Cba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3 Posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1146 times:
After watching the Democratic Presidential Debate last night, I have been wondering why Wesley Clark is so popular, even though he has yet to give specific details about his plans, both home and abroad. The other cantidates who have been around a while have defined their platforms already, however, the only issue Clark has really spoken on is Iraq, and how he wants to get the U.N. involved. I'm not saying that I don't like Clark, I'd take him any day over Bush. However, sometimes I am a bit concerned with his sudden switch to the Democratic Party after praising Bush et al less than two years ago.
Aloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4532 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1137 times:
I dont really think it should matter if Clark had voted for Bush in 2000 or if he praised some of Bush's actions.
Is there some requirement that to be a good democrat, you can never have agreed with or liked something a Republican has done? I think that's pretty childish, childish that he would be attacked for perhaps agreeing with the other side on a few things.
I prefer a president that's balanced, rather than someone who thinks only within party lines. That's narrow minded. It's also why this country prefers to elect someone who is moderate, not extreme. I think more highly of Clark knowing that he has the ability to see the other side's view. If anything, Gephart attacking him over that makes me think much less of Gephart.
Of course, I'm not thrilled with Gephart anyway. That man won't become president, he's too fiery.
Cba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (11 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1133 times:
I'm not criticizing Clark. I like the man. He is very well spoken, he has prescence, and he doesn't lose his cool. He could really stick it to Bush. I'm just trying to find out his platform. He hasn't really released a detailed economic plan. I'm not holding that against him yet, as he just entered the race. However, I'd like to have something to use to compare him with the others.
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (11 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1123 times:
I think it shows that many Americans are very worried about the course that George Bush and the neocons have set this country on, and they're looking for ANYONE that seems to have the metal to do a better job.
No one knows if Clark is that man, or if any of the Dems are, but it shows how uneasy Americans are over the course of events in the last two years.
MidnightMike From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2892 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (11 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1098 times:
well, he is still somewhat of a mystery, so potential voters are curious about him. The media likes him for his military background, I did not say strong or weak, just that he has the military experience.
B757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 22
Reply 9, posted (11 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1072 times:
I guess it depends on who you listen too and who does the "polls". Some polls show Clark far behind Dean and Kerry while others show him well ahead. What's more interesting is the day he announced he was suppose to be ahead of Bush and yet about 55% of those interviewed didn't even know who he was.
If people would listen to what Clark says, then they would see he is totally off his rocker. He wants to spend money to learn how to travel in time and go faster than the speed of light. He was relieved of command in Kosovo due to his unstable personality and for almost starting WWIII with the Russians. He flip flops on this "policies" more than Clinton did. Clark doesn't have a clue and if anyone had watched the last Democrat debate, they would have seen how off the wall he really is.
As for the so called "Clark Republicans", there is no such thing except in the minds of those who only care about replacing Bush with anyone regardless of who that may be. The only Republicans who would actually consider Clark are so called "moderates" which in reality are about as Republican as Howard Dean.
Jaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (11 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1068 times:
"...and for almost starting WWIII with the Russians."
Don't take that quote out of context. You just have to do a google search to understand the context within that comment was made by another NATO commander against Clark. In any case, the blocking of the runaway that Clark was proposing would hardly have caused WWIII.
There is a current world war going on against Islamic fundamentalists that our shenanigans in Iraq have only worsened substantially.
Artsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4747 posts, RR: 33
Reply 12, posted (11 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1056 times:
I think he is just a face that Americans knew, had heard of and didn't have a major problem with. If Bush was doing well, Clark wouldn't stand a chance, but Bush isn't and people are now considering other options. How many people still vote for Alfred E Newman in each election?.