Newsweek says VP choice between Vilsack and Gephardt (please, no!)

[lancdem]

I saw that article linked on http://talkingpointsmemo.com and I agree totally with John Judis' post. I hope this story is disinfo put out by Kerry aides to make it seem like Edwards is out of the running so it's a surprise when he picks him. For his aides to say Kerry isn't "comfortable" with Edwards makes me cringe. I don't care whether or not they're buddy-buddy - just pick the guy who can help you win, dammit!

[truthseeker1]

1. Oh HELL no

Nader goes and picks a winner in Camejo, and now Kerry could end up picking a total loser???

I'm seriously considering Nader again!!

[CharlesGroce]

9. sssshhhhh. These aren't democratic democrats here at the democratic undgd

Don't want to make them angry by making any decisions. They need compromise and strategy, not fair and accurate representation.

Nader is out of touch, and essentially has adopted Dennis Kucinich's platform plus the advocacy of vice taxes, like heavy taxes on liquor to fund parts of the government. I don't believe in taxing the diseased, it's immoral government. Also Peter Camejo is a braggart, and hard to like, check out the debate on http://www.democracynow.org .

See? If you democrats could learn to read and not just blindly follow the media's commands we could probably get somewhere in this country. See how easily I can defeat Nader's ideology with a little reading.

I mean, here we are with a corporate Democrat, advocating the military enslavement of another people (not that you care), and advocating the
capitalist enslavement of you and your people (not that you realize it), and the end just seems so near. I wonder what all you strategists are going to say two years from now, that is, if you could remember what you thought about this situation two years from now.

[LoZoccolo]

18. STUPID argument.

1. What do you want and...
2. ...how is voting for Nader gonna give it to you.

[LoZoccolo]

19. P.S. We let you come on here and say that stuff...

...now don't whine when we call you on the fact that it's a stupid idea. Your freedom is mine too.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LoZoccolo]

30. What was the name of that account?

Did it get tombstoned?

[CharlesGroce]

32. Nope

MrSoundAndVision right here in the flesh (email me @yahoo.com if you'd like). Just lost my password because I stopped paying Alltel for my DSL account.

Is tombstoned some silly slang for getting slapped with the silly ban?

G'night.

[LoZoccolo]

23. Unless you came back after getting tombstoned.

That what happened?

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LoZoccolo]

38. I need a sixth-grade english class?

:hi: :nuke:

[Skip Intro]

22. Where will you be with all your wisdom if we lose by a thin margin?

For some reason, some non-Democratic duers seem to go to great lenghts to avoid admitting the screamingly obvious - Nader can't win.

"You Democrats" eh?

And you?

[CharlesGroce]

33. Me?

Socialist as I've said. It ain't about winning or losing friend. See the two-party system has you trapped between evil and lesser-evil, both of which are evil. I'm free, I accept the true state of American politics, THAT WE ARE UP AGAINST A NEARLY INVINCIBLE POLITICAL MACHINE, but I'm no whore, I value that which I have that is valuable. And I recognize that what I wish to be accomplished in American politics TODAY and RIGHT NOW takes effort. I don't believe in point-click democracy.

More tomorrow, come back here I really must go.

God I love being magnanimous.
Charles

[Trajan]

40. AS a Democrat with respect for the social policies of FDR and LBJ ...

I can say this: Your opinion is appreciated: your disruptive spirit is not ....

We have a goal this election season: ridding the world of the La Bushstra Nustra ...

We will worry about Democratic Party tendencies afterwards ....

[Walt Starr]

43. Well, no end to an IRaq quagmire, even if we win by a thin margin

Really, a Gep choice kind of puts me into a, "who gives a shit" mode with the presidential election.

:shrug:

[Langis]

2. Kerry better pick Edwards!

[Timefortruth]

3. * might lose, but either choice isn't one that will call

people out to vote for Kerry.

[FlemingsGhost]

4. When Kerry formally announces, I'll comment. (n/t)

Dems

[emulatorloo]

58. WOW!, a sane person here on www.overreactiontoanyrumor.com!!!!

or is it www.thedemocraticskyisfallingunderground.com?

:toast:

[Art_from_Ark]

5. If Kerry wants to win, he'll go with a popular Southerner

with some fire in his belly.

Sorry, but Gep ain't gonna cut it.

[qazplm]

8. why?

The only states Edwards could possibly help with in the south are NC and WV. What other states will help Edwards help in?

Meanwhile, Gephardt will help in MI, OH and PA, and let's face it folks, if Kerry wins all three states, he doesnt need to win Florida or a SINGLE SOUTHERN STATE to win...he doesnt even need to hold onto every other Gore state.

To be honest I personally think that Edwards, Gephardt and Clark each bring roughly the same amount (although differing) of positives to the EC calculations.

I dont quite understand the fret as if the reality is that Kerry is going to win or lose with his VP pick, b/c when in history has that been the case?

[KoKo]

15. It hurts if an election is close. Some of us think Lieberman hurt Gore,

big time. It was a "strategy pick." Kerry needs to pick someone he really gets along with who will complement him. Clinton's picking Gore inhanced his status and they worked well together.

I worry Kerry will go with "strategy" and get a mismatch.

[qazplm]

17. but you have to think regionally

not nationally IMO. Make the election not so close in OH, PA and MI, and who cares if Bush picks up NM or WA and sweeps the south? It wont be enough, not even with Florida.

[Art_from_Ark]

I base my statement on the following:

Gephardt doesn't have the ability to stir up the voters. He didn't have it in 1988, he didn't have it in 2004. He trailed the pack badly in both years. I really doubt Gephardt would make much difference in either OH or PA, although he could at least bring a few union voters in. And chances are, he would help to win MO.

However, since 1944, no Democratic ticket has won the White House without at least one Southerner. And even in that year, Roosevelt went with Truman, who was borderline Southerner.

A Southerner on the ticket could bring moderate Southern states like Arkansas into the Democratic fold.

Personally, I would rather have two progressives on the ticket, regardless of what region of the country they were from. However, this election is too important to write off an entire region of the country, especially one with the electoral clout of the South.

[qazplm]

36. but what southern state

does he have even a snowballs chance of winning?

AR? Bush is up 5-7
NC? Maybe but its not a huge state EC wise
VA? Maybe but he is already tied by himself there as it is

OH and PA are the keys, win those two and hold MI and he is damn near a lock. He doesnt need a single southern state if he does that.

[Art_from_Ark]

42. Bu$h is up in Ark because Kerry's VP

has not been announced. Things could very well turn around if the VP candidate were a Southerner.

Louisiana might even come into play, and maybe Tennessee. Plus, Ohio doesn't have that many more EC votes than NC-- 20 vs. 15.

At any rate, the historical trends say a Dem ticket can't win without a Southerner. Of course, a lot of historical trends have fallen flat on their face the past few years.
:shrug:

[qazplm]

44. I dont see Kerry winning NC

I guess I play the percentages, he has been leading in Ohio for most of the Spring.

So there he is operating from a known, he CAN win Ohio because he is winning it now.

Trying to pick a southerner in the HOPE that he will close in AR or that NC or LA MIGHT come into play seems a little dicey to me.

I really dont care who he picks, so long as his focus is on trying to pick up OH and hold PA and MI.

Put another way, with one strategy, he only has to win one new state than Gore did, and its a state he is leading or tied in.

With the southern strategy, he probably has to pick up two or three new states, and do it coming from behind.

[Art_from_Ark]

48. One more thing-- when did the Dems really get their asses

handed to them during the past 60 years?

1972-- McGovern (SD)/Shriver (MA)
1984-- Mondale (MN)/Ferraro (NY)

Of course, there was also 1980, when the Southerner on the ticket barely won his own state. But there is also the election of 1968 (Humphrey MN/ Muskie ME) that was lost by the Dems because the only Southerners were Wallace (AI) and Agnew (R).

Having a Southerner on the ticket is no guarantee of success, but not having one on the ticket will practically guarantee failure, in my humble opinion.

[qazplm]

54. not this year

because he could have any southerner he wants and still be working from behind in nearly every southern state.

Kerry is neither McGovern or Mondale, not even close...so why in the world would those elections be a model for this one?

[Art_from_Ark]

63. What are the differences between Kerry and Mondale/McGovern?

All three are northerners who faced/are facing corrupt right-wingers. All three were derided as "too liberal" by the right-wing press. McGovern was a war hero, but he was slammed as being too wimpy.

[arcos]

51. Kerry is ahead in Arkansas...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1840672

[qazplm]

56. Thats an interactive online poll

gotta take those with a grain of salt IMO, although I do respect Zogby having the cahones to try something a little different.

And unlike Ohio, most polls in Arkansas show Bush ahead.

[Art_from_Ark]

64. Take a look at this article

from my hometown newspaper in NW Arkansas, which is prime bu$h territory:

"The nation is evenly divided between Bush and Kerry and Arkansas is identified as a target state for both Republicans and Democrats. Polls suggest the state really is up for grabs by either side.

http://www.nwaonline.net/archive/2004/05/07/Opinion/198867.html

I would also like to add that the last time I was back in heavily Republican NW Arkansas a few months ago, I had the pleasure of hearing that some of bu$h's most vocal supporters had suddenly become quiet, given all the crap that has been hitting the fan about Iraq and other issues.

[Padraig18]

73. NC is 15 EVs, and that ain't chicken feed. n/t

[gasperc]

6. yeah and the Lakers were going to cream the Pistons

Pistons rule

[stickdog]

7. Just as I predicted the day Kerry won Iowa.

Gephardt kamikazied his candidacy right into Dean's candidacy while Vilsack used the state Democratic machine to lump almost all of the undecideds with Kerry.

Add in corporate media making Dean's "scream" into the biggest thing since Clinton's cigar, and hello nominee Kerry!

[emulatorloo]

60. That Newsweek would run an article about Kerry's VP Pick?

Hey, I could have predicted that.

Why not wait till Kerry actually announces? This is just more speculation.

[stickdog]

61. No, I predicted that the VP would be either Gephardt's or Vilsack's

reward for doing the anti-Dean dirty work that delivered Iowa to Kerry.

If I'm wrong, I'll celebrate. But I'm usually right.

[emulatorloo]

66. Predicated on idle speculation about "dirty work" which has no basis in

fact?

Why would Gep kill his chances deliberately in the first primary based on a vague promise from a candidate who behind in New Hampshire? It doesn't make sense.

Vilsack wouldn't even endorse Kerry!

(PS from my personal experience in Iowa, Dean's final numbers were all about Dean and not evil external forces. Dean and Kerry were my main focus, and I ***love*** Howard Dean.

But as things played out in the final weeks, Dean did not wear well. With me, with my spouse, with my neighbors, or my close friends. It had nothing to do with Gep. It was Dean)

[stickdog]

67. Then why did Dean DOUBLE Gep's numbers in IOWA??????

And we'll soon see if my speculation was idle or right on target, won't we?

[emulatorloo]

69. Cuz more people caucused for Dean than Gep?

re speculation I was referring to the "backdoor deals" you were speculating about, not VP pick - sorry I have seen nothing substatantive to back the backdoor deal scenario up. OTOH I have seen Howard Dean and John Kerry yucking it up together and playing cards and having fun - apparently they have "bonded." And from what I know about Howard Dean, he would not have "bonded" w Kerry if yr allegations were true.

Personally I think Newsweek doesn't have the real scoop. . .wasn't Kerry bitching last week about people who don't know anything leaking stuff?

At any rate, if Kerry picks Gephardt, maybe it is because Nader advised him to?

do a Google of Nader Kerry VP Gephardt and you will see what I mean

(PS Gep is way on the bottom of my list)

[stickdog]

77. Dean knows politics ain't checkers and to the winner goes the spoils.

Dean also knows he and his staff, the corporate media, the DLC four, Sharpton and Vilsack worked together to orchestrate his poor showing Iowa.

Don't kid yourself about any of this.

[emulatorloo]

79. Actually . . .

I try real hard to maintain a position somewhere between naivete and thinking the absolute worst of people - neither extreme seems really viable (exception - repug politicians don't get much slack from me). Kerry and Dean are both good men, and I have no doubt that Dean has Kerry's ear when it comes to this VP stuff

[Fenris]

10. Ladies and gentlemen, may I remind you that...

The Kerry team has its share of political scientists, image consultants, media wranglers, etc. These people know the system far better than we ever could. Every time a story like this prints, the rabble gets louder, but that's about it. The Newsweek story is pure speculation. It will not be Vilsack or Gephardt.

[lancdem]

13. That's what I'm hoping

The assumption over the last couple of days has been that it's Edwards, so perhaps the Kerry people are trying to inject a little diversion to make it seem less than a foregone conclusion.

[CharlesGroce]

14. so what we hope that the richest senator in history suddenly dies and....

Dummy Edwards takes office.

"The answer is................................................yes." Edwards? Not my kind of guy sorry. I'd vote for Kerry if Dennis Kucinich were in his senior adminstration, I really would.

[rumguy]

46. You may be right - and I sincerely hope so!

[Warpy]

11. Newsweek also says F911 is full of lies

yet we know Moore has hired fact checkers to go through it line by line.

I think we can safely say Newsweek is NewsMax lite, and like that pit bull Bay Buchanan (who is all the Today show could find to ask), can only come up with wimpy choices.

I suggest we all wait. I don't know that much about Vilsack, but I do know Gep brings a great deal of prolabor experience with him. Although I'd rather see him as Secretary of HEW, I wouldn't mind seeing him on the ticket. At any rate, I really don't give a rip who's on the ticket at this point.

I just don't think GOP news mags and GOP talking heads have any more of a clue--and probably less of a clue--than people on this board.

[iamjoy]

12. He Doesn't Have To Sleep With The VP...

I mean, does it matter if he's "personally comfortable" or not?
Edwards has what Kerry and most other prominent Democrats lack (personality, likability). Plus, although from the South, Edwards has strong appeal in the mid-west.

The best arguments against Edwards are that if he couldn't win any states (except South Carolina) against Kerry in the primary, why should we expect him to help deliver in the General Election. Furthermore, many express doubts that Edwards could even have been re-elected to Senate, much less deliver NC on a presidential ticket. Also, do we want two Senators on a ticket?

Well, it was an unusual primary, Dems dislike Dubya so much, that we immediately united behind the candidate (the pundits told us) was the best one to beat the current White House occupant. And Edwards has more appeal outside the South than in it. As for two Senators on a ticket, that logic flies out the window if Kerry is thinking of putting Gephardt (OK, a congressman) on the ticket.

Geesh, if Kerry is so worried about being "personally comfortable" with his VP why doesn't he just pick Teresa? (sarcasm)

[qazplm]

16. my question is

why are we worried about doing well in the south when we have a MUCH better chance of winning in Ohio, PA and MI and that if we win those three, it will be very hard for Bush to win?

Seems to me those are the three states that we should focus on because every last one of them Kerry is ahead or tied. What state is Kerry ahead or tied in the south?

[iamjoy]

37. That's Just It

and polls indicate Edwards holds a lot of appeal for mid-Westerners.

[qazplm]

39. I am sure he does

but Gephardt would play well there too. And to be honest, so would Clark.

So my question is, when you have three different candidates who would all play well in the target region I listed, why the gloom and doom if Gephardt is picked?

[stavka]

24. We are all DOOOOOMED! Doomed I say! Doooomed!

I'm not pushing for any particular VP candidate, but either of these two? You've got to be kidding!

[Walt Starr]

25. Fuck

Barack Obama is the only reason I'll show up on November 2 if this is true.

[Jacobin]

26. Aw Fuck

Nader gains five points.

[left is right]

28. It can't be Gep

The pukes will show over and over again Gep lined up behind Bush as he announced the war plans. Gep was the very first Dem to publically and vocally support Bush invading Iraq.

[Walt Starr]

29. I'll definitely be giving Nader a second look

if Gep is the choice.

Not saying I'd vote for the guy, but I'd definitely reconsider.

[qazplm]

35. why

what is so horrible about Gep? He's no more conservative than Edwards.

[Walt Starr]

41. The problem is, I'll have a hard time forgetting

the images of him in the Rose Garden standing with Bush on the war.

I'm very alienated to the Kerry campaign (despite donations, etc.). Gep on the ticket only pushes me further away.

[qazplm]

45. well

respectfully, there is only one alternative...Bush.

I cannot see how possibly Kerry/Gephardt isnt much much better than Bush/Cheney.

Heck, I think Kerry/Satan v. Bush/Cheney is at least a push. ;)

[Walt Starr]

50. No, there's a lot of choices

and a gep Veep may push me over to another choice.

Not saying it will, but it could.

[qazplm]

52. there are plenty of "choices"

but only two alternatives...Kerry or Bush.

It's going to be one of those two...

The former sounds about ten times better than the latter.

[Walt Starr]

55. It may be one of those two

but I do not have to choose one of those two.

A Gep Veep could make me not really give a shit any more which of the two get it.

[qazplm]

57. well

guess I really just dont understand that kind of thinking. Because Gephardt supported Bush once? Thats it?

Wow, so did Kennedy, it happens.

I dont see how anyone could, after four years, seriously think another four years of Bush is preferable to having Gephardt be VP. I dont get it at all.

[Walt Starr]

71. Actually, it's different from waht you are saying

it's not really seeing any significant differences between the alternative to Bush and Bush, and it may or may not happen with me if Gep is Veep.

[sventvkg]

34. I've heard more then a few say if Gephardt is VP Kerry will lose

I do not know how sound that judgement is, but it came from some very active members of the DNC...Privately they worry.

[stickdog]

47. Gep as VP candidate = cutting off your eyebrows to spite your face

[FlashHarry]

49. KERRY/EDWARDS 04 IS THE ONLY WAY

If this is true--and, don't get me wrong; I like Vilsack and Gephardt, each in his own way--if this is true, it will generate ZERO media buzz and pick up ZERO extra electoral votes. Iowa will go Kerry, no matter what. Missouri will go Bush, no matter what. Edwards, on the other hand, is a dynamic, youthful speaker whose "two Americas" theme is exactly the concept around which the campaign should center. IN THE FOUR YEARS BUSHCO HAS BEEN IN CHARGE, THE RICH HAVE GOTTEN RICHER AND THE POOR AND MIDDLE CLASS HAVE GONE DOWNHILL. THIS IS THE MESSAGE THAT WILL RESONATE.

[Oddman]

53. I think Kerry will pick Edwards.

He will help the most. Kerry/Edwards 52% - bush/Cheney 48%

Electoral Kerry/Edwards 310 - bush/Cheney 228


one nation under bush

[Zomby Woof]

59. relax

Newsweak stories hold water about as well as a cheese grater.

[JustaSingleDad]

62. Does anyone else miss Dean?

Come on admit it, don't you still miss Dean? I can not seem to get excited since Dean was derailed by the power brokers. I still think Dean had more fire in his belly then the entire pack put together!

Does it really matter which of these guys he picks, we are all going to vote for him no matter what.

The middle-of-the-roaders, don't make up their minds until they pick up their ballot on the day that they vote. About 1/3 of the country will decide how they feel by what the headlines on the car radio is on election day, and by then all of this smoke will have been cleared up.

[Zan_of_Texas]

65. Yep. Just about daily.

Welcome, JustaSingleDad!

[AntiCoup2K4]

68. HELL yes I miss the best candidate in 35 years!

And if Newsweek is correct, someone is about to be rewarded for fucking him - and us. And the election will be over, with the DLC traitors conceding to Bush :grr:

[JustaSingleDad]

80. Gore's speech is fabulous, BUT Dean's speech was crazy! Am I nuts?

Who do you think derailed Dean when he was raising a million new voters and millions of dollars from individual donors on line. Everyone knows Dean was actually climbing in the polls!

Every time I think of what happened to Dean, I get pissed! How could the same people that think Gore's screech speech is fabulous, and Dean's speech was crazy.. am I nuts or is that crazy? Who derailed Dean, and WHY?

[Hubert Flottz]

70. Bummer!

That SUCKS!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

72. Damn! Just when I had decided to hold my nose and vote for Kerry.

Kerry seems determined to revoke my decision.

[genius]

74. Maybe Kerry doesn't want to win. Sort of a death wish.

[Francine Frensky]

75. I'm from MO, I'm a yellow-dog democrat, and I hate Gephart!

The guy has no personality, no charisma, and he lost the house for us back in '94.

He worked his rear off in Iowa, but he got creamed because nobody likes him!

He may be nice, he may be high on the list for labor, but what exactly has labor done for us lately??? Why should they be rewarded? Or are the dems being bribed?

I'd like to see Clark myself, but if he's out, it should be Edwards.

[Reciprocity]

76. Edwards for VP. n/t

[VolcanoJen]

78. Absolute Disinformation. Nothing more, nothing less.

I agree, lancdem. I'll be absolutely shocked if they don't pick John Edwards, and so would the media at this point.

They fed this story to Newsweek so that in early July, when he announces it's Edwards, everyone can be "shocked."

:D I'm not worried one bit. They'd done internal polling out the ying-yang on Gephardt and Vilisack, and they're not registering with voters. In fact, I think certain polls show Gephardt actually hurts Kerry's chances.

These folks aren't dummies. I think they're well aware of what they're doing. :D