Edwards and Dean continue to do well in voting after dropping out

[WI_DEM]

So far four names are being vetted for VP by John Kerry: John Edwards, Tom Vilsak, Dick Gephardt, and Wesley Clark. Presumably Howard Dean is not under consideration, but he and Edwards continue to do well in the primaries after they dropped out showing that they both have staunch supporters.

In Pennsylvania last week, Dean actually came in second in the primary with about 10% of the vote--79,612 votes. Edwards was close behind with 76,676 votes.

In Indiana on Tuesday, Edwards garnered 31,954 votes and Dean 19,308. Clark also made a showing of 15,714.

In California, Edwards got 606,224 votes and Dean got 129,063 votes. two other candidates being considered for VP--Clark, got 50,455 votes and Gep got 21,613 votes.

In Illinois Dean got 47,090 votes (Edwards was still an active candidate). Clark got 19,191 votes.

In Texas, Edwards polled 118,977 votes, Dean 40,038, Clark 18,158, and Gep 12,148.

In Ohio where Edwards made his last stand--Dean received 30,291 votes and Clark 12,577.

In Louisiana, Edwards polled 26,074 votes while Dean edged Clark 7,948 to 7,091.

In Mississippi, Edwards got 5,582 votes while Dean edged Clark 1,997 to 1,878.

In the homestates of the candidates who dropped out--Edwards won the preceint caucus vote in NC by a wide margin 51.1% after leaving the race (Dean got 5.7% in NC) and Dean won the presidential primary in his homestate of Vermont with almost 60% of the vote.

We will find out in two weeks how Clark will do in Arkansas. Gep, Lieberman, Graham, and Braun did poorly in their homestates.

Do you think--especially if it comes down to Edwards and Clark that the Kerry campaign will take into account the votes that the candidates have gotten in the primaries since dropping out--to gauge enthusiasm/support when making the final selection?

[AP]

1. Here are the official Indiana totals:

http://www.state.in.us/serv/sos_primary04;jsessionid=aZ7d9PeEhph4?page=office&countyID=-1&partyID=-1&officeID=36&districtID=-1&districtshortviewID=-1&candidate=

[Darkamber]

2. There's more issues then just support with Democrats...

I think that there is popular support for both Edwards and Dean. Clark continues to have a core group of supporters that are not as large as Edwards or Dean, but remain passionate to Clark.

Personally, I think Kerry should wait as see as long as possible about the direction the war and the economy goes in.

Both Edwards and Clark can tap some of the same groups.

Both are Southerns.

Both are not lifetime politicians.

Both have national name recognition.

Both come from humble roots

Both are viewed as moderates

Both have appeals to the important group of Independents and swing Republicans.

Both have fund raising abilities

Both bring grassroots groups with them who will GOTV.

Personally, I think Edwards would be better to deal with the politics in the deadlocked Senate as well as doing the fund raising thing, but I could easily live with either one of them.

[Cuban_Liberal]

3. Edwards was not an active candidate in Illinois.

He suspended his campaign on 3/10, and IL's primary was 3/16.

In answer to your question, I do think Kerry will ultimately go with Edwards, simply because he is clearly well-liked by the voters.

[seaglass]

4. No, I don't think the votes will mean a thing. n/t

[Adelante]

5. Your analysis is faulty

This doesn't show anything except Clark has encouraged his supporters to vote for Kerry and not himself. Even in Arkansas, his home state, he is not running for VP. He's campaigning to elect Kerry president and has brought his supporters full force behind Kerry's campaign. Individuals may vote for Clark if their states are safe, but most won't, because Wes has made himself clear wants his support to go to Kerry.

[Cuban_Liberal]

6. Edwards made the same thing just as clear!

So i would submit that your analysis is just as faulty.

[WI_DEM]

7. and Dean too has been quite outspoken

for Kerry.

[chimpymustgo]

8. Wow! Clearly, voters are weighing in for Edwards as VEEP!

The voters are speaking loud and clear.

Kerry/Edwards '04. And beyond.

[WI_DEM]

12. it makes more sence that some

[AP]

10. Edwards is campaigning for Kerry too. And Clark's totals in some states

were very low both before and after he dropped out, so it's hard to argue that they're not voting for him now because he's supporting Kerry. Why weren't the voting for him before he dropped out? To support Kerry?

In fact, by your logic, Edwards is more noble than Clark if, say, his % has dropped more than Clarks, because that shows that more of his supporters are probably supporting Kerry (eg, if his avg % was 30% before he dropped out and is now 12%, but Clark's was 10% and is now 5%, then Edwards is clearly doing a better job of getting his supporters to support Kerry).

[Padraig18]

20. Edwards has been just as, if not more helpful than has Clark.

Edwards has also endorsed Kerry and urged his supporters to back Kerry, just like Clark. In addition, Edwards has brought many financial 'heavy hitters' to Kerry's side, something Clark has NOT done.

I like them both, but by damn, let's not be so bloody one-sided abut our asessment of who has done what, shall we? They have both backed Kerry 100%!

[fujiyama]

9. It should be taken into account

to SOME extent.

I think Gephardt's extremely poor showing in his state indicates the lack of support he has there as well. There is little indication he could deliver Missouri. Of course, unlike Dean and Edwards, Gep has never been elected to a state wide office.

Clark's situation from the other candidates is very different. Being that he never served in any elected office, and especially at the state level, he still may not be extremely well known, so I would not expect him to do quite as well as Dean or Edwards in their respective states.

[AP]

11. I've read that Gep's district is one of the whitest districts in the state

and in the US. It's over 90% white.

I'm not sure if that's indicative of anything. But it's probably worth noting.

[chimpymustgo]

13. Thumbs up for Kerry/Edwards and my new avatar.

Okay, let's see...

[spooky3]

14. I certainly HOPE that Kerry's staff will take these numbers into account.

[Freddie Stubbs]

15. This only gauges ethusium for them among hard-core Democrats

These are the people who are voting in the primary even though it doesn't mean anything. They will likely vote for the ticket regardless of whomever Kerry picks. Kerry needs to pick someone that will win him votes of swing Democrats, independants and even some Republicans.

[chimpymustgo]

16. Well that would be John Reid Edwards.

He helps to shore up the base, and, as he showed in the "open" primaries, Edwards appeals to swings, Indies, and disgruntled Republicans.

[AP]

17. Which is even more encouraging for Edwards, since the more moderate

voters considered themselves, the better he does.

So he's doing great with hard core Democrats. Just imagine how he'll do with Republicans and moderates.

Do you remember the exit polling from the primaries?

[fujiyama]

18. IIRC

he did really well among independants and disgruntled moderate republicans. Some tried to pass it off as republicans trying to play around with the process, but I think the support was genuine. I think the exit polls from Wisconsin showed a lot of support for Edwards among this group, though my guess is the other primaries showed similar results (I only remember the WI results).

Either way, the point is, Kerry could do much worse than picking Edwards.

[chimpymustgo]

19. You do remember correctly. Just another reason so pick Edwards.

nt

[liberalmike27]

22. Looking at Vote Chart

I just printed a vote chart of the 2000 counts, and the more I look at this, I think it'd be a good idea to choose Richardson, the governor of New Mexico. I notice four states AZ, AR,NM, and NV, which three were won by Bush/Cheney, and in New Mexico the Democrats barely scraped by. For this reason, and the fact that Richardson is an extremely well-spoken, and intelligent Governor and ex-Clintonite, I'm thinking he may be the one. His geography is good, and for some reason I'm thinking he's not going to play with any of his opponents in the primary.

The southern strategy doesn't really work well, and with the exception of Florida, and Mississippi, the South doesn't appear to be even close. This is, of course maddening, since it is the poorest region in the country with the exception of Florida and Texas (perhaps). It just shows how much influence the donor-class has on both parties that candidates can't even support issues that would concern the working poor in these states enough to get their votes. Democrats, keep that spine or DFA will give you an adjustment!

[liberalmike27]

23. Chart

http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/electoral_college/2000/popular_vote.html

Here is a chart with vote totals.

[Padraig18]

24. Richardson has stated categorically that he will not accept, even if asked

The poor man can hardly make it more clear than he already has that he will not accept the VP nod, even if asked. Why do people continue to bring him up? :shrug:

[fujiyama]

25. I wouldn't mind

Bill Richardon, but it really seems like he doesn't want to be the VP. After all, he was just elected to being the governor two years ago. It's understandable.

I think Edwards could speak to the concerns of hispanics in the southwest. He did a great job speaking about the concerns of hispanics that have moved into his hometown in SC.

He also speaks of an inclusive agenda, which is good. He articulates this much better than Kerry IMO. He would be a great asset to Kerry on the campaign trail.

[AP]

21. The "play around with the process" theory doesn't make much sense...

...given that recent Stanford-Texas study which showed that people who were given lots of information about the race ended up liking Edwards the most, and that he matched up with Bush the best.

Why would people be trying to get Edwards nominated if the most informed voters thought he had the best chance of beating Bush?

If they wanted to screw around with the process, they should have been voting for Joe or Howard.