Is Dean/Clark a viable ticket for '04?

[StrongBad]

Imo, I think it has potential.

Dean has proven political experience, has a fervent base of supporters/activists willing to fight for him. Plus he IS electable. I don't buy the claim that he is too liberal and not in touch with the mainstream

Clark has great military experience, which will be a big issue this election and can compensate for Dean's lack of experience in this area.

Will Clark settle for the VP slot?

[FlashHarry]

1. Actually, it may be ideal.

If Clark settles for veep, that is. Dean brings the grassroots fire of the disenfranchised left and Clark brings the south and his military cred. with him. What's not to like?

[RamboLiberal]

6. I think Clark also brings grassroots support

A lot of boots, sneakers, loafers, and sandals, etc on the ground for this ticket.

Dean/Clark or Clark/Dean IMHO is the dream ticket that is Rove's worst nightmare!

[el_gato]

2. I like it!

why not?

[alonso_quijano]

3. I think it's the most viable...

...with the exception of Clark/Dean.

But I'll vote for, and register voters for, and campaign for, and donate to, any of the 9+1 candidates we have.

[tjdee]

4. Do many people actually understand the nature of Clark's experience?

I know this is kind of off on a tangent, but IMO, Clark is the stronger candidate (on this we'll disagree). And hiding him at the bottom as if people vote on VP....does anyone vote based on VP?

As SACEUR, Clark negotiated with many of the same players that the next president will. The job is, after all, commander in chief. He worked with international leaders, etc. Clark also runs his own consulting firm and has a master's in economics (didn't he work at an investment bank or something like Dean as well?)

The doubt about his abilities seems to lie in the fact that he hasn't raised money or done all the "politician" things necessary to win a race. (And, that his domestic policy ideas are ???) But it's not like he was some colonel who joined up right after high school and was running boot camp or something.

[ieoeja]

31. Gore was a factor in my first vote for Clinton

I voted for Poppy the previous election. And he *did* correct some of the wrongs created by Reagan (S&L crisis, anyone?), so I wasn't completely disappointed.

After a series of Democratic candidates who refused to answer their critics, it was the Clinton's response to the Gennifer Flowers "scandal" that actually made me a Clinton supporter in the first place. He also ran a somewhat more liberal campaign than he governed (anyone else notice this trend among presidentical candidates?).

But Al Gore's promise of an "information superhighway" also caught my attention as I headed up a global computer network at the time which was anything but easy before they opened up the Internet to the general public. Frankly, I didn't think it would work. But I was excited by the idea that it might.

[tameszu]

51. Good call!

"But Al Gore's promise of an "information superhighway" also caught my attention as I headed up a global computer network at the time which was anything but easy before they opened up the Internet to the general public. Frankly, I didn't think it would work. But I was excited by the idea that it might."

Very nice work...

Could you imagine what would have happened to the Internet if Bush/Quayle had been reelected? (shiver!)

:toast:

[Malikshah]

35. Clark Experience...

I've brought this up elsewhere--but it would behoove folks to actually investigate each of the candidates--including Clark.

My father, retired-Army, career bird-- has some serious questions concerning Clarks qualifications as 1) politician & 2) career military.
Folks need to stop thinking Military=Good OR Military=Bad

It's a lot more complex than all that.

[Pepperbelly]

45. what exactly are his questions?

I mean ... to lay this out as a smear without specifics is a questionable practice.

[meegbear]

5. Why not Clark/dean

Clark's definitely more electable than dean.

[Clark Can WIN]

7. Clark/Dean

Clark/Dean - even more viable :dem:

[tridim]

8. I like it too,

Much more than I like Clark/Dean, which is my second choice.

[deutsey]

9. Joe Trippi, Dean's campaign mgr, said last night

at an event I helped to put together that Dean and Clark do talk and that they like each other. This was in response to a question like yours that someone asked.

He also said, however, that it's way too early for anyone to start speculating on possibilities like these.

Still, he seemed pretty positive about Clark, which made me feel good. I also like what I know about Clark.

[w13rd0]

10. It's a very viable ticket...

...consistent message, good creds. Only problem I see is, and I mean no disrespect, two white guys. Don't think for a moment that lacking minority rep on the ticket won't be used against the nominees...

[JasonBerry]

21. No Offense???

"Only problem I see is, and I mean no disrespect, two white guys."

“I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”
- Martin Luther King, Jr.

If I were Dean or Clark and was knocked off the ticket because I was white and/or male - I'd be damn offended. Just like if there was a great ticket with a minority and they were bumped for that reason.

[w13rd0]

24. And the content of their character is excellent...

...which is why it isn't an objection, but an observation.

[JVS]

11. I'm not a big Clark fan, but this would be a good ticket

My big concern about Clark is lack of political experience. Going for President as your first elected position is akin to the Greens going for President when they had nobody in the House or Senate, too much of a step at once. Clark would make an excellent VP and after (hopefully) 8 years learning to do the politics in Washington, he would be one of the best VP to Pres. candidates ever. Also Clark as VP would help assure those who are concerned that we've never seen how Clark governs. We'd grow accustomed to him while he's VP.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. Washington, Grant, and Eisenhower Skipped The Vice Presidency

[JVS]

34. Come on Washington was 1st president, of course he did!

Skipping directly to president is rare, and correctly so.

On edit: BTW I don't think much of Ike. And Clark is not Grant. When Grant was elected he was a living legend, Clark isn't.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

41. I Love U.S. Grant

but his record as pres was mixed at the best.

Washington is consistently ranked as one of our best

And Ike is consistently rated in the top ten.

I'd take any of these three over the current resident.

[JVS]

43. When I say that Grant was a living legend...

what I mean is that his campaign slogan could have been: Vote Grant, he saved the country. Not that his presidency was particularly successful.

[tjdee]

42. Teddy Roosevelt went straight to governor, also.

I'm so interested in this "oh, he has no political experience"...

Does everyone who thinks that also think Sharpton should drop out?

[Rick Myers]

12. My thought from Day One!!!

:thumbsup:

[tedoll78]

13. Currently my ideal ticket!

Dean's presence guarantees bringing-into the process thousands of new voters. Go to any Dean MeetUp and ask how many are new to politics. Even if turnout is just 5% higher due to this, that's actually millions more voters in our column. His broad appeal, from pragmatic Greens to distraught Republicans, makes him a winner.

Clark's presence gives the ticket much-needed foreign policy weight. His military image also gives the ticket more of an image of moderation, which will be needed to hold-onto close Gore states and pick-off weak Bush states. As icing on the cake, he'll probably guarantee Arkansas' 6 electoral votes. With Dean bringing New Hampshire's 4EVs to the party, the fight becomes on to win Gore's states once again.

A great ticket.

[VermontDem2004]

14. HELL YES!!

it is a viable ticket. It is a very electable ticket because Dean can do extremely well with young and first time voters and that is the base that will help us win, also should do well in the south with there stance on guns and Dean is very pro military as is Clark despite the right wing spin. But I think Clark would be better fit as Secretary of Defense, but if you want a very electable ticket, add Clark to it. Besides. Dean Clark '04 is a very nice phrase. Better then Bush Cheney '04 imo.

[nomaco-10]

15. Not only is it viable, I believe it would be unbeatable. NT

[StrongBad]

16. Welcome to DU

And I appreciate your very thorough and accurate analysis :)

[Bombtrack]

17. No, Clark wouldn't, under Dean anyway

Clark is smart enough to know that Dean would be unelectable with Jesus Christ as his runningmate, and he wouldn't throw away a potential washington career by becoming the first loser veep footnote of the 21st century

[Capn Sunshine]

19. Nice side swipe there BT

But if you still buy that bit of Rovian philosophy "unelectable" I've got a bridge for you to buy

[Bombtrack]

22. Rove WANTS Dean to be nominated

I've actually studied elections and public policy analysis for over 3 years. I'm "buying" documented history and social social science

Dean wouldn't come close, barring a second recession, a tet-offensive like happening in the middle east, and more, - and absolutely nothing going RIGHT for Bush for his perception( of which many things Rove probably will make happen)

He's unelectable in every probable way, and the Gingriches and Scaifes are doing everything to see that he defeats Edwards, Graham, and Kerry, - just as CREEP did to Ed Muskie FOR McGovern

[deutsey]

28. If you've studied elections, then surely you know about this

From http://www.historybuff.com/library/reftruman.html
The 1948 presidential election campaign was a hard fight for Truman. By traveling thousands of miles, Harry Truman talked and spoke to many people. He spoke out his feelings on the issues rather than double talk his way out of giving a direct answer. The people that listened to him started the now famous phrase "Give 'em Hell, Harry". Harry Truman said he was just telling the truth. More and more people began to come out to listen to his speeches. The famous "whistle stop" campaign drew the farmers and small town people out by the thousands. The Democrats were so badly split that they didn't think Truman had a chance against Dewey. There was very little money behind Truman.

SNIP...

When Truman went to bed November 2, he was losing the election. Upon arising the next morning he, of course, learned he had won. he traveled to Washington, D.C. that day by train. On a short stop in St. Louis, Truman was presented with one of the "DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN" papers while on the back platform of the train. It was at this moment that the now famous photo of Truman holding up the paper was taken. When asked to comment, Truman said "This is for the books."

[DemocratSinceBirth]

33. Truman Was The Incumbent

[Bombtrack]

44. It was also almost 60 years before this election

Truman has almost nothing in common with Dean. Dean is a self-proclaimed straight-talker who uses code-words and meaningless rhetoric to create buzz which his supporters mindlessly regurgitate, because Dean knows that is what passes for political discourse these days.

Truman was actually a pretty unpolitical politician, and he also had humble roots and worked his way up into the power/money establishment, where Dean was born into it and is no less political than most politicians.

[deutsey]

63. Yeah. Right. Whatever.

That isn't the point I was making, but, ok, whatever.

I see that you've obviously got some ax to grind against Dean. I gave money to DU but I'm seriously thinking of leaving. I can understand differences, but these threads are just getting so narrow-minded my wider perspective just can't seem to squeeze into these threads anymore.

Here, everyone. Take this gun and this bullet, put the bullet in the gun chamber, lock, and shoot yourself in the foot.

I just can't understand why we all have to tear apart our own. I really can't.

I like Clark. I like Kerry. I like Kucinich. Etc. My heart tells me to go with Dean and that's what I'm doing, through the guidance of my reason. I don't feel the need to tear apart the other candidates in my pursuit of a Dean nomination and will do my damnedest to help whomever win if Dean doesn't get nominated.

Again, whatever. Right?

[deutsey]

60. Yes, and?

He was still favored to lose. Incumbents do lose. Carter, Ford, Bush I.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

67. I Think Bombtrack Filled In The Rest

I was lazy

-:)

[JasonBerry]

29. Sorry, Bombtrack

McGovern wasn't even a speck on the radar screen when Muskie had that "episode" in the snow - and I agree it WAS a dirty trick. But doing it "for" McGovern? Not in their wildest dreams did CREEP have any idea that McGovern could even come close to the nomination in 1972.

This is ALWAYS said about Democrats in the primary because they run to the base of the party. After the convention, Dean's record will be scrutinized closely - and frankly, it's hard to call it "moderate" - it's actually pretty conservative save the civil union issue and MAYBE health care.

Your argument doesn't hold up at all. And by the way, if ROVE wanted DEAN, do you really think they'd let it be known - even accidentally? Or, would in Karl Rove style would they want you to think that's who they "want"????

[DemocratSinceBirth]

39. I Think Bombtrack's Argument

is to be taken seriously.

I'd bet my last $1.00 that if you polled Political Science and History professors the lion's share would agree with him.

History and sixty years of social science research are on his side. The last Democrat to win the presidency who wasn't from the South was John F Kennedy.

That's a long time ago....


And the last Norhern Democrat to win the presidency was Franklin Roosevelt...

That was a very long time ago....

Let's see how non-southern candidates have done since 1960*

Hubert Humphrey - lost every southern state except Texas.

George McGovern-lost forty nine states

Walter Mondale-lost forty nine states

Michael Dukakis lost forty states and every state of the Old South except West Virginia.

As Sanataya said " those who do not learn their lessons from history are doomed to repeat it."

I'll go as far to say that having a southerner or midwesterner at the top of the ticket is a necessary but not sufficient condition for success.

[Bombtrack]

40. his record is moderate, by Vermont standards

however he will never be able to shake the gay-coddling, pacifistic, limousine liberal perception to the vast majority of Americans

he's not running "to the base".

The dem base is not anti-war angry white yales and some gays. Dean's base is closer to Ralph Nader's base. The type of people who say there is barely a difference between the 2 parties.

The dem base has, for a very long time been white union households, minorities, jews, and educators.

Dean exascerbates every major dem weakness with either platform positions, or even more with his positions such as being anti-war, which is a position that would lose him millions of votes despite not being a proposal at all.

And he doesn't neutralize or even really lessen any major weakness at all, despite his implication that his NRA rating will bring all the gun-nuts flawking to him away from Bush.

[JasonBerry]

John Edwards?

No, Dean being a liberal - period - is funny. Look at his record!

Anyway.....

So your answer is John Edwards? Really????

By "running to the base" I mean the primary voters - like it or not, Bombtrack - it's the primary voters who nominated all of the above on your list of losing candidates. Uh.....Howard Dean was a relative unknown a year ago, the latest polls of Democrats show he is doing very well. Your guy?

[Bombtrack]

52. I didn't say Dean was a liberal, I said he is/will be seen as one

Howard Dean wasn't unknown a year ago, he's been the governor of a state that shares a media market with New Hampshire since 1990, and he's been campaigning both there and in Iowa for 2 years, and he announced his exploratory committee almost a year before the next candidate to do so.

it is Dean completely a matter of enterpratation to say Dean is any more or less liberal or left than Edwards, kerry, Graham, or Gephardt

However, what he has presented himself as is THE liberal/left-winger among the serious candidates(which exlude Sharpton, Kucinich, and Braun). Of course mr. Bluntness would never actually say what he means(or rather what he wants the activists to think he means). He uses code words. He's the only REAL democrat among the serious candidats etc.

He also is the most Dovish of the serious candidates, the most pro-tax increase, is the only governor ever to sign into law civil unions, and is from a state which is arguably the most stereotypically left-wing there is.

He will and is already viewed as the fringe serious candidate, and once people got to know him if he were to be nominated, he'd also be seen as the haughty, pessimistic, arogant, egomanicacle, ultra-political, loser that he is.

Oh, and Edwards is doing good enough in the states that HE needs to be doing good in, although he has enough time to do better.

No other candidate is litterally interacting and communicating with as many voters as he is, because nobody can do it as well as he can. The corporate media also is also stifling his campaign as much as possible, while it promotes Dean's. They both won surprise fundraising battles in different quarters, but one was ignored and one given everything.

[JasonBerry]

56. Dean's Fundraising was GRASSROOTS

First - real quick - a year ago Howard Dean was an unknown in the nation-at-large. Yes, I know he was the governor of Vermont - do you know how little that means to the rest of the country? To say Dean's rise is all "corporate media" is ridiculous. The media wasn't even paying attention to the Democratic race up until the last few months; while Howard Dean was building a constituency using the internet, on campuses, etc.

Fundraising:

You cannot compare the two. Dean's funds have been a broad stroke of the brush from GRASSROOTS from all over the country. John Edwards? A huge percentage have come from a very narrow interest group: trial lawyers. Yes, Edwards' numbers look good - but a large percentage have been from a group not exactly loved by the vast majority of the American people.

I say all of this as someone who hasn't decided on who I will vote for when the primary rolls around. I support Kucinich and his cause. I think Dean may be more electable. A shame, as Dennis is a fighter; but in our pathetic system of financing, nobody like DK is going to raise the funds necessary to compete in a cross country primary mostly frontloaded to help the more well-financed candidates.

[Upfront]

74. BT Bull

I don't care what, or how long, you studied, what you learned isn't impressing me. My opinion is based on involvement in real campaigns. Dean has the voters' attention, and is the real deal. Best man I have seen sense RFK. If we can get him the money, he will run dim-son back to Texas on a fast horse.

[Doctor_J]

23. I am afraid of this too

I like Dean, but next year's candidate is going to have to be bulletproof. Hate radio is already calling Dean a draft-dodger, even though the current resident of the WH is a DESERTER, and most of the people doing the namecalling also stayed home from Nam. And of course it is sticking in the so-called minds of the nation's Limbeciles.

No, we need the big gun at the top of the ticket, to go at Smirk mano-y-mano. If the VP spot had any significance, we'd have won in 1988. Clark for Prez immediately neutralizes *'s only issue (which will also be the media's only issue), IMO. Clark for VP doesn't have the same effect - Big Media will not even mention his name if he's #2.

Sorry, all of you idealists. I believe deep in my heart that the nation will be lucky to survive another four years of Rove, and our nominee must be the person most able to win a landslide. For me, that's General Clark. If things go well in his first term, and Delay and his cabal have been sent packing, then in 2008 we can start to think about grandiose things. FOr right now, we must FOCUS on sending Smirk back to the pig farm in Jan 05.

[VermontDem2004]

38. People who listen to Hate Radio

on a regular basis have no chance at all voting Dem no matter who is on the ticket. I recall Rush calling your boy Wesley Clark a war criminal.

[Bombtrack]

46. veep spot does have signifigance, but you can't put all your cards on it

and no stereotypical new england or even northeast democrat(which Kerry and even more Dean are) is going to have a shot at atleast 130-150 electoral votes worth of states that pols from the south, and to a lesser extent the midwest, and west will have.

For quite some time. Until we can reverse our perception in the redDER area's of the country(certain states and certain counties, and demographics) we won't be able to gain back the power we had in even the 60's, nevermind the 30's and 40's

[VermontDem2004]

54. You think southerners will vote for someone just because they are from the

South? Gee, why what happened with Al Gore?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

68. I would argue it's a necessary but not sufficient condition

[TacticalPeek]

47. PETA's gonna git on you 'bout torturing them poor pigs.

n/t

[tameszu]

55. No one is bulletproof

Clark is very strong, but, as we've seen on this board, he's not without vulnerabilities. The question is, who is best positioned to deflect those vulnerabilities and to attack/counterattack Bush?

Dean has proven that he can a pretty darned good job of mobilizing a big chunk of the base and increasing participation. What everyone is wondering is how good he will be at rallying enough independent/moderate GOP/blue state support.

Clark, on paper, looks like a dream on the latter category, but his campaign skills still need to be tested. I for one am quite confident that if he announces, he wbe a strong campaigner.

Perhaps the one really significant advantage about Clark over Dean is that his biggest vulnerability, as an outsider military guy, is whether he can get enough of the base, and this is something we can check during the primaries (not perfectly, but it will provide an indication). With Dean, if he wins the primary, we will be more unsure.

[Capn Sunshine]

18. I'm on board

all we have to do is convince an excellent candidate and military man who has always been in charge to take a back seat in what is condidereed the most non vital post in the land. I'm all for it if he does it.

But I think he'd make a better Sec Def.

[Captain Absolut]

20. Zogby said it best...

By then, Clark may well have made a decision. And if nothing else, his band of 30-something draft organizers will have had some fun. They've even got the dream running mate in mind: Sen. Kent Conrad (D) of North Dakota. The bumper stickers would read, "Clark Kent: Superticket for America."


I hope he runs...or I hope bush dies...soon...

[Philosophy]

27. If Clark really has presidential ambitions

He would be much better off going for VP then Sec Def. Sec Def is definitely not a stepping stone to president - at most it's a stepping stone to VP. And as VP he could spin himself as kind of man behind the curtain like Cheney does on security issues.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

25. How about a progressive ticket instead, like Clark/Kucinich?

We don't need *two* centrists on the ticket, and Clark is the more electable centrist.

[Minstrel Boy]

26. It's always been my favourite

I think it strikes an excellent balance. If the election is even barely on the level, it would be a rout.

[papau]

30. Clark-Hillary?, Dean-Hillary, Clark-Kerry - so many possibles!

And I's vote for any over Bush!

:-)

[TacticalPeek]

48. Clark-Tyson

Don't know yet what VP might reinforce a Clark sweep, but keep Dr Laura Tyson in mind.

[JasonBerry]

57. Seriously?

Dr. Laura Tyson? Good woman - but VICE-PRESIDENT? That would be the leap of leaps! One problem with Clark-Tyson....on a humorous note...who is accused of running the state of Arkansas? Tyson Chicken! Where is Wesley Clark from? Arkansas. Just an ironic joke - I'm not serious.

[TacticalPeek]

70. He would need someone with more political reverb, I guess.

I just miss seeing her on tv. (sigh) She's great at cutting the pants off supplysinners.

Sec of Treasury? Chairmomma of the Fed?

[karlschneider]

36. You bet! As would the inverse, Clark/Dean n/t

[poskonig]

37. I spank the monkey over the thought.

George Bush is the monkey, naturally. :+

[snyttri]

49. Clark for President--somebody else for VP

I think you have to have your most effective spokesman at the top of the ticket if you want to win.

http://www.draftwesleyclark.com/in_the_news.htm

Dean is great at mobilizing the left part of the base (though he's more of a centrist), bringing in new and young people and leading the way on use of the internet. He also has some very refreshing, out of the political mold things to say.

However, his domestic experience exclusively in Vermont (possibly the least challenging state in the country to govern?) may not be best to compliment Clark's shortfall in that area. His medical background should make him great on health care. But he always says 'If we can EVEN have it in Vermont we can sure have it in the United States'. As if anyone is going to believe the spin that Universal Health Care would be easier to achieve in the U.S. than it is in Vermont.

Gov., Dr. Dean also has shown a tendency, despite being very much a political veteran, to say things (like insulting other candidates) that he has to apologize for, and to melt under hostile press confrontation (Meet the Press). It seems unlikely that Dean would not spend much of a campaign against the Republicans in damage control. Republicans are good enough at smearing the other side without any help.

For VP the Party should seek someone who is more likely to perform well under fire than not. If Dean shows in the fututre he can handle national pressure in addition to mobilizing the troops I would want him on the ticket.

[JanMichael]

50. I believe that it is.

Both are very credible candidates so a coupling should work well.

[Proletariat]

53. You mean Clark-Dean

[jfkennedy]

58. Clark/ Edwards

Clark/ Edwards is the team that will be in the White House in 2004.

[gulliver]

69. I think so too. n/t

n/t

[StrongBad]

59. I've never seen Clark in action

All that I know about the man is from DU and the draftClark website. If he is a convincing and motivating speaker, perhaps I might entertain a flip in the ticket so it is read as Clark/Dean.

But I dunno...Dean just seems so presidential to me. The man for people who want change.

[Pepperbelly]

62. Wesley is not a bomb thrower by any means ..

He is very precise in what he says and the general flavor I get from him a determination to fix the problems wrought by Bushco. He is not an ideological firebrand but a pragmatic man seeking answers for some pretty difficult straits.

[jos]

61. A definite possibility

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=211132

[JaneQPublic]

64. Consider these reasons for a Dean/Clark ticket:

Dean/Clark make an unbeatable force against the Bushistas. Take a look at how well they complement each other:

-- Dean has expertise in domestic issues; Clark has expertise in foreign affairs.

-- Dean brings gravitas as a doctor; Clark brings gravitas as general.

-- Dean has executive experience, culminating in a balanced budget and a health care program in his state; Clark has military experience, culminating in service as NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander – Europe.

-- Dean, from Vermont, is a northerner; Clark, from Arkansas, is a southerner.

-- Dean has the “Big Mo,” as indicated by rising poll numbers, media attention, and fundraising success; Clark is already respected by the public, who knows him through his spots as an expert consultant on CNN and other news shows.

But let’s not forget the important things they have in common:

-- Both Dean and Clark are exceptionally well educated and well spoken.

-- Both have outstanding, squeaky-clean resumes in public service.

-- Neither of them is a member of Congress, which means their election to office will not deplete either the House or the Senate of a sorely needed Democratic member (a critical consideration, when several of the other candidates represent states with Repug governors).

[tedoll78]

72. Also note:

Dean's bringing a TON of new people into this process. Ask at any MeetUp: who's new here to politics? Anywhere from 1/2 to 2/3 raise their hands. That's wild, politically speaking.

If Dean's candidacy raises turnout by just 5 to 10%, and if that turnout is due to enthusiasm for Dean himself, we'd win easily. Given that about 100 million voted last time, an additional 5 million turning-out for Dean would be incredible, especially if they show-up in the right states, if you know what I mean ;)

Aside from his broad ideological appeal, Dean's ability to pull large numbers of new people into this process is what will make him a winner. Watch the caucuses; the turnout there will go up dramatically, and he's going to stun the world. Then he won't be brushed-aside as some flavor-of-the-month. Mark my words.. we've tapped into something powerful here.

[TrueBlueDem]

65. Sounds like a well balanced ticket

Although definitely Dean in the #1 spot, not Clark.

I've long respected and admired Clark, but after all the militarism we've had from the Chimp administration, I'd prefer not to have another president with a military mindset.

Also, I need to learn more about Clark's views on domestic issues. All I know about him is where he stands on the various issues of foreign affairs.

[TheBigGuy]

66. Dean/Graham would be a more solid ticket.

More credible, I think.

[FubarFly]

71. I waver between the two.

Graham's political experience outweighs any Dem in the field. He is too conservative for me on a lot of issues, but he does do what he believes is right, and he did oppose the war. He would make a good VP.

Clark however, has qualities that no one else has. A progressive leaning 4-star general by definition is intriguing. I'm not sure how savvy Clark will be in deflecting the inevitable smear campaign against him, but his credentials certainly indicate that he would be capable. Also, an outsider ticket in this current corrupt climate would have definite appeal.

On paper Dean/Clark is a powerful ticket. In reality, IMHO, it is too soon to tell. We simply don't have enough information on Clark yet.

[tedoll78]

73. I used to be a Graham man..

but I doubt he can carry Florida for us. His numbers there are in free-fall since he began to speak-out more vocally against Chimpy McCokespoon. Dean's one big weakness is foreign policy, and when it comes to addressing that weakness, you can't do much better than a four-star general.

Graham does have some really great campaigning ideas though. Trotting-out the grandchildren is adorable, and it paints him as a normal joe/family man. And I really really like his attempts to appeal to rural white hetero males with the truck sponsorship and such. We need to improve among them, and badly.

Either ticket would make me happy though.