Question about the VP "vetting process.... Does anyone know...

[snowbear]

When our nominee starts to vet potential VP candidates, does that mean each person they narrow the list to agrees to go through a "vetting process?

I read that Kerry's list of those vetted consisted of: Senator Edwards, Governor Vilsack, Governor Richardson, General Wes Clark, and Governor Mark Warner.

It's not surprising to me that a few of them; Gep, Edwards and Villy wanted to be VP..

But does that mean the General would've accepted it if he had been chosen?

All right. What's the latest on this process?

JOHN MERCURIO, CNN POLITICAL EDITOR: Well, by all accounts, we are really deep at this point into the vetting process of the short list of five or six candidates. And this a list that you could recite in your sleep.

You've got John Edwards, Dick Gephardt, Tom Vilsack, Bill Richardson and Wesley Clark. Mark Warner, the governor of Virginia, his name is also sort of bouncing around. But the scrutiny at this point is extremely intense.

In fact, speaking of Vilsack, there was a great article that was in the Chicago Tribune this week by Jeff Zelnick (ph) that sort of showed how meticulously the Kerry campaign's VP search committee is combing through the records of these guys. In fact, for example, there was a -- the aides have apparently gotten their hands on about 20 years worth of back copies of the Mount Pleasant News, which is a daily newspaper in a small town in Iowa called Mount Pleasant, Iowa, where Tom Vilsack was the mayor before he became the governor.

Now, he actually wrote a column, apparently, called "The Mayor's Moment." So that was -- apparently some Kerry aide is staying up all night having to read years of this column.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0406/03/ip.00.html

So.. I'm assuming that means that all six of them agreed that yes, they wanted to be VP if elected?

Which would mean that General Clark has already agreed to be someone's Vice President once!!



And it means (maybe) that he's likely to agree to it again.

Right?!? Is that how it works? ...(If they agree to go through the vetting; they're agreeing they'll accept the VP selection??)

Anyone know for sure?

[NoodleBoy]

1. vetting is half making sure the potential VP nom hasn't metaphorically killed any hookers, and half

polling to see which would bring in the most votes as Veep. The list usually starts out with dozens of names at the beginning of the season and is steadily narrowed down to about a dozen, at which point, usually, the potential VP's are notified by the campaign that they are being considered, which is when the list of names officially becomes the "Short List." Then those who declined are taken out of consideration and the ones that are left are focused on. Alot of times, the Short List is used as a way to boost the resume of potential future Presidential, VP, or other office candidates.

Sometimes, very early in Pres campaigns, some candidates will make deals with either other candidates or non-candidates regarding VP selection. For example, in 04, when it was pretty clear to the insiders that Clark would not have the momentum to jump over the other candidates to get the nod, there was alot swirling around that he was Dean's personal choice, and if I recall correctly I read about one instance where the two met to discuss the possibility.

On the other hand, sometimes potential candidates will make some noise about running for President just to raise their profile among the activists and the candidates running to try to grab the Veep slot. From my guess, that's what Bayh and Vilsak are doing--to try to be Hillary's Veep--and that's what Hagel's doing on the Republican side, probably to try to get on anyone's short list.

[snowbear]

2. Thanks Noode..

Somehow it's just nice to know that the General would've taken it had it been offered. ~~~

[NoodleBoy]

3. well, it's a little different in his case

I could imagine him turning down the VP job, because it was rumored that in a potential Kerry administration Clark would be Secretary of Defense-- and I'd imagine Clark would rather be in charge of a department instead of basically sitting around waiting for either the President to die or the Senate to be evenly split.

[jcrew2001]

5. The VP position is what the president allows - look at cheney

Bush granted him free roam on foreign affairs. I see Kerry wanting a lock on foreign affairs, and maybe not allowing Clark much freedom for his own interests. Obviously, past VP's haven't been working on the same foreign policy as the president - I believe Reagan never included GHWB in active foreign policy discussions. I don't think Gore ever had a large role in foreign policy. I think the VP has to understand that he will have a limited role but if he picks his issues, he can get full control of those pet projects.

If it was Kerry/Clark, I could imagine that there would be a lot of struggle for power on foreign policy.

[Honeycombe8]

8. I don't think Clark COULD have been Sec of Defense back then.

Wasn't there some rule that a certain length of time had to have passed since someone was active military, before he could be Sec of Defense or something? Clark was close, but that period of time had not quite passed at that time? As I recall, that was the situation.

He could certainly be Sec of Defense now, I guess.

[FrenchieCat]

12. The rule is 10 years out......Clark would have been 5 years out in June of '05.......

and won't be 10 years out till 2010.

[Honeycombe8]

31. Thanks. I couldn't remember the particulars on that.

Too bad he couldn't be SoD in 2008.

[jcrew2001]

6. I think Clark would have def taken it if Dean was the nominee

since Dean had not had the exposure to foreign policy issues that clark had; and Clark would have a lot of power in that administration on foreign policy.

Kerry would not have ceded much power to Clark. I see both of them sharing a lot of the same issues, potentially creating a conflict.

[FrenchieCat]

10. You think a lot of things......

First, Kerry never uttered a word about Clark as Sec. of Defense, so I don't know where that is coming from. Clark wouldn't have been eligible as having only retired 5 years before, and 10 years being the standard. I doubt that Kerry would have wanted to start off his administration battling for an exception to the rules.

Second, I don't know about this "struggle" you are talking about between Clark and Kerry.......and this potential "conflict". It's like.....are you making shit up again just cause you can?

[jcrew2001]

13. well, i don't see clark pursuing pet projects like inventing the internets

or global warming. My guess is that he'll want a lead role on the iraq govt, middle east diplomacy; but these are hot issues and media spotlight issues; and Kerry has too much pride having spent a lifetime on foreign affairs to cede the spotlight to someone else. Certainly if there would be any voice on those issues, president kerry would have been the lead voice. The parameters of the VP is what the president wants, not the other way around. But the VP understands that in 8 years, he will have a lock on the nomination, which is nice.

[FrenchieCat]

18. Clark's pet project is making sure that another war isn't started with Iran

and becoming a prominent figure in the discussions of holding our government accountable and restoring our legitimacy in the world.

http://download-v5.streamload.com/b50a1981-f3b5-4406-bef3-6dbb566f8ea1/securingamerica/Hosted/public/SAIS_speech051607.mp3

5/24/07 - The Annual SIG-ASSU Spring Speaker, Stanford University @ 7:30PM PDT
Start: May 24 2007 - 7:30pm
End: May 24 2007 - 9:30pm

description:
Stanford in Government (SIG) and Associated Students of Stanford University (ASSU) present General Clark as the Annual SIG-ASSU Speakers Bureau Spring Speaker.

http://speakers.stanford.edu/index.html for additional information and access to directions.
Location: Hewlett Teaching Center, Room 200, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA

review:
Gen. Clark talks Iraq, U.S. policy
Former presidential candidate entertains notion of ‘08 run
May 25, 2007
By Ben Stoll

Gen. Wesley Clark (Ret.) spoke for an hour last night in a nearly-packed Hewlett Teaching Center about U.S. foreign policy since the end of the Cold War and about America’s place in the world.

The audience burst into frequent applause as Clark outlined — with candor and dashes of humor — his role in post-Cold War politics and his thoughts on the world today.
http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2007/5/25/genClarkTalksIraqUsPolicy

[jcrew2001]

19. exactly, that's my point, that as president Kerry would he really cede

such hot topics like Iraq and Iran to VP clark. IMO Kerry wants the spotlight for himself and his ego would be affected if clark took over those issues. I mean, what else is Kerry going to worry about - climate change and health care and jobs, nah.

[FrenchieCat]

21. Clark dealt with 19 countries of NATO heads of state.......

I'm sure that he and Kerry would have done just fine working together.

[jcrew2001]

23. i just don't think kerry would allow the perception that he needs clark

to handle foreign policy overshadow him in the media. The initial reaction would be to muzzle clark and let Kerry have the PR coverage, but maybe a working relationship would be worked out, just as long as everyone knew president kerry was in charge, and clark was acting on orders of Kerry.

Except for Cheney, no other VP has ever overshadowed the president; but even cheney knows to stay in the shadows.

Clark would need to stay in the shadows, but would he do so willingly?

If he was hillary's running mate, he would definately have more leverage, being the "man" and "expert" on foreign policy. But clark did serve under bill, so they already have a relationship - hopefully that would still remain positive andnot have gone sour.

[karynnj]

27. Not to mention on the diplomacy end of Iraq and the middle east

Kerry has excellent credentials. He has been one of the strongest voices. Kerry is an expert on foreign policy and terrorism. On terrorism, he was one of the very few Senators who understood it before 911. He wrote a book on non-state gl;obal criminals. On foreign policy, Madeline ALbright in her new book chose to quote Kerry on foreign policy from his 1966 Yale speech. In 1971, Kerry clearly fascinated some of the Senators who opted to question him on a broad range of topics.

I know you are a Clark fan, but foreign policy was one of Kerry's main issues - when asked to pick 3 committees he really wanted when he entered the Senate - he said SRFC, SFRC and SFRC. Kerry is not an egotist. Kerry does go to the military officers and speaks to them on military issues.

[FrenchieCat]

28. Crew is NOT a Clark fan by any means.......

maybe a VP Clark to help those less fortunately endowed in the realm of Foreign policy knowledge, strategic planning, brokering peace deals, winning wars....those kind of things.

[karynnj]

30. You are so right

(I went back to look at some of his previous posts. :) Also, just wanted to say - as I didn't explicitly say it, Clark, of course, does have great credentials in this area.

I hate these second guessing on the VP threads because I know Kerry's expresed goal is that the process be private and the only name to emerge would be the VP. The problem is that into a vaccum, rumour will flow. (I've also heard Durbin mentioned.) Kerry's preference might have been rooted in his own experience where he was considered by Gore. The end result was that he ended up smeared in the process.

The other reason I hate them is that they push people to say either defend or thrash Edwards and all possible alternatives. None of us know the real negotiations - Clark may have been a possibility or may have taken himself out of consideration, it may have been thought that their skills were too much in the same area, it might have been that Clark's ability as a campaigner was not known or Edwards may have been, in part, an attempt to give the media and the party something they really wanted - to get support the party and media didn't naturally extend to Kerry.

To be even considered seriously for either VP or President is an honor and a recognition given to very very few people. When the person has also done good things, this alone should entitle them to respect.

[jcrew2001]

34. i agree that clark's political inexperience was a factor in Kerry's decision

and that Edwards' campaigning was a strong factor. Many long-time democrats were skeptical of Clark since he was new to politics and to the party. That is why Gephardt was 2nd choice, because he was such a loyal long-serving democrat.

[karynnj]

36. We do NOT know this

Kerry has never said who was his second choice and he surely did NOT list why he ruled people out.

Edwards was a very traditional choice - a southerner to balance a northeastern.

Kerry had no real areas where he was not strong - he is one of the top foreign policy people in the US, he also was good enough on financial issues that he was able to get on the Finance Committee, he and Kennedy wrote the Democratic children's health insurance bill modeled after the Massachusetts bill that was passed by Kennedy and Hatch as S-CHIP and as Gore said, he had the best environmental record in the Senate. So, he did not need a VP to compensate for an area he lacked. (ie - Gore provided both foreign policy and environmental credentials which Clinton lacked)

Kerry might have thought that with his NC background he could helph in rural ares where he might not relate as well.

[jcrew2001]

39. I believe that gephardt was ahead of clark on Kerry's short list

because Gep is from the mid-west, is a loyal long-serving Dem, and has a good long term relationship with kerry.

Even with Gep, Missouri likely would not have gone to Kerry; plus Edwards was a better and more popular campaigner than Gep.

I think that Gep's chances for VP would have worked with Bill Clinton, but I think Bill made the correct choice in Gore.

I think Gep should run for the Senate, unless he is making money as a lobbyist.

[jcrew2001]

32. I'm not a "Clarkie" fan - I'm going to let Clark decide if he wants to run for Prez

but I think he would be invaluable as VP on anyone's ticket, for his ability to bring in moderate/pro-military republican voters.

As for his actualy role as VP - totally depends on how much the President lets him do. If the president wants him in diplomacy, or national affairs, or nothing. That would be something that Clark would need to understand and be at peace with; it won't be his show, it would be the President's show.

[Adelante]

37. God, no, not a Clarkie

Just a pain in the ass.

[jcrew2001]

38. Clark would be a good VP IMO and I have always said so

but I am not a "clarkie" fan who will idol worship clark. I will wait for him to decide when he is ready to run for president.

[Clark2008]

15. You're partially correct.

Dean met with Clark about this possibility BEFORE Clark got into the race. Clark was one of Dean's advisors on FP.

[dsa]

4. has anyone noticed that wes clark looks just like

race bannon from johnny quest?

[FrenchieCat]

7. oookay!

:rofl:

[polichick]

9. He reminds me of this guy...

[FrenchieCat]

11. Noooo, not the menace!

:scared:

[polichick]

17. Lol

Not in his behavior, just in looks ~ his blonde hair and smile.

[Clark2008]

16. LOL

No - but thanks for the comedic interlude.

[Clark2008]

14. It's my understanding that, no, he did not want to be VP

He may have undergone a vetting process - but it more than likely was for a future cabinet position.

[jcrew2001]

20. really? He would turn down Hillary's request for VP?

I think he would be on the top of her list - but that's just because I think that would be logically the strongest choice if Hillary won the Nom. But when has logic ever ruled politics.

[snowbear]

22. We'll never know who she would've selected Jc..

BTW. William hasn't offered you any koolaid on here lately has he?

If so.. run quickly and DON'T DRINK THE STUFF !

[jcrew2001]

24. so u think Hillary is done? I agree

but if she did win the nomination, I think a Hillary/Clark ticket is her only real shot at winning the general election IMO.

Clark is trusted by independents, military republicans, and moderate republicans. Hopefully he can convince them to vote for Hillary, and convince the voters that he would make sure their moderate views would have a place in Hillary's governing.

I don't think Clark would accept VP from Obama or Edwards. he's indicated he doesn't want to be cheney to an in-experienced president. I think Clark would chafe at the neophytes.

Richardson could pick clark - I don't know what their previous relationship was, if any during the clinton administration.

[snowbear]

25. That last pick you had...

...that Richardson/Clark connection.. the reason that I think that could happen is because I sent an e-mail to the Richardson campaign and they ACTUALLY RESPONDED!!

I didn't write suggesting VP's (like they'd listen to a DU'er for their VP advice!!!! ) .. I wrote because they (like HRC) were discussing various campaign songs and they asked the public for input.

The guy who wrote back (I put his name on here last night, but I'd have to pull up that thread to remember it right off) said one song being suggested was a Van Halen song called "Big Bad Bill is Sweet William Now" (never hoyd of it )

And when I sent them back a response to their first e-mail, I said, "Oh and by the way, General Wes Clark should be the governor's VP pick!"

The staffer campaign dude joked that I was reading the governor's mind.

I'm taking that as being somewhat interested in him as a VP pick.. but who knows. 9 out of 10 of our candidates won't even have to comtemplate who they'd pick.

If memory serves.. I thought you were never overly keen on Clark? Or was that just for the nominee? Or do I have the wrong jcrew?

Far as HRC goes.. nah, no way is she done. She'll be right up there towards the end probably.

I guess I'm just not crunching the same numbers when it comes down to potential electoral votes that some here are.

You know how primaries work though...

The last person we suspect.. and the one who probably has a minus rating in the polls right now.. will end up winning the whole damned thing!!

[FrenchieCat]

29. Yep....that's what happened on all of the reality shows this season....

American Idol, searching for a SuperModel(or whatever), and PussyCat Dolls are people too. LOL!

[jcrew2001]

35. i've always said that clark would be an ideal VP pick

I'm anti-clarkie and their idol worship. I will let clark decide when he wants to run for President, instead of the netroots 'convincing' him to run.

If I were Bill Lopez-Richardson or HRC, I would try to get Clark's endorsement; and even claim that Clark would be on the short-list for VP. That would give them a surge in the polls and in internet buzz.

If clark is not running, then he's got nothing to lose by endorsing HRC or Bill; and much to gain!

[venable]

26. If that's the short list, those people agreed to be vetted

which means they agreed to be VP if chosen.

I think that list is pretty accurate. I know it finally came down to Gep or Edwards.

As for Clark, I think that maybe his experience was considered redundant to Kerry's military resume, even though it was considerably more extensive. Given the eventual swiftboating, Clark would have been a good one to shut them up (assuming Mary Beth Cahill would have let him do it. She didn't let Edwards, no matter what is said here. Of this dynamic, I have no doubt.)

But if this WAS the vetted list, yeah, Clark would have already agreed to it, as it is quite intensive and demands a lot of the vettee.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.0
==================



This week is our second quarter 2007 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend on donations
from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for your support.