Question for Clark supporters...

[gully]

Why Clark?

Choose the one that best represents your views.

[maha]

1. Too simplistic.

How about "all of the above"? Although I don't think Clark is the ONLY candidate who could beat Bush. I do think Clark is a "safer" candidate than some others.

[gully]

2. I deliberately left that out...

I wanted a general position, but I'm sure most supporters are all of the above.

[union_maid]

3. Yes and then some

It's not just a matter of beating Bush. I think that Clark has the best shot at that. I also think a very smart president is a good thing and Clark certainly is that. I think that his background is well suited to the times we're living in and I think that Clark is best suited to bring us as close to peace as we're gonna get. But then back to beating Bush - I think that he can not only beat him, I think he can send the RW back to the sidelines where they belong and make being a wingnut a social liability as it was so many years ago. I think he can make moderate/liberal ideas mainstream again and move the center leftward a bit. I think he has the best chance of getting agena items through congress because I think he approaches his ideas with a cool logic that persuades better than anyone I've ever seen. There's more, but that's probably enough for now.

[maha]

13. I get the same gut feeling

"But then back to beating Bush - I think that he can not only beat him, I think he can send the RW back to the sidelines where they belong and make being a wingnut a social liability as it was so many years ago."

Amen, sister. But I think that's the sort of wisdom you either see, or you don't. The Clark slimers will not see it.

[Kahuna]

29. The Clark-hatas will thank us one day.

:o

When bush receives a humiliating defeat, they will thank us. When Clark snaps up half of the red states, they will thank us.

[SeveneightyWhoa]

4. What a waste of a poll.

I like Clark for all of the above reasons, among many more.

If I had the ability to make polls, I'm sure I wouldn't waste people's time like this!

[gully]

5. uhm then don't RESPOND.

And perhaps donate a few bucks so you can create your own "more meaningful" polls in the future.

Thanks for the replies. I am surprized that there aren't more #1's?

[bicentennial_baby]

11. It's more complicated than that

Yes, I do think Wesley is the only one that can absolutely beat Bush, but I could'nt support him for just that reason. For instance, if he was pro-life or advocating unilateral foreign policy, I could'nt get behind that. Also, I think his foreign policy/diplomatic acumen will be sorely needed once * is sent back to Crawford. Whoever kicks that evil carpetbagger out of office is going to have a lot of work to do to get our foreign policy and allied relations back on track, and I think Wesley is the best man for that job. As a Bio major, I also admire his intelligence and his deep interest in science. His optimism and positive vision give me hope. Plus, he's a General who dares to wear a "Dissent is Patriotic" button :P

ps- there's more than that, but I have to get off of DU and get back to writing my paper on "the future of U.S. Humanitarian Interventions Abroad", which is giving me major writer's block right now! :-)

[janekat]

12. I agree - it's all the above and more for me

n/t

[maha]

17. If the only reason

... for supporting Clark (and note I also support Dean) was that he could beat Bush, I wouldn't be interested in him. I think that's a consideration (those of us old enough to have been voters in 1972, 1984, and 1988 understand that ignoring the electability thing is suicidal), and I think Clark will be a safer candidate against Bush in the general election than most of the other candidates, but if Clark didn't impress me in other ways I wouldn't be interested.

I get the impression that anti-Clark people assume the ONLY reason anyone would be interested in Clark is that he could beat Bush, and that just isn't true.

[gully]

7. BTW, your from Canada?

Can you vote in the election?

[WillyBrandt]

6. Poll misses it entirely

I agree with all of the above, but I think only Clark--at this moment in American politics--has the chance to usher in a political realignment favoring the Democratic Party.

There are larger issues about progressive politics that the poll misses. I think Clark has the cultural credibility the others, except Edwards, lack to push forth a progressive agenda that will last over the next generation or two. He can move the center to the left the way others cannot. And unlike other candidates, who can energize the base, but not do much to expand it, I think Clark can do both.

I also have an atavistic joy waiting to burst out of watching Chickenhawk Bush debate the Supreme Allied Commander, but that's not my reason for supporting Clark.

So, yes, us Clarkies have thought about our reasons for supporting Wes long and hard, and like Dean supporters, we resent efforts to be pigeonholed into categories that miss the point entirely.

[gully]

8. I am not trying to pigeonhole...

really. And, I appreciate the replies. I am gaining much insight into the campaign.

I find it interesting that Clark supporters want the party to move back to the left? I would not have thought of Clark as a person who could do that. But, I can understand your perspective here.

Thanks.

Edited to add: I made it narrow on purpose. I realize you have complex reasons for supporting Clark.

I would say the military backround is the main one for you then, because Clark can move the Dems left with out being called a 'patsy' right ??? ;)

[WillyBrandt]

14. Clark can re-align American politics

Sorry for being snippy. Really, apologies. :) You know us Clarkies, defending our man. . .

As for moving the center to the left. . .Yes, it's a variant on only Nixon could go to China. Clark is a candidate who almost literally embodies the values that Republicans claim that they have (but don't): his campaign theme is a "New American Patriotism," he has courage, and honor, and a rise based almost entirely upon his own merit. He understands the "real world" of international affairs, and brings the weight of a warrior to the liberal perspective on foreign policy.

In other words, voters who are culturally suspicious of the Democratic Party--the kind Nixon and Reagan transformed into Republicans--see a candidate in Clark that does not confirm any of their fears. He is GENERAL CLARK.

Here's the trick: because he's got such a solid centrist appeal by his resume and manner and geographic origin, he has natural political capital to go forth with progressive politics. And, what's best, his quiet manner makes liberalism seem like common sense, which it is.

Now, compare with Dean. Like it or not, the media has pegged him as a liberal and as a leftist. The pressure is on him to be more centrist, to tout his "A" NRA rating, and to utter the phrase "fiscal conservatism." I don't doubt that Dean would love to implement a far-reaching progressive vision, but he has to appeal to the center to maintain his power, since there are cultural suspicions against him.

Look again at Clinton. He was tagged as a hippy and had to be more in the center than he himself probably would have liked.

I think that only Clark can dissaociate liberal politics--which PEOPLE AGREE WITH--from the negative stereotypes of liberals than the GOP has encouraged. If we can get down to the issues themselves, and if we've got as impressive a messanger as Clark, and if we've got such a discredited rival the Bush GOP, then we've got a chance at getting the whole she-bang.

Clark is the newest Democrat, sure. But he's the only one who has a chance for building a 21-st century analogue for FDR's New Deal coalition.

(Whew! Thanks for reading. edit: title)

[gully]

16. Very interesting

apology accepted. ;)

I can totally understand your concept here and respect your opinion. I think you sum it up for alot of Clark supporters.

I had no idea that Clarkies wanted to move the party left. I also find it interesting that you feel Clark could move some on the Right, Left?

Dean is another topic, so I wont go into my 'support' but I hope if Clark gets the nomination you are correct in your assessment.

[WillyBrandt]

22. Moving the Right Left

Sure. Lots of the folks on the right are just suspicious of big city folk or the "liberal media" or they identify the flag with the GOP. If you ask them about particulars--like universal health care--they often like the Democratic positions better.

Why are they voting GOP? So often it's not self-interest. It's that the GOP has stolen the common symbols of American pride: flag, duty, country, honor, etc. Even we liberals sometimes recoil a bit at those words (that GOP is effective), though they are our common heritage.

Clark takes those symbols back. And if the GOP continues their anti-patriotic actions he can make them symbols of our party, and will associate them with progressive politics, just as TR and FDR associated their progressive politics with love of country.

Appeal to the center culturally, and thus move all of us to the left politically.

The alternative to winning both the primary and general is to appeal to the PARTY culturally (denouncing Bush, etc.), and then appeal to the center politically.

Anyway, read The Emerging Democratic Majority. It has nothing to do with Clark per se, but tell me if you don't come away thinking--that motherfucker can make this prophecy a reality. It's almost eerie.

[rhite5]

24. "If we can get down to the issues themselves....."

Nice, thoughtful response, Willy!

But you see the phrase I chose to highlight. We really NEED to know specifics on the issues, especially the domestic ones. We have little to go on except standard phrases like "pro-environment" "pro-choice" etc.

What about "consumer protection"? "Free Trade" vs "Fair Trade"? Public ownership of utilities? and a whole long list of other things.

We need details. We have no voting record to look at for clues.

[WillyBrandt]

25. I was speaking of the party

Folks agree more with standard Dem positions on nearly all issues than they do with GOP positions.

And from what we know, Clark has standard Dem positions and normal liberal instincts. And as his broad generalizations--"pro environment"--get fleshed out into plans (as with his jobs plan), everything looks good.

The question in your mind would, I think, be: does he REALLY have those basic liberal instincts? If he does, you can probably trust his positions overall as they develop.

Very briefly, a few reasons in his favor (please, ignore the slander mongering that will arise again. . .)

(1) Voted for Clinton, Clinton, Gore.
(2) Amicus Curae brief in favor of affirmative action
(3) A proven _DEVOTION_ to multilateralism, and working with our Allies, in the pecking order of the UN and then NATO. His actions have confirmed this, as have his two books and many articles.

There's a lot more, but that's a sampling. Political views often come in packages, and those are the actions of a Democrat, not a Republican and certainly not a GOPer.

And watch him in interviews or read his longer pieces. If he's not a confirmed Democrat, he's the best actor in the world.

[Julien Sorel]

9. What a waste of a poll.

How about some more choices: because he has a chance to permanently alter the way the Democratic Party is perceived.

Because he has a chance to change the demographic base of Democratic appeal.

Because he has integrity.

And the thing about 'he's the only one who can beat Bush' is garbage, as has already been pointed out. It should read 'because he has the best chance of beating Bush,' but you've obviously been infected by the anti-Clark, pro-Dean spin to the point where you can no longer weed it out of your normal thought process.

[gully]

10. Hell I'll reword it man...

shisa! And, I'll ignore your insults in the process.

I added another option or two as well... I am trying to get a rough idea, not trivialize your support mmmmkkk???

[RandomUser]

38. thanks for the rewording

makes the poll a bit more informative. An interesting poll.

[clar]

30. Oh please,

There was nothing anti-Clark about this poll. The person posting it is clearly going out of his way to avoid being negative about him. Wish I could say the same for you. In a recent thread not only did you repeatedly opine that Dean is a "reeking piece of shit", you also suggested that he wasn't fit to lick the toilet bowl of a certain fictional character. After making comment like these, your stating that someone has "been infected by the anti-Clark, pro-Dean spin", is utterly laughable.

[RichM]

15. What a silly poll. No criticism permitted, only ass-kissing & flattery?

:puke:

[gully]

18. huh?

The question is for Clark Supporters. Who should I have them criticize?

[WillyT]

20. LOL... I Was Thinkin The Same Thing !!!

:shrug:

[Brian Sweat]

35. Any person with half a brain would realize that it would be totally

illogical to have an option critical of Clark in a poll asking Clark supporters what they like about Clark.

Is there something you really hate about the candidate you support that is the primary reason you support that candidate.

[RandomUser]

37. He totally missed the point of the poll

They just knee-jerk react when they see a clark thread. His complaint doesn't even make sense in the context of this poll. Sigh.

[Bread and Circus]

19. Thanks Gully...

but I think it is really a combination of
things for me. A little of all of the above.

[gully]

21. I think most Clark supporters feel that way...

Thanks ;)

[Hamlette]

23. He's smart AND I agree with him

I heard him on TV months ago and thought "who is that guy? He's making sense."

Every time I heard him after that...same thing.

[WillyBrandt]

26. One more thing. . .

In addition to reasons stated above, a lot of us Clarkies look at Clark himself, and at the particular political situation we're in and think "Motherfucker! Stylistically, substantively, and politcally we have got the tri-fucking-fecta. We'd have to be nuts not to have this guy be our candidate."

That's not quite an answer to the poll question, but we think that is very many--though not all--regards he is simply a superior candidate. I feel personally that we lucked out with Clark running to beat Bush.

[catforclark2004]

27. Poll should have allowed me to vote "all of the above, and then some"

General Wesley Clark is who we need to cut the damm defense Budget back down to a freecking manageable size.....take that money and start working on reducing the deficit and shoring up Social Security!.....I am 45 on Oct 7th....and I want my social security when I retire...at the rate we are going....there won't be nothing there.

Other candidates, if elected, won't be able to touch the defense budget...they will be too busy proving themselves and shying away from the controversy it would bring.

Welsey Clark knows where the fat in the Military Budget is....knows what bases to shut down...knows what military hardware is meaningless....Bet he won't be approving no "small Nukes".......

Wesley Clark will make sure that veterans are taken cared of...

Wesley Clark doesn't want depleted Uranium laying around.......

Wesley Clark will call for a "real" investigation on 9/11.....

Wesley Clark will tell republican congressman to kiss his ass...in a very diplomatic way.

The other candidates will only dream of what they would want to do....but at the end, they will be too scared for their re-elections...as they are career politicians!

[Kahuna]

28. All of the above. Didn't vote because you didn't include..

that option.

[DemExpat]

31. Especially number 3, but all of the above...

:kick:
DemEx

[Rowdyboy]

32. 3-4-1-2

He's right on the issues that matter to me, he can change the public perception of liberals, he can whip the shit out of George Bush, and his military service and academic career are breathtaking.

Other than that, he's just like any other candidate.

Yeah, right.

[RandomUser]

33. I hope this dispells the myth that Clark supporters are lemmings

blinded by four stars and supporting him just because they believe he's the only electable one.

Most of us support Clark for all these reasons and more. And as seen in this poll, the dominant reason is not that he's a military guy, or that we believe he's the only one who can win. No matter how the anti-clarkers keeping say that.

[gully]

34. It was an interesting poll.

I tried to include what I had heard from Clark supporters.

Some have told me 'he's the only one who can win' etc... which is why I included it in the poll. I wanted to gauge how many Clark supporters felt that way. Others, in a round about way, think he's the only Democrat who can go left with out being criticized.

What I've found overwhelmingly though is that the military experience plays a huge role in his support. I don't criticize it, I understand the thought process now. I respect the reasoning behind his support. He's viewed as a liberal General. Some see that as the ideal package. And, again I respect that.

I appreciated the dialogue and chance to learn more. ;)

[RandomUser]

36. All these factors play a role

And no matter what each supporter says is the dominant reason with their vote in this poll, we all agree that we're influenced by all these factors, I think.

I don't think Clark is the only one who can win, but he's the one who can give us the biggest landslide, and shift perception of the party, and has the best chance to move the center leftwards. His military credentials is a plus, certainly.

But when it comes down to it. We're not voting for the uniform, or for the electability, or for the issues, or for strategic realignment of the country's politics. We're voting for the whole package. And any candidate (not just clark) should be judged on the whole package of who he is. I think all of the candidates have pluses and minuses, even clark to some extent, but when you consider the whole package, Clark wins out for us Clark supporters. At this point in history, with these circumstances, we see a rare unusual chance, not just politics as usual. If we succeed, we'll have created a new image of the Democratic party in the minds of voters for decades to come, and earned the right to set the liberal agenda for the next century.

Much as some may hate Clinton, he has undeniably grasped the mantle of the economy for democrats. Prior to him, democrats were seen as fiscially irresponsible and bad for the economy. No one can ever say that about us again, because we had one of the largest economic booms in history under Clinton. Clark will add the mantle of patriotism to our party (I don't mean just the military, but everything that goes with patriotism -- the flag, the constitution, identity with the founding fathers, country music, that special something that makes your heart puff out in pride when you hear the national anthem, etc.). When people think of the flag, of what it means to be a true American, they'll think of democrats if we play this right. Everytime they hear the national anthem at a sports stadium, we want them to think of democrats. And with this new influence we can shift the entire country leftwards more easily.