Let's play Veepstakes survivor! Round one, 5/23/04 VOTE SOMEONE OFF

Ok, I'm not sure this hasn't been done yet. We'll start off with ten, and vote someone off of who DU wants least. I'll start a new poll either every 2 days or 100 votes, or when a candidate is mathimatically garenteed to get the most votes before 100 votes are cast. Whichever comes first.

It seems a given that the most DUers want Clark and the second most want Edwards. But let's see how this works out regardless.

Warner would be even worse for Kerry in my opinion.

except shaking his hand at a fundraiser in the eighties for then Lt Gov Jerry Balisles... interested in your reasoning as to how he would be worse than Bayh.

that could be enough to give him the victory in Ohio, although I think a couple others could give him just as much of one in it. Warner does almost nothing for Kerry in my opinion. He didn't win his election by a big margin in VA, and he's another native New Englander(born and raised in CT), and it's not clear he has some of the credentials needed as a minimum for this election that most people in congress have as it deals with things like foreign policy.

as the 1988 belief that Quayle would bring in the "womens' vote". Simply based on no facts.

Want help in Ohio - go Gephardt - very strong on manufacturing and union votes. He isn't my choice - but he is much more likely to bring the boost in Ohio than is Bayh.

boost. Not the biggest boost of all the people in the running, but bigger than most. Gephardt is just a horrid, horrid choice. The people who believe in the myth of Gephardt are people who either are in the Washington bubble or believe what they read from people who are. Gephardt is NOT the favorite son of the midwest, he's not even the favorite son of Missouri. Look at what happened in Iowa. And I'm not one of these people who buys into the "primary success = general election success" whether as veep or not, but it so clear to me he is just such a hackish, unappealing, uninspiring person, and he would just hurt Kerry so much in that respect because that's one of Kerry's problems to a much smaller degree than Gephardt.

I litterally had a physical reaction to change the channel everytime Gephardt spoke at the debates. Sorry.

I am. Haven't been in the DC bubble since Reagan was president.

Bayh gives zero boost to the midwest.

Gephardt gives a boost to the parts of the midwest where the Unions still have a presence.

I don't like Gep - he was a lousy Majority whip and Majority Leader. He paled in comparison to two of his predecessors that I had the great pleasure to often watch in action: Tip O'Niell and Jim Wright.

That said - he does have an influence in getting turnout from Unions. So if you want a boost in Ohio - that is the direction to go. Look, I am in agreement with you per Grahm - I think he is the best. But if you are looking for an Ohio boost... you have to think about what constituency in Ohio can swing/tip elections. Back in the eighties it was still a very democratic state - one of the swing constituencies were the Union tied Reagan Democrats - but it took about ten years for that to filter down from top of the ticket voting - to the senate and elsewhere. In my estimation that is where the vote could most easily be tipped back.

Bayh brings nothing. There is very little Union boosts in Indiana outside of the Gary area. His popularity is not due to that constituency. It isn't even due to the agricultural constituency. More to the monied business folks (who, believe it or not in Indiana, perfer moderation from either party to extremes), insurance, financial and pharmaceuticals. Just how does that transfer in Ohio?

Again he'd probably be my second choice of who to vote off given those options. I just think that while Bayh's boost of any electoral vote liklihood going to Kerry may be negligable, it's more negligable for Warner.

per Bayh - that when analyzed always falls apart.

I would guess that you are correct per Warner. He may, or may not, help revive democratic voting in Virginia - but it is way too early to tell.

Also think that nominating anyone for VEEP that has only been in office a few years, and thus has very little perceived "experience" is also not a good way to go.

Again - I don't know that he has huge campaigning appeal (but neither did Lieberman) - that is part of why I think that the senator and former gov of Florida would be an excellent choice. While more moderate than I, I trust moderates who are deliberative in their policy and decision making processes. He has a great deal of respect from many parts of the party.

Per Ohio - personally I think it is either going to swing for Kerry because of a) Kerry and b) how bad bush policies have been for Ohio and c) fatigue with the far right... or it isn't. I don't think the VEEP selection will tip Ohio one way or the other.

I've got to vote Evan off the island. For once I agree with Ralph Nader, Evan is no Birch Bayh.

I wonder if it was just to spite me.

No surpise there... :shrug:

:evilgrin:

How about a few actual liberals that I've heard of? Congressman John Lewis has been mentioned. Maybe Carol Mosely Braun. Is Bill Richardson going to be on the next one?

nt

At least John Lewis has been mentioned in a few articles. If Kerry really is only considering picking moderate white men then I'm a little worried. That's not the way to victory.

And I'd like to see the "few articles" John Lewis has been mentioned in. I follow this issue very closely and these 10 I put up are I believe the 10 ten most likely on any top 10 list the Kerry campaign has.

Didn't you know? I haven't heard Landrieu mentioned in any articles, but she is still right-leaning, which goes to my point that I seriously hope Kerry is considering someone other than white moderates. My mistake on leaving out the women but they aren't the names I see mentioned most often either.

Lewis is mentioned in this New York Times article that the AP picked up and ran in many papers around the country.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/8543325.htm?1c

85 percent of the time. What drags her overall liberalism into the moderate wing is her environmental voting record, because she votes in favor more than most dems of the oil industry, which is basically just a vote in favor of the fact that she's from an oil state. On every other day to day issue she's a clear liberal.

And I hope you could post the exerpt from that article mentioning lewis, and the others you mentioned, considering you used the word "few". It would help if you posted what preceded it in the article to see the context. Thanks in advance

by anyone serious in a serious way. And Richardson only get's speculated about by extremely lazy journalists who haven't realized, heard, or accepted that Richardson has vociforously(SP?) ruled it out again and again.

Richardson is already chairing Kerry's NM campaign, in the middle of his first term as governor, and chairing the DNC convention. And people believe he can do QUADRUPLE duty as the VP nominee? It isn't going to happen.

She's the junior US Senator, just re-elected.

I know Florida doesn't have 3 senators

thanks for the heads up

though, so I didn't vote. It sounds like "Survivor" but it's not clear how to vote. :eyes:

of the most serious contenders as gathered by the various reports of what the campaign is considering.

KIDDING! :P

Thank you so very much for not including him. We didn't need another reminder of how dumb an idea putting him on the ticket would be.

hmm. Should I reduce the maximum vote per round?

Hmmm. Would it be wrong to call it? Will it get 100 votes before 2 days?

.

Even under these circumstances. Can't wait to vote off Gephardt in the next round though :evilgrin:

:evilgrin:

I'll also guess that Edwards will be removed in earlier rounds. But final will be the same as all the VP polls on at the DU...Clark wins.

But it will be interesting to see who DU's top 4 or 5 are.

I hope people vote for who they actually would want least on an individual round basis, not just for spite or some other strategy