The problem with Wesley Clark is that up until that time he really wasn't a Democrat, and had drifted between the two parties, which harmed his image among Democratic voters; add to this his rather horrid campaign organization and poor decisions and it is understandable as to why his campaign ultimately failed despite his personnel strengths.
However, if John Kerry were to bow out of the race that Fall as I believe he came close to doing, I think most of his support would be driven toward Clark. However since Clark has virtually no infrastructure in Iowa that state would go to John Edwards, which opens a whole new can of butterflies that begin to blur what direction we can expect things to go. In the most basic terms, I think the primaries would end up like this:
GREEN - Wesley Clark
RED - John Edwards
BLUE - Howard Dean
Basically a stronger primary effort by John Edwards and dissatisfaction by Liberals who remain with Dean until he drops out. Both gain more delegates but Clark still gains the majority of the media attention, thus allowing him to push on through to the nomination. For a running-mate I am not sure who he would pick, but in order to keep things interesting I will say Senator Max Baucus of Montana; had served a significant amount of time in the Legislature, held positions similar to those of Clark, and was also one of his early endorsements. This might drive the more Liberal voters towards Ralph Nader, but they would likely be offset by Independent voters who switch to the Democratic ticket.
I imagine the race would be close but Clark would appeal more to voters in the Center, and thus carry the day. Below is just one the maps I imagine occurring, simply because Clark's major strengths were in the West. It is also the most interesting to me. Almost granted Clark Arkansas as well, but that seemed a bridge too far.
Wesley Clark (D-AR)/Max Baucus (D-MT): 278 Electoral
George Bush (R-TX)/Dick Cheney (R-WY): 260 Electoral
Excellent overview, Ariosto, though I'm thinking it would be slightly closer then what you've thought of. I think Clark might be able to take Arkansas, at the cost of Iowa. Though, that might be my penchant for having candidates take their home states talking.
Anyway, so Kerry folds early (maybe Clark or another primary candidate pulls a Swiftboat-style attack on him, or he doesn't do very well in a debate or whatnot), and Clark picks up a bunch of his support, with the rest of the Kerry supporters going to Edwards. Sounds good. But I'm still interested in Clark getting into the race early. If he does that (say mid August instead of September), could that lead to Kerry weakening and falling out of the race?
I'm personally of the opinion that Clark would take a different person as VP; it seems to me that he'd want a younger person than Max Baucus to balance the ticket. Maybe one of his rivals (John Edwards seems like an eternal VP choice) would work.
Oh, and how do we keep Clark from screwing up in answers?
Well, Cheney almost had the USAF bomb the Roki Tunnel and OTL, the USAF flew Georgian troops from Iraq back to Georgia.
OTOH, Clark would likely have at least reevaluated Iraq.
I'm sure that, if CBS does not try to use the anonymous sources, the Bush skipping his NG service story could get more legs. (After all, there was ample evidence that Bush had failed to serve his required term in 1999, when it was first reported by the BBC, of all places.)
That might work; Clark could run on a "I'm a general, I know what I'm talking about, Bush doesn't, he's doing the wars all wrong, he's never really known the military" sort of message, right?
We go beyond light-speed.
(points to whoever gets the reference, as I was literally just researching Clark now for something)
Hmm... Clark's comment about believing that we could eventually go beyond light-speed, right?
I play Clark in '04 all the time. The problem is experience and Bush is going to have a field day over Clark's lack of it.
That's true; but could Clark pull an Eisenhower? Could he point out Bush's lack of military experience?