08 Presidential Poll. Ha! Without Clark!

[usregimechange]

Because we all know the General would kick some major DU arse. So, what about the rest of the crowd?

[patrice]

1. Why isn't Clark on there?

[usregimechange]

4. "Because we all know the General would kick some..."

[Left_Winger]

7. I'd like to pose the same question.

[jobycom]

11. Don't question, just be grateful. nt.

[Midnight Rambler]

14. It's like excluding the Beatles on an All Time Greatest Bands list

You know they'd be number one, so why bother? Clark is like the Beatles of DU presidential choices.

[patrice]

25. He would not be a presidential candidate to me.

Just a vice-presidential possibility.

[Thirtieschild]

20. My other is Clark

The best man for the job.

[pkspiegel]

29. Mine too!

nt

[BikeWriter]

63. Me, three.

[LWolf]

83. None of the above.

Including Clark.

Any other offerings?

[Stand and Fight]

2. John Forbes Kerry. n/t

[eallen]

17. Only if you want to see whoever the GOP runs as president.

[arewenotdemo]

112. And that's NOT allowed here at Democratic Underground

I know because I've tried. I ran a Clinton/Hagel/3rd party poll just for fun (and to measure the depth of anti-Hillary sentiment).

She came in third in a pretty tight race...before the thread was blocked for promoting a Repuke for Prez (after complaints).

[0007]

113. Know what ya mean Ed.

[Charlie Brown]

3. What about Schweitzer (MT Governor)

He seems like a down-to-earth guy with moderate appeal.

[Wetzelbill]

74. All Hail Brian Schweitzer! He's the real deal!

He'd never run in '08, if ever, but this guy is about as good as it gets.

[AX10]

5. Wesley K. Clark!

:kick:

[Tyrone Slothrop]

6. Please, Al! Run again!

Set history back on its correct path.

No one else stands a chance...

[leftstreet]

8. Prove Clark would "kick major DU arse." Put him on the Poll!

:)

[Renew Deal]

16. Here you go

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5417351&mesg_id=5417351

[A Simple Game]

26. Was Gore left off to make Clark look good? n/t

[Renew Deal]

27. No

Gore said he wasn't running.

[Uncle Joe]

28. Gore has said nothing different than any other candidate regarding

running with the exception of Biden.

[nickshepDEM]

9. See the sig...

Warner

[Dinger]

10. Other - Clark!

Sheesh, but it is interesting to see the secondary results though : )

[ticapnews]

12. I prefer to think of them as...

potential running mates on the Clark/? ticket in '08 ;)

[usregimechange]

15. Damn you Clarkies! Can't we have a poll without him just once?

Even when I make one to explictly exclude him you find a way to make it clarkable. :crazy:

[FreedomAngel82]

19. Exactly

It gets old. At least all these other people have had experience in politics! Now I remember why I don't come to GDPolitics.

[FrenchieCat]

35. What gets "old"?

That DU members vote for Clark in the majority?
Why? It ain't like he gets any recognition for it...instead he gets taken off the polls. How old is that? :shrug:

[Crunchy Frog]

58. It really gets old for me

that there are people posting on DU who have opinions that differ from my own. Even older that they actually post them. How dare they?!? I think they should only allow people to post on here who's opinions are identical to my own, and I'm going to bitch and whine and complain until such a policy is enacted.x(

[Clark2008]

46. No, what gets old is

... hearing that someone has to have experience in "politics" - or whatever you think is "politics" (because becoming a four-star general is clearly political - so is stumping for your own candidacy and other candidates) - to be elected to president.

Maybe it's time for someone who hasn't spent a career in politics - who's worked as a leader - to be president.

For the record, I didn't vote in this poll. I really don't have a second choice.

[SharonRB]

85. What's really starting to get old

are these daily polls for '08. We pretty much know how they're going to turn out. Let's concentrate on '06. Not that we shouldn't be thinking about '08 at all or talking about it at all, but I'm really starting to get sick of the constant rehash.

[Clark2008]

88. Well, that's true, too.

:hi: Sharon.

[SharonRB]

89. Hi, Clark

:hi:

[faithfulcitizen]

68. that's wierd I see clarkies in the lounge, LBN, GD-I see them everywhere!

:nopity: maybe clark should stop practicing "politics" and helping dems every chance he gets and then we could ban all the clarkies from DU... on second thought, nah.

[Crunchy Frog]

56. I apologize

for being a member of the board and for posting on a thread.

Oh wait, no I don't.

[Ignacio Upton]

13. Warner

[FreedomAngel82]

18. Tough choices

I was torn between Kerry, Gore and Warner (I'm starting to like him a bit more).

[NCarolinawoman]

42. I'm a Clarkie but I like the same three that you mention.

I think National Security would still be extremely important; so while I like a lot of Warner's policies, I would have to consider either Kerry or Gore. These two are great on the environment as well, so it is hard to choose. I guess I would pick Al Gore even though I don't know of his present plans for Iraq; but I do know he was very much against the war and would have never gotten us into this one.

( By the way, many people don't know what a great environmentalist that Clark is. He has the same love of the land that Jimmy Carter had. Otherwise, I couldn't support him.)

[Clark2008]

47. You only like Warner because you're so anti-Clark

besides the fact that he could clearly flip our state blue - much faster than Warner, Kerry or Gore.

:eyes:

[Demeter]

21. I Picked Obama Because Dean isn't listed

I'm not sure if he's 35 yet, though.

[w13rd0]

23. Haha, Obama is in his 40s...

...I look forward to a future run by him, but I don't think 2008 will be his time. Although if he threw his hat in the ring, he'd have my consideration.

[0007]

86. Mine also!

[Susan43]

48. My dream team

Edwards/Obama

http://www.oneamericacommittee.com/

http://www.promiseandopportunity.com/about/mission/

Check out what he's doing. He's a good man and he understands government.

[w13rd0]

22. Without hesitation...

...of those you list, Gore is my choice.

[Texas_Kat]

24. Clark anyway

[FrenchieCat]

30. But, But, But....

I think there are many polls out there taken by polling companies that exclude Wes Clark.

Why do we want to be like them? :shrug:

There are many who state that the media and the poll companies work hand in hand in providing "the chosen few" with losta of publicity and therefore name recognition out there in Corporate world....so why do we have to leave Clark off on the Internet too?...the only place that really gives him any fair dues.

I hate conforming to those standards. Hillary, Warner, Kerry, Edwards, and yes....even Biden get wayyyyy more press than Clark does....but somehow I guess that you are saying that Clark has the unfair advantage? What kind of stuff is this?

This poll makes me sad. :(

[robbedvoter]

33. Don't be sad - Clark wins anyway !

Somehow, it's hard to ignore the General ;-)

[SpongeBob]

31. Clark

[robbedvoter]

32. Other - that is - Clark

[Hippo_Tron]

34. Feingold... but Clark too

The General is awesome.

[McLuhan]

36. Clark

That's my "other" choice.....

[vdeputy]

37. Other + Clark

[DemExpat]

38. LOL...looks like Clark wins this poll too....

:D:D:D

DemEx

[faithfulcitizen]

66. hehehe.....yeah, "Other" wins! na na, na na na...

:P

[Clark2008]

79. Well, of course he does.

DU is made up, mostly, of smart people. ;)

[Pithy Cherub]

39. My other is firmly Clark super-sized!

:P

[ArkDem]

40. Well, that does make it more realistic.

[FrenchieCat]

43. True, true.....

The man has to be excluded in order to be ignored.


That's what happened during the primaries, so why not now?

After all DU members rationality does not even come close to the vast wisdom of the "sane" sheeple population, does it? :sarcasm:

[ArkDem]

59. He can't help it if he is a horrible candidate but to answer your

question, oui!

[Dances with Cats]

41. Wes!

Definitely Clark. Fuck "Run to the right" Hillary AND the capitulating, surrendering, no fighting John Kerry.

[Lefty48197]

44. Write-in: Clark, because I think he might be the best national candidate

Probably vote Feingold in the primaries, because he thinks more like I do.

[ruggerson]

45. Warner/Schweitzer

Two one term governors who have absolutely nothing to do with the idiotic mess in DC.

[FrenchieCat]

49. And have no Foreign policy experience between the two of them

at all.

Good luck.

And I thought we wanted to clean up this mess, not learn how to make more of them on the job!

This is some serious pandora box shit that has been opened up in the Middle East.....if Dems act like the issue doesn't exist, we may be the ones that will near extinction by 2008!

[ruggerson]

51. 9/11 did not change the world

the rest of the planet has been dealing with terrorism for decades. This is just the first time they succeeded with us.

If you think 9/11 "changed everything", you're buying into republican rightwing mindspin.

We need a sound foreign policy, based on diplomacy and strength, and we need to solidify our defenses here at home.

Warner is eminently capable of doing this. FDR, Truman, Reagan, Clinton and Bush II didn't have any foreign policy experience when they hit the WH. The only one who completely bombed out was Bush.

[FrenchieCat]

53. How many of those listed were actually elected during a WAR?

I agree in advocating a "sound" foreign policy based on diplomacy and strength. However, I do know that neither your Prez or your VP picks have experience in diplomacy or strength in the foreign policy arena; that I do know.

I also know that Warner didn't think Iraq was such a bad thing back in the days when opinion polls didn't either.

Please know that is is not about ME buying into the 9/11 mentality (that the Republicans can maneuver and arrange just about anytime as they control the bully pulpit and aren't above "orchestrating" whatever is required...and I would point out that the ploy worked quite well with voters in 2004 with the showing of the Osama tape in late October)...as the issue of National Security was what got Bush over the hump according to most after the election stats.

I just hope that 2008 won't be about Democrats running away from the very real issue of strength in National Security and attempting to hide from what is their perceived (by voters) weakness.

Sure, we'll have Warner and your choice VP up there...and then on October 31st of 2008, we get another tape, or a small explosion. Then what do we do when Possible candidate McCain talks about how strong he is in keeping our nation "safe"?

Achilles' heel got Achilles, and this is clearly our party's unprotected heel. I advocate making the heel protected...that's all!

Peace!

[skipos]

57. Like you, I am a big fan of Clark but

I also like Warner. Just as I am not a single issue voter, I am also not a single candidate voter.

[FrenchieCat]

61. That's fine, I can respect that.....

However, for me, I know a whole lot about Wes Clark, and practically not much about Mark Warner. I don't advocate for any candidate until I have researched them thru and thru and they come out smelling good.

So based on my research thus far, I'm a one single candidate voter...and will remain so until more is "let" out about Warner's Foreign policy and national domestic policy stances. He's a cautious one, doesn't mind triangulation tactics, is a member of the DLC, an attendee at the last bilderberg meeting, made a fortune from high end corporate activities, and his claim to fame is passing a tax cuts. For me, that's not enough on the plus side of the ledger to get excited about the man.

I will say that Warner appears to be good at keeping a lot of info from the media for the time being on his thoughts about our current raging debate, which appears to be good for HIM politically but the lack of information is not so great in giving ME a window to see thru in an attempt to make a determination as to who he really is and where he would stand as a leader of this nation.

So for me, as early as it is in the process, I'd rather root for someone that I know a lot about as opposed to someone who's the new flavor of the month....but yet no one can give me his stance on Iraq....then or now.

[skipos]

62. I just saw Warner on Cspan last night, maybe they will

replay it. I found him to be very direct and non-politician sounding, easy to understand, and aware of what his stances are. He really reminded me a lot of Clark, and I think they would be great compliments to eachother in my fantasy '08 ticket. He was speaking in New Hampshire, if Cspan replays it, I highly recommend it. Or if you want to read my long rambling post about it...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2268147&mesg_id=2268147

[ruggerson]

64. Actually if you read up on him

one of his claims to fame is balancing the budget in Virginia by raising taxes on the wealthier income earners. Thus keeping Moody's, S&P from cutting Virginia's debt rating.

He did this by convincing moderate Republicans to hop aboard what would be considered a traditionally Democratic tax plan.

In other words, he sold them a plan that actually worked and that did not benefit wealthy Republicans, but rather the middle class.

His fortune from high end "corporate activities" is simply because he had the foresight to see in 1980 that the American public would all eventually want to be able to talk on the phone while driving. He had no money, he went to financiers and convinced THEM of his vision and became a self made millionaire.

I kind of think it would be a little short of a miracle to have a President with a vision and a sharp business sense, who has it as a basic tenet to help lift the working man and woman.

And I have no idea where you're coming up with the tax cut scenario as he actually did just the opposite.

[Wetzelbill]

75. Brian Schweitzer lived for 7 years in Saudi Arabia

which is more than any other national figure could say. He speaks Arabic and knows more about terrorism and that area of the world than any other potential Presidential candidate from either party ever will.

The only president we've had in my lifetime who has had foreign policy experience is Poppy Bush. In all honesty, that isn't even a factor and 9-11 doesn't change that. It's more style that gets a guy elected president anyway. Credentials are really window dressing. Very few voters know anything about anything. They just vote for who they like, they don't really care how long his resume is.

[Jai4WKC08]

80. Your lifetime is too short

With the exception of Bush41, we've only elected Governors since 1976. And every one of 'em, Dem and Repub alike, made serious foreign policy blunders near the beginning of their terms. The last one possibly the greatest blunder in American history; thanks to him, we can ill afford to send in another newbie. 9/11 and the Bushie reaction did change that much--the Middle East is exploding, terrorism is a bigger threat than ever and growing daily, and the rest of the world hates us.

Also, it's total hogwash to say that living in an Arab country, even speaking the language, gives someone more knowledge about a region or the problem within it than actually combatting the problems, planning for them, negotiating with the leaders involved. So because I've lived in the Kansas City area for 10 years, I'm more capable of dealing with Kansas City crime than a professional police officer, or better able to fix Kansas City schools than a professional educator, just because they come from a different city? Pfft.

That's not a knock on Schweitzer. He probably does know more than most governors or other politicians. But it doesn't automatically put him at the top of the list either.

As for what gets a guy elected... Ok, I'll agree, style is often what it mostly boils down to. Too often. That's how we got Dubya. And Reagan. And even Carter and Clinton, altho I like them both very much. But you're jumping from who would be best qualified to serve to who MIGHT be most electable. Apples and oranges.

[Wetzelbill]

82. uh, yeah that's what I said

the only president in my lifetime who has had foreign policy experience was Bush 41. You just reiterated what I said, not sure what you meant by doing that, and I was born before 1976. The blunders are obvious yes, and what you are saying is that foreign affairs experience should be a consideration, ok, it should. But really it won't be. Not in the end. Too many people vote solely on wedge issues or along party lines or get spun into voting a certain way. Sure, you and I vote on credentials, most people don't. Should we avoid getting another newbie on foreign policy into office? Sure, it would be nice. Probably won't happen though.

It isn't hogwash to say that somebody who has lived in an area, and speaks the language may have an edge in knowledge of the region. Your comparison about the police officer doesn't fit. It's like saying just because I was born and raised on an Indian reservation it doesn't make me more qualified to make decisions or policy than a member of the tribal council. Well, it doesn't. Not in and of itself. But would make me more qualified to do so is my knowledge of policy, my background as a writer and analyst, my education, innate curiousity, and intellect, which augments my roots there. Now if you were a professional educator or a police officer AND lived in KC for ten years it would make you more qualified than say, somebody who didn't know anything about the city or system there, but may be otherwise qualified. Brian Schweitzer has lived there, speaks the language, knows the people, has had to work with leaders there and prominent businessmen, all the while, because of the line of work he was in, be conscious of and educated on terrorism, years before it become en vogue for other politicians to do so. Does that make him the best candidate? I don't know. Lots of factors to consider. Would I vote for him? Not sure if I would or not. But to dismiss the guy's life experience as somehow not being beneficial to foreign policy is foolish. Just because Wes Clark was in the military doesn't exactly mean he knows much about foreign policy. It means he knows a lot about the military. I have friends who were in the military who don't know jack shit about foreign policy. However, because a guy like Clark has been engaged in negotiations with Bosnia and has bonafide academic credential as well as nearly unparelled analytical skills then you can safely say that he does know his fair share about foreign policy.

However, not a single candidate out there has any real experience combatting, planning and negotiating with Middle Eastern leaders and terrorists. Unless Condi Rice runs and you can feel free to vote for her. Other than that the only person being bandied about as a candidate who has any legitimate experience and knowledge about the Middle East is Schweitzer. That is a fact. Does that put him at the top of the list? No, not necessarily. But it is a credential and part of his life's experience. And, the real idea I was getting across is that just because some guy hasn't sat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for the last ten years doesn't mean that he isn't knowledgeable about foreign policy. There are other ways of developing those credentials.

[Jai4WKC08]

96. Switching a lot of gears here

First off, I specifically stated that there is a big difference between what it takes to be "best qualified to hold office" and what it takes to be electable. I'm not willing to concede Clark doesn't have both, but they are two entirely different skill sets.

Also, you didn't say originally that Schweitzer background might give him "an edge." You said it meant he knows more than anyone else on the list knows or ever will. That's what I say hogwash to. And I specifically limited my analogy to living a relatively few years in a region. Not at all the same as being born and raised there, as with your reservation example. Nor did I say it wasn't an advantage, just that it didn't automatically put him above all the rest.

But you don't know much about Clark if you think he has no experience combatting terrorists or negotiating with Mid Eastern leaders. There was quite an issue of terrorism in Europe and in Latin America during his respective assignments. He once had his staff car bombed, you know. Similarly, his area of responsibility as the CinC of European Command included the northern part of Iraq, the Mediteranean littoral, and parts of North Africa, so he was involved in Middle Eastern policy even then. He has also spent a lot of time in the Middle East since his military retirement, and he doesn't just hang out in coffee shops.

[Wetzelbill]

103. that's funny I always thought he was a coffee man

No big deal. I think we are kind of crossing hairs here a little. I get what you are saying.

[skipos]

50. Glad to see Warner moving up. Sad to see any votes for Hillary.

[Nimrod2005]

52. Wes!

[Tinksrival]

54. Other!

As in WES!!

[Crunchy Frog]

55. Sorry, I have to go with Clark,

even if it is just a voice vote.:hi:

[New Earth]

60. lolololololololol

lolololololololololololol

[wiley]

65. Clark

[Sparkly]

67. "Other."

Need I say who? :popcorn:

[MrSlayer]

69. I voted other.

But I'm not quite sure who that "other" might be. :P

[bvar22]

70. Why no Liberals in your poll?

just asking

[FrenchieCat]

71. I think that "Other" is a liberal

But don't quote me on that!

[karynnj]

76. Feingold and Kerry are liberals

[obreaslan]

72. HA! Other, as in Clark!

:)

[FW_]

73. Other

Other= a vote for Clark for me

[renate]

77. I voted "other"

If only we could find another Rhodes Scholar from Arkansas; we had a good eight years with the last one.

[Jai4WKC08]

78. My "other" is a vote for Clark

I can appreciate wanting to see who comes in second, but let's not delude ourselves into thinking the results show anything but #2.

[name not needed]

81. Clark

[Captain Hilts]

84. Another 'other' for Clark. nt

[skipos]

87. Check out the results from this old DU poll circa Jan 2004

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=118329

[Kosmos Mariner]

90. Other/Clark '08

He's the one to lead the nation, and get back on track. "Restore integrity back to the Whitehouse." :patriot:



:dem:

[BootinUp]

91. Why is "Other" so high?

:lol:

[ruggerson]

92. Because people are not familiar with Warner yet?

;-)

[Jai4WKC08]

93. Or maybe because his artificial bump

Is over?

[ruggerson]

98. Ahhh, yet another Warnerphobic Clarkie n/t

[Jai4WKC08]

100. Piffle

A name-calling Clarkie-hater is better?

I got nothing against Warner. But I think I know DUers well enough to know how the one-term DLC governor will play after the newness wears off.

[ruggerson]

105. Uh, show me where I've ever said

anything about Wes Clark which would indicate that I am a "Clark hater."

You cannot, because I haven't.

So, if I make light of your Warner bashing, your response is to incorrectly call me a Clark hater?

Come on, you can do better than that.

You remind me of the religious rightwingers who try to pass vicious laws against gay people and when gay people object, the religious rightwingers scream indignantly "Christian haters!"

What idiotic spin.

[Jai4WKC08]

108. Read it again

I didn't call you a Clark-hater. I called you a Clarkie-hater. Let any other DUer rant and rave against Clark, Dean, Kerry or ANY other Democrat and that slips by unnoticed. But let someone with a Clark avatar or signature express an opinion and we're phobic? Give me a break.

I didn't "bash" Warner. I just suggested that his popularity at DU would be fleeting. If I was bashing anyone, it was probably DUers, but it was more a comment on human nature.

You're the one who name-called me, so don't give me the persecution act.

Why do you feel the need to call out a Clarkie for expressing anything about any other politician that doesn't drip with praise?

[ruggerson]

109. Little defensive?

I'm not the only one to notice that Clark advocates have been jumping all over Warner threads dissing him. Half the time, what they write is dead wrong; they haven't even investigated what he stands for and what he's done in Virginia. One said his claim to fame is "tax cuts". No joke. Others use buzz words like "bilderberger" and "dlc" as if they were talking about the klu klux klan.

Feel free to keep it up. We'll see next year who people look to for leadership into the future. I have nothing against Clark at all, I probably would not vote for him in the primaries, but if he were our nominee I would support him. But some of his supporters, at least at DU, come off as a bit aggressive and hostile.

[BootinUp]

110. Why not cite the posts you have a problem with

instead of creating the world according to ruggerson and with nothing to back it up.

[UrbScotty]

94. Russ "True Progressive, Anti-'Patriot' Act" Feingold (nt)

[JABBS]

95. Edwards-Warner

It worked in 1992, and it can work again. Warner has good crossover appeal. You get two youthful, moderate-to-conservative Southern Democrats.

Edwards has a great message, and Warner has a great resume to attract Reagan Democrats or Clinton Republicans or whatever you want to call the middle.

[Field Of Dreams]

97. Clark

I'd write him in on any ballot if need be.

[Auntie Bush]

99. Other----Clark n/t

[leanin_green]

101. Ah, let the Clarkies have their guy. I like him too, just not at the top.

What's nice to see for me is how well Gore still does among the others listed. Gore/Clark sounds like a winning ticket for me. I'd vote for it in a heartbeat.

[AtomicKitten]

102. Me too.

Or Gore/Obama.

[andlor]

104. done

[PDittie]

106. You ought to do a poll where

Gore isn't a choice, because he's made it clear he's not running.

Similar to Dkos, where they include everyone who's formed a PAC.

[SamuelAlito]

107. I, Samuel Alito, throw my hat in the ring

It's not without precedent that a sitting Supreme Court Justice runs for the presidency.

Once I'm confirmed, the way will be open!

The Right Honorable Samuel A. Alito, Jr.
(the A stands for Awesome)

[LandOLincoln]

111. Welcome to DU, your honor.

Nice blog, too, but if I may make one teensy little suggestion?

Warn your readers to put down the coffee cup/soda can/wine glass/beer bottle and SWALLOW before proceeding, 'kay? Thanks! :rofl:

[MissMarple]

114. Clark.

Maybe Kerry. There are many leadership positions for our many talented Democrats. They all can't be president, nor should they be. The leadership positions in the House and Senate, and the Cabinet Secretaries are critical in the running of this country.

Let's don't go overboard on investing ourselves in one personality. The Democratic party has many competent progressive leaders, and their are many leadership positions to fill.

I think Hilary would make a great Senate majority leader, she could bring a stability, focus, and leadership that the Senate sorely needs. And, in many respects, while the role of President may have star billing, the real opportunities for serving this country lie in other directions.