Okay, Clark Supporters...

[leftist_rebel1569]

I'll give you one shot on winning me over to him. To be honest, I'm real skeptical on him, and I want to know what the big deal is about him. So, go on ahead...post why you support Clark.

Oh, and this is for Clark supporters ONLY. Take your bashing elsewhere for the time being...

[diplomats]

1. See how he does in Thursday's debate

that way you can compare him to the other Dems. I'd rather let his performance win you over (if you are impressed) than anything someone on DU could say.

[EagleEye]

2. Why do you support him?

What policies do you agree with?

[Edmundo]

8. I'm also waiting until the debate...

I can't really fully support Clark until the debate or until I see more substance. People here are trying to disqualify Clark and paint a bad picture before we can learn more about him.

As far as trust I don't think I can really fully trust any of the front runners for the democratic nomination. I have to wait out and see. I'm going to try to keep an open mind until it's time to vote.

I'm not going to blindly support anybody like most people here seem to be doing. My main focus is kicking Bush out of the white house and any of these front runners are all better than Bush and have my vote in the national election.

[renie408]

9. "As far as trust"

You can more easily distrust some than others.

[renie408]

10. I will move it somewhere else

Sorry, I found something detrimental about Clark and asked about it in this thread. I reread the original post and was reminded that the author didn't want anything negative said. I'll ask it somewhere else.

[seamarq]

3. Here are some of my reasons in another thread....

http://democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az...

I also think he is highly electable. I want Bush out.

[cyclezealot]

4. are we sheep.

I am not impressed.. Too many conflicts about what Clark stands for. What is more disappointing to me, a nation of sheep.. We know nothing about this person.. I am very skeptical.. I am not even content with Dean for offering solutions to our problems..
Just put on the ribbons and it does not matter what he stands for or what inconsistencies we find.. As far as I am concerned the DLC could not have its way with Liebermann so comes along some midnight suprise of god knows what. That is what I supsect.
Conservatives bash liberals for wondering about the intelligence of the American people. We go for such an unknown quantity-- well enough said.. Just put on a suit like Oliver North did and we are sold.
Watching Kucinich at rallies, being overwhelmed by his dynamism, connecting with people and real solutions for the people,and displaying an uncorruptible character. I will not settle for less. It is Kucinich or another who later proves his issues and character or I don't give a damn. I will not go out of my way for some questionable pig in a poke.
I want solutions or else it makes much less difference to me who wins. All I will do is just vote for those for which I have to hold my nose ,no more ; and those, I trust -I will work like hell.
As for those who bash Kucinich..One questioned whether he could carry Ohio for Senate.. Hilary now appears she can't win New York again. Hilary of the DLC in liberal New York.?
Don't dare question the abilities of a sterling character like DK.. Rural Ohio is not Cleveland and Ohio has produced some repugnant Republicans, with its delegation like 70% Republican.. Always has been.
DK is too valuable a speaker for the progressive Caucus and certainly more free to speak his mind than the snobbery of the Senate.
If he is not president- he should stay where he is and be a thorn to all those who betray the legacy of Paul Wellstone. Certainly, he has shown his leadership on battles over privatizing Social Security, bad trade deals, unnecessary wars. He is too much of a dynamo in the House's largest caucus- the progressive caucus.. He must stay there to challenge those who betray us, regardless of which party has the presidency..
When people possibly jump off the cliff for some unknown packaged quantity.. Really riles me up.Sorry.
I will listen to Clark-but a people so enamered and his positives automatically jump so high- just wait a minute. Know what you are doing..!

[Edmundo]

12. Dean wanted Clark as a vice president...

Dean was asking clark to join his campaign a few weeks ago... What is Dean doing calling a right wing worse than George Bush conservative like Clark to be his vice president?

Probably because Dean is just as bad or irresponsible at the very least.

[carpetbagger]

5. He might just convince Americans to go our way.

For years, we've been losing elections because of the image we project. Sure, we got Clinton into office, but immediately there began a backlash. It's one thing to propose univeral health insurance, it's another thing to pass something resembling it. Clark's views are as liberal as most of the pack. What sets him apart is that calling him a liberal doesn't seem to have the same resonance among voters who are not liberal. Maybe I have a low opinion of voters, but when I ask my Texan acquaintences why they like Bush, few of them say anything outside of personal preferences, prejucices, and image. So I've concluded that the best way to get the liberal agenda done is to hand up someone who can get the working majority. I like pizza, but I wouldn't put it on a bait hook.

Is it meritocracy? I accept that he's not paid his dues in partisan politics. But neither Bush nor Reagan were products of any discernable meritocracy system. But Clark's got as broad a base of experience and skills as the next guy. He's negotiated a peace treaty, he's served in a number of military positions having to do with White House and congressional functions (probably he's spent more time in the White House than any other candidate). He's worked at OMB. He has a Masters in Economics and taught economics at West Point. He's held a number of commands where he's personally been responsible for the well-being of many thousands of soldiers and their dependents. By all accounts at the time of his announcement, he was a tireless advocate for those families.

He's got brains. First in his class at West Point, Rhodes Scholar.
He grew up without a whole lot of special priviledge, and had his share of knocks.
Some of my preferences are just that, but I'm impressed with his speaking style, and frankly the guy makes me think there's more good in this country than what I'm seeing.

[renie408]

7. Statistically, don't we

Just need to get DEMOCRATS to vote? I mean, if we can get a candidate that excites the Dems, we will still carry the election, right?

[carpetbagger]

18. Democrats only make up 35-40% of the electorate.

Futhermore, some of those voters would be turned off by typical fire-up-the-base strategies.

[Vikingking66]

20. not according to recent polls

Normally 40% are solidly for the Dems and another 40% for the Repubs.
10% are the "vital center." On the other hand, when pressed, they tend to split evenly. This election in particular, with the polarizing effect of the the 2000 election, the tax cuts, the war, etc. polls show only 7% as swing voters, which is why both parties are going with fire-up-the-base strategies.

[cyclezealot]

13. Go our way?

If the facts pan out that the charges against Clark and the airport fiasco are true;for god's sake use your brain..
If true, why don't we just convert Bush to be a Democrat. Clark as in the past should be happy to be a Republican.. To nominate someone who has this kind of past, if true; would turn the Democratic Convention into another Chicago.
Be patient and careful about what you buy.. I ideally want a unified convention, not be outside protesting like 68.

[phegger]

6. try this:

http://www.theconnection.org/shows/2003/09/20030908_b_m...

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 a short answer, but it's all I've got the energy to provide this late at night...hope it helps.


-ph

[Padraig18]

11. Hmm...

I'm not a Clark supporter, but neither am I a basher. I tend to discount many of the gaffs, etc., as being the 'baby steps' of a new campaign/new candidate.

What I DO see that impresses me favorably are his obvious intelligence, his expertise on military affairs and diplomacy (you don't run NATO successfully without being a consumate diplomat, first and foremost), his steady rise in an institution notoriously hostile to liberal thinkers (the US Army), and his proactive stance on women's rights (he instituted a proactive program aimed at combatting spousal abuse in the Army_, is pro-choice, etc.).

I will also 'wait and see' how he does in the debates and on the campaign trail, but unlike many of my fellow Dean supporters, I'm willing to listen to what he has to say.

[kang]

14. Here's a synopsis of my reasons

Ok, I'm not a sheep and I think there are many of us who do know a great deal about Clark. While he hasn't rolled out his specific domestic agenda, he's pro-choice, pro-affirmative action, against tax cuts for the wealthy, but he's for the right to own guns (just not assault weapons).

For me personally, I'm for Clark because he argued for intervention in Rwanda when people in the Clinton admin. were trying to delay action in the U.N. (even refusing to use the word genocide when all evidence made it clear that's what was happening). He argued in the Pentagon for intervention and the halting of the Serbian war-crimes machine under Milosevic (but ended up having to negotiate the peace with Milosevic and his flunkies...like Mladic). While winning the Serbian campaign, he fought for ground troops and apaches in Serbia to stop the on-going (and actually accelerated) crimes of Serb forces in Kosovo. He's also been a strong advocate of bringing war criminals to justice.

I understand that he hasn't gained the trust of some liberals because he's yet to commit to a domestic agenda, but I'm pretty sure it will be acceptable to most (there isn't much variation once you agree on some core things). But I trust Clark where it counts to me, that he'll work with other nations and use American power to lead the world against genocide, war criminals, and other things that run counter to the values of freedom, equality, and justice.

Here's some more info on him. Hope that helps you.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2088740 /

http://slate.msn.com/id/2088624 /

http://slate.msn.com/id/2088588 /

http://www.trepca.net/2001/12/011220-Interview-General-...

[Padraig18]

15. I some times wonder

I some times wonder if we've not become sooooo cynical the we're actually afraid to believe that someone like General Clark is just exactly who and what he appears to be. Have we become so disillusioned and bitter that we've absolutely given up hope that a 'white knight in shining armor' might, in fact, exist?

I'm a Dean supporter, but I have found 99.9% of the (allegedly) 'bad stuff' that people are dragging up about Gen. Clark to be of the *yawn*, so-what variety.

At least give the man a chance to speak, before you all shove a knife under his 5th rib, is all I'm saying.

Note: edited for typos

[renie408]

16. What would get you going?

Seriously, if his voting record and his fundraising record and his stand on the war and his joking about wanting to be a Republican and his not being able to remember his own policy position without calling his campaign manager and his insinuating that he was being pressured by the White House, directly or indirectly, to lie for them (which he later recanted) doesn't bother you...what would? Oh, yeah, I forgot....being a trial lawyer.

[newsguyatl]

17. AfreakingMEN RENIE~!!!!!!!

>>>>>>>and his fundraising record and his stand on the war and his joking about wanting to be a Republican and his not being able to remember his own policy position without calling his campaign manager and his insinuating that he was being pressured by the White House, directly or indirectly, to lie for them (which he later recanted) doesn't bother you...what would? <<<<<<

it's ugly indeed isn't it?


many of my trusted colleagues and friends are very upset about clark and his record... i share their sentiments.

there is a perfect word to describe clark... i'll withhold for now, but only so as not to start a flame war.

[seamarq]

19. And Deans waffeling isn't an issue?