What is the case for Clark?

[goobergunch]

There are a LOT of Clark supporters on this board. I've been a bit harsh with some of them, and I apologize for that. However, I don't know too much about Clark on the issues. All I basically know is that he has a great bio and is a good speaker.

So Clark supporters, why should I or anyone else support Wesley Clark for President? Issues only, please...and no flames.

[Democat]

1. The best case for Clark is...

He can win.

http://www.draftwesleyclark.com/Biography.htm
http://www.draftwesleyclark.com/on_the_issues.htm

[whathappened]

2. don't no much about him

myself , other then seeing him on cnn well the war was being fought , i no he can use a pointer to point at things on a map well covering our invasion of iraq , i too would like to no more about him

[Nashyra]

3. Start at the Leadership for America Site

then go onto the clark weblog, there you will be directed to numerous interviews and articles which articulate many of his views on the issues. Happy reading and thanks for the civilized inquiry.

[Mz Pip]

4. There is plenty of info

if you want to take the time to read it.

http://www.wesleyclarkweblog.com
http://www.draftwesley clark.com

Pay particular attention to his Leadership for America site and read the Esquire article.

MzPip
:dem:

[PROGRESSIVE1]

5. I had stated before that there is a Pro-Dean Bias on.....

the DU discussion board! While Dean is in the upper half of my choices he IS NOT MY FIRST CHOICE! I would Support Wes Clark if he throws in his hat! Clark is a credible voice on foreign policy issues and it is very important that we be so next year!!! On domestic issues he is much more progressive than Dr. Dean, Those of us here who do not support Dean should be given alot more consideration!

[Starpass]

11. Prog--thank you, I agree that Clark is very good on foreign issues

and of course, things military. AND I do so very much trust him more on social positions than Dean. I'm leary of what Dean's real social positions are regarding programs, etc. this country so desperately needs or needs to keep viable. And, I do think we need someone with some experience outside the US and dealing with foreign powers. I've had enough of the guber that's in office now and his total lack of knowing how to talk and deal with others in the world. This nation so desperately needs this skill back. Clinton had it. Gore would have had it. Dean, I feel would be another bumbling Bush.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

14. Thank You Starpass!!!

:kick:

[Brucey]

6. Yikes,

Because of the extreme actions by the warmongers, it will now be difficult for a lot of people to vote for someone with a military career. It is a wee bit mindful of the Humphrey loss. Some people couldn't get behind him and stayed home or voted third party because he had the smell of war on him.

[Mz Pip]

7. McGovern was anti war

and still lost to Nixon. Vietnam had cost Americans more lives than Iraq has to date and Nixon's dirty tricks in Watergate had already started to come out. Being anti-war wasn't enough.

I don't think Clark's military background all by itself matters much, but he is progressive on all the domestic issues that matter. Clark's miltary experience does inoculate him somewhat for his position against the Iraq war. It doesn't turn him into a Teflon candidate but it doesn't hurt either.

Being a career military person and being against the war are not mututally exclusive. In a way , it gives his position more credibilty.

MzPip
:dem:

[PROGRESSIVE1]

10. Yes!!!

and he has first hand experience on security and defense issues!

[alexwcovington]

8. What does Clark stand for?

We KNOW he's a general. What's his position on the pressing issues?

[Kahuna]

16. He stands for restoring our constitution, ridding us of

the fear-mongering and conducting the office of president with dignity instead of smoke and mirrors and showmanship.

[Wendec]

18. Okay, here's why I support him

I cannot make the case nearly as articulately as Clark himself can in the speeches available at digitalclark.com, but as a quick summary, my support for him is based upon:

-- Strong and consistent views on foreign policy, particularly the
need to return to a policy of multilateralism to address world
problems

-- View that the war in Iraq was "elective" and unnecessary

-- Opposition to Bush tax cuts

-- Opposition to Patriot Act

-- Strong criticism of Bush's behavior

-- Latest quote (from U. S. News) on the nature of the political
system in U.S. "We've got one party that's pushing the bounds,
between the impeachment, the Florida recount, and the
California recall. Are we going to have a two-party system with
reasonable and informed debate, or are we going to collapse into
a single-party system?

-- Obvious intelligence (first in class at West Point, Rhodes
Scholar)

-- Pro-choice position; statement that military should rethink
"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy because it's not working

-- Electability potential -- very progressive views without the
snarl can be coupled with military background to appeal to a
wide range of voters, particularly those not dedicated
Democrats

There's a lot more to say, but this is a nutshell of my thinking.

[LEW]

9. I support Clark because (repeat posted on another thread)

He knows for which he speaks...(something Dumba certainly doesn't) He is intellegent, articulate, knowledgeable and easy on the eyes. (Sorry but the last one counts to some)

I truely believe he can attract the undecided, the sometimes Repubs and centerist. (I am also more convinced then ever that Dean cannot)

I think his stategy has been brilliant; keep the mystery going, generate enthusiasm, build support, let other candidates go after each other (which they are doing) then announce like a breath of fresh air....and win the nomination.

Looks like Clinton is supporting him and will be throwing considerable resources and votes his way....

[FDRLincoln]

12. The case for Clark: perspective

I decided to back Clark because he has the best perspective on our current troubles. Everything I've heard him say makes it clear that he understand the HISTORIC importance of the 2004 election.

THIS IS NOT JUST ABOUT POLICY DISPUTES. Bush isn't just making "bad" decisions that are easily correctable. He is making HORRIBLE decisions that could seriously endanger the stability of the world and the survival of American democracy itself. THESE ARE THE STAKES, and Clark, more than the other candidates, understands it.

Don't get me wrong, I think the others, Dean and Kerry especially, understand how important the current moment is. But Clark has a broader historical view, and is able to articulate that in a way that the average person can understand. Dean is too "angry" to do that well, and Kerry is too "patrician."

That's why I back Clark.

[Mz Pip]

13. Clark's statements on Real Time

It's the Democracy, stupid. :-)

"We live in a liberal democracy. That's what we created in this
country. It's in our constitution! We should be very clear on this...
this country was founded on the principles of the enlightenment. It was
the idea that people could talk, have reasonable dialogue and discuss
the issues. It wasn't founded on the idea that someone would get struck
by a divine inspiration and know everything, right from wrong. People
who founded this country had religion, they had strong beliefs, but they
believed in reason, and dialogue, and civil discourse. We can't lose
that in this country. We've got to get it back."


This pretty much sealed the deal for me.

MzPip
:dem:

[tjdee]

15. Just saw that last night, and he was revved up

and ready to go--he kept asking Maher if he could expand on what he'd said.

I'm tellin' ya--if Michael Moore and Bill Maher (well, at least his mom!), two Nader voters, like Clark, there's something to be said for the guy.

[Stargleamer]

17. Clark supporters want a Democratic landslide in 2004

They believe that Clark would win every state except Utah, Texas and Idaho.

[TacticalPeek]

19. Shrub will have to fight for Texas, from a fetal position in Crawford.

[CoffeePlease1947]

20. Why I am leaning toward Clark

The main reason is because Bush has messed up things for the US in almost every country except maybe Poland.

So what if we just win with Dean or somebody else. We need someone that can fix things and restore integrity for the nation in the eyes of the world. That isn't going to be easy. Clark has enough experience, and the right kind, as far as I can tell, to help in this effort.

Dean might be a really good domestic policy President. But that is not what the real problem is. The real problem is that we have no friends. I think once we restore our friendships with other nations our economy will come back strong and we can have dignity again.

Bush has left use a great big pile of shit to shovel with more to come in.

I view the economy like straw, and foreign policy like shit. Clark, Kerry, and Edwards have have a flat nose shovel, Dean, Kucinich, and Gephardt have pitch forks. I favor the guys with flat nose shovel over the pitch forks.

Mike

[Donna Zen]

21. Good debate

breakdown from TNR stating the case for Dean and Clark:

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=debate&s=foerscheiber090203

Personally I find the Clark case the more compelling, not because of the Dem establishment, but because I clearly see that we must nominate the strongest candidate. And if we are going to fight the fight I fear is coming, I want a General leading the battle against the chickenhawk fratboy.

[RichM]

22. Here's how it works. You assume that most of the rightwing world-view is

correct:

- that Democrats are soft on defense, & thus not really patriotic.
- that Americans now live in constant fear, ever since 9/11, & that this is quite reasonable (& can potentially be politically exploited)
- that the military is an institution that Americans rightly revere & should look to, in times of trouble
- that what's important about a candidate is not so much what his specific program is, but whether or not he's a celebrity, & what position he's formerly held. (Of course, extra points are awarded for being handsome & having a nice smile.)

You add in that the Democrats are desperate, don't really know what they stand for anyway, & have already shown that they're more than willing to imitate Republicans.

Finally, you add in that Clark is an intelligent guy, with at least some socially liberal-sounding viewpoints (though much of the detail here remains to be seen).

This is the basic case.