Veeps.... Would it be better for the person who came in second in the primaries in terms of

GreenPartyVoter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Aug-07-08 07:44 PM
Original message

Poll question: Veeps.... Would it be better for the person who came in second in the primaries in terms of

delegates or votes to automatically become the Veep? Or is it preferable to continue the tradition of a) allowing the POTUS nominee to select someone (s)he prefers and b) using the timing of the announcement to garner a bounce in the polls?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bigwillq

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Aug-07-08 07:46 PM
Response to Original message

1. Let the nominee choose

that is his/her's first duty as our nominee.

In the past, though, it has been the second place finisher because the nominee thought that would be the best route to take.

It surely is interesting to see what Obama does this year.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

GreenPartyVoter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Aug-07-08 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #1

7. I agree. It will be very interesting to see what Obama does.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Mike Nelson

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Aug-07-08 07:48 PM
Response to Original message

2. Leave it the Nominee's decision

Why change it?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Muttocracy

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Aug-07-08 07:50 PM
Response to Original message

3. The primaries/caucuses are not all on the same date, so 2nd place

isn't that straightforward. Who can and will hang in there even if they're not ahead depends way too much on media and money. If financial endurance is all it takes, that will make things even less fair.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

GreenPartyVoter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Aug-07-08 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #3

6. That's a good point. There would have to be quite an overhaul to the system

on many levels in order to make sure it isn't just another case of someone buying the office.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nsd

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Aug-07-08 07:51 PM
Response to Original message

4. This could be disastrous.

In 1988, the runner-up was Jesse Jackson. In 1992, the runner-up was Jerry Brown. In 1996, there was no runner-up since Bill Clinton was essentially unopposed.

This year has been exceptional because we had two strong candidates who both collected a lot of delegates. But a lot of years it isn't close at all. Somebody wins the early contests and the race is effectively over, with the strongest opponents throwing in the towel and only marginal candidates holding on. We don't want the runner-up in those cases.

Also, the VP has to be someone the presidential nominee can work with, during the campaign and during the presidency. He or she should pick.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

BlooInBloo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Aug-07-08 07:52 PM
Response to Original message

5. Only Clinton supporters would want that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

book_worm

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Aug-07-08 08:01 PM
Response to Original message

8. In 1972 George Wallace got more votes than George McGovern should he have been the Dem nominee?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

OnionPatch

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Aug-07-08 08:04 PM
Response to Original message

9. I like the way it is now.

If we choose the one with the second-most votes, it may be someone who doesn't complement the nominee very well. Maybe they would be too much alike and both be lacking in the same area. I like the way the nominee can choose a VP who "rounds out" the ticket and brings something to the table that perhaps the nominee lacks.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

GreenPartyVoter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Aug-07-08 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #9

10. Good point about the balance thing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

saltpoint

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Aug-07-08 08:30 PM
Response to Original message

11. I like the protocol of the nominee asking the delegates to confirm his choice.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

RichGirl

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Aug-07-08 08:48 PM
Response to Original message

12. In 2004...

Edwards was runner up. Yes the nominee picks. If he's smart he picks the runner up who can get him the most votes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

marimour

(696 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Aug-07-08 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #12

13. great plan kerry had. worked out so well for him.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Tue May 07th 2024, 01:25 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

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.