Pretty soon there will be a lot of disappointed partisans

[Tom Rinaldo]

Kerry can't name everyone to be VP. A whole lot of us are just going to have to get over it. We've been through this before with the top slot, it's doable. This time though there will be less time available for the losers to nurse our wounds, the real campaign is about to go into full swing. So yeah, I still want Kerry to pick my guy, but I'm tempering that feeling with an acknowledgment that whoever Kerry picks will obviously have a lot going for him (or her), and America AND the World badly needs us to win this November. I'm swinging into unity mode, we are going to have a GREAT ticket!

[SoFlaJet]

1. It should be either

Edwards or Bob Grahamn senators from two states that we lost(ahem)in 2000.

[democratreformed]

2. Good for you, Tom.

I have been trying to do that all along. I have been trying to convince myself, mentally, that I really do not care about the VP and that I trust Kerry's judgement implicitly.

[whistle]

3. We'll know in three weeks correct.....

[Wickerman]

4. Excellent post, Tom!

absolutely correct - when my choice is picked, the rest of you, fall in line! /kidding.

The stakes are high, I do hope everyone can come back to the table and support Kerry - it might be the last time you get to vote.

[joeybee12]

5. I, for one, do not have a favorite; HOWEVER, I do hope it's a SMART

choice.

I really don't think gephardt will be a smart choice. If Kerry chooses him, then I have doubts about his campaign strategy.

[displacedtexan]

6. Have you checked to see if your guy's name is domained w/Kerry?

I checked a couple of weeks ago, and Kerrydean.com (.net and .org) were all still available.

However, these were taken:

kerrygephardt
kerryclark
kerryedwards
kerryrichardson
kerryvilsak
kerrycleland

Now, I don't know who has purchased these domains, but I do know that JK's internet guru (Dick Bell) is no fool.

[Doosh]

7. kerry-edwards2004.com and kerry-gephard2004.com is also taken

kerry-vilsack2004, kerry-clark2004, is not, kerry-richardson2004 has just been registered.

I think that's the most likely web addy will have a dash seperating the names and 2004 at the end.

[displacedtexan]

14. www.bushcheney2004.com takes you to...

www.georgewbush.com

And on that page, BIGGER than any pic of Bush*, is this (Warning! Frightening Image!):



Remind me never to go there again!

[Eurobabe]

46. Is this a movie ad for Stepford Wives redux?

please don't post such naughty pictures so early in the morning!

:puke:

[liskddksil]

16. www.kerry-edwards.com

you get a page that says coming soon.

[Tom Rinaldo]

19. That's standard when a domain is registered

A lot of registration sites automatically slap that up after a domain is registered until someone actually uses it, whether or not any plans are in place to actually use it.

[wjsander]

20. Yeah, most of those Kerry/VP pages were bought up months ago...

... long before much thought was put into who it would actually be.

So unfortauntely, web site registrations mean pretty much nothing. :(

[displacedtexan]

21. My point was that Dean seems not to be a contender

for VP.

That shocked me.

[Protected]

42. That's a domain owned by some guy in Chicago.

Anybody can register a domain name. Kerry-Clark.com, Kerry-Gephardt.com, Kerry-Vilsack.com, Kerry-McCain.com, and many others have been registered as well.

[MontecitoDem]

8. Right on the money Tom!

I have tried to stop participating in the VP wars for this very reason. It took me a while to get into high gear for Kerry, and I am not turning back no matter who his choice is.

Did you read that thread about the increase in toxins during the last few years? As much as I am concerned about the war, we also have serious stuff going on domestically that just cannot withstand 4 more years. Kerry will be great for the environment and that is what I am focusing on.

Unity mode! Cheers to that!:toast:

[orthogonal]

9. Kerry could pick a sock-puppet

Kerry could pick a sock-puppet,and I'll still vote for him.

Anybody But Bush.

[Frances]

11. I will too

but I will be very disappointed if it isn't Edwards

The reason is that I think Edwards will help the most. And I am desperate to get Bush out of the White House.

At the same time that Kerry picks Edwards, I hope that he says that he plans to have Clark, Richardson, Graham, Cleland, etc. in important positions in his administration.

[M155Y_A1CH]

18. Me too

Even if he runs with a old yellow dog! LOL

[bushwakker]

45. Didn't that sock puppet lose his job under Bush?

Can't remember what dot-com co. that was with the sock puppet? Anyway, they went under during AWOL's rule.

[Qutzupalotl]

47. Pets.com

Because nothing fits in to the impersonal nature of the internet like cuddly pets.

However, Kerry-sockpuppet2004.com is still available. Kerry has said repeatedly that his VP has to have national security/foreign policy experience, and sockpuppets don't.

[MontecitoDem]

10. And maybe people will even change their avatars?

[Tom Rinaldo]

12. At least when the pick is announced I hope lol

I don't use an avatar, but my signature line pretty much says where I am at, and I will update that when the pick is known.

25. I'm not changing mine. No WAY

:)
this is still who I want for VP

[deminflorida]

13. Kerry can help with this by breaking with tradition and naming

key spots of his administration during the convention.

Then he stands with them on stage at the convention and unifies the party.

Americans already know what they have in the current Administration. Give swing voters a choice in 2004.

[MontecitoDem]

15. I like the sound of that!

Has that ever been done before? Naming some cabinet positions pre-election? I'm not that experienced in Presidential politics.

[theboss]

26. It's an insanely bad idea

That's a dozen people to vet and any of them can blow up in your face. Can you imagine if Candidate Clinton had to deal with Zoe Baird or Kimba Wood before the election? The story would be, this guy can't even pick the right people for a Never Never Land Administration and we are going to trust him to run the country?

Contrary to the opinion on this board, the VP pick has never won an election but has played a role in losing many. The key is not screw it up. So, why risk screwing up a bunch of selections for positions no one gives a damn about.

Like I said, the VP pick has never been shown to be a factor in winning an election. Do you honestly believe that Kerry's choice for Secretary of Health and Human Services is going to swing any voters? It's just another place to be vulnerable.

The Cabinet is a place where the incumbant is usually at a disadvantage. I mean, don't you love the fact that just saying John Ashcroft's name guarantees applause to Democratic audiences. Why give up that advantage?

[Jai4WKC08]

27. Good point, but....

He could limit it to just the people he vetted for the VP position already. Clark, Edwards, Gephardt, Vilsack, Graham. Maybe others we don't know about. Assuming they all passed.

Besides, he doesn't need to swear on a stack of bibles. Just say he's considering the following... or that these will be his choices if nothing changes. Eh, maybe that's not such a good idea--flip flopper charge from the right.

Still, if he has anyone in mind, of those vetted, or semi-vetted, he could announce 'em and then just change later after the election, if necessary. You think anyone would remember come Nov 08?

Bush announced Powell as SecState before the election of 2000, and I personally think it really helped him out.

Course, just to consider the other side, if there is anyone on the vetted list whom Kerry really really doesn't want in his administration, but he announced one or more of the others, the one(s) left out would be conspicuous by their absense. Same goes if he wanted them for a relatively minor role--something less than their supporters envision as acceptable. Could cause some pretty hard feelings.

[theboss]

30. I don't think Bush announced Powell as sec of state

Powell himself was asked if he would serve in either Administration in the never-ending quest to determine his party affiliation. Powell basically said he would serve either in any capacity if asked (ever the diplomat). And then both Bush and Gore rushed to announce that yes, of course, Powell would be asked to serve in some capacity. I don't recall if Bush specifically said Secretary of State.

But anyway, it wasn't a coronation of any kind, and it made sense politcally since Powell has always been - as they say in the business - a needle mover. He was also one of the two or three untouchable people in American politics; in other words attacking Powell would have hurt Gore (especially since Gore himself agreed to hire him).

It would be fair game on Wesley Clark and the last thing on earth John Kerry wants to defend in a debate is his future National Security Advisor's (or whatever) mistakes in Kosovo.

[Tom Rinaldo]

31. I'll assume you mean "alleged mistakes" since ...

... we all know that the Republicans are capable of making any allegation. And in that sense I see the sense in your post. Of course there is nothing wrong with contrasting how well everything went in Kosovo compared to how poorly things have played out in Iraq, is there?

[theboss]

34. I should have said "alleged"

But you know what I mean.

The bottom line is that we can talk issues all day long, but pretty much every presidential election comes down to who fucks up the least in the campaign. So the key is limiting your fuck-ups. As I said before, selecting a vice-presidential candidate is pass/fail. Everybody either says, "Eh, I can live with that" or "Holy shit?!?!? That asshole?!?!?!" It doens't win you anything.

Naming a cabinet now allows multiple chances to fuck up. It's simply not worth the risk.

That was vulgar, but I think it makes sense.

[Jai4WKC08]

37. Funny that you would mention Clark

I was thinking more along the lines of Gephardt as Sec of Labor and Edwards as something (I'm still not sure where he fits), but I made a point of mentioning each of them.

I have absolutely NO concern that Clark won't be prominent in Kerry's administration and couldn't care less whether he announces it publicly.

(Except that it'll have to be before the end of the convention ;) )

[sparrowhawk]

38. Kosovo

Mistakes in Kosovo? Most of the military analysts at the time were predicting the War in Kosovo would take years to achieve when actually it took less than 3 months. Of course some mistakes were made, but there are mistakes and miscalculations in every war.

[Justice]

40. Powell's Name Was Released As SOS During Recount

It was used to placate people that Bush would appoint a popular person as SOS.

[wjsander]

17. Some have ONLY one VP they want, others just prefer a certain VP

Personally, I would PREFER Edwards because I think he gives Kerry the best chance to win. I would still be happy with Clark or someone else within reason.

Gephardt is someone I would NOT like, only because I think Kerry would watch his poll numbers drop all the way to Nov 2nd. But if I'm wrong and Kerry wins, great!

I would just like to know the VP selection soon, so I know if I have to plan on moving after Bush wins this fall or not.

22. This wording of yours is interesting

"This time though there will be less time available for the losers to nurse our wounds"

No one is a loser in this unless they view themselves as losers.

Even the potential selections if they are not picked are not losers, they're not actually running for anything.

So how can a supporter of one of them be a loser?

I'm afraid a lot of people do think of it the way you're putting it though. I find that sad. It creates needless acrimony.

[BootinUp]

23. Understand your point but

People who support a politician with their time and money certainly do have an impact on the politicians weight so to speak. At least 3 former Presidential candidates have PACS so they can still fund political activities for instance by collecting contributions. I suspect Kerry evaluates each prospective veep by looking at the groups that support them.

[sleipnir]

24. I might not vote for Kerry, IF he picks Gephardt

I'll have some major soul searching to do, but if that's the situation, I'll be voting third party, and not for that damn fool Nader. I just can't justify my single vote for two people I don't believe in or trust (after the last three years in Congress.) If it's a Kerry/Gephardt ticket, that's just too much for me, I can't bend that far.

Any of the others on the short list would be fine with me.

[Adelante]

28. With you, Tom!

:thumbsup:

[democratreformed]

32. Hi WesDem!

Been wondering about you. I was not here much for a time. Then, when I came back, I din't see you much.

How are you?

[Adelante]

33. I'm great, DemReformed

Just moving to Mexico in a couple of weeks and packing up, selling off, running around, all that. I'm beat, but upbeat, if you know what I mean. :)

[democratreformed]

35. Wow, I had no idea.

It's been hectic here on my homefront as well. My husband lost two of his brothers three weeks apart.

Life does get tiresome sometimes, doesn't it? I certainly understand "beat". I'm upbeat as well.

[Padraig18]

29. I'm voting for John Kerry, not for 'John Kerry & _______'

My vote is being cast for John Kerry for POTUS. There are 3 VP nominees I like better than the others, but no matter who he chooses, my vote remains the same.

Kerry in '04!

[SW FL Dem]

36. Good Post

I have my hopes, and I will probably be disappointed but I will get over it and work for Kerry/___________.

[cosmokramer]

39. I don't care who the VP is as long as he/she has Nat Sec/FP

...experience, therefore, I am not a 'candidate partisan'. I prefer Clark, but any other with significant exp. in this field will do. I will NOT be happy with someone who doesn't have significant exp. in this area, no matter how 'charming' they are.

If Kerry goes the sans FP VP route, count my vote, but don't count on counting my money or my enthusiasm.

[charlyvi]

41. Yes Tom

We will all coalesce behind our ticket. It's too important to do otherwise. Thank you for saying it so well. I do hope it is not Gephardt, but if it is--GEPHARDT HAS MY VOTE.

[MoonRiver]

43. I completely agree Tom, and thanks for that post.

Many will be disappointed but a much bigger picture is looming. If my favorite isn't picked I'll still put my entire heart and all my energy into getting team Kerry elected this November. None of the candidates being vetted is offensive to me so it should be easy to enthusiastically carry on. Hoping its Clark, but ready to fight for Kerry and our democracy regardless.

:grouphug: :kick:

[Awsi Dooger]

44. I will be very disappointed only if it's Gephardt

Kerry/Gephardt is a double dose of strategic and safe that will make me sick, and pessimistic about November. I continue to believe you need to take risks to oust an incumbent.

I prefer Edwards or Richardson because they are most suited to win terms of their own in 2012. If that Emerging Democratic Majority thesis is legit, I don't understand how we can dismiss presidential electability as a top priority for the VP post.

Still, the VP position is heinously overrated on DU and should not be Kerry's prime focus at this point. If we don't match the Republican GOTV advances, the late polls will mean little and we'll drop another devastating heartbreaker. Right now we need to be keeping pace in minority registration, absentee ballots, email lists, poll workers, etc., as well as making sure there are no ballot problems in key states. An astute friend of mine insists the Republicans are simply more talkative about their progress in those areas this cycle, and that Dems are quietly making unprecedented progress.

[sampsonblk]

48. He should pick someone that represents the party

We havea pro-labor, pro-health care, pro-teacher, anti-war party. What typifies this party - at present - more than anything else is that we were ( and remain) almost all opposed to this "war" from the start. If Kerry picks a pro-war running mate, I will vote for Nader. Period.

[LabMonkey]

49. VP choices CANT help, You try to pick one that wont HURT. eom

[sampsonblk]

51. I agree - can hurt, but can't help

A pro-war VP will hurt, cuz I will be OUT. And so will many others. So I agree with your point. Two pro-war guys leading an anti-war party? Not for me.

[Tom Rinaldo]

50. Aside from my own concerns about Gep and the war...

... which I am willing to overcome, my biggest concern about him is that a number of people like you may be REALLY concerned about it, which can hurt us. I guess we'll cross that bridge if we come to it. Some of course raise the same issue about Edwards and a number of the other potential VP's. I am in the "a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush" camp, and believe that Bush is far more dangerous to the world than any of the, to varying degrees, perceived pro war Democrats would be.

[surfermaw]

52. Right on Get over it or suffer 4 more years of Republicans

[surfermaw]

53. Ohio Ralley...poll taken

Edward's the winner, Edwards from the South didn't seem to matter to the Ohio people...Edwards has been in Ohio campaiging for Kerry several time, I think, I know of one time.