Create full tickets for potential 08 hopefuls.

[saltpoint]

Considering electability, create 08 tickets for as many of our 18 potential candidates as you wish.

Play it tough -- like a smokey backroom pol of old, the savvy, hard-bitten, white-knuckled, get-it-done realist. If you feel you have to skip some tickets, you can. Break a few hearts if need be. You don't have to do all 18 tickets. If you prefer alphabetical order, that's ok too.

Consider demographic balance, ideological compatibility, campaign style, oratory skills, debate acumen, type or length of experience, electroral college strategy, appeal to voters, and other criteria.

Choose as your veep nominees people you feel would meet winning criteria. Other presidential candidates could also be your veep choice. You have unlimited power in creating our ticket, so go ahead and use it, whether your choices are high-profile or obscure.

If you feel I've omitted any potential presidential candidate, tell me, then please add him or her and go ahead and create your tickets.

Try to resist ranking your personal favorite ahead of a ticket topped by another candidate who may be more electable. You're powerful, but you're realistic, too.
______

Create 08 tickets for each of our potential candidates:

Sen. Evan Bayh
Sen. Joe Biden
Sen. Barbara Boxer
General Wesley Clark
Sen. Hillary Clinton
Sen. Tom Daschle
Sen. Christopher Dodd
Sen. John Edwards
Sen. Russ Feingold
Vice President Al Gore
Sen. Mike Gravel
Sen. John Kerry
Congressman Dennis Kucinich
Sen. Blanche Lincoln
Gov. Bill Richardson
Gov. Brian Schweitzer
Gov. Tom Vilsack
Gov. Mark Warner

_________________

TIA.

[rpannier]

1. Clark/Edwards

from looking at the list these two names resonated the most with me.

But...I was an Edwards supporter in '04, so that probably has something to do with it.

[saltpoint]

7. I think both of those folks are major players in our party, no matter

what.

[saltpoint]

2. Random possibilities: Clark-Schweitzer. HClinton-Richardson.

[Minnesota Libra]

3. Go for the best President Al Gore and Senator John Kerry nt

[saltpoint]

8. A lot of people feel this should have been the 2000 ticket instead of

Gore & you-know-who.

[Minnesota Libra]

12. Yes, I agree totally!! But later is better than never. nt

[saltpoint]

15. LOL! Although I think both Al and John are mostly interested in the top

spot, I think your model would likely work, because Kerry might be inclined to take the position if it were offererd this time around.

There's 18 people on that list, plus some I've inadvertently forgotten. They can't all be on the ticket. Catchawave suggested that they could comprise the next Democratic Cabinet, and I love that idea. And you have given a Gore-Kerry ticket another well-deserved nod.

Well, just my 2-cents' worth, but I could see Kerry accepting that role with dignity, and the two of them blasting the GOP ticket out of the water.

[Minnesota Libra]

16. "blasting the GOP ticket out of the water" is the whole idea LOL nt

[1932]

20. I wonder if Dukakis-Mondale was a popular choice for '92.

[saltpoint]

29. 'Have been told that Dukakis' wife, Kitty, had been having difficulties,

and that his heart was not in electoral politics by then.

Not sure about ol' Walt.

[CGrantt57]

4. Gore-Clinton

Just to see various republican heads explode.

[saltpoint]

9. Boy, they would, too. Explosions by the thousands.

It would drive Rush Limbaugh deep into oxycontin again, likely never to return.

[1932]

5. A strong progressive ticket will include: Boxer, Feingold and/or Edwards

An OK, and possibly successful ticket might include Warner, Bayh, Napolitano (not on list), and, as VP only, Kerry/Clark/Dodd/Schweitzwer/Lincoln/Gravel/Antonio Villaraigosa (not on list).

I think a losing ticket would inlcude Vilsack, Richardson, Kucinich (sadly), Gore, Biden and Clinton, and, as President, Kerry/Clark/Dodd/Schweitzwer/Lincoln/Gravel.

I think the strongest ticket is going to need a Calfornian somewhere on it so that all that person's connections in California put their energies into the election in the same way that Texans have done that for the Republicans, and I think it's going to need someone who really symbolizes for people what has been happening over the last 30 years in terms of the concentration of wealth in the hands of a small group of Americans and someone who can criticize the neoliberal agenda from a very mainstream perspective.

[saltpoint]

11. I think Villaraigosa as a possible veep choice is bold and attractive.

I thought it was a great day when he won. He's awfully new to that job he has now, but even so, he's dynamic and smart and compassion -- absolutely everthing Dick Cheney isn't. Ok, Cheney's smart, but he uses his smarts for evil purposes.

Appreciate your mentioning Janet Napolitano. I like her and feel she is a kind of delightful star out there on the Arizona desert for us. Do you think her appeal can be translated into other regions of the country? If so, she could do us a world of good west of the Mississippi alone, plus any other gains elsewhere.

Your observations on California and Texas, 1932, are outstanding, and deserve a thread of their own. Please consider it. Really astute and startling.

Who in California would match that criteria? There could be a handful... well, anyway, I loved that observation.

[1932]

19. Re California--I didn't think that until I read Phillips's American Theo-

cracy.

He makes a really interesting argument about the significance of Republicans (and Democrats) putting Texans on the ticket since 1960 and the thing that was so obvious after reading that is that, perhaps, Democrats aren't doing so well because they've not been thinking about California the way Republicans think about Texas.

I really think Boxer is the Californian who belongs somewhere on the ticket. She almost definitely has connections with Steve Jobs (who now has some control over ABC) and all the other people in the "copyright" (entertainment/computer/technology/sciences) industries which are so important to the American economy. She's also a progressive. I think she could convince California industries with whom she has connections, who really depend on a big, strong middle class, to break away from supporting the Republicans' fossil-fuel-intensive, get Americans on the hook with insupportable debt project.

[saltpoint]

30. You won't have to work hard to convince me that Barbara Boxer should

have an extremely prominent role in our party.

Personally I would love a Boxer White House. Not sure how we swing the primary campaign strategy, but on its face, it has enormous appeal for me.

I have read other of Phillips' books, but not this one. I know it's out there and need to get to it.

[saltpoint]

6. Christopher Dodd and Chris Bell.

[Catchawave]

10. Edwards/Warner

That should be no surprise :D Though a NC/VA ticket might not be the best demographic balance, but neither was Arkansas/Tennessee in '92 !

Huggable Edwards for his rock star popularity with this tired nation and the world, and that sharpie Warner for his most excellent executive skills as a self-made millionaire, CEO and a top 5 governor.

Of course, it makes more sense to reverse my ticket, but I think our new President is going to be busy travelling the world making people love us again :loveya: The US will be in good hands with Warner running the country.

In fact OC, your list is my dream Cabinet too :patriot: I will support any one of them on a ticket too.

[saltpoint]

13. Hey there, Catchawave. Happy Sunday to ya. Well, I'm only playin' here.

We're gung-ho on the 06 midterms, but out of some of our gains in 06 the support structure for the ticket iin 08 will emerge.

I like speculative politics anyway!

Edwards-Warner could very well happen. A strong, very electable ticket. I'm not frightened of a NC-Virginia ticket, and you point out that Clinton/Gore was an AR-TN ticket in 92. Worked just fine.

Yes. I think Edwards-Warner would be very potent, and is also very possible.

[Catchawave]

34. We DUers are multi-taskers....2006-2008

It is a giant Chess Game, on the netroots internets :) Especially here in Virginia...2008 kicks off on June 13th....believe you me :party:

We have a bloody Dem primary and George Allen is worried :evilgrin: Now if Miller and Webb don't kill each other, we do have a fine chance at weakening Sen Allen's Presidential ambition. Gee, maybe even throwing his "I'm bored" arse out of the Senate this November :toast:

I honestly don't think Edwards will run for Veep again, unless it's Elizabeth ! But an Edwards administration would be the closest we've gotten to Camelot since John and Jackie.

Congratulations OC, I believe you allowed us (all) to speculate on '08 without any dastardly comments about "it's too soon/early/etc" and I thank the other thread posters for that too. 2006 has 2008 written all over it :patriot:

[bklyncowgirl]

14. Here's a few Gore/Obama & Feingold/Clark are my favorites.

Gore/Obama: Experience and passion marries youth and charisma. My dream ticket.

Feingold/Clark: Constitutional warrior joins four star General to defend America against all enemies foreign & domestic.

Warner/Schweitzer: Centrist Warner balanced by populist Schweitzer. Two successful Democratic governors from Red States. Warner gets top of ticket because of experience. Frankly I like Schweitzer better and I'd love to see Jaq as first dog but he's too green.

Clinton/Richardson: Richardson, as a border governor, & Hispanic could help defray some of the Republican attacks on immigration and his fairly solid reputation might defray some of the criticism of Clinton.

Kerry/Boxer: Kerry needs a tough guy running mate. Boxer can punch.

[saltpoint]

17. Holy Moly, bklyncowgirl -- you would not have to ask me twice to

show up at the polls to vote for John Kerry and Barbara Boxer on our ticket.

I'd be there so fast it would make your head spin.

Your entire list is very thoughtful. Much appreciated. HClinton-Richardson is, I admit, not my very first personal choice, but my thread is going for the realist's electability factor, and on that harsher criteria, it is a winner. Also: I think it has a very good chance of actually happening. Powerful odds put that ticket up for the Democratic Party in 2008.

Al Gore is being kind of coy about his interest in the 08 race. To me, that means he's definitely interested. I say he goes for it. Whether Obama would be lured onto the ticket or not, I have no idea, but Gore-Obama would be invincible in the debates. They'd massacre any Republican debate opponent. The Red Cross would have to be called in to bury the Republican dead after a debate with either of those two guys. And I think it would be a strong multi-regional ticket, coast to coast. We'd keep all our currently blue states and flip a couple more. The "new" Al Gore will draw back the environmentalists who strayed to Nader, and Obama would increase vote totals in major metropolitan areas, and would appeal very strongly to Hispanic and Latino voters. We win Ohio, Florida, New Mexico, and just maybe Virginia with that ticket.

Warner-Schweitzer. Wow. Another strong contender ticket. Republicans have a lot to fear from your political acumen, bklyncowgirl. You're whippin' 'em real bad here with every stroke.

Excellent tickets.

[bklyncowgirl]

23. Not crazy about Clinton/Richardson myself

Since she's the elephant in the room I couldn't ignore her so I thought I'd team her up with someone who can bring something to the ticket without causing unnecessary discord. An antiwar running mate would have to either backtrack on his/her opinion in order to run with Hillary. Richardson hasn't been outspoken about the war and he did serve in the Clinton administration.

[saltpoint]

31. I hear you on first-tier selections, but I still applaud you on the

strategy.

I think it would be formidable.

If HClinton survives the caucus/primary season, she'll be far stronger than the week before Iowa.

Just one person's opinion there.

But if she survives that first week or so with Iowa and NH, she is not going to be easy to knock off. And I'm talking about Republicans in the general here. I think she'd be MORE than prepared for the debates.

[saltpoint]

18. John Kerry and Max Cleland. John Edwards and Patty Murray.

[bklyncowgirl]

24. I like Kerry/Cleland. Two vets for the price of one

But watch out for the Swift Boats!

[ms liberty]

21. Gore/Feingold, Gore/Boxer, Gore/Kerry, Gore/Edwards, Gore/Clark...

more or less in that order of preference. I'm of the mind that it's gotta be Gore/Someone to win, and I'll be happy if we get Gore at the top of the ticket!

I think it will NEVER be Gore/Clinton(Hillary)- I've read over the years that they don't like each other. I'd rather Hillary stayed in Congress; if she were to run we'd have all the right wingnuts going rabid over the thought of a Clinton that close to the WH. We don't need that kind of distraction.

[17yroldtwins]

22. Gore/Boxer ! I'm in!

I don't know much about Feingold...I'll have to investigate.

Boxer has always been my V-P choice since experiencing her as the straight-talking, no-holds-barred Senator at the various hearings.

I think she's just golden.

[bklyncowgirl]

25. Here's another--the scorched earth ticket--Gore/Dean

If Gore runs he may need a little help to keep him from lapsing into "cautious candidate" speak. That's where Dean comes in. If you want an attack dog for VP Dean's the man. Both were way ahead of the crowd on Iraq, both can run as outsiders and Dean's ability to throw a knockout punch could work. Could work very well if there's a center right third party candidate.

[saltpoint]

26. Good god, that is the perfect name for it, and I hope Paula Zahn is

wearing flame-retardant clothing for the primary season!

I'm picturing the liveliness of the debates, too. Whoa.

[LWolf]

27. OK

From your list of 18, all the possible combinations of these 5:

Boxer, Gore, Kucinich, Schweitzer, Feingold

That's 20 different possibilities, if I've done my math correctly.

I'm not going to play the "electable" game. Too many great candidates get ignored that way, and I think "electable" has to do with the way the campaign is run and whether or not it's an honest election. As an idealist, I want those who would make the best pres/vp on the ticket, not those who aren't the best but are proclaimed "electable" by TPTB.

I'd like to see Boxer in there somewhere, because I'd like to see a woman on the ticket. From an idealistic standpoint, Kucinich/Boxer would be my top choice. From a practical standpoint, I'd work for any of the 20 combinations.

[saltpoint]

32. Lwolf, that's an exciting deck of cards no matter how you shuffle it.

I also hear you on the electability part, and agree that the other variables must play a huge role. There's too many instances to point to where that's true for me to doubt it.

Your math looks good to me, and so do your choices.

[Jai4WKC08]

28. Of the names on the list, Clark/Boxer or Clark/Feingold

But I think he could do better. Not ideologically better--Boxer and Feingold are fantastic. But better in the sense of finding someone who attracts and motivates a constituency we need, like a red state or maybe a minority group. I like Sanchez from CA (yeah, CA is pretty much a given, but she could bring out Hispanic votes from lots of red and battleground states), or Ford from TN (assuming he can pull off the win for Frist's Senate seat, and TN continues to have a Democratic governor to appoint a replacement).

[saltpoint]

33. Interesting possibilities. I hadn't thought of Sanchez, but yes --

we could benefit from having someone who will draw other states' Latino and Hispanic voters.

Wouldn't hurt one bit.

I'm pulling for Ford in Tennessee, but some of the early polls show him slightly behind. Not by huge margins, but enough to show he's got a rough row to hoe.

To me, the thing about Clark is that he would be a nominee who seems to go with just about anybody. He's got a hell of a lot of charisma, and it's the charisma of substance.

Your tickets look formidable. A Clark-Boxer ticket would be almost astonishing. The media would have its hands full, because they couldn't push those two around.