A question.

[frustrated_lefty]

I'm a diehard Deanie, but try to pay attention to the stances of all of our candidates and give them thought. The incessant attacks on Dean have made me ask myself, why do I support Dean, why do I react so negatively to these other candidates?

That's required a lot of soul-searching, so I want to express appreciation to those of you who have criticized Dean over the last few months. Without that criticism, I probably wouldn't have given so much thought to the issue.

My realization was I wanted to support someone who wanted the office of the presidency to do some good, not someone who wanted the presidency like something you put on your resume. For me, that eliminates Kerry, Edwatds, Lieberman, and quite possibly Clark. These gentleman, despite their well respected records, have, in my view, pursued politics to hear their name resounding through crowds.

I don't get the impression that Dean wants his name shouted from the pulpits, he simply wants change. It could be argued that Kucinich or Mosely-Braun would bring about more change. It's a valid argument. I would welcome Kucinich in office.

My question is, do you think your guy is fighting for higher goals, and, if so, what are those goals?

[kixot]

1. I think Clark is running for noble reasons

He didn't just wake up one day and say "hey, I think I'll run for president!"

It took a long, concerted grassroots campaign to DRAFT him into running. FOr that reason I wouldn't put him in the same category you mention above.

[dajabr]

2. He had to be prodded to get into the race?

Not a strong point, IMO.

[Tatiana]

6. I think it's one of his strongest points.

He's truly in this race because of his sense of duty to the people who asked him to use his leadership skills for the benefit of our country. To me that shows he has a lack of ego. Meeting him and listening to him speak, I feel his sincerity in wanting to make this country as well as this world a better, more peaceful place.

[dajabr]

7. Came off as "wishy-washy" to me...

And, didn't the Draft Clark founders bail after he entered and treated them poorly?

That's why I'll lean more to Kerry, he's been dead-set to run for a looong time!

[Tatiana]

9. I like Kerry too.

I'll never see how someone as experienced and talented as him managed to run such a piss-poor campaign.

That said, many persons in the Draft Clark movement have positions (esp. in Arkansas). The founder felt like he deserved a prominent position on the team (and I agreed). He didn't get it. However, that's not being treated poorly. That's just choosing a staff you are familiar and comfortable with. As a candidate, Clark had that right.

I don't think Clark's decision to run was wishy-washy. He weighed his options, he weighed the effect running for President was going to have on his family. In particular, I believe it took him so long to enter the race because his wife wasn't thrilled with the idea in the beginning.

[dajabr]

13. OK, that's fair. But his staff gives me reservations...

Especially that Lehane guy.

Glad Kerry fired him.

Maybe when we see if Clark can start raising a higher percentage of his $$$ from the "little guys" this quarter, I'll take another look.

[Julien Sorel]

12. Nonsense.

Almost all the draft Clark people are members of his campaign team now. No one 'bailed,' and no one was 'treated poorly.'


Didn't Dean have an ugly wife-beating incident, that he hushed up by abusing his gubernatorial authority?

[KaraokeKarlton]

8. But why did some people want to draft him?

Because he was entertaining the thought of running and let it leak to the press. There was a pretty big effort to draft Gore, too, yet he didn't run. I don't think Gore lacks a commitment to doing the right thing or whatever. Bottom line, Clark is in the race because he wants to be, and it's equally as likely that he intentionally put his name out there to test the political wind and see if there was any interest in him running.

[MariaS]

3. I support Clark

and I will till the very end because I believe him and believe in him. I sincerely think his goal is to take our country to the high ground and give us back the pride and respect we all want and need to feel for this country. I sincerely think that what Bush has done to our country hurts Clark inside. He has served this country well and honorably and I can only imagine how he felt watching as Bush took everything that he (Clark)and America stand for and dishonor it. I don't see Clark as ever grandstanding or doing any of this for self-serving reasons. Maybe I am looking at Clark thru rose colored glasses but right now I desperately need someone who can get back for America the one thing I think is most important in this country. Our pride. The war in Iraq is the over riding issue for me. The way Bush has shamed us across the world and his total disregard for the plight of others be they here or in other countries has sickened me. I want to be the country that others look up to and respect. I want our soldiers to be hailed as heros as they were when they marched into Europe during WWII. I want a hero not a politician as my leader. I think America is desperate for a hero. I think the following quote sums it up nicely at least for me it does.

"Just when the world is being dragged into the death
spiral of an unending cycle of violence by a
vision-less, cold blooded collection of think-tank
warriors goose-stepping their way into the new
millennium with a stunning lack of respect for human
rights, the environment, or international law, along
comes a man with the proven credentials of
intelligence, integrity, and courage singularly
equipped by his spirit and experience to lead us out
of this mess. Don't listen to what the lying liars say
about him; listen to what he says. Wesley Clark is a
prayer answered."

Peace
Kris Kristofferson

[frustrated_lefty]

4. Ok, I think we share a common aim

It's a shame our candidates are at odds.

[MariaS]

5. I agree

but I think it's more the supporters who are at odds as to which man is better suited to the job of POTHUS more so than the candidates.

[yaledem]

10. There are 3 non-career politicians in the race

Edwards, Clark, and Sharpton.

Edwards fought the good fight for 20 years as a lawyer standing up against corporate abuses, and wanted to take his fight to the next level. He's not running for reelection to his senate seat, risking his political future because he feels Bush needs to be stopped, and he thinks that he is the best person to stop him. (I agree)

It would seem to me that people who have been on the political scene for 20-30 years (Dean, Kerry, Gephardt, Kucinich, and to a lesser extent Braun) are the ones who love to hear their names "shouted from the pulpits." It is widely known that Dean wanted to run in 2000, but made a judgement that he couldn't win the primary, so his own political calculations won out over his "desire to change things."

Edwards has stated many times that he will either be POTUS in 2005, or practicing law in Raleigh, and is content with either one.

If Edwards was in it purely for selfish reasons, he wouldn't be running in 04. He'd be biding his time for the next 20 years, looking for year when it is "his turn." He is running now because he feels strongly that middle class people in this country are being screwed over, and he couldn't in good concience not try to stop it as soon as possible.

[Julien Sorel]

11. Excuse me, but your guy 'who simply wants change'

investigated running in 2000, but decided against it when it was obvious he would get crushed by Gore and Bradley. Please spare me the naivete. Dean is as big a political whore as I've seen in my lifetime. He's about Dean and Dean alone, and the idea that he's running because of some desire 'for change' would be laughable, if it wasn't simply sad that there are people who actually believe it.