Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Which is the best choice of my current dream ticketS for '08

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Bombtrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:42 AM
Original message
Which is the best choice of my current dream ticketS for '08
Edited on Fri Nov-17-06 11:43 AM by Bombtrack
Presidential / Vice Presidential
A: Wesley Clark / Barack Obama
B: Wesley Clark / Barbara Boxer
C: Wesley Clark / Russ Feingold

I appreciate as many comments as possible.

I think all could be great for different reasons. And obviously each vp candidate would be a first of a different kind (African American, female and Jewish American, and just Jewish American, respectively if they did win)

however Barack would be the first CANDIDATE of his kind, which Barbara and Russ would not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Deep13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
1. "C" is the most geographically desireable.
Wisc. is a swing state, IL and CA are pretty much in our column.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bombtrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. Since you're a Dean fan, don't you think that basis for decision is contradictory
to Dean's 50 state philosophy ?

I know you did qualify desirable with "geographic", but there is something to the idea that demographics are becoming more important in presidential politics. And if so, exciting people who say, would love to see an African American Vice President, especially one as amazing as Obama, or someone who'd love to see a female Vice President, especially one as amazing as Boxer, could be far more important than an effect on Wisconsins electoral votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deep13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. Dean's plan is to expand the base into red states.
That's part of it anyway. While I would sleep well with any of those folks as VP, securing an iffy state and maybe other Midwestern states is more important in my view.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bombtrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. I just think Feingolds substantial geographic power ends outside Wisconsin
Edited on Fri Nov-17-06 12:18 PM by Bombtrack
his overall appeal as a candidate is in my opinion great but for reasons removed from that specific a geography. The midwest isn't the south in terms of level of homogeneous identity and relation to presidential candidates, which is a compliment to them.

I think Feingolds strength comes from just how respectable and impressive a legislator and man he is, not what effect he could have on, say, Ohio or Missouri.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zensea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
2. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Monkeyman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
3. A N/T
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bowens43 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
4. Clark can't win.
Democrats do not want a general to lead our civilian government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. help me proofread this
I am writing a blog for Clark, take a look time permitting and give me your criticisms. I have a lot more to do on it this is just a start really. There are some dates I gotta check etc, just wrote this last night.

Why Wes Clark is the right man to lead our country in these times

First About me:

I am a moderate Democrat and I frequently defend other moderate dems in the blogosphere. You can usually find me at the DU – Democratic Underground supporting the Democratic Party. I am also a big admirer of Bill Clinton’s “stop and think” style of politics. Clinton is a true uniter not an ideologue, and without a doubt the best President of my lifetime. I am 43 years old, and was born and raised in So Cal. I am married with 2 children and live in Northwest Georgia.

About General Clark

General Wesley Clark (Ret.) is a four star General and Rhodes Scholar who led NATO forces as the Supreme Allied Command Europe during the Kosovo conflict 1998 – 1999? Clark graduated first in his class at West Point and served in Vietnam where he was wounded in battle. He rose through the ranks quickly and helped transform the US military into the volunteer service it has become today. He has written two books: Waging Modern War – about the Kosovo conflict, and Winning Modern Wars – about how to best approach today’s challenges in the Middle East and Iraq with an emphasis on a multilateral approach.

Clark was directly involved in negotiations with Slobodon Milosevic, the Serbia strongman who plunged the Balkans into a period of ethnic conflagration and wars during the 90’s. He was present at the Dayton accords in 1995? which established new borders and ended the Bosnian war. As NATO SAUCEUR, Clark communicated with leaders from the other NATO allies about military strategy and tactics and has received much recognition for his skilled leadership during this time.

Not a single American soldier lost his life in the Kosovo campaign and over 1.5 million Albanian refugees were returned to their homeland at the end of the war. Clark actively promoted his military strategy in Kosovo and ran into some resistance from the Pentagon. The Clinton administration was under political pressure from the Republican Congress for pursuing a humanitarian based mission to end the ethnic cleansing in the Balkans. Clark stuck to his guns and accomplished his mission, but his strong advocacy resulted in some bruised egos in the Pentagon. General Hugh Shelton the CJC and Defense Secretary Cohen moved to retire Clark early with the expressed reason being to make room for General Ralston to succeed him. Despite these disagreements Clark was eventually awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Bill Clinton who praised Clark’s leadership of the Kosovo campaign and service to his country.

Clark became a successful businessman after retiring from the military, forming his own consulting agency, investing in technology startups, and joining the Board of Directors for technology companies. Then came the attack of September 11, 2001, a national crisis. Not long after the attack Clark visited the Pentagon and became alarmed by what he was hearing. The Bush administration was planning to invade Iraq and other Middle East countries like Syria and Iran as part of an aggressive strategy to spread democracy through the use of force.

Clark would testify before Congress in September of 2002, warning of the difficulties and regional ramifications of a unilateral invasion and occupation of Iraq. He advocated using the UN to pressure Iraq to comply with UN resolutions and UN inspection regimes. He questioned the portrayal of intelligence on Iraq and as an imminent threat. He was familiar with that intelligence from his service where he had coordinated with Centcom activities in Iraq. Paul Wellstone credited Clark’s testimony as a key reason he opposed the Republican IWR bill that was eventually passed.

Clark was a CNN military analyst during this period and was garnering attention with his insightful analysis during the lead-up and invasion of Iraq and on operations in Afghanistan. Many people remembered him from his service and leadership in the successful NATO Kosovo campaign. A draft Clark movement formed in 2003 to push Clark to enter the Presidential race. He made several appearances in the media over the summer in 2003 discussing his political views and the draft Clark movement continued to gain momentum.

Clark left his successful career in the private sector to run for the 2004 Democratic Presidential nomination. His campaign was built around his opposition to the Iraq war as “a war of choice” and a “great strategic blunder”. Clark was one of the strongest voices for the Democratic Party opposing the Bush policies in the Middle East and other misguided policies related to the War on Terror. He spoke against the Patriot act and for strong protection of civil liberties. Entering the race very late in September 2003. He employed a strategy of skipping the Iowa caucus since he had not campaigned there and did not have the ground support that is a key to winning the caucus there. This late entry and strategy has been identified as one of the key reasons for his unsuccessful bid. In fact prior to the Iowa caucus, Clark was polling second behind Howard Dean in New Hampshire and was gaining on Dean during the months of December and January. He eventually withdrew from the race in February but not until after he had placed 1st in Oklahoma, 2nd in North Dakota, New Mexico, and Arizona, close 3rd in Tennessee, and 3rd in New Hampshire just behind the 2 New Englanders. He immediately threw his support to the eventual nominee John Kerry and campaigned extensively for Kerry and the Democratic Party.

The key to Clark’s strength as a political newcomer has been credited to a strong grassroots following that grew out of the Draft Clark campaign and spread via several internet sites established by the Draft Clark movement. When I first learned that Clark was considering entering the race, I went on-line and searched for more information about him.

I was able to watch several videos of interviews he had done and I saw that not only was he very telegenic, and passionate in what he believes but that he was saying exactly the right things with regard to the misguided war in Iraq, the failure to capture bin Laden or secure Afghanistan, and the domestic policies of the Bush administration that was concentrating power in the hands of a few. He spoke eloquently on how it was up to each of us to oppose these policies and put the country back on the right course. That dissent was the highest form of patriotism. When Clark speaks about our country and the challenges we face, he comes across as intelligent, thoughtful, and someone with real leadership ability. I searched the net for any information I could find about Clark and his life of service. The more I read about him the stronger I felt that he could be the type of President that only comes along rarely, a combination of selfless service, integrity, intelligence, and experience that was sorely needed in our Government right now.

The problems caused by the Iraq war will be with us for some time, certainly beyond 2008. Iraq is in a low grade civil war with no end in sight, Iran is emboldened to increase their influence over the Middle East and to proceed with their nuclear program. North Korea has just tested their first nuclear weapon and has accelerated their plutonium production. American strength and political influence over these situations is clearly weaker than before the invasion. Our military is overextended. There is no less need for the kind of leadership Clark can deliver now than there was in 2004. I am compelled to join the effort to draft him once again. This time the outcome will be different. I know he can go all the way!

With his WesPAC action committee he has been campaigning for Democrats leading up to the mid term elections of 2006 has demonstrated his commitment to be a leader for change. His frequent consultation with the Democrats in Congress has helped to mold the party National Security strategy. Clark endorsed many Democratic candidates and contributed over 1 million dollars in financial support to their campaigns. A Democratic strategist recently recognized Clark as being the dark horse candidate for 2008.

Please consider joining this effort and ask General Clark to get in the race. If you are still learning about Clark, you can visit the WesPAC internet site to get more information, talk to other supporters and get involved.

Thank you for your interest and time!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bombtrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #4
11. The fact that as many Democrats want him to as any other candidate
on DU proves your statement flatley wrong, because I alone wanting him to do so and my being a Democrat proves it wrong.

Clark is a Civilian. Democrats owe their victory 2 weeks ago to retired military men and women running for federal office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JNelson6563 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 08:38 AM
Response to Reply #11
35. Maybe here on DU
Clark's got a long way to go before he's what you claim, wanted by the Dem masses. And Obama's green. Boxer and Feingold wouldn't boost Clark's chances.

Strategic thinking isn't the strong suit of all DUers I see.

Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #4
32. I'm a left leaning, treehugging, never shot a gun in my life, anti military intellectual snob & I...
...support Clark for president. There's a zillion different ways to serve your country. Some do it in uniform; I do it in a classroom. I support Clark because he alone among the candidates makes the effort to tie all the core Democratic values to the Constitutional values that framed our government and made our country so successful, safe, and free. He's a far-sighted strategic thinker who just so happens to know how to speak convincingly and clearly on a range of topics. I don't think we should form our opinions about people in uniform based on the bombastic rhetoric of the worst of the 1960s militarists.

*Note: I actually have shot a gun a few times, but it's been many years and I'm pretty sure I missed whatever I was aiming at.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marnieworld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
5. Gore/Clark
Undefeatable and truly the best for the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
6. This is my choice.
Wesley Clark / Hillary Clinton. :hide:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deep13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #6
13. Best not to have the popular one on the bottom half of the ticket.
Remember 1988? Same goes for Clark/Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bombtrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #13
21. Hillary should not be summed up as "popular" and don't even attempt to equate Clark to Dukakis
He's a fucking Rhodes Scholar from Arkansas who with the spotlight of a presidential nomination has a better pontential to become truely popular than someone who isn't the most decorated/knowledgable military man and diplomat perhaps in the country and certainly in contention for the presidency when those qualifications have never been needed more. People are most concerned about Iraq, no bullshit, polls support that.

Obama and Hillary are more famous than Clark, there is no intellectually honest way to contrast their popularity until Clark gets a fraction of their exposure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deep13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Wow, not just a Rhodes Scholar, but a fucking Rhodes Scholar.
Edited on Fri Nov-17-06 01:16 PM by Deep13
I donated $500 to the Clark campaign in 2004. I lived in MA when Dukakis was governor and after decades of corruption he had that state running like a Swiss watch. I ask you, therefore, not to make disparaging comments about the Iron Duke.

Being an excellent leader is not the same thing as being an excellent candidate. That should be pretty obvious by now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bombtrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. And this may be the only time in my lifetime the most excellent candidate has the greatest potential
to BE the most excellent leader.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. I was a big fan of Dukakis
Unfortunately he ran into on of the best slime machines of all time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. Seems like Hillary Clinton is running up against several slime machines!
BTW I thought Dukakis was great also.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #6
20. He'd have to watch his back and have someone taste his food for 8 years! / nt
TC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
7. I see a trend there. ;)
Seriously I really like Obama. But all those people are winners in my book.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tigereye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
9. why not the other way around?
why should Clark be president over Hillary and Barack and the rest? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deep13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #9
14. No Senator has been elected since 1960.
Even that was a fluke. I know what you mean though and raised that issue in another post. You don't want a bottom-heavy ticket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tigereye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #14
30. yeah, that is true.
But Clark isn't a Gov. Lately we seem to only elect Southern govs.

But hell, if we can have a woman Speaker, we can start electing Senators for Pres. again. I say, Boxer or Feinstein for Pres!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bombtrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #9
16. I didn't mention Hillary, and you provide one more example of why I resent her alledged campaign
if indeed she decides to participate and/or take advantage of her bullshit "frontrunnership" the lemmings of all political/media hackery have given her.

As far as why Clark over Barack, who I did mention, because the United States has a bigger and more desperate foreign policy problem than any time in modern history and Clark was fucking born to atleast attempt to remedy it. In 10 more lifetimes the average politician could not garner more expertise and respectability and discipline in the arena of world relations and military issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tigereye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #16
31. hmmm
Edited on Fri Nov-17-06 04:54 PM by tigereye
"expertise and respectability and discipline in the arena of world relations and military issues."


yes, but it takes more than that to be President. Well, it should. :)

I like Clark, he was impressive. But I guess I don't see why he would be better than any of the other folks named. We could also say that, using that criteria, Colin Powell would also fit the bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
15. Clark/Sebelius, or better, Gore/Sebelius.
Edited on Fri Nov-17-06 12:03 PM by longship
Not Feingold as Veep. An all progressive ticket may not be the best idea.

We need Obama, Feingold and Boxer in the Senate.

How about a governor? Sebelius' star is rising. She could be a real winner for us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deep13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Sebelius/Richardson
Someone who will be a breath of fresh air to the voters who are sick of the scandals, the fighting and the who Washington scene. Whatever is going on there, she has nothing to do with it. Also it would make inroads into two areas of the country: big square states out west and the Southwest. Incidentally, Sebelius is the daughter of former Ohio Governor Gilligan. That is a hook for that state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bombtrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. I challenge you to provide any non-bullshit example of Sebelius' "star rising"
Edited on Fri Nov-17-06 12:24 PM by Bombtrack
IMHO she doesn't have a star to rise. Not in the same universe as Obama. Who would be replaced by another progressive Democrat Jr. Senator were he to take the VP office. Illinois is a BLUE state.

And nothing has changed that dramatically in America since 2000 that if Al Gore couldn't win Tennessee in a presidential race that Kansas and its fewer electoral votes would go for the Democrat in 08, especially not against a moderate republican which odds are the candidate will be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deep13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #19
23. You might be right. We will see.
The think you might not be grasping is that America by and large does not want a progressive celebrity. They tend to be polarizing figures. Someone relatively obscure is preferrable and a governor is always preferable to a Senator. The only Senator to become president in the 20th century was JFK.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bombtrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 07:48 AM
Response to Reply #23
33. Since when did Clark become a Senator or a "progressive celebrity"?
Most of everything else you said is utterly unfounded, as apposed to undeniably false like the notion Clark is a Senator or progressive celebrity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #19
29. Why the hostility?
Edited on Fri Nov-17-06 01:58 PM by longship
Yes, I like Obama, maybe a lot. However, I cannot form an opinion on the guy as a Presidential candidate until I see more of the guy. I will not vote for *anybody* based solely on their charisma. When we do that, we get people like "nice guy" George W. Bush. Obama may be the cat's meow, but I am far from ready to support him for an election which is a whole two years down the road.

As to Sebelius, you obviously know little about her, her history, and what she has accomplished in KS. Her star is rising because of her deeds, not because of any perceived rock star status. She'd make a helluva Veep candidate.

Nothing has changed in America since 2000???? Pshaw!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bombtrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 07:49 AM
Response to Reply #29
34. I'm suggesting Obama for VICE PRESIDENT, not president
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Claire Beth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
25. Wesley Clark/ Bill Richardson n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deep13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. Hmmm, good possibility of finding new electoral votes there.
:-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 20th 2024, 05:18 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC