Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Undecideds, can you find a candidate to love among the current crop of Democrats?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
bklyncowgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 08:11 AM
Original message
Undecideds, can you find a candidate to love among the current crop of Democrats?
Many of us pine for Al Gore, others long for Wes Clark, someone had a post here about Gary Hart. All of these would be great additions to the candidate mix but if none of these guys get in is there anyone else in the mix that you can get behind enthusiastically?

I'm personally enjoying watching the show and learning about the candidates--at some point I'll pick a favorite--and probably doom his or her chances.

I could easily support Richardson. Obama has moved up in my estimation-- though his lack of experience still has me concerned--he's showing a great deal of class. Edwards could convince me to forgive his vote for the IWR--I'm with him on the issues. I'm not a Clinton fan but I can find plenty of reasons to support her in the general election if she's the nominee.

By and large not a bad group of candidates. If Al, or Wes or Gary doesn't get in I can find someone to love.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BOSSHOG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 08:16 AM
Response to Original message
1. I'll have to wait till we have a nominee
because by the time my state (MS) has its primary the decision will already be made and I doubt too many candidates will be flocking to the Magnolia state begging for votes. I supported General Clark in 04 and would do so again but I will be wholeheartedly behind whomever the party nominates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ms liberty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 08:16 AM
Response to Original message
2. I'm waiting for Al Gore, but...
I like Richardson best right now, and I could also easily vote for Kucinich, Edwards, or Obama. Any of the Democratic candidates would be better than a Replican, and I'll vote for the nominee even if it's Sen. Clinton who is my least favorite of the current crop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 08:18 AM
Response to Original message
3. I want a Gore-Feingold ticket personally, but
I see strengths in both Edwards & Richardson.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alexander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #3
31. Gore-Feingold would be my dream ticket
Except this dream seems more realistic than most.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
4. Enthusiastucally? No, none really. Not like I was behind Howard Dean
several years ago. That's not saying I won't support the chosen Dem candidate, but my enthusiasm just isn't there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bklyncowgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 08:44 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. I didn't fall in love with Dean until pretty late in the game--I call myself the kiss of death
I loved it when he told Chris Matthews that the media monopolies had too much power. In retrospect that was probably not the smartest thing the man could have said--some truths cannot be spoken if you do not want to make enemies of people who can turn you into a laughing stock.

I'm going to watch the debates and the campaign stops and see these guys and gals go through their paces.

C'mon, candidates make an urban cowgirl fall in love.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #6
24. LOL! What is that line?
Never start an argument with someone that buys ink by the barrel.:rofl:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bklyncowgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #24
29. Yup that would be the case--talk about your "Inconvenient Truths" nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 08:25 AM
Response to Original message
5. I'm more befuddled.
Confused.

Every time one of our candidates speaks - that's my candidate.

I like them all (okay, I wince when Biden speaks, but still).

Mix them up - P/VP, shake them up, upside down - switcharoo - running/not running, they all work for me.

Confused's a good place for me.

It's the 2 remaining years of the *monkey's regime that's got me down. :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 08:57 AM
Response to Original message
7. We've got a great selection so far. I could love one of them. The reason I'm undecided
has more to do with me wanting to see what each candidate does in the next six months. I want to see how they handle each other, how they handle the public, and how they handle the Republicans. I'm not too worried on the individual issues, other than to be sure whomever I choose can put together and understand a complex plan of action that takes all factors into account. No plan of any candidate is going to be accepted by Congress without alterations and input from all other Democrats involved, so all plans will wind up pretty much the same once a candidate takes office. The plans will be worked on by the whole party. My main concern is getting someone in office who can get it all done, and who can handle emergencies without compromising their ideologies.

With all those factors in mind, I tend to like experience over pretty words. That has me leaning towards a couple of people--Clinton, Richardson, and Dodd, mainly. Obviously only one of those has much publicity yet, and that's part of why I'm holding out--to see if anyone else I like emerges. Behind those three, I like Obama a whole lot. He has the pretty words, but he also has an energy about him, and seems to have leadership skills. He lacks experience by the bucketfulls, though (no, being a state senator from a local district doesn't mean jack to me).

I had ruled Edwards out completely up until recently--despite the fact that progressives have latched on to him, he had a more conservative voting record than Clinton, was a co-sponsor of the IWR, and, despite common opinion around here, was a gung-ho supporter of Bush and the invasion up until the polls in 04 showed it was unpopular. I still remember him atacking Dean for being anti-war, and Kerry for changing his opinion. It means a little to me that he apologized, but he was still very much a supporter until it was no longer popular. I can't shake the feeling when I hear him speak that he's an opportunist more than an idealist. I've come to change my mind on him in recent weeks, though. I'm starting to thing that maybe he's really the progressive he's acting like now, and that before he was pretending to be a moderate--and now that he's out of office he is free to be who he wants. I'm not convinced, though. And even if I become convinced, he's still a one term senator who has lost a series of primaries and was on the losing ticket in 04. That doesn't mean he's not electable, it just doesn't inspire me. ANd through it all, I can't shake the thought that he was once gung-ho for the invasion. He admits it was a mistake, now, after the polls changed, and maybe he sincerely regrets his choice. But he still made the wrong choice.

So did Clinton and Dodd, obviously, but neither of them were strong supporters of the invasion. Clinton's speech before the IWR vote shows me that she was trying to restrict Bush's rush to war, not empower it. The fact that that backfired weakens her, in my opinion, and that's another reason I'm undecided. But I never saw her make a fiery speech praising the invasion and criticizing those who opposed it, the way Edwards did. I saw her say such empty things as "We must unite behind our troops," and that's annoying, but still not gung-ho.

Of those not in the raise, Kerry and Gore interest me. Gore might get my vote if he jumped in, but I hear rumors, opposite of what I hear around here, that he won't jump in if Hillary is the frontrunner, whether out of respect for her or because of the historical impact of the first female president. Kerry has said no. Either of those would move to the top of my pack. Clark, I really don't trust. He's obviously one of the most intelligent candidates, and he has strengths I like. His forsight on the invasion was accurate and prescient. But he hasn't been a Democrat for long enough for me to believe his ideology is solid all the way through. He could convince me, but that's where he'd have to convince me.

I haven't really ruled anyone out, but there are a couple barely hanging in there, in other words. And there are a couple of frontrunners, but they haven't sold me yet, either. So that's why I'm undecided. I love our candidates, and would welcome others, but I'm holding out to see how they handle the pressure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bklyncowgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #7
12. Very thoughtful response--wait and watch and let them show us what they've got.
It's nice to have so many decent choices. I have not ruled anyone out either.

How can they win me over:

Richardson: Show me some depth and common sense in the debates. I want to see some passion. That and your plain speaking western style (although you sound like you're from my old home town sometimes)could give your campaign a big boost.

Obama: Continue to exceed expectations. I'm also looking for more depth and knowledge from you than I've seen so far--that might overcome my concerns about your lack of experience.

Edwards: You've done a good job on substance and have always had a great deal of style. I want you to convince me that you're not just a smooth talking politician and that you really believes what you says. More Elizabeth, please, no one who's married to Elizabeth could be a total phony. Also, while you are now a very strong opponent of the Iraq war please explain why you were such a strong supporter of the war before things started to go wrong.

Clinton: Please, show me that you can stand on your own. Also, show me too that you can work with people that you don't agree with. Finally, show me that you can explain why you voted for the Iraq war and that you understand that this was a very bad decision without getting all tied up in knots.

Dodd: Show me how your experience as a Senator will translate into the ability to run a huge enterprise such as the U.S. Government.

Biden: Show me that you can explain things in clear English.

Kucinich: I'm with you on single payer, now show me how you can turn your disadvantages around--a sense of humor about your appearance might help.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. Good responses.
You nailed my feelings on Edwards exactly. I am worried he's just a slick package, but the thing that has turned me more favorably towards him lately has been Elizabeth's devotion to him. She seems like the real deal. I don't usually judge a person by their spouse, but in this case, I can't help but let her influence my opinion of him.

Clinton, too. That's my biggest complaint about her--she seems too sensitive to criticism, too unwilling to humble herself. That comes across as insecurity, and that's not a good leadership quality.

Dodd, I trust on his leadership skills, and he's been a solid, reasoned presence. I just need to see that he can do something big. So far he's invisible. If he can't get any attention in the campaign, I'm not sure he has the initiative required to run things. I really, really, really want to see him play a role in this race. Right now I think he may be campaigning for VP, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tigereye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #12
32. nice to see a good rundown of questions and views about each
:thumbsup:

and thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xkenx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #7
35. Some Clark food-for-thought for you.
When Wes Clark was General Clark, he had to be non-partisan per the nature of the job. He was always registered Independent, voting for Reagan, but then for Clinton, then Gore. He registered Dem. several years ago. This is just background, but I believe his actions over a lifetime of work label him a a true progressive. Here are some highlights:


THE "DUCK PRINCIPLE"
Ducks don't wear signs labeling them ducks. If it has a ducksbill, waddles like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, then you know it's a duck.

Wes Clark is one of the Democratic Party's foremost progressives by virtue of his actions over the years, not by any labels that people want to throw at him simply because he had a career in the military.
It is time to appreciate just how lucky we are to have this national treasure. Just a few items:

--Clark was always butting heads with the stereotypical "macho" military Neanderthals because he saw the horrors of war firsthand in Vietnam and always espoused "diplomacy first."
--Clark was one of the leaders of the all-volunteer Army created after the Vietnam debacle. To keep personnel in you had to do a good job of providing for their family needs, health, education, equal opportunity.
--Clark actually won environmental awards at bases under his command.
--When Clark was working at the Pentagon in the mid-90s, he was virtually the only voice crying out to intervene in Rwanda.
--It was Clark's voice, along with Madeline Albright, who persuaded the Clinton Admin., over the objections of the Pentagon, to stop the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo. Tell the Kosovar Albanians that Wes Clark isn't a liberal, progressive, humanitarian.
--It was Wes Clark's voice prior to the Iraq invasion who urged that we exhaust all possible diplomatic means before any military action, including in testimony to Congress.
--It was Wes Clark who filed an Amicus Curiae brief in the University of Michigan affirmative action case.
--It was Wes Clark who committed the act of political courage by appearing on the cover of the Advocate (gay rights magazine)in the midst of the 2004 primaries.

Since when is it some kind of a black mark for someone to give to his country by serving in the military if he does so in a principled manner? Wes Clark felt that he could make the most impact by providing a progressive voice to that institution.

As for voting for Nixon and Reagan, he did so 20-30 years ago, simply because he felt they were strong on national security. Clark discovered that the modern Republican Party is so different they wouldn't have Nixon, and maybe not even Reagan. Clark evolved to where he started voting for Democrats, and then officially registering as a Democrat after registering as Independent for many years. Reagan WAS a democrat prior to running for Gov. of California. Are any Democrats wanting to say that Reagan, in his later years was a Democrat, simply because he started out that way?

So I'd have to say Wes Clark is my Democrat, liberal, progressive "DUCK" because he has proved it.

Not since Bobby Kennedy have I been so inspired by a public figure as I have been inspired by Wes Clark.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

INTRODUCTION TO WES CLARK

The campaign video on Clark done by Harry Thomason and Linda Bloodworth Thomason who did "Man From Hope" for Bill Clinton in 1992. http://clark04.com/americanson/ This is approx. 19 min., but shows a very professional and comprehensive picture of the essence of Wes Clark.
It is also on You Tube.

How my wife and I discovered Clark. I posted this on www.democraticunderground.com

Wes Clark's Amazing Town Hall Meetings
To piggyback on WesDem's and Lefta Dissenter's comments--I was a Kerry supporter prior to Clark's entry into the race, for all the usual reasons--Vietnam vet, good Progressive, lots of exprerience, etc. I felt he was doing well in early debates, but my wife said "Not so fast; Kerry sounds like he's lecturing, talking over people's heads, just not connecting with people." Once we started to notice Wes Clark, it turned to "OH MY GOD! THIS MAN HAS IT" (the indefinable "IT" that you know when you see it). The absolute clincher was Clark's first town hall meeting in Heniker, NH right after the first debate that he was in. That meeting was shown only on CSPAN, and it is since gone from the archives. The man was amazing, a political neophyte handling and connecting with the crowd like Bill Clinton. Answering any and all questions with sincerity, knowledge, compassion. I'll never forget a very hostile question from a woman, now retired from the military, who said that she was a victim of abuse in the military and nothing ever happened to the perpetrator, and what would he, General Clark, do about that? The woman was so upset and hostile, she was shaking. Instead of being defensive or blowing her off, he looked her in the eye and apologized for the military for what happened to her. He asked her if she used the chain of command for redress. She said "yes, but," and Clark said "Didn't work, did it?" "No." Clark went on to explain how they worked very hard in his commands for equality of opportunity, equal treatment, no abuse, etc., but understood that there were still problems, and that, as president, he would work hard with the military to correct the deficiencies. He also volunteered to speak privately with the woman after the meeting to learn more about her situation so that he could help. The woman melted before our eyes! I found out afterwards that Clark met privately with her for 20 min. after the town hall and that her complaint was serious--she had been raped. Instances such as this have convinced me that Wes Clark only needs sufficient exposure to have the following to be elected President. Once people get to know this man's intelligence, character, compassion, integrity, and depth of real world experience, they become dedicated Clarkies.......Ken



And these endorsements from some very prominent progressives.
GEORGE McGOVERN
Today, I am proud to stand here this morning and announce my support for a true progressive, a true Democrat, and the next president of the United States.

A man whose progressive policies on education, taxation, health care are in the finest tradition of the Democratic Party.

A man whose ideals, decency, and compassion are in the great tradition of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, and Bill Clinton.

A man whose life's work and devotion to America will serve as a beacon to our young and give pride to us all.

That man is Wes Clark - and he will lead our party to victory in November.

Like Wes Clark, I'm a veteran. I was an airman in World War II. And I believe there is nothing more patriotic than serving your country.

I also believe there is nothing more patriotic than speaking out - and standing up for what you believe in. That was one of the reasons I ran for president in 1972 - because I believed that Vietnam was a not a war America should be fighting. Back then, Wes Clark was an officer in the United States Army. And in the election of '72, he voted for the other candidate. Let's call it youthful indiscretion. The good news is that this time we both agree.

Today, we are fighting the wrong war in Iraq. And that's one of the reasons I'm standing here today. Because there is only one man in this race with four stars on his shoulders and thirty-four years of military experience. There is only one man in this race who stopped genocide and saved 1.5 million Kosovar Albanians from ethnic cleansing. There is only one man in this race who has a success strategy to get us out of the war in Iraq - and get our servicemen and women home safely. And that man is Wes Clark.

Wes Clark is also a champion of America's working families, because he knows that you can't be strong abroad unless you're strong at home. Wes Clark understands the problems facing ordinary Americans, especially the three million Americans who've lost their job since George W. Bush arrived at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. And the 44 million Americans don't have health care, and the thousands who can't afford the sky-rocketing costs of education.

Wes Clark is the only man who can get our country back on track. He's got a jobs program to get our economy going ... a real tax reform to help our working and hard-pressed families ... and a health care plan to make health care affordable for all Americans and universal for all our children. He wants to fight for all Americans, from all walks of life. These are not just Democratic values. These are American values.

Running for president is no easy task. And I have the battle scars to show it. I, too, was the subject of a few dirty tricks during my day. But I'll tell you, there is no better man to withstand the Republican attacks then Wes Clark. And the Republicans know that - they're running scared. The last thing they want is a four star general on their hands. So to my Republican friends out there: get ready, here we come.

Finally, let me say this: There are a lot of good Democrats in this race. But Wes Clark is the best Democrat. He is a true progressive. He's the Democrat's Democrat. I've been around the political block - and I can tell you, I know a true progressive when I see one. And that's why he has my vote.

Wes Clark will bring a higher standard of leadership back to Washington. He'll fight for America's interests, not the special interests. He'll bring honesty, openness, and accountability to the White House. He is a born leader.

That is why I am standing here today: because there's one man in this race with a success strategy in Iraq... there's one man who can really stand up for working American families ... there's one man who can beat George W. Bush - and take back the White House in 2004.

And that man is my friend, our leader, a true progressive, and the next Democratic president of the United States, Wes Clark.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------From a poster on Democratic Underground

Everything you've posted so eloquently could have come from my heart. AND I have another, completely selfish, personal reason.

My son decided long ago that he intends to make the military a career. This kid is not a gung-ho shoot-em-up type kid, but one that turned down a nomination to the Air Force Academy because he so adamantly opposes the way the leadership has dealt with women's issues there. A kid who is a 4.0 honors scholar and is majoring in political science and international affairs. A kid who is a Democrat through and through and values the leadership in a military that is based on a meritocracy.

My selfish, personal reason: I would trust Wes Clark with my son's life.

Wes Clark is a man who understands the value of each and every life and what a tragedy it is to lose even one. He understands that every action he takes has consequences. Wes has used his talents, his skill and his conscience to make sure that every decision he makes guarantees the best outcome with the least cost in lives and heartache. Tirelessly, sleeplessly and with unfailing courage and unceasing care.

Oh, there are a lot of politicians that I might vote for, but there are NONE that deserve to make the decision about whether my son lives or dies.

Except Wes Clark.

Because you see, I think he may be the only one out there that values my son as much as I do.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MARIO CUOMO
Mario Cuomo said, "Wes Clark is a man of whom you can ask a question, and he will look you directly in the eye, and give you the most truthful and complete answer you can imagine. You will know the absolute truth of the statement as well as the thought process behind the answer. You will have no doubt as to the intellect of the speaker and meaning of the answer to this question....So you can see, as a politician, he has a lot to learn."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL MOORE
I?ll Be Voting For Wesley Clark / Good-Bye Mr. Bush ? by Michael Moore

Many of you have written to me in the past months asking, "Who are you going to vote for this year?"

I have decided to cast my vote in the primary for Wesley Clark. That's right, a peacenik is voting for a general. What a country!

I believe that Wesley Clark will end this war. He will make the rich pay their fair share of taxes. He will stand up for the rights of women, African Americans, and the working people of this country.

And he will cream George W. Bush.

I have met Clark and spoken to him on a number of occasions, feeling him out on the issues but, more importantly, getting a sense of him as a human being. And I have to tell you I have found him to be the real deal, someone whom I'm convinced all of you would like, both as a person and as the individual leading this country. He is an honest, decent, honorable man who would be a breath of fresh air in the White House. He is clearly not a professional politician. He is clearly not from Park Avenue. And he is clearly the absolute best hope we have of defeating George W. Bush.

This is not to say the other candidates won't be able to beat Bush, and I will work enthusiastically for any of the non-Lieberman 8 who might get the nomination. But I must tell you, after completing my recent 43-city tour of this country, I came to the conclusion that Clark has the best chance of beating Bush. He is going to inspire the independents and the undecided to come our way. The hard core (like us) already have their minds made up. It's the fence sitters who will decide this election.

The decision in November is going to come down to 15 states and just a few percentage points. So, I had to ask myself -- and I want you to honestly ask yourselves -- who has the BEST chance of winning Florida, West Virginia, Arizona, Nevada, Missouri, Ohio? Because THAT is the only thing that is going to matter in the end. You know the answer -- and it ain't you or me or our good internet doctor.

This is not about voting for who is more anti-war or who was anti-war first or who the media has already anointed. It is about backing a candidate that shares our values AND can communicate them to Middle America. I am convinced that the surest slam dunk to remove Bush is with a four-star-general-top-of-his-class- at-West-Point-Rhodes-Scholar-Medal-of-Freedom-winning-gun-owner-from-the-South -- who also, by chance, happens to be pro-choice, pro environment, and anti-war. You don't get handed a gift like this very often. I hope the liberal/left is wise enough to accept it. It's hard, when you're so used to losing, to think that this time you can actually win. It is Clark who stands the best chance -- maybe the only chance -- to win those Southern and Midwestern states that we MUST win in order to accomplish Bush Removal. And if what I have just said is true, then we have no choice but to get behind the one who can make this happen.

There are times to vote to make a statement, there are times to vote for the underdog and there are times to vote to save the country from catastrophe. This time we can and must do all three. I still believe that each one of us must vote his or her heart and conscience. If we fail to do that, we will continue to be stuck with spineless politicians who stand for nothing and no one (except those who write them the biggest checks).

My vote for Clark is one of conscience. I feel so strongly about this that I'm going to devote the next few weeks of my life to do everything I can to help Wesley Clark win. I would love it if you would join me on this mission.

Here are just a few of the reasons why I feel this way about Wes Clark:

1. Clark has committed to ensuring that every family of four who makes under $50,000 a year pays NO federal income tax. None. Zip. This is the most incredible helping hand offered by a major party presidential candidate to the working class and the working poor in my lifetime. He will make up the difference by socking it to the rich with a 5% tax increase on anything they make over a million bucks. He will make sure corporations pay ALL of the taxes they should be paying. Clark has fired a broadside at greed. When the New York Times last week wrote that Wes Clark has been ?positioning himself slightly to Dean?s left," this is what they meant, and it sure sounded good to me.

2. He is 100% opposed to the draft. If you are 18-25 years old and reading this right now, I have news for you -- if Bush wins, he's going to bring back the draft. He will be forced to. Because, thanks to his crazy war, recruitment is going to be at an all-time low. And many of the troops stuck over there are NOT going to re-enlist. The only way Bush is going to be able to staff the military is to draft you and your friends. Parents, make no mistake about it -- Bush's second term will see your sons taken from you and sent to fight wars for the oily rich. Only an ex-general who knows first-hand that a draft is a sure-fire way to wreck an army will be able to avert the inevitable.

3. He is anti-war. Have you heard his latest attacks on Bush over the Iraq War? They are stunning and brilliant. I want to see him on that stage in a debate with Bush -- the General vs. the Deserter! General Clark told me that it's people like him who are truly anti-war because it's people like him who have to die if there is a war. "War must be the absolute last resort," he told me. "Once you've seen young people die, you never want to see that again, and you want to avoid it whenever and wherever possible." I believe him. And my ex-Army relatives believe him, too. It's their votes we need.

4. He walks the walk. On issues like racism, he just doesn't mouth liberal platitudes -- he does something about it. On his own volition, he joined in and filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in support of the University of Michigan's case in favor of affirmative action. He spoke about his own insistence on affirmative action in the Army and how giving a hand to those who have traditionally been shut out has made our society a better place. He didn't have to get involved in that struggle. He's a middle-aged white guy -- affirmative action personally does him no good. But that is not the way he thinks. He grew up in Little Rock, one of the birthplaces of the civil rights movement, and he knows that African Americans still occupy the lowest rungs of the ladder in a country where everyone is supposed to have "a chance." That is why he has been endorsed by one of the founding members of the Congressional Black Caucus, Charlie Rangel, and former Atlanta Mayor and aide to Martin Luther King, Jr., Andrew Young.

5. On the issue of gun control, this hunter and gun owner will close the gun show loophole (which would have helped prevent the massacre at Columbine) and he will sign into law a bill to create a federal ballistics fingerprinting database for every gun in America (the DC sniper could have been identified within the first days of his killing spree). He is not afraid, as many Democrats are, of the NRA. His message to them: "You like to fire assault weapons? I have a place for you. It's not in the homes and streets of America. It's called the Army, and you can join any time!"

6. He will gut and overhaul the Patriot Act and restore our constitutional rights to privacy and free speech. He will demand stronger environmental laws. He will insist that trade agreements do not cost Americans their jobs and do not exploit the workers or environment of third world countries. He will expand the Family Leave Act. He will guarantee universal pre-school throughout America. He opposes all discrimination against gays and lesbians (and he opposes the constitutional amendment outlawing gay marriage). All of this is why Time magazine this week referred to Clark as "Dean 2.0" -- an improvement over the original (1.0, Dean himself), a better version of a good thing: stronger, faster, and easier for the mainstream to understand and use.

7. He will cut the Pentagon budget, use the money thus saved for education and health care, and he will STILL make us safer than we are now. Only the former commander of NATO could get away with such a statement. Dean says he will not cut a dime out of the Pentagon. Clark knows where the waste and the boondoggles are and he knows that nutty ideas like Star Wars must be put to pasture. His health plan will cover at least 30 million people who now have no coverage at all, including 13 million children. He's a general who will tell those swing voters, "We can take this Pentagon waste and put it to good use to fix that school in your neighborhood." My friends, those words, coming from the mouth of General Clark, are going to turn this country around.

Now, before those of you who are Dean or Kucinich supporters start cloggin' my box with emails tearing Clark down with some of the stuff I've seen floating around the web ("Mike! He voted for Reagan! He bombed Kosovo!"), let me respond by pointing out that Dennis Kucinich refused to vote against the war resolution in Congress on March 21 (two days after the war started) which stated "unequivocal support" for Bush and the war (only 11 Democrats voted against this--Dennis abstained). Or, need I quote Dr. Dean who, the month after Bush "won" the election, said he wasn't too worried about Bush because Bush "in his soul, is a moderate"? What's the point of this ridiculous tit-for-tat sniping? I applaud Dennis for all his other stands against the war, and I am certain Howard no longer believes we have nothing to fear about Bush. They are good people.

Why expend energy on the past when we have such grave danger facing us in the present and in the near future? I don't feel bad nor do I care that Clark -- or anyone -- voted for Reagan over 20 years ago. Let's face it, the vast majority of Americans voted for Reagan -- and I want every single one of them to be WELCOMED into our tent this year. The message to these voters -- and many of them are from the working class -- should not be, "You voted for Reagan? Well, to hell with you!" Every time you attack Clark for that, that is the message you are sending to all the people who at one time liked Reagan. If they have now changed their minds (just as Kucinich has done by going from anti-choice to pro-choice, and Dean has done by wanting to cut Medicare to now not wanting to cut it) ? and if Clark has become a liberal Democrat, is that not something to cheer?

In fact, having made that political journey and metamorphosis, is he not the best candidate to bring millions of other former Reagan supporters to our side -- blue collar people who have now learned the hard way just how bad Reagan and the Republicans were (and are) for them?

We need to take that big DO NOT ENTER sign off our tent and reach out to the vast majority who have been snookered by these right-wingers. And we have a better chance of winning in November with one of their own leading them to the promised land.

There is much more to discuss and, in the days and weeks ahead, I will continue to send you my thoughts. In the coming months, I will also be initiating a number of efforts on my website to make sure we get out the vote for the Democratic nominee in November.

In addition to voting for Wesley Clark, I will also be spending part of my Bush tax cut to help him out. You can join me, if you like, by going to his website to learn more about him, to volunteer, or to donate. To find out about when your state?s presidential primaries are, visit Vote Smart.

I strongly urge you to vote for Wes Clark. Let's join together to ensure that we are putting forth our BEST chance to defeat Bush on the November ballot. It is, at this point, for the sake of the world, a moral imperative.

Yours,

Michael Moore









Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #7
39. Oh - please keep Edwards ruled out.
Everything he does is politically motivated, including his "admission" of his war-vote mistake.

I don't see how you can trust Edwards and not trust Clark. That absolutely makes no sense to me when you follow who's stuck to their guns AND been right about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #39
41. I have to agree with you that not trusting Wes Clark is incomprehensible
To not trust Wes Clark is incomprehensible. I have no comment about Edwards authenticity, sincerity, ambition or record that I have not made before. I hope large numbers of Democrats vote for the uncommitted delegate choices in the primaries. It's fine that all these states want to have their primaries earlier, but people should vote for uncommitted delegates to send a message that we're not getting stuck with someone just because of their early fundraising ability.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 09:10 AM
Response to Original message
8. its way too early for me to decide n/t
Edited on Fri Apr-06-07 09:10 AM by bluedog
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 09:16 AM
Response to Original message
9. Love.....not yet.....
I'm in "deep like" with Obama and Edwards - they're at the top of my list (and I'm discounting Kucinich and Gravel, whose positions I'm in more agreement with, but I know have no chance.)
But the candidate I love - OzoneMan - appears very unlikely to run at this point. :cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftwingnut Donating Member (843 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
10. Love was for Howard Dean in 2003...
no love for anyone this time around.

But if Richardson can gain some momentum....he wins the general election EASILY.

The other side really has nobody.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
11. Love? Nah.
I don't love anyone currently in the race. I would probably support Richardson in the primary and would consider Obama. Sometime in the summer, I will decide, if Clark isn't in before then. In the GE whoever it is, natch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cmd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 10:17 AM
Response to Original message
13. I will love the nominee
Meantime, I gotta get through the '07 local elections. Hope you are all involved at the local level.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
15. Real complete enthusiasm for a candidate is rare
2004 may have been an anomoly - because there were several candidates who inspired deep commitments from those who admired them. (Kerry, Dean, and Clark STILL have people who never stopped following them as leaders)

I can say that the only candidates that have ever really been people I was proud, happy and excited to vote for - mainly Kerry and Gary Hart, though my first vote for McGovern was a good one too. I know there are plenty of people here who fell in love with Clinton and were unenthused with all the 2004 candidates. Every year will not have a candidate that everyone thinks is exceptional.

From what I see, none of the candidates reach that level - though by the primary I will vote for one, but at this point there are a few possiblities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PresidentObama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #15
22. You hit the nail on the head.
"Every year will not have a candidate that everyone thinks is exceptional."

I think thats what it comes down to. I have a hard time imagining any candidate ever touching me like Senator Kerry did in 2003 when I was introduced to his campaign. I think Clark and Gore, if they enter, would be the closest I would get to having that same excitement and happiness towards a Presidential candidate. And Edwards could also at least keep me excited about this race. I like John Edwards a lot. He's my current favorite in the race!!

But I have a tough time seeing myself have as much hope, love, and loyalty towards a candidate like I did John Kerry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bklyncowgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #22
27. You never forget your first love.
Though I have to admit, I've never been totally in love with a candidate. I wavered between Kerry and Dean in 2004. I was very excited about Gary Hart and I'll admit to having something of a crush on Jerry Brown in his younger days but I've never had that sort of high powered devotion that leads you to devote hours of your time and large sums of money to the cause.

These days I'm sort of wavering between Richardson, Obama and lately Edwards. The good thing is there's plenty of time and there's no Democratic candidate that I dislike so much that he or she couldn't make the sale.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tigereye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #27
33. I've been campaigning for Dems for 30 years
and often the candidate I was most unsure of turned out the be the best. It's really quite interesting to see what plays out during our increasingly lengthy campaign process.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #27
40. For me, the 2004 cycle was unique
Edited on Fri Apr-06-07 03:25 PM by karynnj
In 2003, I wavered between Kerry and Dean as you did. I knew a bit about Dean because we spent a week in VT each year and loved reading the local paper. Kerry I knew, as many my age did from 1971, when I was amazed by his brilliance and eloquence.

After reading more, I was surprised to find that the more I read on John Kerry, the more impressed I was. I was struck by a comment from someone speaking of Kerry's 1971 speech that the end of it was what made it extraordinary - more so than the famous "How ..." question. He ended with a call that Vietnam be where America turned. In reality, Kerry fought the same misguided imperialist foreign policy in the Senate when he was the one who investigated the Contras. He was consistent in his opposition to arming bad guys to fight other bad guys. If there was anyone who would have changed the misguided foreign policy of the last 50 years, it was Kerry.

However, had Kerry not run, I would have been very happy with Dean. In fact, in late 2003, my biggest concern was that they would divide the same pool of people and neither would win.

I also think it may take a few cycles after a candidate you really are serious about before you become really interested in another candidate. I make the inevitable comparisons and this year's candidates don't stack up. (partly because they are not the "one".)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unlawflcombatnt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #15
42. Edwards
Edwards has the most credibility when it comes to opposing free trade, globalization, and outsourcing.

Clinton and Obama are generally free-traders, though both have used so much obfuscatory campaign rhetoric that it's difficult to determine what their positions really are.

We'll know more on Clinton & Obama's free-trade positions when renewal of King George's fast-track trade authority comes to a vote. And we'll know more when the Korean Free Trade bill comes to a vote.

The fact that both Obama & Clinton have received so much in the way of campaign contributions makes their support of Corporate-favoring trade bills a concern.

I'll have to admit, however, that I'd rather have Kucinich or Feingold when it comes to opposing free trade. Edwards seems like the best hope of the candidates who might win.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
16. Not really
If I seriously thought Kucinich had an icecube's chance in hell of becoming president, I might give him a good second look.

Hillary is too much a packaged product (please, lady, loose the shrinkwrap). Obama is too much a rock star (here I am -- pleae vote for me because I'm here). That leaves Edwards, who didn't have much presence in the Kerry campaign and didn't stay in the Senate to fight the good fight there; that bothers me, even if I like his populist rhetoric.

So, taking them all together as a group, two cheers for the Democratic presidential candidates. At least that's better than the raspberries I'm giving the Republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OHdem10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
17. I am finding it liberating waiting for the nominee to
be chosen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMDemDist2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
18. I am leaning more and more to Edwards within the current crop
but Dodd is talking some sense too :shrug:

I really haven't fallen in love with any of them
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Yeah, I like Dodd, too, and Gravel nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMDemDist2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. whois Gravel?? I haven't heard about him. where's he from and
is he a comgresscritter or what?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. He's in the no chance in hell category
A former Senator of Alaska. I think he lives in Virginia now. I have a lot of respect for him. He's the guy who read 4100 pages of the Pentagon Papers into the Congressional Record and led a five-month filibuster against Nixon and the draft back when. He won't go anywhere, but he is a true Democratic hero to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMDemDist2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. oh yeah! I remember that guy now
good for him! but the 'no chance in hell' is the category I fear
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PresidentObama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Gravel, no matter if you support him or not, is truly a great man!!
I'm glad at the very least his voice is in this debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #20
26. Long past his time, and his tax plan is terribly regressive. He was great in his day
but now I'm not sure his ideas can work.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JNelson6563 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 01:34 PM
Response to Original message
28. I reckon I could
But not until much closer to when MI actually votes. I've got buckets of time and have no intention of working on any primary effort (unless Gore jumped in).

Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
windy252 Donating Member (742 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 02:01 PM
Response to Original message
30. While I've been leaning towards Obama lately,
I would really like to have someone who can viciously attack and respond and not just say they will and forget about it. Is there anyone like that in the current field? Maybe I've overlooked someone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChiciB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #30
37. Feingold & Waxman Are Real Fighters... But It Won't Happen....
I do LOVE Al, but don't think he'll jump!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rubberducky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
34. Richardson looks to be at the top of my list right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChiciB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
36. I'm With JOHNNY! I Know It's Early, But He's Been My Choice For
a very long time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-06-07 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
38. Nope.
It's pretty sad, but, no, I can't.

I either don't trust some of the current crop and/or don't think the others can win.

:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 04:00 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC