Open Left: the Case for Wes Clark (as a Veep choice)

[featherman]

"I'm going to lay out my brief case for why I think Clark would be the best candidate for VP. There are a number of possible candidates for Vice President being bandied about. The most prominent is the one for Jim Webb, with Webb himself leading the charge against anyone not in elected office. As the only elected Democrat in the Senate identified as a strong military leader, this argument inherently leads the field open to him on national security grounds. Webb's argument is that, "Other than Eisenhower, the great military leader in that incredible World War II experience, you're going to want someone on your ticket who's demonstrated he can get votes."

I've already laid out my case against Webb. On the plus side, Webb was forcefully against the war from the beginning, and he pushed through the GI Bill in the Senate. He won in a swing state, and has an appealing background as an ex-Reagan official turned Democratic populist Senator. On the downside, Webb has huge problems with women, and it's not clear that he offers anything in terms of getting votes. His base in 2006 was white liberals from Northern Virginia, hardly a constituency group Obama is likely to need help with. And he doesn't help heal the Clinton-Obama divide; he isn't identified with the Clinton wing of the party. He's an island, an independent power source, which maximizes his leverage in the Senate, but isn't helpful in unifying the party.

Contrast that to Wes Clark. Clark, though not in elected office, has a better sense of what it's like to run for President. He has after all done it before, and for a neophyte, he did very well. More importantly, he has excelled at the real job of a VP candidate, which is not getting votes for the top of the ticket, but being a surrogate for the campaign and for lower ticket races. In 2006, Jon Soltz of Votevets tells me, Clark was the single most requested surrogate in the country, with the possible exceptions of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Clark is heavily involved in both his own PAC and Votevets, raising money and supporting Democrats up and down the ticket. He has huge credibility with officials all over the country because he was reliable and helpful to groups, candidates, and activists. There is simply no one else who comes close to his ability and track record of delivering a persuasive and progressive argument on national security on behalf of Democrats."

More at: http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=6119

[FrenchieCat]

1. I would have said that he was great, till I visited his blog last night.....

where his current supporters were discussing how they were all waiting for the "why'd he" (Whitey)Michelle Obama tape.

If you think Hillaryis44 was bad, Wes Clark's Blogsite has been keeping up right with it. And to think I was a member of Clark's Blog since 2003!

[beachmom]

3. OMG. FrenchieCat -- you were a TOTAL Clark supporter. Perhaps

the majority of Clark supporters are gone from his website, and just Hillary supporter types are there.

[FrenchieCat]

5. I haven't "Monitored" the blog, but I do know some of the "dieHard" are there......

Folks that I have discussed issues and Clark with since 2003. :(

I'll have to wait them out and see if they change their tune, but that blog has definitely been as much anti-Obama as they have been pro-Hillary.....

And they have gone far in some of their discussions.

I don't know how Wes Clark allowed the Blog to degenerate as it has. I realize that he believes in dissent, and that's fine...but Character assassination and hoping for smears about the presumptive Nominee's wife is really way far gone for me.

Most have sworn to voting for McCain or not voting at all; in otherwords, many are now "out to lunch"!

[Tom Rinaldo]

6. It's 50 hard core people acting that way Frenchie, actually less

There may be another 50 who are still pushing for Clinton thinking she is the best candidate, but without the additional hard core anti-Obama stuff. It is a very tightly knit group of frequent posters, you know that, but it is also insular. Clark never feeds that energy, and even the most anti-Obama posters there know their days are limited at Clark's blog because they know that Clark will back the Democratic nominee. They are exchanging email addresses now so they can stay in touch off the board when WesPac swings behind the Democratic nominee.

Plenty of Clarkies as you know are supporting Obama, but not wanting to show disrespect to Clark, they have stayed away or avoided discussing the primaries on his web site blog. That left the field clear for the most fervant supporters of Hillary to dominate the blog there. Those days will soon be over.

[FrenchieCat]

10. Thank God!

[Cali_Democrat]

2. Wes Clark?

He questioned Obama's ability to be CIC. Also, European allies described him as a loose cannon during the Kosovo War. Something about that guy just makes me suspicious.

[featherman]

4. Thanks for the heads up about the blog - true lunacy but not sure that

we can hold this deluded true believer spouting off against the General himself who seems level-headed.

Clark is only one choice I'm keeping an eye on personally. I'm liking Brian Schweitzer also and maybe Mark Warner. Would prefer not to have a Senator although it that is the case Claire McCaskill would be my first choice of that group.

[mzmolly]

7. Sheesh, sorry I just duplicated your post.

I checked for it and didn't see it, but I'll alert the mods.

K and R.

[lastliberalintexas]

8. No thanks

Wasn't interested in him in 2004, even less so now.

We really in truly need to stop trying to pick someone to get the republican demographic to vote Dem and instead focus on forming a ticket that excites Dems and engages OUR demographic for a change.

[Jersey Devil]

9. Problem with Clark is that he has never campaigned for anything

Oh sure, he was in the early stages of a primary, but not the real thing and a veep has to be the hatchet man for a campaign by custom, so I would rather have someone who has experience in a general election.