MAY DATE TARGET FOR DEM MATE - NYPost

<requesting permision to post from conservative paper>

March 30, 2004 -- WASHINGTON - John Kerry is looking to name a running mate early - by the end of May - to help raise money, build momentum and serve as an attack dog, sources said yesterday.
Kerry's advisers believe they can send out their No. 2 to hammer President Bush and quickly respond to Republican charges - in a fashion similar to Bush's use of Vice President Dick Cheney, who's been giving hard-hitting anti-Kerry speeches.

Also, picking a veep nominee early would give the cash-strapped Kerry campaign free media coverage for weeks, the strategists say.

Among those under consideration are Rep. Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.), Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.), Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, former Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.), Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsak and Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.). http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/22159.htm
------------------------------------------------------

Considering that this doesn't reflect negatively on anyone in any real sense, I feel it very well may be acurate.

No Wesley Clark? No Bill Richardson?

I hope this means there are others.

I can't believe he is not considering Clark.

but how could he possibly be named in May the VP if he is on the 9-11 commission? I would prefer Clark but Bob Kerrey is an attack dog as seen during the questioning during the recent commission hearings.

the south so they can campaign with all those Senate seats up down there.

Who's helping to choose, Rove?

Bill Richardson is not an option.

Wes Clark is still Karl Rove's worst nightmare. Don't expect his name to be floated as a Veep possibility in any RW rag.

Of course, as is clear from some of the posts on DU, Wes is the LW's worst nightmare as well.

Gotta love that guy. Anyone who can set the wingnuts at both ends of the spectrum to frothin' & foamin' the way he does is definitely da man. :loveya:

Which would severely dent the Nader factor.

no foreign policy experience, Texas already solid Bush terrority.

Oh yeah, she'd be PERFECT.

Bob Kerrey as a person - nothing against him, but a ticket of Kerry & Kerrey?? It ain't gonna happen. Rendell? Who the Hell is he?? (don't bother explaining, I'm predicting the average voter reaction here.

Edwards or Graham? Might be reasonable choices, but 2 senators on one ticket is suicidal. Bayh? Republican. Gephardt? Spare me!

Looks like Dean or Richardson then ;)

People don't pick VPs based on immediate name value, dude, lol.

Later.

RJS

list at the time, if I recall correctly. Of course, that's not why Clinton picked him, but he was certainly becoming more well-known outside of Washington. But that is besides your point! ;-) You are right about name recognition. In my humble opinion, though, this election it might be better to pick someone more well-known so we don't have to introduce him to the public . . .

Suicidal?

Please do remind Kennedy/Johnson of that alarming fact.

;-)

they get instant name recognition with the vp announcement. sometimes the lesser known the better.

That's about as likely as Fox News hiring 82-year-old George McGovern to replace Bill O'Reilly.

Who the hell is Brian Blomquist and why should I care what he says his sources are saying?

There was a similar report in the NYT about a week ago. It makes sense.

Something to either stir the media into a frenzy or deliver a state.

Ed Rendell my poli sci prof, Pete Burns, will probably wet his pants, lol. Urban Policy, we had to read Buzz Bissinger's A Prayer for the City, about how Rendell took Philly from the brink of bankruptcy back to a manageable city again. You could tell he really admires Rendell. Heh, I'd dig a Rendell pick only to see his face the next day.

PROFESSOR BURNS RULES!!!!!!!!!!!

Later.

RJS

isn't the greatest but there are some interesting choices. First thing I would do is kick Gep and Bayh off, because I really think those two bring very little to the ticket.

I like Bob Kerrey, but he can't make the same case Clark and Graham can that the war on Iraq was a distraction from the war on Al Qaeda. Granted, Edwards too would be faced with this problem.

Rendell is a hell of an attack dog and I've seen him before on Hardball and other forums, but I don't think we necessarily need him as our VP to get the state -- like Richardson, I believe they can deliver the states by just campaigning for Kerry. Plus, even though PA is very close in the polls, if Gore could pull it off in the end, I believe Kerry can too. Same goes with Iowa -- small state, with not enough EVs to make it worth it. I also doubt Vilsack has the appeal outside of IA that would really matter. I also think Kerry will win IA regardless.

I would replace BAyh and Gep with Clark and Breux. Breux is too conservative for my tastes, but it seems like he's popular enough in LA to help Kerry carry the state. Granted, I would prefer Graham -- after all FL is a MUCH bigger prize, but I'm not as confident in his ability to do so. But I definetely wouldn't be dissapointed if Graham were picked.

If they are going to pick based on bringing in a State, I would go with Graham, myself.

National Security: Clark

But please not Gep, I've been told by people from the midwest that he's not all that anymore. And he's a congressman with another dread voting record and a hardly Mr. Excitement either.

is another Senator, "with another dread voting record and hardly Mr. Excitement either."

Granted, if he can get us Florida then let's go for it.