Wes Clark

Remove all ads!

I've heard some chatter here on Dean and the upcoming US elections.

I'm, just wondering what are y'alls thoughts on Wes Clark?

 

From what I have seen of him seems to be an interesting person, and one that in the long run might have a better chance to oppose Bush with the proper backing than the other candidates I have seen. Clarke's military background might be enough to lure a few of Bush's traditional backers over. The man seems to have some guts too, saw him get furious at some Fox commentator when he was interviewed and proceeding to berate the reporter.

I am just looking in from the outside though so my knowledge is limited but if I was an American and if the election was today I think I would have voted on Clark.

 

Wesley Clark is awesome.

I also saw that interview when Wesley Clark took that Asman guy from Fox to town. I've never seen a "reporter" cower down like he did after General Clark authoritatively pointed out how he misconstrued the meaning of his quotes. "Uhhh... uhhh... I'm only reading what you said." It was even more hilarious because it was one of Fox's lying pseudo-journalists.

I agree with Clark on most issues. His biggest weakness is his high level of intelligence and his holistic, complex view of the issues. The average American voter is incredibly ignorant and Clark's complex views of issues is bound to overload voters who are used to 12 word soundbites.

 

I agree. I like Wes Clark. However, the democratic party is more interested in moving further to the left then staying closer to the middle. Personally, I think it is a flawed strategy. From what I hear it bothers the democratic leadership that they would have won the election if it hadn't been for Nader and his green party. However, I'm firmly convinced that moving to the left will alienate the more moderate democrats and push them over to a more middle republican candidate.

 

Wes Clark is appreciated the most in intellectual circles. If he is still in the hunt for the nomination when my state holds the primaries, he'd get my vote. However, my state isn't among the first to hold primaries, so usually the potential canidates are gone by the time it's our turn. I think it's ridiculous that New Hampshire and Iowa have a major say in who runs for president because their primaries are first, and most canidates drop if they have poor showings in those states.

Dean is definitely a very leftist canidate, definitely further to the left than I would like. A more moderate canidate like Clark would probably be the best canidate, as I would place Bush further to the right than just a "moderate".

 

I like Wesley Clark. A lot. He's got balls and his credentials speak for themselves. I would LOOOOOVE to see him in a debate with Bush about anything, especially war policy. Bush would get his ass kicked. But then again - anyone kicks Bush's ass when he doesn't have a teleprompter in front of him. Even Diane Sawyer took him to town the other night.

Anyway - back to Clark. I like him more than Dean and Gephardt combined, but I don't think he'll get the nomination. I do think he's the best man for the job. It would be nice to have a man like Clark in charge of the most powerful military on earth. As opposed to a man who isn't smart enough to correctly pronounce the word "nuclear." Does that scare anyone else besides me??

 

While I disagree with the dismal assessment of Bush's debating ability, he's no Tony Blair.

Clark could be an incredibly strong candidate. The problem is that he's running a terrible campaign. Getting in late with fanfare was good, but since then his campaign has blundered all over the place. Most recently when Bush decided to remove the tariffs on steel, Clark's campaign sent out a press release stating that this was proof that Bush was in the pocket of the steel industry. Once they realized that the steel industry WANTED the tariffs, they sent out a pathetic retraction.

I would think that a U.S. Army (he's army, right?) general running as a Democrat would be earthshaking, but -- like when Geraldine Ferraro became the first woman vice presidential nominee -- the public just doesn't seem to care.

Some wonder whether the reason that Clark hasn't taken off is that Democrats are tired of people with such strong Clinton connections.

Howard Dean, although he's a madman, has run a great campaign. I'd never vote for the guy for anything, but I love the way his campaign has unfolded. He's gone around the DNC establishment, gotten a lot of grassroots support, and may well end up as president. I like to think that doing such things without the full support of the DNC is still possible. Warms the cockles of my... er... cold, black, lump of coal.

 

"The Democrats' hateful, moronic comments are beyond the pale, and the Democrats know it, but they don't care because they have nothing to offer the public debate but rage, resentment and quackery. Until other Democrats stand up against this hysteria, they're admitting to the country their party has no claim to national leadership." -- Tom DeLay

Clark should set himself apart from the other democratic candidates and a republican may have shown him the way.

 

"When the Republicans say guns, we will say education;when they say war, we will say healthcare; when they say race, we will say jobs. Because everyone needs an education, a job and healthcare." - Howard Dean.

Makes me wonder who the real "madmen" are.

[ December 19, 2003, 05:10: Message edited by: Chandos the Red ]