Wes Clark just said he's "thinking about" running again!

[jenmito]

Al Franken is talking to him on AAR and said he'd really like him to run again and he quickly said, "I'm thinking about it! But I'm not thinking about it too hard because we gotta focus on the '06 elections..." You could tell by the tone of his voice he WILL run again. He quickly changed into his "focusing on '06" thing, but he sounded like he's rarin' to go! :D

[Totally Committed]

1. "You could tell by the tone of his voice he WILL run again."

I hope you are right!

TC

[Name removed]

94. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Robbie Michaels]

2. Run, Wesley, Run!

:applause:

[MoonRiver]

3. Franken is clearly encouraging him to run!

He said, this country needs a better BS detector than individual citizens. Clark has known the Iraq war was a mistake, and clearly said so from the beginning. Franken stated something I definitely believe. He said that the 2008 Democratic candidate MUST be someone who disagreed with the Iraq war from the getgo. One of those people is GENERAL WESLEY CLARK!

[faithnotgreed]

28. i wholeheartedly agree with franken - for me the candidate has to be

someone who did not want nor vote for the iraq war if they were in a position to do so

its not just because that person was against a tragic horrific war
its also because this shows me the most powerful elements of who is a real leader: has a working heart and mind, cares about all people, is curious, thorough, cant be intimidated or bought, and listens to all the information before making a decision - especially one that wasnt "popular" at the time
and most of all they were smart enough and honest enough to know that whatever this administration was pushing they werent buying~

and it figures that leaves only a select few


on edit: the select few includes?
gore clark boxer....

[AndreaCG]

32. IIRC Franken supported Clark in 2004

And did at least one fundraiser for him.

[Jai4WKC08]

41. Nope, not true

Franken barely acknowledged he was running.

Seems to have changed his tune, tho.

[CarolNYC]

43. Yep, I was always disappointed...

in how little mention Franken would make of Wes during the primaries....

I don't know why but after he and Wes appeared at the cheapo late night get together held after the very pricey dinner (which all candidates attended) held after that primary debate in NYC shortly after Wes joined the race (And I'll never forget that NO other candidate deigned to show...not John "I'm always thinking of the little people" Edwards or even my beloved Dennis who still lives in the little blue house...No one else could be bothered to hang with us "poor folk" but Wes and Gert...) I just thought he'd at least talk about him as a serious candidate some....

Al did seem to be really pushing him to run today...I was a bit surprised as I always think of him as a Kerry guy...Whatever was going on, it was nice to hear.

[Jai4WKC08]

48. Well, Franken said that he thinks

Our 08 nominee has to be someone who was against the war from the beginning. However much Al might like and/or respect Kerry (and I don't know how much that is), it seems pretty obvious Kerry isn't on his list anymore. Not that that couldn't change, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

To tell the truth, I don't know how much Franken was behind Kerry during the primaries. He reported from several Dean rallies, if I recall. Even got into some sort of shoving match with a heckler at one. But at some point, he seems to have decided Dean didn't have what it took to win, or maybe it was something else. All I really know (and maybe "know" is too strong of a word... what I have read) is that Franken lent his apartment to, and I think I remember that he attended, some sort of Kerry strategy meeting to help him pull his campaign together when it was sort of floundering in the Nov/Dec 03 time-frame. That doesn't mean for sure that Franken was backing Kerry, but he was definitely leaning his way, or at least wanting him to do better, and was tight with someone(s) in Kerry's camp.

I'm also not sure when Franken came around to being more Clark-friendly. He said in the interview yesterday he was tremendously impressed with Clark's convention speech. He may have also heard Clark campaigning for Kerry at some point. Garrison Keillor appeared with Kerry and Clark in Tacoma and afterwards was positively raving about how great Clark was--since they're both in the radio biz, maybe Franken got wind of it. I do seem to remember Clark's being on Franken's show once, a month or two (or maybe three) after he dropped out of the race, and Franken wasn't very warm, altho not totally hostile either. But by the time Clark appeared again at the City Year anniversay in Little Rock, after the 04 election iirc, Franken was acting like his best buddy. So somewhere in between, something changed his mind.

Franken also seemed yesterday to be very aware of how much Clark is doing to elect Democrats in 2006, and that would naturally add to whatever he enthusiam he had before.

I don't put much stock in any hope that Franken will be endorsing Clark in '08, or even favoring him, should he decide to run. Franken may just think Clark has good ideas that will benefit the whole field, and/or is a better speaker than he once thought and maybe has learned enough to be competitive. But I do tend to think Franken won't be actively working against Clark, or ignoring him, and that will be a MAJOR improvement over last time.

On the other hand, I think Franken is not an "out of Iraq now" Democrat. As he said yesterday, he was inclined to support going in, based on what he knew at the time. He realizes now it was a bad idea, but he might be looking at who is best capable to straighten out whatever Middle East mess we're left with in 2009. He wouldn't be unique to think that guy is Wes Clark.

[CarolNYC]

82. Franken certainly did seem to be excluding....

the IWR "yes" voters, didn't he...especially when he said he wanted someone who was a better BS detector than he was....

Whatever it may have been that turned Al's head a little, I'm happy he's coming around....

[Clark2008]

34. If Wes doesn't run, my second choice is in your sig line

or Russ Feingold.

I really am not interested in anyone else besides those three - the rest of the wanna-bes are too tied to corporations or aren't liberal enough to be much different than a Republican.

[bagimin]

I spit out my yogurt

and fell out of my chair....when he said that.
Mmmmmm Gore/ Clark.

[Tinksrival]

4. Oh Please, Oh Please, Oh Please!!!!!!

Real leadership! Brains, Brains and more Brains! What a difference! We won't know how to act!
President Clark sounds great to me :applause::applause::applause::applause::applause:

[HereSince1628]

5. I look forward to that with a little more enthusiasm than

that which the Democrats of the day provided Gen. George McClellan, but honestly, not much.

I none the less respect and salute your enthusiasm.

[Jai4WKC08]

24. Wes Clark is EVERYTHING George McClellan was not

More along the lines of George Washington. Or Honest Abe himself. For one thing, Clark understands the need to take the battle to the enemy, the GOP.

[0007]

6. General Clark would make a fine vice president for Senator

Feingold. Or Secretary of Defense.

[Adelante]

13. Senator Feingold would make a fine vice president

He will know how to preside over the Senate most effectively. We need a commander in chief and chief executive in the Oval. This combo makes no sense any other way.

[jenmito]

15. Exactly!

Wesley Clark needs to be Commander in Chief!

[serryjw]

88. May I 3rd that!

I love Feingold but he would be tough to elect as Prez. We still need someone to fix this mess. There is not a btter person to do that than Wes clark.

[Sparkly]

18. Hear, hear!!

:applause:

[UrbScotty]

23. Feingold/Clark or Clark/Feingold... Can't lose either way. (nt)

[Clark2008]

35. For the bazillioneth time - Clark can't be Def. Sec.

US Code requires the Defense Secretary be out of the military for 10 years. By 2008, Clark will have only been out eight.

[Bucky]

63. 10 years? I thought it was less than that, four to six tops.

In any event, I don't think it'd take more than a quickie law passed by Congress to overcome this. I'd rather see Clark as president, but I don't see this particular law as too big a barrier.

[Jai4WKC08]

85. Nope it's ten years, but can be waived by Congress

The waiver has only been granted once, when General Marshall was made Truman's SecDef during the Korean War. It took approval by both houses of Congress, as opposed to just the Senate as in the confirmation process, which also has to happen. Marshall's waiver was for a year, so there's a precedent to only lift the restriction on a limited basis.

If we have a Democratic Houase AND Senate, I suppose it's possible Clark could be given a waiver too. Altho, it's worth noting that Marshall's waiver was almost not approved by a Democratic Senate; it had to be voted on twice. And Marshall was not a controversial choice--he was pretty much universally respected and loved. Nor was there any concern that it would put him in a position for future elective office, so no political concerns among potential competitors in the Senate.

Fwiw, Clark wouldn't need a waiver for long, altho more than a year, since his ten-year waiting period would run out in the summer of 2010.

That all said, what a waste of talent. There's probably no Democratic leader better able to run the Defense Dept than Clark, but there are many who could handle the job and do very well indeed. Cleland, Levin, and Murtha jump to mind, but I'm sure there are many others. Clark's experience encompasses diplomacy, education, environmental issues, health care, emergancy response and much more. Obviously from my avatar, siggy and DU name, I want to see him in the Oval Office. But I'd rather see him as VP than any cabinet office (he has worked with Congress enough to know how it operates, and understands the full range of issues Congress will face), and Sec of State or even Homeland Security before Defense.

[FrenchieCat]

86. I agree.....Homeland Security before Sec of Defense....because,

Wes Clark knows more than just about defense......unlike what many not familiar with Wes Clark "think".

http://www.wittassociates.com/

[shireen]

7. yipppeeeee!!!

a real commander-in-chief!!!!! how revolutionary!!!

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:


:patriot:

[Pithy Cherub]

8. Against bush's needless reign of terror and with

a stunning array of impressive contributions and critical thinking to the national dialogue, Clark would set a course for America that people could believe in and hope for again. :applause:

Hope he does run and also important that many '06 candidates will have sincerely appreciated Wes Clark's efforts.

[FrenchieCat]

9. Let me know when you get a link!

I'd like to hear this!

[Tom Rinaldo]

10. Here

Try this

http://premium.airamericaradio.com/

[FrenchieCat]

11. Thanks....listening now!

[Clark2008]

39. Which hour?

I don't have time this evening to listen to the whole show.

Thanks! :hi:

[jenmito]

42. He was on at 2pm for about 45 min.! So, the start of the 3rd hour.

[LSK]

12. Clark totally gets it

I can get behind him without a problem.

Maybe him working at FOX gives him an advantage of who the enemy thinks.

[jenmito]

14. He sure does...

And working at Faux was a brilliant move to allow those who'd never hear of him otherwise to be exposed to him and his informed commentary so in '08 he'll be a familiar name and face to those who will no doubt be unhappy with the Repub. candidate and see Clark as a viable choice.

[Tom Rinaldo]

19. Clark is brilliant at not pissing off average Republicans while he...

...tears apart the Bush Administration and Republican Congress limb from limb. He has mastered the art of appealing to the patriotism of swing and moderate Republicans by honoring their commitment to the values that Democrats run on. He uses reality as a wedge issue against the National Republican Party with their own natural base, while simultaneously rallying Democrats to restore sanity to America. This is the winning strategy for both 2006 and 2008.

It was a pleasure listening to Clark play that hand on Al Franken's show.

[jenmito]

20. Very well put!...

"He uses reality as a wedge issue against the National Republican Party with their own natural base, while simultaneously rallying Democrats to restore sanity to America." That's deep! And so true! :patriot:

[CarolNYC]

44. Fox

Well he did say, at the Soros fundraiser last week, that one of the best things about working for Fox is that he gets to see the White House talking points every week. ;)

[tishaLA]

16. That was a VERY impressive appearance

You could tell Franken really liked Clark and Clark was utterly charming, even when Franken started to dog Fox.

It was quite powerful and not only because of the happy news that he's "thinking about" running for President again.

[imlost]

17. This would be the best! He rocks!

He gets my full support, volunteer, money, you name it.

He is a man of integrity, honor and intelligence.

Fraken is correct on the 08 candidate must have been against the war.

The General is one of the few that wasn't only against it but can't be called a wimp for it.

[MoonRiver]

25. 100% agree with what you said imlost!

And a very warm welcome to DU! :hi:

[imlost]

45. Thanks!

[Clark2008]

36. Consider yourself no longer lost!

:hi: Welcome to DU. I always :hug: new DU Clarkies!

[imlost]

46. I've been lost since he dropped out. n/t

[Thirtieschild]

21. Loved what he said about growing up in the South

and how Southerners resented people coming down and condescending to them. (Not exactly his words - my interpretation.) That's going to resonate with a lot of Southern Republican voters. Also loved him warning senators not to give the administration a blank check, that their plans didn't just include Iraq, but Syria, Lebanon and, finally, Iran. The General knows whereof he speaks.

[UrbScotty]

22. From what I've heard him say, I bet he will.

But like him, I am more concerned about 2006 now.

[LittleClarkie]

26. That's the big "no duh"

Anyone who has a leadership PAC and has visited NH and Iowa in the last year or so is thinking of running.

We won't know if any of them follow through until after the midterms.

[Renew Deal]

27. I think he wants to take another crack at it.

He felt like he made a big mistake by not going to Iowa and also announcing so late. I am very confident in Clark the man. I am not as confident about Clark the candidate. He's not a politician and it showed last time.

[Tom Rinaldo]

30. That's the beauty of the political process

We will all get to watch it unfold live. Clark said on Franken that running for President was a steep learning curve and no doubt it was. Clearly he is much stronger at dealing with the Press for example now, dueling with the FOX jerks weekly, than he was when he first entered the race in 2004.

Clark will have to produce on the campaign trail to win the nomination. I think he can, but it is all just opinions at this point, mine, yours, the talking heads on TV, all opinions. Whoever wins the nomination is going to have to win a lot of real votes. What I don't want to do though is just accept corporate media spin "conventional wisdom" about who the Democrats strongest candidates are. I do not trust their filter.

[Vidar]

29. I certainly hope so.

[wiley]

31. Clark/Feingold would REALLY be cool

Integrity, Intelligence, Honor, Compassion, Competence, Vision, Environmentalism and Real Leadership Experience. It seems too much to even hope for in this terribly broken country. But he's right. Let's wipe up the mess and corrupt stench in 06 first.

[Adelante]

33. That's my ticket, wiley

And 2006 first.

[Clark2008]

37. If that's the ticket, I'll feel I've died and gone to Heaven.

:loveya:

[Doctor_J]

38. I wonder how Rove will Swiftboat him

[Tom Rinaldo]

40. They already tried to last time

The Republican noise machine went into high gear against Clark the moment he declared as a candidate for 2004. But swiftboating is just an attempted strategy. It's not a fait accompli unless it works. Swiftboating can also be turned around against the attacker.

Here is what Gene Lyons, Co-Author of "Hunting of the President" had to say on October 22, 2003 about how Republicans would likely attack Clark:


"BUZZFLASH: You're probably one of the most well-informed journalists on how attack politics play themselves out with a culpable media, based on your extensive research and writing on the Clintons. How do you think the right wing is going to go after Clark? What can he expect? What advice would you give Clark and the people who are working for him?

LYONS: Well, the outlines of it are already evident. They're saying he's too tightly wrapped, which is kind of akin to what they tried to do with John McCain. They're saying he's a zealot and tends to become unhinged. They're suggesting he's crazed with ambition.

I wrote in a column a couple of weeks ago that one of their lines of attack would be to portray him as sort of General Jack D. Ripper, who was the megalomaniacal general in Dr. Strangelove who was so concerned with his precious bodily fluids. And that's what I think they will try to do. They might go all the way to the edge of suggesting some kind of mental illness. I don't think he's very vulnerable to that sort of smear.

Clark gave a very interesting quote that I used in a column in a profile in Esquire. He said the whole question about running against George W. Bush boils down to how much pain can you take. So I think he has some idea of what's coming. I think he has some idea that it will be shrill, it will come from that side of the spectrum, and it will be harsh. I think they're going to try to portray him as a crackpot and as wildly ambitious, and therefore dangerous. The right-wing will definitely label him an opportunist and say he's switching parties simply to become President and he's power-mad."
http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/03/10/int03221.html


Republicans are already floating trial baloons for new swift boating campaigns against Clark. See this DU thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=321522

[Auntie Bush]

80. Don't you remember the "He almost started WW3" meme?

Bet Rove was 100% behind that one!

[iconoclastNYC]

47. Shock!

The kabuki theatre these candidates play insults my intelligence.

[jenmito]

49. Think of WHY they would do this...

If Clark were to announce today that he's running in '08, the attacks would start TOMORROW on him, pounding it into everyone's minds whatever lies his competitors/Repubs. want people to think. And he'd have no money to counter those attacks. It's better to pretend he's not running at all and then get in while everyone's busy attacking Hillary, which they're all doing because they're "sure" she'll be running.

[Jai4WKC08]

50. "Kabuki theater"?

I'm not sure I follow. I assume you mean the little dance that many politicians do, refusing to say one way or the other about running when it's pretty obvious by the money they're hoarding and the staff they're hiring, they have already made up their minds. If that's a wrong assumption, let me know.

But Clark hasn't done that. He said yesterday he's thinking about running, and he's said before that he wants to. But he has also said that the MOST important thing is to get back the House and/or Senate in 2006 and until/unless that happens, he's not going to make a decision. I happen to believe him. If you look at what he's been doing, every step is devoted to electing Democrats to Congress. His PAC is running on a shoe-string; every dime goes to supporting his travel and other expenses involved in campaigning and fund-raising for other Democrats and local/state parties. He has only about a half-dozen staff or contracted consultants, and none of them the big guns for a campaign of his own. He is advising first-time candidates on the game of politics, dealing with the media, and so forth. And spending a lot of his time working with the elected party leadership to put together plans and positions that congressional candidates can run on.

Now, I realize that travelling around and campaigning for others doesn't hurt him for 2008, and that it's one of the things prospective presidential candidates do. But he seems to be doing a helluva lot more of it than those with a lot more money in the bank, some of whom act like the only Democrats worth supporting reside in Iowa and New Hampshire.

[CarolNYC]

83. Amen to that, Jai

I keep playing back in my head what Clark said at that Soros fundraiser last week in answer to the question, how much money do you need? "As little as necessary" he said he tells everyone, because people need to be donating to the campaigns of those who are running in '06. Quite an extraordinary thing to say, I thought, especially in front of a roomful of monied supporters...The man's a gem, no doubt about it...

[Jai4WKC08]

87. Too good maybe...

If I'm remembering right from what I read, pretty much everyone at the Soros soiree has very deep pockets. It's wonderful that Clark wanted people donating to '06 campaigns. But a bird in the hand... who knows when he'll get another chance at 'em, and it's not like most of 'em can't afford to do both.

Ah well... otoh, these people aren't stupid either. They know what they can give, so maybe it wouldn't put them off from maxing out to WesPAC too. Might even work as a little reverse psychology. Hope so anyway.

Btw, I saw a mention of that party at TheNextPrez blog. When Soros talks, people listen and word gets around. So nice to see GS is still in Clark's corner. Not to say he'll endorse him. If I recall last time, he gave to Clark, Dean and Kerry, but made no formal endorsement until Kerry already had the nomination. But I understand he helped Clark make contact with a lot of other big-money Dems. I hope he'll be doing that again.

[CarolNYC]

89. Yeah, except for me, they looked like they did have deep pockets...

I was so out of my league there...

I don't know about the others...although a lot in attendance were then going on to the even pricier dinner with Wes...but, judging from Mr. Soros' remarks, I have no doubt he'll donate the absolute maximum allowed by law to WesPAC....Hopefully, the others there won't be stingy either.

[Texas_Kat]

51. Transcript and audio

have been posted at Securing America

http://securingamerica.com/node/932

[Placebo]

52. The last thing we need is 12 democratic candidates running in 2008...

when we all know only a couple have an actual shot at winning the nomination. It makes us look splintered and unsure of ourselves.

It also, for all you anti-Hillary people out there, gives whichever candidate is going to become the "anti-Hillary" a lot less time and money in which to mount a formidable opposition. And if they do, it will come too late.

Please Wes, don't run. Bite the bullet and become Secretary of Defense in the next Democratic administration, or something, anything, but please don't run.

[Donna Zen]

53. Wes Clark cannot be Sec. of Def.

How about all the candidates without executive and foreign policy experience staying home?

Cripe...

I hope none of the professional politicians or MSM get to make the cut. Or the military haters...how about them?

[Placebo]

54. Who hates the military?

:shrug:

[Jai4WKC08]

62. Lots of people

Oh, not a very large percentage to be sure, but too large in number and some of the noisiest. And the GOP is very adroit at ampliphying their chattering.

None of the potential candidates hate the military, I wouldn't think. Some are probably more comfortable in dealing with them than others. But the previous poster was talking about who would select our nominee, not who our nominee would be.

As for your earlier post, Clark has a very good chance of being that "anti-Hillary" you talk about, if one is needed, and imo has the best chance of being successful at it.

[FrenchieCat]

56. Hey, I've got a "novel" idea......

Why don't we ask Kerry, who's already done it...not to run....
And Edwards......who didn't help Kerry win last time as well.

Let's see, let's ask Mark Warner not to run....cause he's not a leader per se
and Hillary should refrain as well, cause .....well just cause she's a woman.

Evan Bye should'nt run just based on his last name and what that connotates.....and

And Let's ask Richardson not to run.....cause he's overweight and would'nt count the votes in NM.

Also Biden.......Hair plugs yet still bald doesn't really make a whole lot of sense....

And while we are at it....Feingold, who is single with two divorces under his belt should probably think twice about what that will mean to the electorate.

Let see....so far we've got 8 out......leaving Wes Clark....and maybe a couple of others.

OK...the field is now "clear"!


Is there anything else I can do for you Placebo? :shrug:

[Placebo]

58. Looks like you did a lot for yourself there.

Leaving Clark, the ultimate longshot as the one remainder.

Pssh, someone's sure fair.

[Jai4WKC08]

64. Hardly a long shot

Twelve generals have been elected president. That's better than a third of all presidents in our history. In fact, there have only been three to run and not win. And while the most famous have been those who led the military in a major war (I'm thinking Washington, Grant and Eisenhower), the rest have been fairly evenly spread out thru times of relative peace.

Clark has more brains, ability and charisma than the rest of the field put together.

And in case you hadn't noticed, the American people still respect the military. More than they do any other agency of government. MUCH more than they do Congress. They won't have the least bit of trouble pulling the lever for a retired general.

But I think the point of most of the replies you've gotten is, who the hell are you to decide who has a chance and who doesn't, and everyone else should just step aside. We have a process to determine who gets the nomination. Why don't you think we should let Democratic voters decide who should be in the race?

[Totally Committed]

57. "Please Wes, don't run. Bite the bullet..."

Are you out of your mind? He's proabably the only Democrat other tha Al Gore who has a snowball's chance in hell of winning against the Republicans. Go tell Christopher Dodd, Joe Biden, Joe Lieberman, Mark Warner, Evan Bayh, and all the other waste-of-times to back off, and then tell Hillary she was hustled and make her back off.

Then, we might have a full slate that would make us look like a JUGGERNAUT!

TC

[Placebo]

59. You tell them.

You seem to have quite the diplomatic and convincing tone.

:eyes:

[Texas_Kat]

61. How about we reduce the number of 08 candidates

by disqualifying those who are sucking all the money from candidates who need it in 06?

We could start a list.

[Bucky]

66. Those lists exist already. They're called "primary ballots"

Give democracy a try is all I ask.

[Bucky]

65. Agreed: Democracy is too important to risk it all by giving voters choices

Just everyone shut up and get behind the only one candidate who can save this party, Senator Phil N. DeBlanc. Don't you see how competition weakens us? Don't you see how vetting our best choices through a democratic process will make the party more likely to select a bad candidate? No! No more choices! Vote for Senator DeBlank now and please quit questioning the authorities who are in charge of our party.

[Jai4WKC08]

68. You know, I agree about one thing

I too am concerned about such a large field of candidates. Normally, I believe the more voices, opinions and ideas, the better. But...

The debates in '04 were next to worthless, and far too easily manipulated by the talking heads at the podium, because there wasn't time for every candidate to get a shot at every question, much less a chance to offer a detailed answer. And the primary process itself was manipulated by the media as a whole, deciding who got what share of free media coverage.

But we seem destined to have at least a dozen candidates, and that's not counting the "issues" candidates that are bound to throw in, just for the chance to influence the debate, knowing full well they don't have a prayer of winning.

I'm sort of thinking the best hope is to have an even larger field. Maybe 20 or more. More than can possibly fit on one stage or into a couple hours of discussion. FORCE the DNC (and/or networks... or whoever decides on the format) to figure out a way to break them into groups or some other more innovative approach to the problem.

[karynnj]

76. Sorry, I thought the debates were pretty good

I would have preferred longer answers and some back and forth, but overall they did show a lot about the candidates. (It never occurred to me to give weight to the talking heads when I saw the debates myself.) I also think that a looser format would favor even more the best debator. (hint: the Yale debate team star from 1962-1966)

[skyblue]

93. The last thing we need is to alienate mainstream voters.

Several candidates is probably better because I think it might be a better moneymaker. The problem is that eventually 1 candidate will rag on another making both weaker in a general election. The problem is that eventually 1 candidate will probably suck up to Dem constituents with ideas that won't fly in a general election which might cause them to win the primary, but will become a major problem when it comes to the general election. But people get all pissy and want candidates to follow their own agenda up to and beyond the white picket fence rather than follow a winning agenda..........

Whatever It Takes! If that means voting for someone who voted to authorize Chimpy to use force then Hey I DON'T GIVE A CRAP!!!! If he's a candidate who will WIN that is FAR more important than that vote.
I want a President who will acknowledge Global Warming and not be a sissy when it comes to standing up to corporate polluters who perhaps may have mercury emissions et al.. which could possibly help to cause children's asthma and the breast cancer that 1 in 7 women get. I don't want my taxes to pay for another Terry Schiavo to spend over a decade in a hospital. I want these Recreeps out of office!


:kick:

[David Zephyr]

55. Good News! I hope that Al also jumps in.

And Hillary should not be the only woman entering the primaries. I hope that Barbara Boxer might change her mind and run.

The debates would be great and good for Americans and Democrats to watch. The comparison to the neanderthals that will be in the GOP primaries will be delicious.

I'm still with Wes Clark. He can win across the board from North to South and East to West.

[Texas_Kat]

60. From listening to the Clarkcasts

BBoxer may just be a Clarkie.

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LandOLincoln]

69. Put your money where your

mouth is, and give us a link to one of the "public statements" (unedited, mind you--none of your typical Drudgian cut'n'paste) where this alleged "neocon fellow traveler" says anything remotely resembling your claims.

Just one.

And...enjoy your stay on DU.

[Sparkly]

70. Wow.

You're not from around here, are you? :rofl:

[CarolNYC]

71. Hey, dude(tte), did you mean to "out" yourself in that post....

....or was it purely accidental? :rofl:

[Rowdyboy]

72. Even using the freeper term for Wes ...."Weasel" or "Weasley"

Its like shooting fish in a barrel.

[Texas_Kat]

73. To coin a phrase

"that was then, this is now". 08 is by definition, not 04. It's not 1992 either.

Clark has never been a neocon, nor has he ever promoted any of their goals nor espoused any of their philosophy. Clark has been lauded by everyone from Paul Wellstone to Jimmy Carter, from George McGovern to (rest his soul) the founder of Earth Day - Gaylord Nelson.

I think what must upset you is the broad and diverse support that Clark garners. Greens, Libertarians, Independents, Democrats across all spectrums and even disaffected Republicans.

Must be very frustrating for you.

[Sparkly]

74. Talk about frustrating!!

I'm sure our friend is furiously seeking the "statements" LandOLincoln requested. Now THAT has to be frustrating!!

Hey -- maybe he'll come up with some "statements" from Karl Rove, claiming to be a leftwing liberal! :rofl:

[Texas_Kat]

75. Imaginary links .. Fictional quotes

He's probably been hanging out at the American Speculator too long.

[CarolNYC]

84. Yep,

bet he's out there looking for some really HUGH!!11 "statements"...Sheesh!

[Dinger]

77. Wahoo! I Can't Wait!

Reporting for duty sir!:patriot:

[Auntie Bush]

78. That's the best news I've heard since Bush's poll numbers.

Of course we all KNEW he'd run again. I'd have been shocked if he didn't! We sure NEED him right now. I just wish we could impeach bush* and that whole gang and put the others in jail...then have a special emergency election and get Clark in there soon. We can't wait till 2008 to get rid of this dangerous stupid administration.

[xkenx]

79. I've seen and spoken to Clark at two events recently, and

he says (about running in '08), "Rule Out Nothing" with that twinkle in his eye and tone that says he can hardly wait to announce his candidacy. HE IS RUNNING!
BTW, Clark is live on Bill Maher's HBO Real time this Friday. Tickets for the show may still be available if you live in or are visiting L.A. Arrival time is 6:30 PM Fri. 5/5 at CBS studios on Fairfax next to Farmer's Market. Call 323.575.4321 for tix. I got tix just a few hours ago, so more may still be available. I have to go now to practice my "Run, Wes, Run" chant for the show.

[FrenchieCat]

81. Oooooh.....

Going to Maher's show! How Very Kewl!

[ima_sinnic]

90. yes! Wes is my #1 pick! (nt)

[mtnsnake]

91. If he can just win the primaries, our next pres will be President Clark!

The sooner he starts "running" for '08 the better. I'd like to see him getting more of the media spotlight somehow. If he can get in everyone's face, the country will fall in love with him.

[FrenchieCat]

92. You got it......which is why the Corporate media kept him off as much

as possible last time round....and why he countered by signing up with Fox. Some people want him to leave Fox.....as his contract expires at the end of this month.....but I'd rather he stay at Fox through 2006, cause I think that will help our 2006 Dem candidate a lot, since the seats we need to win in order to retake the house are currently considered Red Districts.