VP prediction

[dmkinsey]

I think it's a mistake to assume that the veep candidate will be one of the recent presidential candidates. Probably won't be, IMO.
I doubt that the candidate will be a member of Congress, especially not a current Senator. We can't afford to give up a seat in the Senate.
I think John Kerry mentioned the man in his speech last night.
Someone who is a decorated Vietnam vet, with experience in government, who has worked hard to get Kerry to the nomination and a man who has an extra strong desire to chase the bush regime out of DC

Max Cleland

[eissa]

1. My predictions

for VP have remained the same since December:

Edwards, Bayh or Graham

I think Cleland would be a fantastic choice also, and I'm sure he'll play some role in a Kerry administration, like Secretary of Defense or Veterans Affairs.

[salin]

4. Of that group - more likely Graham than Bayh

Bayh brings little to the table. Won't bring the state (bush is more popular here, than is Bayh), and Indiana isn't influential on other midwestern states (e.g., won't bring Ohio or Kentucky, nor solidify Michigan.)

I agree with your assessment on the senate - but not just for fear of losing the seat, but also for wanting to appear to bring more diverse governing experiences to the team... Graham and Bayh both bring 2 terms as governor, unfortunately neither Cleland nor Edwards do.

Wildcards would be longtime house stalwarts (The Nation suggested Lloyd Doggett- wouldnt bring texas, but might have a more regional impact by exciting the base.)... including (as some might not want to hear) former Majority and Minority Leader Dick Gephardt.

Have to wonder about other former governors... maybe too long ago, but isn't the former Gov of Virginina, Gov. Wilder pretty well respected...?

[carolinayellowdog]

8. Not a loyal Dem at all

I never voted for anyone with more enthusiasm than for Wilder, but he's the last person I'd want on the ticket based on his behavior since then. Right now he's doing something that is perceived as stabbing his current Dem successor in the back, which is the umpteenth time such a thing has occurred since he left office.

[salin]

11. haven't lived in Va for years

and when I left Balisles (sp) was gov and Wilder was Lt. Just giving the context for my ignorance in asking... what exactly has he been up to lately?

[eissa]

14. Please not Gep

I would have such a hard time swallowing that one. That's an interesting take on Bayh -- I always assumed he was popular enough to carry his state. The more I think about it, the better Graham looks.

[democratreformed]

15. Why not Gep?

Seriously, I never studied him much but I did like him.

[eissa]

24. Gep with * in the Rose Garden

would be played in every ad. Kerry needs someone who can balance him out a bit (record or geography). Gep offers neither -- he voted with * on a lot of issues (like Kerry) and he wouldn't be able to carry Missouri.

[bushwakker]

37. I want Gep

he is most logical choice politically.

[Toucano]

20. Why not Mark Warner

Virginia's current governor?

I don't know much about him, but he struck me as being pretty strong.

[salin]

21. Has barely been in office...

need at least one term (or more) under the belt, I would think.

[liberalpress]

26. Let's make it Ann Richards...

...and screw Texas

[eissa]

28. I love her!

:loveya: that "born with a silver foot in his mouth" line from the '88 convention will forever live in my heart.

[sadiesworld]

2. Well, since most of the candidates have given up their day jobs...

giving up a seat won't be an issue.

[cosmokramer]

3. Richardson or Clark

Clark for the fp/military/diplomatic/southern/popular with moderates/fund-raising superstar. Can deliver with Kerry Arizona, NM, Arkansas and Ohio, and raise a crap-load of cash.

Richardson for his vast experience, broad appeal, and can deliver Arizona, NM, and possibly Nevada. Doesn't raise cash like Clark can though.

[LandOLincoln]

5. My prediction: Clark will be VP, Cleland will be SecDef, and

Richardson will stay right here in New Mexico as he's promised us time and time again.

[cosmokramer]

6. I really like Cleland....

...but the rest of the sheeple might be an issue.

I think it would be fabulous to have a disabled American in the #2 slot. When FDR was unable to stand, most folks didn't know it (lack of TV).

Now, there may be a 'perception of health' issue with the general electorate. Let's remember, many, many are small minded and may give more consideration to Cleland's disabilities than they do to his tremendous abilities in government.

Sweet revenge would be to have Cleland in charge of Homeland Security--smack the GOP with the same issue with which they took Cleland out! :-)

[Thrill]

7. I'm sticking with one of the

governors. Vilsack, Bresden, or Richardson.

[w4rma]

9. Edwards or Cleland. Edwards is not running for reelection. (n/t)

[cosmokramer]

10. Edwards can't win his own home state...won't help Kerry at all.

[Cuban_Liberal]

19. The last NC poll vs. Bush showed Edwards winning NC

I don't know what YOU'Re talking about, but the last presidential-preference poll in NC showed Edwards winning the state against Bush.

[cosmokramer]

25. And what poll would that be?

Source?

And how many of these polls have been taken? Is there a history?

I don't think so.

We don't need a VP candidate who would be in a dogfight to win his home state...that would be suicide for the ticket.

[Padraig18]

29. Oh, baloney!

It was surevyusa.com, I'm 99% sure, and it showed edwards beating Bush by about 8% in NC. :wtf: is your hardon for Edwards about?

[cosmokramer]

31. WRONG!

http://www.surveyusa.com

Edwards 50% Bush 47% with a MOE 3.9%

That is called a statistical TIE, and a HUGE, HUGE risk for Kerry.

No trend, no history, and a teeny tiny sample of 654 persons in ONE poll.

My beef with Edwards? None. He just won't get the VP nomination because he adds NOTHING of value to the ticket.

There are dozens of others that would greater benefit the party, and WIN their home states without a dog fight.

Edwards isn't it.

[Padraig18]

33. WRONG! "Edwards 50% Bush 47%"

A win is a win. Isn't that what you Clarkies got your panties in a wad about after OK?

Edwards brings PLENTY to the table--- it's called the South and 'swing voters', the latter group being immensely important.

[cosmokramer]

34. HE didn't impress the swing voters in Ohio...

...they wouldn't even let him have a union hall in which to speak.

And no, 47-50 with a MOE of 3.9% on a sample of 654 persons is NOT A WIN--it is a tie. Which actually contradicts Edwards math, because according to him, 1,300 votes seperating someone with another candidate is a 'tie'. Strange how you look at numbers so conveniently the way you want to, rather than the way they are. Elections don't have margins of error, but polls do. So you say the poll is a win, and the election was a tie? Hmmmm.

Him being southern brings nothing.

He lacks, at least, two major things the KERRY CAMPAIGN specified that they would require:

Someone who can win their own state without a dogfight.

Foreign Policy/Diplomatic/Military experience.

Again, that ain't Edwards.

And you failed to address the TRUTH of the survey USA poll:

Where is the history?

Where is it compared to other polls?

Where is the sample demographic trending?

Or are you going to behave like a Deanie and say that one poll PROVES electibility?

[Padraig18]

36. If you wanna behave like a disgruntled Clarkie, then yes, I will.

Your sour grapes are palpable, as is your specious 'reasoning'...

[cosmokramer]

38. You are behaving like a whining Edwardian who lost.

I have no bitterness whatsoever.

But your reasoning lacks just that: reason.

Bye! You are wasting my time...

[Padraig18]

39. Your reasoning never had any, either.

Unless you consider comparing apples and oranges 'rational.' Bye to you, too.

[dave29]

12. Howard Dean

...

why is everbody looking at me funny?

;)

[OneBlueSky]

13. Kerry/Clark is the strongest ticket BY FAR . . .

I've seen a half dozen analyses of Kerry's potential running mates and not a single one of them mentioned Clark, even as someone with an outside shot . . . given what we know about the media, there's something to be said about this kind of omission as a signal that the media (and therefore BushCo) REALLY don't want Clark as Kerry's running mate . . . which means he should be given serious consideration, imo . . .

I've thought all along that Wesley Clark would be the perfect compliment to Kerry . . . a Kerry/Clark ticket would be bulletproof on national security and defense issues, and Clark put forth a lot of good progressive ideas during his candidacy . . . that the press ignored him during the primaries is yet another indication that the powers that be want nothing to do with him . . .

I believe that Kerry/Clark would be the strongest ticket we could put forth and would put a lot of red states in play . . . if you take defense and national security off the table, the campaign MUST revolve around domestic issues, which is where Bush is weakest and where they LEAST want to play . . . Clark would nullify what BushCo perceives as their advantage and put the whole ballgame back on our home field, right where we want it . . . and right where they DON'T want it . . .

Kerry/Clark = victory in November! . . .

[Donna Zen]

23. Clark would be the winning ticket

but he won't be chosen.

Democratic insiders will be doing the talking from here on out.

[TacticalPeek]

48. Unfortunately, you are probably correct. n/t

[northernsoul]

16. I've been wondering about that too!

Lord knows it would be some fitting payback for what those SOBs did to Max in '02!

Kerry / Cleland 2004 - take that, chickenhawks!

[Zynx]

17. Clark or Edwards would be my picks.

[Toucano]

18. I think what matters most to voters

About a VP candidate is that candidate's proximity to the oval office.

Voters are going to be looking at the number 2 spot and thinking, "If Kerry should die in office, would I want that person to be president?"

I think the answer for Max is going to be "No".

This election is far too important to risk disturbing the electorate's "comfort level" by making a bold VP pick. It's going to be business as usual to the nth degree.

While certainly not the norm, the advantages of choosing a running mate from the crop of candidates this time include the facts that the media has already had a chance to disect the candidate, and voters are familiar with him.

The party will be very interested in using the VP pick as an investment in the future. Max Cleland great, but I don't think he's the future of the party.

The only disadvantage to Edwards being the VP candidate is the fact that when he got his wish and the primary season was essentially a two-man race, he was obliged to distinguish himself from John Kerry by disagreeing with his trade record. The press could make a big deal about it if they were running together. To his credit, Kerry was able to simply minimize the differences and say they were not that substantial.

I put the odds in favor of Edwards being the VP candidate at 3 to 1.

[angryinoville]

22. Clark without a doubt. Bulletproof

[Nashyra]

27. Clark

I agree he is a great fund raiser and he is apealing to the moderate swing voter. National Security and Foreign Policy wrapped up with him on the ticket. * is scared to death that there will be a Kerry/Clark ticket. Their worst nightmare come true.

[NewJerseyDem]

30. Kathleen Sebelius- Governor of Kansas

I know it is a longshot but I'm going to go out on a limb and predict Sebelius. I figure if I get this right, then it eliminates all those other predictions when I was wrong.

This is my LONG list of potential VPs:

Gov. Rendell (PA)
Gov. Warner (VA)
Sen. Edwards (NC)
Sen. Graham (FL)
Sen. Nelson (FL) Jeb Bush would replace him so he is probably unacceptable
Ex-Sen. Nunn (GA)
Ex-Sen. Cleland (GA)
Sen. Breaux (LA)
Sen. Landrieu (LA)
Sen. Lincoln (AR) Has to run for reelection to Senate, though
Gen. Clark (AR)
Gov. Bredesen (TN)
Sen. Bayh (IN)
Sen. Stabenow (MI)
Sen. Feingold (WI)
Gov. Doyle (WI)
Gov. Blagojevich (IL)
Rep. Gephardt (MO)
Gov. Vilsack (IA)
Sen. Conrad (ND)
Sen. Dorgan (ND) Has to run for reelection though
Sen. Johnson (SD)
Gov. Sebelius (KS)
Gov. Richardson (NM)
Sen. Bingaman (NM)
Gov. Napolitano (AZ)
Sen. Feinstein (CA)

[Vittorio]

32. Clark, Edwards, or Graham.

[bushisanidiot]

35. I Hope Kerry's Campaign "leaks" several different names before the

convention just to throw Rove off. They won't know what issues they can take a hard line on until they find out who Kerry's running with.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

[eissa]

40. Yes, keep them guessing

and draw it out until just before the convention. Keeps Kerry in the news, creates excitement just before convention, and rove won't know who to hit until then. It'll be like the political version of "The Bachelor"

[bushisanidiot]

41. Exactly! If It's orchestrated well it could keep voters interested and on

the edge of their seats all summer! :)

[earthsea wizard]

42. Tom Harkin /nt

[eissa]

43. I've always liked him as well

BUT...he endorsed Dean and therefore is out of consideration.

[earthsea wizard]

45. Thats a silly reason!

I voted for Dean, as did thousands upon thousands of other voters.

Are we to be dismissed so easily?

[eissa]

47. So did I

Look at my sig.

BUT...it just won't happen when you consider that there are many others just as qualified, with equal or greater assets, that have either supported Kerry from the beginning or did not endorse another candidate.

[Leilani]

44. Imagine if Kerry picked Clark & then said:

One of the 1st things I will do after assuming office will be to send Gen Clark to Iraq to assess the situation that Shrub has gotten us into. He will meet with the military leaders, & then we will consult with our allies, & figure out a new plan to solve the Iraq problem!!

That's a winner!!!

[Shanty Oilish]

46. Agreed, it is usually a total surprise

and sometimes a shock, the veep pick. (Who? Whozat? and you run to the almanac to check out the unknown quantity suddenly in the race)

Personally I could well live with any choice Kerry makes, barring a very few. And after all, it usually turns out to be someone that the nominee finds personally sympatico, and how are we to know that ahead of time? Most of us don't keep tabs on Kerry's dance card.
The quintessential "political" choice was Kennedy picking Johnson. It was believed by the cynics that Kennedy chose Johnson because he had to---and to "keep him where I can SEE him." I don't think Kerry has that problem. And nowadays, after we have all experienced the frailty of life in office and the real risk of...unanticipated tragedy...the candidate usually gives great consideration to the veep's role in being a heartbeat away. Kerry will probably pick somebody he knows to be qualified to take over in an instant, God forbid.