Excellent point.

I read in my Spokesman-Review this morning, where Kerry is doing background checks on at least Gephardt, Edwards, and the Governor of Iowa, whose name escapes me. The Kerry camp said also that there was quite a few names still being tossed around and considered. The article also made it sound like it could still be awhile before we know who is picked.

Oprah for Veep!

All I have to say is Geraldine Ferraro. Geraldine was Walter Mondale's desperate Vice President choice in 1984, an election he knew he was doomed to lose. How desperate will John Kerry be? He simply needs to pick the man (or woman) who would make the best Vice President. If he resorts to a "gimmick" choice it will tell the nation that he knows he cannot win.

Kerry's choice will definitely not be a "gimmick" choice. He is moving along cautiously and methodically as he should, because his choice could very well decide the election.

Maybe Ralph Nader should just run for Vice President as an independent. Im fairly certain that can be done technically.

Since voters vote for President and VP seperately, its conceivable that we could end up with winners from opposite parties one day, if the Electoral College goes along with the popular vote.

Maybe John Kerry and Dick Cheney? George Bush and un-named Dem VP choice? Kind of scary to think about it though.

Kerry needs to announce a running mate real soon. The time is at hand. What the hell is he waiting for? He is waiting for those credit checks to come back from experian.com. LOL. ....What? Edwards was delinquent on his telephone bill in 1987...oh no.... eek!

www.experian.com

Originally posted by DallasUNC
Where have you been voting?? President and Vice President are always together by parties. You don't vote for each separately.

If vetting shows John Edwards record to be consistent with his campaign speeches, he would make an excellent choice. He would bring a certain sex-appeal, literally and figuratively (though I don't quite see it) and women, who may vote more this election might be even more motivated. They are a dependable voting bloc.
I'm not that familiar with Richardson, or the potential increase in the latin vote that he might bring. Making the choice later in the campaign would make it less of a distraction too.

I think John Edwards' campaign for president, in which he seemed to run on a "politics of niceness" theme, works against him in the Veepstakes. Kerry needs a pitbull & he needs one ASAP. The Bush campaign has done a brilliant--albeit reprehensible--job of setting the parameters of the campaign and defining Kerry. It's still early in the race but, every day that passes without an effective response (and Kerry's nuanced statements just don't cut it) is a day letting Bush/Cheney/Rove get away with their scummy tactics. I don't think Edwards would be an effective attack dog &, if he did attack, it would counter whatever good he did during his presidential campaign in defining himself as a "different sort of politician" for future races.

~Adam

Sounds a little sexist to me - Seriously , do you think women don't vote on the issues? - only for the hot hunk????? Didn't that kind of attitude go out of style with Jack Kennedy? Now, I personally want Edwards to be VP so I can have my hot "vice president & cop jack -off on Air Force One" fantasy. (Something I could never do with Cheney!) wink

Of course that occurred to me copman. I hesitated to make the post and thought about it a lot. But I recalled the enthusiasm Edwards generated during his campaign. As I've said before "sex appeal" can draw one to the trough but it wont make them drink. Women are attracted not only to his looks but his modern-man attitude and personality, then they see his positions and realize there is no conflict between voting for both for their issues and the guy they like the look of. A southern gentleman.

If you get a chance check out CNN's veepstakes... It is a set of brackets, it is actually quite fun 32 goes to 16 to 8 to 4 to 2 to 1 and it is a contest...Great fun!

Regarding the possible Veep's sex appeal: remember when Bush the Elder chose Dan Quayle, elected Republicans openly praised Bush for choosing someone so good-looking & called Quayle's looks their "secret weapon" with women voters. Looks do matter; with Quayle and Edwards it's just that the discussions about looks are open.

~Adam

There was a big difference with Quayle. Dan Quayle has the intelligence of a fence post.

John Edwards is intelligent, well spoken, well informed on the issues, and would be a complement to John Kerry.

If my memory serves me correctly, didn't Dan Quayle even mis-pronounce potato?

The mental picture of that is going to neccessitate me staying at my desk for a while.

Misspelled it. As in POTATOE. I think you're insulting fence posts, by the way.