Many repubs would vote for Clark in the GE

[Toronto Ron]

...based on my small sample space: Among the very few repubs I associate with, two would vote for Clark - but no other Dem candidate - against w*. Both are fairly liberal socially (pro-choice, not homophobic, not religious), and non-wealthy. For one of them, the main issues are national security, foreign policy, and fiscal responsibility. He trusts Clark on those counts, hates the tax cuts, and even laments what w* has done to the environment. The other is one of those libertarian types: hates the Patriot Act and generally thinks w* is a moron.

Surely there are lots more like these guys out there. Probably more than enough to offset Green votes and other defectors.

Anyone else with similar observations?

[brainwashed_youth]

1. sounds good

Ya, I can agree with that statement. Clark is big on national security, which is big with alot of repubs, so ya, I can buy that

[alittlelark]

2. Mine certainly are. That's one of the reasons I started supporting Clark

in the first place. A number of Repub friends and family were looking at him as acceptable. Isn't it odd just how many lifelong Repub's are becoming deeply disillusioned?

[roughsatori]

3. Your post is a good reason not to vote for Clark

I would think that you would write posts that would encourage Progressives to vote for him--not to further highlight their reservations about Clark.

I think that Clark would do worse in the GE then any candidate except for Sharpton. I support Kucinich.

[Taeger]

6. May I point out

First, I like Dennis Kucinich as well. In a perfect world, he would be a perfect President. Unfortunately, this isn't a perfect world.

I will point out that Al Sharpton has more delegates than Kucinich. So I'm not entirely certain that Kucinich would do better than Sharpton. ;-)

[Toronto Ron]

8. There have been enough posts about Clark's liberal policies

...which you can read about at clark04.com if you really care. A couple of examples: Eliminate federal income tax for many families and reduce it for everyone making under $100K; paid for by raising tax rate on income over $1 million. Pro-choice. Against NCLB and vouchers. Against ANWR drilling. Stronger corporate governance. Committed to separation of church & state.

[Momof1]

4. My thinking exactly, I am surrounded by repugs and no one

has said one bad word about him. No one can make an arguement. Thats why I am hoping that he gets it.

[Taeger]

5. Clark is the ONLY one ...

Clark is the only one who can address the gays in the military issue. The reason is simple. HE KNOWS. He is respected. He was commander of NATO.

He has been commanding troops for 30 years. He knows how everything works. He's seen how the units in the gay integrated Euro units are FIRST HAND. He can authoritively tell people that IT'S NOT AN ISSUE!!!!

Plus, he's a Southerner. And Southerners won't be swayed on an issue like this by some Yankee.

So all you gay folk out there. Clark is YOUR man. Kerry will have his but handed to him on this issue if he tries to bring it up.

Beyond this, I think that Clark is truly the candidate who can get deluded Republican voters to wake up and vote Democrat. He has a grandfatherly aura about him that is nothing less then powerful. If he gave me a command, I think I would have no choice but to obey.

He is AMAZINGLY qualified. His pedigree is AMAZING. His military record (a hot button issue in the reds) is AMAZING. He is pretty untarnished by years of compromising in Washington (he does have some military lobby experience).

Plus if Michael Moore supports him (a former Nader supporter) he must be on the right side of the NAFTA/WTO issue. I just wish he'd be clearer about it (I don't want another Clinton).

If Clark is the nominee, DEMOCRATS ARE 100% SURE TO WIN. If Edwards is his Veep, we are 110% sure to win.

Howard Dean for Secratary of Health and Human Services irregardless of who is the nominee. He has done too much for the party and he has a lot more strength and energy to give to this nation.

[eaprez]

7. Bush is in trouble...

after lying about the cost of the new medicare bill, questions about the war, questions about his military record, the deficit, the mess in Iraq, lost jobs, a pending indictment on the release of the CIA agents name, there are a lot of Republicans out there prepared to vote Democrat no matter who the canidate is.

[maggrwaggr]

9. the irony of primaries is that they appeal to the base

and Clark doesn't appeal to the base.

Oddly, he appeals to lefties and moderates and disgruntled republicans.

As such, I believe he's the best guy to beat Bush, now that Dean seems to be only (as I've been told) supported only by "educated liberals" (gosh I guess I'm an educated liberal)

I think Clark would do an excellent job as president.

[For PaisAn]

10. It is irony

because he is the best guy to Beat Bush, has broad appeal to liberals, independents and moderate republicans. Leadership, progressive domestic platform and solid foreign policy/military experience. What a gift. Will we pass it right by?

[Meritaten1]

11. I agree with you Ron_GreensboroNC

Clark's background and policies allow him to appeal to voters across the political spectrum more effectively than other Democratic candidates. He would be the most formidable candidate against the GOP in a general election, I think.

Even though w* stumbled with his own base this week-- even many conservatives are upset with his budget deficits and lying -- there are still many months to go before the general election. Democrats will have to give the nomination to a candidate capable of attracting swing voters (many of whom live in "red states"). It is not safe to just assume w* will be so unpopular anyone can attract these voters.

[ThomWV]

12. I Generally Agree

That is the sentiment I hear, but I don't particularly hear Clark's name, unless I am the one bringing it up.

I do think, however, that we may win the election without Clark, but that we will definitly win it with him.

The one thing we can be quite sure of is that the vast majority of Democrats and independents are going to vote for the Democratic nomimee no matter who it is. Clark, Kerry, Edwards, Kucinich, doesn't matter as far as the natural base goes. Where the actual candidate does matter is in what crossover we can hope for. That is where Clark shines.

I think there are a lot of Republicans who can not bring themselves to vote for Bush, and I thank God for that, but many of those same Republicans won't vote for Kerry and they won't vote for Edwards, but they will, at least to some greater extent, vote for Clark. Now if they want to stay home that is just fine with me, at least its not a vote for the dud, but I'd far rather have them voting for our guy and so it behoves us to pick a candidate that they would not find repugnant. There people who hate Bush. There are people who hate Kerry. There are people who hate Edwards. I haven't run across anyone who hates Clark.

Thom

[krkaufman]

13. Same here

A number of Rep friends and coworkers are interested in Clark; while averse to the Dem Party insiders and left-wing evangelists. (Love 'em to death, but we're working to insure * is booted.)

[Moderator]

14. Locking

Rules to start discussion threads in the General Discussion forum.

...

7. Discussion topics that mention any or all of the Democratic presidential primary candidates are not permitted in the General Discussion forum, and instead must be posted in the General Discussion: 2004 Primary forum.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation,
DU moderator