So, who would be a good VP?

It seems like Dean takes a plurality of DU votes for pres. Who do ya'll think would make a good VP for him? I'm thinking it'd have to be a southerner, as I don't think any ticket with no southerners would do very well in the South.

How about if Kerry were Pres? Or Clark? Or, God forbid, Lieberman? Gephardt?

Thoughts?

nt

His press secretary today said he wasn't interested in the VP slot. He thinks he's got the best qualifications to be president.

I think he's tired of the senate.

Dean/Graham... 2 governors.. both strong on national defense. Graham would give Dean gravatas in much the same way that Cheney gave shrub.

It's a dream team.

The northern vote? All the enthusiatic Dean people who are going to vote against Bush anyway?

I think Graham should be the top of the ticket. Why? Because he can pull what Dean can't, top or bottom of the ticket--the southern swing vote.

Whether V.P. or President, the Democratic party and the rest of us need his leadership and experience. Besides, I think Cheney has rewritten the role of the V.P.

n/t

Wishful thinking? Maybe.

... if we're going to get serious about taking this country back ... imo ... we need the right people leading us to help do it ... otherwise, we'll just be spinning wheels ... taking this country back doesn't just mean getting * out of the White House ...

would work well with Kerry or Dean. I've been disapointed by her votes in the past, but I think she'd be a nice balance to a Northeasterner, would make places like Louisiana, Arkansas, and perhaps Florida and NC easier to carry.

Like Kerry/Edwards or Dean/Edwards as well. Also like Kerry/Graham or Dean/Graham.

Kerry/Clark or Dean/Clark also very interesting.

I think it's way beyond time that a woman was elected. No offense to white men, but I'm kinda tired of seeing only them in the most important positions. A woman would be great for the country, and she's a southerner.

That would be cool, but I worry that it would just bring back memories of the disastrous 1984 election with Geraldine Ferraro on the ticket with Mondale against Reagan/Bush.

Landrieu does meet most of the criteria Dean mentioned on Larry King: a Southerner with Washington experience, who also appeals to an important constituency -- women.

I've always thought Graham would be a great choice, as another Southerner with Washington experience. However, he's becoming fairly unpopular in his home state of Florida, which has me a little concerned.

What about Dianne Feinstein? She's immensely popular here in California (which is voting for the Democratic nominee anyway), and may provide some real appeal to the swing voters. She's a little conservative for my taste (our other senator, Barbara Boxer, is much more of a good old fashioned liberal), but I think she could bring some real excitement to the ticket.

I wonder if she had this in mind in deciding not to run in the recall election, which she probably would have won.

Hmmm......

Graham is still plenty popular in FL. He's losing a lot of republicans who supported him in the past because of his attacks on Bush but he's doing fine with democrats and independents. Instead of winning the state with 65% voting margins, he's probably down to the mid 50's in support.

She might help get a victory but I really don't like her. She would be a leading candidate in 2008 if we lose and an almost certain candidate in 2012 if we win. I don't want to see her in the white house. She doesn't seem like a great friend of the environment. Also, if a republican wins the governorship in Louisiana in 2003 we would lose that seat and we need ever seat in the senate that is possible.

Otherwise, I'd suggest that Dean might be a good second fiddle to Clark.

Take your pick...

:loveya:

I think that he will only be 34 in January 2005 and he needs to be 35.

and for the Edwards fans out there, there has been much speculation that if his poll numbers don't jump within the next month and a half by a large margin, he'll drop out. We'll see if those ads he launches help him out at all. I think he'd make a great VP.

Speculation from who?

and one of the nightly news programs (I believe CBS) within the last week alone. Those are just the ones I've seen in my own viewing (and I don't watch any TV except for the nightly news, the only paper I read in print is the Globe).

There's always "speculation" one way or another.

Edwards has said over and over, on Monday latest, that he is in the race to stay.

and he loses his Senate seat, I have no respect for him. None of the other senators face this, and if Edwards loses another dem. seat in the Senate b/c he chose to foolishly pursue a nomination he couldn't win (some within the NC Dem. party say he should decide by October, many want it sooner), he will have done no good for himself, his party, or his country. I have no problem with him staying in until possibly the first primary, but if his poll ratings haven't improved, he'd better jump ship for the greater good IMHO.

If nothing else changes. He's ranked second in SC and has the 2nd most money--I don't think there's any need to rush him.

He's had meetings with Erskine Bowles, which I'd presume were about the senate seat. I don't think Edwards is interested in screwing the Democratic party.

Also, if Clark enters, that may shift the race dramatically, so Edwards (and others) make make different decisions.

I do take issue with your saying he's pursuing a nomination he "couldn't possibly win"--I don't think any of us have access to a crystal ball. The primaries are months away and nothing is set in stone.

I think he'd make a fabulous VP candidate.

That seems to be the big thing dividing our country, and there is no better way to unite it than by accomodating both sides.

That's clear, to me anyway. I look forward to the nominee not doing that, though. Sometimes we don't learn.

Dean-Clark would be an ironclad ticket -- the "perfect storm" of a Doctor and a General, bringing expertise in both domestic and foreign issues.

A few reasons for VP Clark:

-- He's a southerner (hails from Arkansas, correct?), so he'd balance the ticket geographically.

-- He provides tons of experience and gravitas in foreign affairs (imagine Clark debating the Big Dick and making him look like the opportunistic poser that he is.)

-- No doubt he could handle the job of president if need be.

-- As a novice to political office, he doesn't have a history of votes and quotes for the media to throw back in his face in that Gotcha Game they always play.

-- Clark and Dean together look like a team you could trust:

Having him on the ticket wouldn't deplete the House or the Senate of much-needed Democratic member.

That's a critical consideration, because if Kerry or Graham were chosen as VP, their state's Repug governor would pick their replacement, correct?

(Edited for redundancy.)

I personally think that Clark would be better as the head of the ticket rather than the tail of it. He's a good candidate and if Dean goes in as VP he could use that position to counterbalance Clark as a guy who is supposed to be strong on domestic issues.

...is that people could easily accept either member of the team at the head of the ticket.