Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If Clark declares as a Democrat --- I think he would win if nominated

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 (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
The Lone Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 12:41 PM
Original message
If Clark declares as a Democrat --- I think he would win if nominated



The one thing Bush has going for him is his image as a war time president. That photo of him in flight suit is going to garner a lot of votes. The country is going to see him as a war time president. That is the strategy Rove has developed.

With Clark we would have a real war hero to run against the phony war hero. Clark was wounded not once, but four time in Vietnam. I think he could beat Bush and might well have the coat tails to carry in the Congress for Democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
quinnox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. Highly unlikely
Clark might run to get more name recognition, and advertise his credentials for a VP slot, or a cabinet position.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tjdee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. I think you are correct.
I go back and forth between thinking a)he'll be a serious candidate, or b)he is running for VP.

Today, LOL, I think he's running for VP. Considering he's never been involved in politics, no one knows him or what he's for/against, etc.

I have no problem with his running seriously for Pres either and I would sleep very easily with any combination of a Clark/Edwards combo. I just don't know if he would be. He's just sitting around, doing whatever he does every day, and is like, gee, I'd make a good president?

?????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greatauntoftriplets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
2. What is the big unknown to me is Clark's positions on the issues.
How progressive is he? In my experience, generals tend to be fairly conservative. Wasn't there speculation back in the early 1950s that Eisenhower also might run for president as a Democrat?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quam Donating Member (112 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. His Positions? Seach and You Will Find
You were not able to understand his positions on numerous international and domestic issues after listening to an interview with him on a talk show?

As you assume he is a fairly conservative person, I assume you have done your homework in determining what sources provide his positions on issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greatauntoftriplets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. I don't watch the Sunday morning talk shows.
Instead I wait for Pundit Pap from American Politics Journal. It is much less risky for my television.

Clark has not announced what party -- or IF -- he will run. You don't get to be military brass by being a flaming leftist. I will wait for him to declare a party. If he runs as a Republican, I will not even consider voting for him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tameszu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Clark is quite progressive...
...he rubbed people in the Pentagon the wrong way and may have been relieved of his command a bit early in part because of his liberal and multilateralist outlook.

Eisenhower was probably the last respectable, moderate Republican president. He was the one who issued the famous warning about the military-industrial complex.

Clark would agree with you that the miltiary since Vietnam has been a power base of conservatives, but he thinks that that is in a way a tragedy and should change. As he wryly notes, the American armed forces offer socialized housing and welfare!

I think at least with regard to foreign policy, Clark is the candidate with the most potential to move America in a progressive, internationalist position, since his experience and credibility allow him to push much further than others. In contrast to Clinton, who got bullied on foreign affairs around by a nasty GOP opposition willing to play the draft dodger card at every turn, Clark would have a lot of leverage against a Republican Congress on foreign affairs and defense issues. The same goes for Kerry, to a lesser extent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wndycty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Hey great aunt. . .its your friend wndycty Clark looks progessive
FROM:http://www.draftwesleyclark.com/on_the_issues.htm

Affirmative Action: Clark is a strong proponent and supporter of affirmative action, diversity, and multiculturalism:

* “I’m in favor of the principle of affirmative action… what you can’t have is you can’t have a society in which we’re not acknowledging that there is a problem in this society with racial discrimination.” Meet The Press
* "I saw first hand the racial prejudice, the civil disobedience, the intolerance… I've often gone back to that experience. It's something I've related to." Waging Modern War by Wesley Clark
* Clark was recently one of several former military men to file a pro-affirmative action "friend of the court" brief on behalf of the University of Michigan in their battle against the Bush Administration efforts to dismantle Michigan's admissions policy. Clark said he was "surprised and dismayed" by the president's decision. (Read the consolidated brief (PDF) of retired military leaders (including Wesley Clark) in support of University of Michigan's affirmative action program.)


The Environment: Environmental protections appear to be part of Clark’s overall global and progressive vision for America.

* "Human beings do affect the environment and all you have to do is fly along the Andes and look at the disappearing glaciers down there and you recognize that there is something called global warming and it's just getting started as China and India modernize." (source – speech at the Council on Foreign Relations)
* "100 years out, the only things we leave behind that will matter are the environment and constitutional legitimacy."
* Opposes drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge on the grounds that "the gains in terms of US energy independence are relatively marginal" The Diane Rehm Show

Gays in the Military: "But essentially we’ve got a lot of gay people in the armed forces, always have had, always will have. And I think that, you know, we should welcome people that want to serve." Meet The Press

Guns: Clark has implied that gun ownership is primarily a local issue. He also believes that assault weapons should be banned for the general public, stating, "people who like assault weapons they should join the United States Army, we have them." (CNN's Crossfire, 06/25/03)

Health Care and Education: Clark is a strong supporter of a social safety net, including effective and well-supported systems of education and health care:

* "I grew up in an armed forces that treated everyone as a valued member of the team. Everyone got healthcare, and the army cared about the education of everyone's family members. It wasn't the attitude that you find in some places, where people are fending for themselves and the safety net doesn't work." (Source: Waging Modern War)


Immigration: "We’re a nation of immigrants. We should be encouraging every person from the Indian Institute of Technology that comes to this country to stay in this country. Become an American citizen. Join with us. Make a great company. Let’s all be wealthy and prosperous and happy together. Immigration has a vital part to play in that process." (Source: New Democrat Network speech)

National Security, 9/11, and The Patriot Act: Clark is wary of trading off individual rights that allow the government to escape accountability. Clark supports a review of the Patriot Act to assess its effectiveness and potential damage to individual rights. He has also called for more accountability surrounding 9/11 so we know what went wrong and how to prevent these attacks in the future.

* “I think one of the risks you have in this operation is that you’re giving up some of the essentials of what it is in America to have justice, liberty and the rule of law. I think you’ve got to be very, very careful when you abridge those rights to prosecute the war on terrorists. So I think that needs to be carefully looked at.” Meet The Press
* "One of the things about the war on terror that I am disturbed about is that we've essentially suspended habeas corpus. Which is something that's only been done once in American history and then only for a very brief period. When I go back and think about the atmosphere in which the PATRIOT Act was passed, it begs for a reconsideration and review.” (source – Salon.com interview)
* “We’ve got a set of hearings that need to be conducted to look at what happened that caused 9/11. That really hasn’t been done yet. You know, a basic principle of military operations is you conduct an after-action review. When the action’s over you bring people together. The commander, the subordinates, the staff members. You ask yourself what happened, why, and how do we fix it the next time? As far as I know, this has never been done about the essential failure at 9/11. Then moving beyond that, it needs to be looked at in terms of the whole intelligence effort and how it’s connected to the policy effort. And these are matters that probably cannot be aired fully in public but I think that the American people and their representatives have to be involved in this. This is essential in terms of the legitimacy and trust in our elected leadership and our way of government.” Meet The Press


Taxes and the Economy: Clark favors a responsible and progressive taxation system that creates jobs and doesn’t put this country into ruinous financial shape with gaping deficits. Clark, who at one point taught economics at West Point, was against Bush’s tax changes because they don’t effectively create jobs, they are unfair, and they imperil our nation’s fiscal health.

* “Taxes are something that you want to have as little of as possible, but you need as much revenue as necessary to meet people’s needs for services.” Meet The Press
* “ were not efficient in terms of stimulating the kind of demand we need to move the economy back into a recovery mode, a strong recovery and a recovery that provides jobs.” Meet The Press
* “The tax cuts weren’t fair… the people that need the money and deserve the money are the people who are paying less, not the people who are paying more. I thought this country was founded on a principle of progressive taxation. In other words, it’s not only that the more you make, the more you give, but proportionately more because when you don’t have very much money, you need to spend it on the necessities of life. When you have more money, you have room for the luxuries and you should—one of the luxuries and one of the privileges we enjoy is living in this great country.” Meet The Press
* “I mean, you look at the long-run health of the country and the size of the deficit that we’ve incurred and a substantial part of that deficit is result of the tax cuts. You have to ask: “Is this wise, long-run policy?” I think the answer is no.” Meet The Press


Women’s Issues: Clark is a strong supporter of women’s rights. Bluntly stating on CNN's Crossfire "I am pro-choice." He is pro-choice, supporting the rights of women to make these decisions outside of governmental regulation (Source – The American Prospect), and in the early 1980s, he proactively tackled spousal abuse as an army commander with a forward-thinking assessment of the demands of the modern family. (source - War in a Time of Peace, by David Halberstam)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greatauntoftriplets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Thanks, wndycity!
When are we congregating in Hyde Park????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. I believe that he is a registered Democrat
Edited on Sun Aug-10-03 01:31 PM by w4rma
The positions he has put out are all left of the center. But, until he outright says that he is a Democrat and supports the Democratic Party, he's on my list right above Joe Lieberman. If he did come out and say he is a Democrat, then he would immediately move up on my list.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amazona Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. he is definitely a committed Democrat, link
Everyone should read this Esquire article:

http://esquire.com/features/articles/2003/030801_mfe_clark_1.html

Clark leaves no doubt that the dark side tried to get him to come over after 9-11, and he refused. He also has strong words about the accountability -- or lack of it -- for the enormous security failure that was 9-11.

There is no doubt that he is a Democrat. The only question is, does he want to put up with the B.S. involved in being a candidate?

When * went up against Osama, Osama walked. When Clark went up against Milosevic, who he basically calls a kittycat (euphemism here), then...well...where is Milosevic now?

Seems like a no-lose situation. Either * would be forced to arrest Osama and have a public trial...or Clark could make plenty of hay out of the fact that he didn't.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kahuna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-11-03 06:59 AM
Response to Reply #8
23. He's definately left of center. I consider myself left of center....
and he sounds even more liberal than me!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
realFedUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
3. What are his positions?
Aside from military experience, there needs to be
definitive stands on every issue concerning us domestically.
Terrorism isn't going to take this country down in the end,
but bankruptcy of democratic ideals themselves will.
I don't know if this guy is really a Democrat right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
4. Check out www.DraftClark.com for some positions
The people there have assembled some of his public statements on certain issues. He's a Democrat if he runs, and I hope he does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MaverickX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
11. no he won't
He has no civilian foreign policy experience.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nashyra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Like * had any
This guy makes * look like a spoiled child. Found this article
http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/polipro/pp2003-07-09,html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
imhotep Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. just what we need
another president that thinks violence is an acceptable foreign policy....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MaverickX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. any candidate that says he'll never use military force..
Would never get elected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
imhotep Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #18
22. you are right
and there is a fine line between never using force and using it too much. It isnt hard to figure out where a General would be within the spectrum of "diplomacy."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tameszu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-11-03 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #22
24. Really?
Oddly enough, some of the best diplomats throughout history have been generals and advocates for the use of force as a last resort.

You can start with Sun Tzu, whose notion of an ideal victory involved not fighting at all, and Thucydides, who criticed the civilian demogogues of Athens for their belligerence, go through Washington and then work your way to Eisenhower's critique of the military industrial complex.

And Clark, as Donna points out, negotiated the Dayton Accords to bring about the major ceasefire in Bosnia. Also note that the Kosovo conflict was perhaps one of the most unusual wars in modern history: it was fought by an alliance of 17 democratic nations and in great part for humanitarian purposes (the self-interest purpose would be stabilizing and securing Eastern Europe from Milosevic). Leading it required an immense amount of political and diplomatic skill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nashyra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. Sorry the link does not pull up the page
if you go to draft Wesley Clark on google the top entry will take you to the home page and the article is in the section In the News about 5th from the top on the left side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MaverickX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Bush was "elected" before..
Foreign policy became such a major issue. Unfortunately "dealing with" 9-11 gave him foreign policy credentials.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donna Zen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #11
19. The Dayton Accords
Clark was a US negotiator. Also, he worked extensively with Richard Holbrooke in the Balkins.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #11
20. clark has no experience whatsoever.
Edited on Sun Aug-10-03 06:19 PM by KG
his supportes tout his being 'ex-military', and 'integrity' and some quotes from MTP as his 'position papers' as qualifications.

but he has no foriegn policy experience, no economic experience, no civil right experience.

no local, state or national political experience. never been voted into any office.

but somehow this guy deserves a nomination for prez? please.

(now, what have i seen on DU 10000 times as a complaint about the greens/nader? 'they should get (local, state) experience before they go national')




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LTR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-10-03 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Like Bush had any before the White House!
Gen. Clark does have a masters in economics, I believe.

Also has been a business executive.

As for international experience, He headed the NATO forces and worked extensively in Europe, as opposed ot talking about it in Congress. How much more 'experience' do you need?

This lack of experience never stopped Washington or Eisenhower from becoming good presidents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MaverickX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-11-03 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #21
26. umm...
There's a huge difference between civilian foreign policy experience and military experience. Foreign policy wasn't a major issue when Bush was "elected".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tameszu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-11-03 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #20
25. Others have already pointed to his foreign policy experience.
As for economic experience, one could point to his graduate degree, his teaching it in he military, his stint as a White House Fellow with the OMB, as well as the financial administration involved in running the entire American forces in Europe as SACEUR--not the same as economic experience, but it's something.

He has no electoral experience, although he arguably has national political experience, as being a regional commander is an intensely political job.

No one "deserves" the nomination--the language of desert is not an appropriate word to describe the selection requirements. Rather, the people choose the person who they feel best represents their political vision and outlook and who they feel is bested suited to lead them at the time. Because there are a myriad of different valid justifications for this choice, and because the people are free to revise their justifiations, the language of desert is just not a good fit here.

P.S.: It's not that the Greens ought to get local experience first, it's that they should build up a series of local *movements* first. In a 2-party system, having 2 leftish national parties only helps the right. Ideally, the Greens will only go national when they are poised to wipe out the Dems, the Dems are poised to wipe out the GOP, or after achieving electoral reform.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MaverickX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-11-03 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #25
27. yes but he has no civilian foreign policy experience..
Generals don't formulate foreign policy decisions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OldSoldier Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-11-03 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #27
28. Neither does the governor of Texas
If Clark gets some good civilian foreign policy people in there to advise him, and he listens to them, there's no problem. He's certainly smart enough.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MaverickX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-11-03 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. again..
Foreign policy wasn't a major issue in 2000. If it was I doubt Bush would've been elected.
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 Fri Dec 27th 2024, 06:24 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) 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