nt

Although I am starting to warm up to the idea of Kaine a little bit. I would rather him than Vilsack.

Vilsack, while a nice compelling story and I like his Pittsburgh ties, would be bad. Though Vilsack, I think has a 100% rating from the League of Conservation Voters, his ties to BigAg worry me to no end.

Kaine has no such ties. He has some moderate views, based on principle and as long as he doesn't stray too far to the right on LGBT issues then I am fine with him. And I have NO PROBLEM with Kaine's views on abortion, so he is against them. Fine. He still has always been a big supporter of Roe. That says a lot about Kaine, willing to govern for the PEOPLE.

And I think Hillary would rather serve with him.

I am worried that her confidence has taken a hit and she is following the suggestions of Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Terry McAuliffe, all of whom appear to favor Tim Kaine.

She could not have delivered the speech she just made in Tampa if she weren't confident and FIRED UP. She was fantastic!

.


It would be a BIG WIN for TEAM MONSANTO!


.

If that's who she wants.

The media, starting almost as soon as Kerry easily clinched the nomination wrote many articles suggesting Edwards had the charisma that Kerry (per them) lacked. They actually wrote that if he was not chosen it would be because Kerry did not want to be over shadowed. (They never explained why Kerry kept winning states when it was down to just win. ) In addition, ALL the media coverage of Edwards was almost universally positive. He was a "sunny" politician, with the perfect family. As one said - "Bill Clinton witthout the bimbo eruptions".

That coverage likely led to the fact that Edwards had very good favorable ratings and Kerry's team found he polled best as VP. In addition, both Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy supported him. In fact, IF the team would have gotten the Edwards of the primaries - rather than the almost bored Edwards of the general election or Edwards, the trial lawyer, who would work for his client -- that would have been a good choice. Instead he regularly promised to defend Kerry ... and then did not. Clearly already looking forward to Edwards 2008 and not wanting any possible new negatives. Kerry deserved better, but should have gone with his gut about Edwards.

Gephardt, who made the deal in the House that made the IWR the bill that would be voted on was NOT popular here. However, he had long time union connections and could not have been worse than the narcissistic Edwards. A few years after the election, a Chicago paper wrote that Kerry's personal first choice was neither Edwards or Gephardt, but Dick Durbin.

off if she picked Vilsack than Tim Kaine.

Both would have been better than EdwArds.

My guess is that you may have already read them, given what a huge John Kerry fan I know you are.

The first article identifies Visack as a finalist, along with Gephardt and Edwards.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/06/kerry.vp/

The second is written by Bob Shrum and discusses the process in great detail.

http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1626498,00.html

The articles are both good reads IMO.

I think clinton should go with who she wants.

She is a huge Kerry supporter. I am not sure if you are.

John Kerry enthusiast.

I am quickly becoming the same way about Xavier Becerra. I am sorry that she isn't choosing him. But he may well become Speaker of the House some day.

I think you will like them, since I know you are a big John Kerry fan.