Who Would Be The Best Running Mate For John Kerry?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

[DemocratSinceBirth]

1. My Crystal Ball Says Edwards....

[chelsea0011]

10. Dianne Feinstein...it's about time for a woman...

and there isn't a stronger candidate. She has a long, productive career and the Dems. need to invigorate the electorate. Edwards and Clark would be just OK choices, but I'm not sure Edwards can "deliver" the South and I am concerned of his inexperience being a hinderance and Clark may make the Dems too military top heavy and having no experience in campaigning...a whole different ballgame. Bush is down and I would hate to see him get up.

[papau]

15. Hillary - a nationwide positive!

:-)

[rainy]

20. agree

nt

[Cuban_Liberal]

26. Hillary as Gen. Sherman.

"I will not run, if nominated, I will not serve, if elected", or words to that effect. Why don't people believe her when she says 'no', which she has loudly, clearly and repeatedly?

[dusty64]

2. Two Senators

that voted the same way on many issues that have divided the party is not going to cut it. Picking Edwards would do nothing to healing the serious and real rift that exists within the Party, acknowledging it would be the first step toward uniting the opposition and ignoring it will just cause it to fester.

[BruinAlum]

4. The Party isn't all that divided

It just looks that way here on DU.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. Yep

NT

[Zech Marquis]

6. what divide?

I don't see what you're tlaking about... :shrug:

[dusty64]

9. What divide,

you guys ARE kidding with me right? Kerry may have won all the primaries thus far, but where do you think the votes for Dean, Clark, and Kucinich (who have been placing second, third, etc.) are coming from. In many cases the votes for Kerry/Edwards have not totalled 50%, so what do you think the rest of the people are voting about? A divided party, and yes there is a division is NOT going to cut it in November. Denying it exists and ignoring those voters is NOT the way to heal it.

[BruinAlum]

17. That doesn't indicate a divided Party

That just indicates a primary. There is no reason for everyone to get behind the same candidate during a primary. Everyone can still vote for their preference. When cadidates drop out, voters shift to another candidate. That's how it always works in primaries.

Come November, the majority of Democratic voters will stand behind the Democratic nominee. There will be no mass exodus of certain supporters. It only looks that way here on this message board but this doesn't represent the public.

There is no major divide in the Democratic Party. There just isn't.

[dusty64]

19. So the millions

angry about our illegal war and the "patriot act" to name only two issues are not really angry at all, they are just pretending to be. A large portion of the most loyal of the Party's base is happy as can be with their leadership and the establishment of the party. I suppose they are also thrilled with the quality of opposition we've received over the last three years and are pleased with the way we've kicked ass in the elections last year.

I'm afraid the desire to deny there may be a problem is not going to solve it and the candidate can ignore it at their peril. You're correct that most of the angry will not vote against the Party in November, but their level of enthusiasm is definitely at stake. Wouldn't you rather have these voters donating time and $$$$ and talking up the nominee instead of simply holding their noses and pulling the lever for them on Election Day.

[Ripley]

30. Bingo.

This argument that the two Senators who said screw you to millions who were against the war are now our best hope is ludicrous!

This is exactly why this party is becoming irrelevant.

[Iverson]

31. yep, no prob. at all

It's a sunny day, and peace will prevail simply because it should.
Wishing will make it so. Whee!

[BagoDem]

3. VP Choice

Max Cleland!!!

[praxiz]

8. Clark or Edwards?

I don't really know that much about Edwards, and quite frankly he seems too young to be vice president.

"Kerry, Clark, two thousand four" has a nice ring to it, and quite honestly, in my pacifist liberal heart I find quite the soft spot for a three star general with a masters degree in philosophy. I mean doesn't that just give you a tingling sensation?

It MAY however be too much with two "military men", and maybe people are sick of war and want at least one civillian. However, Bush is hardly a military man and people seemed really pleased about this war about a year ago, so who can tell.

I was betting on Dean/Clark '04 a few months ago, so who am I to judge? :)

[kiahzero]

18. Minor correction

Clark's a four-star General.

[newyawker99]

23. Hi praxiz!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[newyawker99]

21. Hi BagoDem!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Monte Carlo]

7. Clark with Kerry would balance the insider/outsider angle...

... there seems to be a strong anti-Washington, need-for-an-outsider sentiment among Democratic voters these days. I like Edwards, but two Senators with Washington voting records might be a little much. Clark wouldn't come with that baggage, and might lessen the effect that Kerry's record will cause.

[WoodrowFan]

11. Lieberman!

Liebermnn, he did so well LAST time! LOL.

Seriously, Mark Warner? I don't think even having our Governor on the ticket will allow the Democratic ticket to carry Virginia.

[King of New Orleans]

28. Why not Virginia

It's an interesting state and considering Bush only pulled a little over 52% of the vote hardly out of reach. A third of the state is N. Virginia and has shown an inclination to be swing voters. Kerry has the background to do well in the Tidewater area. And Mark Warner's emphasis on innovative ways to promote investment in small town VA would add another dimension.

[ablbodyed]

12. My tendency is....

to have the geological balance of K/Edwards: it would at least make NC undecided. Yet, the argument that 2 senators with similar records might be counter-productive is a good one. Edwards would be a great campaigner, but he IS only 50 and there's plenty of time for him. The Clark potential is good too, but I worry about his political inexperience and K's military record doesn't need much burnishing.
Bill Richardson is an excellent choice: his political record is exempleary and his nomination would undercut any Hispano-pandering by the Rethugs. Good geo-political balance there.
OTOH, there are SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO many good Dems out there, and God-be-praised, I think that we have a REAL chance to save our democracy.

[globalcitizen]

13. Harold Ford Jr. of TN

southern, black, telegenic, intelligent. The downside is that he might be too young.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. I Don't Think He's Thirty Five...

NT

[Ficus]

24. 31 or 32

can't remember

[newyawker99]

25. Hi globalcitizen!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[PATRICK]

16. About Veeps

The real rules are simple. They should not have negatives or the ability to hurt you. "Balance" is important sometime for psychological reasons when regions feel divided or left out. It is not so much for delivering the home state that a Veep is needed as for his complementary values. In a winning campaign the Veep can contribute immensely and fan the glow, tip the balance even. In a debate with the other Veep points can be scored for the team. The advantage is usually with Dems if the Veep is a partner or a powerhouse campaigner of a powerful constituency. The miserable choices of the GOP are even worse than their presidential candidates, usually attack dogs and snipers who can do the lowdown work while the main guy bites his tongue and takes the high road. fear of competition seems to dominate their choices so you have many inconsequential, even lapdog GOP veeps, though the occasional conniving Nixon or Bush will be foisted on a popular figurehead.

OK, I am an Edwards supporter. he could well by several scenarios have won the nomination because of his regional strength, his campaign message and his personal stump skills. Analysis of surgings of undecideds in the wake of Kerry's inevitability march show his great vote getting power. he seems to complement many of Kerry's strengths and weaknesses. It would be the strongest campaigning ticket we ever had, bar none, on the strength of the two men in and of themselves, before you even get into regionalism.

Clark and Dean both overmatch Kerry on military appeal and regionalism respectively. Clark is a commanding figure too big for the Veep position and maybe a handful for Secretary of Defense where a good man's hand is vitally needed. In fact, it is in recognition of his leadership experience and desires that may put him out of reach even were he asked. Dean, unfortunately, even forgetting everything else completely, has shown the ability to draw attention to himself in a negative way, a true capability to hurt the campaign.
They would be watching him so mercilessly that they may have to send him campaigning in North Alaska. A great deal of that is not his fault at all, but such are the cruelties of present day politics.

Or Kerry may choose someone else entirely outside the field. A lot depends on their decisions, not our handicapping.

If I might add a word about people disgruntled by the nominees not being enough of something or too much of another. That is fine talk WHEN we get our country back and want to keep progressing the state of affairs. If somehow bitterness and suspicion can mask the great and humane qualities of our two guys versus the Dark Side of the Farce you have just become an absurd adjunct of Free Republic. Of course, we are not electing demigods who are purists on liberal issues above all practical considerations. We are electing real people- which is a vast improvement on the moral cripples infesting the People's House. Because the contest is rigged to be unfair we have to concentrate on overkill and liberating the nation top to bottom. Lord knows even the best ticket in national history is no guarantee against crime.

[LiberalBushFan]

22. Clark would be the best.

But I think he would choose Edwards.

[adadem]

27. Max Cleland or

Jeanne Shaheen

[Iverson]

29. "other" explained

The best running mate would be Kucinich as the nominee for President.