With the gubernatorial elections less than a month away and presidential debates covering the news, thoughts of the 2004 presidential election are on many minds.
Democrats have been seeking a promising candidate to run against George W. Bush. With Bush’s approval rating steadily declining from 90 percent shortly after Sept. 11 to 70 percent during the peak of the war to now just a little over 50 percent, a strong Democratic candidate has more of a chance then ever. Gen. Wesley Clark is the man for the job.
Graduating first in his class at West Point Military Academy in 1966, then going on to Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar, Clark is qualified. He served as a leader during several military efforts as supreme allied commander.
As a Democrat, Clark is facing much opposition in the battle of the party nomination, but he surpasses all his opponents. He offers what no other candidate can-a platform that appeals to both Democrats and Republicans.
Democrats are anxious to get Bush out of office. Clark could win their votes based simply on the fact that he isn’t Bush, not to mention his admirable career. If Clark were to get the nomination, the Democratic Party could count on full support from its members.
At the same time, Clark appeals to Republicans. Clark is not a liberal candidate. Though his policies lean toward the left, Clark is more conservative than most who call themselves Democrats. Republicans who don’t support Bush would easily vote for Clark. Surely his patriotism would win him a few votes on the Republican side as well.
Clark can easily sway the most influential group of voters in this election, the moderates. His military career (appealing to many conservatives not happy with the current handling of the war), combined with liberal foreign and social policies, make him the perfect, middle-of-the-road candidate.
The general also has some coincidental similarities to former President Bill Clinton. Both were raised in Arkansas, became Rhodes Scholars, attended Oxford University and entered the public spotlight.
A few years ago, resembling Clinton may have hurt a person’s career. But the public is seeing now that Clinton wasn’t such a bad president. After all, he did boost our economy and keep us out of war, both of which the current leader has not been able to do. This positive association may win him some votes.
One group that Clark can count on, without any doubt, is the U.S. military. What better military advocate is there than a man who has served his time, done his patriotic duty and led America’s men into battle? The men and women who serve our nation every day should gladly support a man with such a strong military background.
None of the other candidates offers quite what Clark does. Some of them come across as too liberal, too Bush-hating. Others aren’t very charismatic or appealing to the public. The rest will face difficulty based simply on their gender and race.
If the Democrats want any chance in defeating Bush, and taking over the White House, Clark needs to be their candidate for the 2004 presidential election.
Shaina Hanson is a freshman political science major. She can be reached at [email protected].