Third party candidate
Submitted by The Wes Clark Army on May 7, 2007 - 11:13pm.
Election '08
Today one of Chris Mathews guests on Hardball was News Weeks chief political correspondent, Howard Fineman. This is part of what he said about the 2008 Presidential race.
"It’s possible Florida is moving up it’s primary to January. We have a situation where both parties nominate somebody that they are sort of not really enthusiastic about and then there are going to be 7 months February, March, April, May, June, July, August until after the Olympics in China for people to have buyers remorse big time. It’s a remarkable situation and potentially dangerous one".
He went on to say that if Clinton and Giuliani wrap it up early and then after several months of a subway series nationwide, people may be looking for third party candidate like a Bloomberg or a Hagle to drop in and make a serious run.
My question is, what about a Wes Clark? That could make for a interesting situation. I mean there are a lot of Democrats (I hate to say) that just aren’t going to vote for a woman under any circumstance. Just like there are a lot of people who aren’t going to vote for Giuliani because he’s been married 3 times and wears dresses entirely to often. So under these circumstances, a retired general who is liberal, but not too far to the left. Someone who doesn’t believe in total gun control, but is against assault weapons. Someone who believes in the Christian ethic, but is pro-choice. How do you think that candidate might do.
It’s something to think about, and I wonder if the man who has the vision Gen. Clark has, may have already thought about it.
The logistics of getting a third-party candidate on the ballot in all the states is an almost insurmountable hurdle.
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
If not us, WHO? If not now, WHEN?
BE THE CHANGE you wish to see in the world.
I don't see it. Not given all the time Wes Clark spent in '04 proving he's 'really a Democrat'...and
not given the huge investment/time/effort he made
in '06 getting them elected.
C'mon General Clark...let's give them something to talk about!
leave aside the third party stuff for a moment, please, and think of what might happen between now and Jan. '08, given voter fatigue, 'flat' rosters, and 'missing' stars, and the urgency of the situation.
I just don't think Wes would see it as an option, not realistically, not after the investment he's made...
I just don't think there's much hope for it.
Third viable parties are created from the ground up
in local politics.
C'mon General Clark...let's give them something to talk about!
I wasn't suggesting 3d party.
I do think we should think of what might happen between now and Jan. '08, given voter fatigue, 'flat' rosters, 'missing' stars, and the urgency of the situation.
Think creatively; bored/po'd electorate, etc., leaves big gap, imo, and room for new approaches to selecting candidates. Suggests to me less if ANY deadlines for waiting/undecided 'candidates.'
Here is the video of the Hardball dialogue mentioned in the post above from Monday, May 7 where Chris Matthews and Howard Fineman talked about Chuck Hagel and Michael Bloomberg as being possible sane third party candidates:
May 7: Dark Days for Bush
While I fully admit that I could be in the world of fantasy football, I would not completely rule out a third party run by Gen. Clark IF he thought that it was in the best interest of the country!
I have heard the sound argument made that Gen. Clark would not run as a third party candidate because of all the Democratic candidates who he supported in 2006.
Gen. Clark did that because it was very clearly in the best interest of the country to dethrone the GOP controlled rubber-stamp Congress from power in order to restore some real accountability back to Bush!
While that is true, these questions still have to be asked: What if Gen. Clark is not the nominee and he does not have confidence that the eventual Democratic nominee (either Obama, Edwards, or Hillary) can get us out of Iraq in a responsible manner and what if the Democratic nominee will not listen to him about how to get us out of Iraq responsibly?
Obama, Edwards, and Hillary are mainly focusing on set timelines to get out of Iraq to maintain their popularity with a lot of Democratic activists in the primary process instead of focusing on the right kind of diplomacy that is needed to arrive at a sound political solution to get us out of Iraq responsibly. They do NOT seem to have the same understanding about how to RESPONSIBLY get us out of Iraq that Gen. Clark has:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/11337
How Gen. Clark differs with Obama, Edwards & Hillary on getting out of Iraq!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on March 6, 2007 - 5:55pm.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/11184
My open letter to Gen. Clark about running for President in 2008
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 25, 2007 - 6:17am.
What if Gen. Clark sees a false choice in 2008 between another GOP Neocon nominee who will "stay the course" and a Democratic nominee who will leave Iraq on a set timetable regardless of what the state of diplomacy is in order to fulfill campaign promises which could possibly make the situation even worse than it is right now?
I do not know what Gen. Clark would do under those circumstances if he is not the Democratic nominee and if the eventual nominee will not listen to him in order to fulfill campaign promises that they made during the primary process in order to win the Democratic nomination!
I would gladly support Gen. Clark if he decided to run as a third party candidate under those circumstances because I will always do what I think is right as opposed to what is popular at the moment!
However what is more realistic about third parties in 2008 is that Chuck Hagel is very clearly open to running and Michael Bloomberg may possibly run with him. Check out these two articles:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aWPuH8ejxG_E&refer=us
Hagel Says He Would Consider Presidential Run as an Independent
By Nicholas Johnston
May 4 (Bloomberg) -- "Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska said he would consider entering the 2008 presidential campaign as an independent.
An independent bid ``is possible,'' Hagel, 60, said in an interview with Bloomberg Television's ``Political Capital with Al Hunt,'' scheduled to air today..."
http://www.nysun.com/article/53800
Was 2008 the Main Course When Bloomberg, Hagel Dined?
By JILL GARDINER
Staff Reporter of the Sun
May 4, 2007
"Mayor Bloomberg's dinner with Senator Hagel of Nebraska this week has some wondering whether the two potential White House candidates were strategizing about an independent 2008 candidacy, or perhaps drawing straws to decide who would run.
The maverick Republicans had dinner at a political power-broker restaurant, The Palm, in what a Bloomberg aide said was their first extensive encounter. Neither Mr. Bloomberg's office nor Mr. Hagel's would disclose what the two discussed over their steak and fish, but political analysts asserted that 2008 probably took center stage..."
I definitely think that IF Gen. Clark either does not run or IF he is not the Democratic nominee, then Chuck Hagel would be a very serious Independent candidate. Here are my reasons about why I think that is the case:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/11378
ANALYSIS: Can Hagel win the GOP Nomination or the Election as an Independent?
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on March 9, 2007 - 5:25pm.
If Hagel ran at the top of the ticket being financed by Bloomberg at the bottom of the ticket, then that ticket will go places in my opinion. That ticket would probably poll at over 15% so it would get in the debates!
Hagel holds to Gen. Clark's position on the Iraq war and would get many moderate, Independent, and centrist voters if he ran on a moderate platform specifically focusing on the two main themes of getting us out of Iraq responsibly and unifying the country. Those are the two main themes that Gen. Clark has been talking about all the way back to 2003 when he first announced!
If one of them (Hagel or Bloomberg) became a Democrat, then they could run on the unity08.com ticket which already has a lot of support and has plans to get on the ballot in all 50 states!
I am compiling data on a future post right now to show why I think that a credible and sane third party ticket can run a serious campaign and possibly even win in 2008!
Here are some of my finding right now that I plan to credibly document in a post sometime in the very near future:
All of the rules of past campaigns are changing in 2008 from what I am seeing right now:
1) The country is very divided and polarized right now in an unhealthy manner and many moderates feel squeezed out of the process. Moderates actually make up the majority of the country but they are not as loud as the activists on both sides. A record 38% of the country considers themselves to be Independents right now and they would probably go for a serious moderate ticket which is not in political debt to a heavily partisan activist base!
2) So many people have lost confidence in Bush that there is a mass hysteria about 2008 right now. While polls are showing that these people are not happy with Bush, they also show that 56% of the country do not have confidence in Democrats to responsibly deal with foreign policy issues either!
3) Circumstances are NOT the same now that they have been in previous elections: Major party Candidates are raising near unprecedented amounts of money right now compared to past elections, it is considered by many to be "late" to get into the race in just early 2007, and the world is in a huge crisis right now due to Bush's irresponsible policies that people want real answers for!
I plan to document these and possibly some other points in a future post to show why a credible third party ticket can either run a serious campaign or even possibly win in 2008 based on the polls, trends, and the unique circumstances that I am seeing right now!
I hope that Gen. Clark would consider running as a third party candidate to get his ideas across if he cannot win the Democratic nomination for the wrong reasons of not being able to raise enough money or get enough media attention in the primary process when so much is at stake in 2008!
If that does not happen, if Hagel runs a serious third party campaign on Gen. Clark's foreign policy as a moderate and/or with a Democrat on the ticket, and if I do not have confidence in the eventual Democratic nominee to get us out of Iraq in a responsible manner, then I would support Hagel under those circumstances!
If both Gen. Clark and Hagel do not run as serious third party candidates and if someone else does, then I would have to decide between that candidate and the Democratic nominee as to who can most responsibly get us out of Iraq and unify the country!
Most of the people in this country ("the forgotten middle" and "new silent majority" talked about in this Reader's Digest article) want to see the country united and hunger for that to happen:
http://www.rd.com/content/openContent.do?contentId=28693
A Fractured America?
Red State, Blue State. So the media says. But is our country really that divided?
By William Beaman, From Reader's Digest, November 2005
"So the sexy story may be that there's an all-out war between red and blue, but the bigger news is about the forgotten middle. These centrists lack power and influence, but they've got the numbers. Put another way, America has spawned a new silent majority."
No President in my opinion, regardless of party, can EFFECTIVELY run the country or successfully implement their domestic agenda if about half of the country absolutely hates their guts (just like how they do with Bush right now), if they cannot get their agenda through a heavily partisan Congress, and/or if we are still paying billions of dollars for the Iraq war (or possibly paying even more money than we are right now if we do not get out of Iraq responsibly and then we have to go back to try and stop a regional conflict that broke out because we left Iraq without the right kind of diplomacy having taken place)!
Even if a third party does not win in 2008, a serious third party campaign can influence the debate and can impact the outcome of the election depending on which major candidate they take more votes away from in the general election!
While many consider it to be "late" in the process, it is really very early where anything can still happen in the 2008 election!
He's quite a puzzle for me.
He sounds so sensible and has the courage to speak out against Bush's war, but his voting record belies the impression. He is not a strong supporter of the environment. And he voted to authorize Bush's war, so while he talks convincingly his record doesn't back it up.
I just don't think there's much depth (maybe it has to do with his limited formal education, although other people who didn't graduate from college can understand that long term degradation of the environment can be harmful to health and our economic life)or he wouldn't vote the way he does, IMO. He seems to be a straight talker and says his brother is liberal and they argue all the time. I just think he has bought into a mythology that panders to the wealthy class without giving it much thought.
Graduating from the University of Nebraska is "limited formal education"?
I think Hagel is an old time conservative who put party before country.....and is possibly regretting it.
People want leadership......and in the absence of leadership, they will listen to anyone who walks up to the microphone.
Lewis Rothschild, in "American President"
and he said he did not graduate...perhaps he was talking about an earlier part of his life and went back to school.
I found this:
"In the five years between his dad's death and his departure for Vietnam, the new man of the family was sturdy, attentive to his brothers and rudderless in his own life. His first goal, set by a football scholarship to Wayne State College, was thwarted early on when an injury left him with a pinched nerve in his neck that surgery couldn't correct. He then drifted to the University of Nebraska at Kearney (pronounced Carney) and from there, dropping out on a sudden impulse, toa school of broadcasting in Minneapolis, where he tried to support himself by going door to door near the airport, in an attempt to sign up United Airlines stewardesses for the Encyclopedia Britannica. It would be a smart investment, he'd tell them, for the children they didn't yet have. "Well, I did make some sales," the senator said."
which explains my impression that he dropped out...he did.
However after he returned from Vietnam he went back to complete his degree at the University of Nebraska.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/12/magazine/12hagel.html?ei=5088&en=0f43b99fc9a11a60&ex=1297400400&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&pagewanted=all
I just remember hearing Brian Lamb say.."so you dropped out" and Senator Hagel said "yes". According to this NYT piece that was in 1967 and he apparently got his degree in 1971/
Years ago I called Senator Hagel and Senator Feingold to ask them (at different times) to run for president. I did so because both impressed me as having the courage to speak their mind.
But I have become so concerned about the environment from the perspectives of sustainability and health that I'm afraid I've grown impatient with what I see as a blind side to Senator Hagel's philosophy.
Teddy Roosevelt was a Republican who worried about runaway corporate power and the environment and I think he was right on target.
The preferential tax policies and preferential regulations that absolve corporations of their responsibilities to clean up our air and water that they use as their corporate toilets is unacceptable.
Senator Hagel doesn't seem to consider that what's going on is perhaps not a free economy or capitalism, it's theft in my opinion. I would very much appreciate Chuck Hagel's making an effort to consider the huge external costs that the public has born for the petrochemical industry. It doesn't seem right to me that the millions of pounds of toxins spewed into the air or the billions of dollars of military costs (not to mention the loss of life) to protect their oil drilling ventures are real costs that we all bear but are not charged to the corporations that benefit.
I have a similar problem with Senator Byrd who may also be an old time conservative.
I respect and like Senator Hagel. I would just worry if he or Senator Byrd were in the oval office because of some of these issues.
is nearly libertarian in his rejection of government for civil society social community;
he votes against envirnonment
social programs
social security
healthcare
education
like Cheney to Hagel government is for Defense and not much else;
fact check my memory on this though
little snapshot from google - there is more of course
Divided We Stand United We FallLibertarian swing vote backs Chuck Hagel for President ... and even secured a 0% rating from NARAL indicating a perfect pro-life voting record. ...
westanddivided.blogspot.com/2006/11/libertarian-swing-vote-backs-chuck.html - 44k - Cached - Similar pagesDivided We Stand United We FallHagel, is by no means a libertarian. He is just more libertarian than any ... to see him run in 2008 in hopes that it shines a spotlight on e-voting issues. ...
westanddivided.blogspot.com/2007/03/can-chuck-hagel-save-gop-from-bushies.html - 60k - Cached - Similar pages
[ More results from westanddivided.blogspot.com ]The Credibility of Chuck Hagel | The Moderate VoiceWhat is your problem with Hagel, Iraq or his hard Right voting record. ... NicRiv I am a Liberal/Libertarian who would support Hagel over McCain and Hillary ...
themoderatevoice.com/politics/10548/the-credibility-of-chuck-hagel/ - 33k - Cached - Similar pagesChuck Hagel for President in 2008: August 2006This week we will explore Senator Hagel's voting record on fiscal and ... In sum, the labels conservative, moderate and libertarian do mean something. ...
hagel2008.blogspot.com/2006_08_01_archive.html - 137k - Cached - Similar pagesChuck Hagel for President in 2008: March 2006Here are some interest group ratings for Senator Hagel's voting record on the ... He gives his support to Chuck Hagel from a Libertarian's perspective. ...
hagel2008.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_archive.html - 136k - Cached - Similar pagesChuck-Hagel - RSS Archive"Libertarian swing vote backs Chuck Hagel for President" ... The U.S. Chamber of Commerce gives Senator Hagel high marks on this voting record. ...
www.topblogarea.com/rss/Chuck-Hagel.htm - 31k - Cached - Similar pagesDigg - Sen Chuck Hagel vs Rep Ron PaulLook at his Voting record, compared to the voting record of Ron Paul. ... to think the mainstream news is going to acknowledge a libertarian these days. ...
digg.com/2008_us_elections/Sen_Chuck_Hagel_vs_Rep_Ron_Paul - 38k - Cached - Similar pages
<blockquote>They hope they prey they get their way - the Voice</blockquote>
on linking his voting record to bein a libertarian is that the policies he endorses are corporate welfare not libertarian.
http://www.esquire.com/features/chuckhagel0407
C'mon General Clark...let's give them something to talk about!
Chuck Hagel in my opinion will get many Democratic votes if he runs as an Independent on a moderate platform and if Gen. Clark is not the Democratic nominee based on what I am seeing right now!
Look at all of the progressive support that he has right now:
A) Jack Cafferty likes Hagel:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0703/07/sitroom.03.html
THE SITUATION ROOM
Aired March 7, 2007 - 19:00 ET
BLITZER: "And so is Jack Cafferty. He's joining us from New York. It's going to be fascinating, Jack. You've got a potential Republican candidate who's a fierce critic, arguably one of the toughest critics of the president's Iraq war strategy.
JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: Yes, I like Hagel a lot. I think he would be an interesting voice to add to the mix and further the national debate on this thing that's going nowhere over there."
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0703/08/sitroom.03.html
THE SITUATION ROOM
Aired March 8, 2007 - 19:00 ET
MALVEAUX: "Jack Cafferty joins us now from New York. Jack, looks like he was in a little bit of trouble there.
JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: There aren't a whole lot of places I don't guess in the world where they just roll out the red carpet in eager anticipation of seeing President Bush these days...
Gee, what a coincidence, right before the next presidential election. If the polls don't change the Iraq war will be the deciding issue in the 2008 elections. And as long as seven out of 10 Americans oppose the war, guys like John McCain who think the war is a good idea, can pretty much forget about it. But a guy like Chuck Hagel, the Republican senator from Nebraska, could have a real shot at the White House.
This is a tough, outspoken Vietnam veteran. He's been telling anybody that would listen that President Bush is clueless when it comes to the war in Iraq. Hagel's expected to announce his intentions on Monday. If he runs and the war remains the hot-button issue, he could wind up giving people like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama migraine headaches. Here's the question.
Are deadlines for withdrawing troops from Iraq a good idea? E- mail your thoughts to
or go to CNN.com/CaffertyFile -- Suzanne.
MALVEAUX: So Jack, does Hagel have your vote do you think?
CAFFERTY: Well I'm not going to tell you who has my vote. He hasn't even said if he's going to be a candidate yet, but I like his position in opposition to some of the stuff that the public has recognized is just wrong about this war in Iraq for a long time. He's one of the few Republicans with the stones to stand up and tell the administration you've got this one all wrong.
MALVEAUX: Well, Jack, he could definitely make it a lot more interesting."
B) Keith Olbermann likes Hagel:
http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?g=989D0419-C862-4AB7-B656-9C120C8E0350&f=00&fg=
Jan. 26: Countdown Video: Will Hagel run for President?
Countdown transcript of this video:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16870919/
'Countdown with Keith Olbermann' for Jan. 26
Read the transcript to the Friday show
OLBERMANN: And what about from the other point of view, if there were some sort of draw that would get him into the Republican nomination, despite these ideological similarities to Mr. Bush, he is horrified not just by the war, he‘s also been an outspoken opponent of the unilateralism.
He‘s been a defender of the civil liberties. I mean, he sounds like me on the civil liberties. These are a lot of things that are ascribed as liberal attributes these days, but would they be enough to endear Democratic or sort of left of center moderates or even the moderate moderates, towards that man.
MILBANK: well, it would be enough for the independents and for the Democrats, but I think the real question here is, is it enough for the Republicans. And there was a time when what you are talking about isn‘t some sort of a liberal thing. It was a libertarian strain of the Republican party that was dominant. Now it has been entirely emasculated and it‘s really a socially conservative party, that Hagel‘s very much on the outside of. And the sort of libertarian sentiment has shifted almost entirely over to the left.
C) Robert Scheer of The Nation likes Hagel:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070129/truthdig
truthdig | posted January 17, 2007 (web only)
Chuck Hagel Gets It
Robert Scheer
Chuck Hagel for President! If it ever narrows down to a choice between him and some Democratic hack who hasn't the guts to fundamentally challenge the President on Iraq, then the conservative Republican from Nebraska will have my vote. Yes, the war is that important, and the fact that Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York, the leading Democratic candidate, still can't or won't take a clear stand on the occupation is insulting to the vast majority of voters who have.
Sen. Hagel is a decorated Vietnam War vet who learned the crucial lessons of that Democrat-launched debacle of post-colonial imperialism. Even more important, he has the courage to challenge a President from his own party who so clearly didn't...
D) Bill Schneider of CNN (who does the major polling) says that liberal Democrats will vote for Hagel:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0703/07/acd.02.html
ANDERSON COOPER 360 DEGREES
Aired March 7, 2007 - 23:00 ET
COOPER: "This just -- this makes what is already a fascinating race even more interesting, I think.
SCHNEIDER: It shakes everything up. We don't know what's going to happen. But we know that if antiwar sentiment continues to grow as fast as it's been growing in the last couple of years, then suddenly you could find Chuck Hagel with a very strong constituency and becoming the hero to a lot of voters.
I know liberal Democrats out there who say -- some of them have said this publicly -- if Chuck Hagel runs for president, I'm going to cross party lines. I'd even register, they said, as a Republican to go over and vote for him because they so strongly believe in this issue which will define his candidacy if he decides to run.
COOPER: No doubt about that. Bill Schneider, thanks. Interesting."
E) Sen. Jim Webb spoke well of Hagel:
I personally heard Sen. Jim Webb praise Chuck Hagel as properly understanding Iraq and foreign policy along with Russ Feingold and Barbara Boxer when he came to Dallas, Texas for a fundraiser that I went to when he was a Senate candidate back in September of 2006!
F) Zbigniew Brzenzinski said he could support Chuck Hagel for President:
http://www.q-and-a.org/Video/?ProgramID=1122
http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1122
April 8, 2007
Zbigniew Brzenzinski
Author
"And if the Republican candidate, for example, was Chuck Hagel, I would have no hesitation in supporting Chuck Hagel."
G) Gen. Clark and Hagel are very friendly with each other:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/10653#comment-174441
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 22, 2007 - 7:09pm.
Gen. Clark & Hagel in a forum together, Hagel suggests a Clark 08 Presidential candidacy (see 1:1:25 into the video) which got a lot of applause and Clark complimented Hagel's role in the Senate while he was actively campaigning for Democrats in Congress (see 44:06 into the video):
Modem Video
http://forum.wgbh.org/wgbh/forum.php?lecture_id=3128
Hagel will also get many disillusioned Republican voters as well.
The main objection I hear about Hagel is that he is conservative on other issues outside of the Iraq war and foreign policy.
My impression of Hagel based on what he is said on Face the Nation is that he realizes the country has to be united and I think that he is sincere when he said the following things:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/21/ftn/main2381341.shtml
Hagel Says Republican Party Must Change
Sen. Hagel May Run For President With The Hope Of Shifting Republican Philosophy
WASHINGTON, Jan. 21, 2007
"In recent weeks, Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., has seemed to go against the Republican party and has even suggested that he might consider running for president as an independent."
"he said if he runs, he will do so as a Republican but hopes his party can shift back to the center."
"Hagel has been one of the most outspoken Republican critics of President George W. Bush's handling of the Iraq war, and he continues to try to force his party to adopt a new strategy — not just with the war but in it's overall philosophy."
"Hagel, a Vietnam veteran, continued. "The party that I first voted for on top of a tank in Mekong Delta 1968 is not the party I see today."
"We're Article 1 of the Constitution," he said. "We are a co-equal branch of government. Are we not to participate? Are we not to say anything? Are we not to register our sense of where we're going in this country on foreign policy? Bottom line is this. Our young men and women and their families, these young men and women who are asked to fight and die deserve a policy worthy of those sacrifices."
I have also seen Chuck Hagel publicly stand up to Joe Lieberman better than any Democrat I have seen other than Gen. Clark:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/10529
Hagel beats Lieberman on Iraq; Preview of how Clark will beat ANY GOP ideologue!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 15, 2007 - 5:14pm.
My conclusion is that IF Gen. Clark does not run or IF he is not the 2008 Democratic nominee, then Hagel (who is NOT an ideologue in my opinion) running as an Independent on a moderate platform is our best chance to get out of Iraq in a responsible manner and to unify the country!
Those two issues trump eveything else right now in my opinion because if we are not out of Iraq responsibly and if the country is not united much better than it is right now, then any Democrat will have a very difficult time implementing their domestic agenda if they win in 2008!
Hillary has flip-flopped on Iraq (as well as calling for permanent bases there), Obama has followed Hillary around "within minutes" on his Iraq war policy, and Edwards let Bob Shrum tell him how to vote on the Iraq war in 2002:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/11442
CNN: Hillary Iraq Flip-Flops, Obama following Hillary & Edwards following Shrum!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on March 14, 2007 - 1:54pm.
Does anyone here really have a lot of confidence than Hillary, Obama, or Edwards can get us out of Iraq in a truly responsible manner?
I am NOT very confident of that!
I did quick survey read of the article - and will read again for comprehension later;
<blockquote>They hope they prey they get their way - the Voice</blockquote>
Here is the Hardball video link in my comment above:
May 7: Dark Days for Bush
Here is the Hardball transcript of this video where Chris Matthews and Howard Fineman talk about Hagel and Bloomberg as possible Independent Presidential candidates in 2008:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18554190/
'Hardball with Chris Matthews' for May 7
Read the transcript to the Monday show
Updated: 11:04 a.m. CT May 8, 2007
Guests: George Tenet, John Bruhns, Eric Egland, Howard Fineman, Ed Rogers, Jenny Backus
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL. Dark days for President Bush; the latest “Newsweek” poll shows his approval rating at an all time low, 28 percent. Here to talk about the president, plus the 2008 race to succeed him, is “Newsweek‘s” chief political correspondent and our own Howard Fineman.
Howard, let‘s take a look at the question of whether Democrats or the Republicans are satisfied with who is running for 2008. Seventy seven percent of Democrats are satisfied with their presidential choices. But only 52 percent, just about half, of the Republican. Does that surprise you?
HOWARD FINEMAN, “NEWSWEEK”: Not really, given what I‘ve seen out on the campaign trail. There have been bursts of enthusiasm for some of the candidates occasionally, like Rudy Giuliani sometimes, McCain sometimes, Mitt Romney sometimes, a straw poll here and there. But basically the Republicans are unhappy and they may be unhappy because they need a super hero. They need Spiderman to get out of the situation they‘re in.
MATTHEWS: Well after the Rockettes the other night, I guess that didn‘t help things any more, when we had 10 of those guys across the stage raising their arms. We should have said raise your legs for different things. Maybe that wasn‘t the kind of show—it helped Romney apparently marginally, and it may have hurt Rudy marginally.
What do you think? In the long run, is it too early? Is the long run too long for any one of these debates to have much impact?
FINEMAN: I thought they do have impact. I thought the one you moderated did have impact, because it did help Romney. It was the first time he was on a national stage with the others. He was articulate. He was the CEO type.
MATTHEWS: Are we allowed to use that word, articulate?
FINEMAN: Yes, I think we are. I think we are. Especially when it is a matter of comparison. The problem the Republicans have, with that 38 percent unhappy number, is really interest. The other thing that is going to happen, Chris, Florida is moving up its primary it looks like to January. We may have a situation here where both parties are going to nominate somebody that they‘re sort of not wildly enthusiastic about. And then there is going to be seven months, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, until after the Olympics in China, for everybody to have buyers remorse big time.
It is really a remarkable situation and a potentially dangerous one.
MATTHEWS: Let me take a leap beyond what you suggest to maybe where you‘re thinking, which is that Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton—you can‘t beat Bill Clinton‘s, the former president‘s, popularity in California. You‘ve been out there. You know it. He is a movie star out there. And Hillary is as well. And you go down to Florida with all of those retired New Yorkers down there and they automatically have a connection with Hillary, a lot of them liberals, some of them not, but a lot of connection with her.
She could roll it up on those corners of the country, California and Florida. Maybe New York will have a primary early. You‘re suggesting maybe she rolls it up. Even Giuliani, with whatever questions about him there are, because the first tests are in those big states, which are polyglots, which are more liberal, if you will. He could win early too.
FINEMAN: I agree. That‘s what the number in our poll tend to show at this point right now. Both Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani, despite some surges from Barack Obama on the Democratic side and a lot of interest in some other Republican candidates, still are in pretty strong shape. And yes, if the schedule for the primaries ends up with California, Florida and New York that early in the process, right on top of Iowa and New Hampshire, it could be over by February 1st.
MATTHEWS: You know what it says to me, again leaping beyond to where you‘re really thinking. It says third party, because after two or three months of a continental wide subway series between Rudy and Hillary, people might be dissatisfied with the options, as we‘ve been saying, about the party picks. And they may be looking to a Bloomberg or a Hagel or someone else to jump in then as an anti-war or some alternative. Right?
FINEMAN: I absolutely agree. You read my mind. That‘s where I was headed. I think that‘s what this is set up for. So we‘re going to have an act play, at least, maybe a five act play. That‘s partly because it‘s starting as early as it did last week.
MATTHEWS: That guy got 19 percent back in 1992. Right?
FINEMAN: Yes, as a matter of fact, there was a time when Ross Perot in 1992 --
MATTHEWS: Imagine a real sane third party candidate, what he could do. Anyway, thank you very much, Howard Fineman. As always, you‘re thinking beyond your words, sir...
votes than GOP votes if he ran as an Independent in this Countdown video from last night:
May 8: So what IS Giuliani's abortion position?
But without Gen. Clark in the race, with such a very weak field of so-called "top-tier" Democratic candidates, and with Iraq being the dominant issue, what else can really be expected when Hagel holds to Gen. Clark's foreign policy positions and when he teams up with Democrats Jim Webb and Joe Sestak in Congress on foreign policy?
Hillary has flip-flopped on Iraq (as well as calling for permanent bases there), Obama has followed Hillary around "within minutes" on his Iraq war policy (as well as considering Joe Lieberman to be a mentor), and Edwards let Bob Shrum tell him how to vote on the Iraq War Resolution in 2002:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/11442
CNN: Hillary Iraq Flip-Flops, Obama following Hillary & Edwards following Shrum!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on March 14, 2007 - 1:54pm.
Does anyone here really have a whole lot of confidence that Hillary, Obama, or Edwards can get us out of Iraq in a truly responsible manner?
I am NOT very confident of that!
Chris Cillizza. I'm sorry, I guess I was tired last night when I was posting...full of inaccuracies...thx for correction. I saw Cillizza say it:)
We have a two party system. Unlike Parliamentary democracies where multiple parties have infrastructure at the local level, we are just not set up for it......not at the national level anyways.
Wes knows this. I think he would have been very happy running as an Independent back in 2003, but he quickly surmised that in order to win the WH, you need the backing of a party machine.
I see no scenario where he would put himself through the rigors of a campaign knowing he had absolutely no chance of winning.
People want leadership......and in the absence of leadership, they will listen to anyone who walks up to the microphone.
Lewis Rothschild, in "American President"
many times. Although I must say I see a distinct advantage in thinking and running like a third party candidate in the Democratic Primary. If people are going to be tired of the front runners by next June, they're going to be tired of them by next January. All the things people think one can do as a third party candidate next summer can be done as a Democrat this summer. If you think Wes has got a chance of having an impact as an independent, he's got a much better chance of having an impact as a democratic primary candidate because as a "outsider" primary candidate, he might actually win.
so glad to see you considering these issues seriously.
And Mitch, you too.
Along with others, I think we're in for a 'run for our money,' no pun intended; I think we all (candidates and peeps) should do our best to take advantage of this unusual situation to make something great, whether its great candidates, great parties, great rosters, or great new structures for our system.
I am not against breaking the mold; in fact, there are times when we MUST!
Newsweek, Fineman:
'As California governor, Schwarzenegger has prospered in the role of centrist, hybrid “Repubocrat” —an independent force. As he watched the ten GOP presidential candidates take turns bowing to the GOP’s conservative base, the Governator bore the fixed smile of a man who had a desire to be elsewhere.
If I were a GOP strategist—or a Democratic one—I would be worried by Arnold’s body language. He and other major independent actors on the political scene—New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and former Vice President Al Gore, chief among them—comprise a Third Force that could upset two-party politics as we know it in the 2008 presidential race.
Indeed, although there is no formal alliance, Schwarzenegger, Bloomberg and Gore have formed a mutual admiration society that has huge potential implications for 2008. They have come to share similar visions on the urgency of the global warming and health care crises, and a similar impatience with politics as usual.
This could be the year of the Third Force.
There has never been a period like it in presidential campaigning. Nature abhors a vacuum; so does politics. Buyers’ remorse among Republicans and Democrats will have eons of time to set in; independents, as numerous as party loyalists, will have little to do but nurse their dissatisfaction.'
...and furthermore, it seems he has little insight into Arnold and/or how he finnagled the governorship in the backroom with Cheney's thugs, and/or, how he nearly got his ass kicked (by a group of nurses) into supporting centrist Dem philosophies.
and/or...if so, perhaps he might have reported on Arnold's true character before it was too late?
y'know? rather than leaving it to Palast?
C'mon General Clark...let's give them something to talk about!
I was just looking at the possibility. I'm glad to see that it has provoked such a wide range of opinions.
Everyone should become a delegate for unity '08 cause they are organized enough to get on the ballot.
If you don't know, Unity08.com are putting together an online convention and plan to run the #1 republican and the #1 democrat together. Who ever gets the most votes gets the president spot the other gets the vp.
One thing I would look at though. Submitted by The Wes Clark Army on May 8, 2007 - 9:51pm.
Everyone should become a delegate for unity '08 cause they are organized enough to get on the ballot.
If you don't know, Unity08.com are putting together an online convention and plan to run the #1 republican and the #1 democrat together. Who ever gets the most votes gets the president spot the other gets the vp.
Have to be a delgate by May 15th
to have any input at unity 08 you are right - we need to be part of this
so we don't get shut out; <blockquote>They hope they prey they get their way - the Voice</blockquote>
if a person took a look at the Lamont - Leiberman run, it may have just opened a door. At minimum, it's a strategy worth reviewing.
We all know the General had said many times in the pass that he knew he could win the general, he just wasn't sure he could win the primary
Praying for a Third Party Run
One gets the sense that our elite media members spend their days praying for a strong third party run by somebody. There are a few reasons for this. First, the elite consensus is a consensus without much of a constituency so they really would like some validation of their worldview. Second, it gives them a perspective from which to bash the major party candidates, especially Democrats as voters are always apparently dissatisfied with Democrats, without being seen as taking sides. Third, it gives them infinite excuses to spend their time spinning out ever more elaborate horse race nonsense rather than spending time on actual policies and other things which matter.
I don't know if there will be a strong run this time, but anyone "sensible" who makes any noise along those lines will get lots of attention. How much attention has Unity08 - the stupidest idea in history - been given already?
People want leadership......and in the absence of leadership, they will listen to anyone who walks up to the microphone.
Lewis Rothschild, in "American President"
...not even sure it's really 'the stupidest idea in
history' but Atrios sure as hell scored a couple
of bingos!
...Fineman fergawdsake, such an
'air of knowledgability'
...let Hagel do it
;)
C'mon General Clark...let's give them something to talk about!
because I posted 2x yesterday on closely related subjects, and am looking forward to stirring somethings up here; in fact, the situation allows us to relax right now, and wait for what I call Part Two. But let's talk! 2 posts follow:
'With campaigns and debates kicking off a full 18 months ahead of the next US presidential election, American voters are getting tired of the race already, polls and observers suggest. . .
"With nearly nine months to go before the first presidential primary, many voters are showing early signs of campaign fatigue," said a recent report by the Pew Research Center.
More than half of US voters, 52 percent, judged the campaign "dull," and nearly two-thirds thought the early-starting campaign period is "too long," the pollster said. . .
But the flood of publicity generated so early on as the hopefuls crammed their war chests may rebound on them later in the contest, some observers warn.
"Candidates have been running so long already it opens up opportunities for late entries," said blogger Glenn Reynolds on the website instapundit.com. "We may not like it, but voter boredom may now be a driver of politics.". .
As for the Democrat favorites Clinton and Obama, the two rivals risk mutual destruction in a tight race which could leave an opening for former vice-president Al Gore to make a late bid, said Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University in the capital.
Bill Simon, policy director on the campaign of New York's Mayor Rudy Giuliani -- currently the leading Republican candidate -- told AFP he was giving "a lot" of thought to the threat of voter fatigue.
"Clearly the campaign has gotten off to an early start, and the pace has been very frenetic," he said. "Whether that pace is maintained we'll have to see. I suspect it will cool off a bit over the summer, but then it will pick up again in the fall."'
http://rawstory.com/news/afp/_Dull_presidential_race_fatigues_US_05062007.html
Post number 2:
'I think we are living at a time here in this country, Al, that is as unpredictably politically as I've ever seen maybe in modern times. I think the political currents are running swiftly, deeply, unpredictably," he told Hunt, after the TV host had asked him if he was considering an independent run for President as one of the options for his political future.'
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Hagel_might_run_as_independent__0507.html
I've written to professor turley, suggesting that he should have included general clark in his list of possibles, not just gore, and I'll write fineman tomorrow (later today) similarly. I'd like to spend some time thinking/talking about process and structure for part two and the last rounds for 2008.
Does anyone have PoliSci's e-mail, and armando's, too?
I'm getting excited; have to open a window! I don't like to sweat!