Clark may prove that 'centrist' is not a dirty word

[wyldwolf]

Party officials, journalists and other campaign camp followers, who tally political statistics with the fervency of baseball fans, need to wake up. Between dropping off dry cleaning and picking up kids from soccer practice, most Americans could give a rat's patootie whether Clark once supported an incredibly popular Republican president. We are not a nation of party loyalists.

Numbers bear this out. According to Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics, only about 37 percent of the electorate strongly identify as Democrats or Republicans. The majority's vote could be up for grabs.

Other than the carpetbagger Clark, few of its candidates have much more than fringe appeal. Even the much ballyhooed Howard Dean doesn't poll well in the South or upper Midwest, critical regions for national Democratic success. And Clark appeals to NASCAR men, who have fled the Democratic Party in droves since the Reagan era.

Democratic activists need to honestly ask themselves: Which candidates is electable and has the most crossover appeal? While they may be peeved at Clark's lack of party credentials, many party faithful also want to back a winner. But to Americans sick to death of right and left wings, a candidate's past party crossovers and centrist bent are more assets than problems.

http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/democrat/news/opinion/6926945.htm

[leesa]

1. Clark is not a centrist. He is standard Republican.

He only is a centrist in this warped world of neoconservatism. I don't mind that he's Republican, but don't call him a centrist.

[Loyal]

8. I disagree

n/t

[zeemike]

44. I agree

The neo-cons have away of warping words to suit the purpose. Clark is a member in good standing of the military industrial complex and that is not “centrist”

[retyred]

46. Only a bush

supporter would try a bush tactic of repeating a lie long enough to make it true.



CLARK FOR PRESIDENT
"I'm going to give them the TRUTH and they'll THINK it's hell."
Retyred IN FLA.

[Cogito]

54. Clark is not a centrist he is a liberal

Pro choice, pro environment, pro labor, pro multilateralism, pro civil rights and affirmative action. The place where Clark departed from the Democrats historically appears to be on the dimension of the military and foreign policy. No doubt his experience in Viet Nam shaped his early perspective and, as a member of the Army in the 1970s, he saw the extent to which the armed forces had been allowed to decline. As I have argued elsewhere in the thread, Clark is going to find it much easier to cut defense spending than any other Democrat and I much prefer sensible cuts to pork barrel spending disguised as defense spending than seeing cuts to medicare and social security.

[zeemike]

56. A liberal?

That voted consistently for Republicans? Tell me it isn’t so Joe.

[wyldwolf]

57. voted consistantly for republicans?

...you mean Bill Clinton and Al Gore are republicans? You mean the Dem Congressional elections he worked on - they were really republicans?

He's pro-choice, pro-affirmative action, and he's a republican?

[Cogito]

59. The guy was in the Army in the 1970s

Clark was Army in the 1970s and a Viet Nam vet. He was a career military guy. The Democrats of the era were busy characterizing people who fought in Viet Nam as war criminals etc and, more importantly, the Dems were seen as not being particularly strong on defense. It makes sense to me that a guy who is liberal on social issues but conservative on defense and economic issues would vote for Reagan. There were many such people. Perhaps the most important thing about Reagan for people in the Armed forces is that he made them feel good about their service to the nation. People have lots of different issues that are important to them and the importance they put on different issues changes over time. Since 1992 Clark has been voting Democratic. The political reality of 2003 is much different than 1980 or even 1992. As supporters of Dean can attest, people change their views on the issues over time.

If the issue is party loyalty then vote for Kerry or Gephardt. If the issue is getting the policies Democrats want actually enacted then vote for Clark.

[zeemike]

69. Well I was in the Navy in the 60s

And your assertion that; The Democrats of the era were busy characterizing people who fought in Viet Nam as war criminals… is an out and out lie. No democrat that I know of did that and there was no wholesale condemnation of the solders in Viet Nam like you imply. If you are not old enough to remember those days you are just uninformed, and if you are you are just trying to rewrite history.
I know many men that served in Viet Nam and not one of them was spat upon when the came home although if you lessen to the spin misters you would think it a regular thing.
But it was a different time. We had not yet created the cult of heroes that we have now.
Solders then did not think of themselves as heroes but just doing their duty to country. And they saw no glory in killing and knew it was wrong but did it because they believed in our government.

[loudnclear]

71. I agree. How many times are we going to be fooled by the feepers

sheeple in Dem clothing? I like a lot of what Clark says but I don't think he really means it...it's 'good cop/bad cop' routine in which the Republicans cover all bases. Clarks stand on the ME and his uabashed biased toward Israel did it for me. I won't be supporting him. If he gets the nomination I'll have to think very hard about pulling the lever for him. I don't really like Dean that much, but since Mosely Braun won't be able to win, I'll have to consider Dean.

[Brian Sweat]

78. You're right, he doesn't mean it

That's why the Clintons support him. That is why so many Democrats in congress support him. That is why Howard Dean tried to talk him into being his running mate.

[hedda_foil]

2. Tell me, wyldwolf ....

Are you paid by the campaign yet or are you still trying to convince committed Democrats (aka the base) that Centrism is Speshul for free?

[wyldwolf]

6. You define your screen name beautifully!

[hedda_foil]

35. But you have not answered my question.

Is there a reason for that or did you just forget?

[wyldwolf]

39. Sure I did... but I'll have to explain it to you like you're 5...

...by commenting on your screen name in relation to your silly question, I implied you are prone to nonsensical conspiracy theories - like the implication you made in your queston.

At the same time, (and I shouldn't be surprised) you failed to address the content of the original post, instead choosing to divert the attention to the poster.

Silly.

Next?

[zeemike]

45. Is a yes or no that hard to type?

[The Magistrate]

48. That, Sir, Would Imply The Question Is To Be Taken Seriously

It is not a serious question.

The fantasy that anyone bothers to pay people to swan about on message boards is mere comedy.

[wyldwolf]

49. not the issue...

...the poster is running from the focus of the thread, trying to divert attention from the issue, and asking irrelevant questions. If I were a paid consultant in the Clark campaign I'd proudly proclaim it, but it wouldn't make a difference nor would it change the facts of the article.

But, to "head of foil's" way of thinking, recieving a paycheck for posting an article excerpt would be a (crazy? stupid?) way to say the article was without merit.

[hedda_foil]

No "wild wolf" ... You went for the jugular like your screen name ...

You didn't answer the question which is quite serious indeed. My screen name is a pun, sir. My question is no joke. I am referring to the fact that you spend an indordinate amount of time trying to convince DUers that preferring candidates (any of 9 at this point, ranging from far left to center right) who are actual Democrats to run for the Democratic nomination for the presidency is no more than than a silly matter of "ideological purity."

Given the fact that you have been employing propagandistic techniques to spread your memes and promote your candidate, I think it's quite within reason to ask whether you are paid by the campaign to do so, or if you are simply hoping they will hire you in the future.

It's an easy question. Answer it. It might help your credibility which, if you haven't noticed, has been suffering as a result of your repeated spinning.

[wyldwolf]

61. employing propagandistic techniques? bwahahahahaha

1. see post #48 and #49
2. When you have spoken to everyone on DU and reached a clear consensus of my credibility, let me know. It appears fine to me - accept in the Dean camp. Besides, I couldn't care less when I'm quoting articles. That is what you're supposed to do... point out a news item and discuss.

Get it? Magazine or newspaper_____________ says ______________ but of course it isn't true because wyldwolf's credibility is _________.

But since I have answered your question, please tell us why it is relevant?

Are you implying that the minds of DU are no match for a campaign operative and that, because of a campaign operative's special training of (gasp!) finding articles and posting them that said campaign operative has a special advantage over people like you?

next?

[Julien Sorel]

66. LOL

Get it? Magazine or newspaper_____________ says ______________ but of course it isn't true because wyldwolf's credibility is _________.


Ouch! A perfect reply to a psuedo-intellectual mess of a post.

[boxster]

70. Bravo. Interesting how "propaganda" seems to be today's

word from the Dean camp and others. Suddenly, anything that they do not agree with is dismissed as "propaganda" from the "establishment".

[bushclipper]

65. I don't see wyldwolf's credibility suffering at all...

..unless, like he said, it is with Dean backers - who generally oppose the candidate wyldwolf backs.

How can posting news items be propagandistic techniques?

I'm afraid posts like yours are seriously lacking in credibility.

[boxster]

10. Hmm, perhaps we should actually read the posting to understand

what it's about.

No, that would take too much time away from posting mindless responses.

Anybody who believes that a Democratic candidate can win with nothing other than the liberal vote is in denial.

50% of this country still thinks Bush is doing a good job and my guess is that a lot of them are independents. We need a candidate that can appeal to the middle as well as the left.

[mhr]

3. This Reads Like a Well Constructed Piece of Propaganda

to promote Clark.

Remember, that the establishment has a vested interest in finding the least objectionable alternative to Bush in their view.

The interersts of the establishment and the people rarely coincide.

[boxster]

12. Ah, another anti-establishment response

with zero thought, zero effort, zero rationale, zero calories.

But, then, it's so much easier to just rubber-stamp the same old establishment BS than to actually post something productive.

Ignoring the fact that independents and a few moderate Republicans may be necessary to beat Bush is delusional. 50% of the American public still supports him. They're not all right-wing wackos.

[mhr]

13. Just Another Personal Attack On a DU Poster

You Clark people are all alike.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

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

[DemocratSinceBirth]

40. "Just Another Personal Attack On A DU Poster"

"You Clark people are all alike."


If you don't see the irony in that statement I suggest you repeat the eighth grade.....

[SWPAdem]

75. How is that a personal attack?

Yes, we are all alike...sick of the attack Clark drones.

[TLM]

21. Nobody is ignoring that swing votes will be needed...

However the fact that the candidate who wins will need to reach out to swing voters does nothing to change the facts about Clark's past words, his actions, and that they contradict his current claims.


The man s not a centrist, he is a trojan horse who has been working for and with the same people pulling W's strings.

[The Magistrate]

24. Another Mountain Made Of Mole-Hills, Sir

It seems to be a favorite waste of space around here.

[Cogito]

43. Trojan horse for whom, the DLC?

The DLC doesn't really have an agenda beyond getting Democrats elected and they figure the best way to do that is to follow the polls. They thought Dems should match Bush's position on the war and fight him on the economy. That was a mistake because the war is gonna be a loser for Bush too so they miscalculated. But Clark did not go along with the DLC he opposed the war and makes a devasting critique of the NeoCon fantasies that led to the war. Clark is gonna destroy Bush on the war issue. The difference between Clark and the DLC is that Clark has a progressive vision while the DLC only reads the polls.

[SWPAdem]

76. "Trojan Horse"

Karl Rove thanks you.

[The Magistrate]

18. You Say It Like That Was A Bad Thing, Sir

Your comment is, of course, nothing but a poorly constructed propaganda to oppose Gen. Clark. That, like any incompetent thing, is a bad thing, and that from your own point of view.

Do it well, or do not bother to do it at all.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[zeemike]

51. You need to add something to your signature praise

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"( don’t pay any attention to that man behind the curtain)

[bushclipper]

4. I've noticed no one has disputed the focus of this article..

According to Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics, only about 37 percent of the electorate strongly identify as Democrats or Republicans. The majority's vote could be up for grabs.

[wyldwolf]

5. I didn't expect them to...

I PM'ed a few people and accurately predicted the "he's a republican - it's propaganda" response.

[The Magistrate]

9. No One Will, Mr. Wolf

They know it is accurate, and cannot be disputed.

It is necessary for victory to maintain the votes of a number of people who have voted for Republican Presidential candidates. After all, some two-thirds of the vote in 1984 went to Reagan, and many of these people are still voting. Many of them voted for President Clinton, and for Vice-President Gore.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[union_maid]

7. He's more liberal than centrist

If someone can show me that he's one inch to the right of any of the top tier candidates then I take it back. They're all to the right of Kucinich, Mosely-Braun and Sharpton, but except for those, I haven't seen anything flaming liberal like out of any of them. Moderate to liberal is how this field shapes up.

[boxster]

14. I think the point should have been that he appeals more to

centrists than that he actually is one. His stances on the issues are pretty liberal, but with the military/business experience, he can get away with that.

The point that people like to ignore is that we really do need a candidate that will appeal to as much of the political spectrum as possible. Clark counters Bush's false military bravado with real military experience, yet he's progressive on social and economic issues. Keep the left, add the middle, and add a few unhappy moderate Republicans, and I think you have a winner.

[TLM]

23. Any of the other candidates work as a lobbyist for Kissinger?

[SWPAdem]

77. And, another dollar is donated to Clark's campaign

Keep it up, please.

[bhunt70]

52. I totally agree with you union maid.

.

[Old and In the Way]

11. If furthering the liberal agenda means electing a military man,

I'm all for it! The concepts are not mutually exclusive....although there may be some who can shake their stereotypes and personal biases.

Of course, I'll be voting for whoever the Democratic candidate is, but if Clark has the appeal to largest audience, so much the better.

[w4rma]

15. double post (n/t)

[w4rma]

16. The passionate centrist (Gov. Dean's already proven that.)

NEW YORK -

At the end of summer and onset of fall, pundits are gearing up for the Democratic presidential primaries. Recently, columnists have churned out a slew of articles profiling, criticizing and praising the candidates. Rating the candidates, writers have given the health insurance gold medal to Kerry, the centrist medal to Lieberman and the leftist medal to Dean.

Absent from all this politicking, however, is discussion on the Democratic strategy. Aside from TIME magazine's "How to Build a Better Democrat," no columnist has provided a comprehensive or innovative view of the identity Democrats need to assume in the coming election.

It seems each party is having an identity crisis. George Will, the conservative columnist for the Washington Post, stated, "Foreign and domestic developments constitute an identity crisis of conservatism, which is being recast - and perhaps rendered incoherent." In an effort to broaden their image, Republicans created an unassailable facade of "compassion," claiming to be "for" all those typically overlooked by the system: the elderly, minorities, the poor.

A cue for Democrats: To broaden your image, embrace the idea of passionate centrism. A 1997 USA Today story quoted then Governor of Vermont Howard Dean as calling himself a "passionate centrist." A cursory look at his governorship proves this to be true. And so, Dean's success, both as a governor (he's won five consecutive elections) and a presidential candidate, is based on impassioned moderation.
…
http://www.michigandaily.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/08/04/3f2de34c3b301

[boxster]

22. And Dean's already done that.

It's been thoroughly discussed that Dean's presidential campaign varies somewhat from his political background. Initially, he seemed to be running closer to the liberal side of things - which was in part, to be fair, a creation of the media; since, he's moved a little closer to the middle. His record in Vermont seems pretty moderate, with the exception of the obvious, like civil unions.

But, as far as I'm concerned, modifying your message is necessary, because running for Governor of Vermont and running for President are two very different races involving two very different groups of potential voters. While other people would scoff at his change of tactics, I think it's utterly necessary in the real political world. I'm sure that Kucinich supporters and others would likely disagree, but I think you have to appeal to anyone you can. This doesn't mean ignoring or changes your stances on the issues; it means packaging your views in a way that appeals to voters.

The ultimate goal would be to keep the left, add the middle, and gain a few unhappy moderate Republicans. To beat Bush, we're going to need all of that. One typical concern with Dean is that he'll have a hard time drawing voters in the South, so he has to be inclusive of those needs to a greater extent, more than, for example, typical needs of liberals in the Northeast. Either that or pick Edwards or Clark or Graham for VP.

I think George Will misses the obvious point. Republicans basically just stole some of the traditionally liberal ideas and claimed them as their own, and the media and much of the public bought it. They obviously had no intention of following through, but unfortunately, a lot of the public doesn't seem to have figured that out.

[Cogito]

37. Trouble is that Dean will be typecast as a flaming liberal

Dean can call himself a passionate centrist but he is going to be flying into a stiff wind of disbelief in the south and midwest aided by $200 million worth of misinformation from Bush. Vermont means Ben and Jerry's, socialist Congressmen and gay civil unions. Don't get me wrong, Dean's grassroots campaign is truly groundbreaking and if things go bad enough wrong with Bush he could pull it out. But what a freakin risk to take when Clark starts out with the four stars and the wind at his back in terms of credibility as a centrist. For gosh sakes, he can say he even voted for Reagan!

Dean has to convince me that he is the most electable. The grassroots effort really helps but angry ad hominem attacks only serve to make him less electable and less centrist.

[boxster]

68. That's very possible, especially regarding the civil unions law.

I live smack dab in the middle of the red states and trust me, although most of us agree it was a very gutsy thing to do in Vermont, it is not going to play well to the masses here. These people think homosexuality is a mortal sin and there's nothing that is going to change their minds. I expect much of the same in the South.

Most Dean supporters like to ignore that it exists or claim it's a pro and not a con. It's a pro with us, the left, but it's a con for much of the country.

[MasonJar]

19. Clark could be the man

Clark could be the man that gets the White House away from Stump. Isn't that what we all want? It's what I want. I will be out working for whoever gets the nod from the majority of Dems. Why are you attacking Clark? I can't get my mind around this abuse. He came out strong today for a special prosecutor/commission to not only investigate the outing of the CIA officer, but also the lies that led to war. How can that not be a good thing? It is the strongest opposition yet. He is not afraid of the neo-cons; he doesn't cater to them. He is pro-choice. He is liberal-leaning and fiscally conservative just like Dean. Please let the Dems support whom they want. Work hard for the person you want and let the rest of us do the same. I have not made up my mind yet, except on one thing: I intend to work hard for whomever the majority selects. You should do the same. Otherwise this country is probably finished.

[TLM]

20. Talk about bait and F-ing switch... Am I the only one

who remembers just a few weeks ago the draft clark folks painting CLark as the end all be all of liberal progressive hope? Clark was being painting as being as far left as Kucinich on almost every issue.

Now that we find out that his campaign lied about him being a registerd dem, he was working as a lobbyist for Henry Kissinger, he was a co-director of the NED with Frank Carlucci, and he was heaping praise on the leadership of Bush and Reagan at a republican fundraiser in 2001, so now suddeenly the super liberal hope is a centrist?

Two faced fraud is more like it.

[boxster]

25. I think you perhaps missed the point.

The point is that the candidate of the Democratic party needs to appeal to as much of the political spectrum as possible. The point of the article was that Clark can appeal to the centrists (in addition to the left), not that he is one.

I'm not sure why Dean supporters seem to think that Clark and Dean are polar opposites on the issues. There is plenty of documentation proving otherwise, if you take the time to look. Try issues2000.org, for starters. Dean and Clark are rated very similarly on both the social and economic scale in their comparisons.

[TLM]

26. Clark is not a centrist, he's a fraud.

I do not disagree that the candidate will have to appeal to the middle... my point is that the sales pitch for Clark seems to have suddenly changed from him being the great liberal hope, to him being the centrist everybody can agree on.


"I'm not sure why Dean supporters seem to think that Clark and Dean are polar opposites on the issues. There is plenty of documentation proving otherwise, if you take the time to look. Try issues2000.org, for starters. Dean and Clark are rated very similarly on both the social and economic scale in their comparisons."

Unfortunately those ratings are based on Dean's record, and Clarks' WORDS, because Clark has no record. What Clark SAYS isn’t very different at all from what Dean says and has done. However what Clark has done, like heaping praise on republican leadership at a republican fundraise in 2001, working as a lobbyist for Henry Kissinger, and co-directing the NED with Frank Carlucci, really call Clark's words into question.

[incapsulated]

30. Hmmm...

"Unfortunately those ratings are based on Dean's record, and Clarks' WORDS"

That's an interesting take, since Deans WORDS often conflict with his previous WORDS and record.

I wouldn't throw around the slur "fraud" so lightly. Your guy has plenty of his own baggage.

I don't like Dean but I will vote for him if he gets the nod and fight for him against Bush. It seems pointless to whip myself into a fury over I guy I may well have to vote for.

But I'm not going to waste my time arguing with Clark haters anymore. You people are more against Clark than you seem to be FOR anything. You are, fortunately, an extremely vocal minority who will make no difference in the final vote. The majority of Democrats are willing to accept Clark and that acceptence is growing by the day, up to and including choosing him as their preferred candidate. The party has finally learned that indulging fringe groups and "purity" tests gets us nowhere but on the sidelines. We've tasted success with Clinton and we like it. We want it back and we want the Bush criminals out of office.

[Cogito]

34. Clark will govern in a more progressive way than Dean

TLM,
Ad hominem attacks just don't cut it. Tell me, suppose Dean gets elected and has to make a decision about how to balance the budget. First, he will go for a modest tax increase but that will be d**m hard to get through a Republican congress. But grant him the tax increase, we still have a budget shortfall caused by Bush's massive giveaway. What is he going to cut, guns or butter? Dean has already promised to preserve defense spending but Clark has already pointed to defense programs he wants to cut. Dean will most likely take the money out of medicare, medicaid and social security because he has credibility with those constituencies but will not cut defense lest he be labeled as "weak". Clark has the reverse problem. Everyone knows that he is strong on defense so he is going to be able to cut pointless defense programs but he is not going to be as trusted on social spending. He is going to have to protect those programs more to shore up his base than Dean will have to.

Bottomline. Elect Clark and get more progressive policy results than you get with Dean (in the fairly unlikely event he managed to get elected at all).

[newyawker99]

36. Hi Cogito!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Cogito]

38. Hey NewYawk

Time to start talking to people who might listen to reason eh?

[boxster]

67. Interesting - we're apparently supposed to accept "words" from

every candidate in the race except Clark. Especially from Dean.

Do you suppose that Dean can support everything he's ever said with actions? I seriously doubt it.

So, I guess that means that we should discount everything Dean's ever said that doesn't have a specific Dean action, vote, or signed law to support it. That's your logic here, isn't it?

Who cares if Dean has a plan for anything? That plan's completely irrelevant, according to your logic. Unless it's backed up by written proof that Dean actually did something about it, it's meaningless.

"Heaping praise"

Perhaps you should actually read the transcript of his speech. He mentions the current administration exactly once in an hour-plus speech and those words were quite harmless, thank you.

[stickdog]

73. Clark has a record.

He lobbied for the indefensible Big Brother CAPPS II program.

He is a board member of the Orwellianly named "National Endowment for Democracy."

He rose money for Republicans and spoke glowingly of BushCo's murderous neocons after Chimpy was elected President.

He recently spoke at the graduation ceremony of the notorious School ot the Americas -- the foremost vehicle for exporting CIA-style terrorism to Latin America.

[Code_Name_D]

33. No, LTM is dead on.

The Clark supporters here seem to have forgotten that "centrisem" is far from a new. Clinton ran against it when he went against Bush Sr, And promptly began to fail ever sense then. Up until 2000, dems have been winning by being the lesser of two evils. A policy that proved a disaster during the 2002 election when the Democratic "centrist" position looked more like a "We Stand by the President" form of opposition. 11 years of centrisem has resulted in that vast middle. But in 11 years, the Dems have failed to tap into it.

Centrisem by it's vary nature, is a policy of capitulation and compromise. To never be critical about the Republicans, no mater how much mud they throw back. And to always be prepared to comprise with a party that is philosophy against the vary notion of compromise, seeing it as an expression of moral weakness.

Centrisem is also by its nature, completely divorced from reality. Republicans have their spin, but the Centrist Democrat has his OWN spin on the issue. And neither is true.

If Clark runs on a centrist campaign, than he will lose to Bush. America wants some one to stand up to Bush, not meet him half way.

[zeemike]

55. well said

[Julien Sorel]

60. And who is this white knight?

Kucinich? Sharpton? Mosely-Braun? Who in the field is a non-centrist who will 'stand up to Bush?'

[Code_Name_D]

74. This ain't the movies

I never said their was a white hat out their. And even if their was, why in the world would I want to put all my eggs in one basket again? I did that with Gore, and he let me down.

What their is, is a comunity of critical voices with a wide range of expertise and observations.

Goldenboy Clark seems to have been born yesterday. And is working to apeal to the same old demografical water barores of the center, while taking corprate money under the table.

But the best way to find that person who will truly fight for you, is to not follow the first chest full of shiny objects that crosses your path.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. You Can Call Him Anything, Love

as long as you call him president

<kisses>

Brian

[retyred]

53. Was is a past tense word

living in the past is a sign of not being able to accept the present, time to catch up sport.



CLARK FOR PRESIDENT
"I'm going to give them the TRUTH and they'll THINK it's hell."
Retyred IN FLA.

[watercolors]

27. Voting for CLARK

I also like the idea he has been an independant as I have.I . Also just recently registered Dem.

CLARK ALL THE WAY!!

[wyldwolf]

28. Aw woo woo! YOU'RE NOT A REAL DEMOCRAT!

LOL!!

[watercolors]

29. What are you? Lazy

I/m a firm believer that all citizens should look at every candidates' voting record and learn all they can and make the choice. I have voted repug and dem. I feel those who chose the mantra , vote the party ,are lazy and don't care to do the homework. I have been voting for 60 yrs, Only bad choice was Reagan the first time. Don't put people in boxes, there are good and bad in every party. Choose the best of each! I trust Clark all the way !

[wyldwolf]

31. my post was sarcasm...

...some people here believe one must be a democrat for life before they're a REAL democrat.

[watercolors]

32. Sorry for the flame

and THANK YOU!

[gulliver]

41. Centrist is just another useless label.

Clark is on the record as not liking labels. He was asked if he considers himself a moderate, and he said (paraphrasing) that he didn't like labels and thought they confused things more than cleared them up.

What's a centrist? Is there a center of politics?

I think Clark is on the "leading edge" if there must be a geometric metaphor.

[KittyWampus]

50. Clark Is On The Leading Edge!

Doggone, Gulliver, I LIKE IT!

Hope you don't mind if I steal it. :+

[Deja Q]

47. Try to appease everybody and you satisfy nobody

Stick to your ideals. Don't drool over who can win the most. Waffling, flip-flopping, and pandering doesn't work. Clark is guilty of flip-flopping as he's got puke stains on his shirt...

Look at television. It does something similar to win the most masses and nothing good gets accomplished in the end.

[TakebackAmerica]

58. hi.

How many Du'ers will not vote if Clark iis hthe nominee.
It seems that plenty of people juston't know ANYTHING about Clark.

[Rowdyboy]

62. It's incredible the garbage you read hear...

He's DLC (how could he be, I thought he wasn't even a real Dem?), he's PNAC/neocon (try reading his book before you humiliate yourself further). But people don't care to educate themselves-its far too hard to actually READ what he has written) and much more fun to toss Molotov cocktails. Thank God the majority of my party is not reflective of some of the people on this board.

And I'll say the same thing when people lie or misrepresent any of our candidates.

[wyldwolf]

63. "the majority of my party is not reflective of some of the people ...

...on this board"

We are indeed fortunate for that!

[Padraig18]

64. Heretic!

All non-liberals are witches who must be BURNED! Get the behind me, Satan the Moderate! /sarcasm off :eyes:

[stickdog]

72. Get back the Reagan Democrats by nominating one! (NT)

[sujan]

79. wait!

I thought he said he was a Liberal.