Deleted message

[Name removed]

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

[JI7]

1. clark is from the south, kerry is from massachusettes

and for clark that is a positive for general election and for kerry it's a negative. that's one of the things i hear the most, and i think it's important to take into account. but i have taken other things into account also and think even if kerry would be attacked as an elite northeastern liberal he can overcome it.

[returnable]

7. That's certainly part of it...

I'm a Clark supporter, and I think those points are well taken.

Another is foreign policy experience - Kerry said himself that Bush is going to run on national security. Kerry does have some legislative experience in terms of foreign policy, but I think Clark's role in the Dayton peace accords, his position as Supreme Allied Commander, and the success of the Kosovo campaign trumps that.

That said, I have a tremendous amount of respect for John Kerry and was very excited by his win last night.

I hope the mud doesn't get too thick between these two guys this week. I like 'em both a lot. :hi:

[Bread and Circus]

57. My sentiments exactly, it's a WIN WIN for me

[panzerfaust]

21. Conn Game

After all, der Neufuehrer is from Connecticut. He did spend some time in Midland - but not on the Texas side of town.

[wyldwolf]

71. It's already been mentioned but I'll say it again - the south

..and that is really the only strength Clark has over Kerry. They're about equal otherwise across the field. Kerry has some stronger points and Clark has some stronger points.

[Democrats unite]

2. As a life long Dem myself...

I happen to like Kerry. I just happen to like Clark better. I suggest visiting their web sites to make up your own mind.

Clark happens to lite that fire in me, that noone else has been able to. Maybe thats how you feel about Kerry?

[adamrsilva]

3. Because Clark is from the South

And Kerry is the quintessential northeastern, elitist liberal.

[West Coast Democrat]

22. Bingo!

That's how some voters will view him, whether he's elitist or liberal.

[flpoljunkie]

70. An "elitist" who won the votes of working class folks in Mass and Iowa...

This "elitist" crap can be countered with the facts.

[Bolo Boffin]

72. Absolutely.

John Kerry pulled a lot of the veteran vote in Iowa. That's only to his advantage in the South. I really liked the after-Iowa speech. Kerry looked double-plus Presidential.

This is me, considering the possibilities of choosing Kerry, Clark, or Edwards come November:

:bounce:

Whoooohooo! May the best candidate win, and may the others embrace him and push him on to victory!

[Feanorcurufinwe]

65. It that enough reason to be President? Zell Miller is from the South.

Would that be a reason to support him over Kerry? Surely there's got to be more reason to vote for someone than because they are from the south.

[wyldwolf]

74. But Zell doesn't match up with Kerry on democratic issues and ideals

Being from the south is just icing on the cake for Clark.

But I would be ecstatic if Kerry won it all.

[IndianaGreen]

91. Yes, he does!

Zell Miller voted for PATRIOT as did Kerry. They are blood brothers when it comes to democratic ideals such as freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, due process, etc. They both believe that Bush can restrict those freedoms at will, which is exactly what a vote for PATRIOT meant.

[Wetzelbill]

4. I suppose you could argue

that Kerry was a war hero in the junior ranks, while Clark has been a leader from top to bottom in the military. Clark is a Rhodes Scholar, speaks 5 languages, but.....

I just can't take Clark over Kerry. Kerry has been fighting the progressive cause as a anti-Vietnam protester, Iran-Contra exposer and through 4 terms in the senate.

As much as I like Clark, Kerry's proven leadership for liberalism trumps him. Clark just doesn't have that record.

[mmonk]

15. good points

but how does that translate into the general election fight against bush and how does it translate better than Clark vs. bush in the general election?

[BurtWorm]

5. Just possibly, some people can't forgive Kerry for IWR.

Just a theory.

[IndianaGreen]

64. Forgiveness is only possible when there is repentance and penance

If Kerry were to go to confession and confess his sins of IWR and PATRIOT, the penance would be to admit he made a mistake, to demand the impeachment of Bush, to introduce a resolution repealing IWR, to introduce a bill repealing PATRIOT.

Kerry is Catholic. According to Catholic theology, God forgiveness is dependent on the sinner repenting and doing penance for his sins.

Why should we give Kerry a pass when God won't?

[Freddie Stubbs]

6. Kerry's voting record

Kerry has made thousands of votes as a Senator. Republicans will be able to twist many of these and take them out of context to make Kerry look bad.

[blm]

13. And Kerry can take the TRUTH about their actions and make them look worse.

Kerry is the holder of all the BCCI, IranContra, and CIA drugrunning information, isn't he?

[Freddie Stubbs]

67. Problem is he isn't running against Ronald Reagan Ollie North

I don't know how much traction he is going to get from voters bringing up things that happened when Bush was the owner of a baseball team in Texas.

[blm]

69. Ha. BCCI snagged Shrub's Harken deal and deals with Bin Laden.

You will NEVER win this based on the FACTS.

BCCI is now a current court case in England with another starting in June.

BFEE is going down.

[Freddie Stubbs]

73. But what specificlly did Bush do?

Is there any proof that Bush was involved in any wrong doing? There must be a reason that Kerry hasn't been bringing this up on the campaign trail.

[blm]

83. BCCI characters link to 9-11 and Iraq events.

We'll soon see, won't we?

[Freddie Stubbs]

94. But what exactly does this have to do with Bush?

I'm not sure that playing Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon is going to make a very good campaign commercial. Is there any proof that he did anything wrong? If this were such a great issue, don't you think that Kerry would be using it?

[adadem]

89. And we must be ready

with a quick rebuttal of the truth...that didn't happen last time.

We have to be ready with letters to the editor of every newspaper in the nation....as Democrats we must be ready to do this if the media ignores the truth.

on edit added more commentary.

[KC21304]

8. That is why Kerry/Clark has been my dream ticket for many moons.

We can have the best of both.

[LeinesRed]

58. Your dream ticket....

is Karl Rove's WORST NIGHTMARE!!! I love it! :thumbsup:

[adadem]

88. I love anything

that gives Karl Rove nightmares!!

[dogman]

62. I've been thinking Clark/Kerry

Since I preferred Kerry until Clark entered and I feel Clark brings a better chance to win the GE. I think Kerry's Senate background makes him better suited to be President of the Senate. I just find Clark more fresh and inspirational. I certainly could vote for Kerry at this point and hope he does not go more negative (himself or his surrogates) than he already has. I hope they both leave the negativity to JL and HD so they can come out strong while the others self destruct. If Kerry wins I believe Edwards would be more likely for VP since Clark has said he is not interested although I think they are just as likely to go outside the field for a VP.

[in_cog_ni_to]

9. Here's one.

<snip>
Suggesting the direction of his campaign in the coming days before the New Hampshire primary, Clark detailed his breadth of military experience as compared to Iowa winner and rival Sen. John Kerry.

“He’s got military background but nobody in the race has the kind of background I’ve got. I’ve negotiated peace agreements, I’ve led a major alliance in war. It’s one thing to be a hero as a junior officer. He’s done that and I respect him for that. But I’ve had the military leadership at the top as well as at the bottom.”
<snip>
Also drawing contrasts between the two candidates was Bennett, highlighting Clark as an authority figure in foreign policy.

“(Kerry) served with tremendous honor and distinction in Vietnam but the fact is he piloted a swift boat; that’s not foreign policy. Yes he has foreign policy experience in the Senate but it’s legislative. What General Clark has is executive. He was the supreme allied commander.”

He suggested that Kerry’s legislative experience might be a liability.
“No legislator has been elected directly to the presidency since John Kennedy,” Bennett said.

The campaign pledged to continue their current plan in reaching out to voters. <snip>

To add my "personal opinion....Clark is MUCH easier on the eyes and has a more "lively" personality. JMCPO



http://www.politicsnh.com/archives/pindell/2004/january/1_19clarkwaits.shtml

[blm]

17. Except Clark is wrong. He may have forgotten that

Kerry helped negotiate peaceful turnovers in the Philippines and Cambodia.

Was the POINTMAN on normalization of relations with Vietnam.

Crafted Kyoto Protocol for 10 years with other world leaders.

His investigations helped end wars in Iran-Iraq and Central America when he exposed the illegal covert actions of Reagan and Bush.

I can see that Clark could just easily have forgotten these things in the excitement of the campaign trail.

[Jerseycoa]

75. I don't challenge Kerry's credentials

I never have even once. But between the two, I think Clark does have the edge in foreign standing and policy experience, as well as executive military over legislative. The biggest thing is the commander in chief role. I believe Clark fits it better post-9/11 than anybody in the field, Kerry included, and despite his past service and heroism. National security, no matter what anybody wants to think, is the primary issue against Bush, because even if we are magically out of Iraq before November, we are still vulnerable to terrorism. In the primary race it's more about domestic issues, taxes, health care, education, etc., and on these both are very good, although Kerry has the legislative record to his credit. But in the general it's national security, national security, and national security, because it's all Bush has to run on however ridiculous that is. I think either Kerry or Clark would be great presidents, but I think Clark is the better contender.

[blm]

90. Good thing Kerry wrote that terrorism alert book in 1997, The New War.

Just think what our national security would have looked like if MORE people had read his book back then? The people who SHOULD have read it. Like the Bush administration.

[Don Claybrook]

10. As a Dean supporter, I agree with you

Kerry is a good, solid liberal, and if Dean fades, Kerry has my vote.

I also wanted to take a minute to thank you for being a good advocate for your candidate. If Dean goes down, which I'll grant is very possible for a number of reasons, the Dean supporters have to go somewhere. Contrary to GDPrimary propaganda, most of these Dean supporters will not vote Green, nor will they sit out the election. There are supporters of each candidate who seem to realize this, and their accomodating stances are welcome. There are also supporters of candidates who seem obsessed with making Dean supporters run as far and fast from the other candidates as possible.

So, Pete, I wanted to thank you for being a good advocate for Kerry. A few like you make it easy to shift gears, if that becomes necessary.

[EllieDem]

14. Kerry was never fired by Clinton, Cohen & Shelton

enough said

[in_cog_ni_to]

16. Nor was Clark.

He retired early. Can you post a link where Cohen and Shelton say Clark was fired?

[mmonk]

20. We'll be glad for all three

to speak to that issue (which will expose it for what it was).

[phiddle]

27. Clark was NOT fired by Clinton:

Cohen and Shelton did the deed when Clinton was out of town, and by the time Bill found out, it was a done deal and he was VERY pissed.
As for differences, I'd rather NOT lose a Democratic Senator if we can avoid it, in order to gain the White House. Clark has more executive experience, less baggage (those thousands of Senate votes of Kerry's are a lot of garbage for Rove to pick through), and his Souhern origin gives the Repukes problems where they live. Clark's platform, esp. his tax and foreign policy planks, seems better to me than Kerry's. Overall, I think that he's just as progressive as Kerry, and more electable.

[mikehiggins]

54. How nice for him. Neither was Clark

Clark was stabbed in the back by his superiors, that is true, but I don't think that is so much a reflection on him as on those who wielded the blade.

He believes Clinton when Bill says he didn't know what was really going on when Shelton and Cohen brought the reassignment up so as to keep General Ralston on active duty. Maybeso, or maybe Bill didn't want to get in another fight with the Pentagon just to protect someone who had done a good job for him. I don't recall loyalty being one of Clinton's strong points but that is no reflection on Clark.

And I'd remind you, Ellie, that things like that didn't work in Iowa. If your guy wants to play negative in New Hampshire you can count on him being called on it. Not attacked, just being shown to be playing dirty. Everyone saw in Iowa how that plays out.

[Jerseycoa]

76. Enough said?

Clinton will tell you himself he never fired Wes Clark. Cohen is a Republican and Shelton an advisor to an opponent's campaign. They were both working against their commander in chief's policy and Clark was working in support of it. Honestly, there is nothing here that will go against Clark.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

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

[quaker bill]

11. Better experience internationally.

Stronger on defense, with better jusgement on when to use military assets.

[thebgrkng]

12. Clarks Tax Plan...

His tax the rich (over 1 million) and help the poor and middle is not only a great idea, its general election gold.

It will be the easiest to sell to America:
If you make less then $1 mill your taxes will stay the same or go down, if you make over $1 mill they will go up. That makes a us and them where us is 99.9% of America. It will be tough for Reps to defend that.

-TheBgrKng

[adamrsilva]

25. Repubs will say

"Shouldn't everyone pay at least some taxes? This is unfair."

[returnable]

30. That's what they'll say...

...but I doubt it'll resonate with those who cast the votes.

[thebgrkng]

34. Then he hits them back harder...

as he did in the speech where he proposed it.

Everyone does pay taxes. They pay payroll tax, the pay property tax, they pay sales tax, they pay state taxes.

he can then go on to say how they contribute in other ways in overwhelming ways such as how poorer people make up a majority of the military and fight and die for America.

-TheBgrKng

[funky_bug]

36. They can't

This doesn't include payroll taxes... those we still pay, plus state, county...blahdy blah...lol :)

[thalerd]

85. That would be suicide

If the Republicans set the pins up like that, Wes could easily bowl a strike, with one word: Enron. If they think everyone should pay some taxes, why have all of Bush's corporate best buds gotten away with paying zero dollars of taxes year in and year out? Why is it alright for the rich to pay no taxes, but not lower- and middle-class families?

[GainesT1958]

18. General Clark talks TO people...

Sen. Kerry has the propensity to talk "down his nose" AT them.

Sincerity. Gen. Clark is sincere, and comes across that way without seeming to "force" the emotion. Sen. Kerry makes every act of sincerity look like a cold, well-thought-out calculation.

Plus, two words that have been used before by a Bush campaign, to unfortunate--and unfairly--great effect:

"Massachusetts Liberal"

I say this with more than a little remorse, having supported Michael Dukakis in the primaries in 1988, over Al Gore. Al wasn't ready for the presidency then. General Clark has been ready for the presidency for some time. Sen. Kerry..well, he's WANTED the presidency for some time...:eyes:

Three more words; similar, in this case, to Bush family members attending Yale:

"Skull 'n Bones".

Two people named George Bush taught me never to trust a "Skullie"; why vote for a third one simply because he's not a Bush family member?

The Iraq War Resolution.

Yes, I know; you've heard this one before. And besides, didn't Gen. Clark "support" the Iraq operation? No, he did not--especially not as Dub wanted it and Rumsfeld executed it. Sen. Kerry has YET to give a satisfactory answer explaining why he voted for the IWR. Hasn't done it. Still needs to, one way or the other. At least John Edwards is matter-of-fact when he tells us why he voted for it. As is Gen. Clark in stating why he opposed it.

Credibility. Two wounded war vets went at it last night on Larry King's CNN show. Gen Clark may have been called "a colonel" by Bob Dole, but he turned around and made Sen. Dole look like Pvt. Dole who needed to be saved. Could Sen. Kerry do likewise in the same situation? Maybe--hopefully. With as much ease? Probably not.

The "Confidence" factor at work. When you've got it, you don't need to brag about that ad infinitum. Sen. Kerry looks like he needs to do so just to make himself feel better. Gen. Clark doesn't.

There are my reasons--my $.02, if you will--to your "Query about Kerry"!:D

B-)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

19. Here's one. Clark didn't vote for the War.

I'm still undecided if I would vote for Clark in the GE given his past lobbying for the "defense" industry and support for the SOA, but there is no way I will vote for Kerry.

[thebgrkng]

23. A New Face...

The GE voters seem to like outsiders. Clark can (i feel) convincingly make the arguement that he is running cause he saw where the country was going and felt like he could help out. He can say that this was never part of his plan, but he always wants to do what he thinks is best for America. He can say im doing this for my grandkid, im doing this for your grandkid.

Kerry is my number two (and the only other candidate I feel that has a shot against bush). But I feel that he along with the other candidates have just been waiting for their turn to run.

-TheBgrKng

[thebgrkng]

28. REMOVED (nt)

This was supposed to be its own message, im still getting used to the board.

[hilzoy]

24. Here's one.

I am from Massachusetts, and have therefore seen Kerry in action for decades. He's a good speaker, but has not been a particularly good Senator. He doesn't follow through on things particularly well, and he really is standoffish and vain. (Go back and read the reports about his last campaign reshuffle. They do not do him credit.) Lots of people have commented on Clark's lack of legislative experience; personally, I think Kerry's lack of executive experience is more serious, since part of being President is, after all, running a large and complicated organization, and Kerry has never done a good job of running even a small Senate staff. In addition, there's that little matter of the Iraq War Resolution. What bothers me is not the fat that he voted for it per se -- I wouldn't have, but I think there are more arguments pro and con than some people do, and that these turn on recognizing that voting for the IWR is not the same as voting for war. The problem for Kerry is that as best I can tell, he voted for the IWR because he believed that he had to in order to be electable. Even on the most charitable possible interpretation of the results of a Kerry presidency, they are not important enough to outweigh the damage to this country, and to the kids who lost their lives, of giving George Bush the power to take us into a needless and stupid war. I think that there are issues one can compromise on with honor -- if I had to vote to give Angora farmers a subsidy in order to get full funding for Head Start, I would -- but this is not one of them.
Clark, by contrast, does have executive experience (what he spent most of his time doing before he became SACEUR was turning around troubled units); and when he was presented with a choice between his career and his principles (going to the mat for Kosovo) he chose his principles. Besides, he's a much, much more impressive person than Kerry.

[EllieDem]

29. Hugh Shelton is supporting Kerry over a

fellow general. Enough said

[returnable]

32. And Harkin supported Dean...

...over a fellow Senator.

So what's your point?

And since when has Hugh Shelton been an arbiter of progressive platforms?

[mmonk]

33. exactly

but not in the way you mean.

[Toucano]

39. Yes, enought said.

I was unaware of that.

There's a strike against Kerry. Shelton is a conventional McCarthy-esque tool.

Edit: Grammar

[in_cog_ni_to]

42. LOL!

Of course he is. Clark used his power and RIGHT as Supreme Allied Commander...to go to the Head of a State...Clinton, to do the right thing in Kosovo. Shelton didn't like it. Too damn bad. Shelton is the one who looks bad here, not Clark. I somehow doubt Clark would accept an endorsement from Shelton...of all people. :eyes:

[mikehiggins]

56. I thought Shelton was supporting Edwards

also that he just got on the board of a company that has gotten another non-competitive contract to do work in Iraq.

And, just in passing, are you aware of the reply Shelton gave the judges in the Hague regarding his famous smear of Clark?

Look it up.

[Jerseycoa]

81. Oh, don't be so mean

Shelton said it was JUST POLITICS.

[Bread and Circus]

60. That's not "enough said" at all...

Many legislators have endorsed Clark over Kerry.

Your point has no merit, sorry.

[Jerseycoa]

79. I didn't know that

I thought Hugh Shelton was supporting Edwards?

[in_cog_ni_to]

96. Isn't Shelton a hired adviser for Edwards?

Yes, I do believe he is and that is why Clark wrote a letter to the Edwards campaign. I have no idea what kind of response he received back though. :shrug:

[adamrsilva]

26. Electoral math is another reason

Kerry would win the Gore states, but I think it would hard to win swing states we need like Ohio and MO.

Clark would have Arkansas, and could more easily win one of the needed swing states.

[Ridley Park 704]

38. I fear that some Gore states may slip away this time

That's why we need insurance to win the election. Say Pennsylvania goes for chimpie this time, we'd need some southern states to make it up.

Clark could do it!

If Clark gets the nomination, how could any Democrat not support him against Bush? Why all this infighting and hair splitting about these candidates?

[goodhue]

31. me neither

I think yesterday was as bad for Clark as it was for Dean.
If Dean does not win NH he is done.
If Clark is not 2nd in NH and 1st in SC, he is done.
I think they will both be out by April.

[Toucano]

43. I disagree

No reasonable person expects Clark to do better than 3rd in NH.

You've got two strong New Englander's in the race there.

[goodhue]

46. well

before Kerry won yesterday many reasonable people thougth NH would be a two-way race between Clark and Dean. Now its essentially 3-way with only two tickets out, at least that's what reasonable people say. Personally, I think reasonable people don't know what they are talking about. In any event, its reasonable to believe that if Clark gets 3rd in NH and does not win SC, he is not going to go all the way.

[thebgrkng]

37. A mixed background

Clark has a mixed background. Back in the day he supported Republicans. More recently it has been Democrats. I have no doubts where his heart is.

He alone among the crowd can say to the middle of the Spectrum; 'look at me. I give both sides a fair shake; and im telling you you gotta go democrat.' He can use those clips from 2001 and say 'I never wanted GWB to fail, but he has. We need to replace him.'

-TheBgrKng

[BeyondGeography]

40. Clark's personality will play better with indy voters

Clark has never said publicly he hated going to places like Dubuque. Kerry's money, Ted Kennedy liberal status (Pubbie term, not mine) and his wife will be used to paint him as an elitist, and it will work. His Vietnam history helps overcome that, but the Pubs will also dredge up his antiwar activities and try to muddy the waters. He voted for the first Bush tax cut, IWR and NCLB. The motorcycle stunt, Vanity Fair poses and use of the f-word in Rolling Stone were clumsy attempts at populism that made many of us wince.

If the above strikes you as unfair, it is. And so is BushCo.

Kerry's my firm #2, but there are real reasons why many of us switched to Clark, who we find to be a far more genuine person and to be a more effective voice on national security and foreign policy.

All that said, if Kerry's the nom, he'd make a seriously bad mistake by going with another slick-talking politician like Edwards for VP and passing on the opportunity offered by the other Southerner, Clark, to be bullet-proof on patriotism and national security.

[TreasonousBastard]

41. Well, you don't have to...

it's not your vote, or mine for that matter, that will choose the candidate. Stay with Kerry and then go with the winner, whomever that may be.

All things considered, it's pretty much a tossup between Kerry and Clark as far as I'm concerned, with Edwards now looking better.

I like to think that Clark would have the best chance to dump Shrub when we get to that point, but who knows? Last night has shown, if nothing else, that no one has a working crystal ball.

As far as who would actually make the best President, that's even more in the air than who could best win. Presidents have not always been known to act they way they campaigned.

[thebgrkng]

44. The Hispanic Vote

Pure speculation but I think Clark will relate better with Hispanics. He speaks Spanish. He has a Hispanic daughter-in-law and his grandchild is half Hispanic. That *might* help his argument to connect with Hispanics since it is more personal to him.

[incapsulated]

45. Great point

The black and latin vote is stronger for Clark, I think.

Everyone else has made the points I would have, so... ditto and stuff. :)

[KLA2004]

47. i dont know

but I think Kerry has been a lifetime politician.

[John_H]

48. Clark has the Gravitas w/o the pompusness

Kerry's my strong second and i think he'd make an outstanding president. And i even think he can probably beat Bush.

But he's going to run into the same problem that gore did when standing next to Chimp. Like it or not a significant number of people vote for Chimp because his handlers present him as the kind of guy they'd like to have a beer with.

The media will paint kerry as the "elitist tight ass." They can't do that to Clark.

I'll proudly vote for Kerry if he wins the nomination, but Clark is by far the more electable of the two men.

[bobbieinok]

49. front page picture Kerry with Ted Kennedy in background

in Tulsa World today

Kerry will be attacked as a liberal clone of Kennedy. There will be endless attacks on 'rich liberal easterners' trying to tell 'good, god-fearing Amurikans what to do.'

NOTE: I have always (since the 60s) liked Kerry. Now for me it's between Kerry and Clark. I think Clark may be more electable.

MOST of the things I admire Kerry for, starting with the anti-VN war group, are PRECISELY those things that label him a 'no good, rotten liberal' in OK and elsewhere.

[copithorne]

52. For me?

It was decisive to me that Kerry voted for IWR. In my book, that is a mark against his judgment or leadership.

But even if you debate the meaning of that vote, EVEN NOW, John Kerry is stuck still waffling about the war. He gave a victory speech last night -- a fine speech -- without ever mentioning the war.

I will not vote in the primaries for a Democrat who is unable to clearly and forthrightly say that starting a war in Iraq was a mistake. With Kerry, I get the message that it was the right policy, only poorly executed.

No, sir, a thousand times no. This war was a mistake. Wesley Clark says it loud and clear. He can make the case with the American people. I stand with him.

[edzontar]

50. Kerry has ten times the poltical record of Clark...

And that is only in the last year.

There can be no contest btweeen them, IMHO.

Kerry has the military expereince, the heroic stand against the war, and a solid international and environmental record.

My only complaint with him, really, is the IWR vote (and it is a big one)--but compared to clark, there is jst no question.

[Maeve]

51. To induce YOU to select him? Ah, there's the issue

The key is in your post: "Kerry is a Democrat's Democrat." The party needs to pull in Independents and even some (sorry!) Republicans. The question is whether Kerry can do THAT better than Clark and I think the jury is still out on that. We'll have to see how the rest of the primary season goes.

Staying firmly on the fence, here; just trying to see it all pragmatically.

[mikehiggins]

53. Dropping back to Kissinger

and that famous essay of his about how the German establishment fell to Hitler because they just couldn't get their minds around what was going on, and kept trying to relate things that were taking place to the things as they were accustomed to seeing them.

Whew! Gasp! Damn these run-on sentences.

Anyway, Kerry hasn't shown ME any reason to think that he has "got it" about the Bushites. These are people who he knows and has worked with for many decades. As a long time established politician Kerry knows that things can be worked out, that with a bit of pressure here and a quiet handshake there things can be made okay.

His present rhetoric, borrowed for convenience from Dean and even Clark (now we have to value families), doesn't speak to his years of experience in dealing with one kind of goverment, a kind of government when even Nixon stepped down when faced with disgrace, where LBJ quit when he saw his own party had turned on him because of his refusal to step away from Viet Nam.

I don't believe for a second that Kerry will be anymore able to deal with Bush in an election than he was able to deal with him in Congress. He has had his opportunity to stand up and lead, and he bobbled it. I don't see any reason to expect he'd be anymore effective as a President.

Clark, at least, is a true outsider who is also familiar with the way power works in Washington. He brings a whole different approach to things and doesn't know in advance what won't work. He may not be the most desireable man to have in the White House (although he almost has to be better than the present pResident) but his novelty and left leaning agenda makes him a much better shot at reaching it than does another voice from the same old, same old school of politics.

Want something new? Then you have to go out and get it. We already know the Kerry style of governance and politics is flawed and faulty.

I like Kerry and Gephardt and the rest but I want to win this election and I can't see why anyone thinks a continuation of the way things were, will make anything better for the future.

Bill Maher asked Clark if he would run away from the label of liberal.

Clark said no.

He's got my vote, and my money and my work.

[bain_sidhe]

55. Lots of good reasons here... to which I'd add

Kerry, though I like him, represents a commitment to the status quo of the Democratic party. We're losing nationally with that strategy. We need to expand the party, and I think the right way to do it is to bring back those Democrats that went to Reagan. They've been lost in the wilderness of republican propaganda for 20 years. I think Clark can bring 'em home.

[VOX]

59. The "Washington outsider" has broad appeal, and Clark brings this...

to the campaign.

A sitting senator has not been elected president since 1960. (Interestingly, it was the senator from Massachusetts.)

IMO, Clark would catch on with a good number of fence-sitters and independents -- the appeal of the outsider with fresh ideas is very appealing to many voters.

on edit: typos

[Jerseycoa]

82. Outsider appeal

I think there is less to this than meets the eye. Anybody who wants to will examine Clark's career and know he has worked in Washington on and off throughout his military career and for a time after as a national security lobbyist. He can say he is not a politician, that works, but "outsider" -- I don't see it flying. He can, as Edwards does so effectively, present himself as a striver who had nothing handed to him on a silver platter, but neither man is a Washington "outsider," in my opinion.

[blm]

84. That"insider" exposed more govt, corruption than any other lawmaker

in modern history. He also has an impressive record of progressive legislation.

Do you have a problem with that?

[Bread and Circus]

61. Here's what I can think of off the top of my head

Southern States
Crossover appeal
Swing states
Better executive background
Better educational accolades
Better looking
Non-partisan
More important achievements in Foreign Policy/CIC type duties
A little more down to earth speaking style which is less likely
to get him "gored".

You asked. However, I really do like Kerry and would be
happy if he were President.

[IndianaGreen]

63. Clark did not vote for IWR or for PATRIOT Act, and he is not a Bonesman

Those are three darned good arguments for choosing Clark over Kerry.

[windansea]

66. Clark is less polarizing

I agree with most of the pro Clark comments above...and I also like and would support Kerry if he wins...but if you look at the 40-20-40 equation Clark is the one with the answer.

[BootinUp]

68. Across the board appeal?

How do you know that based on a caucus where less than 25% of registered democrats show up?

[IndianaGreen]

78. So Kerry won with 9.5% of the vote of all Iowa Democrats?

75% of all Democratic Iowa voters skipped the process altogether, and Kerry only got 38% of the 25% that bothered to caucus? That's some victory!

[sangha]

80. And Dean didn't even get half as much

despite outspending the other candidates.

That's some defeat!!

[IndianaGreen]

92. Which proves that Iowa caucus is not representative of Democrats

Which proves that Iowa caucus is not representative of Democrats in Iowa, much less Democrats elsewhere.

This could also be a big red flag! If 75% of Democratic voters skipped the caucus, how many of them will sit out the 2004 Election or worse, support Bush in November?

[Hoppin_Mad]

77. Neither can I -nt-

[kerry-is-my-prez]

86. A lot of people don't want a Washington insider. Also - he cannot get the

votes of Repubs. I'm in an organziation of Dems, Independents and Repubs who want to get rid of Bush but most will only vote for an anti-war person such as Clark or Dean. In addition, they want someone "new" - not just one of the "regular" politicians. (Note: these are their words not mine.)

As a Dem, I'd have no problem voting for Kerry at all...

[adadem]

87. Me, too. Clark doesn't have

the domestic policy experience that Kerry has...with the way shrub has messed things up we rally need a candidate with well rounded experience in every area...Kerry has that. I like Wes Clark and can vote for him but he just does not have the experience that John Kerry has.

As for the southern issue I think it will be very important for the VP running mate to be a Southerner...my current favorite for V.P. if Kerry wins the nomination is Max Cleland from Georgia.

[thalerd]

93. He does have experience

Clark worked in the Office of Management and Budget and in the White House, so he actually has hands-on experience in the executive branch of the government. And while being in charge of NATO's forces in Europe, he also dealt with schooling and health care plans for the families of the soldiers. He earned a master's degree in Politics and Economics from Oxford and taught those subjects to students at West Point. If it's a question of whether he'll be able to perform his duty in issues of domestic policy, there is no doubt he has the knowledge and experience to do it.

But, no, he is not a Washington insider. He is not a career politician. He is a proven leader who is in the race because he answered the call of 75,000 citizens who "drafted" him for this purpose.

That said, I really like Kerry a lot. Perhaps because he has a lot of the same qualities that Clark has. I'd vote for the guy in a heartbeat. But to me, Wesley Clark just has something more to offer.

[IndianaGreen]

95. Kerry's domestic experience gave us the PATRIOT Act

and Kerry skipped the vote on Bush's Medicare bill, and he skipped the vote on Bush's bill to develop new nukes. Skip-along Kerry will not do!

[West Coast Democrat]

97. The "Elitist" thing will be a major hurdle

whether it's true or not; and I have a liberal co-worker who still refers to him as the "French-looking guy."

[KC21304]

98. You have a liberal co - worker who repeats wing - nut name calling ?

Does this person usually do this ?

[West Coast Democrat]

105. Yes, I've pointed out to her many times that the whole Kerry...

French-looking thing was just Republican name-calling, but she just keeps saying, "but it's true. He does have funny-looking hair." It's one of those memes out there, like Al Gore is stiff and boring. People hear it over and over.

[Leilani]

99. Did anyone mention the gun issue?

I don't know if this has been raised; I didn't see it.
Kerry has one of the strongest anti gun positions of most people.
Now that may be popular in Mass. or NY, but it doesn't play in the South.

I know Clark is for some controls, but I believe it is a less restrictive policy.

We need to hold the Gore states & add a couple of Southern or border states. I heard John Breaux say that Clark or Lieberman could win Louisiana, but none of the other Dems. How about West Virginia, Tennessee, Arkansas?

Just my opinion. I'll happily support Kerry if he is the nominee.

[DrBB]

100. Because Kerry is 2004's Mondale

That would be my argument, as fleshed out here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=152372

[HuckleB]

103. I would take Clark over Kerry for a number of reasons, but...

we have got to stop trying to paint candidates with old paintbrushes. Kerry is Kerry. He is not Walter Mondale. And Bush is not Ronald Reagan. We need to get into the here and now.

[SadEagle]

101. I personally consider Clark a better speaker, for starters.

That's kind of valuable. And if you want to be cynical, note the flip side of the lack of the public record: no baggage, either. He can position himself however he wants, and does not have to worry about any voting records, or having signed/vetoed any bills.

[HuckleB]

102. I like Clark's tax proposal over Kerry's plan. And...

I think Clark stands a much better chance at winning the GE than Kerry does.

That said, I am still in the Dean camp.

[Loren645]

104. Hey PeteCA, Brokaw read a letter to Kerry that stated it well

From a young woman who asked him why we should vote for him when:

-He vote for the Iraq War Resolution,
-He voted to pass the Patriot Act,
-If we want someone in the white house send us into
a bogus war and trash the constitution, why switch?
We already got one of those.

Kerry's response was just muddled and evasive.
I'd think he'd be adept at fielding those very questions
by now, but he isn't. He just rambled about how there
are good and bad things in the Patriot Act.

I wonder if he read the Patriot Act before he voted for it.

Seems like he should have addressed the "bad things" then.
But he didn't, did he?
He just rolled over.

Wes Clark doesn't have to explain why he betrayed us like that.

He has a plan to deal with the Iraq quagmire that Bush/Kerry/Edwards
and congress created, a progressive record, a platform for truly
progressive and simplified taxes/middle class tax cuts and the rich
can pay their fair share, grants (not loans)
for higher ed, affirmative action, voting rights for all,
addressing the racist criminal justice system...

He has the most detailed and progressive and thorough issue
statements of any candidate.

Hey, if you're truly curious, read his platform for yourself:
http://clark04.com/issues/

Listen to him tonight on Nightline.
He handles the media much better than Kerry.
He doesn't timidly let himself be interrupted like Kerry does.
He doesn't ramble instead of answering questions.

I understand why Kerry supporters are worried about Clark.
You're right to be worried. He's the best candidate.

He can also carry the South, which Kerry can't do alone.
New England candidates historically don't do well in general elections.

And he's not in Yale's Skull and Bones Society like Kerry is.
So his number one loyalty will be to us, not to his fellow Boners
like Bush.

Since you asked Pete.