Clark/Edwards...Does this 2004 ticket work for you?!

[spooked]

I think this would be an awesome combination!! Clark would appeal to men, and Edwards to women...It's a winner!!
What do you think?

[CMT]

1. if Clark is nominated, Edwards would make a good running mate

for him. He also would be a good pick for most of the other candidates. If Dean is the nominee I favor either Graham or Edwards as his running mate at this point.

[Starpass]

2. Yep--it's the double gang bang on the South---another team did that

once---called Clinton and Gore. This regional stuff doesn't bother people in other parts of the country but it's a big thing down South. So give them two southern boys and one a military general to boot and maybe we could get a few of those border states that fell to Bush back and maybe do some damage in other southern states---like at least bringing more Dem congresspeople to D.C.

[JVS]

4. Trust me, it bothers quite a few of us up North

[dolstein]

15. Not this Northernor

What bothers me is the prospect of another four years of George Bush.

Anyone who thinks the Democrats can win the White House without carrying a single Southern state are deluding themselves.

[Starpass]

17. I live in Maine - can' t get much further north. Prior to that

born and raised in Dubuque, Iowa. Lived for 45 years between Wisconsin and Iowa before moving here. Did live for a year in Arizona and it just is not a big thing with people that a candidate has to be from their neck of the woods. No one was screaming that Clinton and Gore were both Southern boys. The north isn't still fighting the Civil War.

[NashVegas]

45. That's the Problem - Kind Of

"The north isn't still fighting the Civil War."

And that's why you still don't realize you've been blind-sided.

The Southern states must be given another reason to come to the table other than regionalism. Take a good look at the balance of power in this country and understand there's a reason why the conservative movement has been so successful.

[Terran]

23. This regionalism shouldn't matter

If the candidates are the right people, it makes no difference where they come from, they're still Americans.

[JVS]

29. Which is why I find a southerners only strategy offensive

I'm not the one saying that candidates should all be from one place

[RandomUser]

33. Me too, but I bow to realities

Although I'd love to see a liberal from the Northeast (I'm one!) win, I don't think such a ticket would have as easy a time of it. You have to realize that the Southern preference by other Southerns is very strong and dates back to the Civil War and civil rights movement (and back to slavery if you want to go that far). Basically, after the war, they felt they were wronged, denied their right to succeed from the union by bullying Yankee northerners. The depth of the lives lost and physical desolation and the corruption that came with the Reconstruction people (carpet-baggers looking to make a quick buck) leaves long memories. Remember, the south was the last of the civil rights hold-outs with Jim Crow laws. This mentality of us Southerns vs. Yankee northerners persist to this day to some degree. A recent example was the depth of feeling roused by the row over having the Confederate symbol in their state flags.

Us northerners don't feel the same sense of Us vs. Them, because we didn't experience the same level of physical destruction during the Sherman's March to the Sea that burned city after city. And besides, we won the civil war. But Southerners still feel that sense of Us vs. Them. It morphed over the decades to Jim Crow holdouts, resistence to affirmative action and gun-control, and recently fights for the Confederate State flags. The political differences have become entrenched in lifestyle differences (bible belt, social conservatives against gays and sexual promiscuity, eating grits for breakfast instead of bagels which they've never seen, sweet tea, hunting season, etc). The Us vs. Them mentality is still alive and well to some degree in the south. And if you want to win a national election, it's something you need to take into account. You may not feel this way, but many Southerners do.

[JVS]

36. Fuck em! If they can't tolerate one nonsoutherner on a ticket they ...

deserve more of Bush. I can understand having a southerner on it to balance the ticket, but this molly-coddling has got to stop.

[JVS]

37. Upon further reading I would like to add

That if we contine to "bow to realities" like this I would not be surprised to see the civil rights gains of the 60's be completely lost. Bowing to the sentiments you have described seems to encourage and reinforce them. One southern state, Florida, has already violated the rights of many african americans to vote. I've also heard the same of Tenn.

Since I don't want that area calling the shots for the entire country, I've decided to create a political reality of my own. I won't vote for straight southern tickets. It is a small change, but it is what I have to be willing to do if I seek change.

[RandomUser]

39. Not policy-wise

I meant field a candidate with our liberal policies, but with a southern origin to keep them happy. Nowhere do I mention a candidate with conservative leanings to roll back civil rights. Bow to them regional-wise to satisfy the ones griping about the Us vs. them yankees. But don't bow them policy-wise on pro-choice, sepearation of church and state, etc.

A compromise needs to be struck to address both northerns and southerns. Thus, I think the easy viable choices are southern liberal, northern/californian conservative (Reagan), or a centrist moderate from either north or south. I want the southern liberal, since I would rather compromise on the region rather than the policy stance. Anything else, like a southern conservative or a northeastern liberal would be an uphill battle with considerably more risk.

[RandomUser]

35. It shouldn't but it does

Unfortunate but true. Reality, sigh. And if we want to win, we have to deal with it.

[dobak]

3. sure

Any ticket looks good just as long as it does not contain the words:

Bush / Cheney

[WilliamPitt]

5. Gold

[zekeson]

6. I like Edwards a lot

I don't think I like him in the front of the ticket - but hell yes - he would make an excellent VP for the eventual nominee.

[hippiechick]

7. ummm ... I'm a woman. Why does Edwards appeal to me ?

:shrug: Did I miss a memo out there somewhere ?

'Cause Edwards is bringing up the rear of the field from my perspective, along with Lieberman and Gephardt.

Clark is a good notion, but there's something about his whole candidacy that makes me nervous. VERY nervous.



:hippie:

[cally]

8. Umm, why exactly does Edwards appeal to women?

I like him because of his stand on the issues and how he has always stood up for the less powerful. I see him as decent man who has always tried to help others. Edwards is attractive but I think it's naive to think all women will vote for him because of that. I actually think his cuteness works against him because so many don't see the intelligence and drive behind the pretty face.

[NashVegas]

47. "Southern Gentleman"

Was the thing that stood out for me, after watching him announce his candidacy on TDS. He reminds me sooo much of my boss and lots of other guys down here in that it's just so *easy* to say something totally bold (by their standards) - or impolite, depending on whom you ask - and send them blushing on a whole variety of subjects. Sometimes that "aw shucks" hides more intelligence and drive than you could possibly imagine. My boss, for instance, would never say a bad word about anyone, or openly stick a knife in anyone's back, but my gads, is he talented at climbing over the right bodies.

[RandomUser]

9. I'd prefer

Clark/Graham -- to get Florida (and I like Graham's diary and regular periodic workman days)

or

Clark/Dean -- to make use of the huge Dean grassroots to complement the Draft Clark grassroots

[RandomUser]

12. Edwards as AG

I think Edwards, with his legal background, would make a fine replacement for Ashcroft.

[gulliver]

10. A 16-year dynasty right there.

And for all the right reasons. Brains, commitment, courage, understanding the lives of real working people...

[kanrok]

11. Works for me.

And I'm from up north.

[spooked]

13. I'm from New England,

and it works for me too!

[JVS]

21. I'm from PA, a big swing state

and it make me want to go 3rd party.

[oasis]

14. Clark/Graham then slide Hillary in after Graham retires in 2008. Kerry

and Graham, same thing. Clark/Edwards is the stronger of all three.

[Hippo_Tron]

16. Not really...

I don't want two southerners on the ticket, too much risk of northern liberals going green.

[Dookus]

18. My concern...

would be that he'd need to allay the perception that he can't find his way around Washington. Edwards has served what, 4 or 5 years in the Senate?

Graham, or another SENIOR democratic senator would be a better choice. Graham particularly because he could probably carry Florida.

[einsteins stein]

19. I Don't Like It, But I'll Vote For It

I like Dean, that hasn't changed a bit. Regardless, I'm an ABB guy, and I have no moral dillema with a Clark/Edwards ticket in 2004.

I wouldn't even have to hold my nose :-)

I know that may seem like a poor recommend, but it's honest and pragmatic, at least.

[RichM]

20. No, anything with the pseudo-Dem Clark is completely unacceptable.

Plus, your interpretation of sexual-role behavior here is childish & mindless.

[spooked]

41. It was totally

said in jest, rather flippantly at that. If I'm smart enough to love DU, I'm smart enough to know nothing is that stereotyped.
:spank: Forgive me?

[KFC]

22. The perfect ticket

Bring in a southerner. Ignore the anti-Clark crybabies.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

24. I have no problem with it. However...

Clark/Dean or Clark/Kerry might have a wider geographic appeal.

[Rooktoven]

25. I'm anxious to see how the next debate goes

I'm not sure Clark is a foregone conclusion any more than Dean has seemed to be. Don't get me wrong, I'm ABB, but I want to see some interaction with the other candidates. You can't run from above the fray.

Personally, I'm tending to favor the best debater-- or rather the one who would do Best in a one-on-one with dubya. I don't think that that person is Clark (or Dean, or Gephardt, or Lieberman...)


Reverse that ticket.

[dofus]

26. Personally, I have several problems with that ticket.

In no particular order:

As a woman, I'm OFFENDED that you assume Edwards appeals to me just because I'm a woman.

I'm not fond of either guy, although I will vote for that ticket if that's the one that comes out of the convention.

And I'm f**king sick and tired of having southerners running the country. Okay, Bill Clinton was pretty good. But when was the last time someone from the northern part of the country, let alone the midwest, was president? We'd have to go back to JFK and Eisenhower for that. (Gerald Ford's interin presidency doesn't count)

How's THIS for geographical balance: Dean/Bustamente.

[Rooktoven]

27. Bustamante seems pretty week

I don't see any national superstars for the Dems right now in CA. (Maybe if Art Torres became governor, but not right now.)

[Katie]

28. Edwards is hot!

nuff said

[AP]

46. Edwards, in person, looks & sounds like a cross b/w Jeff Bridges &

the pilot in Foxfire (?) -- that sci-fi series by Joss Wheedon (the actor also played the preacher in the last season of Buffy).

[RandomUser]

30. Californians

I agree. I don't think anyone from California would play well on a national ticket. Pelosi and Fienstein have some national exposure, and I think they're doing a great job representing the liberal point of view. But if they run a national ticket, they'll get slandered and labelled as morally corrupt hollywood liberal gay activists. Yes, I know it's not true, but that's how they'll be painted. Hollywood has long been demonized by the Republicans as being a promoter of sexual promiscuity and violence. This plays well in the conservative states. And the gay-tolerant progressive atmosphere will be a major negative for them to run with.

In general, I believe that on the national scene, the best hope is to run against stereotypes. That was partly why Regan was successful, a conservative from a liberal state. And that's why I think Clark will be successful, a liberal from a conservative state. In this way, the liberal/conservative political positions placate one group, while the region's association with liberalism/conservatism placates the opposite group. That's why I think someone who runs as a Northeastern/Californian liberal or a Southern/midwestern conservative will have a hard time with a nationwide electorate. Even Bush had to tinker with his image and run on a moderate image of "compassionate conservatism" instead of as a pure conservative or neo-conservative image.

[Myra]

31. I like it!

Let's go with it.

[Waistdeep]

32. Works for me, but won't work for the Clintons

I can't see this happening because Edwards would be the presumptive democratic presidential nominee in 2012 --- something that the Clinton's wouldn't allow to happen.

[Gore1FL]

34. As long as it doesn't have "Bush" in it

I can find almost any ticket acceptable for 2004.

[VOX]

38. Works for me. Edwards is a good veep choice for any Dem candidate...

Edwards has some youth appeal, a bit of an idealistic aura (a good thing) and, like Wes Clark, is very telegenic.

Yes, we should be beyond apppearances, but if that were true, Shrub would be okay to look at and listen to. He's not, by a long shot -- and it's not just the horrifying content of his message -- it's the messenger also.

[OKNancy]

40. If we want youth appeal we need to get Sharpton

since he is two years younger than Edwards. :-)
Just kidding there..I like Edwards a lot.

[phillybri]

42. Hell yeah!!!

:kick:

[im4edwards]

43. I don't really want to have my boy 2nding Clark

Besides I think Edwards is a far better choice for the top of the ticket.

[renie408]

44. Damn skippy

And I am not that in love with Clark. I think Edwards would do better in the number one spot.

[tjdee]

48. If Edwards doesn't get the nom, I hope Clark does.

As a team, I think they'd put a serious, serious hurting on Bush/whoever they replace Cheney with when it's clear that Clark/Edwards or Edwards/whomever is the ticket.

Any combination of the two is more than lethal.