Bayou Buzz : Vice President John Breaux or Mary Landrieu ?

[JI7]

from 3/5/04

"As John Kerry makes his southern tour and speaks at Woldenberg Park today in New Orleans, the only news worth reading right now in a campaign is who will be the running mate.

Obviously, those close to the political scene are wondering if Mary Landrieu or even John Breaux might be that someone.

Landrieu certainly took on President Bush during her run for the last Senate roses. Instead, perhaps it should be said that Landrieu ran on Bush’s record and then distanced herself from the president as he meddled in the election but on the side of Landrieu’s opponent, Suzie Terrell.

John Breaux has announced he is getting out of the Senate presumably to make some green stuff. However, with his seniority and his moderate record, he certainly would make things formidable.

So, for now, as Kerry makes his way down South, the pundits will be looking for all signs that might look, smell and taste like VP. Louisiana certainly has two offerings. And, when you consider their popularity, their national appeal and their abilities to hit the stump, the presumptive presidential nominee might just sit a spell at the banks of the Mississippi while at Woldenberg Park and listen to the quiet sounds of the great river as it flows through and empties out of our state. "

http://www.bayoubuzz.com/articles.aspx?aid=1253

[rocktivity]

1. We don't have time the time, money, or mainstream media support

to "develop" a relative unknown. If it has to be a Southerner, it has to be Edwards or Clark.

:headbang:
rocknation

[JI7]

2. vp announcement gets instant media attention

the kerry team needs to plan wisely to get as much as they can out of the free media they will get when the vp is announced.

[katieforeman]

17. Free media with a negative spin is not a good thing.

According to conventional wisdom an unexpected choice for vp generates a buzz and a lot of free media attention. However, it is a mistake to blindly follow formulations from past elections without considering the unique dynamics of this election.

True, if Kerry makes a surprise choice like Evan Bayh or a Midwestern governor (which is still the choice I suspect he is inclined to make) the surprise will generate free media attention but he may find himself fighting a very unfavorable spin.

This election is unlike any other in that there is a clear preference and expectation among primary voters and even the general public for who the vice-president should be. See www.draftkerryedwards.com for national poll results or check out the Cnn exit polls in the FL, TX, LA, and MS primaries. Edwards is the clear choice even over home-state Senators.

The Kerry volunteers I talked to during the primaries without exception told me they wanted a Kerry/Edwards ticket. There is even a draft Kerry/Edwards movement. Has there ever been a movement to draft a vice-president? Does anyone doubt that Edwards would have won a vice-presidential election primary in a landslide? Kerry ignores these very real expectations at his peril.

An unexpected but uninspired choice might hit the ground with a thud, generating a wave of disappointment instead of a wave of excitement. As one reporter put it, if Edwards is not chosen it will be because Edwards is a "rock star." The spin might be that Kerry didn't want to be upstaged by his running-mate. Furthermore, William Saffire and others will likely be spinning Hillary Clinton conspiracy theories. Edwards was not chosen because the powers that be in the Democratic party didn't want Edwards to be the front-runner for President the next time around. There might also be speculation about residual resentment from the primaries by Kerry against Edwards. This is not good free media.

More importantly if Kerry turns a deaf ear to the clearly expressed wishes of those who gave him the nomination, it will re-enforce the image of Kerry as aloof and out-of-touch. Kerry asked primary voters to send a President instead of a message. These voter will be very disappointed if it turns out they sent a President who didn't get the message. This kind of free media nobody needs.

[JI7]

22. those who gave kerry the nomination did it for kerry

i have been a big strong supporter of kerry for a long time. i have preferences for vp, but i have no expectations that he do what i personally want when it comes to picking the vp. anyone kerry person who thinks that way needs to get over themselves and i'm sure they are in the minority. edwards would be a good choice for kerry for many reasons but him being the preference of many kerry supporters is not one of them. it's also pretty insulting to those who support kerry to say they would see him as aloof and out of touch just because he didn't pick edwards. if it was all about edwards they would have voted for edwards. but we supported kerry because we like kerry for many reasons.

[katieforeman]

27. My main point was the negative spin.

As you have pointed out, most Democrats, myself included, will vote for John Kerry because we like him. John Kerry has served this country with courage and distinction. He is extremely smart and he is right on the issues and he will make a great President. However, Democrats are not in the majority in this country.

I should have made this more clear in the tone of my prior post- but I was trying to get at the perception of the electorate as a whole (which is often not based on reality) and the spin generated in the media.

You said that a consideration in selecting a vp is the free publicity. I was trying to point out how the media might cover it. The media loves stories about personal conflict and the media is extremely cynical. They are likely to speculate about personal conflict between Edwards and Kerry because those are the kinds of stories they like. They are likely to speculate about Kerry not wanting to be upstaged because they are extremely cynical. I would be willing to bet money that Saffire would write a ridiculous editorial saying the Clintons didn't want Edwards because Hillary wants to be President. Undoubtedly, that type of speculation would eat up a lot of the coverage if Kerry chooses someone unexpected.

Because of edwards' national recognition, he is the running mate whose anouncement might give Kerry the biggest initial bump in the polls. Because the media loves the horce-race that type of coverage could generate excitement and momentum. If Kerry chooses someone other than Edwards who fails to give Kerry a bump in the polls that might generate the types of unfavorable coverage I described above.

I totally agree with you that Kerry has the right to choose whoever he wants for vp. He won the primaries fair and square. However, I don't think the preferences of the people who voted for Kerry are completely irrelevant. People vote for and volunteer for someone to represent their interests. I really doubt Kerry thinks the preferences of the people he represents don't matter.

This does not mean that Kerry should choose Edwards because a plurality of primary voters prefer Edwards. Their preferences should be weighed against other considerations, but their preferences should at least be part of the calculus.

Furthermore, there are many people who supported Kerry because he was their first choice. There were also many Kerry voters who really liked Kerry but had a different first choice and voted for Kerry because he was the most electable.

There were a lot of good reasons that people had Kerry as their first choice-Kerry's environmental record, his health care plan, his military service, his toughness, his experience. However, for many Kerry voters the most important reason was electability. This year everybody was focused on beating Bush- we don't know who would have won the primaries if electability weren't the overriding factor.

Just as a note of apology. I personally do not think Kerry is aloof at all. When I would listen to the Kerry events on c-span in IA and NH, I thought he had a good sense of humor and seemed like a nice guy. I really should have been more clear about that.

[virtualobserver]

3. Breaux can carry Louisiana

It would put a lot of pressure of the Bush team.

[BOSSHOG]

4. Landrieu can too

and she has an enormous dislike for bush because of his unprofessionalism (typical) during her last senate race against a typical republican neanderthal. She can kick gop ass with ease and look good doing it. And the governor of LA is a democrat so no lost seat.

[Zynx]

11. Breaux would do it easier.

He has a massive approval rating there while Landrieu is a little divisive.

[freebird71457]

16. I don't know

After Breaux's stand during the recent gun votes in the Senate, he lost a lot of political capital here in Louisiana. I've voted for the man in the past, but as I wrote him in my last letter: "It is a good thing you decided to retire, because you won't get elected in Louisiana any more."

Landrieu for VP? That might be an interesting ticket. Voters in Louisiana love Landrieu, and she did beat Suzie Terrel, although some pundits think that the Terrel loss had more to do with voter backlash over Governor Foster's policies than a strictly Landrieu v. Terrel contest.

You have to realize that Louisiana has open primaries and some of what happens in our voting would not happen anywhere else in the US. Louisiana politics is a free-wheeling brawl.

[arcos]

21. Breaux is antichoice... he would NEVER get the ticket n/t

[Zynx]

24. He is?

He could help us get people who vote Republican solely on that issue then.

[arcos]

28. that's not gonna happen...

People who vote GOP solely on that issue would still vote GOP because it's the VP and not the President who is against abortion. It would alienate a whole bunch of people in the Democratic Party, though...

[Cuban_Liberal]

5. Breaux would be a good choice.

He'd almost certainly bring in Louisiana, would balance the ticket politically, and would also help us in some border states. He would have the additional advantage of not having to give up a Senate seat, which Landrieu would have to do.

LA is 'doable', folks.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

7. Breaux has one of the worst environmental records of any Dem

I doubt Kerry would choose him, given his particular commitment to this issue.

[Cuban_Liberal]

8. AS VP, Breaux would preside over the Senate.

If he brings in as many (or more) EVs as someone else, Kerry would be a fool NOT to pick him, and Kerry's no fool. The point is to win the election, not pass some 'purity test'.

[JI7]

12. the way i see it

it would be like kennedy picking johnson for vp. kennedy didn't like johnson but he wanted to win and johnson helped him do it. johnson turned out to be a great president if you take out vietnam because of his support and passing civil rights laws and programs for poor and others but he was still chosen to help kennedy win.

and i know john kerry wants to win. he is having trouble mostly with moderate to right voters, not with liberal or others in the democratic base despite what you may see on du.so if breaux can help him he should pick breaux. it's not like breaux will ever run for president since he would be too old. and as vp he would do whatever kerry wants him to do and kerry can keep him away from issues breaux is wrong on like environment. breaux can also focus mostly on helping democrats in the entire country, and especially in the south. it would be great if democrats could win back the south especially in the congress.

[katieforeman]

23. I agree Kerry should pick whoever will help him win .(Edwards)

I also totally agree with your assessment of Kennedy and Johnson.

However, I disagree with your assessment of Breaux. People vote for President not vice-president. Cajuns may like breaux as their Senator but that doesn't necessarily translate into Breax being able to sell them on Kerry. The local party machinery and media isn't as important today as it was in the time of Johnson and Kennedy. People evaluate Senators differnetly than they evaluate Presidents.

To win Kerry needs the VP who is best able to sell the voters in the contestable states on John Kerry as President. I think Edwards is the running-mate able to convince the most voters in the most battleground states to vote for Kerry for President. Here are some reasons:

1.) There is no question that Edwards is the best campaigner in the party today with the possible exception of Bill Clinton. If I were John Kerry, I would want John Ewdards out there making my case to the voters every single day.

2.)John Edwards has proven himself on the national stage. Breaux is a complete question mark outside of LA. There are many closely contested states in this election. It is a mistake to place all our eggs in one basket by choosing a running-mate on the assumption that he or she could convince voters in their home state to vote for Kerry.

3.) Kerry's running-mate will be the person most closely associated with Kerry in the minds of voters. Edwards youth and energy highlights Kerry's maturity and gravitas while at the same time bringing out Kerry's smile and warmth. Kerry/Edwards is experience courage, energy and optimism.

Kerry/Breaux would be a ticket of career politicians and Washington insiders. Furthermore, breaux might confuse voters about what Kerry really stands for. Kerry's attacks on Bush are less credible if he chooses a very conservative Democrat who voted with Bush much of the time. Furthermore, Breaux's very long voting record provides more ammo for the Republicans.


4.) Edwards has already proven his ability to reach Republican and Indepents during the primary and in national polls when Edwards was beating Bush by about 10 points, about the same as Kerry at that time. Edwards has demonstrated appeal to sell Republicans ans Independents on a more Progressive candidate and progressive agenda. Edwards can reach these voters and sell them on Kerry and Kerry's policies.

5.) I know OH is an important part of Kerry's strategy, and I basically spent my entire life living in a big OH focus group full of swing voters. John Edwards really connects with people there. As just one example, I talked to a self-describerd moderate Republican, an accountant who voted for Bush. He told me without my ever mentioning Edwards, "you know who I kind of like- John Edwards." Kerry/Edwards will win OH.

6.) Please see my earlier post about expectations. An unexpected but uninspired choice could generate negative free media.

Sometimes the obvious choice is also the best. Please, please let's go with Edwards.

[nator311]

19. so does Landrieu

Oil drilling off of the Louisiana coast provides a lot of revenue for the state. Since Kerry is taking a totally opposite stance on oil, I think it would be too risky to select anyone from Louisiana as a VP pick. Which is too bad, because Landrieu otherwise makes a great choice.

[Bombtrack]

26. How would it be risky? It's not that hard to explain that LA senators

vote in the interest of major industries in there states. There are no perfect vp choices, they all have some flaws. But that isn't the kind of thing you can point to to disqualify someone. We KNOW Landrieu is in consideration.

[arcos]

29. and his commitment to choice...

Kerry considers abortion as a litmus test for judges. Why would it be any different for his VP?

[katieforeman]

18. Breaux might help in LA but at what cost?

Remember Nader is in this race and Nader did very well in the states that went to Gore by less than one percent last time around. A DLC vp might be just enough to tip the scale in some of those states to Bush.

Stick with your avatar. Edwards did better than Breaux or Landrieu in the primary exit polls in LA- beating both Breaux and Landrieu. Edwards has demonstarated appeal in the South and in the Midwest. There is little evidence that they could be of significantly more help in LA than Edwards and they don't have the experience on the national stage that Edwards has. There is no way either could compare with Edwards on the campaign trail.

Also their last names have to many vowels and are difficult to spell which is really annoying.

[Padraig18]

25. No question that Edwards is my first choice.

Breaux is about 4th. I think he was just trying to point out some of the positive things he could 'bring to the table' for Kerry. :)

[robsul82]

6. Landrieu - The Cajun Kennedy (in name value)

You know, it's funny. 9/11 happened, EVERYONE was loving Bush. Midterms in 2002, Republicans kicked ass. The ONLY beacon of light was Mary's W against Suzie Terrell. DU was in celebration that day, and now it doesn't know if she can carry Louisiana.

Let me tell you, from BEING here for the midterms - basically, Mary beat Bush once already. Terrell's ENTIRE platform was I (Heart) George W. Bush. And she LOST! In a time where I (Heart) George W. Bush was winning elections nationwide, it lost in Louisiana. Why? Because a Landrieu was the Democrat. The name Landrieu carries a lot of weight down here. If Mary's the VP nominee, Louisiana bleeds blue. Bank.

Later.

RJS

[Cuban_Liberal]

9. "The ONLY beacon of light was Mary's W against Suzie Terrell"

I guess the Democrats takling control of all three branches of Illinois' state government wasn't significant, huh, even though it was a feat that hadn't been done in almost 2 generations... :eyes:

[robsul82]

10. Not really, no.

Sorry, bro.

Later.

RJS

[zulchzulu]

13. Neither

Breaux is a Republicrat and Landrieu barely won her last election. Louisiana is not a swing state.

I'm guessing JK's only going down there to get some of that Nawlins flavuh, baby. I miss the town too and can see why. A pile of mudpuppies and a bucket of Dixie Beer feeds the soul.

[BootinUp]

14. There was a story not too long ago

That talked about campaign strategy, and it revealed a little bit about republican strategy for Louisiana, saying that they would highlight Kerry's energy policy as bad for Louisiana energy industry, jobs etc. I do not know if this is that relevant. Just throwin it out. I can probably find that article but it didn't say much more than that.

I guess I am wondering if any DU'ers from Louisiana could comment on whether this came up in recent elections.

[dae]

30. It didn't make any waves. I don't think Breaux would help Kerry's

ticket; Landrieu, however would be a whole new dimension. I have watched her come up through the ranks from state legislator, treasurer, to her current position. Sen. Landrieu would be an excellent choice for the VP slot she can work a crowd like few politicians I've seen, and she demands the best from her staff for her constituents.*
That being said, I would prefer to see Gen. Clark selected as Sen. Kerry's VP.:)






*disclaimer - I am not employed nor related to Sen. Landrieu or any of her Staff.

[OHdem10]

15. I do not want to be negative

but refresh your memories---Their votes with Bush 70 to 80D% of time.

Taxzcuts and Medicare Votes. It is all with our values I guess .

[Bombtrack]

20. That is really a fabrication of a statement on your part

Breux is a true centrist, and he does vote the liberal line only slightly more than the conservative (about 55-60 percent), however Landrieu is much more to the left, voting the liberal line a little more than 3 quarters of the time.(about 75-80 percent).

Neither voted for the last Bush tax cuts(the only dem for those was Zell).

Breaux would be a mistake, but Landrieu wouldn't. What brings her "liberal" score down is her environmental voting record, because, basically, she comes from an oil state, and supports bussiness in her state.

That's the only thing she could be called not left-of center on. But Kerry is about as pro-environment as you can get in the senate and I think that on balance it would still be a wicked pissa tickit on the environment. The prospect of her being the first female vp would, I believe be seen as bold by everyone, males, whites, blacks, hispanics etc, but most of all by women obviously.

[OHdem10]

31. not tobe argumentatve

but Mary Landrieu in her own campaign in order to try to appeal to her Republican supporters"I have voted with Pres. Bush 80% of the time." Go to C_span and check their votes. Too many of us watched the votes. Breaux voted taxcuts.He and Baucus were the only Dems Republicans could trust enough to even let them in the room when the Medicare Bill was being developed. They are conservative democrats as most southerners are Conservative Democrats. I simply believe our party has a big umbrella. Conservative Dems, Moderate Dems and
Liberal Dems.

[Bombtrack]

32. Breaux is a true centrist, voting close to half and half lib and conservat

ive. But Landriue isn't. She's a moderate, DLC dem, around the same place as Lieberman. The only thing she's not liberal consistently on, again, is the envirnonment.

Voting with the president is a misleading statement. Maybe I shouldn't have said fabrication, but to say "voting with the president" is proof of bush-litism is not really the case. First of all, most of the time when a democrat votes with the president, it's on procedural non-partisan, non-ideological crap. Second, in that election she was campaigning in a state Bush was popular in and did use RHETORIC that made her seem closer to Breaux and republicans themselves than she actually was. She also might have said "this year" or something as often congresspeople make votes close to elections that they wouldn't at the beginning of terms for political reasons.

You aren't going to get John Kerrys voting record in clearly right of center states. However Landriue in all probablity is just as liberal as most senate democrats from democratic/liberal states and would be such as a vp or president