Kerry the nominee?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by mactastic, Mar 2, 2004.

  1. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #1
    Sounds like CNN is reporting that Edwards is dropping out, effective tomorrow. So unless Sharpton or Kucinich makes a strong more soon, it's all over. ;)

    Wonder if Edwards will be chosen for the #2 spot...
     
  2. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #2
    I've heard the same. Edwards is suppose to make a speech tomorrow in Raleigh announcing his withdrawal. Now it will be a question of which running mate Kerry chooses. Edwards, Clark, or Richardson are the ones most often mentioned. Looking at the electoral map and the realities of trying to take any Southern state, even with the help of a Southerner on the bottom of the ticket, I'd go with Richardson. He would help with New Mexico and Arizona. Although I sure would like to see the trial lawyer in a debate against Cheney. :D

    Now here is a nightmare scenario for all you political junkies out there. Assume Kerry carries all the states won by Gore in 2000 (for the purposes of this discussion I'll concede Florida for Bush) and he picks up New Hampshire (very possible for the New Englander, Kerry) and Nevada (which is trending more to the Democrats with the growth of Las Vegas) - what do you get? A 269 - 269 tie! It would then go to the House of Representatives for a vote with each State getting one vote. Think 2000 was a mess? Just wait for the whirlwind that will happen if the vote breaks this way.
     
  3. numediaman macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago (by way of SF)
    #3
    The theory du jour is that the election actually won't be as close as people think. I tend to agree (I'm not talking about the popular vote, but the electoral vote.)

    If you think about it, it would be easy to see a fairly big win one way or another. For instance, give Bush NM, MN and Penn, and suddenly its a huge win. Give Kerry Florida and Ohio and its an overwhelming victory for Kerry. The 1992 Bush vs Clinton election was fairly close in the popular vote (Clinton won with only 42.93% of the vote), but Clinton ended up with 370 EC delegates vs 168 for Bush.

    First guess: forget about Florida and Georgia -- right now Bush and Kerry are even in Florida right now. With big job losses, an unjust war, Bush caught in lies, etc. and its still even? Forget it, Bush wins easy barring a big development.

    But Ohio can be had. Maybe Missouri, Iowa & Arizona.

    On Bush's side, I can see some manipulation of the news cycle (capturing ObL, for instance) helping him in Oregon, NM, maybe WI or MN, & PA. Forget the silly talk about CA being in play. If Bush were able to win CA then it would be a win of Nixonian proportions.

    In any case, it is gonna get real dirty, real fast.

    By the way, looks like the Political Discussions board has been relegated to the minor leagues. Maybe we need to start some guns discussion to liven things up again? ;)
     
  4. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #4
    I see you've been using your time in exile well. Without doing the numbers, I think Kerry has to pick a running mate who will help him win a large battleground state. This tends to argue against the three most often mentioned. Kerry might just pull a rabbit out of his hat -- most nominees do this, if only for the rush of media attention it receives, and its contribution to that all-important momentum factor. Remember Mondale's choice of Ferrarro? For a few minutes there, it looked like he might even have a prayer. One thing's for certain, Kerry's choice will tell us a lot about how he will run his campaign. Naming Edwards or even Richardson would suggest an abundance of caution, and I'm not sure that sort of strategy wins this election.
     
  5. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #5
    Yes, exile is good for thinking up strange possibilities. I've been in exile in the realm of Presidential politics for most of my adult life - Clinton was the first person I voted for that actually won. In '76 I voted for a minor party candidate instead of Carter and that was the start of a long time in the wilderness even though I voted for democrats there after. Think St. Helena not Elba.

    About the VP selection, don't you think naming the first Latino candidate for national office would be a bold step? With a Richardson nomination, Kerry would be saying he is not thinking in just the traditional North-South ticket balancing terms. How he would be as a candidate is unknown. He did win in New Mexico and has the Gubernatorial credentials that are often looked on with favor.

    Edwards would be the obvious and therefore the most boring pick. That doesn't mean it wouldn't be a good one. Traditionally VPs are the attack dogs on the campaign trail. Edwards has the skills to be outstanding in that role. As I said before, I would love to see him in a debate with Cheney.

    Clark would bring strength to an already existing strength. If Kerry wants to reinforce the idea with voters that "Hey, this is the war heroes ticket, and the Republicans are all folks who didn't face the fire" then this is a good pick. It only helps marginally in the South, although if it meant carrying only Arkansas that could be the difference.

    Other picks? Of the possible women candidates Senator Feinstein and Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano are the most often talked about. Feinstein is not likely because Kerry is going to win California anyway. Napolitano maybe the dark horse candidate that wins the race.
     
  6. numediaman macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago (by way of SF)
    #6
    V.P.: Too bad Harold Ford Jr. from TN is too young (I think he is only 34). I think he is telegenic, and very bright. I love the way he has conveyed Kerry's positions without being overly aggressive -- very articulate.

    Richardson is very qualified, but he has said over and over that he wants to stay governor (though you never know).

    Kennedy picked Johnson for purely political reasons, so this might go into Kerry's thinking. Maybe he'll pick Tom DeLay. ;) (or how about Zell Miller? The first V.P. to be openly hostile to his running mate! The Dems could decline debates with Bush so that they could have debates between Miller and Kerry.)
     
  7. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #7
    St. Helena, as in, the whine country? I suppose I must have voted for Carter in '76, though it was his nomination that ultimately drove me into the independent column where I've been ever since. Supported Anderson in '80. Think I've still got the button around here somewhere.

    I hadn't heard about Napolitano being on the short list (or the pundit's short list anyway). Might make an interesting choice.
     
  8. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #8
    I'm sure Napoleon spent a lot of time "whining" in his exile after Waterloo and I've done my share as well over the years, mostly dealing with recovering from drowning my sorrows on election morning afters.

    Yes, Napolitano is an intriguing possibility that would obviously help in Arizona and make a huge difference in the "gender gap" nationwide. I just don't know enough about her to know what kind of candidate she would make.
     
  9. Thanatoast macrumors 6502a

    Thanatoast

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    Denver
    #9
    Just to throw it out there, what if Cheney goes the way of the dodo and Bush picks Condoleeza as his VP? He's ballsy enough to try it I think, to grab the female and minority vote, or at least take enough away to hurt the Dems. Would this then force Kerry to pick a female candidate as well? I don't know anything about the female Dems mentioned here. It would also make a cool dynamic for having the first woman vp, no matter who wins. :D
     
  10. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #10
    Two problems with this scenario. First, the Democrats go first. Second, it looks like Cheney is very close to Bush, and indeed all the reports are that Bush depends on Cheney for many things (some have gone so far as to call Cheney the real power behind the throne.) It is unlikely Bush will dump Cheney because of this relationship.

    I think it would take a real health problem or a scandal around Cheney that looks very dangerous to Bush’s chances to make this happen.
     
  11. Sparky's macrumors 6502a

    Sparky's

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    #11
    Has anyone considered what will happen to Kerrys campaign when Hillary decides to push for the "Vice" position, all the talk I hear is how Kerry can't afford NOT to give it to her but then how much it will damage his chances.
     
  12. mactastic thread starter macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #12
    Why the hell would Kerry pick HRC for a running mate? Hmm, lets put TWO northern liberals on the ticket, that'll guarantee we win the south. :rolleyes:

    Hillary will stay out until '08. Maybe even '12 if Kerry gets re-elected.
     
  13. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #13
    is this actually being speculated?
     
  14. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #14
    Only by the right-wing commentators who can't leave their grudges against the Clintons out of an election that has nothing to do with them. Hillary would be one of the last people Kerry would choose, and if he did she would be a fool to accept it. She has committed herself to finishing out her Senate term and if she broke her word it would destroy her chances of retaining her seat. In return all she would do for Kerry is polarize the electorate around Hillary instead of around Bush's misdeeds. This is truly in the "snowball's chance in hell" category.
     

Share This Page