Reply #22: If you don't see the difference, I probably can't help you. But, I'll try.

[boxster]

Here's the difference. If you asked me to marry you, knowing for an absolute fact that I am going to say no, then you are risking nothing in asking, as you already know the outcome. You can then ask either as a joke or to make a point or to put on a show.

For a putting-on-a-show example (the most appropriate comparison to the Kerry/McCain soap opera), if your parents are nagging you to get married, you can ask me to marry you in their presence - you already know that I'm going to say no - so you can ask me confident that I'll say no and your parents will quit nagging you.

You probably don't realize it, but you answered your own question in another way. Kerry was asking McCain if he would be considered(put on the short list, as you said); he did NOT ask McCain to be VP. Kerry asked it already knowing the answer and already knowing that the base would vote for him regardless and the middle would consider it an act of reaching out across the chasm that so obviously exists between the right and the left.

Bottom line - there is no downside, except for people looking for an ideological angel. This is politics, and Kerry knows exactly what he's doing.

He didn't get this far without understanding that the middle is what wins elections, and that the base is safe. In fact, it's safer this election season solely because liberals are desperate to get Bush out of the WH.

If you want ideological perfection or if you want a candidate that isn't going to play political games, you're not going to find that in ANY candidate, because it's impossible to do either and win a race like the presidency. They ALL play the game. Kerry's just better at it than most.