Help me understand the appeal of Wesley Clark

[LynneSin]

First and foremost this isn't a bashing thread and if anyone want's to reply with Clark Bashing I will kindly ask to take that to another thread please.

To be honest, I know he was the leader of the Kosovo Peacekeeping forces during the Clinton Administration. I also know he's from Arkansas and from what I've gathered he and the Clintons are close.

But help me understand this appeal. Is it because he served in a war (Which several other candidates have) or because he is friendly with the Clinton and folks see him as a return of "The Clinton Years" back to the White House (again - not an issue here).

Thanks for repsonding!!!

[renie408]

1. From what I read

During the actual Clinton years in the White House, he was only very casually acquainted with the Clintons. He may have had a working relationship with members of the administration, but I didn't get the impression that he was really on the inside at the White House.

[DinahMoeHum]

2. His presence in the race puts to rest a long-standing myth

about the Democrats being pussies when it comes to military matters and supporting our troops. With him and John Kerry in the race, that myth is dying a well-deserved death.

This myth has been around since the Vietnam era, and the Repukes have perpetuated this myth over and over again with politically devastating results for the Dems for over 30 years.

But now, the myth is coming to a crashing halt, as the military is seeing with their own eyes that the Repuke competence in government and military affairs is fast becoming a myth unto its own.

:kick:

[meegbear]

3. OK ...

Four star general - we need an experienced military man to straighten out the crap * got us into and give the military true respectability here and abroad.

Rhodes Scholar - well educated and familiar with world politics (in a way, that ties to the previous)

Degree in Philosophy, Politics and Economics - knows the world view politically and ecomonically; probably knows that tax cuts to the wealthiest 1% isn't going to do anything good.

I want a candidate who is worldly as well as local. With the crap * put us in, I think someone like Clark will put us back to national and worldwide stature.

[w4rma]

4. Short explanation: He's a military general.

Look how many ex-military folks that the Democratic party fields: McGovern, Dukakis, Kerry, LBJ, Carter.

And this is just presidential candidates.

[TreasonousBastard]

5. I haven't met him...

and have only seen him on TV, but he, more than the others, seems to ooze with self-confidence.

That's confidence, not arrogance. Big difference.

Personally, I'm not terribly interested in positions and issues. They are things that will have to be compromised in the course of governing, and, with few exceptions, campaign positions mean little. Most are canned statements designed to offend as little possible.

What does mean something is a grasp of the situations that one will face and a commitment to deal with them. I get warm fuzzies from Clark about this. Under some heavy grilling, he hasn't skipped a beat or fallen for trick questions. Clinton had that same command of the room. I admit that I was disappointed in quite a few things Clinton did, but I never doubted that he understood precisely what he was doing and what the consequences would be. (I'm talking policy, not BJ's)

What a lot of people seem to forget is that military commanders at that level don't just bark orders. Generals don't actually take orders from other generals, but agree to agree on actions. Lee had his problems with Longstreet, Eisenhower had his problems with Montgomery... A successful military leader is a diplomat and an inspiration, not a dictator.

Military leadership is not that much different than leadership in other areas-- subordinates must have confidence in the leaders that they know what they are doing. The only difference in the military is that the stakes are higher if the leaders screw up.

From what I've seen Clark inspires that confidence.

Need I add that whether one agrees with me or not, he inspires a lot more confidence than the Current Occupant?

[polpilot]

6. I don't know and am completely surprised at the polls. The only thing

that I can think is that the vast majority of Americans only watch TV and the Iraqi Sheperd Bombing, 911, yellow flag/red flag/ terrorrrist! terrrorrists! terrorists!!! has frightened a lot of people. I don't know.

Also, I am beginning to think, that people are really scared about their security after 911. I think their concern is warranted after the U.S. actions of the last 10 months.

Dean '04...

[Nicholas_J]

7. He is a military man

AND he is an OUTSIDER...

More than that he iss the DLC's outsider.

And more than that he is a political outsider.


Much of Deans support comes from the fact that he is nor a Washington insider. But he is a POLITICIAN. He is a political insider.

Clark has NO dirt on his hands.

[renie408]

8. I dunno about that one

I am willing to bet that Clark has plenty of dirt on his hands. And the media, once so in love with him, is digging it right now.

The cleanest one running is Edwards. Another of the reasons I like him for the nomination. He has been in DC long enough to say he knows his way around and made a pretty good splash in some high profile committees, but hasn't been there long enough to be considered 'one of them'.

[Padraig18]

9. *sigh*

Edwards seems like a great guy, but Lord have mercy, do you REALLY want to have to sell a personal injury trial lawyer to the American people? I'd do my damnedest for Edwards, if he were the nominee, but I don't think it would be easy overcoming that particular piece of baggage, given what most people in this country think about lawyers.

[renie408]

11. *sigh*

You mean sell a guy that has worked his whole life looking out for the little guy?? Yeah, I think I can sell that. Do you know ANYTHING about Edwards trial history?

[Padraig18]

12. Whoa!

I didn't say sell him to ME, I said sell him to the American PEOPLE. BIG difference. :D

[renie408]

14. And I am not talking about selling him to you

You asked if I thought we could really sell Edwards based on his being employed as a 'personal injury' trial lawyer. You had spun it one way, I was spinning it the other. And if you check Edwards trial history, the vast majority of his cases were medical malpractice suits against insurance companies and doctors. What do you think people hate worse than lawyers?? You got it, insurance companies.

[Padraig18]

15. I stand by my original statement

Rich trial lawyers are NOT 'beloved' in the eyes of the American public. *shrug* That's ALL I said, my dear. :)

[sandnsea]

21. swimming pool drains

What people hate more than cheap ass health insurance companies is cheap ass corporations that kill kids. That's what certain swimming pool drains were doing and that was one of Edwards' biggest cases. People just need to be reminded that the court is their ONLY line of defense when they suffer an injury. And almost everybody knows somebody who has suffered an injury and had to hire a lawyer to get fair compensation. Erin Brockovich. People love lawyers who fight for the little guy and they always have.

Edit: And Matt Damon, The Rainmaker; John Travolta, A Civil Action; people will definitely get it about Edwards

[renie408]

13. I thought I would help you out a little bit

Do you really think you need to SELL this??

>>A few weeks later, at "Tar Heel Thursday," his weekly constituent meeting in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Edwards once again showcased the skills that make political consultants swoon. Twenty minutes after he was scheduled to arrive, he strode through the grand, paneled doors in a dark suit and pink tie, walked smiling to the front of the room, and without notes or pretension, summarized the issues he was working on (education and the patients' bill) in a lucidly matter-of-fact manner that didn't once invoke the name of either political party. On this day, he was addressing a group comprised of poultry farmers, home-schoolers, and assorted North Carolinians on late-summer vacations . The intimacy of the small gathering lent it the air of a church social. When he'd finished, Edwards answered all manner of questions---displaying a keen knowledge of everything from chicken prices to military testing to the rights of home- schooling parents---many with good-natured homilies about his experiences as a lawyer in small North Carolina towns. The crowd nodded appreciatively. Edwards finally was stumped by a Durham man who'd heard on talk radio that America had secretly been in a state of emergency since the early days of the Roosevelt administration and was concerned. Without flinching, Edwards spoke warmly (and uncondescendingly) about the importance of a vigilant citizenry, and promised to look into the matter. His tanned features, quick smile, and the reassuring cadence of his mild Southern accent made one feel certain that he would be on the right side of any debate. (It was also tempting to flash back to the second presidential debate---the one in which a burnt-umber Al Gore stiffly tried to appear gentle---and marvel at the thought of Edwards opposite Bush.) By the time Edwards left, the room was positively aglow, and everyone agreed it would be a good thing if he ran for president.

Afterward, Edwards explained that his proclivity for talking to constituents stems naturally from his childhood dream of becoming a lawyer. He came of age at a time when many lawyers were rightly viewed as heroes. They included people like Thurgood Marshall, who used the law to bring down the system of legal segregation in the South, and Ralph Nader, whose lawsuits forced an arrogant auto industry to install seatbelts and airbags, thereby saving thousands of lives. "My idealistic view of lawyers was that they could help people who couldn't help themselves, and couldn't fight for themselves," Edwards says. "Since childhood, I thought that's what being a lawyer was all about. I still think that, by the way. In that sense, the transition to the Senate was a very natural one." <<


Then let him go into how he earned his way through college and law school by working doing odd jobs, including sweeping the factory floor where his daddy worked and unloading tractor trailer trucks and I am thinking it sells itself. Think about it, how many people are REALLY worried about a trial lawyer taking what is theirs? And how many people want a trial lawyer to help them take what they think OUGHT to be theirs?

[kang]

16. Edwards' story is quite good

He's a guy who's really lived the American dream and helped people along the way. But I think the point about people not liking rich lawyers is that there's a sort of twisted distrust of anybody who's liberal, but became rich. After all, you don't usually become rich by accident. I know Edwards won some good cases and really did help people, but chances are his trial talents also squeezed out of juries more money than sometimes was warranted. That's being a good lawyer.

Also, being a lawyer myself, people tend to think we can argue either side of an issue and perhaps don't care about which side's right. I don't think Edwards is like this (or are many of us lawyers), but perception is what you deal with.

He's definitely a good sell and I think his weakness is nat'l security/foreign policy. Not his positions or ideas, but the fact that he people aren't going to trust him on these things and he'll have to be twice as convincing as some of the others have to be.

But if he were our nominee, I'd be happy to vote for him.

[dfong63]

18. clark's story is "quite good", too

But I think the point about people not liking rich lawyers is that there's a sort of twisted distrust of anybody who's liberal, but became rich. After all, you don't usually become rich by accident. I know Edwards won some good cases and really did help people, but chances are his trial talents also squeezed out of juries more money than sometimes was warranted. That's being a good lawyer.

let's turn this argument around. Clark is a 4-star general. you don't become a 4-star general by accident. chances are he has killed innocent people, covered up and lied about scandals, his own or others', on his way up. chances are he's participated in corrupt procurement practices and the revolving door between the military and industry. that's just being a good general.

[sandnsea]

19. As Renie says, damn skippy!!!

We need to get our collective heads out of our collective asses and recognize that trial lawyers are almost always the ones that bring dangerous products and harm to the attention of the public. People can fight for change all they want but most of the time it's a lawsuit followed by regulation that really makes the changes we need. Alot of trial lawyers are true heroes and it's time we liberals get on their side again.

[Padraig18]

24. I don't disagree with that statement at all

And I have never implied otherwise. *shrug*

[dfong63]

17. clark has blood, and depleted uranium, on his hands

[kang]

10. Why I think Clark's a good sell for president

First, on the political level, his over 30 years of military service combined with his experience in Vietnam and commanding NATO (he was also SOCOM too) insulate him (and hopefully the whole party should he not get the nod) from charges of being unpatriotic in criticizing the current administration. In fact, Clark has unrolled a new line in his campaign arguing that we need to find a new kind of patriotism, one that encourages dissent and discussion. He recently spoke to students at the Citadel (of all places) about this (somebody had the link for this).

Second, on a very real level, Clark's experience working w/NATO nations and learning how to manuever the difficult terrain that accompanies any multi-lateral int'l effort gives him a significant leg up on other candidates in hands-on experience. Yes, the other Dem candidates have supported policies, spoken with foreign leaders (some of them), etc., but Clark has actually worked with them to do something, in this case a war. While the war against Al Qaeda will require much more than military force, Clark at his core understands that no problem that comes from the rest of the world will be effectively combatted without the world's help. I think people pick up on that and really start to wonder why Bush has made America so unpopular with the rest of the world.

Third, he can perfectly claim that as far as politics goes, he is the outsider among all candidates. He voted Republican, he's voted Democrat, he hasn't been planning all his life to be president, but he's still served his country and loved doing it the whole time (put in contrast to Bush).

Finally, while many people are citing his Rhodes Scholar (which personally doesn't really mean anything to me) and other accomplishments, the overall theme is this guy's a winner and a competent leader. He's selling his leadership skills and an opportunity for Americans to feel confident in our future again (scary to say, but this was Reagan's other theme...big gov't being the other one). Too much of the Bush Admin.'s game plan has been to scare Americans with the war against terror, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. so that they would rally around the commander-in-chief. But then you need to deliver real results and I don't think most Americans feel like he has.

So that's why Gen. Clark's leading in the polls and is right there with Pres. Bush now.

*As far as dirt, I sincerely hope that it's not Dems who are doing the digging for the media. And I sure hope the media tries this time around to really find out where the hell Bush was for a whole year during the Vietnam war. And unlike Dean's deferment, that one does matter to me.

[MercutioATC]

20. No dirt (yet), perceived as strong on defense, attractive.

Those are the three I come up with. I'ts not a fair question with me because, while I am concerned with foreign policy, domestic issues are at least equally important to me and I haven't heard Clark say anything about them (but I do look forward to seeing him in the debates).

He's not a bad guy in my estimation...I just haven't heard him say that much...

[genius]

22. His appeal is much like the reason people supported Dean

They thought Dean could beat Bush until he started self-destructing. Clark would have a much better shot against Bush than Dean because he was the general who came out against the war.

Those who want the best man for the job are still supporting Kucinich. Kucinich's support is pretty strong and growing.

[FubarFly]

23. Try new Wesley Clark brand "Terra Balm". Very soothing, and non-toxic!

Just gently apply three times a day and watch all your terra woes float away.

Aaaaah. Doesn't that feel better?


Kidding of course. Clark brings a considerable amount of intelligence and competency to the table. And people who know him highly vouch for his character. He is still understandably weak on domestic issues, but for people who have had the bejesus scared out of them for the last three years by b*sh, Clark is a strong and reassuring presence. He is perhaps the most "presidential" of all the candidates running. IMO I think he can have a similar effect on people as Reagan did, which would mean a high influx of "Clark Republicans" in future elections.

Clark is not my first choice, but based on what I've learned so far, I think he would make a fine President, and I foresee little difficulties in voting for him.

[molly]

25. He's got what it takes - brains, attitude, and experience

performing in tough situations - he's quick on his feet. He's appealing to both men and women. He has that "easy charm".

[phegger]

26. my reasons

http://www.theconnection.org/shows/2003/09/20030908_b_main.asp

When I hear someone say that Iraq is a mess of our own (that is, Bush's own) making, and that the administration uses language to manipulate public opinion, and and that we are in danger of becoming a one-party state, I think, This man gets it. These are my concerns, and I want these things said by someone who will be taken seriously and who won't be dismissed as a wuss or some left-wing flake.

That's the short answer, but I hope it helps.


-ph B-)