Clark is the only truly electable candidate I see.

Wesley clark is the only truly electable candidate I see in the pool of potentials.

Hillary would be a great candidate, but the right wing media juggernaut has had over 14 years to vilify her. Most of the Joe six-pack demographic has been fed the idea that she is "anti-american" and they have eaten willingly. If you listen to the radio talk shows (O'Reilly, Hannity, Michael Savage, etc.), you will hear them actually say that they think Hillary is the most dangerous person on earth. Unfortunately, if you tell the public something often enough, a large number begin to believe it. She cannot win in the general election due to this concentrated propaganda effort, which has not eased off even a little since the original smearing of her reputation in connection with health care reform, way back in 1992-3.

Lieberman - not even an option - no fire in the belly.

Dean - Same as Hillary, except they managed to destroy him based on nothing at all, and in much less time.

Gore - Just can't see it.

Wesley Clark not only has the faith and trust of our armed forces, he has no real negatives for the right wing media juggernaut to pound on. The only thing they can fault him on is his willingness to play a bit of brinksmanship with the Russian military in Yugoslavia. Even that is a positive, because it gives him something unique. He engaged in said brinksmanship in order to stop the continuing genocide of Muslims in Yugoslavia.
This gives him something no one else can claim - credit with the Muslim world. Kind of hard to go on bitching about the "Great Satan" when it's leader is personally responsible for saving the lives of hundreds of thousands of Muslims.
Add to this the obviously clear grasp of Geopolitics (So clearly lacking in the current administration.) and a brilliant mind with a real understanding of strategy and tactics and you have the makings of a great statesman, a man who could lead America into a new age of global cooperation.
I have to admit I am not totally comfortable with the idea of a General being President, but despite that, he is my choice for the office.
On the domestic front, he has shown a penchant for putting forth realistic solutions that have been well thought out and can actually be implemented. Contrast this to the behavior of the current administration, which throws out an ill-considered initiative periodically, then implements just enough of it to put more money in the pockets of their corporate cronies (Halliburton,etc.). He has firmly established himself as a Progressive in the political arena, embracing many of the issues that matter most to the poor and middle class such as health care and schools.

Will we back the strongest of us, or will we divide our efforts, crippling ourselves and allowing this gang of criminals which are currently in power to retain their stranglehold on America? Will we struggle to regain our freedom, or will we give it up in the name of Homeland Security?

It's up to you, but for me, Wesley Clark is the right man to lead us from the depths of depravity to which our leadership has sunk into the bright clear light of a new and honorably lived day!

Wesley Clark for President 2008!!!!

One note however - you point out the RW has had over a decade to villify Hillary. It's true.

But that's rather in her favor - they've already done what they can do, and she's still there. It's known.

I don't think Clark really has the standing. Edwards would be a better choice.

Not that I "dislike" Clark, I just don't see him as "electable" as Edwards.

and get it right this time. I don't want to get stuck with Warner either

Edwards was pretty candid on Hardball down in NO, but I've always loved Wes

I can see Gore winning if he plays his cards right. He already won once. I would love to see Clark as President but if that can't happen he certainly needs to be in any Democratic cabinet should one win. He would be a fantastic SoS or NSA.

candidate that I would work to get elected. I think he is a great man and after 8 years of * he will walk on water with all he stands for and his vision for the future. It is going to take Clark's experience to get us out of the mess * got us into and improve our world standing
Edwards is a terrific guy at a different time in histroy..He is just like Clinton in 1990. A total unknown, very little experience and just doesn't have the stature of Clark on the world stage. He wants VP....maybe!

be the best option we have to clean up the mess.

Wes Clark has weaknesses that can be exploited by the pukes just like any other possible dem candidate. We saw a bit of that in 2004. It's really a bit early for me to pick a favorite, but I have no illusions about the fact that all the candidates I like have their weaknesses.

Clark is far and away my top pick, but when I look at the various possibilities objectively, I'd have to disagree that he's the ONLY truly electable Democratic candidate, especially since the public will be even more weary of Republican control of the government by 2008 than they are now, making a (D) candidate more popular than in 2004. I certainly think Wes is best, though!

Great to have you here!
:hi:

I would rather focus on taking the Senate and/or the House in the next eight months.

We, as a community, are at our worst when we divide ourselves over presidential candidates (as was the case in the last presidential primary season). Rather than giving into this ugly dynamic that criples us in terms of working together ... I woud hope to see that we focus on pulling together to create an elective oversight body that reigns in the awful bush policies (and all the additional damage that they can do this country) now - and get into the "my guy is best for pres." conversations after the mideterm elections.

He is somewhat impolitic and refuses to say many of the things w would want to hear him say. He isn't afraid to call himself a liberal or to show his intellectualism.

He's a little rough around the edges and not a carefully confected creation, like some of the preening, pampered, perfumed princesses and princes running for office. He doesn't necessarily tell us what we want to hear (he never opposed the UAE ports deal, but instead suggested that we use is as an opportunity to look expansively at national security and trade), but he always thinks about what is right.

I hope we can elect the unelectable. I hope we are brave enough.

had. He's not a Senator or a Representative, so he doesn't have a record of specific votes to trip him up in the campaign. Dems should really stop running congresspeople. Most 'swing vote' types I talk to are pretty fed up with both parties. But they don't want someone 'in the middle'; they want someone from OUTSIDE. Clark has this. Dean has this also, to some degree, although his job, which I approve of, as head of the Dem party maybe makes him look like an insider to some, although not necessarily to me.

I like Kerry and Edwards and could live with Hillary (I think), but all three are hopelessly connected to the current system in Washington--they'll get votes from loyal Dems, they'll inspire turnout for the opposing candidate from loyal Repubs (if there are any left by then) and everyone else will stay home.

(on edit:) Gore, at this point, I think, also has some credibility as an outsider.

Best bet, I think, is someone not currently in Congress.