Straw poll for 2008 Democratic Nomination

[bluestateguy]

Poll question: Straw poll for 2008 Democratic Nomination

It's never too early for a straw poll.

[newsguyatl]

1. who else? HOWARD DEAN

[MercutioATC]

9. Agreed!

[Eloriel]

19. Man, how insulting he was left off! Of COURSE Dean.

And only Dean.

[KittyWampus]

33. He's Already Said He's Not Running & It Sounded Like He Meant It.

No, I'm not making this up...

[lojasmo]

34. IF he gets the DNC chair he won't run.....

He said it's too soon to talk about 2008 otherwise.

[Guaranteed]

99. Exactly- like there's even anyone else.

:)

[Ian David]

2. WTF? What about Barbara Boxer?

If anyone deserves to be president, it's Boxer.

[DUgosh]

12. Another Boxer vote here.

[Lenape85]

44. Here here

[HollyC]

97. Clark Boxer Clark Boxer Clark Boxer

Clark Boxer Clark Boxer

[Warren DeMontague]

128. I want a Democrat with Balls. And it looks like my Senator is one of the

few left.

Hell, yeah, Barbara Boxer.

[NMDemDist2]

3. John Kerry

it took two tries for Nixon to get in

[IndianaGreen]

4. Dennis Kucinich

He was 100% correct on the war, PATRIOT, and same sex marriage, and he is not a crook like Sharpton.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

6. Dennis Kucinich

Until someone else shows the courage and the dynamic expressiveness to standup for working class Americans on key issues like election fraud and the privatization of Social Security not to mention other key issues like Iraq, he is my man.

[MuseRider]

11. I'm with you

and Indiana.

[TahitiNut]

31. Yup.

I think people who demean Kucinich deserve Schwarzenegger, who embodies the 'attributes' antithetical to those subliminally inferred to be Kucinich's 'weaknesses.'

[Hippo_Tron]

54. Russ Feingold is the closest to Kucinich who's won statewide office

Plus I really don't get Kucinich's stance on flag burning.

[no name no slogan]

73. DK's district is bigger than most states

He's also got greater national name recognition, and already has a natural, nationwide base in place with the PDA. In fact, his flag burning stance may even help in attracting socially conservative/economically liberal voters to him, too-- especially the vaunted "Reagan Democrats" who so often vote their fears instead of their hopes.

If DK decides to sit 2008 out, I'll probably back Feingold-- IF he even decides to run. He doesn't seem to eager for the national stage at this point in time.

[Hippo_Tron]

85. I'm saying that I don't like his flag burning stance

Now don't get me wrong, I'd take DK any day because I'd trade flag burning for all of the good that a DK presidency would do for the country (plus the fact that the president has no say in constitutional ammendments anyway). I think the problem with DK is that he has yet to prove that he could even win his home state (he didn't even do so in the primary). Now, if he were to unseat DeWine for the US Senate in '06, I guarantee you that people would start looking at him as a potential candidate for national office.

Feingold has proven that he can sell his ideas in a state that Bush lost by less than a point both times.

[American Tragedy]

90. I don't like it either.

The implications are disturbing. I don't want any politician who believes so much that government should invade in our personal decisions. Who the fuck is being harmed if I burn a sheet of cloth, cloth that is my private property?

[eridani]

137. Where it came from--

--one of his brothers is permanently institutionalized due to having a very hard time in Vietnam. This brother has taken zero interest in any legislation DK has voted on during his entire career--with the exception of the flag burning amendment.

Which just goes to show that leading from your gut makes for bad public policy, and even the best do it sometimes.

It's trivial compared to his firm stance against the PATRIOT Act, IMO.

[NoPasaran]

5. Dean

[mdmc]

98. We need Dean in the DNC

:kick:

[NoPasaran]

104. Agreed

But he's not there yet.

[latteromden]

7. I'm assuming Dean gets chair (because if he doesn't, we're kinda screwed),

and voted for Feingold.

[cali]

8. Not a very good list of potential candidates IMHO

You've got Rod what's-his-name, who's Governor of some state I can't even recall, and Vilsac, but not Kerry, Dean, Bayh or Mark Warner, who are all considered more likely to run.

[FightinNewDem]

10. I agree

Warner, Bayh, Biden, and Dodd are all more likely to run than Easley or Blagoevich.

[Withywindle]

88. Illinois

He was getting some Presidential buzz a couple years back. God knows why. 'Cause he has nice hair, I guess. That's dropped off now that he's very unpopular in his own state.

[rodriguez94]

13. not a very good choice I am afraid...

but what about Easley/Edwards 08!! The south will rise again!!

[Tom Rinaldo]

14. I say Clark, but this list is way off

Kerry shows every intention of running again, Dean certainly has not ruled it out, Biden is already making noises, some early interest in Warner already, why wouldn't Kucincih consider it again, etc. etc.

I would still back Clark against any of them, but some serious contenders aren't noted.

[Clark2008]

25. And Clark could possibly turn some non-Diebold, Triad

Southern states, as well.

Of course, given my name on this board, we know who I'm for. :)

[Tom Rinaldo]

36. A possible (I think likely) advantage of Clark

is that he can run well in so many places that the big margins that Bush piled up in the South and other deep red areas, would at the least be sharply cut into with Clark running against the next Repub. That means that the pre Election National polls (which is what most people are looking at) won't be "close" like they were this time. Kerry came out ahead in the popular vote, even as counted, if the South is removed from the totals.

Outright fraud is harder to pull off if the public believes that our guy is solidly ahead going into November 2nd. As Progressive as he is, Clark plays better in red states than your average Democrat. His patriotic life time of service to his country in the military scores him important points. Plus he is just a stand up kind of guy who is comfortable talking about values and faith and the American dream. The race will at least be a lot tighter in Red States with Clark heading the ticket which will put him on top of the National polls prior to Election Day. It ain't fraud proof, but it helps.

[HeilChimp]

47. Wes Clark/Zell Miller 2008, if you can't beat the Repugs, join 'em!

Just a reminder of the "values" all you Wes Clark people are voting for:


“Gert and I are really honored. I want to thank everyone. Thank you, thank you for the introduction. Governor Huckabee and Governor Rockefeller and Senator Hutchison, our wonderful MC Sharon Trusty. I want to thank all of you for coming out and refereeing me tonight. But Sharon deserves a big hand. Let's give her a big hand. And I also want to thank Chairman Racicot and our event chair Jeb, the elected officials, and particularly Pulaski County and the Republican Committee for inviting me. It's a wonderful chance to visit some old friends, and start making some new ones and I just wanted to come here and tell you how impressed I am...”
--Wesley Clark, speech to Pulaski Co. Republican Party, Lincoln Day Dinner

“We won the battalion re-enlistment award that summer, because we had re-enlisted one soldier to stay in the Unites States Army. It was a tough time, but I love those men and that's why I stayed with it. And over the years we built the United States army and our nation's military back up in strength. We were really helped when President Ronald Reagan came in. I remember non-commissioned officers who were going to retire and they re-enlisted because they believed in President Reagan. I remember when he gave his speech on the fortieth anniversary of Normandy.”
--Wesley Clark, speech to Pulaski Co. Republican Party, Lincoln Day Dinner

“I was a colonel in the Pentagon. I was working for the army chief of staff and doing lessons learned and things. And I didn't get to go to the celebration of Normandy, but I, we heard the speech when gave it. He talked about how rangers took Pontahawk (ph) He talked about how they went up that cliff. He talked about the losses they took. He talked about how they did it for love. And we all cried. That's the kind of President Ronald Reagan was. He helped our country win the Cold War. He put it behind us in a way no one ever believed would be possible. He was truly a great American leader. And those of us in the Armed Forces loved him, respected him, and tremendously admired him for his great leadership.”
--Wesley Clark, speech to Pulaski Co. Republican Party, Lincoln Day Dinner

“"Fellas," he said, "it's over, we won. The Cold War is over." We couldn't quite believe it. I mean Desert Storm that was wonderful we whipped Saddam Hussein and all that sort of thing. But the Cold War was over, the Berlin Wall was down. And President George Bush had the courage and the vision to push our European allies to take the risk to tell the Russians to leave. And to set up the conditions so all of Germany and later many nations of Eastern Europe could become part of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, part of the West with us. And we will always be grateful to President George Bush for that tremendous leadership and statesmanship.”
--Wesley Clark, speech to Pulaski Co. Republican Party, Lincoln Day Dinner

“I took a detour to South America for a year and learned about some of the things that Asa Hutchinson's going to have to learn the hard way about the drug problem. And then I was tapped to go back - as one Senator explained it to me - she said, 'You don't want to go over there and fight Bill Clinton's war in the Balkans, do you?' And I said, 'Well, Senator, the honest truth is that when you're a soldier, you march to the sound of the guns. That's your duty and that's - they tell me to do it, that's what I'm going to do.' And so we went over there, we got a little tough with the people in Bosnia; we arrested a few war criminals; we put the squeeze on...”
--Wesley Clark, speech to Pulaski Co. Republican Party, Lincoln Day Dinner

“I don't know if you all know what the National Endowment of Democracy is, but President Ronald Reagan started it in the early 1980's to promote American values abroad. And one of the things that we do with a very small amount of money - which I hope Senator Hutchinson will keep in mind here and help us a little bit with, and maybe his brother will too. This is a $30 million program that could be a $70 million program. We help democracy, we help elections, we help form political parties. There's a National Democratic Institute, an International Republican Institute. And we've got great young men and women out serving our way of life in these other countries. And they're doing a great job of it. And thank God Ronald Reagan had the vision to start that. But I'm really proud to be on that. We've got to do that.”
--Wesley Clark, speech to Pulaski Co. Republican Party, Lincoln Day Dinner

“It's going to take American leadership. And I'm delighted to see General Colin Powell is working that problem actively. We've had the Columbian president up here, and I was so pleased that President Bush called for a North American free trade agreement, because I think the ultimate answer in South America is bring prosperity, bring American know-how down there, and let's build one great team in the Americas.”
--Wesley Clark, speech to Pulaski Co. Republican Party, Lincoln Day Dinner

“If you look around the world, there's a lot of work to be done. And I'm very glad we've got the great team in office, men like Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Paul O'Neill - people I know very well - our president George W. Bush. We need them there, because we've got some tough challenges ahead.”
--Wesley Clark, speech to Pulaski Co. Republican Party, Lincoln Day Dinner

[HootieMcBoob]

50. Remember Reagan was a Democrat

Who became the leader of the new conservative movement and moved the Republican party as well as the Democratic party indeed the whole nation much farther to the right and we continue that move to this day.

Wes Clark could very well be the mirror image of Ronald Reagan.

Personally I think the fact that he says he voted for Reagan is a positive. It could very well make a lot of Republicans, conservatives and people who used to vote for Democrats for President more likely to vote for a Democrat again, in the same way that Reagan got many Democrats to vote for a Republican.

Again - Clark is a Liberal Progressive! For God's sake man he was the only candidate in the last election, that I ever saw, defend liberalism itself in a very strong and cogent way.

We missed a golden opportunity once, I only pray that we're smart enough not to miss it the next time it comes around because we won't have another chance.

[Hippo_Tron]

80. Reagan forgot his political affiliation and one day just guessed...

That he was a Republican. Okay, aweful joke, but kinda funny.

[Tom Rinaldo]

58. Don't think I'm ignoring you

I see you attached your post to mine. I have to sign off for the next few hours. I am sure you will hear from some others about your post. If this isn't beaten to death by the time I return, I will comment more. There are long and short ways of responding to what you posted. I have found however that the type of people who attempt to dismiss the totality of a person's life work and purpose by presenting a moment in time, devoid of a full context, as proof that everything that is clear as glass about that person is wrong, well they generally are not interested in thoughtful answers. They would rather hunt for ammunition to use in discrediting opponents. That is the current Republican way, by the way. This board is full of people who have been paying attention to politics for the last few years. Do you really think we can not see the utter difference between a Wes Clark and a Zell Miller? Maybe I will "see" you later on.

[Tom Rinaldo]

65. Start with this: "When Opportunity Knocks, Open the Door".

Though I don't have time right now to write a full point by point rebuttal, I remembered I had this piece that I wrote last January 18th handy to repost. That's a lot more recent than what you reposted. I think it speaks to the bigger picture:

"Wesley Clark said it best when he commented that Democrats aren't used to having Generals in our Party. Just as true it seems, Generals aren't used to being Democrats. Everyone knows by now that Clark was rather late arriving at our Party. Most V.I.P.'s show up earlier, except, sometimes, for the Guest of Honor. What has Wesley Clark ever done to earn that type of distinction?

It is a good and fair question. Too often though it's posed as a Trick Question: "What has Clark done for the Democratic Party to earn the distinction of being our Presidential nominee?" What's the trick? It's simple really. All political parties exist (or so it is claimed) to advance the greater interests of the American People, not the other way around. The election of November 2004 isn't about selecting the next Chairperson for the National Democratic Party, it is about choosing the next President of the United States, the one who will be sworn to uphold all of our interests.

Talk all you want about third party movements and Independent candidacy's; for a century or more, the successful path to the Presidency has run directly through one of two dominant parties. Democrats tend to criticize some of our leftist friends for diluting our forces, either by running as, or supporting, a Green Party Presidential candidate. Yet some now imply that Clark, a man who chose a non partisan career of service and Independent affiliations, should perhaps be running as an Independent candidate, rather than compete with longer tenured Democrats seeking our nomination, or simply not run at all. That line of thinking fails to directly address the fundamental questions. Who should Democrats be supporting to become our next President, and why? Who is best suited to serve and protect the American public? Who can most likely succeed in the quest to unseat Bush the Pretender? Not succeeding at the latter is almost too depressing to contemplate, but contemplate it we should.

Obviously Democrats hold core beliefs on the values our society must embrace, and the direction our nation should take. Without those a political party is just an expedient shell. Someone seeking our Party's support must uphold those beliefs, so what about General Clark? I think anyone capable of reading or listening knows by now that he does, in spades. Personally I agree with Michael Moore, Clark is surprisingly progressive on almost all issues. Democrats never agree on everything, but if Clark is who he says he is, the overwhelming majority of Democrats, not to mention Independents and moderate Republicans, will celebrate a Clark victory over Bush.

That's the rub for many, isn't it? Should we believe what Clark says and writes now, just what is really behind his good words? There are certainly those who reject Clark for some deeply held principles, or deeply rooted suspicions, and your decision for now is simple; back another candidate. But I'm addressing the rest of us here. Clark has proven his courage and literal selflessness on a field of real battle. That can't be faked. He stood up to the military establishment in the Pentagon, and fought hard and successfully in favor of humanitarian military missions, at the ultimate expense of his own career. That is public record. Clark comes from humble roots and is a self made man who lived for decades on middle income wages in the U.S. Army though fortunes were frequently offered him as an incentive to leave. I know enough people who I trust, who know and trust Clark's abilities, his motivation, and his sincerity, for me to trust Clark also. I've met him. I believe him.

But it's too much of a gamble to select Clark some say, why make it? Gambling is a better metaphor than it might initially appear. Why would anyone not bet on a relative sure thing over something, or someone, less proven? Easy, it's for the greater pay off when you ultimately win. In Clark's case, for me, the question isn't whether is Clark more or less likely to beat Bush. I think the public at large has a much easier time respecting and accepting Clark than do core Democratic voters being asked to chose between a number of attractive choices. Many of Clark's perceived weaknesses in the Primaries turn to advantages in the General Election. One quick example; men embrace Clark more quickly than most women, maybe it's that military thing. Running against Bush rather than another Democrat, Clark will do fine with women, a traditional Democratic area of strength, AND Clark will deeply encroach on Bush's hold over most white males. The arguments have all been frequently made, so I will simply state here that I believe Clark is the man best able to defeat Bush in the Fall.

For me Clark's huge upside is AFTER he gets in office. I think he will make a truly great President. I think Clark possesses greater personal skills than any President since FDR. Equally impressive, Clark is a great communicater. He knows how to speak to Democrats, that's obvious from his campaign, but he resonates with almost all Americans. Here is a man with George McGovern and Michael Moore endorsements who most Americans don't view as "one of those liberals". Clark is a Trojan Horse alright, our Trojan Horse. He can carry our message past the media and propagandist walls designed and built to keep Progressive speech out. Clark steals Republican Thunder to deliver Democratic Lightning. He will transform the political landscape in a way none of our other candidates could. He will restore the Democratic Party to majority status. And what is the downside to this gamble? We may end up with another Clinton. That is a risk I am prepared to take."

[Clarkie1]

130. Thanks Tom for that excellent post and metaphor

"Steals Republican thunder to deliver Democratic lighting"

Bookmarked.

[Clark2008]

68. Good Lord

I think someone here needs an education on who, exactly, Clark is:

"I told you so is not a policy."

"It's hard to change people's minds after you've killed their relatives."

"You will determine whether rage or reason guides the United States in the years to come. You will choose whether we are known for revenge or compassion. You will choose whether we, too, will kill in the name of God, or whether in His Name, we can find a higher civilization and a better means of settling our differences."

"Nothing is more American; nothing is more patriotic; than speaking out, questioning authority and holding your leaders accountable."

"I believe in an America that leads by caring and listening -- in the America of the New Frontier, the New Deal, the Marshall Plan, and the moon shot. The kind of America that inspires all of us to embrace the future, to feel excited at the dawn of a new day, and to view the past as prologue, not a prison. In short, I believe in an America that is determined to do good and dares to be great. One that pushes the frontiers of human potential in the sciences and education ... in health and the arts."

"The next President will have to chart the course toward a better America. And we can't navigate without a compass, whether it's war and peace or the economy. That's what I want to do as president: to point this country back in the right direction.
But the real work, as always, will be done by the people of this country. By people like you. That's what the New American Patriotism is about. That's the spirit I will summon in this campaign-and in the White House, if I'm privileged enough to earn your vote.
The New American Patriotism is not just about matters of war and peace; it's about jobs and growth and hope right here at home. It's about taking responsibility for our shared future. It's about reclaiming what's been lost, but also about building a better future for all our children."

"Today, in the year 2004, we stand at a threshold of a new era. Will we continue down the path of fear and isolation, pursuing America's interests at the expense of others? Or will we reach out to find common ground on which to build a safer world? Will we see an America increasingly divided by a chasm between wealth and opportunity that threatens the very foundations of justice? Or will we dedicate ourselves to helping all Americans reach their full potential? Will we see a democracy that increasingly delegates its responsibilities to a secretive, self-selected elite? Or will we revitalize the spirit of participation on which our nation was founded?
In the America I believe in, the answers to these questions are clear."

"This is a President who is all bully and no pulpit when it comes to our nation's security ... all mouth and no money when it comes to supporting our children ... and all photo and no opportunity, when it comes to fixing the mess here at home."


I see nothing wrong with someone who honestly believed, before Sept. 11, 2001, that Bush might actually BE a compassionate conservative. Most of the media weren't reporting on anything other than that about the Shrub (excepting Molly Ivins, who was called a "nut" for doing so.) I think Clark has learned that Bush is NOT a compassionate conservative and reflects that every time he goes on television now and pops him, which is quite often.

[Tom Rinaldo]

74. Great quotes

I keep logging on to take peaks, lol but don't have time to really "play". I don't think Clark "believed" Bush was a compassionate Conservative. I think "being open to the possibility" is more like it. Clark actually voted for Gore. Clark had just retired from a long non partisan career which at it's heart revolved around offering sage advice to whatever civilian leaders were in power at the time, in terms that sounded supportive enough to them that they would actually listen.

That's is one small piece of the missing "context" to that event Clark spoke at, there is so much more, not to mention some of the editing of what was posted here, what was left out. I've cheated enough on time, back to my supposed "real life"...

[Totally Committed]

76. Does This Sound Like any Republican YOU Know?...

It's one thing to say, "__________ is my candidate, and this is why." It's another thing, entirely to go afte another candidate and repeat a meme that has been disproven in MANY words and deeds by now. YOu all saw how hard he campaigned for Kerry, but for those of you who are STILL so biased against him, that you refused to listen, here are some words:

"Nothing is more American; nothing is more patriotic; than speaking out, questioning authority and holding your leaders accountable." ~Wes Clark


"I believe in an America that leads by caring and listening -- in the America of the New Frontier, the New Deal, the Marshall Plan, and the moon shot. The kind of America that inspires all of us to embrace the future, to feel excited at the dawn of a new day, and to view the past as prologue, not a prison. In short, I believe in an America that is determined to do good and dares to be great. One that pushes the frontiers of human potential in the sciences and education ... in health and the arts." -- Wesley Clark, January 10, 2004


"But where is the balance here? How much must we give up to be safe? And how much will such sacrifices compromise the very freedoms we seek to protect, or the prosperity we have come to enjoy? These are the issues with which you must grapple...they cannot be decided by "experts" and "authorities." Coming up with the balance will be your responsibility - it cannot be delegated to so-called experts - or given over in trust to elected leaders. Rather, yours is the daily responsibility of citizenship, carried on through open debate and exercised at the ballot box on a hundred different issues and candidacies. And this will require dissent, dissent that cannot be silenced through charges of comforting the enemy without surrendering the very freedoms we say we are fighting for." --Wesley Clark, Seton Hall Address, 2002


"This is a President who is all bully and no pulpit when it comes to our nation's security ... all mouth and no money when it comes to supporting our children ... and all photo and no opportunity, when it comes to fixing the mess here at home." --Wesley Clark.


"A lot of people have said, what are you interested in? Why would you even consider running? Isn't it just about Iraq? It really isn't. Iraq is part of it, I think our foreign policy has serious problems, but I think the economy and the way the administration has dealt with the economy has serious problems. But more fundamental than that, it's about what kind of country we want to live in. I think this nation wants an open, transparent government. I think it likes the two-party system. I think it likes to hear reasoned dialogue, not labeling, name-calling, hateful politics. I think 2004 is the election the voters have to put that back in." - Wes Clark


"And now I dream of an even greater America than my grandparents viewed from the ship's railing, an America where we live in peace and harmony; not just amongst ourselves, but with our neighbors around the world. I can see such a place. To me, it's just over the next hill. And I guess when you get right down to it, I'm an old soldier. And I always believe in taking the next hill. I believe that we can get there, that together we can create a world in which all our children are able to fulfill the promise of their own destiny. We can do this; we must do this, for it's our duty, our honor, and our country." - Gen. Wesley K. Clark (Ret.)


From his speech at the Democratic National Convention:

War. I've been there. Heard the thump of enemy mortars. Seen the tracers fly. Bled on the battlefield. Recovered in hospitals. Received and obeyed orders. Sent men and women into battle. Awarded medals, comforted families, attended funerals. And this soldier has news for you: Anyone who tells you that one political party has a monopoly on the best defense of our nation is committing a fraud on the American people. Franklin Roosevelt said it best: "Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth."



"As you know, I have never run for office. I'm just a guy from the heartland, who never had much. I got into this race because I had devoted my life to protecting America's security and preserving our reputation around the world. And this campaign was a way of continuing that service.

In the end, I'm still a soldier, not a politician. But I have loved every minute of this experience. And I leave it wiser, stronger, and even more optimistic about the strength and vibrancy of our democracy -- and even more proud to call myself an American.

For me, this race has been one of the most liberating experiences of my life. I've been able to talk about what I believe in and fight for it. And you've given me the greatest gift a person can receive: the support to make that fight real.

Finally, let me say this:

I'm going to fight on, and I hope you will join me, until we win the campaign to create a new vision for America in the twenty-first century. Because I believe America's best days lie ahead. Today, I end my campaign for the presidency - but our party's campaign to change America is just beginning. And folks, this old soldier will not fade away. I'll be in the field and out in front, working the issues, supporting our candidates, and doing all I can to contribute to building a new and better America.

Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America" -- Wesley Clark



"Patriotism doesn't consist of following orders--not when you're not in the chain of command. For the American people, for citizens in a democracy, patriotism's highest calling isn't simply following what the administration says. It's not blind obedience. It's not unquestioned adherence. The highest form of patriotism is asking questions. Because democracies run on dialogue. Democracies run on discussion. No administration has the right to tell Americans that to dissent is disloyal, and to disagree is unpatriotic . . . . We need a new spirit, a new kind of, a new American patriotism in this country . . . . this new spirit of patriotism should be dedicated to the protection of our rights and liberties . . . . In times of war or peace, democracy requires dialogue, disagreement, and the courage to speak out. And those who do it should not be condemned but be praised." ~ General Wesley K. Clark (Ret.-Army), September 22, 2003 at The Citadel


"This was not a failure of leadership by a Staff Sergeant; this was not a failure of leadership by a Major; this was not a failure of leadership by a Lieutenant General. No, this was a PRESIDENTIAL FAILURE OF LEADERSHIP!" --Wes Clark


When I was in the military, I took an oath to support and uphold the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution is a constitution about freedom and liberty. It doesn't say that it's okay to mislead people, it doesn't say the end justified the means. - Wes Clark


"There's nothing but mixed signals in Bush's policy. It's publicity first and policy last." -- Wes Clark


Republicans...like weapon systems and Democrats like people. - Wes Clark, Phoenix debate 10.10.03


"If soldiers' lives are at stake, the time to criticize the policy is now, not when it's over." - Wes Clark


"Harry Truman used to say the buck stops here. This White House doesn't even know where the buck is!!" - Wes Clark


"Because leadership is about working for others, it's about setting aside the self and giving to others." -Wes Clark


His policy papers and speeches are still all up at www.forclark.com. Please go and read them. This is no Republican, and I am offended each time I read a post that says he is.

Isn't it time to stop doing the Regressive Republicans' job for them, and stop eating our own? If you don't like Clark, or agree with his policies, don't support him. But, stop doing Rove's job for him by continuing this HE'S A CLOSET REPUBLICAN VENDETTA. It's not true.

TC

[Hippo_Tron]

79. So explain to me why Wes Clark didn't join the Republican party?

If Wesley Clark was only interested in power and politics, he would've kissed the Bush administration's ass like none other, spoke for him at the '04 convention, and ran for the GOP nomination in 2008 hoping to get Bush's backing, something he would've been much more politically expedient than throwing his hat into the Democratic Primary in '04. Lots of people trusted the administration after 9/11. Lots of people changed their minds about that trust when they started talking about invading Iraq.

[Tom Rinaldo]

83. Yep. THAT was Zell Miller's brown nosed traitor choice

So much for Miller's life long Democratic credentials. Clark brought down the house when he passionately spoke for Kerry at the Democratic National Convention. Miller's hate laced tirade made even some Republicans nervous when he spoke for Bush at the Republican National Convention. Day and Night.

[Hippo_Tron]

84. I don't think that challenging Chris Mathews to a duel helped either

But hey, it made GREAT television.

[alexm]

109. So moderates & swing voters would vote for him? AKA - WINNING AN ELECTION

Great move pointing out that he was doing the same thing that every single Democrat in America was doing at this time since we had just been attacked (Including me.) -- supporting our President after the most devastating attack on America in it's history.

Better add Al Franken to this list since he said the same kind of things. This includes Kerry, Edwards, both Clintons and even Gore.

It's kinda hard to understand your point with all that bitter in your mouth.

[alexm]

114. Clark / Warner (Both southerners)

That would be an awesome ticket but I think we've got to make a dent in the southwest so I'd like either that ticket or Clark-Richardson.

Three major points --

1. NO SENATORS OR CONGRESSMAN : We cannot defend voting records when we shoudl be talking about issues.

2. WE LOST THIS ELECTION ON NATIONAL SECURITY, PERIOD : Look at all six major exit polls and that is the only reason we lost. If you have faith in Bush's ability to make things better in Iraq and succeed in the war on terror then choose someone other than Clark. If you use reality in your decision makign and realize that things are only going to get much, much worse then Clark is the only candidate in the filed that's electable. Too bad we didn't realize it this time around.

3. WE MUST MAKE THEM CONTEST SOUTHERN STATES : The only way we can do this is by putting a southerner atop the ticket. Edwards proved that no matter how pretty you are or how great a speech you give, VP's do not bring regional states that aren't swing to begin with.

[FrenchieCat]

125. Link Please.....

to this speech. Thank you.

PS--I have a transcript to the speech, and most of what you have quoted above is not in it.

[Sparkly]

127. Zogby Poll -- What does this tell you?

I want my elected officials to work toward the good of the nation, rather than the good of their party. -- 98 percent

A member of the political party to which you do not belong can be a patriot. -- 91 percent

It is in the best interests of the country for our leaders to set a less partisan tone so we can move forward. -- 89 percent

I would like to see my elected officials working more closely with the leaders from the opposing party. -- 89 percent

http://www.zogby.com/soundbites/ReadClips.dbm?ID=10646

[Clarkie1]

135. Thanks, bookmarked n/t

[HollyC]

129. Feel free to move to Republicanunderground.com

That's a cute trick, taking a remark out of context & spinning it to support an impression that Clark is somehow a rabid Republican. Did you learn it from the Swiftvets, or from Scott McLellen? Did you happen to catch Clark's amazing speech at the Convention?
Wes Clark, more Democratic than Democrats.

Saved an entire people from genocide without a single American causualty lately, by any chance? Congressional Medal of Freedom?



FIFTY-FIVE U.S. AMBASSADORS AND DIPLOMATS ENDORSE CLARK


Little Rock – Fifty-five former U.S. ambassadors and diplomats, women and men who have served in some 36 countries during the last four administrations, believe that Wesley K. Clark is the right choice to lead America at this critical time in the world.

“Serving as representatives of the United States has allowed each of us to meet with world leaders and see what terrific leadership looks like,” said Cynthia Schneider, Ambassador to the Netherlands and co-chair of Ambassadors for Clark. “We know that the world is more interconnected than ever before, and so the impact of good and bad leadership impacts America and the world more than ever before. Wes Clark appreciates that and ambassadors understand the interconnectedness of the world and the critical need for a new leader to repair and strengthen our global ties.”

"I am thrilled by the endorsement of those that have the respect of world leaders on every continent,” Wesley Clark said. “They understand the importance of rebuilding America’s alliances and restoring our country to a position of leadership based on cooperation and respect.”

Ambassadors and Diplomats for Clark grew out of the unique phenomena of the Draft Wesley Clark movement. Not only did Wes Clark receive encouragement to run from thousands of individuals from across the U.S., the letters of support came from people, both U.S. citizens and citizens of many other nations, who understand that Wes Clark is the person we need to lead America at this crucial moment in history. The full list of ambassadors and diplomats is below.



Morton Abramowitz, Ambassador to Turkey and Thailand, Assistant Secretary of State
Brady Anderson, Ambassador to Tanzania.
Christopher Ashby, Ambassador to Uruguay.
Jeff Bader, Ambassador to Namibia, Senior Director National Security Agency
Robert Barry, Administrator, Agency for International Development; Head, OSCE
J.D. Bindenagel, Special Envoy for Holocaust Issues.
Donald Blinken, Ambassador to Hungary
Amy Bondurant, Ambassador to OECD
Avis Bohlen, Ambassador to Bulgaria, Assistant Secretary of State
George Bruno, Ambassador to Belize
Paul Cejas, Ambassador to Belgium
Tim Chorba, Ambassador to Singapore
Bonnie Cohen, Under Secretary of State
Nancy Ely-Raphel, Ambassador to Slovenia
Ralph Earle, Deputy Director of State, Chief U.S. Negotiator, SALT II Treaty
Thomas H. Fox, Assistant Administrator, U.S. Agency for International Development
Mary Mel French, Chief of Protocol
Edward Gabriel, Ambassador to Morocco
Richard Gardner, Ambassador to Italy & Spain
Robert Gelbard, Ambassador to Indonesia & Bolivia, Assistant Secretary of State
Gordon Giffin, Ambassador to Canada
Lincoln Gordon, Ambassador to Brazil, Assistant Secretary of State
Anthony Harrington, Ambassador to Brazil
John Holum, Under Secretary of State
William J. Hughes, Ambassador to Panama
Swanee Hunt, Ambassador to Austria
James Joseph, Ambassador to South Africa
Rodney Minott, Ambassador to Sweden
John McDonald, Ambassador to the United Nations
Stan McLelland, Ambassador to Jamaica
Gerald McGowan, Ambassador to Portugal
Arthur Mudge, Mission Director for Agency for International Development
Lyndon Olson, Ambassador to Sweden
Donald Petterson, Ambassador to the Sudan, Tanzania & Somalia
Kathryn Proffitt, Ambassador to Malta
Edward Romero, Ambassador to Spain & Andorra
James Rosapepe, Ambassador to Romania
Nancy Rubin, United Nations Commission on Human Rights
James Rubin, Assistant Secretary of State
David Sandalow, Assistant Secretary of State
Howard Schaffer, Ambassador to Bangladesh, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State
Teresita Schaffer, Ambassador to Sri Lanka & Maldives
David Scheffer, Ambassador at Large for War Crimes
Cynthia Schneider, Ambassador to the Netherlands.
Derek Shearer, Ambassador to Finland
Richard Schifter, Assistant Secretary of State
Thomas Siebert, Ambassador to Sweden
Richard Sklar, Ambassador to the United Nations
Peter Tarnoff, Under Secretary of State
Peter Tufo, Ambassador to Hungary
Arturo Valenzuela, Senior Director, National Security Council
William Walker, Ambassador to El Salvador & Argentina, Head, Kosovo Verification Mission
Vernon Weaver, Ambassador to the European Union
Phoebe L. Yang, Special Coordinator for China Rule of Law, State Department
Andrew Young, Ambassador to the United Nations

[radio4progressives]

134. Please show me where the evidence that Kerry has every intention of ...

running again? I'm not necessarily discounting the validity of this comment, but i've been seeing a lot posted in various places on the internet, but why? what is kerry publically saying or doing that i have missed, giving vidence to what seems like mere speculation?

has he been invited to appear in mainstream media? is there an actual current published interview (please don't send me that ancient post election newsweek article)

it just seems wierd that people seem to be assuming Kerry is interested in running again. I for one certainly hope not.

[sportndandy]

15. Obama

Before his senate voting record gets too long to make it possible.

[Hippo_Tron]

55. He will have been in the senate for 2 years when it comes time to run

Things like this could've happened in the 19th century, but not now. Leaders have to have some sort of experience before they are serious contenders for the presidency.

[bemildred]

16. Dean. Dean Dean Dean Dean! And Boxer. Geez. nt

[catbert836]

17. Russ Feingold

Being from the Midwest, even though he's a well-known liberal, he keeps getting elected... Pair him with a moderate Southerner and he has a good chance. They can't call him a "East Coast liberal" or "West Coast liberal" because he's not from those places.

[Califooyah Operative]

18. Dean has my power vote. nt

I'll be happy with clark or kerry in the end, but i wanna see him influence it again.

[leftofthedial]

20. Dennis Kucinich

or someone not associated with the current crop of professional election losers

[Gyre]

21. Watch the DLC hijack the nomination

So they can put Hillary in front. They'll undermine every dem running with the help of mainstream media (who seem to thrive on the blood of real progressives) until only little ole H is left standing. I'm THROUGH with the dem party until they begin to think outside the box AND grow some balls. Not one red cent to those losers, except for Barbara Boxer.

Gyre

[BlueInRed]

49. too true

:(

[Hippo_Tron]

81. The only positive thing about Hillary, James Carville...

will almost certainly run her campaign. But other than that, I don't see any redeeming qualities about her.

[manhattanite]

22. John Kerry nt

[Nitrogenica]

23. Dennis Kucinich = Far Reaching Vision

[Dems4HowardDean]

140. Obama/Boxer 2008

[LWolf]

24. Dennis Kucinich

No one else comes close.

[tx_dem41]

26. Warner n/t

[hansolsen]

27. Howard Dean. N/T

[ruggerson]

28. This poll is ridiculous

You don't even mention the next President of the US.

Mark Warner.

[saltpoint]

29. Voted 'Other'

'Would like to see Bill Moyers at the top of our ticket and Julian Bond as VP nominee.

'Could go with just about anyone we send up against Frist, Jeb, McCain, and any other GOP candidate.

[AntiCoup2K4]

30. Howard Dean!

How about a President who's capable of leading?

[Clark2008]

69. That's why I voted for Clark

;)

[CTLawGuy]

32. Howard Dean

or whomever he endorses will be strongly considered.

[lojasmo]

35. Kick and a write in for Howard Dean!

[trillian]

37. Wes Clark, no question! n/t

[Lorien]

38. Dean

[fujiyama]

39. I think Kerry might try for it again

It's more likely he might run than Gore...

That said, I'd be more supportive of Clark or Feingold. I don't know much about Warner, Easely, or any of the other southern governors, but I'm worried that they would be more of the same old...

I want someone that will present a clear, principled, and consistant message. The closest that comes to that IMO is Feingold.

[BlueInRed]

40. I always thought Clark/Dean or Dean/Clark would have been a killer ticket

and I'd be happy with either at the top. They are both strong guys, with strong ideas, and complimentary strengths and weaknesses. It's too bad they didn't seem to mesh this year. Maybe next time.

[Cookie wookie]

41. Clark/Boxer or Dean/Boxer n/t

[XemaSab]

43. Boxer/Clark or Boxer/Dean

n/t

[BlackVelvet04]

42. Howard Dean n/t

[madfloridian]

45. Dean.

.

[HootieMcBoob]

46. Pragmatically we have to think about who has the right package

OK now we can make all kinds of funny package jokes :)

But seriously - this has got to be at the top of the list. The Republicans understand this completely. That's why they would run Ahnold in an instant - that's why Reagan was so loved by many Americans even though he was screwing them the whole time.

Dean is not the right Presidential candidate however he is the perfect person to run the Democratic Party. We need him in that position desperately.

Wesley Clark would win in a landslide. He would be such a strong candidate that he's the only person possible to even consider running with a female VP - perhaps Boxer! Then we brake that glass ceiling right there. Two birds with one stone so to speak, completely ending forever the idea that Democrats are weak in general and on defense in particular and we get a woman in the White House as Vice President.

He's also the best candidate if you want to follow Dean's strategy of a 50 state campaign. Clark would be very strong in the south - remember he's from Arkansas and was a four star general, which would appeal instantly to those who have the "strict father" frame. He has the advantage of being perceived as more conservative when in fact he may be one of the most progressive candidates we've ever had.

If we want to win and change the party the ultimate outcome of the DNC chairmanship would go to Dean and our next Presidential candidate will be Wesley Clark and if we're smart we'll rally around him immediately. His campaign should have started on November 3rd.

[BlueInRed]

48. Like the last idea -- Dean DNC, Clark President

Absolutely killer idea. :headbang:

But I also think Dean could be elected. Lots of people in this very red southern state liked Dean who didn't care for Kerry. Surprising to some, but true. They liked his feisty, no-nonsense, straight-talking style and fiscally responsible message.

[IronLionZion]

51. I love that idea

and Clark will have enough political experience by then to run a better campaign.

I would support Boxer or any woman OTHER THAN HILLARY as VP

Dean is the best choice we have for DNC chair. And America needs Eliot Spitzer as AG but first he will be governor of NY.

[leyton]

52. Easley probably won't run.

He stated in an interview in this morning's paper that he wanted to achieve A, B, and C for the state of North Carolina and then be forgotten. He barely campaigns or makes public appearances. Though I do think he might be really successful if he did run since he just looks like a trustworthy guy, has a moderate stance and has been a successful governor.

I currently like:

Feingold - a true common-man progressive who wins handily in swing states
Gore - the guy who won the popular vote and has already run 1 more Presidential campaign than everybody else
Warner - popular Southern governor, won't be hurt by the gun issue.

Maybe Clark, but I don't know much about him.

[Renew Deal]

53. Warner, Dean, Clark

Not in any order.

[DaveinMD]

56. Mark Warner

I'm firmly in his corner.

[LetsGoMurphys]

70. I

Second that.

[iwantmycountryback]

57. Russ Feingold

He's from a midwestern state but is also liberal, voted against the Patriot Act, the IWR, and NAFTA. A Feingold-Warner ticket would be excellent. Feingold would obviously make Wisconsin safe and would also make Iowa and Minnesota safer. I think he would give us a better chance in Ohio. Warner would definitely help in Virginia and North Carolina, and maybe Colorado.

[moggie12]

59. Warner , thank you very much for asking

Pragmatic, gets things done. I don't want the 2008 election to be a referendum on ideology. Get a Dem in the White House, show Americans what Democrats can do, and we will win every Presidential election after that (our policies, after all, benefit the "average" American much more so than do those of the Republicans, especially those of the Republican currently in the White House).

Am I a "sell-out" for not wanting a more left-leaning Democrat who will espouse social progressivism? I really don't care at this point. I don't think a candidate can get elected at this moment in history if he or she does. I am not willing to wait until a near-Armageddon like meltdown occurs as a result of the current disastrous Republican policies -- especially since I'm not convinced Americans would flock to a "progressive" Democratic candidate anyway. I want a Democratic President ASAP -- in 2008! My kids are 12 and 14 and I don't have the luxury of waiting. I fear the America they will be young adults in.


Edited to add:

And maybe Bayh for VP since he was also an extremely popular Red-State governor. With Bayh on the ticket, maybe we could win Indiana, Kentucky, a few midwest states (maybe even West Virgina with this ticket??) Yes, see how pragmatic I am??? PRGAMATISM IS GOOD -- I WANT TO WIN.

[Hippo_Tron]

61. Warner is probably my second choice and I'm very much a leftist

I fully intend to do whatever I can to get him elected if he became the nominee. As you point out, Warner is pragmatic and gets things done. Yes he is a moderate and although I disagree with him on some issues, I think that the most important thing is the fact that he's not a lightweight. The guy was elected in the red state of Virginia, got a tax increase through VERY Republican state legislature, has a good stance on a woman's right to choose, and has an approval rating of 60%. If he could run for re-election he would be very tough to take down. His home state would be very much in play as would several southern states including Louisiana, Arkansas, West Virginia, Kentucky, Missouri, Florida (obviously), Tennesee (if Frist is not the nominee), and MAYBE Georgia and North Carolina. One of the reasons that we lost the last election is that we didn't force Bush to seriously defend anything that he won in 2000 except Ohio and Florida. Kerry had to seriously defend Missouri, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Iowa, and New Mexico. Warner would probably carry at least a few of those southern states and force the Republican nominee to defend almost every single one of them, making it much easier to snatch Ohio.

Russ Feingold is my #1 choice, see post #60 about why, but Warner is definately somebody that I could get behind.

[moggie12]

96. That sounds promising

You, a self-described leftist, could go for Warner, but I (a self-described moderate/centrist), could go for Feingold (your piece on him was persuasive, especially because it was honest and practical-minded). Hmmmm, maybe split between left and center of Party isn't as bad as it looks.

[Hippo_Tron]

126. Since you added Bayh, I'm going to have to disagree there

I don't like Bayh for one reason, he's a lightweight. He does win in the Dark red state of Indiana but it's because of name recognition and money. His father was governor (and I think senator) and he has a huge personal fortune. People will cite the fact that he was just re-elected to the senate and recieved more votes than Bush in Indiana. Take a look at his opponent. His opponent was a college professor with no political experience, no name recognition, no money, and no help from the NRSC. Oh yea and one more thing, his opponent was black. Every bigot in Indaina voted for Bush and for Bayh.

Bayh hasn't won over the hearts and minds of the people and Indiana by any means. They vote for him because he either outspends his opponents or he's better than the other guy, or they liked his dad. I think that putting him on the ticket is just a disaster waiting to happen.

[Hippo_Tron]

60. Russ Feingold, here's why

Russ has about the cleanest image, with good reason, of any senator. People who disagree with his positions still love him for his honesty. He co-authored a major campaign finance reform bill, which was signed by Bush, and is a champion of further finance reform. Feingold also consistantly voted against free trade agreements and thus when he says he's for fair trade, he has a record to back it up. Fair trade is a populist stance that plays very well, especially in the south.

As far as the Patriot Act goes, it's all about how we shape the issue. If he lets his opponent portray him as weak on defense and lets him use the Patriot Act as an example, then it will be a problem. On the other hand, if we explain to people how horrible similar constitutional violations in history have been ex) the Palmer Raids, McCarthyism and the red scare, Japaneese internment camps, etc. then I think that we could use this to our advantage.

Also, unless the GOP does some VERY SERIOUS spinning, Russ wins the "common man" game. Most likely the nominee will be First and by some slight chance it will be Santorum. Both of these men come from serious money, both have serious ethical problems. Russ is the "poorest" US Senator and has consistantly voted against congressional pay raises AND returned any money he has recieved in pay raises to the US Treasurey. Long story short, Frist will have some 'splainin to do when he tries to portray himself as in touch with the "common man" when he has simultaneously voted to cut social programs yet has millions of dollars AND voted for congressional pay raises.

One factor I'm not considering is the possibility that the nominee would be McCain. If that were to happen and it were McCain vs Feingold then this would basically change everything. Russ wouldn't be able to use a lot of the things that he could use against Frist or Santorum. On the other hand, it would be a great tradeoff because it would arguably be the greatest and most honest presidential election that this country has ever had.

[stpalm]

72. I voted Feingold too

As far as the Patriot Act goes, it's all about how we shape the issue. If he lets his opponent portray him as weak on defense and lets him use the Patriot Act as an example, then it will be a problem.

Michels tried that during the campaign and it didn't work. I think his vote will go down in history as a really heroic action and it will help him if he ever runs for president (we can only hope!)


I liked this, too: (from wikipedia.com)
Americans For Democratic Action, a liberal advocacy group which rates members of Congress on a scale of 0 to 100, with zero being totally conservative and 100 being completely progressive, gave Senator Feingold a lifetime average rating of 96. With the death of Minnesota's Senator Paul Wellstone in 2002, this makes Feingold the most progressive man in the Senate. His rating ties him with California's Senator Barbara Boxer for the title of the most progressive person in the Senate. At the same time, the Concord Coalition (http://www.concordcoalition.org/), a nonpartisan advocacy group that pushes for fiscal responsibility, has placed him on its "Senate Honor Role" every year since 1997, usually in the highest or second-highest ranking, indicating that Senator Feingold is also one of the top budget hawks in Congress.

I like the idea of Clark/Feingold

[Hippo_Tron]

77. Well I want Feingold on the top of the ticket

Because I believe that out of all of these people, he's the man with the most ideas and the most accomplishments. I wouldn't mind him being VP but I'd prefer that he be president.

Clark's a great guy and also a guy who has a lot of integrity AND has very good stances on the issues, but he doesn't have the legacy of championing progressive ideals like Feingold does. As you mentioned above, Russ is the closest that we have to Wellstone, and although I love Wellstone, I think that Russ is much more electable than he would've been.

[stpalm]

89. wellstone was a great guy

but too much of a maverik to ever be electable, I agree. I think you are right- Feingold/Clark is better.


EDIT: and I met Feingold at a Pierce County, WI fundraiser- very nice guy, he could connect with Americans very well, I think.

[Hippo_Tron]

92. I think Wellstone might've made a good running mate for Gore

Like Lieberman he would've been able to attract Jewish votes in southern Florida. But the big thing that he would've done is significantly weaken Nader's support base. Almost no progressives would've supported Nader with Wellstone on the democratic ticket.

[zulchzulu]

111. I don't think Russ is going to run

I'd work my ass for him if he did, but I really don't think he's even going to run.

[goddess40]

62. Howard Dean

[Freebird12004]

63. in high-heels & back-wards

It's about time to let a woman do the job right the first time {as usual}

[ruggerson]

64. Would someone please start a poll

which includes Mark Warner.

There seems to be a bit of a conspiracy against him here.

[IStriker]

66. Someone who can win. I like Dean...

but I don't know if he will run since he said if he got the DNC chairmanship, he would not.

[Geek_Girl]

67. I'm Undecided

But I like

Clark
Gore
Dean
Feingold

Not necessarily in that order.

[PassingFair]

71. Dean

or whomever is Dean's first pick, should he choose not to run.

[mvd]

75. I'm on the Barbara Boxer bandwagon

Just like I was on the Kucinich bandwagon in '04. If Kucinich runs again, I'm not sure who I'll vote for in the primaries.

I know that in all liklihood Boxer won't get the nomination, so my second choice is Warner/Clark at this point.

[Hippo_Tron]

78. I think Boxer has a better chance than Kucinich, especially in the primary

Boxer is a senator from the biggest state in the country. Yes it's a liberal state but nonetheless it's a big state and it gives you a broad support base. Can you imagine the advantage she'd have if she's still in it and it's a close race come Super Tuesday?

[mvd]

82. Always possible that we'll be closer to our roots

But looking at it now, unfortunately, I think the party would play up different candidates.

[Pushed To The Left]

103. Boxer got the third largest number

of votes in the country behind Kerry and Bush.

[happyjack27]

106. Barbara Boxer

Ironically, the only Senator with balls.

[moggie12]

119. LOL -- that would make one heck of a campiagn slogan n/t

[SeanQuinn]

86. Dean or in the fortunate event he becomes DNC Chair,

how about Tom Vilsack or Bill Richardson?

They seem like good GUBERNATORIAL candidates.

[Hippo_Tron]

94. Vilsack has no charisma, Richardson will probably run for re-election

If Richardson were to run in '08, however, he would have a distinct advantage in that he would probably walk into election day with a 2-3 point edge in Florida because of hispanic voters.

[zmdem]

87. Al Gore

He won the popular vote in 2000 and only narrowly lost the electoral college vote. Granted he is a bit stiff as a candidate, but I think he could be a good president.

[Hippo_Tron]

95. Gore's loss of the electoral college in 2000 is his own damn fault

As much as I have grown to like the guy over the past four years, he mismanaged his campaign so poorly that I can't support him for national office. While I do believe that Florida was stolen, it shouldn't have been close enough to steel. He shouldn't have lost his home state of Tennesee and overall he should have wiped the floor with a candidate as dumb as shrub.

[moggie12]

102. Nader voters handed Bush the election

Yes, Gore couldn've done a much better job. He blew the debates big-time by acting so strangely (walking up to Bush, etc.) I also wish he'd stuck with the populist message he tried out for a week or two.

Still, even with all that, he would've won if a few million people hadn't decided to vote for Nader because Al wasn't liberal enough for them. Nader voters gave us Bush, in my opinion.

[Hippo_Tron]

123. That may be true, but Nader shouldn't have been enough of a factor either

I was against Nader running in 2004 because in 2004 it was expected to be a close enough election that it would matter. In 2000 it shouldn't have mattered, it should've been Gore in a comfortable margin if not a landslide.

[Clarkie1]

91. I voted for Clark, but as noted by others many names are missing here:

Dean, Biden, Warner, etc. I don't want Boxer to give up her senate seat, and America isn't quite ready for a Boxer candidacy yet...

Clark 08!

[Pastiche423]

93. Dean

[mandyky]

100. Howard Dean

Unless he gets DNC Chair

[_NorCal_D_]

101. It's obviously too early

to make a definite decision, but I chose Clark for old time's sake. :7

[Pushed To The Left]

105. Too many good ones

to choose from! I like (in no particular order) Clark, Kerry, Boxer, Kucinich, Obama, Feingold, Edwards, and probably many others. I would gladly support any of the people on the list in a general election!

[GreenPartyVoter]

107. Dennis or Howard

[orpupilofnature57]

108. Don't know yet, I'm not too worried , Didn't know who Bill Clinton was..

In 1990.

[zulchzulu]

110. It's way too far away...but I'd see if Kerry was available

Dean or Hillary...no. Kucinich...are you kidding? Clark...um...he's not even going to run.

It's too far away for 2008. We may not even have an official democracy by then.

[two gun sid]

112. Howard Dean n/t

[formernaderite]

113. Seems like you weighted this list PRO clark...

...at least do alpha order.

[imenja]

115. Wow! Why the Clark Revolution?

What is it that you all like so much about him? I don't have strong feelings about the candidates. My view is that they ought to announce they are at least thinking of running before I decide to support any of them.

[Tom Rinaldo]

117. Drop by the DU Clark Supporters Group Sometime

Read up on him, read what he has said about issues, what others have said about Clark. Sincere guests are always welcome, but debates about Clark are steered back to the DU General Forums.

[imenja]

118. I watched all the Democratic debates

and thought he was okay though didn't know enough on domestic policy. I imagine he's had time to learn. If I have time to read that group, I will. If he announces he is thinking of running, then I definitely will.

[Tom Rinaldo]

121. Clark faced a triple whammy in those early debates

True, he has had more time to learn, and your attitude about checking back if he announces is a solid one. For the record though here are some factors that effected Clark getting his positions heard in the early debates:

First, his campaign had barely gotten off the ground before the debates began (actually they began before he entered). That meant he had not yet worked out the bugs in his presentation the way candidates always do over many months. Most others had been running for a year or more longer than Clark.

Second, those early debates were very crowded affairs. While Clark was in there were 8 or more candidates on stage. That meant everything was cut short, 30 seconds, 60 seconds, maybe 90 seconds a clip. Clark was accustomed to giving briefings where he actually gave full detailed answers to questions. He hadn't mastered the arts of witty sound bites and talking right past an actual question to say whatever you want regardless of what was asked. Actually he got much better with that toward the end and he was an excellent media surrogate for Kerry by the time the General Election rolled by.

Third, because Clark was not previously a politician, he didn't have a flock of full time political aids associated with him through his career who tend to churn out drafts of position papers for their office holders to work from. The plan for progressive taxation that Clark ended up promoting though was the best I have heard of in years, something that made me proud to support him.

Maybe this is number four. Clark wasn't given as much time to expand on his domestic policies as most of the candidates were. He tended to be repeatedly asked about Iraq or whether or not he was really a Democrat. Though he usualy got maybe one domestic question, most of the other debaters were able to weave a domestic narrative through a string of questions, leaving a deeper impression of where they stood on domestic matters.

Here are Clark's issues pages from his web site for his campaign. Something else to check out if you find the time, lol. You will note that by the end his positions were as, if not more, detailed as anyones: http://www.clark04.com/issues/

[Clarkie1]

124. Clark is "ruling nothing out" regarding a run in 08' and in any case will

continue to support democratic candidates in 06' as he did during the the run up to the election last year through WesPac (his political action committe), which will soon be relaunched.

I believe whether or not Clark ultimately decides to run will be based on an analysis of in what role he can best serve the goals of a liberal democracy and stronger Democratic Party.

As he said, he's ruling nothing out.

[shiina]

116. Boxer

We need someone with guts. And it's just plain embarassing that we haven't had a female president yet. 　

[many a good man]

120. Huey P. Long

Oh wait. He's dead. Nevermind.

[moggie12]

122. Re-do poll to add/delete candidates?

Your poll got great comments. Any chance you can do a new one with Clark, Clinton, and Feingold still in (since they got some votes), and adding Boxer, Warner and maybe Dean??

[Deadbolt04]

131. what john kerry is doing is wrong

while we are talking about this.... kerry is doing something very wrong. $45 million went unspent from his campaign - and he wanted to keep it. after a lot of pressure to do the right thing and give it to the DNC, kerry is still keeping $15 million, presumably to prepare for a race in 08.

this is wrong. dead wrong. think about it:

people donated money for the purpose of BEATING BUSH. that money wasn't spent to beat bush. instead it will be spent to build a very expensive legacy.

these are people who have little to give but gave anyway so that bush could be beat. i have a feeling $45,000,000 might have made a difference in ohio. what kerry is doing is wrong.

i voted for the guy - but i don't think losing gives him a free ride to be the leader of the party. this is OUR party. not his. that money should be given to the DNC or returned to contributors.

[Sparkly]

133. LINK? n/t

[DFLforever]

132. Someone Else is spelled Howard Dean!

[Tacos al Carbon]

136. Harold Ford

He could actually win.

[Crunchy Frog]

138. Wes Clark of course.

With Feingold or Boxer as running mate. The only true progressive out there that would have widespread appeal in red states and accross the political spectrum.

[Stand and Fight]

139. Wesley Clark!

Clark has my vote. I was his Comanche County Coordinator here in Oklahoma, and during my canvasing period I even ran into a few Republicans who said they'd vote for him! I'd love to see a Clark ticket get started earlier, because I truly feel that he can win.

[FrenchieCat]

141. Clark.....

for the many of the reasons given above. His appeal crosses party lines...period.

[TSIAS]

142. Too early

There are a lot of attractive candidates out there. I'd give Dean consideration again, but I expect he'll get the DNC post and sit out 2008.

I think Feingold is an interesting candidate. I could see him being a John McCain type that appeals to a wide range of voters. However, I still worry about a Jew's chances of getting elected.

I don't know enough to make a decision about the likes of Easley, Bredesen, and Warner.

[Hatalles]

143. Dr. Dean is at the top of my list. n.t.