All right Clarkies, convince me to drop John Kerry as my top choice...

[phillybri]

I've stuck with John through this whole race, but his non-vote on the bullshit Medicare bill REEEEEEEEEEEEALLY pissed me off...

Clark is my #2 right now, why should he be #1?

[seventhson]

1. He shouldn't -

Dean should be #1

[Racenut20]

2. He can win

The rest cannot. Even if he is not as perfect as you would like, right now it would be better to have a bad Democrat than the present group.

[mitchtv]

40. I kinda agree with you

I think he would make mincemeat of Awol.And I stick with him all the way, but these attacks on Dean have to stop- the guy is a Dem., already. I am starting to waiver. Cause I think Clark can win also. Dean, I love, but I see Disaster for a Dean campaign, Sorry , but they're in the process of defining him now, thanks to Kerry ,leiberman and gephardt.I hope Clark can keep his primary campaign clean.

[BootinUp]

3. Because the more you learn about him

The more you will know he is the right guy for the job. I have read a lot about Clark, listened to him at the town hall meetings, and he strikes me as very sincere and able to get his message across to voters. I agree with most all of the positions he has taken, he is running on an economic platform in the Clinton mold. He is regarded as being highly intelligent by those that have worked with him. Imagine a highly intelligent President again.

He didn't have to do this, he is concerned about the direction of the country both domestically and with our allies and he has the right stuff to get us back on track.

B-)

[dogman]

4. Because

Do you want B*sh out? Look at the polls. Did you like Kerry because of foreign policy ? Clark is honored in Europe and former Eastern bloc countries. Was it because Kerry is a veteran who understands what that means? Clark is more than qualified. Added to all that Clark has a better chance of working with the opposition because he doesn't have such a partisan background. You might notice he spends his time wisely attacking Bush, not the Repug party or Dem candidates. If all did that they could live within spending limits and still counter B*sh money. He is a strategist and uses his resources more efficiently. He is a winner!

[PSU84]

5. Clark Can WIN

Please see my post titled "Why I'll VOte for Wesley Clark"

I would vote for any Democrat against Bush, and I could CHEERFULLY vote for Kerry, Gephardt, or Edwards - grudgingly for Dean or Lieberman - but I not only believe Clark is the best candidate on the issues, I also believe he can win the general election, and none of the others could. We have to face electoral reality, and the distribution of electoral votes favors the Republican candidate.
WE MUST DEFEAT Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Ashcroft!!

[Northwind]

6. Maybe because...

It would be better to support the guy in 2nd place behind Dean rather than the guy in 6th (or worse) place behind Dean?

[Padraig18]

7. He's my #2 also.

An off-the-wall question: Why are the two groups most at loiggerheads (Dean supporters and Kerry supporters) so frequently in agreement on who we like best besides our candidate (i.e., #2)? :shrug:

[ima_sinnic]

8. not really a Clarkie (he's my #2) but forget Kerry, here's why:

IMO Kerry is part of a stagnant and stale system that has become corrupted beyond repair. Yes, he's "liberal" in his environmental and domestic Senate votes but has lost touch with The People and the idea that, as a professional politician, his voice as well as his actions could be powerful. To put it bluntly, he's a political hack. Several DUers have posted that they wrote, faxed, phoned, and e-mailed his office asking him to vote against IWR and he was completely unresponsive to them. He has never satisfactorily explained--especially in light of his supposed "insider knowledge" of BFEE--why he went along with BushCo without appearing even to be in pain about it.

Let me make a parallel with Senator George Mitchell, who represented Maine at the time I lived there and who COULD HAVE wielded significant influence in turning around events in and policies toward Central America--El Salvador and Nicaragua in particular--in the late 80s/early 90s. I wrote long impassioned letters and was part of an overnight sit-in in his office. He was unmoved by our pleas to use his influence to turn the greedy, self-interested, meddling U.S. policies into something positive for the Central American people and continually voted in favor of continuing those corrupt murderous policies, mainly by continuing the massive money aid that was being used to prop up U.S-selected "leaders" and to carry out torture, murder, and repression. From that day to this I detest that man. He is a heartless phony. Obviously all he cared about were his wealthy capitalist contributors who wanted the region made safe for them to market their crap and exploit as usual (the idea of a socialist government in Nicaragua was more than these apes could stand). He has been lauded as a "statesman" etc. ad nauseum but I see a phony well-greased political hack who will do the bidding of the capitalists no matter how many brown people are disappeared by death squads, no matter how unspeakably atrocious and outrageous the crimes against humanity down there.

When politicians get unresponsive to blatant human rights abuses it is time for them to be voted out of office. Kerry has been in office too long and has learned all the safe ways of doing things. He needs to step aside and let The People take over, because he and the others have basically let all of us down. The Medicare vote was just symbolic of the fact that he is completely clueless about the way he could use the power he has. A vigorous well-defined no vote would have made a statement and cast him solidly in the camp of the nay-sayers, in opposition to Bush. But he played it safe and abstained from voting and now cannot be said to be in true opposition to BushCo--actions speak louder than words. A President Kerry would be a wishy-washy, uninspiring "leader" whom I would always suspect of caring more about pandering to powerful lobbies and to his wealthy and well-connected "friends" than about me and the rest of us common peons.

Plus he always looks like he just smelled something sour and can't wait to get back to his genteel Beacon Hill mansion, away from the smelly unclean masses.

I like Clark and will gladly vote for him if he's nominated. However, I feel Dean is purer than any of them, without any sticky residue of corporate connections/corruption.

[blm]

12. What an untruthful posting. Kerry worked AGAINST big corporations

and their lobbyists throughout his career. He never even accepted corporate pac money for any of his campaigns. He promoted legislation to help SMALL businesses over large corps. and even drafted much of the environmental legislation that the corporations have been seeking to undo, including the Kyoto Accord.

How in the world have you come up with such a fabrication that Kerry is in bed with big corporations? Dean's tenure as governor was probusiness all the while Kerry was working against big business.

How did you come to your conclusion?

[Skwmom]

20. It's disgusting for Dean to call Kerry Bushlite

when Kerry has fought the good fight for many years (unlike Dean who was too busy siding with the GOP in Congress).

[DemDogs]

25. Agree with Skwmom

Dean wasn't there and he didn't even support them from afar in their biggest battles. Where was he speaking out on these issues before he was running for President? When he did speak out nationally he was for capping Medicare or for capping damages in lawsuits or some other Republican position.

Dean will say anything, anything he thinks the audience in front of him will cheer for. Democrats were mad about 2000 and mad about 2002 and wanted to blame someone, so Dean pointed his finger at the other Democratic candidates serving in Congress who not only have been fighting the fight but also supported candidates across the country in 2002 while Dean was touting (surprise here) HIMSELF.
Kerry gave candidates money. Edwards gave computers to state parties. Gephardt worked his brains out.

[LuminousX]

36. Funny how a Clark/Kerry thread turns into a Dean thread

[phillybri]

37. I thought that was amusing, too....

I had a suspicion that a thread addressed specifically to Clark supporters might go that way...:eyes:

[DrFunkenstein]

35. You Missed Business Week Salivate Over Dean's De-Regulating Ways

Dean carefully nurtured a reputation as a "business-friendly" governor. On numerous occasions he pragmatically swept aside onerous environmental regulations and last-use restrictions (this is the greenest state of all) to make room for business expansion and jobs, jobs, jobs. He supported electricity deregulation to take monopolistic pricing power away from big utilities. He even launched one of the nation's most progressive voucher programs for high school students.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/073ylkiz.asp

Let's take Howard Dean at his word: "I was a triangulator before Clinton was a triangulator. In my soul, I'm a moderate."
Plenty of evidence backs up that comment by the former Vermont governor to the New York Times Magazine a few months ago. The self-comparison with Clinton is apt. "During his five two-year terms as governor," the magazine noted, "Dean was proud to be known as a pragmatic New Democrat, in the Clinton mold, boasting that neither the far right nor the far left had much use for him."

University of Vermont political science professor Garrison Nelson: "He's really a classic Rockefeller Republican -- a fiscal conservative and social liberal." After seven years as governor, the Associated Press described Dean as "a clear conservative on fiscal issues" and added: "This is, after all, the governor who has at times tried to cut benefits for the aged, blind and disabled, whose No. 1 priority is a balanced budget."

Business Week : "Business leaders were especially impressed with the way Dean went to bat for them if they got snarled in the state's stringent environmental regulations."

According to Business Week, "those who know him best believe Dean is moving to the left to boost his chances of winning the nomination." A longtime Dean backer named Bill Stenger, a Vermont Republican who's president of Jay Peak Resort, predicted: "If he gets the nomination, he'll run back to the center and be more mainstream."

http://www.progress.org/2003/sol125.htm

[blm]

38. Thanks for that. If Dean campaigned the way he governed

then his numbers would be where they belong - with Lieberman's. Dean is even MORE to the right than Lieberman on some issues.

Dean's friends all know Dean will dump the left as soon as he can. That's how he governed.

[Mz Pip]

9. Anyone who believes

that National Security and Foreign Policy will not be in issue in the 2004 campaign is delusional.

I beleive that Clark's experience with NATO gives him a great deal of credibility. We need someone who can rebuild our relations with our allies. Clark is an interesting combination of progressive social politics and military experience. Obviously the RW will come after him but he can neutralize quite a bit of their attacks with the facts of his experience.

Dean might have been the perfect candidate in another time but not now. His lack of foreign policy experience will sink him. When he said during the debate that he had as much foreign policy experience as Bush did when Bush took office I could just hear the collective "gulp' from around the country. Like it or not, for better or for worse I do not see the folks in the Red States voting for someone with no foreign policy experience. Bush may be a disaster to us but his spin machine will make him seem a far side better than someone who has no experience to bring to the table.

MzPip
:dem:

[carpediem]

10. Why I support Clark and some links

quote from article called How I Became a Clark Supporter:
"Bottom line: Clark is a throwback, a Rip Van Winkle, a pluralistic, optimistic, Greatest Generation-style politician lost, like Howard the Duck, in a world he never made. He's further outside the mainstream political culture than can possibly be imagined. This is what makes him so striking, so hard to parse, and so clearly the best candidate."

There's more here is the link:
http://www.ospolitics.org/usa/archives/2003/11/26/how_i_beca.php

and here is a link from a man who worked as Clark's driver while he was at NATO.

http://cris.forclark.com/story/2003/11/18/185117/66

and perhaps one of the best reasons:

http://craigholland.forclark.com/story/2003/11/28/91354/690

And now, why I support him:
I am a Clark supporter because I honestly believe he is the President we were promised as kids. I think he will put country above politics and bring together a splintered and factious nation. I look at my family members (mostly republican) and many friends who are republican (a product of where I grew up and live- rural) and I think to myself, they really aren't bad people, just uninformed. The problem is they have picked their team and noone likes to lose. With Clark, I think we will all win come November 2004. This does not mean I think Clark is Republican. In fact, his views fall on the liberal side of the left, but people who are on the right will accept him because he comes off as a moderate. I am a supporter also because I trust him - just a gut feeling I get. From what I have read, and I have read many many articles that have been posted here and elsewhere about him, people describe him as a problem solver and a good diplomat. Those are definitely two skills desperately needed in our next President. When I watch him in interviews, I see someone who will fight when challenged, but do it with a smile like it's still in fun. I think that is a great skill beause it disarms your opponent. I don't know about you, but when I am angry and fighting with someone i don't think I could smile if my life depended on it. And just so you don't think i think he walks on water, I realize that he is not perfect, and will not be a perfect President. He will make mistakes, and has made some already on the campaign trail, but it also appears to be in his nature to learn from his mistakes, adapt and move forward. And finally, I support Clark because he is the Anti-Bush, he is intelligent and quick, learned and experienced in the art of diplomacy and as a soldier. He has actually lived a "real" life out in the real world with the rest of us. (I read the other day, that Bush saw his first grocery store checkout scanner this week - WHAT??) And I would like nothing better than to watch this maladministration squirm when they realize they are facing down Clark for the general election. That's it.

BTW - I was leaning Kerry before Clark got in.

[MariaS]

11. Please Read

Since the start of the occupation of Iraq I have been in a depression that I didn't think I would defeat. When the nine democrats declared I most identified with Kucinich, Braun, & Sharpton because they were the ones shouting out the frustration and anger I felt. Bush and his cartel had succeeded in making me hate not only my government but my country because I was convinced I lived in a nation of fools. Our soldiers were being used as bad guys as innocent Iraqis died by the hundreds. Bush and Co.were using our young men and women to carry out the atrocities of a maniacal Republican cult. To me our Military showed no resemblance to the heroes that had marched into France and Germany.

Realistically I knew there was no hope of any of the Democratic nine beating Bush at his own game. I was pretty positive that ole Georgie Boy would make mince meat out of them using his 4th branch of the government "The Press". Brainwashing of America by the Republican party and media, coupled with the fear felt after 9/11, convinced me all was lost and my dream of grandchildren would never be realized. I had decided to vote my conscientious in the primaries but vote any Democrat in the final election. A hopeless gesture to say the least. Dubya seem even more likely to push his finger down on that button. My hope had drained to pretty close to nil. Then along came the General. Striking in everyway including enough military experience to ease the worries of those who feared for our national security. Finally someone who could actually appeal to the moderate Republicans who had tired of Jr. and his policies. Bringing in the moderates was very important but bringing in the moderate Republicans was crucial.

Finally there was a reason for hope. The light at the end of the tunnel didn't necessarily have to be a neocon driven train. When the draft Clark movement began and General Clark made it know that he was considering a run for the white house may others also began to feel that thread of hope as proven by the grassroots movement and their efforts. But once again the greatest nation on earth proves it also has the greatest number of fools. The attacks on the character of the General started coming fast and furious. Attacks filled with half truths, opinions and outright lies. Evidently to the spewers of these half truths it would be ok if Bush hung around for another four years. Well it's not ok with me.

Personally I am not willing to risk my children or the children of others who are dying in Iraq and Afghanistan. I will fight. Fight to get Clark elected because he is the ONLY one who has a chance to beat that monster and give me my country back. Our Government did not listen to the voices of millions people but God did. And by listening God has gave many of us hope once again. I know there are many who support Gov. Dean and I believe he is a good man and his heart is in the right place but I know that people like my father-in-law who is a devote republican would never consider someone like Dean but he is considering Clark. IMHO Clark is the best chance we have to appeal to all voters and not just the angry ones. Please read the following two articles and I hope they will help you to understand why I and many like me have choosen the General as our candidate.

How I became a Clark supporter
By Mark A.R. Kleiman

http://www.ospolitics.org/usa/archives/2003/11/26/how_i_beca.php

Waiting for the General
By Elizabeth Drew

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/16795

[carpe diem]

14. I agree w/ prev comments re: electability...

I was cheering Howard Dean on when he was the first to come out against the war. I thought it was outstanding that a candidate had the guts to do that, but honestly, he was nowhere in the polls so he really had nothing to lose back then. He might have reacted the same as the others if he had been leading. However, movement or not, the PERCEPTION of Dean (and his supporters) is of George McGovern, anti-war, peacenik, birkenstock wearing, weak on national security, New England liberal (i.e. loser) and the Republicans will spend every dime they can get their hands on going to and fro across the land reinforcing that perception, true or not. And the way Dean has portrayed himself as "the Democratic wing of the Democratic party" plays right into that. He will have to "flip/flop" on pretty much everything he's said up to now in order to undo that perception and the Republicans w/ the help of the mainstream media will attack his character in the worst way for doing so.

Clark might be vulnerable to some of the RW attack machine tactics, but it will be a lot harder for them to portray him as weak and soft on national security and convince the general public of it when almost every image of him from his career will show him in a uniform that was legitimately his and not borrowed from the prop room at the White House. And, like it or not, the war on terrorism and national seciruty, and our relationship to the rest of the world is where the 2004 election is going to be fought. The best jobs plan is not going to decide this election, IMO.

[PSU84]

13. Excellent analysis of the electoral map in 2004....

Are Dean Democrats delusional? See

http://thedolphin.typepad.com/dolphin/2003/11/are_dean_democr_1.html#more

[Padraig18]

16. I liked this part of the link:

Right at the very top... "In the interest of full disclosure, the owner of this blog is an active supporter of Wesley Clark..."

Nice, unbiased source, huh? :eyes:

[PSU84]

17. Maybe

He has a "bias" in favor of Clark because he can win.

And your bias in favor of Dean is because...you don't care whether a Democrat wins in 2004?? There's really no other possible explanation, since Dean could easily lose everywhere except Vermont, Massachusetts, and DC.

I want Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Ashcroft out of office on January 20, 2005, and Howard Dean has ZERO chance of winning 270 electoral votes.

Wesley Clark can defeat Bush.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

19. Excellent Analysis?

It opines that Clark is the ONLY Dem that can beat Bush in the General. Everyone else is eliminated. By the speculation of a Clark supporter. Hey, I'm convinced!

I read another analysis recently that showed how Dean could win the Electoral votes without winning Florida. Again, it is speculation, based on the idea that Dean could win Nevada and West Virginia, where Bush barely won in 2000.

The opinion piece on that Blog is based on the incorrect assertion that Dean will be perceived as a far-left obscure Governor...are you sure this wasn't written in the early Spring?

Seriously, it's all speculation at this point. I'm sure the Kerry people have an analysis that shows only Kerry can win the Electoral College. Go figure.

[PSU84]

21. Don't you know

that John Kennedy was the last Democrat from New England elected President?

I don't mean last as in most recent. I mean the last, period. New England Democrats might as well be from Mars in terms of how they are perceived in the rest of the United States.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

23. Yes, our last Dem candidates were Southerners, but

...Dean is a Brand New kind of candidate. He appeals to a much broader base than the typical New England Democrat (like Kerry). Witness for example his popularity in the West, which is unusual for a New England Dem. I do however think he should have a southerner on the ticket (Graham or Clark).

[Nazgul35]

45. Wasn't McGovern...

a military hero who was anti-war and got wiped out...

Now who in todays campaign resembles that scenario?

Hmmmm....let me think about that for a sec....

Any claims of electability are foolish at this point...

And if your guy cant win the nomination of the party (which is not clear that he won't) how the hell do you expect him to win the general?!

And if you look at polls in Iowa and NH, Dean polls better than any other Dems with independents...

Instead of trying to find a candidate who will "save us po' Dems from those mean ol' Repugs..." why not go out and fight for the election yourselves?

Seriously, try winning the election the old fashioned way....earn it!!! It doesnt matter who's at the top of the ticket if we return to the old ways of GOTV and voter registration....

May I suggest you all read: Cry vote! and let slip the dogs of precinct operations by A.M. Marshall...you can find it here:

http://interestingtimes.blogspot.com/2003_12_07_interestingtimes_archive.html#107091809760781403

that is where our victory lies...not in waiting for some messiah to come and rescue us!!

I dont need a daddy...I need a candidate who will listen...

[neuvocat]

15. Selection 2000

Clark called the judges on their agenda whereas Kerry basically told people to get over it.

[KittyWampus]

18. Clark Wants To Cut Pentagon Spending

His service record is one of excellence and WILL diminish Junior's attempt to play up Commander in Chief.

He knows his stuff regarding Domestic Policy.

He wants to invest in Science and Technology for jobs in Alternative Energy and Environmental Reclaimation.

He is the furthest Left other than Kucinich.

He is non partisan and WILL bring America together.

[DrFunkenstein]

34. Kerry Has A RECORD Of Fighting The Military-Industrial Complex

In 1996, Introduced Bill To Slash Defense Department Funding By $6.5 Billion.

In 1995, Voted To Freeze Defense Spending For 7 Years, Slashing Over $34 Billion From Defense. Only 27 other Senators voted with Kerry.

Fiscal 1996 Budget Resolution – Defense Freeze. “Harkin, D-Iowa, amendment to freeze defense spending for the next seven years and transfer the $34.8 billion in savings to education and job training.”

In 1993, Introduced Plan To Cut Numerous Defense Programs

In 1992, Voted To Cut $6 Billion From Defense. Republicans and Democrats successfully blocked the attempt to cut defense spending.

In 1991, Voted To Slash Over $3 Billion From Defense, Shift Money To Social Programs. Only 27 Senators joined Kerry in voting for the defense cut.

In 1991, Voted To Cut Defense Spending By 2%. Only 21 other Senators voted with Kerry, and the defense cut was defeated.

Has Voted Repeatedly To Cut Or Eliminate Funding For B-2 Stealth Bomber

Has Voted Repeatedly Against Missile Defense.

http://www.rnc.org/Newsroom/RNCResearch/research071803.htm

[FrenchieCat]

22. Why I support Wes Clark......as opposed to......

General Clark is a brilliant strategist. The final goal is to remove Bush/Cheney from the Oval office. Four more years of this administration will be very harmful to the US and to the world. There's no need for me to explain why, we all know the reasons.

Way back in the early summer, Wes Jr. posted to Kos's site. "His
father knew he could beat Bush in the general election, but wasn't sure if he could win the Dem nomination.

There are a few reasons why the General will not "beat up" on his
fellow Dems, but the most important one is that they are all on the same "team". Why do the GOP's work for them and try to destroy a fellow democrat who *may* go on to win the nomination, when the end goal is to remove Bush from office.(Joe Lieberman does not understand this, but then Joe's only reason for running is for "ego")

Don't misunderstand, the General is out to Win the nomination and
general election - as he has said before he has never lost anything that he has put his mind to win. His reasons for winning is NOT because of ego, but because Clark took an oath many years ago - to defend this nation from all enemies, domestic or abroad (that would be George Bush). Bush is on a path to destroy all the goodwill and foreign policy that every President for the last 50 years have been building,....Bush/Cheney foreign polices are very dangerous for the US and the world as a whole, plus he's slowly destroying many domestic policies here at home.

Should the General fail to get the nomination, at least he will have mortally wounded Bush in the area that only a 4 star General has the credentials to do.........leaving a weakened opponent for the Democratic nominee for the general election.

If the General wins the nomination (which feel he will, with all his supporters' help) he has the potential to be one of the Best Presidents in our history. General Clark is the candidate running who's motivation is dedication to public service and betterment of America and her citizens. Many other top tier candidates have similar a noble goal but some will try and claw their way to the top and will denigrate other Dems in the process.

View General Clark's bid in the race as a godsend for the Democratic party. After all it isn't just everyday that an intelligent, articulate, handsome, 4-star general from the south (who has won a war and negotiated peace) aligns with the Democratic party and presents himself as a candidate for the party's nomination. The thought of the party missing this opportunity and, instead, nominating Governor Dean makes me heartsick. Howard Dean seems to be the candidate for the Republican pundits:
William Safire: "...frankly I'm all for Dean. I want to see him become the Democratic nominee because I think that would be a McGovern candidacy and I think that would lead to a huge Republican landslide..."
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/newshour_index.html
Dean will not win because he is strong only in States that any Democrat can win. He will not win any Southern States. He will loose battleground States. ADD IT UP.
You need a candidate with a wider appeal. It is selfish and fool hardy for Northern/Eastern Democrats to think that Dean can win.
I now live in California. I saw Southern Democrats switch to Reagan in Texas in the 80's. And now I have witnessed blue collar minority workers vote for Arnold, a Republican, in California. If Dean is the nominee even California is in question after the recent recall election. If the Republicans think that they can "steal" a state it will be here in California.
If the economy rebounds .... Bush will bury Dean.
You need a guy with a wider appeal. ADD IT UP.
It's not how many Unions you get behind you. It's how many States you win !!!!!!
Does Dean have any coattails in battleground states? ADD IT UP.
Wesley Clark is not just a four-star general (there are only 34 at any given time in an army of over 1.5 million) but he also was a professor of economics (and philosophy) at West Point in between his appointment at the Pentagon.
It's a not-oft mentioned fact that this brilliant man knows of what he speaks both domestically and in terms of foreign policy. This is the principled candidate who refuses to pander, refuses to criticize or complain about fellow Dems. the Bushies have taken his advice on how to properly change their helicopter safety routine because after the Chinook disaster as well as many angles of his foreign policy speech since he began running.

This is the right man at the right time at this point in history. This man can stand toe-to-toe to Bush on foreign and military policy and win in trumps. He can speak to Alan Greenspan without needing a briefing. Most of all, he gathers to his camp supporters from every political spectrum and every geographic region of this country, all of whom recognize something in this man that is shining and bright and trustworthy.

Tell me, Dean supporters, why does Jeb Bush and Tucker Carlson wear Dean buttons and praise Dean so much? Why did Karl Rove contribute to the Dean campaign and attend Dean rallies and cheer? Why did David Brooks of the NYT write about the sniggering members of the Republicans for Dean club? Why did Halliburton board member Robert Crandell contribute $2000 to the Dean campaign? Why does Kristol practically cream in his pants when he talks about Dean? Ask yourselves quietly and pragmatically. Why is there such unremitting criticism from the same far right media aimed at Wes Clark? How many Republicans will be voting for Dean in the general election (we know many of them will be voting for him in the open primaries)? How many military folks will be voting for Dean?

Next year, the issue will be substantively about Iraq and national security. Who do you think people will trust with their vote on these issues? Think about it--we have to beat Bush with the best man for this time. There can be no room for error, pride, or ego in this decision. That man is Wes Clark. Listen to the calm beauty of this brilliant man's mind. By the way, he's a Doors fan.
http://www.nhpr.org/view_summary/3/

Dean supporters say he has appeal. But Dean only has appeal in hard core Democratic districts. Does he have cross over appeal in any Western States, any Southern States, any Mid-Western States? Does he have cross over appeal in any farm States? Does he have any cross over appeal in States that have a lot of veterans? cross over in South Carolina? Florida? NONE. Dean has the early shrill ..... that's about it. Dean doesn't even appeal to blue collar workers who are independents. He has appeal to traditional democratic party workers because he has been the only one with the time to get around. Appeal to all independents? Zero. Appeal to Nader supporters? Not once they find out what he really stands for. Appeal to previous Perot supporters? Zero.

Clark's appeal is broader than politics. He appeals to the sense of fair play that has been missing in politics for a long time.
and there is also his stance on the issues: http://clark04.com/issues/
But don't take it from me, here are other minds that conclude the same as I do. I've also included some good articles. If you email me, I have some additional excellent ones. And please don't forget to read his book. It says a lot about him.
http://www.politicalaims.com/archive/2003_11_02_archive.html#106789211346231495
http://www.ospolitics.org/usa/archives/2003/11/26/how_i_beca.php
http://avc.blogs.com/a_vc/2003/11/wes_clark.html
http://www.calpundit.com/
http://www.bartcop.com/
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/
http://www.emergingdemocraticmajorityweblog.com/donkeyrising/
http://www.thetoughdemocrat.com/
http://demwatch.blogspot.com/
http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/03/10/int03221.html
http://claymanforclark.blogspot.com/
http://www.dailygusto.com/
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2003_09_28.html#002033
http://mediawhoresonline.com/ (on vacation until '04)
http://channeledbymodem.com/movabletype/index.html
http://thedolphin.typepad.com/dolphin/2003/11/are_dean_democr_1.html
http://www.maximonline.com/grit/articles/article_5504.html
http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/wesley_clark_/2003/11/a_plan_for_victory_in_iraq.php
http://tinyurl.com/v7me
http://www.issues2000.org/2004/Wesley_Clark_Civil_Rights.htm
http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=8473

[Jack_Dawson]

42. Amen

Well put. Seriously Deanies wake the f$%# up to political reality. Dean may win "Iowa" and "New Hampshire" which for some reason the media creams their jeans about. Other New Hampshire notables - Pat Buchanan, John McCain.

Dean may do well in New England and a couple other "educated" states. But the guy down the street pouring my slurpees has a better chance of pulling votes from the south than Dr. Dean.

I know you've been with him a long time. I know it feels weird and disloyal to jump ship at this point. But if throwing Bush out on his arse is your goal, it ain't jumping ship. It's making your vote count and scaring the shit out of the Hannitys and Carlsons of the world. There's only one choice - The General.

[DemDogs]

24. I'd rather see you with Edwards who did vote on Medicare

But really, I don't think I would let his missing this vote turn you against him. The vote didn't matter; he knew it didn't matter. And it is pretty clear that if it did matter, he would have been there.
He's not my guy but I don't doubt for a minute his opposition to this bill.
I say give him a break, and if you can't, look at Edwards.

[phillybri]

26. In the sum total, the vote didn't matter, BUT....

Kerry talks a lot about the kind of leadership we need in this country. Even in defeat, he should have stood up for his convictions on this incredibly important issue.

That wasn't leadership...

[MrPeepers]

33. Maybe he did?

[moderateindependent]

27. Unresponsive, even offensive camapaign

Many have stuck with John mainly because of his bio - 6'4'', decorated veteran - and his policy stances - big on alternative energy, etc.

But I was saying before Wesley came on was John was the best candidate but had the worst campaign. It's not only that his campaign is non-responsive, it regualarly offends would-be supporters by keeping them out of the loop. For example, John is coming to visit their state, even the volunteers who have run events and donated aren't informed about it. It's the little things that have alienated his supporters and left them up for grabs.

Now, when comparing Clark and Kerry there are two advantages to Clark, one for Kerry:

Clark:
1) He is much more charismatic and connects better. If you saw John on the Tonight Show, Jay gave him a great setup, let him enter on his motorcycle onto the stage, and still within minutes John had sucked the air out of the room.
2) Wesley's military credentials are more that of a commander able to strategize than a soldier. His is a military man and knows it inside out, John simply served at one point.
3) Clark is more responsive to attacks. On FOX News, Wesley blasted away when they tried to twist his words. John lets himself be smacked with the alert levels.
4) Wesley talks like he is talking to you, a person. John pontificates and uses more pre-prepared sounding rotiffs, sounding like he is pontificating. Now, John's style is very strong, but Clark connects and explains things better.

Kerry:

1) Kerry is the full picture - Clark is not as developed on the Domestic side.
2) Kerry is a more skilled and experienced debater.
3) Kerry has incredible support (Ambassador Wilson of the CIA memo leak scandal, Rand Beers who left the Bush White Hous after serving as top counterterrorism expert.) Kerry also, possibly, has more money.

John is likely the fuller candidate, Clark is likely the more charismatic one. Which to choose? I would say think about who can have their weaker point balanced out by a running mate better (i.e. if Clark adds Gephardt as his #2, or Kerry, does that neutralize the domestic side? Can Kerry add someone as #2 that makes his campaign work a little better and his ticket connect better?

For what it's worth...

[PSU84]

28. Clark is a great debater

Clark was captain of the debate team at West Point.

While he was a Rhodes scholar, he went around England debating the U.S. involvement in Vietnam. He is a seasoned debater. (And having argued in favor of U.S. involvement in Vietnam, he has experience on the toughest side of a difficult issue....)

[tokenlib]

29. The major issue will be foreign policy

Clark is our strongest candidate in international affairs. Whether or not the economy will be a major issue is in doubt. When Bush tries to trumpet the millions of new jobs he has created in the service sector and at Wal-Mart ( I'm assuming the worse here)--he will still be vulnerable on the war on terror. Unfortunately the people with good jobs who haven't seen their benefits and wages cut will believe the media hype about a "growing" economy.

Clark has the resume--he has charisma--he is sufficiently progressive domestically (look at his policy stances) (he is more progressive than Dean)--and he is showing that he can take charge with hostile journalists and come out on top. Sure Dean and Kerry can appeal to the Democratic base--Kerry for his overall record, and Dean for his anger--but Clark can appeal to independents and even republicans with his foreign policy strength.

Watch Clark and listen.

[_NorCal_D_]

30. Here are some links for you phillybri:

Sat, Sep. 20, 2003
Clark Calls Iraq War 'A Major Blunder'
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/special_packages/galloway/6815661.htm

Friday 28 August 2003
Bush's Men Tried To Gag Me, Claims Gen Clark
http://truthout.org/docs_03/082903I.shtml

October 27, 2003
Clark: Bush Is Playing Politics With U.S. Soldiers' Lives
http://www.channel3000.com/wisctv/2583515/detail.html

April 10, 2003
Anti-War Candidate? What Must Be Done to Complete a Great Victory
by General Wesley Clark
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0917-14.htm

Oct. 8, 2003
A warrior for peace
Why Wesley Clark could be an Eisenhower for our time.
http://oklahomansforclark.com/Eisenhower.htm

http://www.issues2000.org/Wesley_Clark.htm
Wesley Clark is a Populist-Leaning Liberal.


Accomplishments:
http://www.vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=MZZ72757
Endorsements:
http://www.vote-smart.org/endorsements.php?can_id=MZZ72757&
On the issues:
http://clark04.com/issues/


Please study Clark and his policies carefully and make up your own mind. It would be an honor if you joined us! B-)

[robbedvoter]

31. Why Brokaw asked Kerry about the French:

At the annual St. Patrick's Day Breakfast here in Boston,he
responded to ribbing
about his "non-Irishness" with the witty rejoinder "I may not
be Irish but I'm also
not French"
Every question was loades - Clark was asked about religion because of his statements on separation of church and state.
The easiest argument for Clark:

 http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0311/30/le.00.html

[democratreformed]

32. Maybe I am not a good politician

but I just think that, as a supporter, it is my job to give you information. It is your job to decide if you like or dislike that information. It is not my job to convince you or make you see things my way.

That said, I think there has been plenty of information posted on here about Clark. Also, there is www.clark04.com to give you information as well.

[Jerseycoa]

39. Working through it

Anyone considering Wes Clark might learn a lot about him and the support he inspires by reading through this entire thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=777592&mesg_id=777592

Good luck.

[Meshuga]

41. Take a deep breath and stick with Kerry.

You won't regret supporting him when he gets elected. :-)

[catherineD]

43. Pledge to families they'll be better off by $3,000

Clark has just made a pledge to judge his performance by, that the standard of living of families will rise by $3,000 in his first administration. This is the kind of idea we need in the general election. I read an article just the other day that said in a poll, people agreed more with the policies of Democrats, but the reason that many of them chose to vote Republican, was because the Republicans offer tax breaks.

We know from the last election that many Americans can't be bothered to take seriously the distinction, even when it's spelled out to them, of a million dollar tax rebate for a millionaire vs. $72 for somebody making $30,000. They just want their money. Breaking down the standard of living index and making a positive pledge to put $3,000 more in the pockets of American families, is a way to combat the Republicans' promise of tax cuts. Even if it's not delivered in a check to their home, I think that is something that people can understand.


I can still remember when Mondale came on tv and told us we'd all have to tighten our belts and raise taxes. Clinton was the first Democrat in a while who did not seem to be offering the country an opportunity to be gloomily responsible and "take one for the country." Unfortunately, that's not the way to get elected. But making a pledge to bring $3,000 more to each family -- it's brilliant. And under a Democratic administration -- under a Clark administration -- I have no doubt it can be done.

[Bucky]

44. Three reasons: McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis

Maybe I'm just in a sour mood about this Gore endorsement. This move doesn't really hurt Kerry as much as it hurts Gephardt & Lieberman. But by giving a boost to Dean, it puts the Bush reelection in a much better position.

[Meshuga]

46. Agreed! n/t

[douginmarshall]

47. Why Kerry in the first place?

I like Kerry too, he is my 2nd choice, or was untill he took a nose dive.