Interesting, but is he too late in the game to become the dems nominee? or would he be picked up as a potential VP by someone later?
Dean wants him, but I still think he could give these guys a run.
I think he could give these guys a run for their money, but I would think that he will go for a VP candidate position and go for presdential run the next time. Thats what I sense so far.
I can see that happening as well, Wesley/Clinton ticket has been mentioned.
That clark is alright in my book, but does he look good in civies?
Here ye Here ye
No one will beat King Bush
He will complete his 2 allocated(by supreme court) terms.
On a serious note, I dont much care for democrats and their liberal philosphies. Gosh, I hope Hillary is never elected. That will be a never ending torture. O God, please help us.
The guy with the golden resume!
He may be late, but he certainly has the potential to ruin some other candidates of their main selling point. Edwards is no longer the only guy who can get Southern votes (Gen. Clark is from Arkansas), Kerry is no longer the only war hero here, and Dean is no longer the only "Washington outsider fit to clean up the house".
What I heard yesterday is that Clark has assembled a team of some of the same guys who ran presidential campaigns of Clinton and Gore. So he is making the right moves. He is late in Iowa and Hempshire, plus lags far behind in campaign funds, so it remains to be seen if he can generate enough resources to pose as a viable candidate by the time, primary seasons comes full swing.
He is the first guy whom many Americans can atleast recognize. CNN does that to you. :)
Another case of "better than the alternative, but not best".
kaleem
i dont care much for democrats either but not for their liberal social policies, some of which bother me, but more due to their tax and spend approach, in shorttheir general economic and fiscal approach.
republicans on the other hand have a better view on these issues, although then the ultre right wingers or ultra-conservatove (read closet bigots) get on my nerves.
and..i am so thankful that hillary is not runing, she is like an american benazir bhutto ;)
Clark believes in foreign policy by consensus, as he did in NATO. Perhaps we should let the French vote.
Alternatively we should freeze elections, declare an intifada and have Bush til he is 75! Sound good everybody?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Kaleem: *
**Here ye Here ye
No one will beat King Bush
He will complete his 2 allocated(by supreme court) terms.
On a serious note, I dont much care for democrats and their liberal philosphies. Gosh, I hope Hillary is never elected. That will be a never ending torture. O God, please help us.
[/QUOTE]
**
Sorry if this is not related to the topic, but just one quick question, i won't derail it after i ask this. Just out of curiosity, Kaleem Bhai, who would you want to see elected for the next term?
Nadia, I am a conservative. I like their values and philosphy with the exception of the worl domination. I will like to see another republican ..but that is not going to happen..its either Bush or Democrats. I will take Al Gore over Hillary any day of the week.
[quote]
Nice indeed. A General is coming into the race following legal channels, unlike Pakistani Generals who can kick down the door anytime they please.
[/quote]
What does all this have to do with Pakistan or Pakistani Generals?
I think Wesley Clark is a very strong candidate. The Democrats seem scattered at the moment as they are lacking any real leadership. With Bush's approval ratings hovering around 52 % at a time when democrats aren't offering much, I think Clark can fill that gap quite easily. Next couples of weeks are crucial. If he is able to lay out an 'honest' strategy to address pivotal issues such as the security, iraq, and the economy, he could sway a lot of voters, especially the undecided ones. The money will be an issue, but if he is able to garner enough initial support and build up momentum, it will come. Great candidate, and Muslims should vote for him, considering his role in Bosnia and Kosovo.
outlaw what if he supports Israel?
outlaw
look back at when clinton entered the race, the dems did nto seem to have any strong candidates then either and then it was a wipe out for Mr. "Read my Lips, No New Taxes" if you also go back and recall when dole challenged clinton..he seemed to be a much stronger candidate than the wipeout proved.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
outlaw what if he supports Israel?
[/QUOTE]
Support of Israel is an non-issue, since the current administration seems to be the worst of all.
However, the subjugated persecution of Muslims in the US; the wars in Afghanistan, and Iraq will definitely keep a lot of Muslims away from the Bush's camp.
Then there are other vital issues, such as the environment; Bush's support for massive drillings in the Arctic, thinning of Pacific North West rain forests, trade disputes with Canada. I just think, Americans will be more prosperous and safe without dubya..
Most importantly, Wesley Clark does not seem to hold the "Masonic" view of the world like Bush, and when you take into account people like Anaconda Rice, Mullah Aschcroft, wolfowitz, cheney, feith in Bush's adminsitration; it just casts a bleak outlook for rest of the world. You got real axis of evil in place, that needs to go..
Fraudz, that's exactly my point. The Democrats have not offered real leadership until the Clark's entry, and he's someone with a recent proven track record, someone a lot of people can affiliate with. But, he needs to address wide array of issues swiftly in order to win broad support.
A couple things I find interesting.
This guy enters the race as a blank slate with no one really knowing his positions on almost all issues. Yet, he starts with double digit support. Only a couple Dems have support as high as Clark and they've been on the campaign and money raising trail for quite some time.
Many polls out recently show that the closest Presidential matchup is between Bush and "unnamed Democratic candidate." When you plug in a real name to match up against Bush, GW beats that candidate by a wider margin than he does "unnamed Democratic candidate." Seems to be a case of the more you know about the real Democratic candidates, the more there is to dislike.
Clark's advisers can now start to stick issue positions on him like you stick arms and legs on a Mr. Potatohead. Maybe they'll figure out the right pieces and put them in the right places for Clark to outpoll "unnamed Democratic candidate."
What I like best about him is it pisses him off as much as much as it does me that Republicans consider any criticism of Bush's policies as 'unpatriotic' or 'unAmerican'. Hopefully he will be able to stop that argument in its tracks and bring about real debate of Bush's failed economic and foreign policies.
His best asset is, perhaps, that most Americans recognize him.. unlike Kerry, Dean or Edwards. Perhaps only Lieberman or Clinton (H) can claim as much face recognition.
Not to mention that he is a blank slate as far as issues is concerned... as mv pointed out.. so he can pick and chose popular policies, as he deems fit. No baggage from a prior life.