Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 29, 2014, 05:56:49 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
| | |-+  Kerry/Vilsack would have beaten Bush/Cheney
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Author Topic: Kerry/Vilsack would have beaten Bush/Cheney  (Read 22059 times)
Michael Z
Mike
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4335
Political Matrix
E: -5.88, S: -4.72

View Profile
« Reply #25 on: September 06, 2006, 05:16:00 pm »
Ignore

It was John Kerry who was the problem with the Democratic ticket, not the VP nominee.  People do not vote for Vice President, they vote for President, the one at the top of the ticket.     

Exactly. I really think the VP role tends to be slightly overrated in Presidential elections. If people really paid attention to running mates, Dukakis or Dole probably would have picked up more votes than they did.
Logged
dazzleman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13821
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

View Profile
« Reply #26 on: September 09, 2006, 06:59:09 am »
Ignore

It was John Kerry who was the problem with the Democratic ticket, not the VP nominee.  People do not vote for Vice President, they vote for President, the one at the top of the ticket.     

Exactly. I really think the VP role tends to be slightly overrated in Presidential elections. If people really paid attention to running mates, Dukakis or Dole probably would have picked up more votes than they did.

That's largely true, but VP picks can have some influence.

I think Bush might have been better off politically had he dumped Cheney in 2004.  Cheney was picked because of his gravitas and perceived competence in 2000, something that Bush was seen as needing due to his reputation as a bit of a lightweight, with no foreign policy experience.

In terms of traditional politics, Cheney was a zero politically.  He was from a 3-electoral-vote state that always votes Republican.  He did more to solidify the base than bring in new voters.

Rightly or not, Cheney has become a liability politically, but as VP, he can't be dumped.  I always thought he was more suited to appointed office than elected office.

As far as Kerry goes, he was the primary problem.  It's so hard for me to respect a man who was calling for action against Iraq since 1997, loudly proclaiming the need to rid them of their WMDs, who then instantly caves in to the moveon.org people less than a year into the war and starts peddling the notion that the Bush administration caused the whole thing.

With leadership like that, we could never hope to accomplish anything positive.  Kerry is fundamentally a very weak man, an enough voters perceived that to vote against him.

However, he did make a basic choice, in picking Edwards, that he would attempt to crack the south.  He failed at that, and in retrospect, he would have had a better chance in doing better in the midwest, so a midwesterner would probably have been a better pick for VP.  Edwards got him a big goose egg.
Logged
Joel the Attention Whore
Joel
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 472


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: September 09, 2006, 11:43:09 am »
Ignore

Bush was seen as needing due to his reputation as a bit of a lightweight, with no foreign policy experience.

To those who believe that Edwards would have done better than Kerry as head of the ticket, this is the reason why he would not have.  Kerry was a military man and a long-time Senator.  He lost the security vote.  Edwards was a former trial lawyer and a one-term Senator who spoke of "two Americas."  Edwards would have been soundly defeated.
Logged

Joel
Fantasy Elections:
Northeast Governor
Former Lt. Governor


Joel Mahoney was a phoney
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10459


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: September 09, 2006, 01:01:29 pm »
Ignore

Bush was seen as needing due to his reputation as a bit of a lightweight, with no foreign policy experience.

To those who believe that Edwards would have done better than Kerry as head of the ticket, this is the reason why he would not have.  Kerry was a military man and a long-time Senator.  He lost the security vote.  Edwards was a former trial lawyer and a one-term Senator who spoke of "two Americas."  Edwards would have been soundly defeated.

Welcome to the forums, Joel.

I have to agree with both you and with Dazzleman.

Kerry lost on his own accord, nothing to do with Edwards.  The so called "southern strategy" ploy by Kerry was a miserable failure.  Edwards brought nothing to the ticket.

It would not matter who Kerry's running mate was, it would not result in a Kerry win.  Putting Graham on the ticket would not reverse a Bush margin of 381,000 votes in Florida. 

Edwards as the nominee would have resulted in a bigger defeat for the Democrats.  Add possibly New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin to the Bush totals.   
« Last Edit: September 09, 2006, 01:06:21 pm by Winfield »Logged




WORST PRESIDENT
SINCE WORLD WAR II
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58783
India


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: September 10, 2006, 04:32:26 pm »
Ignore

Bush was seen as needing due to his reputation as a bit of a lightweight, with no foreign policy experience.

To those who believe that Edwards would have done better than Kerry as head of the ticket, this is the reason why he would not have.  Kerry was a military man and a long-time Senator.  He lost the security vote.  Edwards was a former trial lawyer and a one-term Senator who spoke of "two Americas."  Edwards would have been soundly defeated.

Welcome to the forums, Joel.

I have to agree with both you and with Dazzleman.

Kerry lost on his own accord, nothing to do with Edwards.  The so called "southern strategy" ploy by Kerry was a miserable failure.  Edwards brought nothing to the ticket.
There was no serious attempt at a "southern strategy" anyhow. It was just spin.
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines