Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Who's Your Choice If It's Between Clark & Edwards For VP?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
stopbush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 04:48 PM
Original message
Poll question: Who's Your Choice If It's Between Clark & Edwards For VP?
Edited on Fri May-14-04 04:58 PM by stopbush
CNN Veepstakes has narrowed it to these two outstanding gents. Your choice?

On edit: chnaged to reflect that this is CNN's Veepstakes poll saying this, NOT John Kerry. Sorry about the mislead on the original post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Langis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 04:51 PM
Response to Original message
1. With Iraq the way it is, Clark.
Edited on Fri May-14-04 04:51 PM by Langis
If Iraq was in better shape I would say Edwards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StephNW4Clark Donating Member (547 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
2. Wait a second.
Is this john Kerry saying he's narrowed the choice to those two men, or is it CNN's online Veepstakes that has narrowed down the alternatives?

Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stopbush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. I think I may have jumped the gun. It looks like their Veepstakes
is calling it.

I'll try to change my original post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catch22Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 04:53 PM
Response to Original message
3. Clark in a heartbeat
And I say that with great love and respect for Edwards, but Clark has been hitting the campaign trail hard, as of late. He's also been on every news channel spreading the word, so I say Clark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooky3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #3
13. Edwards has been doing the same, not only for Kerry but for Senate
candidates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catch22Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #13
19. My apologies then
I just haven't been looking in the right places. Thanks. Would love to have a pic of Kerry and Edwards if ya got one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ginger1 Donating Member (28 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #3
15. Clark
Damn! I love the man.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SW FL Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
5. Are you referring to the CNN Veepstakes?
If so that is a poll open to any person who registers with CNN. It isn't an official news story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
6. I am not so sure
that either one delivers a state for Kerry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
7. I hope both are in the Kerry Administration.
Both are very impressive. Clark has obvious advantages in the area of defense and foreign policy. But he could be Secretary of State. Or Edwards could be Attorney General. Our party has numerous choices, almost all of them STRONG. The republicans are looking weaker every day.YIPPIE!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Darkamber Donating Member (507 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
8. Clark always wins on DU polls...
That said, I'd still like Clark for Sec. of State and Edwards for VP.

Think of Clark standing before the United Nations.

Why do you guys want Clark in the VP position? He can do much more good and be much more effective in the Sec. of State position.

And I think 3 months from now people are going to be sick of war and might want a choice or some hope and change to vote for. Edwards offers hope and positive voice to the ticket.

Clark would be best suited in a position where he can actually get something done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MontecitoDem Donating Member (542 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Why do you want Edwards?
Clark has the intellect, tempermant, and experience to be extraodinary in the White House. He also will bring over certain voters who in the past only vote for Republicans based on national security concerns(like my Dad). With Edwards, I feel that although he is charismatic, he doesn't offer much else. He has the same voting record and is also a Senator - so who will he draw that isn't already going to vote for a democrat? I think Edwards needs more years in public service, but I am truly open to be convinced otherwise.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Darkamber Donating Member (507 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. Why Edwards?
Edwards has the same ability to attract Swing Republicans and independents. From the Republicans that I have talked to it was Edwards that they supported and not Clark. In fact, my Republican parents in AZ couldn't stand Clark.

Edwards might not have extensive foreign policy experience but that is the only thing he is light on. He has the ability to connect to people and win an argument.

He's the only candidate who ever inspired me. He's the only one, who's positions I totally agreed with and who's plans for change were realist and doing able and worked toward what we need to do the most...raise and strength the middle class.

I want someone who has worked in the private sector and who can fight against Corps. Someone who has fought and won against Corps. Edwards can do this.

Also, he doesn't just bring one state with him. He helps over a wide range of states. He's popular in Washington State. So much so that the re-pubs had to pull out Elizabeth Dole, Sen. NC, to support George Neathercut who is going against our Sen. Patty Murrey. Edwards was out here doing a fundraiser for Patty.

And I've watched the house and Senate at CSPAN and just can't picture Clark walking around them. Edwards has the law background and he can help turn the Senate and House to Democratic and that is what Kerry will need.

Clark, I think is best in the Sec. of State position. Here his foreign policy experience will shine and he can do what he is best at. If you are worried about a run for Pres. in 2012, there's no reason why the Sec. of State couldn't run just as much as the VP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Awsi Dooger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 06:18 AM
Response to Reply #17
28. Edwards is simply a far superior campaigner
Clark's DU apologists eagerly ignore that he sounded great before the primaries, and since they ended, but was an ineffective dud during them. Other than sweater election and showing up in the first little New Hampshire hamlet I can't think of anything memorable he said or did during the primaries.

I'm a big fan of Clark but Edwards has been my choice for over 2 years, P now VP. Runaway optimism, effective and TV-friendly sound bytes like that "objects closer than they appear" classic.

Edwards can blow away Cheney with smiles and likeability alone. It's absolutely amazing to me how lousy the handicapping is on DU, assessing everything in regard to policy fears. Meanwhile, I host debate watching parties and the casual swing voters in my living room react to appearance, charisma and generic upbeat themes much more than laundry list policy garbage. I knew Gore had blown his lead immediately during debate #1 in 2000 when the women seated next to me were aghast at his behavior.

Edwards was the proper choice for president. The same blinders-on, perpetually scared DUers who rejected Edwards as too weak on national security then, will elevate Clark and his mediocre campaigning now. Frankly, the VP slot is laughably overstated and we spend gobs more energy and space debating it on DU than it warrants. But give me the inspirational speaker, the one guy Republicans were most concerned about all along.

Strange, isn't it, when Republicans claimed they lusted after Dean as our nominee, Dean's supporters on DU insisted that meant it was Dean they most feared. Then after Dean imploded you heard Republicans sayng they knew a Dean nomination was too good to be true, a real pipe dream. Later, when Republicans professed to fear John Edwards the most, cynical DUers knew that signified the GOP considered Edwards a real softie and were begging us to nominate him. Once in a while Republicans actually tell the truth, and we're too stupid or stunned to take advantage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RafterMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 06:28 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. "Smiles and likeability"
Draft Mr. Rogers!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jai4WKC08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #28
32. "that 'objects closer than they appear' classic"
Good example! A real classic.

'Course, it was first used about Clark, when he was gaining so fast on Dean in late December. Never did get the media play-time for Clark that it did for Edwards. Wonder why?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shivaji Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #28
44. You make excellent points about Edwards...good post !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #11
21. I want Edwards because America needs a solution in the vein of FDR,
in my opinion.

I see the reason that we're in Iraq as a subset of a bigger problem of power flowing up to a class of fewer, wealthier people. We have totally abandoned many of the prinicples upon which American strength in the wake of the New Deal was founded.

To me, Clark may address the problem of Iraq, but Edwards addresses the bigger problem which is the death of democracy through the strangulation of the middle class and working class.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Darkamber Donating Member (507 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. thank you...you said it much better then me...
Exactly...The war will not be everything forever and when it ends, we will be a finacial mess. We will need someone to help dig us out.

Edwards, I see as the person who can help Kerry to do that.

Clark is the short term answer, but Edwards is the long term answer.

Also, he represents a voice that should have a say. Part of a whole generation that had no wars to fight. My generation and I'ld like our view being included at the top.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. He represents people who grew up DURING America's economic golden age
and got the great public education, and had the expectations, but graduated INTO the decline of the American economy, and he sees a one-to-one correlation between that decline and the assualt on the middle and working class by the super wealthy.

Edwards says that he worked hard and got to realize the full value of his efforts, that he feels lucky, and that he wants to create an America where everyone has those opportunities (and where luck doesn't play the biggest part).

This, to me, is the solution to the problems.

It'd be great to have someone on the ticket who understands what's wrong with America and has the real solution for the problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jai4WKC08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #8
16. Lots of reasons, but mostly
Because Clark is the best qualified to step in if, God forbid, something should happen to Kerry.

I'd also like to see Clark get another shot in 8 years, but a lot can happen between now and then.

And finally, I do think Clark can make the biggest contribution as VP. VP is elected, not appointed. Doesn't need Senate confirmation. And presides OVER the Secretaries of State and Defense (at the pleasure of the President, to be sure). Clark has experience on both sides of that fence--he needs to be in a position to help balance the two.

My turn: Why do you think people will be sick of the war in a couple months? I mean, I'm sick of it now. That's why I want someone to do something to fix it. But it's not a TV show you can turn off when you get tired of it. It won't get cancelled by the network just because people quit watching.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donna Zen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #8
18. Why?
You are correct that there both of these men need to be on the team. Holbrooke will be SoS, which only leaves the VP spot for Clark. That is the truth and there are many reasons why that is so.

Even though there is reason to believe that Clark would prefer SoS, I'm sure that Clark would never do anything to undermine Holbrooke's chances. They faced death together and returned. Holbrooke was the first person Clark called when Shelton and Cohen stuck the knife in his back.

Edwards OTOH would benefit and actually have a higher profile if tapped for a cabinet position.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shivaji Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 05:56 PM
Response to Original message
9. If it is Clark, I most certainly will vote for Nader
I can never trust a dude who a couple of years ago was
raising funds for repugs and extolling shrubs virtues.

At best he is a chameleon, at worst he is a repug Trojan
horse or Hillary2008 Trojan horse for the purpose of
scuttling Kerry campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RafterMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. That's odd
You accuse him of possibly trying to scuttle the Kerry campaign and out of vengeance, you will vote for Nader.

Why doesn't ths add up?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shivaji Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 08:29 PM
Response to Reply #10
40. Oh yes it adds up alright.....
if Kerry is foolish enough to pick this Trojan horse,
I can not trust his judgement as C in C. My Nader vote
is the strongest protest I can make.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MontecitoDem Donating Member (542 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. silliness to the extreme.
What about Nader makes him qualified to be President? How will he work with Congress to accomplish anything?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shivaji Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #12
41. If Kerry cjooses Edwards, Gephardt, Dean, or any other
proven dem, Kerry ofcourse gets my vote. But a johnny
come lately Clark, the recent extoller of shrub's virtues
will make me register a protest vote for Nader. I could
never get myself to vote for shrub no matter how inept
and foolish Kerry's decisions would be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jai4WKC08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #41
46. A vote for Nader IS a vote for Bush
There is no difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. Ridiculous
to the point of laughable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
surfermaw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #9
22. You said it, what if Kerry should die, we would have another Rep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shivaji Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #22
43. Exactly right.....Keery has cancer and repugs have Clark as a
Trojan horse. SCARRRRRYYYYYY.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #9
33. Funny, considering Nader quotes Clark when talking about Iraq
he chided Moore for his support, but it seems Moore enlightened him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shivaji Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #33
42. I am afraid you are missing my point my friend....
I DO NOT TRUST CLARLK!!!! It is as simple as that.
How can I when he was praising Bush's policies
just a couple of years ago. And was actively raising
funds for the repugs.

In addition, Clark has never been ELECTED to any office,
not even a dog catcher. Can you name me ONE person who
got elected president without being elected before. Yeah
Eisenhower was an exception. After millions of deaths and
half a dozen years of WW II, people voted IKE in gratitude.
Besides it was the early 50's. A totally different era.
Blacks did not even get to vote in southern states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jai4WKC08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #42
45. He was not "actively raising funds"
Clark spoke at a LOCAL Repub dinner. Big friggin' deal. No one knew who he was but a local boy done good. He was trying to make contacts in the community. He complimented his hosts and their sponsors. But if you read the content of his remarks, he was saying all the same things he has said since, about supporting NATO and other international institutions, being a partner in the world community.

You have no reason at all to believe Clark is untrustworthy. He has never ever lied about anything. Even when it would have obviously have been to his advantage to do so, even when it was something he could never have been called out on.

But fine, don't trust him. But don't expect the rest of us to accept that you have any rational reason not to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donna Zen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #42
50. Please take the time to read the speech
You have said that Clark "agreed" with bush policies, while what he actually said was that thought the team was good. Well, since the Democrats in the Senate voted for that team and made the rounds of the talk shows praising that team, one would think Clark was just following the Democratic party line. Furthermore, as has been pointed out to you today and many times on DU, Clark's speech was in exact opposition of the bush policies that would later emerge. Although the tax cuts were already shaped, this being a Foreign Policy speech, Clark was not referring to domestic policy.

Each of us has the right to our opinions, and I value yours; nevertheless, disliking someone is no excuse for misrepresenting the facts. I believe that discussions are heightened with by the truth, and that truth is that Wes Clark campaigned actively for Democratic candidates not repub. during the election cycle that fall within the time frame of that speech.

When asked to give that speech, a request from a very close friend, Clark orginally declined because of a scheduling problem. The original speech was not to be part of a "fund raiser." The friend then asked Clark if he would speek on a different date. That is how that occured.

The only donations Clark made in campaign contributions at that time were to Democrats.

Again, he didn't vote for the team, however, many of those names being floated in opposition to Clark did. So what can one make of that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 08:40 PM
Response to Original message
20. Either one.
I like them both.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ibegurpard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
24. Don't care
Neither one does anything for me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 10:11 PM
Response to Original message
26. Clark. Guy who opposed the war, not the one who would've started it himsel
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 10:15 PM
Response to Original message
27. I hope Chris Heinz is still an ACTIVE member!
If he is, Wesley Kanne Clark is "in like Flint." :7

Clark's the man! Go Wes!!!!!!!!! :bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xkenx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 10:38 AM
Response to Original message
30. HERE'S WHY CLARK

Why General Clark is the best choice for VP:

Polls show Kerry ahead of W on domestic issues, behind on national security. Overall a dead heat. W may creep up domestically as economy improves, so Kerry needs to siphon away some of W's support on security. way, and This election WILL be about national security and terrorism because W will make it that. Look at the headlines from Iraq dominating the news. Bush has already put Kerry on the defensive questioning Senate votes and the "ribbon-throwing" incident. All Bush has to do is neutralize Kerry on war/terror, and he keeps his lead. Kerry can co-opt the national security theme on Bush.
Enter Wes Clark: Clark can stand up and say, "Vietnam was a disaster, but I stayed in the military afterwards to build the great all-volunteer Army we have today. Sen. Kerry said "Send me to Vietnam" and served with great courage and honor in that war. Sen Kerry criticized that war afterwards, and I consider that dissent an act of patriotism, for he had the nation's best interests at heart. Sen. Kerry backed up that service by serving his country for these many years in the Senate, including not forgetting Vietnam as he worked with Sen.McCain for years to retrieve our POW's & MIAs. I am proud to stand with Sen. Kerry, a man I consider to be one of the great patriots of our time". (As he wraps himself in the flag and talks about winning the only war NATO ever fought, this man who is one of the most decorated military heroes in U.S. history). This man can bring in military and ex-military votes which NO other VP candidate can do,and he is "squeaky-clean."

There are many other areas where Clark complements Kerry:

1.Ability to step into the Presidency if necessary. Clark has a career of military and diplomatic leadership unparalled. He has earned the respect of European leaders (he has knighthoods or the equivalent from 18 european nations) and understands the Arab world. NO ONE has Clark's credentials to help repair our alliances around the world and gracefully resolve the Iraq problem. Plus, something that many people do not realize, as one of our major military commanders, Clark had "domestic affairs" responsibilities similar to those of mayors and governors. He was responsible for the everyday lives (schools, healthcare, safety, career advancement, etc.) of those under his command, numbering hundreds of thousands at times.

2.Clark brings a "common man" background, someone who grew up poor, earned an appointment to West Point where he finished 1st in his class,
became a decorated war hero--someone with the brains, talent, and drive to go into the business world and make lots of money--who instead chose to serve his country for another 30 years or so. If this man isn't a true American hero, I don't know who is.

3. Agreement on issues: Kerry and Clark are very closely in agreementon Foreign Affairs / Homeland Security issues as well as on Free
Trade, and most domestic issues.

4. Campaigning against Bush: Clark has demonstrated, both during his campaign and since endorsing Kerry, that he is both loyal to Kerry and is a tireless campaigner against Bush. Clark has "fire in his belly" on defeating Bush. Clark can take on Bush/Cheney on all issues, especially those
where Bush would like to think he is strongest.

5. Helping to win Electoral Votes - Clark should help to win all the Swing States that Al Gore just missed winning and retain the Blue States that Bush would like to have. Most candidates are mentioned because they might win one state for Kerry, Clark could help in ALL of the above swing states. This is because he is an Arkansas Southerner who also proved to be popular in the Southwest and among Hispanics and American Indians. In fact, with General Clark's military background and "All American" image he has more popularity than most democrats such as John Kerry in all parts of the country where Republicans tend to be popular. With his Military Supreme Commander status, if he could get just 10% of military families to vote Democratic (who would otherwise vote Republican) this could change the outcome in a number of states. Although Wes is now a very progressive Democrat, his past background makes people feel secure. His comfort with Religion also helps. Both Kerry and Clark have a long history of using guns (despite being pro gun control.)

6. Taking on Dick Cheney: There will be a VP debate. Only Clark can face Cheney and cite Pentagon "inside information" about how Cheney decided from the beginning to go to war with Iraq. On all military related issues, Clark will be more believable than Cheney to millions of swing voters. 4 star hero vs. the
"chickenhawk."

7. Raising funds for Kerry: This is very important to Kerry since Bush has raised so much money. It was Wes Clark who raised almost $9 million in January alone, pre-matching funds. This was about 2 million more than his closest rival. In the 5 months of his campaign, he raised about as much as Dean. While Dean started the Internet dominance, Clark continued it with equal success and still has the best web site and Blog Community around. Since Dean isn't suitable as Kerry's VP, Clark is the best choice to attract the "outsider" type people who support Dean. Clark was often the 2nd choice among Dean supporters and their 1st choice for VP under Dean. In summary, with Clark as VP choice, there would be BY FAR the largest fundraising boost to the Kerry campaign as well as a likely union with Howard Dean and his supporters. Lets also remember that Clark was the most popular with the wealthy and powerful Hollywood crowd.

8. Mutual respect: Since Kerry and his VP choice will probably be together for months, getting along with mutual respect is very important. They have to be able to share each other's secrets. As has been demonstrated repeatedly, their mutual respect for each other's careers is apparent.

9. Kerry and Clark already have a name for their ticket that no one else can claim, "TWO PATRIOTS, ONE MISSION." This alone will be worth millions in free advertising. Undecided voters are easily swayed by these powerful slogans.

10. Appeal to the Church going Americans and Patriotism-Wes Clark has a background that includes several faiths. He is the "most comfortable" of all the major VP contenders with "God" and "American Patriotism". The Flag really means something to him. This is why he is a danger to Republicans in all parts of the country. He still is Karl Rove's worst Nightmare.

11. Is VP the best position for Clark? Some would say that Clark should be saved for Secretary of State. However, if we waited, it is very possible that Kerry would lose a close election. Additionally, as VP he could be used as a 2nd Secretary of State, Defense and Homeland Security. As shown by Cheney, a VP can be very powerful when they are strong and respected by the President in National Security issues.

Please, for the good of the country, select Wes Clark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xkenx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
31. CLARK IS A DEM.
All this stuff about Wes Clark not being a real Dem.--people should really look at the man's background and campaign history. Yes, he voted for Reagan and Bush 41, when most military people did so because the R's were perceived as stronger on defense. As a military leader, Clark was non-partisan. If you look at his record in the military, you see a supporter of equal opportunity, affirmative action, support for quality education and healthcare. Clark was a Democrat in deeds before he even realized that he is one. Please read the below commentaries from/about those who served with him. Wes Clark is a true American hero whom we Dems. are lucky to have in our fold.
The following are posts to CCN
---------------------------------------------------------------------
By cris
Posted to cris's weblog (Firsthand Accounts) on Tue Nov 18th, 2003 at 03:51:17 PM PST
The Man for all Reasons
If you are lucky, once in your lifetime a truly exceptional person will cross your path. I met and know such a person: General Wesley Clark. For three years, I had the privilege of working for General Clark when he served as Supreme Allied Commander-Europe. I can attest to the fact that he is a general's general and a soldier's general.

I first met General Clark in June 1998 on a special assignment in Maastricht, Belgium, in support of General Hugh Shelton. I was immediately struck by two things. First, although General Clark wore the uniform of a four star General, he spoke as though he were a polished diplomat. He seemed comfortable in both worlds - as a General and as a spokesman for NATO.

The second thing I noticed was the way he treated his subordinates. He treated everyone equally, regardless of their rank, and he listened - really listened - to what people had to say. And the General's security detail clearly loved working for him. This is not common; most security guys don't get to know their principals on a personal basis.

A year later, I got a call from my assignment officer. He told me I could either work at the Pentagon for the Secretary of Defense, or I could work for General Clark. After my memorable first encounter with him, there was no question what I would do. I said that I wanted to work for General Clark.

In the weeks before I arrived at SHAPE (Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe), I thought that I would be the "token Hispanic." When I arrived, I quickly found out that I was mistaken. I had never seen so many minorities working in any high-powered setting. I learned that it was because General Clark values diversity and wants to give everyone a chance.

And from the moment I arrived, General Clark and his wife did everything they could to make me feel welcome. My first assignment was to take the General to his quarters and then to a dinner engagement with NATO officials. After the event, the first thing General Clark asked me was whether I had gotten anything to eat. To most four-star generals, security is an instrument. With General Clark, it was a different story. He always treated his staff like family.

During the war in Kosovo, I saw how deeply compassionate General Clark is. He worried about the pilots who were out on night missions, and he would not go to sleep until he knew the last pilot had bedded down. Instead, he would work in his study, going over the latest intelligence reports and providing updates to the alliance and officials back in Washington. When he finally went to bed, it was only for two hours, and more often than not, he would be awakened by calls. His instruction to me before going to bed was: "Cris, push every call through." No rest for the General.

In fact, I don't think anyone in the U.S. armed forces worked harder than the General. His superiors in Washington, DC knew this. They would often preface their calls by saying, "Don't wake General Clark." All of us who worked for him were amazed by his constant upbeat tempo and energy. We wanted to do everything possible to take care of him because he was doing so much for America and NATO.

And no matter how pressing a situation became, General Clark always stayed calm. I recall when an F-117 went down - the only plane to go down during the entire campaign. In contrast to other officers I knew who would explode in tense moments, General Clark remained calm and efficiently took the necessary steps.

I don't think anyone else could have done what the General did at NATO. For anyone who thinks that was a small accomplishment, just get nineteen friends together for dinner and try to pick a restaurant as a group. General Clark took nineteen countries and built consensus through dialogue. He gave Milosevic a chance, and then took action only as a last resort.

General Clark is an extraordinary leader. People trusted him because they knew that he was honest and a straight shooter. And there was no mincing words with him. He always wanted to hear the truth. You didn't put things off. He wanted to know what had gone wrong so that he could make corrections and get back on the right track.

But most of all, General Clark is loyal -- loyal to his country and to the United States Army, the organization that brought him up from West Point cadet to Supreme Allied Commander. I have worked around a lot of generals, and I can say that the Boss is one of the best I've ever worked with. He cared deeply about the soldiers he led, treated all of us who worked for him with the highest respect, and served his country with dedication, courage and honor.
From the right front seat

Cris Hernandez Jr, Chief Warrant Officer (Ret)
Former Personal Security Officer to the Supreme Allied Commander, Europe
Casa Grande, AZ
---------------------------------------------------------------------
This one from interviews


As a junior Navy officer, Eric Massa had no choice the first time he went to work for Gen. Wesley Clark in 1996, as Clark's assistant in Panama. The Navy set up the interview, and Massa hoped to mangle it with blunt honesty.

"I didn't want the job, and I told him so," said Massa. "I was afraid of working for a pompous moron, of which there are several wearing stars. I had worked for senior officers who didn't care about people, and I didn't want to do that again."

It turned out Massa and Clark had something in common there, and Massa spent the next four years attached to Clark, first in Panama and then in Europe, during Clark's stint as supreme allied commander in Europe.

When Massa left Clark in 1999 it was under protest and only because Massa had been diagnosed with advanced cancer. Now, years later, Massa - recovered and retired from the Navy - is working for Clark's army again, this time as a campaign staffer trying to get Clark elected to the White House.

Massa wasn't looking for the job this time, either. Clark asked

him to come on board after learning a month ago that Massa had "involuntarily resigned" from his government job at the urging of Republican bosses. They were upset that Massa had visited Clark at a Democratic campaign event.

"They said I was a political liability and that if I liked Wes Clark so much I should go work for him," Massa said. A lifelong Republican, Massa just re-registered as a Democrat. Massa is the son of a Navy man, and as such grew up outside America and with a respect for the military. The family came to the United States when Massa was 16, and after graduating from high school in Louisiana, Massa attended the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md.

In all, Massa spent 25 years in the Navy, 16 of them on sea duty. In the mid-1990s, Massa's commanding officer told him it was time to decide how he wanted to fulfill his joint duty, a requirement for officers to spend part of their service with another branch of the military.

When Massa said he wanted to do something out of the ordinary, he was told an Army general by the name of Wes Clark was looking for a Navy aide. All he knew about Clark was that he had stars on his Army uniform, and that didn't carry much weight with Massa.

Their 50-minute interview, however, convinced Massa to withhold judgment.

"He had questions I didn't expect from a military man," Massa said. "He asked me if I was familiar with Greek literature, if I read Homer, what I thought about the Illiad.

"And the last 20 minutes were devoted to people questions," Massa said. "He asked me what I would do if a young soldier came to me and told me his wife had died. Or a homosexual soldier told me he was being harassed. His whole thing was treating people with dignity and respect."

Three hours later, Massa was on a plane with Clark to Panama, where Clark was commander in chief of the U.S. Southern Command. Massa described his job as Clark's executive assistant and deputy chief of staff.

Once there, Massa asked Clark what the Homer question was about. Massa remembers the answer: "He said he was looking for someone who was well-rounded enough to talk about issues beyond military terms."

For about 13 months, Massa shadowed Clark, keeping notes of his meetings and drafting follow-up letters to the people Clark had met. Massa said Clark forbade his staff to begin any of his correspondence with "I" because Clark wanted the emphasis on the recipient, not himself.

A show of support
When Clark was promoted to supreme allied commander in Europe in 1997, he asked Massa to stay on and be his advance man. Massa agreed and moved his wife and kids, who had been waiting for him back in San Diego, to Brussels, Belgium. After Clark arrived, Massa was again a close assistant and became one of Clark's main liaisons to Washington, D.C.

Massa had every intention of staying in Europe as Clark's assistant until he got sick in late 1999. He hadn't recovered from running a half-marathon but chalked it up to the flu. He blew off a doctor's appointment his wife had made for him, thinking he'd work it off.

On Nov. 9, 1999, Massa looked up from his desk to find Clark standing there. Clark told Massa that his wife had called worried about his health.

Clark had arranged another doctor's appointment for Massa, and when Massa protested, Clark gave him the only direct order Massa recalls receiving in four years. "I think we have lost the fundamental relationship between a four-star general and a Navy commander," Clark told him. "You will go to the doctor."

The doctor diagnosed Massa, who had never smoked, with advanced lung cancer and gave him four months to live. Clark cut through red tape to get Massa and his family back to the United States for treatment.

Just before Massa left, Clark convened the staff and tearfully awarded Massa the Legion of Merit medal for his work. Clark had received the same medal in the 1970s when he was a speech writer for the then-supreme allied commander.

It's one of the few times Massa saw Clark cry.

"Everyone thought that was goodbye, that I was dying," Massa said.

Back home in San Diego, doctors were more optimistic and diagnosed Massa with non-Hodgkins lymphoma, not lung cancer, and began aggressive treatment.

Unknown to Massa, Clark had a soldier tracking Massa's surgery. As soon as Massa came to in recovery, staff told him he had a call. It was Clark. At the time, he was overseeing the bombing of Kosovo.

A different kind of service
Massa retired about three years ago; he waited so that the last thing he did in uniform was attend Clark's retirement. Now he's living in a hotel in Manchester, trying to avoid a fast-food diet and bringing his family in from New York when he can.

He talks wistfully about the job he lost to get here. Massa was in Washington overseeing part of the Navy budget as a member of the House Armed Services Committee. His departure was reported by the press and has since become fodder for online political sites.

But he doesn't regret where it got him. On the trail, Massa is helping get Clark the veteran vote - and whatever else needs doing.

"If Wes Clark asked me to jump off the Brooklyn Bridge, I'd ask him if he wanted it done in the summer or the winter," Massa said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Mario Cuomo said,

"Wes Clark is a man of whom you can ask a question, and he will look you directly in the eye, and give you the most truthful and complete answer you can imagine. You will know the absolute truth of the statement as well as the thought process behind the answer. You will have no doubt as to the intellect of the speaker and meaning of the answer to this question....So you can see, as a politician, he has a lot to learn."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
be inspired Donating Member (305 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
34. My choice is Edwards
My choice is Edwards, because he's the most amazing speaker I've ever heard, because he cares about working Americans, and because he's exactly what we need to bring some excitement to the campaign and defeat Bush. He'll get the women's vote, that's for sure!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kerry Edwards 2004 Donating Member (72 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. It Must Be Edwards!
Since Kerry has started talking bread and butter issues his numbers have gone up! The American people want a vision of hope in the midst of all of the negatives coming out about the war.

John Edwards is the best candidate to help Kerry communicate that vision.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. No it must NOT....
John Kerry doesn't need Edwards to talk Bread & Butter issues. He just demonstrated that according to your post......his numbers have gone up! To get the OTHER NUMBERS UP, Kerry will need someone that can bolster the areas he is seen weakest in.....and that ain't bread or butter!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
citizen snips Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 03:18 PM
Original message
By now you all should know how I voted for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU GrovelBot  Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
37. ## Support Democratic Underground! ##
==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v2.0
==================

The time now is 4:18:41PM EDT, Saturday, May 15, 2004.

There are exactly...
1 days,
7 hours,
41 minutes, and
19 seconds left in our fund drive.

This website could not survive without your generosity. Member donations
pay for more than 84% of the Democratic Underground budget. Don't let
GrovelBot become the next victim of the Bush economy. Bzzzt.

Please take a moment to donate to DU right now. Thank you for your support.

- An automated message from the DU GrovelBot


Click here to donate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
citizen snips Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
38. dope delete
Edited on Sat May-15-04 03:21 PM by MATTMAN
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ngGale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
39. Edwards for sure...
Kerry has experience and I feel sure he will choose Clark for a cabinet position. Meanwhile, Edwards can inspire and give hope to those of us who need it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abelman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 10:25 PM
Response to Original message
47. Clark
Ever since I found out about Clark I have been behind him. The man was drafted by a grassroots movement from the very beginning. He's a true patriot. Bush/Cheney have already tried to attack Kerry's credibility as a war hero and failed. Let's see them try again with Clark, eh?

This business about Clark not being a true Dem is total crap. He voted for Clinton. Twice. Then, he voted for Gore.

I agree he would be a great Secretary of State, and maybe from the overall view of your average fellow, Edwards might fly a little better, but I choose Clark because he's just so damn awesome.

A lot of emotion and not a lot of facts in that post, but I'm pretty tired.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #47
51. Welcome Abelman!
I can see you are a very able man...thoughtful, intelligent, and learned. Welcome aboard! :bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MoonRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 10:37 PM
Response to Original message
48. Why do we keep doing this?
Clark always wins by a landslide. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donating Member (549 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #48
49. amen to that
and BTW, between Clark and Edwards, I prefer Graham. :)
 Add to my Journal Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VOX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
52. Clark by a whisker...
A solid case could be made for either Clark or Edwards -- both gentlemen would make outstanding veep candidates.

But the way things are going in Iraq, the ME and globally, and with all the media focus on these events, Clark would probably be the wiser choice now, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lefty Pragmatist Donating Member (430 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
53. Clark to counter Cheney
Cheney v. Edwards would look like Bentson v. Quayle -- a rout in experience and gravitas. Edwards is effective as a Kennedyesque front man, but Veep is a meat-and-potatos, fingernails-dirty role and that's just not him. Edwards' ideal role is as a photogenic stumper to shore up the liberal base, to be rewarded with a high profile domestic cabinet post. He can then be a leading cheerleader for progressive economic and labor policy, which suits him and should please the faithful.

As for their pure ticket power, it's six of one half dozen of the other. Neither AS nor NC is going blue, so that's a wash.

Finally, the high road: who would you rather have a heartbeat away? I am taking it on faith that both men are honest and sincere, so I would rather have Clark's executive and leadership skills should anything terrible happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elperromagico Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 04:04 AM
Response to Reply #53
58. I wouldn't write off Arkansas so quickly.
Arkansas actually has a decent chance of swinging to the Dem column. The last two polls released in the state (my home state, I hasten to add) have had Kerry and Bush neck-and-neck - the first had Bush two points ahead, and the second had Kerry and Bush tied.

Arkansas is winnable for Kerry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
54. I really like Edwards but I wonder if Clark would get the military to
join us if Bush tries another coup.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 09:44 PM
Response to Original message
55. Is Clark going to change his mind and oppose depleted U and the SOA?
Edited on Sun May-16-04 09:44 PM by genius
Has anyone convinced him that these are both bad?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ngGale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #55
56. Good question...
both are bad and I see budget cuts for the good. That's why I want Edwards, really tired of bombs. I'm sure the rest of the world is too. If they see a General put in office, and they do know him, it is going to send the wrong signal. We have little creditably left and need to build a road not paved with fear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 01:33 AM
Response to Reply #55
57. Is Edwards going to change his mind
about the invasion of Iraq being a good decision and one that he would have made as President? Has anyone convinced him that the war was a bad idea?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC