VP picks and the candidates

I got to thinking just now, and this is where I went-

Dean/Clark BAD ticket. I'll have a problem with that and I'm pretty damned committed to beating Bush no matter what. It's not a good combination, imho, and that's essentially all this is. I'm looking to my fellow DUers to help me sort through this train of thought.

Dean is a centrist, ok, fine. The polls notwithstanding, the truth is most of America is NOT centrist. MOST of us are left, except we've all given up so that only a handful of us are left being heard from. I'm not posting this to slam on any position along the political spectrum, but rather to ask if anyone is concerned with a ticket combo that is too centrist to take the win next year?

If Dean were the nominee for instance, I'd want someone more liberal on there with him to help counter his centrist tendencies. Clark isn't quite there, much as I respect and genuinely have affection for him. Clark is a good man, VP to Dean? No. He'll disappear in all the centrist BS and NONE of his positions will be heard.

Anyone else have the same gut feeling?

"...the truth is most of America is NOT centrist. MOST of us are left"

My observations have led me to conclude that America is very polarized right now and that it will take a centrist (and therefore, compromise) to bring the two sides together. While I wish you were correct in your statement that most of America is left, I just don't think that's very realistic.

And I love Kucinich but I think Clark has the best chance of beating Bush in 2004. But that's the realist in me.

and yes, I know it's not necessarily accurate, but I genuinely believe it is. Moreover, I'm not speaking of registered voters, but population over-all. Most of the people I'm close to aren't registered, purely because they're left of center and nobody speaks for them. This has held true in at least 7 states I've lived in.

That's precisely what I'm getting at with this- the people even Dean says we need to motivate aren't registered to vote and won't do so to vote for Dean. We need a winning margin that can't be cheated from us, and I honestly doubt Dean is the guy to make that happen.

Even so, going with the premise that he's the front-runner now, I'm asking what others would want in a VP candidate and is centrism part of those criteria?

Sorry for the reality check. VP is mostly just window dressing. May be helpful in moving legislation through if s/he is known and trusted in Congress.

Dean is a smart politician who knows how to pick his fights. He's an incrementalist who wants to inch us forward in the right (left) direction. I think he needs an insider on the ticket who is well-versed on the ins and outs of capitol politics.

I'd love to see Dean announce Clark as his Secy of State at the convention and have Clark hit the campaign trail hard to push the DEMOCRATIC party foreign policy platform. I think that would more than make up for Dean's lack of FP experience. Besides, Clark would probably be the best SOS in our lifetimes.

You are going to have to go South for aV.P...and that should be Edwards, that is if he doesn't make it as President, I think he will be a surprise in N.H and Iowa...Some in the south like Dean and with Edwards working with him,we might see a solid democratic south again.

politician. He would push his ideas forward at all times and could be counted on to speak his mind, even if his positions were different from that of the head of the ticket.

Clark only is viable as the Presidential candidate, and only during this one specific set of circumstances. A good analogy for Clark is this, to paraphrase one of his slogans: if the plumbing in your house is broken, you get a plumber. Right now, this time out, the US needs a "hired gun" rather than a politician. We need a liberal leaning candidate who has the credentials to justify the claim that this guy will do the job better than the guy we already have. Clark is a guy who knows how to get things done, even facing a recalcitrant establishment like the GOP House and Senate. He knows how to deal with our former allies and can present himself to the mideast as the hero of a million and a half Balkan Muslims. He also doesn't have a record of votes and decisions and compromises to dog him throughout the campaign.

It is a lot harder, in a time of war like this, to get away with attacking a military "hero" than just another liberal democrat. Those kinds of attack only undermine the Bush administrations own claims and policies.

If things were different, Kerry would be the obvious choice for the democratic nomination and have a very good shot. In the world that Bush made, one way or another, something else is called for than the "same old, same old," even if packaged (for now) in a bright new populist leftist wrapping.

My guy is Kucinich. I know he's FAR LEFT. Ok, so for a VP slot, I want him to pick someone a bit more centrist than he is. Why? To reassure the centrists they're still being spoken for, and to ensure the whole country doesn't think electing him would be a sudden downfall into "socialism, communism, etc.".

I say he ought to ask Clark to run as his VP. Between the two they could easily justify cutting the Pentagon budget, and Clark could say "Look, Dennis, here's where we're going to have to give a little to get most of what we want.". I like the combo because Clark is left without being percieved as "fringe", AND because he knows what it's like to live a bipartisan life overall. It's NOT easy! LOL

Culturally, Kucinich is the most left of the candidates. In terms of actual policy proposals, he may be a lot more centrist (middle of the road on abortion, pro-flag amendment, deficit hawk) than he's usually given credit for.

Clark, who's lived his life in a big government institution may actually be a good bit more to the progressive left as far as policies go, but he instinctively couches his rhetoric in terms of cultural centrism. He's less centrist than you would think.

Clark, Kucinich, and Sharpton are only ones who've come out in favor of actually cutting the defense budget.

I would love to see a Clark/Kucinich ticket because Dennis is awesome but i dont think he could win running as president first but maybe if he were to be VP he would have a pretty good shot at winning after the Clark term is up.

Differentiating between cultural and policy positions. I hadn't occurred to me to do so, but it explains why Dennis is constistently seen as further left than his actual platform.

I'm a little conflicted with Clark. I generally like the positions he's taking since declaring his candidacy, although I think his platform needs more weight domestically. I am not fully comfortable with his history. I don't necessarily hold it against him, but I have a hesitation. I just don't feel a level of comfort. Yet, I would like to, because I like what I'm hearing from him now. I'd support a Kucinich/Clark ticket.

They would make an interesting team, based on your analysis.

Unless we want another 2000.

If it is Clark:

Clark/Landrieu
Clark/Edwards
Clark/Feinstein (Though I do insert a worry here because of her successor being appointed by Arnold)

Dean/Nunn
Dean/Breaux

Kerry/Edwards
Kerry/Richardson (though he's said he wouldn't)

Gephardt/Edwards
Gephardt/Harold Ford (though he may not be old enough)

j/k haha...Id deplore such a ticket but nevertheless, unbeatable.

Oprah secures the every woman vote, many unemployed men who watch daytime TV, many African-americans and other ethnic groups, etc, all paired with Dean's groups. :)

Totally non political, yet eletcable VP for really any candidate. It is a scary world when a daytime talk show host is probably more "electable" than a presidential candidate.

to be thinking about the VP slot, I suspect that Dean will offer it to Graham. That's based on how highly Dean spoke of Graham back in May at a fundraiser in Kansas City.

Dean/Graham

Clark/Edwards

Kerry/Clark

Gephart/Breaux

Those are the 4 I personally believe have any realistic chance of winning the nomination. I think a Southerner is essential on the ticket.

if most of America was leftist. That's the brutal reality of the matter.