Pay Me
by matt at 2:00 pm on September 15th, 2007 in 2008 Presidential, Wes ClarkBack on April 5th, 2007, I wrote a post about an email I received soliciting campaign contributions for Hillary Clinton. The email itself was unremarkable, except for the address to which it was sent, a Wes Clark-specific address that had never been used for anything but communicating with Clark’s 2004 campaign. I took this to mean that Clark was not running in 2008, and that he had decided to support Hillary, which in itself was not surprising. What was surprising was the massive pushback from Clarkies across the internets. I even managed to get one of them to bet me $10, on top of the $5 Sac had already wagered that this email meant nothing, and that Clark would still be running in ‘08.
I just won those bets and a few more today (via email):
Dear X,
Today, I am proud to announce my endorsement of Senator Hillary Clinton as President of the United States.
Senator Hillary Clinton has earned the support of millions of Americans in her campaign for president — and today I am pleased to count myself among them. The world has reached a critical point, and we need a leader in the White House with the courage, intelligence and humility to navigate through many troubling challenges to our security at home and abroad. I believe Senator Clinton is that leader, and I whole-heartedly endorse her for President of the United States. Senator Clinton and I share a worldview in which diplomacy is the best first-strike tool in our arsenal; in today’s complicated global system, the United States should be making more friends than enemies.
Never before have so many Americans had our well-being so closely tied to world events. Our economic and national security has become more complicated than ever before, and we deserve a leader who draws on wisdom, compassion, intelligence and moral courage — in short, we need Hillary Clinton. She is tough but fair, a rock-solid leader equal to the many weighty challenges ahead of us.
As I make this endorsement today, I realize this may disappoint many of you who hoped that I would run for President myself in 2008. But rest assured: I’m not going anywhere. I’m going to continue to speak out on issues I care about, to work with you to support good Democratic candidates who will help restore the kind of leadership we need in America, to make sure our nation is as secure at home and abroad as it possibly can be.
Your support has been absolutely essential — to our country, to our Democratic candidates, and to me personally. I would never have run for President in 2003 without your support — after all, you drafted me into the race! I can’t tell you how much it means to me that you’ve been standing with me since my campaign for President and right up until now. And we still have so much work to do.
Together, we made a huge difference in the 2006 elections. We helped 42 candidates win their races across America, including 25 candidates who flipped their seats from Republican to Democratic seats. Our Clark community raised more than $1 million for candidates, not to mention the millions of hours of volunteer time members of the Clark community provided to campaigns in every corner of our nation. And I am most proud of the fact we helped elect a number of veterans to the House and Senate. What a tremendous victory for America — and it wouldn’t have been possible without the hard work that you and I and tens of thousands of us put in over those 24 months.
The fight is just beginning for the future of America. Through WesPAC, you and I and thousands of other Americans will continue to play a very active role throughout this entire upcoming campaign — to support strong candidates, to get them into office, and to get our country back on the right track.
Your continued participation in the political process is absolutely critical. I hope you’ll join me in supporting Hillary Clinton’s campaign for President. And I hope you’ll continue to be active here at WesPAC as we support many candidates up and down the ballot in 2008, and continue to speak out on the issues.
I’m proud to endorse Hillary Clinton for President of the United States. But I’m not going anywhere, and I hope you’re not either. We have a lot of work to do in the months and years ahead to get America moving forward again — and I need you with me.
I’ll stop by at 4:00pm ET on Sunday to the Clark Community Network to liveblog. I hope you’ll join me.
Thanks so much for everything you’ve done — and everything I know you’ll continue to do — for me, for Democrats, and for our country.
Sincerely,
Wes Clark
I’m still a Clark fan, but his endorsement isn’t going to make me re-think my support of John Edwards. More on that very soon.
**The $5 from this news, plus the $5 from the Scooter Libby commutation brings Sac’s balance to $10. Like I’ve said before: Please do not attempt to fade my prediction skillz.
tom wrote:
you think clark could be a VP candidate?
Posted 16 Sep 2007 at 4:37 pm ¶
matt wrote:
probably. i prefer him for national security advisor though.
Posted 16 Sep 2007 at 4:40 pm ¶
sac wrote:
Yeah, yeah, I got that email too. Send me your PayPal info. Real email on this comment.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 8:04 am ¶
matt wrote:
man. i was really expecting a response to the effect of “he can endorse someone else and still run.”
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 8:09 am ¶
sac wrote:
I’m a man of my word.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 8:43 am ¶
matt wrote:
yeah, i wasn’t making an integrity judgement. it was more of a “depends on the definition of endorsement” joke.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 8:51 am ¶
tom wrote:
has a candidate announced plans for a VP before the primary? i could see hillary getting a boost by singling out clark before taking the dem nod. especially since he’s already endorsed her, and she must know that people are into him. it would certainly give her more military credibility.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 9:41 am ¶
matt wrote:
not that i know of. there are lots of reasons for this, like a candidate might do better in the primaries than originally expected, and announcing before that would be a problem.
lots of politicians have endorsed hillary, so that’s not the deciding factor. and geography usually trumps all other factors.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 9:54 am ¶
sac wrote:
Seems like Clark would accept a cabinet position and I can’t think of a better Sec. of Defense or Sec. of State than him. Also, it’s looking more and more like Hillary is going to get the nomination. A few months ago, I wouldn’t have like that scenario, if only because I didn’t think she could win. Now I’m not so sure. She’s certainly not my choice, but I now think she could win.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 10:11 am ¶
matt wrote:
not sure how many times i have to say this, but:
Clark retired from active duty in 2000.
I’m not sure that Clark would be an ideal sec state because he speaks too frankly. he has diplomatic chops, but he’s not going to be sec state. VP or national security advisor. bet on that.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 10:25 am ¶
sac wrote:
I didn’t know that about Sec. of Defense. OK then, I’m still not ruling out Sec. of State, but I’d be just as happy if not more if Clark ended up as VP.
Perhaps we should wager on this. Double or nothing?
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 10:52 am ¶
matt wrote:
depends on the definition of bet?
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 10:55 am ¶
sac wrote:
Bet = you pay me.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 11:21 am ¶
matt wrote:
we’d be betting on the same outcome. jesus.
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 11:22 am ¶
sac wrote:
ha
Posted 17 Sep 2007 at 11:52 am ¶