Who would be the best VP for Clark? [View All]

[Mattforclark]

If he wins the nomination (primarily from a strategic point of view)? .

The way I see it, there are several strategies that could be embraced in the choice of VP.

1) The Florida strategy - Bob Graham. He is experienced and would have an excellent chance of bringing Florida and its 27 electoral votes into the Democratic side. With that kind of cushion, we would still have a shot at winning even if something went wrong (IE losing a state or two like Pennsylvania, Iowa, or Wisconsin.) Graham also has good experience in the senate and is reasonably moderate enough not to scare off and very possibly help attract swing voters. But (AFAIK), a good portion of his experience is in the area of foreign policy, which is already Clark's strong point.

2) The Southern strategy - Mary Landrieu (or maybe someone else). Adding Landrieu would bring Louissiana significantly into play, and I think it would also help a bit with Arkansas. I don't think that Clark/Landrieu could win Alabama (for example), but it would force diversion of Bush's resources to defend the south. Landrieu is obviously female, which could conceivably hurt or help; she might balance out any image of Clark as too much of a 'macho man' (if that is a problem). Alternatively, if John Edwards were VP, NC would be brought into play, but unfortunately I don't think we would have as good a chance there as in Louissianna.

3) The Southwestern strategy - Bill Richardson. Richardson would help in NM, which is a vulnerable 'blue state.' He would also probably help with neighboring states Arizona, Nevada, and Colorado, as well as with the 'hispanic vote.' Richardson also has a lot of experience with government, and in Washington, which would be beneficial. In the next ten years or so, I think that this region is probably one that can be pulled safely into the 'solidly democratic' category, or at least into the 'leaning' category.

4) The Midwestern strategy - Gephardt, Bayh, or someone else. Gephardt could bring Missouri's 11 electoral votes into contention, as well as helping in states like Ohio, West Virginia, Iowa, and Wisconsin. He could help with the union vote, and he has years of experience inside Washington. Unlike some of the other candidates, I don't remember Gephardt attacking Clark, saying he is a Republican or anything like that. As an alternative, Bayh could create a scare in Indiana, and might help in Ohio (also 11 votes), but he has less experience than Gephardt and I am not sure he would help to the same degree in states like West Virginia and Wisconsin.

5) The Base strategy - Probably Dean. This might help 'fire up the base,' which could increase voter turnout. Dean would probably help bring New Hampshire into the dem column, and a win could be barely squeezed out if all the Gore states were held and we took (for example) New Hampshire and Arkansas. On the downside, the help this would give us might be concentrated more in solidly democratic states than in swing states. This would also be an outsider strategy, which could be both help and hurt at the same time. It would also presumably bring Trippi. ;)

So which strategy is the best?



IMHO, the Florida strategy seems to be pretty risky because it pins a lot of hopes on Florida. On the other hand, it would make a win possible even if we lost Pennsylvania. I also think that the Southern strategy suffers from a similar problem because it would pin a lot of hopes on a few southern states (Probably AR, LA), but it would probably divert Republican resources to defend 'base' states. The Southwestern strategy is probably also somewhat risky because it relies primarily on winning at least one or two other Southwestern states besides New Mexico (or else at least adding a state or two like WV or AR). The Midwestern strategy solidifies 3 Blue states that are in danger - Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa, as well as helping in Ohio and West Virginia. But on the other hand this might put as at more risk in other regions. I think the Base strategy is also pretty risky, because though it would probably help hold blue states, It is harder to add swing states, of which we need at least 1 big state or two small states.

I think it is a tough call, and I wish we could have a VP for all the strategies :). But on balance I think that the midwestern strategy is probably the safest, and the best from a strategic POV. So while I do not particularly like Gephardt, I think he might be the best VP pick for Clark. But I can see advantages in all of them.