I seem to remember that there were some Bill Clinton loyalists who helped Clark out in '04.  Also, Hilary seems like a very pragmatic politician, and a Clark selection is about as pragmatic a VP choice as anyone could make.  His role on the ticket would strength Hilary's already pretty good national security cred.

The fact that Clark said "Clinton-Clark" and not "Clark-Clinton" suggests that there may be something to this.  I suspect most presidential candidates would be reluctant to speak of themselves as the undercard on a pres-vp ticket unless it was a matter under consideration.

He responded to the question. But you's think if he was running for President he would have disputed it. It's standard operating procedure for Presidential candidates to deny interest in the no. 2 spot on the ticket.

Clark didn't say Clinton-Clark or Clark-Clinton or anything at all.  The ABC newsblog refers back to something a former aide from the Clark 2004 campaign, Chris LeHane, said in May 2005.  Clark was asked if he agreed with what this former aide had said.  Clark didn't respond to the question one way or the other, so he certainly didn't speak of himself as the undercard on a pres-vp ticket.  But, being the polite and gracious person he always is, he said something complimentary about Clinton. Also, consider the source. Chris LeHane did work for Clark in 2004, but he's a Clintonite at heart, and some of us Clark supporters think there's probably ulterior motives when he says things like this.

Also, you should go back and listen to Clark's speech at the DNC meeting.  It was a shot across the bow at Clinton, Edwards, and Obama.  His saying that he was the only one who would stand at the podium that day who had actually done what needs to be done in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the Middle East was a reminder of his experience and the lack of Obama's experience, and also a reminder, I think, of the fact that hope is fine, and Clark is an eternally optomistic and hopeful person, but that hope won't end the war in Iraq, won't get us universal health care, etc.  And he then said that the most ardent supporters of the war had now changed their minds, Clinton and Edwards, and that politicians were now taking poll-tested positions - aimed, I think, at all three.  And just as a personal aside, Clark was the only one who talked about the troops fighting this war with any kind of real personal feeling about it.

This was not a speech of someone looking to be someone else's vice president.  Clark said in 2004 that he wasn't going to be Dean's Dick Cheney, and I don't think he's any more interested in being Edward's or Obama's Dick Cheney. And Hillary Clinton would never want Clark as a running mate for the same reason John Kerry didn't want Clark for a running mate - he outshines them both when it comes to national security, foreign policy, and matters relating to defense and the military.

If Clark runs in 2008, it will be as he said in 2004, to be President and Commander in Chief of the military. 

whenever a presidential candidate is asked about the vp job, they ALWAYS deny it. Of course he's going to say something nice about Clinton, why wouldn't he? But he DID leave the door open. That's indisputable, and very strange.

Remember that answer when asked in 04 if he'd consider running on the ticket with Dean (obviously while Dean was still flying high)?  Everything Wes Clark has ever done has been in service to his country, and it's possible that, should Hillary get the nomination, and should she ask, he'd consider as another means to serve.  However, don't bet the farm that Clark isn't running on his own.  He's a very unlikely VP candidate because his leadership qualities and what he has to bring to the table are presidential material--not as Hillary's VP. 

And you never know what reporters are really looking for when they bring up something that was said by someone almost 2 years ago.  Maybe the reporter was trying to get Clark to say he was running for President, not VP, something Clark isn't ready to say yet?  Who knows?  I just think Clark wasn't going to play this game with this reporter and give him any more information than he's given anyone else.  Everyone's asking are you going to run, when are you going to announce, and Clark hasn't changed his answer for months, which is, I haven't said I'm not running.  And, of course, there was the reporter's decision to use the words "sly grin", which is nothing more a reporter trying to give a particular slant to a story - in this case, portraying Clark's demeanor in a way to suggest that there really was something afoot here.  I wouldn't play along with this reporter either. 

Could already be an almost done deal ... my own ideal ticket for 2008 is Mark Warner and Wes Clark

FWIW Harold Ickes always "aggresively" works the room ... and he seems a whole lot happier than when he attended the winter mtg that made Howard Dean DNC Chairman ... 

Lets look at the selection of the Dem., V.P., froma purely political perspective, assuming Hillary is the nominee.

If Hillary is nominted for president, I'm not sure putting Clark on the ticket will deliver Arkansas' electoral votes for her.  It's still a conservative state and both Hillary and Clark have never held elective office in Arkansas.  Can Bill Clinton's success and popularity transfer to Hilary - maybe, maybe not.

If Hillary chose Evan Bayh, they could have a great shot of carrying Indiana's 13 electoral votes, which has not voted for a Dem., fr president since 1964.  Bayh was elected governor their twice and and to the U.S. Senate from Indiana twice.  He is well liked in Indiana, has great approval ratings and I think he could carry this state for the Dems., unlike Johyn Edwards in 2004.  One added bonus - Bayh's advertising for his governor and Senate races also penetrate large part of northwestern and southwestern Ohio media markets, which could help nail Ohio's electoral votes as well.  Bayh also has impecable foreign policy and national security credentials.

Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico would be an interesting chioce as well.  He is beloved in New Mexico, so that would be a definite pick up for the Dems in 2008.  However, his Hispanic heritage could also aid in picking up Colorado and Nevada as well. Richardson also has good foreign policy credentials due to his service inthe Clinton Administration.

Obama, Edwards, Dodd, Biden, Kucinich, etc., really do not offer Hillary anything politically as a running mate so I am discounting these folks.

Of course, she could say the heck with the whole group and choose Senator Nelson of Florida in an attempt to nail down Florida's electoral votes but I think Florida is trending too Republican these days for him to make a difference there.

with or without Bayh. A runningmate cannot make up 20+%. If you look at the Arkansas link in the above post you'll see that both Clinton and Clark can hold their own in that state. They both led Huckabee by 16% last August. If Huckabee can't win there, I don't know what Republican could.

I agree that Richardson can maybe flip CO and NV as well as NM obviously. Those states were amazingly close in 2004. (Without McCain, maybe AZ as well)

I think if she chose a midwesterner like Bayh or Obama it could help nail down Ohio. No Republican can win that state right now in the current political enviornment over there.

for Hillary supporters to tell me exactly which states she can realistically flip from red to blue in a general election.