My take on the "Dean or Clark" dilemma

[adamrsilva]

The primaries are getting close, and we are seeing it shape up to be what we all knew it would be: Dean vs. Clark. For many who are undecided, they soon must choose between these two (and this is not to denigrate other candidates, just my opinion on the reality of it). Let me say this: I am a Dean supporter. I have been since last summer, when the first sparks of his campaign began. While I still support Dean, I am hope he wins, I do not want to see it an easy win. I want Clark to do well in NH. I want him to win SC. I want this, because I believe that any candidate has to survive a tough primary battle in order for us to truly know if they can take on Bush. I also think we need it to be the battle between these two, who represent different factions of the Democratic Party, to show where the party stands right now. If Dean wins, then he deserves it, and no one should deny that, and everyone should believe in his electability. If Clark wins, then he deserves it, and he will have proben his mettle as a true Democrat who can take Bush down. So I welcome this fight. And may the best Democrat win.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

1. John Kerry adds to the dilemna

because I know that deep down a lot of Democrats want him to do better and want to support him.

[LuminousX]

3. You are correct

In my 'fantasy' primary, it would be a Dean v. Kerry because it would be a win-win for me.

I really wish Kerry was doing better.

[_seachange]

4. Hmmm...

I like Kerry, but unless something miraculous happens he won't be the nominee.

[Kahuna]

12. I want Kerry to do better and not be humiliated..

But I don't want him to beat Clark. If Kerry is humiliated that could kill his chances to be added to the bottom of a potential Clark ticket. Kerry is a legislative expert. If Clark prevails, he will need someone with Kerry's knowledge and expertise.

[Renew Deal]

19. I agree totally.

I think a lot of people want him to be the one early on. Dean reshaped the debate away from Kerry. Now he is close to cooked. If he wins IA, things can change.

[_seachange]

2. ...

*Claps*

Well said. :)

[thedudeingeorgia]

5. Clark is the only logical choice

I believe that General Clark is the only viable candidate to run against Dubya....

I know Dean supporters will disagree with me on this, but given that Dean has an issue with being able to handle criticism from his own party, he surely will be skewered by the Bush-Rove team, who won't let up for one minute when it comes to criticism. Also, given that Dean has virtually no shot in the south after his Confederate Flag comment, it makes no sense for him to get the nomination. I know there are those who will say that he was misinterpreted with what he said, but it is too late for apologies. Southerners know what he is about.....

[adamrsilva]

11. You have missed the entire point of the post

EOM

[mike_c]

6. my support for Dean is lackluster, but I will vote for him if he's...

...nominated. My fear is that Clark will further erode the democratic party base because many on the left, myself included, will vote 3rd party (most likely Green if the Greens nominate a candidate) rather than voting for Clark. There are lots of reasons for this, and I won't bore you with them here, but one of the primary reasons is that I fundamentally distrust career militarists in charge of civilian government. MANY of Clarks public statements, especially those made before he annonunced his candidacy, reflect his bias in favor of military solutions to political and diplomatic issues. That bias is entirely understandable in light of his life experience, but not appropriate for the head of civilian government in a country like the U.S., IMO.

[copithorne]

7. It's all good

I think it is all good too, as a Clark supporter (who had been a Dean supporter/contributor).

But why do you think they represent two different wings of the Democratic Party?

I think they are much more similar than that. They are both able to speak clearly and directly against this idiotic war in Iraq. And they both don't get into thinking that it is rude to savage the Bush maladministration.

To win the Democratic nomination, you need to be able to speak clearly against the war in Iraq. Dean and Clark are the two candidates (who are presidential timber) who do so.

I actually think that General Wesley Clark is more liberal than Howard Dean in terms of policy.

[Bread and Circus]

8. Awesome Post !

:yourock:

Now that's the kind of spirit and honesty we need around here.

[Hoosier Democrat]

9. AMEN!!!!

Thank you for a very thoughtful post. I, too, am an early and committed Deanite. However, if the general wins the nomination, I will be the first on my block to erect a Clark yard sign.

In reality, Dean and Clark are not that much different. They are both moderate Democrats with outsider status. (Granted, Dean tends to be a bit more caustic than Clark) I think that is driving both campaigns' momenta. People are just sick of Washington insiders who just "don't get it", like Gephardt and Kerry.

I think, as the primaries wind down, this country would be well-served by a Dean/Clark ticket (or even a Clark/Dean ticket). I think that after South Carolina, these will be the only two Democrats left in the race.

[Jack_Dawson]

10. Dilemma

Sorry...just wanted to be the first to correctly spell it.

:hi:

[adamrsilva]

13. Thanks

Didn't see that.

[xrepub]

14. Some unity is called for

I am a Clark supporter, and I hope he wins in the primaries.

If Dean wins, I will support him. We must get rid of the shrub. Any Democrat, or any thinking person for that matter, who doesn't vote for the Dem candidate is, at best, a fool.

[thedudeingeorgia]

16. I am no fool

If Dean gets the nomination, I don't know if I could pull the lever for him. I want a President who will be strong when it comes to foreign policy, which Dean has none of. The statements he has made about Bin Laden further cement the image that he would make America weaker, not stronger.

Not that I agree with Bush on Iraq, I don't, but we don't need a leader who is perceived to be a weak one, which is what I think would happen if Dean were fortunate enough to win the election, which I don't think he will do....

Clark, on the other hand, has personal foreign policy experience from his 34 years in the military and would be perceived around the world as someone not to be taken lightly....

If it came down between Dean and Bush, I would probably write-in Clark as a write-in candidate.

[mike_c]

17. this is what REALLY scares me about Clark....

Clark, on the other hand, has personal foreign policy experience from his 34 years in the military and would be perceived around the world as someone not to be taken lightly....

Military expertise is NOT foreign policy experience. And further extending the image of the U.S. as the baddest dude on the global block is the LAST thing I want.

[democratreformed]

18. In Clark's case,

his military career did give him experiences to help him have a better understanding of how foreign policy affects other nations.
He participated in the Dayton peace accords. He worked with the leaders of 18 other countries during Kosovo. He already has the respect of many foreign leaders. Just my opinion.

[mike_c]

22. the same argument applies to Eisenhower, perhaps more so...

...as Supreme Allied Commander during WWII. Yet Eisenhower was a mediocre president at best and some contend one of the worst executives of the twentieth century. His greatest foreign policy legacies were the Korean war and the cold war.

I simply do not believe that the aggressive autocratic culture of the military is good preparation for civilian leadership. If Clark were willing to demonstrate his qualifications first, by serving a term or two in Congress or in state office I might feel differently, but his very disinclination to do that-- only the highest possible rank will do-- reinforces my misgivings. This is one liberal democrat who will bail on the party if Clark is nominated-- not in a fit of pique because "my" candidate wasn't nominated, but because I genuinely fear what Clark represents-- military control over civilian government.

[democratreformed]

24. I respect your opinion.

:)

[robbedvoter]

15. Thanks! That's what is democratic about the primaries

and it's attitudes like yours that will carry us towards the unity needed afterwards! Hat's off to you!

[Renew Deal]

20. This is a great post.

Very well said. I just hope guys like Lieberman don't do too much damage.

[Rowdyboy]

21. You express your thoughts well

Congratulations and thanks for your thoughts.

[John_H]

23. To me it's the win or lose dillema

not about factions of the party--If you look at Dean's actual record and Clark's actual proposals, both men seem to be moderate progressives.

I'd be proud to call either man my President, but I firml;y believe that Dean will spend three months defending himself for inexperience and lose in a landlide courtesy of a scared-to-death-by-the-media public.

By eliminating the fear factor Clark opens up the election on the issues Dems do well with--the economy. healthcare. civil libertes, etc.

To me the choice is clear. Two candidates I like and admire. And only one who has a prayer of getting to be my president.