Provide your top five veep choices (and give your reasons why)

[mndemocrat_29]

Here are mine:

1. Mary Landrieu-She's a woman, yes, but this is exactly the sort of looks risky but really isn't risky sort of campaigning that Kerry could pull. Yes she's a woman, but she's also a popular Southern senator with IMMENSE appeal to moderate women and men. She'd cream Cheney in the debates (and would provide one of the sharpest contrasts imaginable between the two candidates), would balance out the ticket, would create a great deal of momentum and instant excitement in the ticket, and let's not forget about the popularity/bandwagon effect of having someone like Mary on the ticket. The media will love her, she'll easily be able to charm the late night talk show circuit and SNL (who would parady her, Amy Poehler perhaps?), and she'll be able to get heaps of donations. Plus, she'd deliver Louisiana, Arkansas, and West Virginia, along with possibly Arizona and Missouri, plus she'd make it easier to win the Midwest. Additionally, Gov. Blanco will appoint a Democrat to replace her in the Senate.

2. John Edwards-Yes, he's an obvious choice, but he is that for a reason. Edwards is a charming candidate with an interesting and new face, he can raise money like nobody's business, and seems to be a favorite of both liberals and moderates. His being on the ticket should not only help to make states like Florida, Tennessee, and West Virginia competitive, but would also help candidates like Bowles, Castor, and Tenenbaum win us back the Senate. Kerry/Edwards seems to be a favorite among the Democratic standard bearers and he provides a geographical advantage to the ticket.

3. Evan Bayh-A young, moderate Democrat from the Midwest, Bayh could bring a definite solidity to the ticket. He could possibly win his home state of Indiana, and would give us a definite edge in Michigan, Illinois, and Ohio. He, like Edwards and Landrieu, provides a clear distinction between Cheney, has proven to be a solid competitor in his home state, is a former governor, and would be a clear frontrunner for the presidential campaign of 2012. Also, Joe Kernan would appoint his replacement in the Senate, so we'd keep his seat in Democratic hands.

4. Mark Warner-The only governor I'm going to throw into this mix, Warner is a very good governor, the only viable Southern governor for this ticket, and is a strong competitor. He nearly beat a Virginian political institution in 1996 (Sen. Warner) and has already been touted for a Senate race in 2006 and 2008. This proves his validity as a get-out-the-vote expert in Virginia, a state we could feasibly win with Warner on the ticket. He'd also be a strong competitor in West Virginia, Ohio, Arkansas, and Louisiana. His position as a governor can't be scoffed at, since it would provide a Washington outsider vibe.

5. Blanche Lincoln-Another Southern female senator, she would bring many of the same qualities that Landrieu would to the ticket. She's a charismatic and likeable senator, would again carve a sharp distinction against Cheney, and looks likely to cruise to reelection in 2004 for her Senate seat (proving that she can carry Arkansas). She'd be able to lend a hand in her home state, as well as Louisiana and the Midwest. I'd be ranking her higher, except that she's only had one term in the Senate under her belt (though she did serve in the House prior) and she's running for reelection this year (though I'm positive that Rep. Mike Ross would jump in and win that election, should Lincoln be Kerry's choice).

In the end, I'm hoping that we will see Vice President Landrieu, though I'd be cheering for any of these candidates if they were the nominee.

[drthais]

1. ok lets try this again

I posted elsewhere about this earlier
but you REALLY should take a look at Landrieus voting record
before you get all hot about her VP chances

and this is from a Louisiana Democrat

I'm not totally against her
but she has CAVED many times
and this bothers me

[belle]

2. I can't even think of five...

Edwards, I think: number two popular guy, charmismatic, young, Southern, has working-class background and solid economic background, all great ways to complement Kerry.

After him, maybe Clark, I guess, though I don't really like him.

Then I dunno. Someone exciting and young, and preferably southern. Not a northeasterner, sadly ruling out Dean, though I think he's pretty much ruled himself out. *Not Hillary.*

[genius]

3. Kucinich, RFK, JR., Edwards, Arianna, Jessie Jackson, Sr.

Kucinich would end the Nader factor. He's strong where Kerry's weak.

RFK, JR. would also end the Nader factor. He is a very charismatic speaker.

Edwards would get the backing of the anti-NAFTA crowd and assure the support of the South.

Arianna is the one woman in America who tells it like it is. She would also destroy the Nader factor.

Jessie Jackson, Sr., has a large following and the right ideas. A lot of people voted for him for President in 88.

[mndemocrat_29]

4. Can Arianna run?

Was she born in America?

[eyesroll]

7. Nope. Greece.

She can't run.

[Gato Moteado]

6. while i like all the people you suggested...

only edwards makes any sense.

kucinich is my favorite candidate in the race and has been since day one, but kerry needs someone from the south if we want to win this election. same goes for rfk jr.

jesse is too polarizing of a figure unfortunately.

arianna is a journalist and not a viable candidate. besides, i don't believe she was born here.

edwards, on the other hand, is certainly a good call.

[mot78]

5. My rebuttal and list

1. Landrieu barely carried her state in 2002, and she's also voted for * on a number of issues. She spent most of her Senate campaign touting how she agreed with * on a number of issues.

2. Edwards makes the most sense out of these choices. He could bolster turnout for Southern Democrats and maybe put Tennessee, Arkansas, and Louisiana back into play. West Virginia and Florida are already swing states, so there's no problem there. Plus, he's be seasoned enough for 2012.

3. NO BAYH!!! The guy is CHAIRMAN OF THE DLC and he's also pro-life (from what I've heard anyway) he also comes from Indiana, a state that hasn't voted Democrat in a Presidential election since LBJ vs. Goldwater. Nader would get 10-15% of the popular vote if he's the VP.

4. Warner's too untested. Also, he's not as interesting as Edwards. The fact that he's being considered for Governor bothers me about how we look at Southern Democrats who manage to win races down here: we immediately consider them for POTUS or VP just because they won in the South. By doing this, we're killing our grassroots down there.

5. Don't know enough about Lincoln....but I don't want to have a sitting Senator on the ticket, because we'll lose their seat to a Repug.


Here are my top picks:

1. Edwards, for obvious reasons

2. Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, from a swing state, good friends with Kerry. Don't know if he could be labled a DINO DLC posterboy. Also, by having a Governor, he balances out a Senatorial-dominated ticket.

3. Wes Clark, but if he's chosen, * will label the ticket as "Waffle/Waffle '04" because of allegations of Clark flip-flopping on IWR and abortion.

4. Dick Durbin, fairly progressive, but he's from a solid blue state, so he doesn't bring much to the ticket.

...Overall I'd be most satisfied with Edwards or Vilsack.

[nator311]

10. Bayh is not pro-life at all

He has a score of somewhere around 90 from the Planned Parenthood. Also, Edwards being on the ticket will spell disaster in Nov. since he was a trial lawyer. Just about everyone in this country hates trial lawyers.

[salin]

22. this hoosier prefers Edwards to Bayh

Bayh can't carry Indiana - folks love bush more than Bayh here. Compare the attendance to bush fundraisers in Indy (he has had 2 or 3 in the past 8 months to support Mitch Daniels for Gov.) to Bayh's.

Bayh doesn't have mass appeal, beyond being relatively attractive - but Edwards has that as well.

[genius]

27. Bayh is a Republican economically

He regularly votes with Bush on economic issues.

[Armstead]

8. Edwards, Clark, Harkin, Schiakovsky, Durbin

Edwards because he's a great campaigner and is a semi-populist.

Clark because he's got national security but was against Iraq, and also is liberal and smart on many domestic issues.

Tom Harkin because he's an admirable mainstream progressive populist fro0m the midwest.

Jan Schiakovsky (sorry of I mangled the spelling) because she's a strong progressive populist from the midwest, and a woman.

Dick Durbin, because he's a strong liberal from the midwest.

(Notice a pattern among the last three?)

[nator311]

9. my choices

1. Bill Nelson- because he is from Florida and has a good personality (unlike Bob Graham, who was described as "bizarre" by people in focus groups looking at the dem candidates). Also was an astronaut.

2. Gov. Warner- telegenic, business background. Could tip Virginia in our favor.

3. Gov. Rendell- good guy, comes from must-win state

4. Mary Landrieu- could tip Lousiana in our favor. Very strong personality.

5. Evan Bayh- centrist, was a governor, good-looking, even though we won't win Indiana, he could help us in states in that region, such as Ohio, Michigan, WV, and PA. Unfortunately, it is reported that he has a really dully personality.

[mot78]

12. Nelson would lose us another Senate seat

Jeb could appoint a Republican to replace him. Evan Bayh is too conservative for many Dem voters.

[mndemocrat_29]

15. I like your choices

Gov. Rendell may be a little too new (only two years into office), but if Napolitano is being seriously considered, so should he (for the record I also like Napolitano).

By the way, I had no idea that Bill Nelson was an astronaut! That is so cool!

[salin]

23. sad thing... the hoosier dems I know respect our repub senator

more than Bayh. Something beyond a "dully" personality.

[aldian159]

11. Ok, here goes

1. John Edwards. The best campaigner and stump speaker since Clinton, he would immediately inject new life into the party, more so than already. He's retiring, so no fear of his seat being given to the GOP (although they would possibly win it anyway). As VP for 8 years, he would be tailor-made to step in as president in 2012, and he'd be only 58 doing so. States helped: AR, LA, NC, FL.

2. Mary Landrieu. The exact same reasons as posted above. States helped: LA, AR, FL.

3. Dick Durbin. A fiery partisan, he would fulfill the unofficial VP role of attacking the other side while keeping Kerry clean. If elected, governor Blagojevic would appoint a Democrat, so no fear in losing a seat there. However, IL is safe blue (or is it red this time around?), so not much gain there. States helped: WI, MN, MO, IL.

4. Bill Richardson. Coming from the governorship of a state, where the last two and four of five presidents have come from, Richardson would help with the Hispanic vote, the largest minority. He also has international experience as sec. to the UN. However, he has only served NM for 2 years, so that might be a drawback. States helped: AZ, NM, TX, CA.

5. Dick Gephardt. Not only would we most likely win MO, but OH as well. Gephard's legendary connections with labor help us all over the Midwest. However, it wouldn't take much effort to find something Dick opposed and Kerry supported (NAFTA?). States helped: MO, PA, OH, WI.

[mot78]

13. Kerry/Gephardt twould be too insiderish

also, Gephardt rammed IWR down our throats.

[aldian159]

14. yeah, that's why he's last

I wanted five, and couldn't think of anyone else.

[nator311]

18. problems

I agree with Landrieu. But Gephardt is boring and his poor showing in Iowa shows that he has lackluster support from organized labor. Durbin and Edwards are former trial attorneys. That would hurt us big time. Also, didn't Richardson have some big scandal when he was Energy Secretary?

[Toby109]

16. Of all the candidates listed in this thread

I'll go with Edwards for all the reasons given plus he has been in the media spotlight recently. Let us never underestimate to short attention span of most American voters.

[efront]

17. My top five

1 Bill Richardson: I know he probably won't accept, but I think he's perfect. Well respected on both sides, Hispanic, locks up New Mex and hopefully Arizona

2 John Edwards: Obvious reasons- well liked, reminds a lot of people of RFK/JFK, fundraising, et cetera

3 Ed Rendell: Locks up PA, very likeable

4 Dick Gephardt: Maybe too much of an insider ticket, but gets us MO, and significantly helps in IA, OH, MI, WI and PA

5 Carl Levin: Very well known and respected in Midwest, can go toe to toe with Dick C on defense and national security, maybe too important in Senate, however

[nator311]

19. good idea

Levin is someone who I haven't even thought of. But how old is he?

[efront]

21. I guess he's about 70, a little too old, I suppose n/t

n

[genius]

28. Ed Rendell encouraged Gore to drop out. He won't back Kerry if Bush

steals the election.

[welshTerrier2]

29. oops ... please ignore ...

[Tom Rinaldo]

20. My list (for today, it keeps changing).

1) Clark. He is most prepared to step into the Presidency of anyone I can think of, and political considerations or not, I take that part seriously. I think Clark is a good campaigner (and I can point you to a post where I discussed why I say that). Clark appeals to many Republicans and Independents, good for winning swing votes. Clark appeals to many progressives, good for engaging a grass roots activist base. Many of Dean's activist supporters would feel good about working for a ticket with Clark on it. Clark is insurance against any October surprise, arranged by our enemies, domestic or foreign. Clark, with Clinton's help, would win us Arkansas. Clark has National appeal, he showed strength outside of the South, not just in it. Clark is wonderful at attacking Bush frontally on the issues that Bush will be running on (Terrorism, National Security, Patriotism, and Leadership). Clark provides outsider balance to insider Kerry.

2) Richardson. Popular in South West which is a key battle zone. Popular with Hispanics which is a key constituency Bush will target. Executive experience as a Governor, nice contrast to Kerry. International experience as U.N. Ambassador. Dealt with North Korea. Washington experience as Congressman etc. Has some positive national reputation.

3) Edwards. Obviously very bright and charismatic. Helps put parts of the South in play. Excellent at sounding populist economic themes. Positive National reputation coming out of primaries. Seemingly great campaigner, but I wonder why he did not catch on sooner in Iowa and New Hampshire where he spent a lot of time. Edwards developed a great stump speech. I worry a little about what he will follow that with once it wears thin.

4) A long shot such as Bruce Babbitt or Eliot Spritzer. Babbitt was Governor of Arizona, which is a swing state. Was well received on the stump when he ran for President. Strong Environmental record at Clinton's Department of the Interior. Was considered for Supreme Court appointment. Clearly a well rounded and seasoned individual with varied personal strengths. Spritzer unfortunately comes from a safe state; New York, but he is the point man for the attack on Corporate greed and corruption and he would make Bush squirm around Enron.

5) Senator Bob Graham. Hugely popular in Florida, would probably put Florida in the Democratic column. Experienced politician so no Dan Quayle type risks. Showed courage in opposing Iraq war and saying a case could be made to impeach Bush. Not much down side outside of Florida but not much upside either. Charismatically challenges.

[cosmokramer]

32. Clark or Richardson

1. Clark

2. Richardson

3. Repeat above.

[JohnLocke]

24. Edwards, Clark, Graham, Nelson, Richardson.

[Finch]

25. Well here we go....

Mary Landrieu (D-LA):

Pros: Good on TV, Good-looking, from a moderate state, proven campaigner winning arguably the toughest campaign for a Dem in 02, moderate voting record, could well help sway her state for Kerry (but I would be mighty close!), could help boost Dems across the south…

Cons: Little known outside of LA, unproven vote getting ability outside of LA, unknown how she would play in the Midwestern and south western states…


Mark Warner (D-VA):

Pros: Popular in Virginia, Tall (he has to run with Kerry remember), good on TV, excellent with rural voters and lower income white voters in general both voting groups traditionally dominated by the GOP…

Cons: No real national name recognition, very little experience (only been Gov since 2002), could not guarantee Kerry Virginia…


Evan Bayh (D-IN)

Pros: Very Popular in his native Indiana a state which is often staunchly GOP, could boost Kerry in both IN and OH, Moderate voting record and a prominent member of the DLC, Executive as well as Legislative experience and yet he is still relatively young when compared with Kerry…

Cons: No real spark (not very inspiring, his biggest draw back), can guarantee Kerry no state as Indiana is such a conservative state usually (however in Ohio he could attract just enough Suburban conservative democrats to tip the state to Kerry along with the job losses in east of the state), little known outside of Indiana, voted for the tax cuts and has defended this vote repeatedly…


Bill Nelson (D-FL)

Pros: Lots of legislative experience (the House 1979-1991, State offices 1995-2000, Senate 2001-), astronaut, military background, moderate voting record, from FL!, popular, good on TV (not dazzling but good), brings balance to the ticket, would proably play well in the Midwest and in moderate states such as Ohio, West Virginia, Iowa, Minnesota and Missouri and could significantly boost Kerry in FL after Republican gains there since 2000…

Cons: Relatively unknown outside of FL, Flip-flopped on the abortion issue (but then again even DK did that), unproven weather he would play well in the Midwest…


Jay Rockefeller (D-WV)

Pros: Would be a powerful factor in putting WV in the Dem column, Popular in his home state which would well translate into appeal in neighbouring Ohio, good debate and TV performer (similar to Nelson on that score but better than Bayh), Good Name, moderate with a populist streak that would mark him to do well in the Midwest while cementing the dems even further in MI and PA…

Cons: Practically unknown outside his home state, been in Washington along time, no solid evidence to suggest that he would have broad national appeal as most of the other candidates I have suggested might well, visually he seems to be a even duller version of Kerry (big problem)…



Other candidates who I’d say where strong contenders but not in the top five… Bob Graham, Blanch Lincoln, Max Baucus, Bill Richardson, Jesse Bingaman and Harry Reid, Yes their all pretty moderate Dems but hey with Kerry what ever you may think we will need a moderate…as VP and any of these I’d be happy to become Prez if something where to happen to Kerry….

[nator311]

26. about some of your outside choices

Jeff Bingaman is dull beyond belief. Harry Reid is 100% pro-life I believe, and I think he is needed in the senate.

[welshTerrier2]

30. Tom Vilsack or Sam Nunn

1. tom vilsack - ok ... i admit it ... i hardly know anything about him ... i'm looking for someone who would be an effective campaigner from the midwest ... there are 3 or 4 states in the midwest that gore lost by just a percentage point or two ... and there are an additional 2 or 3 states that gore won by just a percentage point or two ... it seems like this mandates a "midwestern" strategy ... and what about Gephardt you might ask ... forget it ... he's too much of a "mr. democrat insider" ... he would make it impossible to attract moderates and those who don't like to align themselves with a party label ...

2. sam nunn - if we're going to give the south a try, i think nunn's extensive defense credentials make him a very strong choice ... i don't believe Edwards made a strong enough showing in the south to be convincing ... and while i have great respect for bob graham who could help win Florida, i see him as an "all our eggs in one basket" candidate ... nunn would combine strength on the defense issue, previous washington experience and still retain an outsider image since he's been out of the senate for some time now ... i also think democrats in georgia are just itching to get even with the republicans after what they did to Cleland ... how cool would it be if we really could win in the south ...

[jackkendem]

36. I like these two

and would add Evan Bayh to the mix. Young, sharp, and moderate, he could help to muffle the whole "most liberal Dem in the Senate" argument against Sen. Kerry.

[JI7]

31. about Mark Warner

the good thing about having mark warner on the ticket is as governor he would be able to speak of how the bush administration has failed when it comes to helping states out. he would be able to give specific examples which relate to people in states and their needs.

[mndemocrat_29]

34. That's an excellent idea

And this would be one of the best ways to win the swing Southern states-having a Southern governor tell it like it is. Warner could deliver West Virginia, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Virginia this way.

[cosmokramer]

33. Clark , Richardson, repeat

1. Clark--the obvious reasons: Mega FP/Military/Security/Diplomatic experience, brilliant leader, years of executive experience, years of Pentagon experience, years of domestic experience.

He is the only one who could automatically step in and get the job done should something happen to President Kerry.

There are many other reasons, but others have already listed them.

He would deliver his home state (unlike Edwards) 100% guarantee--Arkansas would go blue again. He would solidify NM (it was close there in 2000), and possibly bring Arizona (veterans, retirees, hispanics, native americans) in to play. A definite win in Ohio (his ground organization here was the most respected, and the best in the state--we are worshiped by the state party--Clark was HOT here), and in West Virginia, both of which have huge veteran populations, and senior populations. Add Louisiana, too.

2. Richardson--again, the obvious reasons. Solidify NM, maybe bring in Arizona. Otherwise, outside of the hispanic community, he is largly unknown. I don't see where he would help that much in the midwest, but he would definitely help in Florida.

3. Repeat 1 & 2.



It will be a southerner or southwesterner with executive experience, it will NOT be a legislator that has never been a governor--guaranteed--so forget Edwards, it ain't gonna happen, and forget Gep--he is slated as Labor Secy.

[shivaji]

35. 1. Dean 2. Dean 3. Dean 4. Dean 5. Kucinich = Neutralize Nader

[rocktivity]

37. The 2004 Dem VP HAS to be the 2012 Dem frontrunner

The 2004 Dem VP must be:

• a) Southern or Midwestern (to balance Kerry on the ticket)
  
• b) already have national name recognition (the Bush-owned media isn't going to allow us to "develop" an unknown), and
  
• c) be no older than 50, because
  
• d) he or she MUST be able to step into Kerry's shoes in 2012 (keeps the party united and acts as instant GOP shark repellent).
  

That makes Edwards my frontrunner. With Landrieau, I fear that not only will every Repub with a penis will decide they can beat her in 2012, but every Dem with a penis, too. I think Hillary's the best choice if it has to be a woman--she has the national importance, but she might be seen as too old by 2012. As for the others, well, who the heck are they? We just don't have the time, money or media muscle to turn them into household words.

:headbang:
rocknation