin into your brain. Remember: the networks only chose the people who will best serve their purposes.

But unlike Dean, he won't say that he would accept it. Is Clark being coy. Does he want to go back to his business practice if he doesn't win the nomination?

Kerry lacks the grass-roots support which Clark has in his pockets...

It's going to take the entire Clark Army in order to get-out-the-vote in November.

Arkansas and Florida are very attractive as well. Clark delivers Arakansa, and Bob Graham Clark's good friend helps in delivering Florida.

The were questions about Edwards getting re-elected in N.C. so why put eggs into a basket that may not deliver?

Kerry needs to deflect the Washington Insider MEME from his ticket and adding Clark to it does that, as well as totally kills the National Security Platform that Bush and Rove want to go after.

This is a WIN-WIN situation folks, period.

If Clark gets the Nod after Super-Tuesday, he should consider Kerry as well.

We don't just need the White-House people, we need it for 16 years!!!

Clark won't be hiding in a cave for anyone!