Nader Advises Kerry on Running Mates

BOSTON - Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader (news - web sites) said Sunday he had advised John Kerry (news - web sites) to choose North Carolina Sen. John Edwards (news - web sites) or Missouri Rep. Dick Gephardt (news - web sites) as his running mate on the Democratic ticket.

Kerry won't discuss whom he is considering for vice president, but his advisers have been examining Edwards and Gephardt, two of Kerry's rivals from the Democratic primaries.

"They're very careful," Nader said on ABC's "This Week." "They're not going to cause him any embarrassment. And they do bring an additional voter support for him."

Kerry met with Nader in Washington on Wednesday, but didn't ask the third-party candidate to quit the presidential race despite widespread Democratic fears that his candidacy could ensure President Bush (news - web sites)'s re-election.
more....
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&ncid=703&e=2&u=/ap/20040523/ap_on_el_pr/kerry

but if it must be Gebhart or Edwards, take Edwards. Gebhart has never run on a statewide ballot in Missouri, and I doubt he would give the ticket much pull. Also, I don't see where Kerry needs to shore up organized labor. His labor credentials are better than Bill Clinton and Al Gore's. Edwards comes accross as optimistic, energetic and as a genuine friend of the working man. Gebhart can be Secretary of Labor.

One thing about Kerry is how damn predictable he is. Expect nothing unusual or precedent-setting from him--ever. He's copying Clinton's economics, Bush's macho posery, Dean's stump speech, FDR's demeanor & voice, JFK's initials and credentials, and even John Heinz's wife. But y'know what? None of that bothers me (well, except for the macho posing stuff--shootin' birds & riding Harleys on talk shows--sheesh!). The main thing the Bush administration has done is left the country in need of an assload of stability, predictability, and responsibility. After the last four years, I could use a spell without surprises.

So conventional wisdom says it's gonna be Richardson or Edwards. I'm cool with that. We could do worse.

for a position in this administration. He also needs to re-evaluate his opinion on VP. Clark will ensure a Kerry win. I look at the VP issue this way: If something were to happen to Kerry after he became president, I would want Clark in charge, not Edwards. Why? Clark is older, wiser, and wouldn't take shit from anyone.

Glad to have you.

Like minded people... Ahhhh... As good as a cold beer on a hot day.

for Nader?

I get nervous thinking of 2 Senators at the top of the ticket. Id be happier with a governor or general up there - someone with big-time executive role over a bureaucracy. But hey, maybe the right chief of staff and advisers could provide that as well.

You can pick up your parting autographed photo of Senator Kerry at the door.

Next!

Why would Nader advise his opponent as to whom would be the best choice? Why would Kerry accept advice from an opponent as to whom he should choose?

:wtf:

So many questions, so little time.

whatsoever. It would be nice to have someone from the west on the short list. We get mighty tired of being written off out here. The west could offer more support than the DLC thinks.

conservative leaning or moderate male voters who voted for bush because they thought he was an ok guy or who didn't vote at all but have been hurt economically. while they are likely to vote for kerry, gep and edwards help in getting out the votes and speaking from a personal experience and perspective different from kerry's. edwards also has southern leaders pushing him and gep has labor pushing him.

If Nader was playing the spoiler at this moment he would have chosen candidates far to the left of ones that Kerry was likely to pick -- such as Kucinich. Now that he has picked the moderate Gephardt he can't hold such a choice against Kerry.

why would he suggest the two most centrist candidates for VP?

Go home, Ralph.

Something is fishy here.

If Nader wants to pull the ticket to the left
why would he suggest the two most centrist candidates for VP?


I don't know. I think this is just basically Nader's way of presenting his bid as planned attack by Dems and Independents against Repubs. I, personally, think he's making it seem cosier than it might have been. But, perhaps I'm wrong.


Hi, Delphine! :hi:

It's your pal, Ona! Boy that was quick! Heh.

month, but coming out of his mouth, it makes me wonder if Kerry won't pick either one (he might not have anyway, even if Ralph hadn't opened his big trap).

Ralph, shut the hell up!!

seems to short circuit some people's reasoning process....

I think he will; a return surprise kiss for the Republicans this time around.

I see something to gain from him. Wes Clark was a four star general, was he not? I think that qualifies him for the position of Secretary of Defense. He did an excellent job in Kosovo and he can't be as arrogant as Bush or Rumsfeld.

Seems awfully strange to me. Nader is staking much of his candidacy as being the only "anti-war" candidate in the race. Gephardt, as we know, stood side by side with Bush as they announced the resolution to give Bush the power to invade Iraq.

And Edwards has said repeatedly that he would have invaded also to remove Saddam Hussein.

Just what is Nader playing at?

Nader isn't anti-war. He's pro-Nader. That's ALL he is these days.

I've thought that all along. Mentioning him as the "anti-war" candidate was just me repeating his mantra which now seems so ridiculous. :)

Take it easy.

hard-lefties. The war, whether we like it or not, is Bush's strongest issue in this election. Poll after poll has shown that people still rate Bush above Kerry when it comes to foreign policy and the war on terrorism. On the other hand, on domestic issues, Kerry wins hands down. The way to win this election, unpaletable as it may seem, is to keep hammering away at the economy and job losses - which is why Edwards and Gephartd would not be silly choices (though by no means my favourites).

Put it another way: if a voter goes into a voting booth thinking about the economy and domestic policy, they will be much more likely to vote Kerry than if they go in thinking about Iraq and terrorism. 10% more likely in fact if I rememeber the polls well. So this should be the major issue. Bush has put millions of people out of a job, war or no war that should be enough to get him out of office!

his personality and physical appearance compliment Kerry's nicely. I can't say the same for Edwards and Gephardt, in any respect. Not to devalue either one of them. But this time around, together 'Kerry and Clark' represent a fresh appearance of intelligence and the wherewithal to deal with the business at hand.. The War in Iraq.

:kick: