The W
Views: 100027569
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
25.10.14 0455
The W - Current Events & Politics - Wes Clark: Clinton Stooge? (Page 2)
This thread has 10 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 5.41
Pages: Prev 1 2
(1762 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (33 total)
Big Bad
Scrapple








Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 10 hours
#21 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.54

    His defeat is a 50/50 proposition right now if you ask me, unless another conveniently-timed terrorist attack takes place before the elction.


I don't exactly like the wording of this. Not even I would believe that President Bush would order the FBI to 'allow' a terrorist attack a year from now in order to give his campaign a boost. That's crazy.

I'd still pull for Dean over Clark since I'd never get tired of calling him President DEAN~~~!




"When this bogus term alternative rock was being thrown at every '70s retro rehash folk group, we were challenging people to new sonic ideas. If some little snotty anarchist with an Apple Mac and an attitude thinks he invented dance music and the big rock group is coming into his territory, [that's] ridiculous." - Bono, 1997
godking
Chourico








Since: 20.10.02
From: Toronto

Since last post: 3907 days
Last activity: 3853 days
#22 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.90
Remember the Cali field poll where Lieberman was the only Dem to beat Bush in Cali?

Because that was months ago and at the time Lieberman was the only Dem name most people even had a hope of recognizing, not because they particularly wanted the most conservative politican offered up. (I mean, California? Really? Sure they want a conservative politician, that's why Bustamante is ten points ahead of Schwarzenegger in most polls now.)

More telling is the recent slate of post-Clark polling that shows him skyrocketing ahead in every poll and even beating Bush in one (alone of all the Dem candidates). I'm not surprised that the Repubs are desperate to drop him.
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 11 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#23 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.65
    Originally posted by godking
    (I mean, California? Really? Sure they want a conservative politician, that's why Bustamante is ten points ahead of Schwarzenegger in most polls now.)
godking, I am BEGGING you to stop demonstrating such appalling ignorance in this thread. BEGGING.



CRZ
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1271 days
Last activity: 1068 days
#24 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
    Originally posted by godking
    Because that was months ago and at the time Lieberman was the only Dem name most people even had a hope of recognizing, not because they particularly wanted the most conservative politican offered up.

Actually, as we discussed in this thread it was last week.

    Originally posted by eviljohnhunt
    The Clintons supporting Clark in hopes of him losing makes no sense at all. It seems to me that they are supporting him to keep Dean from taking control of the DNC.

Which is also very likely, but also helps the HMS '08 campaign becuase w/o McAuliffe they don't control a damn thing.



A-MOL
Frankfurter








Since: 26.6.02
From: York, England

Since last post: 3875 days
Last activity: 3817 days
#25 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.00
(deleted by CRZ on 24.9.03 0527)
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1271 days
Last activity: 1068 days
#26 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
(deleted by CRZ on 24.9.03 0527)
godking
Chourico








Since: 20.10.02
From: Toronto

Since last post: 3907 days
Last activity: 3853 days
#27 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.90
    Originally posted by CRZ
    godking, I am BEGGING you to stop demonstrating such appalling ignorance in this thread. BEGGING.


You're right, and I apologize. Bustamante is only leading Schwarzenegger by *five* points, not ten, as of the most recent polls.

LA Times poll, 9/12: Bustamante 30, Schwarzenegger 25. The most recent Field Poll duplicates those numbers (although Bustamante was leading Schwarzenegger by ten points in the previous LA Times poll).
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 17 days
Last activity: 14 days
AIM:  
#28 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.77
You know, I was wondering who originally came up with these brilliant insights that are so grounded in reality. Not a shocker there, huh?



"The most important thing is for us to find Osama Bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until he find him."
-George W. Bush, September 13, 2001

"I don't know where he is. I have no idea and I really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
George W. Bush, March 13, 2002
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1271 days
Last activity: 1068 days
#29 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
We'll see what happens at the Debate tomorrow. I didn't even know there was a debate scheduled for tomorrow.

Incidentally, what whiz kid put this on first run in the middle of the afternoon?

EDIT: Incidentally, sounds like Hugh Shelton thinks that Clark has an integrity and character problem:

"What do you think of General Wesley Clark and would you support him as a presidential candidate," was the question put to him by moderator Dick Henning, assuming that all military men stood in support of each other. General Shelton took a drink of water and Henning said, "I noticed you took a drink on that one!"

"That question makes me wish it were vodka," said Shelton. "I've known Wes for a long time. I will tell you the reason he came out of Europe early had to do with integrity and character issues, things that are very near and dear to my heart. I'm not going to say whether I'm a Republican or a Democrat. I'll just say Wes won't get my vote."



(edited by Grimis on 24.9.03 1644)

Corajudo
Frankfurter








Since: 7.11.02
From: Dallas, TX

Since last post: 108 days
Last activity: 3 days
#30 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.51
More telling is the recent slate of post-Clark polling that shows him skyrocketing ahead in every poll and even beating Bush in one (alone of all the Dem candidates). I'm not surprised that the Repubs are desperate to drop him.

I assume that this (usatoday.com) USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll is the one you're referencing with Clark leading. You also can see that only 52% of the people polled have an opinion of Clark. And, roughly 48% of those polled identified themselves as Democrat or Democrat leaning.

The result of the survey was, in a one-on-one poll with 'Republican Party candidate George Bush', 'Democratic Party candidate Wesley Clark' received 48-49% to Bush's 46%. If barely half even have an opinion of Wesley Clark, I'd argue that this poll is more of a Bush vs. some Democratic candidate poll (and the 48% of the Democrat leaning respondents prefer the Democrat--shocking! Yet, at the same time, hardly revolutionary). Even then, the error is +/- 3 percentage points. Given that 'Clark' has a 2 percentage point 'lead' with the 3 point error, I don't know that I'd use these date to characterize him as the front runner.

Regardless, it is asinine to engage in Bush vs. potential Democratic nominee while the race for the Democratic nominee is so interesting and wide open.
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1271 days
Last activity: 1068 days
#31 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
Incidentally, a columnist has made this interesting connection between Clark and George McClellan in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune:

Both generals entered the campaign highly inexperienced in domestic politics. Both finished first or second in their West Point classes, both commanded large armies in war and both were fired by their respective commanders-in-chief, Lincoln and Bill Clinton, because of abrasive, brash and bristling personalities. And both became leading Democrats out of a desperate need for the party to appear strong on issues of war and national defense. Finally, both would uneasily straddle the issue of war. . . .

McClellan repudiated the 1864 Democratic Party's antiwar platform of immediate peace with the South but assured the base of the Democratic Party that he would support states' rights and the continuance of slavery in the South after the end of the Civil War.


EDIT: Incidentally, sounds like the Draft Clark crew might be in the process of being forced out my the professionals.


(edited by Grimis on 25.9.03 1337)


Corajudo
Frankfurter








Since: 7.11.02
From: Dallas, TX

Since last post: 108 days
Last activity: 3 days
#32 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.51
    Originally posted by Grimis
    Incidentally, a columnist has made this interesting connection between Clark and George McClellan in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune:

    Both generals entered the campaign highly inexperienced in domestic politics. Both finished first or second in their West Point classes, both commanded large armies in war and both were fired by their respective commanders-in-chief, Lincoln and Bill Clinton, because of abrasive, brash and bristling personalities. And both became leading Democrats out of a desperate need for the party to appear strong on issues of war and national defense. Finally, both would uneasily straddle the issue of war. . . .

    McClellan repudiated the 1864 Democratic Party's antiwar platform of immediate peace with the South but assured the base of the Democratic Party that he would support states' rights and the continuance of slavery in the South after the end of the Civil War.


    EDIT: Incidentally, sounds like the Draft Clark crew might be in the process of being forced out my the professionals.


    (edited by Grimis on 25.9.03 1337)


Also, in today's Wall Street Journal op/ed page, Rush Limbaugh has an article with the Clark/McClennan comparision, but for different reasons.
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1271 days
Last activity: 1068 days
#33 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
Of course one could argue that he's not a Clinton stooge after This Speech at a 2001 Arkansas Lincoln Day Dinner:

You see, in the Cold War we were defensive. We were trying to protect our country from communism. Well guess what, it's over. Communism lost. Now we've got to go out there and finish the job and help people live the way they want to live. We've got to let them be all they can be. They want what we have. We've got some challenges ahead in that kind of strategy. We're going to be active, we're going to be forward engaged. But if you look around the world, there's a lot of work to be done. And I'm very glad we've got the great team in office: men like Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condolzeezza Rice, Paul O'Neill--people I know very well--our president, George W. Bush. We need them there, because we've got some tough challenges ahead in Europe.




Pages: Prev 1 2
Thread rated: 5.41
Pages: Prev 1 2
Thread ahead: Darrell Issa says "Keep Gray Davis in office"
Next thread: California Primary Debate
Previous thread: Baghdad's Citizens: 'Ousting Saddam Hussein Worth Personal Hardships' says Gallup Poll
(1762 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Yup, Canada is like having a little brother. They always want to hang around with the big kids, but they always get picked last for kickball.
The W - Current Events & Politics - Wes Clark: Clinton Stooge? (Page 2)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.132 seconds.