Running Mates

[12th Doctor]

This is the way I see it:



Kerry/Edwards- the natural ticket if Kerry and Edwards finish 1st and 2nd respectivly

Edwards/Gepardt- if Edwards wins, forget Kerry, this is, I believe the most dangerous ticket for Bush to take-on, Edwards from the south, Gepardt from the mid-west

Clark/Gramm- heavy military and heavy south, Gramm is unpopular in Florida at the moment, however, and I think that as time goes on, more people will begin to realize how bad a candidate Clark is

Dean/Richardson- the new-Democrats take on the GOP, Dean seeks support in the southwest and so picks Richardson, also, Dean will need to pick an outsider, because he has alianated ALL of the other presidential candidates

[12th Doctor]

This is the way I see it:



Kerry/Edwards- the natural ticket if Kerry and Edwards finish 1st and 2nd respectivly

Edwards/Gepardt- if Edwards wins, forget Kerry, this is, I believe the most dangerous ticket for Bush to take-on, Edwards from the south, Gepardt from the mid-west

Clark/Gramm- heavy military and heavy south, Gramm is unpopular in Florida at the moment, however, and I think that as time goes on, more people will begin to realize how bad a candidate Clark is

Dean/Richardson- the new-Democrats take on the GOP, Dean seeks support in the southwest and so picks Richardson, also, Dean will need to pick an outsider, because he has alianated ALL of the other presidential candidates

I think Kerry/Edwards could give Bush/Cheney fits, and perhaps even eke out a victory if a swing state or two goes their way.  Kerry's foreign policy and domestic experience (plus a decorated war vet) and Edward's youth, charisma and common touch could net the Democrats Ohio, West Virginia, Arkansas, Arizona, Nevada, New Hampshire and Florida, all swing states, all states hat Gore lost.  The math is pretty simple.  Let's say Kerry/Edwards win every state that Gore won except for Minnesota and Iowa (I think both of these states have a better than 50% chance of going to Bush in 2004).  That would give them 243 electoral votes.   Winning Florida (27) would give them 270.  Winning Ohio (20) and Arizona (10) would give them 273.  
 

While Edwards/Gephardt would have the south and midwest thing going, Bush/Cheney will pummle them on lack of national security and foreign policy experience.   What made Bush/Cheney a decent ticket in 2000 was a governor (executive experience) and a cabinet member from a previous administration.  Clinton and Gore gave us a governor and senator with war experience.  Edwards and Gephardt would lose.

I don't consider Dean or Clark as electable.  Dean because he would lose several states that Gore won (Illinois and Michigan for starters) and Clark, because he is just not ready.

As one poster pointed out in another thread, Ohio and Missouri may be the key states.

Hoops

I don't think that any ticket with a New England liberal at the top can win the election.  That means Kerry, Liebermann or Dean.  None of them can win if they are the top of the top of the ticket.  That's why I think that Edwards is the only one who has a chance of defeating Bush.  Also, the Dems need to prove that they are an AMERICAN party, not just the party of the Northeast and Pacific West.

[12th Doctor]

This is the way I see it:



Kerry/Edwards- the natural ticket if Kerry and Edwards finish 1st and 2nd respectivly

Edwards/Gepardt- if Edwards wins, forget Kerry, this is, I believe the most dangerous ticket for Bush to take-on, Edwards from the south, Gepardt from the mid-west

Clark/Gramm- heavy military and heavy south, Gramm is unpopular in Florida at the moment, however, and I think that as time goes on, more people will begin to realize how bad a candidate Clark is

Dean/Richardson- the new-Democrats take on the GOP, Dean seeks support in the southwest and so picks Richardson, also, Dean will need to pick an outsider, because he has alianated ALL of the other presidential candidates

I think Kerry/Edwards could give Bush/Cheney fits, and perhaps even eke out a victory if a swing state or two goes their way.  Kerry's foreign policy and domestic experience (plus a decorated war vet) and Edward's youth, charisma and common touch could net the Democrats Ohio, West Virginia, Arkansas, Arizona, Nevada, New Hampshire and Florida, all swing states, all states hat Gore lost.  The math is pretty simple.  Let's say Kerry/Edwards win every state that Gore won except for Minnesota and Iowa (I think both of these states have a better than 50% chance of going to Bush in 2004).  That would give them 243 electoral votes.   Winning Florida (27) would give them 270.  Winning Ohio (20) and Arizona (10) would give them 273.  
 

While Edwards/Gephardt would have the south and midwest thing going, Bush/Cheney will pummle them on lack of national security and foreign policy experience.   What made Bush/Cheney a decent ticket in 2000 was a governor (executive experience) and a cabinet member from a previous administration.  Clinton and Gore gave us a governor and senator with war experience.  Edwards and Gephardt would lose.

I don't consider Dean or Clark as electable.  Dean because he would lose several states that Gore won (Illinois and Michigan for starters) and Clark, because he is just not ready.

As one poster pointed out in another thread, Ohio and Missouri may be the key states.

Hoops

I don't think that any ticket with a New England liberal at the top can win the election.  That means Kerry, Liebermann or Dean.  None of them can win if they are the top of the top of the ticket.  That's why I think that Edwards is the only one who has a chance of defeating Bush.  Also, the Dems need to prove that they are an AMERICAN party, not just the party of the Northeast and Pacific West.

You call Lieberman a "northeaterns liberal"? Northeastern, yeah, but liberal???

Liebermann is economically liberal.  Granted that he is far more conservative than the others, but he is still liberal when compared to the rest of the country.

[12th Doctor]

well I don't see edwards being the nominee, maybe VP that is wide open.  Kerry is a liberal just like Ted Kennedy and Bush will do very well vs him among independants.

Bush's approval rating is around 58-60%.  Whch means a number of independants like him too.  Plus recent polls I've seen even 20% of Democrats would vote for Bush.

That was against Dean, that wouldn't happen against edwards, or even Kerry for that matter.

Kerry would do better than ted Kennedy.

Kerry prides himself on being MORE LIBERAL than Ted Kennedy.

[12th Doctor]

do i like lieberman, not really, but hey i got to support my fellow jews... that would be a huge spet for our regilion and for isreal if he were elected. what should have happened is he should be the first jewish vice president right now

I would never vote for Kennedy, even if he is Catholic.  I wouldn't vote for anyone of my religious backround, simply because they are of my religion.  i vote for people based on the issues.

[12th Doctor]

i understand, but its different for you then me. if you havent noticed by now im a jew, and if a person like lieberman was to win that would be huge for my people. the suitation in isreal isnt getting any better and to mention me being an american jew makes me one the most hated people in the world right from the start. you wouldnt understand i guess... plus it doesnt matter lieberman is going to lose anyway someone needs to tell him hes a republican.. did i mention kerrys endorsement from walter mondale today..you all might think who cares we got murdered in the election but it so happens that he is one of the those selective superdelegates

When you put it like that, I understand, I really do.  A very large minority of people in this country are anti-semitic whether they admit it or not and most of the nations in the UN have a clearly anti-semitic bias.  I personally admire the stregth of Israel and the Jewish people.  That's not just lip-service I really do.

[12th Doctor]

Kerry will easily win NH.  Over the next few weeks Lieberman and Dean fail to win anywhere and will both proably drop out.  This clears the way for Kerry, Edwards does well in the South and woudl be a good pick for VP

Dean will win in Michigan and Arizona I think.  That maybe enough to keep him in it.  Not to mention that Sharpton will start to pick-up votes in the south.

[12th Doctor]

Kerry will easily win NH.  Over the next few weeks Lieberman and Dean fail to win anywhere and will both proably drop out.  This clears the way for Kerry, Edwards does well in the South and woudl be a good pick for VP

Dean will win in Michigan and Arizona I think.  That maybe enough to keep him in it.  Not to mention that Sharpton will start to pick-up votes in the south.

Yeah, of course he will win Arizona. Don't let the fact that he lost half his support there in one week and is currently in 3rd place there disturb that prediction....

I think that Dean will gain a bit more steam after New Hampshire.  Remember, Dean is the only candidate who has a 50 state organization in place and he has the most important thing: money.

[12th Doctor]

Well I saw Grham int he last few days syaing he thought the WMDs were in Syria again.  Will be hard for Dems to argue about that with Graham saying their in Syria.

Evan Byah is up for reelection this year guys and so doubtful he would take VP, I see him running in 2008.

No No Graham! I remembered that he demanded to attack to Syria in last spring after Iraq War. He doesn't sound very smart person.

The weapons are in the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon.  Anyway about Byah, do we really want another senator for Indiana as vice-president?  Did we learn ur lesson the first time?