Democratic Vice-Presidential Candidate - Page 2

The Mad Monk · February 4, 2004, 12:19

Quote:

Originally posted by joncha

Hmm.... George Bush the First wasn't president that long ago, and IIRC he ran against Reagan for the nomination in 1980.

jon.

DOH!

Ya see folks? That's what screwing up your sleep routine does to you!

Excepting GBI, when was the last time it happened?

That's your assignment for today.

Imran Siddiqui · February 4, 2004, 12:22

Truman... if elections after deaths count.

Sava · February 4, 2004, 12:25

I think Edwards is the best choice. And because he is not retaining his Senate seat... it does make sense, as Shi pointed out.

Edwards is only 50, Imran. Waiting 8 years isn't out of the question. Perhaps its more wishful thinking on my part... but I think Edwards would be the best choice.

And jimmytrick, you are terrible wrong when it comes to this "northeastern dem" BS. Nobody thought Clinton could win in the North... but he did.

Plus, you aren't looking at the last election. There are many "red states" that were within a few thousand to tens of thousand of votes. Kerry doesn't need to overwhelmingly defeat Bush in those states. He just needs to get a few more votes than Gore did. And Kerry is a much stronger candidate than Gore was.

Imran Siddiqui · February 4, 2004, 12:34

Quote:

Edwards is only 50, Imran. Waiting 8 years isn't out of the question.

No, I do think he could wait 8 years. But I think he may be better served by doing so on the outside rather than as Veep. If you become the veep, you have to make sure your President survives for 8 years, so you can jump on at the end. If your President loses in the next election, then you are done (you are painted with your President). It is a HUGE risk if you really want to be President.

But, frankly, I don't understand why Edwards isn't running for the Senate. Maybe he is setting himself up for Veep? But it's always awkward when former primary opponents go on the same ticket (Kennedy and Johnson HATED each other, Reagan and Bush though worked fairly well).

Winston · February 4, 2004, 12:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Truman... if elections after deaths count.

If elections after deaths count, then LBJ is the most recent - apart from "Reagan's third term".

I suppose you could make a case for Richard Nixon as well.

Imran Siddiqui · February 4, 2004, 12:43

Quote:

If elections after deaths count, then LBJ is the most recent - apart from "Reagan's third term".

Well, I consider LBJ to be elected as "Kennedy's second term"

. Truman was (barely) elected on himself, not because he was FDR's veep.

Quote:

I suppose you could make a case for Richard Nixon as well.

Not immediate.

Winston · February 4, 2004, 13:00

Imran,
We're talking about Vice Presidents who were later elected President, excluding George Bush. There have been three since World War II, of which you named the first one, Truman, as the most recent.

I pointed out that LBJ and Nixon were more recent, which you can't very well dispute.

Sava · February 4, 2004, 13:02

Quote:

I pointed out that LBJ and Nixon were more recent, which you can't very well dispute.

sure Imran can... he loves arguing against facts...

chequita guevara · February 4, 2004, 13:03

Quote:

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
It's not just that -- we haven't had a VP elected prez immediately after serving as VP for a long, long time.

Sixteen years isn't that long.

GePap · February 4, 2004, 13:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Yes, Miller has said in the past that he backs Bush over his leadership (and with Pelosi and Daschle, who can blame him). Of course the Dems can't kick him out (the voters voted for him, not the party) and he is BELOVED in Georgia.

Other Southern Dems are more conservative than mainstream Democrats. Some of them are more conservative than Northern Republicans.

Having Miller on the ticket would cost any dem votes up north without guaranteeing as big as a return you make it out to be in the south.

Graham or Labreaux would be much better candidates as VP, specially Graham given the importance of Florida.

chequita guevara · February 4, 2004, 13:10

Miller would basically kill the Dem's chanes, as the Deaniacs would see it as a direct snub to them. Many of them would very likely be willing to sabotage the party in November over it. They are tired of being ignored and told to shut-up and like it.

Sava · February 4, 2004, 13:13

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Miller would basically kill the Dem's chanes, as the Deaniacs would see it as a direct snub to them. Many of them would very likely be willing to sabotage the party in November over it. They are tired of being ignored and told to shut-up and like it.

yeah Zell Miller is an asswipe... he can go **** himself

Imran Siddiqui · February 4, 2004, 13:18

Quote:

I pointed out that LBJ and Nixon were more recent, which you can't very well dispute.

The original question by Mad Monk said IMMEDIATELY after so Nixon is out. We are also talking about whether Edwards would take Veep with the hope of being President. If Edwards is planning on killing Kerry in a public assasination, perhaps LBJ works

.

Try to keep up with the main goal of the discussion, will you?

Quote:

Having Miller on the ticket would cost any dem votes up north without guaranteeing as big as a return you make it out to be in the south.

I don't think so, really. Veep candidates usually don't cost a Presidential candidate votes (unless he has a criminal record or has screwed sheep or something), but rather enhances appeal among a segment you are trying to attract.

See the Vice Presidency of Dan Quayle for that.

The only problem with Graham is that he is fairly old. And Breux is basically the same as Miller, only less outspoken about it.

Winston · February 4, 2004, 13:21

I say Kerry wins the nomination and appoints Hillary as running mate.

All the late night hosts are hospitalized with heart attacks from spontaneous, excessive dancing on their desks.

Drogue · February 4, 2004, 13:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Winston
I say Kerry wins the nomination and appoints Hillary as running mate.

All the late night hosts are hospitalized with heart attacks from spontaneous, excessive dancing on their desks.

Sava · February 4, 2004, 13:25

Hillary as VP... that's a sure-fire way to get me to puke...

BLLLLEEECHH!

chequita guevara · February 4, 2004, 13:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Veep candidates usually don't cost a Presidential candidate votes (unless he has a criminal record or has screwed sheep or something), but rather enhances appeal among a segment you are trying to attract.

Well, Veeps generally don't hurt your swing voters. But if they alienate your base . . .

Winston · February 4, 2004, 13:28

Imran,

LBJ became President the same way Truman did, and was re-elected for an additional term, again like Truman. So it's a bit of a mystery why you said Truman was the most recent.

Maybe you weren't keeping up with the main goal of properly remembering your country's Presidents.

And I'll mention Nixon again just for the heck of it.

Imran Siddiqui · February 4, 2004, 13:34

Quote:

LBJ became President the same way Truman did, and was re-elected for an additional term, again like Truman. So it's a bit of a mystery why you said Truman was the most recent.

The main difference is how the elections were percieved. LBJ was seen as Kennedy II. No Republican had ANY chance because people were voting based on their sadness for JFK's passing.

Truman was different. He took over very early in the term when FDR died and thus he ran on his own, not as a proxy for someone else. And, he almost lost to Thomas Dewey because of it.

I really don't consider LBJ as winning by himself. That's the difference.

Quote:

Well, Veeps generally don't hurt your swing voters. But if they alienate your base . . .

They hardly do. I can't even remember the last Veep candidate which cost the person at the top of the ticket votes. Lieberman didn't cost Gore votes, even though he's basically a Republican.

chequita guevara · February 4, 2004, 13:37

Lieberman definately cost Gore votes. It made him seem too conservative, which sent a lot of people over to Nader.

Imran Siddiqui · February 4, 2004, 13:39

Quote:

Lieberman definately cost Gore votes. It made him seem too conservative, which sent a lot of people over to Nader.

BULL! Nader was polling 5% before Gore announced his Veep. If anything it INCREASED his vote total as Jews in Florida and other states came out in droves for Gore. It was a very, very, very smart Veep pick. The one smart thing Gore did during his campaign.

MrFun · February 4, 2004, 14:42

Quote:

Originally posted by OzzyKP
Well if Kerry is going to write off the south and try to cobble together all the other states, he may want a Veep from some of the other swing states like West Virginia or Illinois or something.

I don't think it would be good strategy for Kerry to just shirk off the South -- he needs to make an effort to win at least three or four Southern states while having Edwards as his running mate.

But as some have argued already, Edwards probably won't accept.

MrFun · February 4, 2004, 14:56

Oh, and Edwards is 50!?

He sure don't look like it.

GePap · February 4, 2004, 14:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

I don't think so, really. Veep candidates usually don't cost a Presidential candidate votes (unless he has a criminal record or has screwed sheep or something), but rather enhances appeal among a segment you are trying to attract.

See the Vice Presidency of Dan Quayle for that.

The only problem with Graham is that he is fairly old. And Breux is basically the same as Miller, only less outspoken about it.

Miller would alienate many liberals: Miller is simply a conservative, if still a democrat. As I have said, Lieberman is like an Olympia Snow in tersm of leanings, but Miller is closer to Tom Delay than Bill Clinton, that democratic voters are NOT looking for such a man.

Breaux is not as conservative, and more importantly, he keeps his mouth shut..so he can pass of as more moderate than he may be-not Miller.

Sorry Imran, but you aren't going to sell us on your senator.

Imran Siddiqui · February 4, 2004, 15:15

Quote:

Sorry Imran, but you aren't going to sell us on your senator.

I hope not. My Senators are Frank Lautenberg and Jim Corzine

.

Oh, you are talking about Miller... sorry, but I want to see Kerry win and he'll need to be competitive in the South for the best chance. Miller gives him the best chance to do so.

GePap · February 4, 2004, 15:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Oh, you are talking about Miller... sorry, but I want to see Kerry win and he'll need to be competitive in the South for the best chance. Miller gives him the best chance to do so.

Perhaps gain Georgia and perhaps loose Pennsylvania? perhaps loose Florida? Nah, Miller most certainly is NOT the guy.

Breaux' OK, Graham even better.

GePap · February 4, 2004, 15:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

Sorry Imran, but you aren't going to sell us on your senator.

I hope not. My Senators are Frank Lautenberg and Jim Corzine

.

Lets clarify this: your family lives in Atlanta and you study in NJ or are you unlucky enough to be from NJ?

Imran Siddiqui · February 4, 2004, 15:27

Quote:

your family lives in Atlanta and you study in NJ or are you unlucky enough to be from NJ?

I originally hail from the great state of New Jersey (which aside from the weather is the best state in the union) and my family resides there as well, on the Jersey Shore.

I study in Atlanta for Law School, a) because it is warmer, b) because there aren't any Top 50 law schools in Jersey (Rutgers is 2nd tier).

Quote:

Perhaps gain Georgia and perhaps loose Pennsylvania? perhaps loose Florida? Nah, Miller most certainly is NOT the guy.

I bet that you'd get Florida as well as Georgia (especially with Northern Florida). And I don't think Zell would lose ya Pennsylvannia (but he may be able to get South Carolina or Tennessee for you).

debeest · February 4, 2004, 15:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
How many defeated primary opponents become vice president candidates? It's rare for a reason. I think hoping that Edwards or Clark takes the nod is asking too much. Look for someone else.

I'm not sure that every one of these ran in the primaries that year, but: Lieberman 2000, Kemp 1996, Gore 1992, Bush 1980, Mondale 1976, Dole 1976, Muskie 1968......

GePap · February 4, 2004, 15:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I originally hail from the great state of New Jersey (which aside from the weather is the best state in the union) and my family resides there as well, on the Jersey Shore.

Oh, so sad really.

Quote:

I bet that you'd get Florida as well as Georgia (especially with Northern Florida). And I don't think Zell would lose ya Pennsylvannia (but he may be able to get South Carolina or Tennessee for you).

Why would anyone vote for the dems. if Zell MIller was there? could they claim he would be able to moderate social policy? If so, this alienates the Democratic base..if all they want is a southern name on the ballot, there are plenty of those. Georgia is not a swing state either. So he is popular in georgia, big whoop.