Of all the primary candidates, it was Wes Clark whom MM endorsed

[Scoopie]

And, depending on the success of the movie (which looks to be phenominal), do you think this may factor into Kerry's VP decision-making process.
I mean, Moore - the hero of the Democratic Party at this point - endorsed Clark. He lobbied in his book, "Dude, Where's my Country?" for Clark to run and it was Moore's comments about Bush's service record at a Clark rally that got the subject back into the news.

Thoughts?
Comments?

[Frances]

1. I want to see Clark in Kerry's cabinet

because I think Clark has a lot going for him

But I personally prefer Edwards for VP.

[Scoopie]

6. Where would Clark go in Kerry's cabinet, though?

It's pretty much common knowledge that Richard Holbrooke has the inside track for SoS.
NSA is a sub-cabinet position and wouldn't utilize Clark's talents; and, Clark can't be Def. Sec. because of the 10-year rule.
So - where do you put a man of Clark's talents?

BTW, I understand that a movie may not be the end-all, be-all, but I felt the electricity at the theater last night. I live in Conservative Central and the theater was PACKED. It did my heart good.
Perhaps it's coming to bear that Michael Moore's so-called "conspiracy theories" aren't paranoia, afterall, as the conservative media would have many believe.
Therefore, since Moore has become, or will become, the champion of free speech and liberty this summer, this may bode well for Clark. It's just a thought.

[Frances]

13. I'm not sure

I don't want to get too cocky but now that it seems that just maybe we will be rid of this nightmare administration it would be fun to speculate on who will fill which posts.

[angee_is_mad]

17. Secretary of State?

Now wouldn't that be something!

[JI7]

2. i think Kerry wants to pick Edwards

i'm not sure kerry will pick a vp based on a success of a movie. anyways, don't most democrats still want Edwards for vp ?

[Mecil]

4. Two Senators

I'd not count on a Kerry/Edwards ticket. A ticket with two senators runs the risk of being labeled as too "beltway" like.

If history is any judge (and it often is) then a two senator ticket will be heavily unfavored to win. Last time a ticket with two senators won was JFK/LBJ in 1960 - and before that we need to go back to 1852 (Franklin Pierce and William Rufus de Vane King).

[Scoopie]

9. See, I think that it's the opposite

I think he really DOESN'T want to pick Edwards and is bothered by all the media hoopla and the Congressional pushing.
In a break from how I normally feel about my former profession, I have to actually agree with the news media on the fact that I don't think Kerry feels too comfortable with Edwards. I won't say he doesn't LIKE Edwards, but I don't think he's all that fond of him.
Blast me if you like, but in the debate after Clark bowed out, Kerry acted as if the junior senator from North Carolina bothered him in much the same way as that little dog bothers the big dog in the Warner Bros. cartoons.

[JI7]

12. Kerry himself has asked Edwards to attend many of the events

Edwards has gone to. i know people criticize edwards for being too open about wanting to be vp. but the fact is that many of the events edwards attends are ones that kerry himself and the kerry campaign schedules for him.

[Scoopie]

15. Well, if we're judging by events attended,

then Clark would win.
Kerry has been scheduling Clark left and right for some time now. In fact, Clark has done more than twice the appearances than Edwards. I realize that Edwards didn't drop out until a month or so later, but he really hasn't made up for lost time.

I really fail to see how this amounts to anything.

[cosmokramer]

11. Uh, this democrat doesn't...

...and i don't even particularly care if it's Clark or not so long as the choice has significant FP experience. I would be sincerely pissed off if Edwards were chosen as he reinforces nothing good for the VP slot.

And 'most' democrats who you say 'want' Edwards is just a name recognition response to polling...period.

[cosmokramer]

24. Kerry has been sending signals that he does not want Edwards...

..but no one wants to listen to them. Two weeks ago, a story where Johnson himself said what Kerry required of a VP--and it was definitely not Edwards. Kerry himself said he wanted someone with FP experience--definitely not Edwards. And even Chris Heinz, who originally supported Edwards, said he believed Kerry needed to go with more FP experience in his VP. Not to mention the statement made by Kerry himself: 'What makes him (Edwards) think he is qualified to be President'. Then Kerry's campaign manager, Mary Beth Cahill's remarks, referenced below.

I don't care if it is Clark as long as it is someone who can step in to the presidency and know what they need to know about foreign policy immediately--that isn't Edwards.

The signals are out there, but one has to unplug their bias to hear them.

And this, linked to another DU'er with media links:

"Kerry's campaign manager has also recently made a number of statements about Kerry selecting a cnadidate who has had considerable political experiene, because the campaign is rapidly moving from one of demoestic issues back to one regarding Foreign Affairs and National Security.

One thing is certain, Kerry is being more cautious about making his selection than any candidate in the last century. He is said to have been closely studying the vice presidential selection process made by every president clear back to the election of 1930 and has been said to have made the statment that he will not make the kind of mistakes that others have made. He is carefully looking at the pasts of all of the people being vetted for the vp slot. He is said to want to avoid the kind of scandals about VP's that have cropped up over the last 50 years, in some cases. like Agnew, requiring the VP to resign to avoid problems...

How much any of this will influence Kerry, who is reported to have held two private discussions with Edwards, is unclear.

Campaign manager Cahill also said recently that the war in Iraq had increased the importance of picking a vice president with "the stature" to handle national security."""

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&a ...

---------------------------

SOUNDS to me like Kerry really DOES NOT want to pick Edwards, and I hardly think anyone is going to force him to.

[chimpymustgo]

25. But maybe is you keep repeating it...LOL.

Edwards would not be under consideration if Kerry and Jim Johnson did not think that he met the threshold. Lay off Edwards, please. It really does not help to promote your candidate by slandering this fine Democrat.

[cosmokramer]

27. Slandering?

hahahahahahhaha--nothing I said was slander. Look at the facts without attacking the messenger. I referenced legitimate media reports and direct quotes from the Kerry campaign, and if you think that is 'slanderous' of me, then it is you who has the problem.

[madrchsod]

3. i thought you meant Marilyn Manson

never mind

[Scoopie]

14. You can discuss Marilyn Manson

is you want to!

Heck... he may like Clark, too, for all I know. ;)

[cally]

5. I'm scared that all Senators and Dem elites will face well earned

disdain from this movie. They all abandoned us and Kerry, Gephardt, Dascle deserve disdain for their failure to support the CBC. I was there during the MM words saying Bush is a deserter. It was way overblown but what else is new. I think Kerry may pick Edwards but I doubt he'll pick Gephardt after this movie. Personally, I want, thinks he needs to pick a Washington outsider. It's a huge mistake to pick a fellow Congressmember

[Scoopie]

8. Well, Cally...

I pretty much say that in my review of F-911:
http://lara.forclark.com/story/2004/6/26/2756/96263

I was still getting used to being a new mother during the 2000 elections and couldn't watch as much news on the fiasco that I would have liked, so I knew nothing of the Congressional Black Caucus's attempts to get the Florida fraud investigated until I saw Moore's movie. That was sad.
It didn't make me too fond of Kerry (for the moment-I'm over it now) and put another notch in my distrust of Edwards.

[cosmokramer]

18. He won't pick someone who voted for the war...

...and certainly not another Senator.

[Auntie Bush]

19. God...I hope you're right! n/t

[troublemaker]

7. Probably is a factor against Wes

Sad to say. (I like Wes) Kerry is going to keep a million miles away from Far9/11, and he should. It's the smart move.

[cosmokramer]

10. Yes, I think it will be a small influence.

[AP]

16. Considering his support for Nader in 2000, it was good PR strategy.

Vocally supporting a moderate-looking Dem would hopefully get Dems not to be so hostile towards his movie.

[maxanne]

20. Michael Moore

isn't that big a hero - and plenty of Dems were befuddled by his support of General Clark.

Clark has no traction. I realize it's hard to imagine here, where the Clarkfest still reigns - but in the rest of the country, no one cares that much about General Speedo.

[LandOLincoln]

32. Meeeooowww..... n/t

[maxanne]

33. my my

what a scathing retort.

[Jai4WKC08]

40. Like your remarks were brilliant? n/t

[maxanne]

42. sorry

I didn't realize that reality was such an alien concept here.

[Jai4WKC08]

43. I don't know what planet you live on

But Wes Clark is plenty popular among Dems throughout the country. And he was endorsed by a number of prominent, liberal Democratic leaders. Not that there's anything wrong with Michael Moore.

"There are a lot of good Democrats in this race, but Wes Clark is the best Democrat." -- George McGovern

I just have to wonder about someone who shows up with little interest in anything but trashing someone who the Big Dog himself called one of two stars of the Democratic Party. Maybe you were looking for that OTHER forum... the one at RNC.com?

[MoonRiver]

26. Michael Moore only endorses candidates he believes in.

He believed in Nader in 2000, saw the error of his ways, and then endorsed a much better candidate.

[Joe Fields]

21. I find it amazing that the same person who campaigned

heavily for Ralph Nader four years ago, throwing his considerable weight behind the man who brought us four years of Bush is now the darling of the Democratic Party. I didn't trust his judgement then, and I certainly don't trust it now.

[lanparty]

47. I find it amazing ...

... that someone with only 28 posts is criticizing Michael Moore so heavily.

Michael Moore has been VERY clear on the Nader issue. Nader told him he wouldn't campaign in battle ground states. Then Nader started campaigning in Florida. At THAT point, Moore jumped off the Nader ship and tried to help Gore in Florida.

Moore was on Air America with Gore and apologized pretty profusely about his Nader promotion. He said he was WRONG to throw that kind of support behind Nader.

BTW, a lot of people still have tremendous respect for Ralph Nader. They just prefer that he would run for Senator or Representative instead of spoiling presidential elections.

Personally, my politics are closer to those of Nader than those of Kerry. But I KNOW DAMN WELL he can't win. What dissapoints me is that Nader doesn't seem interested in any other government job BESIDES president.

Nader has ZERO legilative and foreign policy experience. He has a contingency of ZERO in the Congress. Even if Nader COULD be elected, he would have no authority.

Moore did NOT throw the election to the Republicans. Some of the issues stemmed from Gore's inconsistent performance at debates. Other problems were obviously the vote thefts in Florida and Tennessee.

Moore has been fighting for progressive causes for a LONG time. And he NEVER meant to throw the election to Bush. He was only trying to "publicize" the progressive platform of Nader in an attempt to swing the Democrats back to the left.

[Darkamber]

22. Moore's endorsement was a two edged sword...

I think it might have confused some people about Clark. If Clark was trying for the image of an moderate then having Moore endorse him made people get confused.

I just can't see Moore as someone who can help bring this country together, but instead is more of someone who will help to divide us.
To achieve anything, we need to bring in those swing Republicans and I fear that waving Michael Moore in front of their faces will turn them away and back to Bush.

[mzmolly]

23. Well he endorsed Nader in 2000. I've disagreed with him before.

;)

Though, I'd support a Clark/Kerry ticket.

[Myrina]

28. Funny, that ...

and fickle that now Moore is 'the hero of the Democratic Party' considering how many here vilified him when he was campaigning with Nader in 2000 ....


my, how our opinions change .... :eyes:

[maxanne]

29. not all of us,

Myrina. The sea change occurred amongst the Clark worshippers.

[Auntie Bush]

30. "Clark worshipers!!!" Don't you mean

Clark supporters or Clark Democtats or Clarkies for Kerry?
Talk about negative comments! jeezzz! :grr:

[maxanne]

34. truth hurts?

I remember when reading Clark posts sounded like the pages of "Tiger Beat" magazine around here. It seems to be shaping up to sound like that again, in fact.

"Oh...he's so sexy..." :puke:

[JI7]

35. so who do you support ?

[maxanne]

36. for what?

The topic is MM's support for Wes Clark. I don't see the relevance of your question.

[LandOLincoln]

39. Since you've gone out of your way

to pee all over the Clark threads today, JI7's question seems perfectly natural to me. Why are you so cagey about answering? And why so pissy?

[maxanne]

41. nice of you

to interpret for him.

Is not being a Clark adorer akin to being pissy?

[JI7]

44. i was just wondering because i haven only seen you attack Clark

and was wondering if there is anyone you are for. you don't have to be for clark. you are even allowed to criticize him. but seeing how much you don't like him. i was just wondering if there was anyone you do like for vp.

[RafterMan]

31. People who missed the endorsement

can watch it here: http://a471.g.akamai.net/7/471/9997/v0001/clark.download.akamai.com/9997/blog/1_17_04mm.mpg

It's good stuff.

[TexasSissy]

37. That was when MM thought Clark could debate, though.

Story goes that MM endorsed him when he found that Clark had been on the Westpoint Debate Team. But, it turned out, debating was Clark's worst talent.

[Bombtrack]

38. He endorsed him for PRESIDENT, not vice president, which are 2

completely different things. I don't understand why more people here aren't able to differentiate between the 2 sets of needs and advantages that are required as it pertains to being at the top of the ticket and helping John Kerry the most.

There is NOTHING to indicate that Moore favors Clark for vp pick

[FrenchieCat]

45. MM endorsed Clark because

More than anything, MM wanted to see Bush OUT! He didn't endorse any of the others because he felt that National Security would be the issue for the 2004 election...and damn him again, he is SO RIGHT!

Now if MM didn't feel that John Kerry could definitely beat Bush then....he most likely isn't still certain of it. It would be logical that when determining who he would want as the VP, it would be Clark. It wouldn't be Graham, Edwards, or even Dean...as he had a chance to have endorsed them originally.

This is not Rocket Science to surmise that if MM wanted Clark as Prez....and he knows that he was the cause of Wes' trouble (cooked and stirred by the media) on the deserter comment....where Wes steadfastly defended Moore......he would want him as the Veep....as he would, like me, feel that Clark enhances the chance of a Kerry win....and a Bush ouster.

[Lefta Dissenter]

46. Huh,

well, that's interesting, because I thought that one of the most important factors in selecting a vice president is choosing someone who could step in as president at a moment's notice.

As a matter of fact, wasn't that the first thing that Clinton named as a priority when selecting a VP? Oh yeah... that, and having a good relationship between the P and VP...

I don't understand why the qualifications would be so different.