Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

A good reason for going left in the VP choice

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
genius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:04 PM
Original message
A good reason for going left in the VP choice
The right-wing is pretty good at assassinating our liberal Presidents. If a liberal is in the wings ready to take over, they won't do anything to Kerry. Both he and the country escape a nightmare if he has a liberal VP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
cjbuchanan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. Unless they assassinate both of them.
And the plot thickens.

I guess this idea is kind of like selecting Dan Quayle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
2. Not true, Gore was more liberal than Clinton
Edited on Fri Apr-09-04 02:07 PM by tom_paine
The Busheviks had plans to "take him out", either the way Clinton did or perhaps the Real Thing, once Clinton was given the business.

The way to go here is to Go SOUTH not necessarily Left (though I wouldn't be opposed to that)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
T Wolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Max
Cleland
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #3
19. Max Cleland would be the VP pick if he had won re-election
Edited on Sat Apr-10-04 12:54 AM by Hippo_Tron
Granted Max is a GREAT guy who stood up for what he believed in and got destroyed by the Rove smear machine. If I were Kerry I'd feel horrible knowing that I couldn't choose Max because he lost re-election. It's like saying you did the right thing but I have to punch you in the face because you did the right thing. But thats just the reality of politics. We can only hope that karma catches up to Rove and Saxby Chambliss.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bombtrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:15 PM
Response to Original message
4. This is the most rediculous statement, sorry.
As if there's some inner circle of evildoers who were all in on Lincoln, McKinley, and Kennedy. None of them, by the way, were exceptionally liberal either. They were in some ways, but in other ways they were somewhat or very conservative. Kennedy was basically a centrist, as the 60 election was really a centrist vs. centrist race. McKinley was a pro-trust company republican. And Lincoln was very religious, very non separation of church and state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mobuto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. No, the conspiracy targeted James A. Garfield.
We all know that They got Garfield just like They got Kennedy and Ron Brown and early-1990s Latin rock sensantion, Selena.

Garfield was actually a pretty decent President; his successor, Chester A. Arthur, was absolutely terrible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Layman Donating Member (138 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
17. What exactly does,"Kennedy was basically a centrist' mean?
THE SECOND BIGGEST LIE
by Michael Morrissey
The biggest lie of our time, after the Warren Report, is the notion that Johnson merely continued or expanded Kennedy's policy in Vietnam after the assassination.
Sometime after that Kennedy told O'Donnell again that
"...he had made up his mind that after his reelection he would take the risk of
unpopularity and make a complete withdrawal of American military forces from Vietnam. He had decided that our military involvement in Vietnam's civil war would only grow steadily bigger and more costly without making a dent in the larger political problem of Communist expansion in Southeast Asia" (p. 13).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Layman Donating Member (138 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #4
18. What exactly does,"Kennedy was basically a centrist' mean?
THE SECOND BIGGEST LIE
by Michael Morrissey
The biggest lie of our time, after the Warren Report, is the notion that Johnson merely continued or expanded Kennedy's policy in Vietnam after the assassination.
Sometime after that Kennedy told O'Donnell again that
"...he had made up his mind that after his reelection he would take the risk of
unpopularity and make a complete withdrawal of American military forces from Vietnam. He had decided that our military involvement in Vietnam's civil war would only grow steadily bigger and more costly without making a dent in the larger political problem of Communist expansion in Southeast Asia" (p. 13).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiCoup2K4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:50 PM
Response to Original message
6. I agree that Kerry needs a progressive VP for a number of reasons
...but I have to admit this is one that didn't even make the list. However, it definitely applies to the McCain argument ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wasichu Donating Member (74 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:50 PM
Response to Original message
7. you are right
they killed Carnahan, Wellstone and possibly JFK jr.
They wouldn't hesitate if McCain was VP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Right. Also who would we want to take over if something happened
We certainly don't want to come this far just to give the country back to the right wingers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
8. I'm not convinced
Edited on Fri Apr-09-04 03:05 PM by WI_DEM
of the accuracy of your argument. A good example is Mckinley being replaced by the more liberal/activist TR. also it is, imo, debateable if JFK was more liberal than LBJ.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. McKinley was a Republican. The Republicans weren't behind it.
Normally, these days, it's the Republicans who are running around with the guns and doing violent things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiCoup2K4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Lincoln was a Republican as well.
But I certainly wouldn't call John Wilkes Booth a Democrat (at least not how I understand the term)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dolstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
9. You're assuming that a ticket with two liberals can win
NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Festivito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 08:46 PM
Response to Original message
13. Would Kucinich give us Ohio?
If so, that would be so much fun.

Hey, I was rooting for Edwards. But, Ohio, Ohio would be worth even the chance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnKleeb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. it could
I'd like either Edwards or Kucinich tho I see the latter as unlikely but it would be cool.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 12:55 AM
Response to Reply #13
20. Honestly, no
As much as I like Kucinich, he won't bring Ohio with him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 08:48 PM
Response to Original message
14. Good point.
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
16. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC