Kerry's VP...

Look, I'm sure this has been done dozens of times here at DU, but I have been checking in rather infrequently due to an increased set of pressures in my life. :nopity:

So, good denizens of DU, allow me this indulgence and please pick your VP preference.

I gotta lean towards Clark, here... but for my wild and crazy pick, I'm thinking Al Franken.

and :kick: for the Clarkies!

tastes, but choosing him makes the most sense. Besides, I can see the media getting and wet and girly with this choice--they'll spin it meaning Kerry plans on fighting in the South.

I hear in his policy proposals a program that fights back against fascism and one that he could very likely enect.

He's able to put the message in a very compelling narrative form (largely due to his biography and his career) to which I think many people respond. When they hear him talk about class and the value of a public infrastructure and opportunity, and progressive taxation and the importance of balance the interest of capital with the interests of labor in a way that is more more fair and much more productive, I think people really understand what he's talking about in a way that translates into a sort of pressure which will result in policy changes.

I also hear in him exactly the strategy FDR used to fight domestic fascism in the '30s and '40s. It's a proven formula for success.

(BTW, he was the fourth most liberal Senator in 2003 according to the National Journal's annual ranking (and the most liberal in the senat on economic and social issues). http://nationaljournal.com/members/news/2004/02/0227nj1.htm)

VA. Governor.. Can go toe to toe with the repugs and is good guy..

might get more votes

I'm pretty sure, anyway. Gep won't upstage Kerry, he's got a long resume, name recognition and crossover appeal, he's from Missouri, and the choice'll make a lot of labor unions happy. Also, didn't their compaigns have a relationship before Gephardt dropped out?

Would love to see Hilary on the ticket, but not this year.

BTW, does anyone know where I can get a "Howard Stern for Kerry" bumper sticker?

I believe that a Kerry-Clark ticket would be energizing and yes,
unbeatable. John Kerry is looking more presidential every day,
and he and Clark go together just like a pair of book ends.

:hi: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :dem:

And he will win on this one. I'd be happy with either Edwards or Clark and would hope whichever one Kerry doesn't pick up as VP that he includes in his administration and I don't want to loose either one of them.

:evilgrin:

but we're trying to WIN this election, get the point.

He rules.

He'll help to get us out of this freakin nightmare in Iraq.

... being a republican not too long ago, so my gf and I don't trust him. Also, can someone really trust such an accomplished General that hunches when he speaks? :shrug:

Edwards, plz. :)

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Clark was never a republican, and that is a matter of RECORD with the Arkansas Board of Elections. The last time he voted for a Republican was in 1988 (SIXTEEN YEARS AGO). But I guess you didn't bother to fact check.

"I tremendously admire, and I think we all should, the great work done by our commander-in-chief, our president, George Bush, and the men and women of the United States armed forces."
-Wesley Clark

I'm sorry, but that bothers me.

But then again, that's just what he said. He probably meant something completely different.

Oh, and he still hunches. What's up with that?

like Edwards who enabled Bush instead of just praised him... and still thinks the Iraqi War was about the war on terrorism.

Oooooo-Kay..

:eyes:

BTW, how exactly DID Edwards vote before he ran - oh, five years ago, for senator? Does anyone know? Did he work on any campaigns? I'm not being factious, but I've never heard about ANYTHING he did in public service prior to his run for the Senate.

Edwards is not a "bush enabler."

BEFORE the administration completely made a disaster of the United States, and Clark did a democratic fundraiser the following week. That by no means he is a republican no matter how you try to present it.

What is so disheartening is that you support Edwards, who not only voted for the War in Iraq and believed it was the right thing to do, but also voted and partially drafted the Patriot Act, and who also did not oppose and voted FOR the right for military recruiters to force schools to provide lists of students name, address and phone numbers, or the school will lose federal funding (check the No Child Left Behind Act--there is a tidy little provision that Edwards did not oppose that allows militarization for our schools).

Now this being said, one non-political General giving a paid speech in 2001, who opposed the Iraq war from the beginning (check congressional testimony, not Fox News), opposed it during the primaries, opposes the Patriot Act and calls for a full review, and opposes militarization of schools. Hmmmm, should be an easy choice.

And as for his hunching PERHAPS THAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU ARE SHOT FOUR TIMES IN VIETNAM! Now, are you going to criticize Max Cleland for not having any legs???

Ignoring the fact that Edwards enabled the policies that lead to the disasters of which you speak, one must also remember that Edwards, to this day, claims the war against Iraq was the "right thing to do."

Edwards says he wasn't fooled by the faulty pre-war intelligence, whcih means that Edwards has an even lower standard for pre-emptive war than Bush.

Go get 'em, Cosmo!!!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Still giggling uncontrollably . . .

:headbang:

He took a bullet thru his right shoulder. And he's a dedicated swimmer--a lot of swimmers get a little muscle bound thru the shoulders, and he most certainly is that.

But Clark stands ramrod straight most of the time, so I just don't see the problem. Come to think of it, what would be the problem if he didn't? What has posture got to do with an ability to solve problems, speak eloquently, work tirelessly and always for the nation's good.

As for his praise of President Bush, that quote is totally out of context. The entire remainder of his speech was an exhortation for the Repubs to do exactly what Bush has not--maintain our alliances and standing in the international community.

Besides, he had just returned to Little Rock after 38 years away, he was invited to speak at a Republican dinner, and it was before Bush had screwed anything up. What was he supposed to say? I suppose you think Kerry was wrong to speak well of Reagan after his death. I bet you're a lot of fun to invite to a party--probably tell the hostess her hors d'oeuvres suck.

And the personal attacks keep on flying! You guys don't have to attack me just because I stated my opinion about your boy, but that's cool. It's all in good fun, right? ;-)

About taking Clark's comments out of context, I'm sure that's it. Thanks for setting me straight on that.



Comments like that would turn no heads on this board. And if so, keep in mind, they are WAAAAY out of context. ;-)

And as for Edwards voting on the Iraq resolution... yup, you got me. I guess I'm just rooting for a darn republican.

Oh yeah... John Kerry voted for that, too... huh?

So who are YOU guys voting for come November? :eyes:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

as much as the other wingnuts--and I'd be worried if they didn't. As far as I'm concerned the political spectrum is not a straight line but a circle where the two extremes meet and meld into one sanctimonious, self-righteous, hate-filled mass--or mess.

& somebody should tell these clowns that the originator of the "perfumed prince" quote, one U.S. Army Col. (ret) David H. Hackworth, later had a total change of heart regarding Wes Clark at least (IIRC according to Hack, Colin Powell and Norman Schwartzkopf were "perfumed princes" too).

Here's Hack after his Clark Conversion, including the reason(s) for same:

"For the record, I never served with Clark. But after spending three hours interviewing the man for Maxim's November issue, I'm impressed. He is insightful, he has his act together, he understands what makes national security tick – and he thinks on his feet somewhere around Mach 3. No big surprise, since he graduated first in his class from West Point, which puts him in the supersmart set with Robert E. Lee, Douglas MacArthur and Maxwell Taylor.

"Clark was so brilliant, he was whisked off to Oxford as a Rhodes scholar and didn't get his boots into the Vietnam mud until well after his 1966 West Point class came close to achieving the academy record for the most Purple Hearts in any one war. When he finally got there, he took over a 1st Infantry Division rifle company and was badly wounded.

(snip)

"No doubt he's made his share of enemies. He doesn't suffer fools easily and wouldn't have allowed the dilettantes who convinced Dubya to do Iraq to even cut the White House lawn. So he should prepare for a fair amount of dart-throwing from detractors he's ripped into during the past three decades.

"Hey, I am one of those: I took a swing at Clark during the Kosovo campaign when I thought he screwed up the operation, and I called him a 'Perfumed Prince.' Only years later did I discover from his book and other research that I was wrong – the blame should have been worn by British timidity and William Cohen, U.S. SecDef at the time."


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34738

which kind of wingnut we're dealing with here.:)

past a certain point the two varieties have more in common than not.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

...is not only insensitive to the fact that this man was SHOT in Vietnam in service to our country, but it is petty, small, and shows exactly where this country does not need to go.

As I said in my earlier reply, are you going to complain that Max Cleland has no legs??????

I never said I'd never vote for the man, but there are just some questions my gf and I have about someone who just a year ago was praising Bush on the cable news networks. Sure, people can change their minds, but I'm allowed to have doubts without being attacked, RIGHT? I only posted the quotes in defense to me saying I had doubts. Jesus!

And as far as him hunching. Your defense about the bullet is bs. He seems to be standing pretty freakin upright in your picture, so don't give my that crap that he can't stand up straight because he was shot or that horrible analogy to Max Cleland. Shame!

All I'm saying is he needs to work on his image. Personally, as far as my vote goes, I don't care who is on the ticket. Kerry is getting my vote. Unfortunately, not everyone sees it that way and image DOES count for something. If you're an accomplished general, I'm sorry, but you need to stand up straight when you speak. It looks sloppy and weak and ever since TVs were introduced to the political arenas, it matters a heck of a lot. It's something he needs to work on.

I want us to win this election. If Clark is the man, fine. But in this dem's eyes, there are some things he needs to iron out to gain my confidence.

Play nice, boys.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

if Edwards is on the ticket.

I think I've made that abundantly clear.
Edwards is an inexperienced, pushy, money-grubbing hack.
It doesn't have to be Clark, but it damned sure better not be "pretty boy."

Oh - and David Hackworth, who coined the phrase "perfumed prince," has changed his mind on that particular discription. He is all for Clark - wanted him to be prez, but will now settle for VP. I should know, we e-mailed about it. :P

in the land of DU over Wes Clark. We're used to abuse from the Repugs. Because they are deathly afraid of Clark.

You must have lifted your quote straight out of a GOP site, because the original quote also mentions Paul O'Neill:

"And I'm very glad we've got the great team in office, men like Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Paul O'Neill . . . "

We all know what happened to Paul O'Neill . . .

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=97

Read the time-line on the link above. Clark changed his mind. Is that okay with you?

Edwards voted for the Iraq resolution, and now I'm sure realizes that trusting Bush was a mistake. So he changed his mind. Why is it okay for Edwards to change his mind and not Clark?

Kerry is gonna choose whomever he wants regardless of our opinion. When Clarkies hear news that seems to indicate our candidate might get VP, naturally we celebrate. Don't you, when it seems as if it will be Edwards?

I'm excited that it looks as if Clark is in. But if your candidate (Edwards) gets VP I'll still vote for Kerry. I'll just be disappointed. But I won't be mad at you, really I won't. I'll still be glad that the Dems are moving against Bush.


:dem:

has been covered on this board ad nauseum over many, many months. They have all been exposed multiple times as either outside of their broader context, or as unsubstantiated rumors, like the last one on your little list.

Thanks for playing, but at this point it's getting kind of tedious.

"Bill Clinton showed incredible energy and great personal appeal. As chief executive, he showed a deep and far-ranging knowledge of public policy, a great compassion for people in need, and the forward-looking spirit that Americans like in a president." - GW Bush

i guess bush has turned into a democrat, or maybe you can publicly say nice things about someone while still opposing them politically.

(a) he's just got bad posture, which is kinda cute in a career military man--shows just how much stock he puts in superficial military trappings. He also apparently found drills and inspections and all the other spit'n'polish stuff to be pretty much a pain in the ass too;

and (b) as a hardcore technogeek, he spends 'way too much time hunched over a computer keyboard.

Just like all the rest of us, que no? :evilgrin:

YOU are the ONLY person on the blog, probably who SHOULD vascilate and explore. :)
Good on ya for being involved so young! :thumbsup:

I still think it will be Gephardt or Vilsack, but Edwards does have a decent shot at it.

:(

No hurry, Senator. Take your time. Find the person in the line-up who will add the most to your anti-terrorism street cred, who will make Cyborg Dick look like a shirking croneyistic dipshit in the VP debates without saying a word, who will cover your ass on the anti-war smears, the guy with the SACEUR on his resume. Shouldn't take too long, we can wait.

This country just CAN'T afford to do that. Please let it be Clark!

If someone can only be president if they are vice-president first what does that tell you?
& if they can't get elected president on their own, what makes you think they'd be able to get elected president after being vice-president?

...statistical FACT. Which means the odds of Clark becoming President after being Vice President are statistically higher than him becoming President any other way, just as they are for every other Vice President in our history. Your argument doesn't gel with the facts.

The point you are addressing in your post is completely true, but is not the point I was making.
The point I was making is that according to the post I was responding to, Clark will never become president if he is not Kerry's vice-president & I am saying if that's true, if he's not good enough to become president on his own, then why is he good enough to be vice-president?

So the odds are higher, that wasn't my point.

...to be either then? If so, that is completely ridiculous and not based in fact.

You do understand what I am getting at though!
I thought there was that implication in Dinger's post.
Unintended on Dingers' part I'm sure & I was pointing out that implication.
There are reasons to suggest Clark as vicepresident but that he would never become president otherwise is not one of them, imo, for this reason.

:tinfoilhat:

:-)

the same party? Just asking?

I know of at least one example, although he was not sitting vice president at the time

SENATOR HUBERT H. HUMPHREY

ANNOUNCEMENT OF CANDIDACY

FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA

January 10, 1972



I have just signed a certificate declaring my candidacy for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States.

Humphrey did in fact win the party nomination when he was VP in '68. If he lost it in '72, it was probably because Nixon had already beat him once. You don't usually get a second shot.

Edit for spelling. HEMPhrey? LOL

:D

I'm voting for Kerry if he names a ham sandwich as his running mate but it seems to me that one group of voters is going to be pivotal in winning this election and that will be African-Americans. The problem is that voter turnout in the Black community has been problematic.

Putting a well-respected, experienced African-American politician, preferably one who can appeal to the Black community without scaring off moderate and conservative white voters, on the ticket would go a long way to bringing out the Black vote.

Anyone else have any suggestions.

an absolute requirement for Kerry's VP (according to Kerry himself, as well as all the polls that rate Kerry higher on domestic issues but * & Co. higher on fp/ns)

how about Colin Powell? :evilgrin:

i'm sure he will run in the future. he will probably run for senate in 2008 when bill frist leaves the senate and runs in the republican primary for president. but i'm pretty sure if ford was old enough he would be on kerry's list. ford was one of kerry's biggest and earliest supporters.

barak obama is another one but he isn't a "national" leader yet. but he will most likely win his senate election this year and i can see him running for president in the future. he is much more liberal than the moderate harold ford. but then again obama is from a left leaning state while ford is from a right leaning state so it would make sense.

...very easy on the eyes...and wicked smart. Perhaps he will be the first African American president someday...

Picking a leader from the civil rights movement would be a powerful statement that would have a profound affect on voters of all races. I don't think most people in the party realize how easily Kerry would win if he made a choice like that.

Kerry has all the foreign policy and military credentials he needs. Their main foreign policy credentials in my view are being smart enough to vote against the war in Iraq, and Kerry could use someone like that.

both are very good men.

rate Kerry higher than Bush on domestic issues, but the opposite is true when it comes to foreign policy/national security.

A VP pick isn't going to change that. The public is simply socialized to believe over the last 30 years that Republicans are better with foreign policy. The way to change that is for Kerry to present a plan that is very different than what Bush is doing, and make it obvious that Bush is totally incompetent. How things go in Iraq will control the public's view of Bush's foreign policy far more than who is VP. If the public likes Dems on domestic issues, then lets pick someone who has BOTH foreign and Domestic policy experience, like a member of Congress or elected official would have, to emphasize our strong points as well.
Yes, it is possible for Kerry to pick someone other than Clark and still win.

well, on a whole bunch of things, come to think of it.

But specifically Clark excells in articulating how incompetent the Bushies are on foreign policy and their conduct of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And he has the credibility to make even conservatives take heed. Just yesterday, when discussing economic policy with Clark on CNBC, the interviewer (no friend to Democrats) concluded, "and since you're THE foreign policy expert..." (her emphasis). I've heard Joe Scarborough say as much.

Clark has plenty of domestic policy experience. Far more than Edwards or Vilsack have foreign policy or defense experience (essentially none). And it's executive experience, not legislative.

I'm not saying Kerry can't win with another running mate. But if it proves critical that we change even some of the minds of voters to believe that Democrats can handle the war(s) and our alliances better than the Bushies have, then Clark is Kerry's best partner.

So I can't state who for sure I'd like. Of the ones I KNOW about, I'd prefer Edwards or Clark. Probably Clark. But there are a lot more candidates than those two, so I don't know.

Whoever helps us win!

nt.

not be unhappy if it's Clark. In fact I'm tired of waiting around and doing polls. We know Kerry may pick Gep anyway. (Sure losing ticket). After it's over, can we still be friends? LOL