Rhodes Scholar, Viet Vet... looks good on paper anyway ___________________________ A New Democratic Dark Horse? Wesley Clark begins fundraising in NYC. Is the military man what the dems need to get back on track? By VIVECA NOVAK--Time Are dyspeptic Democrats ready to turn to a military man for leadership? Retired four-star general Wesley Clark, who has been famously opaque about his party preference and political future, met privately last week in New York City with a group of high-rolling Democrats and told them he was seriously considering a run for the White House, sources tell TIME. Lunching with about 15 Democratic donors and fund raisers at the Park Avenue offices of venture capitalist Alan Patricof, a strong Gore backer in '00 who is neutral so far for '04, Clark laid out his credentials and his differences with George W. Bush. A Rhodes scholar who fought in Vietnam and served as Supreme Allied Commander in Europe from 1997 to 2000, Clark said the U.S. should finish routing al-Qaeda before taking on Iraq and criticized Bush for being too dismissive of nonwar options there. Commander of NATO's war in Kosovo in 1999, Clark, who juggled the interests of 19 member nations, also took issue with what he sees as Bush's go-it-alone style. Clark, 57, is an investment banker in Little Rock, Ark., and a commentator for CNN. In an interview with TIME, he wouldn't discuss his plans or the lunch. "I haven't made any decision to run, I haven't declared I'm a member of any political party, I haven't raised any money," he said, adding that he has been traveling the country, talking to groups about developing an American "global vision for the 21st century." One question at the lunch was whether Clark has the stomach for the attacks his candidacy would draw from the military enemies he made during the Kosovo war, despite its success. Clark's book Waging Modern War was tough on many at the Pentagon, including then Defense Secretary William Cohen, who replaced Clark before his tour was up. Still, Clark might be an attractive new face for the Democrats. "It's clear the public today doesn't think Democrats are as strong on national security as the G.O.P.," said a source who attended the lunch. "He has the capacity to negate that argument."
A Rhodes scholar who fought in Vietnam and served as Supreme Allied Commander in Europe from 1997 to 2000, Wow, I don't know much about the guy, but this gives him a ridiculous level of credibility on the military side that Bush & company will never have (Bush Sr. had the same). This type of a candidate could really bring a lot of moderates concerned with a change of leadership during war over to the Democratic side.
Wait a minute -- is this the guy that looks like John Mackovic? If so, he seems like a very personable and likeable type of guy. More the Clinton mold than the Gore mold.
I have gotten the notion that military men agree much more with the democrats than with the republicans on this issue. Patriotism, is more of a "we're doing this, so get on board" sort of thing though. That seems to me the disconnect between the cautious military and the tough-guys in their SUVs. He seems to be a heavy hitter. I'm curious to see what comes of it. A Wesley-Powell ticket? The founder of American geology would get talked about quite a bit.
John McCain also beat Bush Jr with a stick, when it came to military credibility. It did not appear to buy him much.
John McCain also beat Bush Jr with a stick, when it came to military credibility. It did not appear to buy him much. The primaries and the general election are very different beasts, though. For the primaries, you have to be able to cater to the far left/right, which McCain did not do well at all. Amongst the general populace, I think he was much more popular than Bush early on. The military also didn't have nearly the same importance in the 2000 election as it does today.
interesting read: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0209.clark.html the guy definitely has some opinions.
Democrats lacked alot in this last election. Military credibility as individual candidates was not one of the problems. They just lack the attack dog mentality. See Max Cleland - disabled Vietnam Vet, incumbent, still lost because he was portrayed as soft by a chicken hawk.
