If Dems do not persue a southern strategy, who should be our VP?

[Doomsayer13]

A few names are being floated around Democratic ciricles for a Vice Presidential selection, especially if Democrats decide to not persue a Southern Strategy.

PA Gov. Eddie Rendell - He would make a key blue swing state for the Democrats much safer and would be the best VP choice if Dems wanted to protect what they had in 2000. Thing is, what will this do in terms of picking up crucial red swing states? I suppose that Rendell could help in picking up neighboring West Virigina

Sen. Evan Bayh - though unpopular on DU, Bayh is attractive becuase it gives Democrats a shot at Indiana, a state that hasn't gone blue since 1964. Bayh is personally popular in Indiana and can also work at swining Ohio in favor of the Democrats. Ohio, and maybe Indiana are in play becuase of job losses and if Bush loses both states, he's toast.

NM Gov. Bill Richardson - Richardson has a strong national record and won a clear and clean victory in New Mexico in 2002. He's Hispanic, which will give Democrats a strong edge among a growing electorate and comes from a Blue swing state. If he's the Veep nominee, there's a chance he may help carry red Nevada and Arizona as well.

US Rep. Dick Gephardt - Missouri went Red last round, but if Democrats choose Gephardt, they may have a chance to carry the swing state that went to Clinton both times. This would again be persuant of the protectionist policy, and would also be a big nod to organized labor, especially more conservative unions like the Teamsters. Gep could help us pick up a union state that went red in 2000, like West Virginia.

So what do you guys think, strategy wise?

[AndyP]

1. Edwards or clark?

Wouldn't they bring in a southern state. I know that seems to be Ewards' rallying cry- the south is my backyard not bush's

[Doomsayer13]

3. Well

Edwards has a lot of folksy appeal but he's not terribly popular in his homestate right now becuase he's been running for President for the last 2 years and hasn't been home. He's turned into a populist as well, and that could hurt his standing in the south. I doubt he'd bring in North Carolina, but he might help with Tenessee. Clark could also help bring in Louisiana and Arkansas.

[DemPopulist]

4. The South is populist

Particularly the states you named - Louisiana, Arkansas. Edwards would help in those states, as well as Missouri, West Virginia and Florida.

[surfermaw]

7. I beg your pardon, the same people in the state as when he won

The same people who elected John, to the Senate is still in North Carolina , and I have seen many excited over the thoughts of Edwards being VP..and have even see and heard some republicans in support of Edwards..hungry babies without health care and a job will go for Edwards

Article in Charlotte paper today..only 400 people out of the thousands of Pillowtex Plant have found job, many of them are getting very anxious as summer is coming and their benefits will be gone, many of these people in their 40's with little education and training, and with the prospect that Bush is going to cut programs to train unemployment workers for other jobs, will come out to vote in numbers for Edwards..

In fact I have in the past couple of months heard several republicans say they wouldn't vote republican, and some say they were thinking, one a Housing contractor, said if he knew he would get health insurance he would vote democratic..and he is a strong my daddy voted republican so I will person.

[Doomsayer13]

10. I speak only from poll numbers I saw

which indicate that he was weak for re-election. I think that's partly why he decided not to seek it. but maybe the tide has shifted, who knows, I'm not a North Carolinian.

[mohc]

16. Edwards never trailed in re-election polls

http://www.dcpoliticalreport.com/2004/NCPoll.htm#S1

As of the last one taken he was ahead by 8, he started off ahead by almost 20 about the time Edwards was getting into the Presidential race. Bowles, who ran against E. Dole in the last Senate race, began behind Burr but seems to have caught up. While Edwards certainly is not a sure thing in NC, especially at the bottom of the ticket, he makes the state competitive, which Bush simply can not afford.

[tobius]

2. Gephardt- don't know if unions will bring the votes though n/t

[UrbScotty]

5. Russ Feingold!

http://www.russfeingold.org/whyruss.php

[Doomsayer13]

9. no

we need Russ in the Senate. Plus, this would do nothing in terms of strategy.

[surfermaw]

6. Many reason to pick Edwards other than southern stragety

He cam in Iowa almost even with Kerry, he came in second in Tenn and Virginia with another southerner on the ticket, he is the best speaker on the stump and as I heard one of the democrat leaders say he is the most promising young democrat in the party, not my words one of the democrat leaders words, can't remember who made the statement.

[Mass_Liberal]

8. Bill Richardson

carrying the west is important. If we win north, northeast, west, we don't need the south or mid-west to win. He's a great guy.

[nator311]

11. Bayh seems like the logical choice

He's a moderate who is pro-choice and pro-environment. He has a young family, which is good for photo oppurtunities. Since he comes from an industrial state that is a mix of the midwest and the south, he could probably help our chances in Ohio, WV, Michigan, and PA. It seems like a lot of people on this board want Edwards as VP, but I don't think America as a whole wants a trial lawyer in the White House, especially with the problems that doctors are having right now with malpractice insurance.

[goobergunch]

13. How pro-choice is Bayh?

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=1&vote=00402

[Doomsayer13]

14. well

Partial-Birth is a tricky issue, and it's an issue where Dems are weak on. good Democrats like Leahy, Byrd and others voted on it too. I consider myself pro-choice and would support a partial-birth ban provided it have the right provisions.

[nator311]

15. he's very pro-choice

He gets ratings of between 80 and 100 from pro-choice groups. Pro-life groups give him a zero rating. This is from his profile on vote-smart. Since he has a conservative constituency, he probably thought that he could please them with this vote since this procedure constitutes a very small percentage of abortions performed (although it does have problems with the exemption for when a woman's life is at risk). Mary Landreiu supported this bill, even though she almost lost the 1996 senate election for saying that she was pro-choice. On a side note, I think that Wes Clark's saying that abortions should be available up till the time of birth would cause more problems for us than this vote.

[Doomsayer13]

12. Now, if we do persue a Southern Strategy, here are some ideas -

Sen. John Edwards - In many ways, he's the natural selection for VP. He looks good, is a good stump speaker, and will go a long ways in uniting the party after the primary. However, his home poll numbers indicate that he probably wont be able to carry North Carolina, but he could go a ways in helping to carry other Southern swing states.

Sen. Bob Graham or Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida - both are good choices and they'd give Bush and Jeb another fight for Florida. Bob Graham would please more of the liberals becuase of his vocal opposition to the War, Nelson would please more of the moderates in the party. Since both are personally popular in Florida, it could perhaps make the difference.

Fmr. General Wesley Clark - This would make Kerry's ticket a genuinely military/foreign policy oriented ticket. It could serve to firewall national security critisisms as well as help deliver Arkansas and Lousiana. The question is, would the General want to play second fiddle to the Lieutenant, and would it make a difference in the south?

[dfitzsim]

17. I don't think we should consider Dem Senators from

states like Indiana. If Bayh goes, we'll likely end up with another Republican Senator. If Edwards becomes VP, his state will likely elect another Republican Senator.

Clark is an ideal candidate in this respect. He gives us the perks without the penalty of giving away a seat.

[nator311]

18. Indiana has a dem governor

who will likely be re-elected (in my opinion). He could appoint someone like Rep. Baron Hill to the senate, who would make a strong competitor in the 2006 runoff.

[Doomsayer13]

19. NC is having an open seat election anyways

It wont matter whether Edwards is Veep or not

[dfitzsim]

20. Ah. Good point.

Forgot Edwards was leaving.

Indiana has a democrat for a governor, but he is riding on coat-tails of coat-tails. When Evan Bayh was gov, Frank O'Bannon was our Lt. Gov. O'Bannon took over as Gov and was re-elected. Recently, O'Bannon passed away. His Lt. Gov, Kernan, took over.

The repugs are floating Bush's "My Man Mitch" to run against him in the upcoming election. Fortunately Mitch is tainted with Indiana's version of an Enron scandal, so I think we'll see Kernan re-elected gov.

Baron Hill is my representative. Sad to say, he is too liberal for the rest of the state. I doubt he has much of a chance of rising above congressman.

Indiana is a very conservative state. It is true that we have lost more than our share of manufacturing jobs since Bush Co. took over, so we *might* be in play. Unfortunately, I don't think our electoral votes will go the D's way even if Bayh is on the ticket.

[nator311]

21. same here

I don't think that Indiana will go our way if Bayh is on the ticket. Instead, I think he would help us win states like Ohio and West Virginia as well as keep Michigan and Pennsylvania on our side. Also, I was under the impression that Hill has a centrist voting record. It's probably much more moderate than the records of Carson or Viscolosky.