I like Clark AND Warner! How can I choose?

With all this premature talk about the nomination coming down to Clark vs.Warner, I can't choose a side! I like them both. If it weren't against the new DU rules, I'd create a couple of sock puppets (one a Clarkie and one Warnerite) and pit them against each other just for the fun of it.

I thought it was going to come down to Feingold vs Gore?

...and take your Republican backers with you!

... it was a joke. :P

Why not at least wait until after the midterm elections. You've probably got a good feel for Clark. I'm sure you'll have ample opportunity to get a better feel for Warner in the coming months.

I guess I'm lucky. I'm already solidly committed. And yes, I do think the talk is premature. I wish people would wait till after the midterms. I just hate the pissing matches and wish they could be delayed as long as possible.

I know enough about Clark that I am quite comfortable with hoping he is the Democratic nominee, and at this point Clark would have to take some very new and different positions on issues that are important to me to make me reconsider my support for him. Something I feel is very unlikely, but who knows? It is early.

I will look closer at Warner for a couple of reasons. One is the simple truth that you can't always get what you want, so it makes sense to have a back up plan just in case. The other is that I want a strong ticket in 2008, and even if I remain convinced that Warner doesn't have broad enough experience to be President now, he might still make a great pick for VP.

None of us have much to go on regarding how well Warner will play outside of his home turf of Virginia after the buzz is gone, so kicking back and paying attention to his progress makes some sense. And I want to see what issues Warner choses to emphasize on a National stage rather than a Virginia stage. I am not happy that Warner is a DLC member but I understand that he was a Virginia Democrat when it wasn't easy to be a Virginia Democrat, so I will keep an open mind around that.

So bottom line, I agree with Crunchy Frog. If a choice isn't clear to you yet, there is still time to track both men and decide later. For all I know Clark may not run in 2008 (though I believe he will) and I could end up supporting Warner despite some misgivings that I have about him.

In general I think we are at a stage now where it makes sense for internet activists to raise general issues about potential 2008 candidates, general concerns about them perhaps, and certainly bring up their strong points also, so that we all can start paying attention to what matters. But I am trying hard to avoid flame fests and threads that go on and on tearing any of these Democrats apart. I may be wearing their T shirt come 2008, and before then there is work to be done for 2006. It is best to hold off on starting fires on bridges, we all still need them.

Plenty of time to sort through your options between now and the campaigns for 2008

:D

For heaven's sake, we have 2006 elections to deal with.

as opposed to the bubble known as DU, all I hear is Warner or Hillary. Must say the only place I ever hear mention of Clark is here.

I don't get why people think they have to choose now. We have so much other work to do.

As to sockies, I'm sure there are enough in existence already so that you could borrow a few.

Julie

In that case I might beat Warner. :toast:

Jerry Brown was high in the National polls at this point before the 1992 election and no one hardly was talking about Clinton. Of course Warner's numbers will go up if he gets more press and they have been down because he hasn't been getting it up until now. But it is also silly to make comments like no one outside of DU knows or cares about Clark. Only a handful of Democrats nation wide score above one or two percent in polls and Clark is in that handful. He gets about as much poll support currently as Joe Biden and Biden seemingly has an iron clad contract to appear on some National political TV talk show every other Sunday. Clark regularly out polls folks like Richardson and Bayh and Feingold, so there is no point being petty about this. Clark is in the mix in the real world and it is very early. Some people were very early in Jimmy Carters camp and they ended up being right. Some folks were very early in Bruce Babbitt's camp and ended up being wrong. People get drawn early to potential candidates for different reasons, but who is polling high or low three years out is just about the worst reason possible.

I didn't say "no one outside of DU knows or cares about Clark". Sorry you read it that way. I said I never hear mention of him. Maybe folks care deeply and remain silent. Maybe they don't care. I don't try to guess. I report what I hear and on Clark that would be nothing outside of DU. We're talking personal experience here. Take it for whatever it's worth.

Frankly I think the person who will be the Dem nominee isn't on the radar yet, hence I keep my powder dry.

Julie

..Clark STILL beat him.

WNBC/Marist Poll.

A little down the page:

http://www.pollingreport.com/2008.htm

So obviously people outside of DU are thinking Clark, eh?

Don't get out much, do you?

I've been asked three times in this past week alone if Clark was going to run again. When I said I thought he would, all three people were excited. They didn't know him the first time around, but they do now and they like what they see.

They are all the counties within the District I chair. I work politics full time.

The only "Clarkie" I know from real life tells me she now realizes she has "much to learn about politics" and thinks she was probably "naive" to think Clark could ever win. It made me a little sad to hear her sound so disillusioned. I told her we're all naive for thinking anyone but the Corporatocracy's choice could've won.

Sorry you take issue with the facts I relay. You still may want to take care with what you assume, as demonstrated by your inaccurate assessment of how much I "get out". Baseless, inaccurate assumptions can cost us credibility and reveal emotion based thinking.

Julie

of the local political scene, huh Julie my friend? :rofl:

I have no horse in that race and little interest in it at this point. When I talk to my counties I only share opinions on how to build the party and stuff like that. I avoid discussion on individual candidates at this point (aside from for-sures like Granhom and Stabenow & their opponents).

When it comes to daydreamy talk of who might be good for our future I stay mute. Fortunately such talk is very rare at this point. Even when Hillary comes up, I bite my tongue! Believe me, it ain't easy but I think it's the way to go. You never know when you may be talking to a zealot and to provide a counter point to such folks could lead to permanent alienation (as is often proven here at DU daily).

When the time comes if there's a candidate I choose to support I will do so as a private individual. Believe me, when it's time for such discussion, from my official position I will state who I am for and pretty much leave it at that.

Julie

... you remind us of it often.

But that doesn't give you a full grip on the facts.

You get input from 14 counties? How many counties are in your state? How many in the whole country?

Again, I refer you to the NBC/Marist poll from Oct. 17 in which Clark out-polls Warner.

Yep, 14 counties in the 4th District. Many more in the state who I talk with pretty regularly too. Remember we all work on some campaigns together.

Frankly I'm happy to report there is very little talk of 08 among serious activists. It's all about 2006 with these people.

Julie

Frankly I'm happy to report there is very little talk of 08 among serious activists. It's all about 2006 with these people.

Well, that's good.

But the topic of this thread isn't '06, it's '08. You can be sure everyone here is also thinking '06.

I play on the internet talking 08 politics but I did real work on behalf of Tim Kaine. I stuffed envelopes for our Township Dems and made phone calls to swing districts regarding tight races to our County Legislature.

We all have to keep doing the real work.

a Governor from VA who has less than 2% name ID nationwide. Damn, times must be hard when your bragging about outpolling a guy who just stepped on the national scene a week ago.

and how it is that all people are talking about in the real world are Clinton and Warner. Predictably that triggered off this particular diversion. We all have our own concept of the real world it seems. My opinion about relative "popularity" of potential candidates at this stage is registered above.

I didn't say everyone in the real world is talking about Clinton and Warner. I said in the real world I hear no mention of Clark.

Hence the swarm action.

Julie

Poor baby...

"Hence the swarm action."

Not a solicitation for sympathy. Actually, a sort of thanks for the confirmation for all to see. And, might I add, thanks for continuing it.

Confirmation of assertions always add to credibility. Thanks for your continuing contributions. You are most accomodating. :hi:

Julie

So if I am "wrong" I am not "wrong again", it is the same initial "wrong", OK?. True, you didn't say everyone in the real world is talking about Clinton and Warner. Concerning the real world you said "all I hear is Warner or Hillary. Must say the only place I ever hear mention of Clark is here."

I think we can drop this now. If I am wrong about your comments I'll just accept the bitter truth now and move on.

I don't mind being criticized for what I do say, but I do mind taking heat for what I didn't. I'm sure you understand.

Cheers
Julie

But what is it when Kerry supporters defend Kerry, or do you never peek in on those threads? What about when enraged hordes of Dean supporters leap down the throats of anyone who dares make any kind of criticism him?

I notice that you only point it out when Clark is involved, as if you were trying to engage in the manufacture of an imagined conspiracy, which you can then go back to other little forums and report on.

Interesting little game that you like to play there Julie.

Of course the internet is not representative of the "real" world. If it were, there would be massive support here for Hillary, a bit of support for Kerry and Edwards, and other potential candidates would barely even be mentioned. Surely you've noticed that's not the case.

Well, anything that seems serve as "evidence" for your little conspiracy theories.

Cheers.:hi:

Aside from this diversion the discussion has been solid. Can we try to let this go now and see if anyone else actually has any more reactions to the OP?

Has anything said here in anyway been helpful to you wyldwolf?

All I said was I never hear mention of Clark here. Yeah, I can see why that might draw the rabid response team. Not.

Julie

Hillary, Hillary. A few people are familiar with Clark. Warner on the other hand is known by exactly one other person besides myself (in my ring of friends and acquaintances).

I knew you were some district poo-bah. Duh.

But that doesn't change this fact: I don't know where you live, but if the people in your district are that under-informed, then you need to do some educational outreach.

The FACT, Julie, is that people in the South love Wes Clark. People in RED states, DEMOCRATS and INDEPENDENTS, love, love, love the man and think he's the only one who can reach across the aisle in these states with a high veteran population to break the stranglehold the Republicans have on former military.

If people in YOUR district are still hanging their hats on New England liberals or those without any form of military or foreign policy experience, we'll lose again in a general election because WE HAVE TO FLIP SOME REDS STATES.

That said, I hear about Clark all the time from people around here. It's a pity your people don't. They're missing out on A LOT.

aren't wasting much time daydreaming about 08, they're focused on 06 and party building for now. That way they will be well prepared to substantially support whoever our candidate is in 08.

But thanks for posting just for me. :toast:

Julie

Red state Dems and Indys are very happy to know that Clark is seriously considering an '08 bid.

Many are looking forward to having Clark campaign for their CD and/or statewide candidates in 06 and help them raise money.

Insular chatter among people in blue states is less interesting than the excitement Clark generates about drawing red state Dems and Indys to actively support Democratic candidates. Active support in a red state is NOT just 'chatting" about which candidate is the flavor of the month.

In a strange way, the 'chatter' you hear says a lot about what is wrong with the Democratic party in general.

Even thought I know you weren't doing it, exactly.

It's just remarkable that both of us in red states know that Clark generates excitement amongst our fellow Dems and left-leaning Independents and that we both posted about this phenomenon at nearly the same time.

It was amazing to see how many Dems in down ballot races all wanted to appear with Clark in THIS very red state.

Seems they were all running to him, rather than away from him.

Guess you have to live in a state where Dems have to learn how to fight to survive rather than coast to an election to appreciate the difference.

into an amicable thread discussing two potential candidates. :toast:

I think you kind of enjoy encouraging little flamefests and then running back to other forums to slap yourself on the back. Well, everybody needs a hobby, so carry on.:hi:

one thing I've noticed...If there's a Clark thread or a post mentioning Clark on a thread you can be sure that Julie won't be far behind...Our friend does chase the Clark mentions around diligently, I'll give her that. ;)

:loveya:

J loves W - I saw it carved into a tree.

for me yet. The emphasis from him about not discussing how the Iraq War was started and to focus on the job at hand, does not mirror Clark's world view. Clark has spent his life looking at issues and reviewing after actions from a military and situational perspective. Clark even studied the mistakes from the 2004 campaign to NOT make the same mistake again. Warner's inexperience showed by glossing over the Iraq War and its inception. Warner's great experience as a governor should have precluded him saying that. Warner certainly studied Virgina to ascertain what he could do better to fulfil the promise of Virginia.

The dismissing of how we got into the Iraq War flies fully in the face of what I believe about democracy, executive leadership and good governance. Clark clearly has those.

Warner would *definitely* pick up a red state we don't normally win (VA).

I also believe he would pick up other red states, but this is all crazy talk right now.

Take the General's own advice: Let's concentrate on 2006.

It's two years (at least) before anybody has to make any choice about 2008. People here at DU are foaming at the mouth about Presidential Election 2008 when it's still years away. It is useless and senseless to speculate about who's running or who's winning. In the meantime it diverts attention away from something far, far more important. That's the 2006 Congressional Election.

People, we need to focus on what comes first and foremost. I, too, wonder about 2008. But I will not even begin considering candidates until there are candidates. That won't happen for two years and unless somebody takes a position of leadership (in principle, not polls) I will not be deciding for some time after that.

In the meantime we have work to do. There are minor matters of a WH collapsing for want of leadership, a Repug party beginning to tatter, and a Dem leadership that seems to be obtaining a backbone. Then, there's another minor matter of the impeachment of an administration. All these things must be embraced and encouraged on the path towards our next big goal, the 2006 midterms. We need not concern ourselves at all with 2008 until 2008 arrives.

No decision is necessary yet, imo.

TC

National Security & Foreign Policy.

Actually, it is a no-brainer for me...I want someone who can take on the Pentagon (one that needs a major house-cleaning) and someone who has 98mph fast ball on the world stage. Our domestic policies now depend on our foreign policies. So..it's simple for me.

Although even given the fact that Warner did a great job as Virginia governor, I just don't see them even in the same league.

We are going to nominate the next leader of the free world for the 21st century at a time of rapid change, opportunity, and danger. We need an experienced world leader, not a newbie.

Just my personal opinion, of course.

appear difficult to me.

I hear you're running for something. What's up? Where and what?

That wasn't too hard, was it?

unless you live in a handful of states, you won't be choosing anyway.

Most Americans vote in lame duck primaries. We never get to choose who our nominee will be. :eyes:

What are the differences or similarities? I really don't know a thing about Warner except that he was a popular Governor of Virginia. From what I've read, when Tim Kaine decided in July to run on the Warner record, it was a very smart move and it did Kaine a lot of good. Kaine's moves with faith and urban sprawl were brilliant, and if you ask me, this is where the win came from, aside from Republican tone deaf ads, but I hear they were his own ideas. It's always hard when somebody else is given so much credit for a win, when you're looking from the outside, and don't know how large the contribution actually was. The DNC gave Kaine $5 million, so that had to help, and prominent Dems like Clark campaigned hard for Kaine. So there's a lot of credit to go around, mostly to Tim Kaine himself, IMO.

When I know almost as much about Mark Warner as I do about Wesley Clark I can probably have a better discussion on the OT. Right off the bat, though, for me, no foreign policy experience for a president in this day and age is a loser. But a strong domestic policy VP, that's a good thing.