Clark is playing this brilliantly....

[phillybri]

Obviously, this is just my opinion, but I feel it's valid:

By not officially announcing, he's maintaining a certain "mystique" among the people and among the media. The guy's been on all the shows and getting a ton of interest from the print media. His impact here at DU is pretty obvious as well.

By not announcing his party affiliation, he gets both Dems and Reps interested in the prospects of his possible run. If he immediately said he was a Dem, all the sheep-minded Reps would instinctively discount him. They may eventually go that way anyhow, but he made them take a good hard look by maintaining the mystery.

Put simply: By announcing, he becomes another face in a crowd. By waiting, he is his own crowd.

[CMT]

1. I agree

I think he may be the frontrunner for the vp nomination on nearly any ticket. He would be great with Kerry, Dean, Edwards, Gep, gosh--all of them.

[MidwestTransplant]

2. I think he is making a play for the top of the ticket...

at least I hope so. Went to a meetup the other day. Was great. Lots of excited people.

[Kahuna]

6. Right. People don't run to be VP. They run to either win...

or to gain name recognition for a future bid. If Clark runs, he's running for the top of the ticket. Period.

[Cornus]

3. Or...

...any of them would make a great VP for him!

[Trajan]

7. I like Clark ...

In either position .... VP or P ....

His ONLY 'weakness' is that he may be TOO rational and stoic for a politician, where it is nearly ABSOLUTELY necessary to jump in the dog pit and snarl and wrassle with your opponents ....

He is a strong philosopher kind of fella, with great military credentials, yet he has no experience in the trenchs of campaign warfare ....

Hell, this could be a plus for him ...

Nevertheless: .. I like him, and Ill vote for him if he becomes nominee .... no matter WHICH chair he sits in ....

He is one of the good guys ....

[SayitAintSo]

4. Very Good Point....

I've heard wild speculation he is being considered as a Cheney replacement ... Surely that's not true - any ideas ?

[Kahuna]

8. That dumbya VP rumor is a stupid whisper campaign...

put out by one of the current contenders who is scared shitless that Clark will enter the race.

[MidwestTransplant]

11. Not even much of a whisper campaign....

I have never heard nor seen anything about it and I spend plenty of time here!

[Doctor_J]

13. Not a chance

He despises * AND HIS ADMINISTRATION'S POLICIES. He has also blasted away at Condi, Cheney, and Rummy. There is no way he would become part of this crime syndicate.

[Quahog]

15. Nonsense

Clark has come out against the war in Iraq. He's pro-choice. Anti-tax-cut. An environmentalist. In favor of campaign finance reforms. Wants universal health coverage for Americans.

This guy is gonna run on a GOP ticket? Gimme a frickin break.

[SayitAintSo]

17. Thanks for the feedback

I feel better now !

[markus]

5. Remember, Powel kept his party leanings to himself

long after he left the service. And look how he turned out.

Having problems with Bush doens't make one a Democrat. It merely indicates sanity.

[wndycty]

12. But remember. . .

He is on record as having voted in the Democratic primary.

[TheBlob]

9. I agree completely

I said the same thing a few days ago here at DU.
By not announcing party affiliation just yet he allows himself to be seen as an individual, not a party member.
So much harder to put him in a box that way.

"Strategery, strategery, strategery"...
(God, I love that word now - I've decided to use it right up until the day Bush leaves office)

[Doctor_J]

10. He's my guy

He is the anti-Bush - brilliant, accomplished, honest, patriotic, and surprisingly liberal, socially. If he runs at the top of the ticket, and makes a good selection for VP, Junior's performance in the election will make Poppy's 37% in 92 look good in comparison. He must be at the top, though. As we saw in 88, having a big advantage at VP is not good enough. He has to take on the His Idiocy head-to-head.

[Caution]

14. Where does he stand on issues?

I've been to draftwesleyclark.org or whatever it is (can't remember the exact link), and found it woefully inadequate regarding his stance on the issues. I'm very hesitatnt to support someone for the Presidency when there is no definitive stance on pretty much any of the issues. Just because he is intelligent and critical of Bush and has a good military record does not mean I want him as President. Give me a reason to support this guy. (I have yet to throw support behind a single candidate and I'm not trying to undermine Clark, but man how can people jump on his bandwagon with what little is out there on this guy).

[Doctor_J]

16. Surprising liberal

In favor of reproductive rights, affirmative action, public schools, coalition building (as opposed to nation building) and fiscal responsibility and fairness.

Edit: see quahog's post #15 for more

[madmax]

18. Some info on Clark

"The Last Word: Wesley Clark
Marching on Washington?
NEWSWEEK INTERNATIONAL

July 14 issue — For a self-described “nonpolitical” person, Gen. Wesley K. Clark finds himself in an unusual position: considering a run for the White House. Earlier this year, a grass-roots organization started a campaign to persuade the four-star general to run in 2004. Clark recently received more than a thousand letters from supporters in New Hampshire urging him to run, and last week draftwesleyclark.com opened its national headquarters in Washington, D.C." more:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/934709.asp

Clark website: http://www.draftclark.com

:hi:

Kerry/Clark

:kick:

[GainesT1958]

19. Plus...

Why should he SPEND money as an "announced" candidate, when he could be making speeches and quietly RAISING funds for a run to begin, say, in Sept. or Oct. of this year? That way he's less subject to the "tearing-down" the media whore types are giving Kerry, Dean, Edwards, Lieberman, Gephardt, etc. And he IS a Democrat, from all indications!:D

Let's face it, that leadership image he's got is going to be hard to beat once he gets into the race--though the media and their benefactor, Karl "Chip" Rove, will obviously give it their best shot.

B-)

[madmax]

20. Clark on either end of the ticket

imho, would be win and win big.

[bigwoody]

21. I can see it now

Chimp sees Clark as vp for dems. and calls the old man. "Daddy, hows comes those guys get a pretty general for vp and I don't? You promised me the best of everything, and all I get is a bald headed guy who can't smile because he's always having heart stuff or something. I want a pretty general too, or I'm tellin' the Quaker Oats lady, uh I mean mom!"

[TLM]

22. I bet the VP slot will be beteween him and Edwards.

With Graham close behind.


However, I do not think that CLark should be president, he hasn't got the experience. He would however make a great VP.

I'd rather see him as VP, because the ticket with him as VP would win... and Clark would be set to run as president later.

[Pepperbelly]

30. his experience is arguably superior to John Kennedy's prior to ...

his election once we get past the absurd notion that elective political office offers much in the way of reasoned, rational problem solving. In fact, it seems to run counter to that proposition.

Harry Truman, one of my very favorite Presidents, had lots of experience as a Missouri ward healer. That was the preponderance of his experience, as a county judge before he became the machine's candidate for the Senate in 1934.

Bush I had oodles of experience and look at what a dud he was. And of course Ike had no political experience whatsoever before he ran. Like Clark, he played mighty coy with his party affiliation for a long, long time.

Wesley brings both skill and knowledge to the table and right now, we need skill and knowledge to repair the MESS that bonehead has made of our nation.

[Sushi_lover]

23. Nope. He's an interchangable military figure

Since I watch very little news on TV, I have barely noticed him.

If he writes Op-Ed, it doesn't make it to the publications I read. So he's nothing more than a TV war commentator. A common commentator.

In my limited exposure to him, he has appeared as an interchangeable ex-Pentagon general. A talking uniform in the NFL-today style CNN production of the war. A play-by-play pundit. Dandy Don Meridith without the singing. Frank Gifford, etc.

[Kahuna]

24. How many "common commentators" took four bullets and

lost chunks of flesh in the service of their country? :eyes:

[Caution]

25. Not many

But this still doesnt make him qualified to lead the country...I'm still looking for something more definitive about where Clark stands on the issues. I have watched Clark as a commentator for a while and generally like what he has to say, but I just don't see why people are jumping on this bandwagon other than to think he might sway some repub voters thanks to his military background...he just doesnt make any sense right now as a candidate...

[Wendec]

26. Try

this website. It has a link to quotes on issues. Don't know if it answers all of your questions, but it's a pretty good start.

http://draftclark2004.com/

[Julien Sorel]

29. Don't care about Repub voters.

I want the sway vote, those people who are in the middle. Bush is going to run based on his 'success' in the war on terra, which really boils down to the fact that he unleashed a modern military machine on two essentially helpless countries. That is, believe it or not, the sum of his 'accomplishments' in office to date, but it's enough for some people.

Michael Moore is something of a kook, but he also hits the nail on the head: Americans live in a society of fear, and Bush has positioned himself to prey on that fear. Clark has the credentials to point out that Bush's 'accomplishments' are actually empty, and as an ex-military man, his opinions will A) carry weight; and B) not be tainted by the inevitable cries of 'soft on terra' that will be coming from the right wing nutjobs. When he says that there are better ways of combatting terrorism than firing up the military machine, people will listen, and not think of him as some kind of weak-kneed liberal. That has the potential to pull the rug out from under Bush, because outside of his wars, what does he have?

It also helps that Clark is intelligent, photogenic, and seems to have a big picture understanding of what a successful America looks like. I think he can win, and I also think he'd do a great job. He gets my support unless I see something really awful between now and when he decides to go or get off the pot.

[Pepperbelly]

32. maybe what they're seeing is ...

a real problem solving person who actually seems to answer questions in a straight forward, succinct and reasonable fashion. It is refreshing to hear someone do that rather than spin and spin and spin.

It could well be that is exactly what we need at this juncture.

[robbedvoter]

34. He calmly made minced meat of Russert and everything

he said publicly do far was of substance and deadly to the Chimp. The man has the authority - and so far hasn't given in an inch to the Nazies - so far, he looks like a winner to me!

[wes_clark_for_pres]

27. More Clark info in this month's Esquire

http://www.esquire.com/features/articles/2003/030801_mfe_clark_1.html


What do you all think?

[wes_clark_for_pres]

28. The people in the Pentagon HATED him!

Works for me!

[newsguyatl]

31. well

wesley's certainly the best looking in the race... that's gotta count for something...lol

[Donna Zen]

33. A snip from a wise Dem warrior

I hesitate to post another's words and have been waiting for permission to share these words of a person who was part of the Wellstone organization, but on every Clark thread many have doubts about his progressive policies. Let me share a snip from someone who has worked on the past presidential campaigns of three very liberal presidential candidates. By the way, it is her words months ago that made me go searching for answers to the very questions you are asking. When I hear from her, hopefully soon, I will post some other things she has written...........


"I have a couple of reasons for supporting him -- and I should add here that I support Dean too, and have donated some money to the folk who are starting to organize for him in the caucus next year. But I spent a lot of time thinking about how to beat Bush, and it was that which made me get a little more active supporting Clark.

"I don't think Dem's have a chance in 2004 unless we are able to put National Security -- NATIONAL SECURITY IN CAPS -- out front. In the end people buy into a candidate based on trust, and security has a lot to do with that -- and none of the present crop, including Dean really, cut the mustard on that issue. I know there are some progressives who have an allergy to the Military (Clark covers that in his book) -- but in Clark you have a 4 Star General who also quotes Bob Dylan liberally. You have a character who thought through the youthful allergy to the military that he found in Clinton's early White House -- and came to laugh at it a bit when he realized what probably bothered them was his uniform, which he describes with wit as the "Ultimate Power Suit." He has a number of reflections on this, both witty and serious. I think as some of this is discussed a good many otherwise allergic folk will see the advantage of someone who cannot be questioned on "toughness" on National Security matters. Along with that goes the ability to tell Gingrich and DeLay that they are not competent to discuss military matters -- and make it stick. But we have to face up to the reality -- we have to get otherwise Republican Centerist voters

[chaska]

35. Message from Wesley Clark Jr. posted to the daily kos today

Just a couple of comments (and yes, I am who I say I am as Kos can attest),

I don't know if he will run but he'll make an announcement either way (my guess is at the very latest labor day). I understand that the wait might be frustrating for people in the DraftClark movement and the Democratic party - but if he runs, I assume that those who think he is a good candidate now will probably not hold it against him just because he waited a few extra weeks.

He won't be running as a Republican.

He IS NOT campaigning for a VP slot.

He is very progressive on every issue - he's stated that global warming is happening, that he's pro-choice, that he's pro-affirmative action, that he's pro-union, that the tax code should remain progressive, that multilateral solutions should be found for the world's security concerns, that he was against the decision to go to war in Iraq and that we need stronger social safety nets. I don't know what other positions people need to find out which direction he leans but it seems fairly clear to me.

He is most of all interested in the battle of ideas and not that of individuals (to include himself). I'm sure he'll help out whomever wins the nom for the Democrats when it comes time to bring down Bushco - whether he mounts a campaign himself or not.

I don't know if he would be able to win the Democratic nom but I believe he is the only one who can win the general election because it will be about one thing - national security. I wish it were about health care, the coming water crisis, the need for alternative energy or the economy but it won't be. National security is now personal security and that trumps every other issue.

As an unrelated aside, does anyone else out there believe that the real reason the Repubs are having the convention in NYC isn't to crow about 9/11 but to provoke a riot a la Chicago in '68?

Wesley Clark Jr. | 07.09.03 - 5:05 pm |