Post-debate Veep Possibility?

[SavageWombat]

Poll question: Post-debate Veep Possibility?

Now that we've seen the debate - who do you think made a good showing for VICE-president? I know we've had discussions on "who would bring in state X" - I want to know what people saw in the debates that makes them think that a particular candidate would make a good running mate for their favorite.

When adding comments, you might want to mention your preference for head of the ticket, just for clarity.

[CMT]

1. I said Edwards

not because I necessarily favor him for VP, but it sounds like per the Hill newsletter that he is going to be pulling out of the senate race in NC to concentrate on the presidential race and should he not win the nomination he will have free time on his hands in the summer and fall of 2004 (besides his senate duties) and could be a logical choice for VP.

[cjbuchanan]

2. I think the best person did not even make your poll

I think New Mexico's Governor Bill Richardson made the best pitch as a possible V.P. with his open comments. He talked of his record, gave a few ideas on how to make things better and most of all encouraged Hispanics to vote for a Democrat if they want to see things improve.

The future nominee would be foolish not to consider Richardson.

[CMT]

4. he took himself out of the running yesterday

said under no cirumstances would he consider vp in 2004. I agree with you--he would have been great.

[cjbuchanan]

7. Had not heard that

Maybe he will reconsider.

Thanks for the update.

[PA-DEM]

9. always 2008

nt

[ryharrin]

10. Why would we change VPs in 2008?

?

[Ilsa]

5. That's a shame.

I also think he would have been great, and would have shored up the Hispanic vote, especially after yesterday's lies about the Dems opposing Estrada because he is Latino.

[AntiCoup2K4]

8. Why is Richardson on FAUX News all the time??

Is it wrong of me to be automatically suspicious of any Democrat who appears on the PNAC network on a regular basis?

[poskonig]

3. Depends on the candidate.

Dean -- Clark (Dovetails with Dean ideologically)

Kerry -- Edwards (Graham gives Florida but puts too much dry edge on the ticket; no Clark because of inconsistent war position, too war-heavy. Edwards keeps the Kerry campaign warm and fresh)

Gephardt -- Richardson (turnout minority vote in blue states where Gephardt is weakest, don't want anti-war candidate on ticket, Lieberman, or candidate who outdoes Gephardt in terms of stature)

edit: nix Richardson for VP (see post above)......... pick a pro-war guy from the coasts... Lieberman? Hmmmmmmm

[dofus]

6. Why don't you have a

none of the above choice?

I seriously doubt that the VP will come from the ranks of those. Just my opinion.

[ryharrin]

11. You don't think Clark is very likely?

I'm thinking there's a 50% chance he'll be it.

[dofus]

13. No, I don't think Clark is all that likely.

I think it will be someone not currently in the running, someone the eventual nominee chooses to "balance" the ticket and because he or she honestly things the vp will be a good partner, rather like Clinton and Gore.

My personal dark horse favorite is Cruz Bustamente, after he turns California around. He's Hispanic, great geographical balance to Dean. :)

[oasis]

12. poll check in.

:dem: