do you think Kerry will pick a Republican Vice Pres?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by acidrock, Mar 10, 2004.

  1. acidrock macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    The Evergreen State College
    #1
    Pres. Lincoln picked a vice president from the other party, now NPR is wondering if this would work for Kerry. What do you guys think? It might actually work, but would he pick an independent or Republican?

    NPR
     
  2. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #2
    I think not but would could be interesting is if he picked Bill Clinton. there is no Law that says he couldnt.
     
  3. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #3
    The only two who it would make any sense to even consider are Powell and McCain. McCain has said he would have to consider it if his friend Kerry asked him. However, it is a terrible longshot. Powell would not likely consider it and he is very damaged goods after his promotion of the Iraqi war. McCain is so conservative on so many issues (abortion, etc.) that it would likely engender a rebellion at the Convention. It makes a nice fantasy scenario for political junkies, but is very unlikely to happen.
     
  4. wordmunger macrumors 603

    wordmunger

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Location:
    North Carolina
    #4
    No, he is much to dyed-in-the-wool Democrat for that. A non-political figure, maybe--a CEO or military type. Maybe Warren Buffett. But not a republican.
     
  5. DavisBAnimal macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    #5
    Might cause a bit of an uproar, but man, oh man, the election would be in the bag with a McCain pick.

    That said, I think Wes Clark's the only republican he'd think about picking up ;)

    Davis
     
  6. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #6
    I think it would knock the GOP on its heels, but I still think it won't happen. Clark would be fine by me and I'll ignore the slur (Michael Moore endorse a republican, I think not!) ;)
     
  7. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #7
    Interesting idea, but after he just called Republicans crooks and liars, I don't think so. :D
     
  8. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #8
    despite the spin, i believe he was referring to bush, cheney, rumsfeld, armitage, wolfowitz, ashcroft, feith and probably a few others.

    i don't think he meant the campaign guys, i don't think he meant all republicans.
     
  9. wdlove macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
  10. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #10
    george w bush lies somewhere between conservative and moderate within the gop so most republicans like him and his stances...there are some on the right wing of the party who think he should have stayed more conservative with his appointments and they didn't like powell and rice

    some fiscal conservatives and conservative isolationists, in the mold of buchannan, don't like bush for spending what he did on the war in iraq

    it would be strange if kerry picked john mccain, who is right of bush, to be a running mate

    it would be strange with bush, the moderate with a conservative vp vs.
    ...kerry a moderate to liberal democrat with an ultra conservative john mccain as vp running mate

    it would confuse people but in the end i think most conservatives would still go with bush since he is still in the republican party...but then again, i wouldn't expect mccain to leave the party

    secretary of defense cohen, an loyal republican, was clinton's defense secretary so it's not unlikely that kerry can pick a republican

    bush chose norm mineta to run department of transportation and mineta is defenitely a liberal democrat

    i hope there is some true bipartisan cooperation in dc...but i find myself a little worried that kerry would pick a running mate to the right of bush...some say to the far right of bush

    if kerry won but died or was incapacitated, then we would have a conservative too right wing to have won on his own accord to the oval office...today's gop, as conservative as it is sometimes, still will not go as far right wing as a mccain or forbes...they are idealogues and not practical for today's gop...the gop would rather win than to have a supreme loyalist in the ticket, but lose
     
  11. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #11
    I watched a press conference last night on CSPAN featuring members of all of the Democratic candidates campaign staffs. Kerry's man (sorry, forget his name) said that the campaign isn't going to be involved at all in his choice of a running mate. To hear him say it, this will be entirely Kerry's decision. Another person, I think it was a Gebhardt staffer, observed that the "conventional wisdom" about the choice of a running mate to balance the ticket either geographically or ideologically or to deliver an important state isn't necessarily a winning strategy. In fact he pointed out several recent presidential tickets where this was not the strategy in the choice. He said that the vice presidential choice is more significant for how it communicates something about the presidential candidate's priorities and character. I can see this point, and how it opens up the field to complete unknowns on no pundit's short list.
     
  12. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #12
    when mccain was running in 2000, i really wanted to see him get beat by bush in gop primaries...the media posed mccain as far too conservative and not in touch with america...but being democrat, i could not do anything to make W beat mccain

    ...the only thing i liked about mccain then was that he had "character"...but what is character if the dude is out of touch with most of america?? i also think buchannan has character, but again, he does not represent a lot of people in america today

    now that W has been in office and proved to be more conservative than he promised to be, maybe mccain as president wouldn't have been all that bad, or worse than W ;)
     
  13. Krizoitz macrumors 6502a

    Krizoitz

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Location:
    Wakayama, Japan
    #13
    Republican <=> Democrat...

    One of the most interesting things I have noticed about todays politics is how the Republicans and Democrats have basically completely switched agendas over the past 150 years.

    Civil War Republicans
    - federal gov't over states
    - civil rights

    Civil War Democrtas
    - states rights over federal
    - pro slavery

    Current Republicans
    - big buisness and small govt (states rights)
    - constitutional ammendmant against gay marriage

    Current Democrats
    - bigger govt
    - more civil rights

    Now obviously its more complicated than that, even the Republicans have big govt tendencies (i.e. the gay marriage issue) and since they came from the inudstrial north Republicans have longer had ties to industry, while Democrats have held on to the rural industry. However it is also interesting to note how the party of the elite USED to be the Democrats (plantation owners, etc) and the party of the average Joe was the Republicans (city workers, etc). Now its Democrats championing the working class and the Republicans for the rich america.

    It would be interesting to try and figure out when this occured, probably towards the end of reconstruction I would guess was the turn around.
     
  14. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #14
    Buchannan has character? The man is practically a Nazi, and I don't use that term lightly, like some people do.

    The media never convinced me that McCain is further to the right than George W. Bush. The reason Bush won the 2000 nomination over McCain is because the GOP power structure united behind Bush very early on, and that means a great deal in the Republican party. He was seen as the most "electable" and of course McCain has rubbed quite a few in his party's leadership the wrong way over the years. So if you heard negative messages about McCain in 2000, that's where it was coming from, not the media.
     
  15. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #15
    We've talked about this before, but the last progressive Republican president was Taft, and he wasn't nearly progressive enough for TR. The shift in gravity in the Democratic party from populism to progressivism probably can be traced to around the same time, with the election of Woodrow Wilson, and certainly it'd shifted clearly in that direction by 1932.
     
  16. Krizoitz macrumors 6502a

    Krizoitz

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Location:
    Wakayama, Japan
    #16
    Personally I felt McCain was far more moderate than GW and thats why the party didn't like him, he's too much of a maverick...which is of course why i voted for him in the primary
     
  17. yamabushi macrumors 65816

    yamabushi

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    #17
    I think it would be interesting if Kerry chose Rev. Jesse Jackson for a running mate.
     
  18. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #18
    The Hayes-Tilden compromise of 1876 ended radical republicanism and the support of the GOP for reconstruction (i.e. no longer supporting the goal of ending the domination of the newly freed slaves by southern white society.) IJ is right that the last of the "progressive" Republican Presidents (and only, I would argue) is TR. Taft moved so far to the right that TR forms the Bull Moose party and runs against him in 1912. Robert LaFollette, Senator from Wisconsin, tries to carry this tradition on in the 20s and 30s, but is largely unsuccessful. Some Northeastern Republicans still claim this heritage (Lincoln Chafee etc.) but are isolated in the national GOP which is dominated by Reaganites and formerly Democrat Southern Conservatives (Strom Thurmond is the best example of these.)
     
  19. TheMacOS.com macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Location:
    South of Heaven, West of Hell
  20. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #20
    buchannan does have some unpleasantly right wing views but i don't think he is a nazi, like metzger or timothy mcveigh or david duke

    when buchannan has a viewpoint, he sticks to it and he does not resort to lying and using spin...now W is a different story...he wants to fight terrorism, so goes and attacks iraq??? he talks about wmd's and then there are none??? he is so pro-military but he was awol for 18 months??? he promises tax relief but then gives most of it to the ultra rich??? he talks about defecit but he keeps on spending???

    W is so two faced and that is not something i would ever say about buchannan

    but as far as core beliefs, i am much closer to a bush, or reagan, than a buchannan or mccain who are so far to the right that they have nothing in common with conservative democrats like me
     
  21. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #21
    forgive my ignorance, but what makes mccain so right-wing?
     
  22. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #22
    at the time of the elections in 2000, W was perceived as not being hawkish...but his actions have shown otherwise since he gained the white house

    mccain seemed too hawkish for my tastes and he has never really seemed to be very sensitive to minorities and gay people...bush claimed he was in touch with hispanics...at least

    but now that i have seen the job, or lack of, that bush has done, i would love to see him go...i have no idea who kerry will pick but i have heard edward's name mentioned the most

    bush's best chance is to keep his people in place and run that way...if he drops cheney like i have heard some rumors say, he will sabotage himself...he he...which i wouldn't mind at all

    i don't think W is such a bad guy, but he does not belong in the white house...i think bush is more of a figurehead to factions within his party and sometimes i actually think he is so stupid as not to be able to tell the damage he has inflicted on this country, and iraq

    if W had made a much more serious effort to catch bin laden after 9/11, instead of practically giving up and going after saddam to divert attention away from not catching bin laden, then things might have been different
     
  23. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #23
    what i meant to ask was "how is mccain more right than bush?". if one ignores what bush says and looks at what he does, i don't see much of a difference in your examples.
     
  24. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #24
    i don't want to find out since i think mccain would be "at least" as conservative as bush has been, if not more

    what america needs right now is a good moderate to unite okur country in this hard time, not someone who is increasingly catering to one wing of american politics

    i think arnold would be a much better president than W since arnold does listen to democrats and is a true middle of the road politician
     
  25. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #25
    To put it mildly. I did say "nearly," which is close enough for government work.
     

Share This Page