Why hasn't Clark announced any plans to run?

[beaconess]

I assumed that it was a given that Clark would run, but I haven't heard anything from him (plenty from his supporters, but nothing from him). Is it possible that he won't run? Is he biding his time?

FYI - I'm not trying to pick a fight with Clarkies - I really want to know.

[PresidentObama]

1. I really wish he would.

I have serious doubts Gore will run, and my guy Kerry is already said he isn't running. Clark is what America needs!! With all due respect to the top three candidates, Clark would be the kind of nominee we need in these troubled times. If Clark doesn't get in, and Gore doesn't get in, that makes my three top candidates out of the race :(

In that case, I'll probably support Senator Barack Obama whose very impressive. But I really hope and wish Clark gets into the race!! And soon, I have no clue why he is one of the last if not the last candidate to get in.

[seabeyond]

4. having wanted kerry myself, i am hoping for clark now, too.

and if clark isnt running i would go to barack. but.... i would really prefer clark

[gizmonic]

2. Perhaps he figures his best chance...

...is as someones VP or Sec. of State or Defense.

[Tom Rinaldo]

16. Clark isn't shopping for that chance

Trying to land a political slot in a Democratic Administration doesn't motivate him, providing leadership for America does, and Clark is willing to do so in any way that is effective. In 2004 he did so by running for President and after that he did so by working to create Democratic majorities in Congress and by consulting with Democrats in Congress. He continues to do that now, according to Maxine Waters. Our Congressional majorities are just starting to gell but almost 10% of the Democrats in the Senate are already running for President. Clark told all of us directly, at this point his urgent priortiy is helping the new Democratic majority in Congress formulate a sweeping policy alternative to Bush on National Security. Once Clark is a declared canidate, his ability to operate as a non attention grabbing consultant to the full Democratic caucus becomes impaired due to natural rivalries and the spotlight that gets focused on the aspects of policy that seperate Democratic candidates each from one anothter rather than uniting them.

Wes Clark keeps doing things behind the scenes to make a pending presidential canidacy viable, his speaking at the DNC Winter Meeting was a somewhat rare public indication of that, becasue that really was an event he had to be at if he plans to run. Soon Clark will have to shift gears from working on behalf of the whole Democratic Party to tooting his own horn for President, but he has not rushed to do so for, in my opinion, profound and honorable reasons.

[delphinium]

3. I wonder, too

Clark was one of my faves in 2004, but the field we have for '08 already is very strong. Maybe he's just not sure, or is leaning against it.

[AndyTiedye]

7. Where is This "Strong Field" of Democratic Candidates?

What "strong field"? Neither Gore nor Feingold are running.

We all like Kucinich, but at 1-2%, he is hardly a "strong" candidate.

[PhilipShore]

5. Gore is not going to run --- General Clark needs to get in quick...

General Clark --- is by far the most qualified to be President of the United States in 2008, and would win big over Jeb Bush, in 2008.

[PresidentObama]

6. Jeb Bush? Excuse me?

Am I missing something here....

[PhilipShore]

9. Jeb Bush Rallies Conservatives at Summit

By Zachary A. Goldfarb
Special to The Washington Post
Sunday, January 28, 2007; Page A04

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/27/AR2007012701171.html

At a time when the conservative movement is looking bereft, humbled by midterm-election defeats and hungering for a presidential candidate to rally around, Jeb Bush delivered yesterday in Washington a resounding endorsement of conservative principles, bringing his audience repeatedly to its feet.

In his lunchtime remarks to the Conservative Summit, Bush struck every conservative chord, blaming Republicans' defeat in November on the party's abandonment of tenets including limited government and fiscal restraint.

[AndyTiedye]

11. Maybe Jeb Should Talk to His Brother About Fiscal Restraint

Clinton left us with a quarter-trillion dollar SURPLUS.

Bush** is running more than a half-trillion dollar DEFICIT.

[PhilipShore]

13. Jeb Bush and Pataki will be the front runners in the 2008 Repuke primaries

[AndyTiedye]

8. I Don't Think Diebold Can Build Voting Machinez Fast Enough to Elect Another Bush***

Jeb is the only one that loses to ALL of the Democratic candidates in polling.

[cobaindrain]

10. Because he's not running

And his support outside of DU is paper thin

[Bucky]

29. Where are my duelling pistols? Ooo, ooo, the noive of some people!

:) You're trying to get a rise out of me. And it's working. :hi:

[KingofNewOrleans]

12. From a strategic standpoint

He has some big obstacles to overcome. He didn't campaign in Iowa last time, so predictably his poll standing there is very low. His poll standing in NH in low too (2%) despite the fact that he got 13% of the vote there in 2004. South Carolina would be an uphill fight to compete in, so that leaves NV as his best chance for an early win. Clark would still have to campaign aggressively in Iowa and NH because he can't expect to get low single digits there and have NV carry him.


After that Feb 5th was supposed to be a mini-state Super Tuesday, with several Mountain states, Missouri, Oklahoma, Alabama, North Carolina, Michigan (caucus) and Deleware slated. The Southwestern strategy would be plausible again, however, he has a strong regional competitor in Richardson in race now. If Clark took a different tack and tried to go after the Southern states (plus Missouri) he's got to contend with Edwards and Obama (Of course, no matter where he campaigns he'll have Hillary to contend with).

And of course, there's a real possiblity that several larger states including California and Florida will move up to Feb 5th, making that a virtual National Primary Day. In that case, it would take a ton of money to compete.

If Clark were to get in at this point, he'd probably be best off taking Jimmy Carter's old strategy, move to Iowa for the next year.

[dogman]

14. Clark is working on foreign policy with the Democrats.

He has stated he does not want a candidacy put political overtones on his efforts. This is something the others have ignored in their personal quest. I believe this might also be a reason Gore is holding back. He cares enough about his work to try and keep it out of the political arena as much as possible for now.

[IndianaGreen]

15. Wes Clark would be a hot commodity were he to join someone's campaign

I tend to think that Clark is not going to run for he has done little to indicate that he is running. Consequently, the second best thing that Clark can do is to join the campaign of a Presidential candidate, perhaps one that lacks gravitas on foreign policy.

[JaneQPublic]

20. I'm guessing it will be Hillary's.

I recall Bill Clinton announcing a few years ago that the Democratic party had two "rock stars": Hillary and Clark.

It's likely he framed the two of them together like that for a reason.

[Tom Rinaldo]

21. They have travelled different paths since then

And not only on Iraq, but on Iran as well. I do not see them currently on the same page, and Clark put in his time already in the military. He no longer has to implement policies that he doesn't fully support. I think it would take more than a change of heart by Hillary on those issues for Clark to support her (unless she became our nominee). It would take a heart transplant.

[IndianaGreen]

23. Exactly! Clark is a long time advocate of talking to Syria and Iran

while Hillary continues to parrot the belligerent language of Bush and the Israel Lobby when it comes to the Middle East.

Remember that Hillary refused to endorse Baker-Hamilton commission recommendations, just as Bush has. She has no troop withdrawal plan on the table, unlike Kucinich, Kerry, Obama and others.

[IndianaGreen]

22. My gut feeling is that it won't be Hillary.

As to Edwards and Obama, it is more plausible that Clark would find himself at home with either one of them.

[Tom Rinaldo]

24. I think this entire tangent is way off base

If Clark does not run for President himself he will act an an independent advocate for and consultant on international sanity until such time as Democrats agree on a nominee, and then he will work to get that nominee elected.

Since Clark clearly sees himself as having an important enough role to play, both in public and in private, working with Democrats in Congress on national security issues, that it has diverted his full attention away from his own Presiential run for weeks now, I see no reason why he would drop that to prop up a different candidate.

[Bucky]

28. Big Dog said "rising stars", not rock stars. And please note that if Clark joins Sen. Clinton

I will eat my hat and post the pictures on DU.

[Adelante]

17. I would answer if I knew, but I don't

Except to say he thinks that right now it's more important to work against Bush on Iran than to join the primary parade. I think he's right about that.

[longship]

18. Where's the damned fire?

Why do we have to be in 365 days a year campaign mode? Year-in, year-out. It seems that we're letting the corporate media dictate our lives, our wishes, our politics, now the pace of our political campaigns.

Who cares who's running for president in 2008 now? It's totally meaningless. Hillary and Obama are both likely a mere bump in the road.


The campaign will not get into gear for a year. Until then we have much more important things to deal with. For instance, handling an out of control executive which is trying to get the US into yet another war, even before they're finished losing the first two wars they got us into. This 2008 campaign stuff is just a distraction.

Before this is all said and done we will find out just how stupid it is to declare oneself a target this far out. The only reasons I can think why one would do that is either to frame one's politics in a near hopeless presidential campaign or to feed ones unbridled self-importance. I can fully understand and support the former. I'll leave it to others to analyze the latter.

Relax about Clark, Gore, and the rest. They are the smart ones. I'll reserve judgement on the rest. One can imagine what I'm thinking, though.

[CarolNYC]

19. Bravo, longship...well said.

This is why I think I will always hate politics.

Here's a guy who is actually willing to put his political ambitions on the back burner in order to work on something he thinks is of vital importance to the future of this country and the world and that's looked at, even here, as a bad thing.

People should be jumping up and down for joy that we've finally got someone who cares more about our future than their own...but, no. Somehow, that means he's lacking.

If what people want is a self-centered, egotisical, my future is the only one that matters type I guess they'll have a lot of choices to pick from.

[KingofNewOrleans]

25. Most likely the campaign will be over

Feb 5th (especially if California and Florida move up), not just getting into gear.

[Clarkie1]

26. And it is now....February 11th.

Is a year of traditional campagin politicking before the first caucus really necessary?

I guess the mass media thinks so; I don't. I mean, can't voters make up their minds in six months instead of a year? Even six months is a long time!

[FrenchieCat]

27. Well for those with personal fortune and/or a corp. media working overtime

in their election PR department, no time running is too long. In fact, many have been running for years....perpectually.

For someone like Clark who's isn't in anybody's back pocket, and who the media in essence "freezes out"........the longer is not necessarily the better.

[Hippo_Tron]

37. It's necessary to raise the money to compete on February 5th, yes

It costs an absurd amount of money to compete on Super Tuesday and if candidates want to be competitive they have to start raising now. In the old days candidates could start fundraising after a successful Iowa or New Hampshire run because there was one primary per week until Super Tuesday which was far later in the calendar. Thanks to primary front loading and George W Bush's precedent of raising absurd amounts of money in primaries, they simply can't do it anymore.

In the old system someone like Clark could enter very late and compete with Hillary's war chest because there was only one primary per week. But if Clark tries to enter in October again Hillary, Obama, and possibly Edwards will swamp him because he won't have the money to compete in 10 states in one week and they will.

[KingofNewOrleans]

38. Exactly eom

[AlCzervik]

30. Thank you.

[incapsulated]

31. What longship said

Plenty of time. And those who announce a little later won't be lost in the crush of candidates.

[Hippo_Tron]

36. The corporate media has nothing to do with it...

Front loaded primaries and the drive for money have everything to do with it. Super Tuesday is going to be held on February 5th this year. In order to be able to compete in 10 states on February 5th, candidates have to start raising money NOW. This isn't 1992 anymore and candidates are no longer accepting federal matching funds.

We could easily get off of this absurd primary schedule if candidates would take public financing and the DNC would only allow one primary per week until March or April instead of having 5 or 10 per week starting in February.

[longship]

39. This is an indication of how screwed up this all is.

You said: "Super Tuesday is going to be held on February 5th this year." Actually it's *next* year. So, again. I'll ask the question, "Where's the damned fire?"

I would also argue that if the candidates weren't in permanent campaign mode they wouldn't need to raise so damned much money.

I like your idea of moving all the primaries back as that is clearly part of the problem. However, I would go much further. I would have the primary season begin after Summer's start, into July, or even August.

Why in the Sam Hell do we need two fucking years to select a leader when virtually none of the rest of the world does it that way? It's stupid to do it this way.

I say, bring back the smoke-filled rooms. Eliminate the primaries and put in a caucus system like that in Iowa. Schedule the caucuses in late summer so that candidates can form their committees in the spring of election year. They would basically have the summer to commune with the delegates in the various states. Scheduling the caucuses would be another matter. We'd want to minimize any one state's or region's influence on the process. (I've always found it astounding that two of the smallest states, Iowa and New Hampshire, have such a disproportional influence.)

Others may have different, better ideas.

Something like this is doable. There's only the will to do it. The current system is a fucking mess. It *has* to be changed.

[PhilipShore]

43. All candidates should not be able to receive---private donations....

Each Candidate that would run -- would receive no money from private corporations or people, and they shall receive no media coverage by ads, or by news. Each would receive the same amount, about $100.000.00 (one hundred thousand dollars) from public funding.

That would require them to go door to door to sell, their ideas, and no more of the One Dollar, One Vote electoral system -- this fair change -- would also force them to develop a political point of view -- rather -- then a one minute sound bite commercial.

[jen4clark]

32. He'll announce sometime in March

My crystal ball told me so. ;)

[karynnj]

33. This is way earlier than anyone announced - even as recently as 2004

With a whole year in the brutal zoo that is the current Presidential race, it is possible that after the first few debates and the campaigning where eveything that can be taken out of context will, the three front runners could end up battle scarred and with gaping liabilities. This is an awful process for picking the nominee.

It may well be that one of the second tier candidates will then emerge - and appear fresh compared to the candidate who already was in the spotlight for six months. No one knows what will happen. Gore might enter or not. Many of us could point out liabilities of each - the question is how they counter them and gain enough support. Imagine the top three do open wounds - poor idea - but that is where it looks like we are going, Clark may jump in. Clark does not hold office. So, if he did opt to run, even in summer, he could put in a huge amount of time in the early primary states. He has nowhere as much money, but Kerry had less than half of what Dean did available for the Iowa and NH primaries.

[DonkeyInChinaShop]

34. Money, Money, Money

[Tom Rinaldo]

35. Most money is raised close to and during the early Primaries n/t

[Dinger]

40. He & Gert Went On An Island Vacation After The DNC Winter Meeting, Similar To 2004

They need that time together, before the "Big Announcement." I hope they're enjoying it a lot!
I don't have a link, sorry. I think I read it on CCN.

[mnhtnbb]

41. Because he can't figure out where to get the money.

[CarolNYC]

42. diary on kos

Here, read his diary and comments on kos today:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/12/122254/478

He is terribly worried that whatever time we have to stop the mad rush to war with Iran is growing very short.

Here's one of his comments on the diary:

I do believe that the Administration is laying a lot of groundwork to convince people that Iran is a threat...And once the Administration starts talking about how close the Iranians are to completing their nuclear capacity, it will be difficult even for Democrats in Congress to stand up to them. That's why right now is the time that Congress must speak about the strategy!

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2007/2/12/122254/478/171#c171

He thinks this is serious enough to delay any decision he might make on getting into the race. He's putting the country and the world's interests above his own. I know it's pretty much unheard of in the political realm but, geez, some people seem to think that it's a character flaw or something.

It's as if some think he doesn't desrve to be President or doesn't deserve our support because he refuses to care more for his own future than for ours.

Hey, but if what people want is a self-interested politician who will tell them exactly what they want to hear, whether or not that politician believes it himself, no shortage of those.....

[Freddie Stubbs]

44. Is Clark still on the payroll for FoxNews?

Perhaps there is something in his contact which requires him to resign before running for office.

[FrenchieCat]

45. I haven't seen him on Fox since 2/2/08.

So I don't know.

Although he many need to throw in some levity in reference to this new PR campaign against Iran that he blogged about on KOS today:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/12/122254/478