Since it's an index, you have to pick a column (or set of columns) which is guaranteed to be non-null and unique in all cases. That's the biggest and most stringent criteria - anything that might be NULL or duplicate is out of the question right from the get-go.
Depending on the type of queries you'll be running on this indexed view, you might also want to see if you have any columns (e.g. a DATE or something) that you'll be running range queries against. That might make an interesting candidate for a clustering key.
But the main thing is: your clustering key must be unique and non-null in any circumstance. And in my personal experience, to reduce index size (and thus increase the number of entries per page), I'd try to use as small a key as possible - a single INT is best, or a combination of two INTs - or possibly a GUID - but don't use VARCHAR(500) fields in your clustering key!
UPDATE: to all those poster who keep telling us clustered indexes don't need to be unique - check out what the "Queen of Indexing", Kimberly Tripp, has to say on the topic:
Let's start with the key things that I
look for in a clustering key:
* Unique
* Narrow
* Static
Why Unique?
A clustering key should be
unique because a clustering key (when
one exists) is used as the lookup key
from all non-clustered indexes. Take
for example an index in the back of a
book - if you need to find the data
that an index entry points to - that
entry (the index entry) must be unique
otherwise, which index entry would be
the one you're looking for? So, when
you create the clustered index - it
must be unique. But, SQL Server
doesn't require that your clustering
key is created on a unique column. You
can create it on any column(s) you'd
like. Internally, if the clustering
key is not unique then SQL Server will
“uniquify” it by adding a 4-byte
integer to the data. So if the
clustered index is created on
something which is not unique then not
only is there additional overhead at
index creation, there's wasted disk
space, additional costs on INSERTs and
UPDATEs, and in SQL Server 2000,
there's an added cost on a clustereD
index rebuild (which because of the
poor choice for the clustering key is
now more likely).
Source: http://www.sqlskills.com/blogs/kimberly/post/Ever-increasing-clustering-key-the-Clustered-Index-Debateagain!.aspx