Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Obama/Clark Revisited!

By

In essence Clark would strengthen the ticket by bringing gravitas on the major issues of the campaign; national security, the war in Iraq, and the economy.  And as it has been said, he is the one candidate whom McCain has to solute.   While the decision is ultimately Obama’s to make, the consensus of  the netroots may ultimately give him direction.  Do check out the website.

 

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. Obama is around 6′ tall, and Wes Clark is 5’10” as far as I can tell, although I thought he was shorter than that.

    <

    p>A POTUS wants to be taller than a VPOTUS; makes him look more in command.

    <

    p>

    <

    p>Yes, this is an absolutely silly consideration.

    • When he appeared on Meet The Press, and in response to a question about Clark’s “getting shot down is not a qualification” comment, Kerry said:

      Yeah, I, I don’t agree. I don’t agree with Wes Clark’s comment. I think it was entirely inappropriate. I have nothing but enormous respect for John McCain’s service. I had the privilege of standing with John McCain in the, in the cell in Hanoi when we visited there together, when we worked on the issue of Vietnam together. It was an emotional moment. I, I have awe for John McCain’s experience as a prisoner of war, and he, and he does understand duty and service.

      Why did JK think that was a good idea? Why could he not point out that Clark was right, instead of pretending that the comment was some kind of attack on McCain’s war record? Because it wasn’t.

  2. Howard Fineman of Newsweek puts the short list at Kaine, Biden, and Bayh. His sources claimed all vetting has been done and Obama is undecided between the final three.

    <

    p>I still like Clark the best,but I have a feeling Kaine will be the pick.  

    • …and I doubt it…I’d say Bayh…both gov and senator, can can packaged as having Foriegn policy experience, will help in Ohio as much as make Indiana a battle ground state.

      <

      p>Besides, his twin boys will balance out the stage with Obama’s daughters.

  3. Yes, I have that feeling as well that Kaine will be the choice and that is why I wrote the post.  In the end I have come to believe that Clark bests all three, Kaine, Biden, and Bayh, all good guys, but Clark, the consummate patriot, a southern Viet Nam vet who rose to become the Supreme Commander of NATO and won a war without sacrificing a single American life and a true progressive, inspires more confidence and a greater sense of wisdom and security.

    <

    p>Clark grounds the ticket and would help people to be more willing to take a chance on a pragmatic visionary, not to mention African American, candidate like Obama. And you say that Obama can’t decide between the three–let’s create a groundswell from the netroots in favor of Clark!

  4. When the ridiculous right wing frenzy over his (truthful) comments a month or so ago hit the waves, Clark did not back down, and I think acquitted himself well explaining it.

    <

    p>I do like his no-nonsense let’s-cut-the-bull style. I think it could complement Obama’s more ornate speaking style well.

  5. I really don’t understand with the number of great Democrats, we’re stuck with the same names over and over again.  There are so many Democrats who would be great vice presidents, and all I hear are Biden, Bayh, and Kaine.  Blah.  What about…

    <

    p>Barbara Boxer.  Russ Feingold.  Maria Cantwell.
    Henry Waxman.  Debbie Wasserman Schultz.  Peter DeFazio.  Pat Murphy.
    Dave Freudenthal. Janet Napolitano.
    Rocky Anderson.
    John Kitzhaber.

    <

    p>The list extends beyond the shiny things that grab the media’s attention…we have a very deep bench; surely we can do better than what we’re hearing.  I know most any politician has a strike against them, and you probably have issues with many of these names.  But we have more than 3 media superstars.  Who do you think is being overlooked?

    • … too effective right where he is to move him.

      <

      p>Boxer is an interesting idea.  Feingold, as I recall, put an early quash on the idea, but I could be remembering wrong.

      <

      p>How about a real break from conventional wisdom?  I’m just throwing it out there: Robert Rubin.

      • but it feels like pandering.  Rubin is not a bad idea at all.  I don’t think I’ve seen his name floated, though.  Have you?  

      • I think at this point VP may be too political for him.  It’s clear he’s got the policy knowledge, but after a while I couldn’t help wondering how he’d got elected governor.  Too many mistakes.  I think it would be a crime not to give him a very prominent post, but VP doesn’t seem like the right fit.

        <

        p>Plus, if a black man and a woman would be too much, how would a black man and a Hispanic man fare?

        • how would a black man and a Hispanic man fare?

          <

          p>From a purely tactical perspective, this is a no-go from the get-go.  No freakin’ way.  

          <

          p>I like Richardson a lot.  Unfortunately, he’s a terrible campaigner and has some trouble communicating.  

    • She does not even support the Dem challengers to her good friends, the Diaz-Balart brothers. DWS is the antithesis of more and BETTER Democrats that the Netroots is all about.

      • On everything from foreign affairs to fiscal issues, Schultz brings a great balance to Obama on the ticket.  Yes, she issued one statement about Florida Republicans about which Markos worked himself in a lather (she was a woman who supported Hillary — the worst kind of Democrat!), and was a non-issue outside of the liberal blogosphere.

        <

        p>Even if one goes along with the willful ignorance that Markos et al have about her, on balance she offers more as a Democrat than the names I keep hearing.

    • the lefty you think she is.

      <

      p>If you haven’t been following her antics in south Florida and her work for Red to Blue program which she’s running for the DCCC, check out what I wrote about her the other day in a piece I wrote about Clint Curtis, who’s running for congress in FL-24.

      <

      p>She’s made the progressive community of south Florida very angry.

      • Never said she was a lefty.  That’s not a bad thing in my book, frankly, that Schultz is a moderate..  If you do want ten reasons why she’d be a good pick, I wrote it up here months ago.

        <

        p>Reaction to Schultz’s decision not to include three nearby Republicans on an initial “Red to Blue” list is almost liberal self-parody.  These Congresscritters became far right-wing radicals, and her delaying their naming in the first round became “practically an endorsement”  Schultz didn’t follow the priorities of the left-wingers in South Florida, true, partially because she has national responsibilities and can’t cater to everyone.  The link you provide is another “national figure X isn’t paying enough attention to my favorite neighborhood candidate” rant that says more about the writer than Schultz.    

        • You refer to the link I provide. Which one? If it’s a link in the post, there were several. If it’s the link to my blog, well then, I guess you’re talking about me and my “rant.” I spent a lot of time researching and writing the piece, because it was important to me to get it right. I’ve written rants before. That was not a rant.

          <

          p>Your statement

          another “national figure X isn’t paying enough attention to my favorite neighborhood candidate” rant

          is totally off the mark. I’d like to see Curtis win, because I emphatically believe he would be more effective than Suzanne Kosmas in congress, based on her votes and her non-accomplishments in the FL legislature, and on Curtis’ positions, support and polling numbers. The DCCC has a history of coming into a race and essentially paying for the primary. Curtis has worked hard for a long time and is the likely winner against Feeney. The DCCC wants to be the decider. Throwing money at a second candidate to challenge an existing candidate who is likely to win seems wasteful to me.

          <

          p>As far as DWS is concerned, the point of Red to Blue is just that–turning Red districts to Blue ones. Nowhere is it stated, “unless it’s going to make things uncomfortable or hurt someones feelings.” (Can you imagine Ileana, Mario or Lincoln fighting to protect Debbie from a contested election? HA!) Her job as chair of that committee is to work to oust Republicans and get Democrats elected. As far as I’m concerned, she’s not doing her job.

          <

          p>You say she has “national responsibilities.” Damn right she does.

        • Your ten points include:

          <

          p>

          She is a great strategist. She’s a leader in the effort to expand the Congressional map for Democrats in the red-to-blue program. She knows elections, to the point where she has a shot at leading the DCCC.

          <

          p>bluestateblues’ point is that if she’s a great strategist, it’s for the Republican side. The fact that she can lead the DCCC may be great for her, but if she’s not going to get Democrats elected, it’s not great for them.

          <

          p>You say:

          <

          p>

          Her district is 20% Hispanic…another bloc with which Obama struggles.

          <

          p>Except he doesn’t anymore, according to the Desert Sun:

          <

          p>

          Latinos overwhelmingly support Democratic Sen. Barack Obama for president over Republican Sen. John McCain, 66 percent to 23 percent, a poll released Thursday shows… More than three-fourths of Latinos who voted for Sen. Hillary Clinton in the Democratic presidential primary said they would now support Obama.

          <

          p>You say:

          <

          p>

          Speaking of blocs with which Obama has problems, Wasserman Shultz is Jewish.

          <

          p>Gimme a break. Obama is going to lose the Jewish vote???

          <

          p>

          She is also young…under 40. Folds in well with Obama’s energy vibe… She has some heft on foreign policy…a hawkish heft, balancing off Obama’s negotiatory leanings.

          <

          p>So she’s like Obama, which is good, but she’s unlike Obama, which is also good.

          <

          p>Aside from your analysis’s internal contradictions and questionable assertions, you seem to think that demographics are all that count. Wasserman-Schultz’s actions, accomplishments, character are a minor footnote to you. But hey, you admit that you’re mostly interested in picking someone who’s been ignored (justly or unjustly). So knock yourself out.

    • Barbara Boxer.  Russ Feingold.  Maria Cantwell.
      Henry Waxman.  Debbie Wasserman Schultz.  Peter DeFazio.  Pat Murphy.

      <

      p>all are leftists from blue states. Cant bring in any states, forces Obama from the electable middle to the unelectable left, and frankly I think Boxer, Feingold, and Waxman are far more effective on the hill where they actually have power as opposed to the useless office of the VP (acting President Cheney excluded of course). As for Cantwell she is a huge b—h and treated all of the volunteers that had to work with her at DNC Boston in 2004 like garbage she really played the do you know who I am card and was rude to us volunteers and to Secret Service officers. Additionally she was a huge Clinton supporter and attacked Obama in the media during the primary, including on television which McCain would use to undermine him. And blue state liberal so does s–t for the ticket.

      <

      p>

      Dave Freudenthal.

      <

      p>WY isnt a swing state, is pro-life, pro-gun, anti-tax, basically would anger and divide the left wing base while not bringing in any states. Also few people have heard of him.

      <

      p>

      Janet Napolitano.

      <

      p>-actually a solid choice but thin foreign policy resume

      <

      p>

      Rocky Anderson.
      John Kitzhaber.

      <

      p>-Im a political junkie and I havent heard of these dudes what makes you think joe six pack has?

      • Cantwell is a leftist?  Schultz is?  Murphy?  And Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Florida are all blue states?  If you say so…    

        <

        p>You may have a point on Freudenthal, but I tire of the old base of the Democratic Party turns up its nose on the people who are making it competitive in the Mountain West.  If I lived in Wyoming, chances are I’d want a gun, too…

        <

        p>Joe SixPack hadn’t heard of Obama three years ago and look where he is now.  I doubt Al Gore and Dan Quayle were household names either…or Dick Cheney for that matter.

        <

        p>Oh, I’m not going to respond to your sexist slandering of Senator Cantwell based on gossip you may have heard and the fact that she supported Clinton.  The primary’s over — move on.

        • Actually I agree with you on the Mountain states thats likely the real future of the party, while I think we are in a unique place in the South this year, high black turnout, a poor economy, a depressed religious right (fingers crossed McCain picks the Morman!) might swing a few our way. But beyond VA none will truly be transformed into permanent regions.

          <

          p>But you have a point that the West could be the Solid South of the 21st century for the Democrats. So I have no problem with making it competitive in the mountain states. What about Schwietzer? He could definitely bring in MT, help in CO and the Dakotas, and his folksy style might even help in the south. He had spent several years abroad as a businessman and i believe a foreign service officer so he actually has some foreign policy experience even though he’s a Governor and even speaks Arabic. He also gives a great speech on green collar jobs and could seize the energy issue form McCain. The blogs like him and he’s a bit more pro-life and pro-gun than the party so he appeals to independents as well.

          <

          p>And for a long term view beyond 2008 even if we don’t win a ton of Mountain states by throwing them this bone we can help transform the region into blue territory for 12′ or 16′.

          <

          p>So have we found a candidate we can agree on?

          <

          p>  

        • Not to split hairs, because I agree with your overall point, but Al Gore was very much a household name back in ’92, insomuch as any US Senator can be.  

          <

          p>He had already run for Prez in ’88 and, very early on, he was discussed among the front-runners for the ’92 nomination until his son was hit by a car and he decided not to run.  He had also just published “Earth in the Balance” which was on the NYT bestseller list.

          <

          p>He was certainly no Dan Quayle.

      • Cantwell is a leftist?  Schultz is?  Murphy?  And Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Florida are all blue states?  If you say so…    

        <

        p>You may have a point on Freudenthal, but I tire of the old base of the Democratic Party turns up its nose on the people who are making it competitive in the Mountain West.  If I lived in Wyoming, chances are I’d want a gun, too…

        <

        p>Joe SixPack hadn’t heard of Obama three years ago and look where he is now.  I doubt Al Gore and Dan Quayle were household names either…or Dick Cheney for that matter.

        <

        p>Oh, I’m not going to respond to your sexist slandering of Senator Cantwell based on gossip you may have heard and the fact that she supported Clinton.  The primary’s over — move on.

  6. Kaine isn’t very popular right now amongst the left or the right in VA.  The Lege ended session deadlocked, and it was widely blamed on TK.  He has no signature accomplishment, and he’s got a tough act to follow in Warner.

    <

    p>I don’t like him because he’s a bit too pushy on the God button for my tastes, but that aside, I just don’t see how he’ll help Obama nationally or within Virginia.

    • With Kaine and Webb campaigning for Obama even off the ticket, we have our best shot at wooing Virginians of the last decade.  But if we’re just going for key state mechanics, put Ted Strickland or Bill Nelson on the ballot and be done with it.

      • Strickland said no in a Sherman esque statement so he’s not an option.

        <

        p>Nelson would actually be a great pick and I wasn’t even thinking of him, brings in Florida, is a moderate, and has great national security experience. And he was an astronaut which while electorally insignificant is f-in awesome and would be a plus in my book.

        <

        p>Also Jay Rockefeller could be an interesting sleeper pick. Is very popular in WV and might put it into play, could probably bring in VA and maybe IN with his more populist style and policies, has a huge personal fortune that he could give to the campaign, and he is chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee so solid foreign policy credentials. And he is a Rockefeller which again while electorally insignificant is f-in awesome though not as awesome as being an astronaut.

  7. I’m glad you switiched from Bayh, who doesn’t excite me.  My hands-down first choice is still Hillary.

  8. Bayh is even worse that Obama in his willingness to play political football with LGBT civil rights.  We don’t need two of that sort in the White House.  And his baseline positions are even more bigoted than Obama’s appear to be.

    • Gawd, I would gag if he did something that uninspired.  Bayh is  Republican Lite at its worst.  Ugh.  More and better Democrats.  Oh yeah.  

  9. I want a VP candidate with the ability to dissect McCain, Rove, and the rest of the Republicans with two wags of his (or her) tongue.  That’s why, of the four “short listers,” I am cheering on Joe Biden.

    <

    p>Note – this is the reason some are urging McCain to pick Romney.  Wouldn’t it be fun to watch Joe Biden carve up Mitt Flop?

  10. There was a  little Peabody get together on Saturday, August 2nd.  

    <

    p>Folks were very direct!

    <

    p>There is a war on!  People have to work two jobs to make ends meet!

    <

    p>One lady with her grandchild, in a stroller, meekly picked up an O’Reilly flyer.  When offered a Kerry flyer too, she staunchly replied she didn’t need one of those!

    <

    p>A young lady, gleefully, took a Kerry bumper sticker.

    <

    p>A gentleman said he knew whom he was for and said sternly, “John Kerry is out for himself and always has been!”  He said he was for O’Reilly and already had a sticker and didn’t need to take on because he hoped someone else could use it.
    Obviously, John Keery has some heavt lifting to do if he wants to make ammends.

    <

    p>On the VP front, the consensus was that Obama is just getting a taste of what the GOP has in store for him.  People strongly felt if Barack is the nominee, he needs Hillary to take on the Republicans.  She has experience with them!

    <

    p>That’s the message from Peabody on Saturday, August, 2.

    <

    p>K, B, and B; three boring guys!  Kaine is the best of them because he is an outsider.  But still; it in our Party’s best interest, and the nation’s, for Hillary to be vice president.

    <

    p>

  11. The Obama campaign has signaled that Hillary for VP has been taken off the table — even Hillary’s campaign manager, Terry McAuliffe, confirmed this when he promoted Kaine to be VP. And the Hillary for VP website has been taken down. So my point here is that the polls have tightened and Obama needs a running mate who can be a tough fighter and have the credibility to really go on the offensive against McCain and the Republicans on the war in Iraq, National Security, and the economy and few have the level of credibility to do this that Clark does and at the same time he wants to be VP. In addition he has been one of the most effective  surrogates campaigning for democratic candidates everywhere in the last four years. The Obama campaign needs to rethink this now and seriously consider Clark.

    • Listen lefty bloggers your top two choices: Clark and Clinton are not gonna happen so just get over it already.

      <

      p>Clinton would be just a plain awful choice. She was more vicious in her attacks against Obama than even McCain has been, she semi-endorsed McCain, and all of her attacks could be used against Obama. I am sick and tired of this Clintons and its the wrong message to send in a change year that your going with a 20 year Washington insider, the most insider of insiders I might add. And the argument that we can’t win without her is completely retarded. She doesn’t bring in any new demographics Obama, or a Obama +a VP without baggage cant bring in on his own. And the baggage is really bad, and there is no better way to revive McCains campaign than to put her on the ticket and give thousands of Republicans who might stay home a reason to vote. Awful, awful, awful choice. Also hes not offering her the spot, and frankly I doubt shes interested in the job.

      <

      p>If Clark was a great campaigner and a strong candidate he would be President by now. In 2004 on paper he was the most electable candidate, the only one who could challenge Bush on national security and look credible. Since unlike Kerry he was anti-war and unlike Dean he was a f-in general so you couldn’t paint him as a pinko. But he had one of the most dull campaigning styles, you could tell he really didn’t want to do it, and he sucked on crafting a domestic message which is crucial for an election hinging on the economy.

      <

      p>Listen people here are the three questions that make a good VP.

      <

      p>Do the bring in a state or put a region in play?

      <

      p>Do they balance the candidates resume or ideology or both?

      <

      p>And lastly will they do no harm?

      <

      p>The answers:

      <

      p>Clinton.

      <

      p>No, No, and No

      <

      p>Clark

      <

      p>No, No, and No.

      <

      p>its as simple as that.

      • Blogs are about articulating opinion, not shutting down opinions you don’t like.  

        • You respond to my responses title and completely ignore any of my substantive points. Did you actually bother to read them?

          <

          p>I am saying shut up on Clark or Clinton cause it aint gonna happen. You can feel free to tell me why Im wrong or you can keep telling me why Im a bad person-the choice is yours. Will you articulate an opinion or shut mine down?

          • You lay claim that what you wanted was a conversation, but you said ‘shut up’.  It’s hardly surprising that nobody wanted to play.  

          • But since you are so intolerant of the opinions of others–indeed, you feel empowered to tell people, on their own diaries, no less, to “shut up,” what would be the point in addressing any of them?  

            <

            p>I have never told you to “shut up”–thus I have never attempted to “shut your [opinion] down.”  I did, however, comment upon your consistent rudeness and intolerance of the opinions of others.

      • Obama’s perceived weakness in Foriegn Policy would not be helped by the addition of a 4 star General.  His southern background won’t hurt and you don’t mention what harm he could do.  And I’m listening to you why…?

Archives