>Clark campaign is going to do some interesting things in the next two weeks, particularly as relate to fostering the grassroots, and I'm very excited to see them all happen.

I'm interested, where is this coming from?

Let me be the first to to echo Ezra's comments from the other side. I think Dean is the most exciting Democrat since Bill Clinton, and he has my full support. But Clark is an excellent candidate as well and I will proudly support him if he wins the nom.

May the best man win.

Well, he is all these things which will make him a great match against Bush, but tonight I went to the Dean blog to see what was going on, as is my want each night, and Dean has a statement about what happened in Iraq yesterday. But I want to see what Clark had to say about it, and I googled his site and went to it, and to his blog and couldn't find a word about it. Is this possible, that he has made no statement about it?

The statement is here:
http://clark04.com/press/release/057/

You're endorsing the hottest candidate! Good go, Ezra!

Also, depending what happens... he is possibly one of the only Democrat candidates who has a chance of taking my vote away from Bush. Not that my vote counts in Seattle, but I think it's a big deal anyway.

At the very least, he's a President I could stand behind, as opposed to many of these candidates, who I'd rather have no association with at all. If we have to have a Dem. president in 2004, so far I'm saying please God let that man be Wesley Clark.

I differ with your assessment that Clark is the best candidate.

He certainly has the one of best resumes if all you believe that a military background is essential to understanding and leading foreign policy. So far, though, he hasn't proven to be a particuarly good candidate. Perhaps he'll hit his stride one day, but as he has yet to campaign for anything, that is a matter of pure faith at the moment.

Maybe. The Republicans know it's vital to turn out their base to win the election. Would Clark be as effective as Dean in energizing the base?

Not to insult our host, but I just want to say I think Clark comes off as a bad communicator and a bore. Every debate I have seen him in, I feel he projects a similar type of cluelessness, milqtoast persona Bush does. Additionally, someone really needs to tailor the General's suits. He obviously is buying them off-the-rack and they fit him poorly. At the last debate in Detroit, I swear I thought General Clark was going to fly off the stage with those shoulderpads.

In terms of electoral math Dean has a MUCH more difficult fight than Clark. Dean in 2004 means we have to defend states we won in 2000 and pick up 1 or 2. Clark in 2004 means we can hit Bush in the states he won. You make Bush fight for the south, and you've already neat him.

I am sorry, but I don't see how Clark is magically supposed to easily care all the Gore states plus be competitive in Bush states. Is it his resume and his military credentials? If so, then people ought to be talking up John Kerry who has a great military career.

Also, please remember, due to the 2000 Census results, it is not enough to simply win all the Gore states plus one Bush state. The population and the it was the Bush states that got some more Electoral College votes.

Finally, you beat Bush in the South if you can talk about issues that matter to people in the South - what are you going to do about the rural economy? What are you going to do about the high tech economy? What are you going to do about factory jobs?

Thank god ezra... Clark could never win without the support of a small minded 20 year old college student in Santa Cruz. Dean is done for.

Clark could never win without the support of a small minded 20 year old college student in Santa Cruz

Yeah! How dare you reject The Leader?

I don't understand why some of you think Clark has a better chance of beating Bush.If Clark becomes the nominee I guaranty you Bush's team will run commercials showing Clark endoresing him before he decided running for the president him self. And at the end of the commercial they will say the only difference is now he is running to become the president. I don't see how he can overcome this.

By saying that Bush has betrayed the confidence he, and the country, placed in him. It actually makes Clark a much stronger candidate -- he's not a partisan challenger, he's a disappointed citizen.

An unimportant door is never locked.