It's almost certain that the nominee will be Clark or Dean. While Dean seems to have an edge, it's still up in the air.
This is to fellow Clarkies wondering who the best VP choice would be if Clark won. For a while, I had thought Edwards or Kerry. Edwards would super-Southernize our ticket, and possibly give us 16 years of power. Kerry would give us a duo of war heros to take on the chickens in power.
But. But. . . what about Dean? I had resisted the idea of Dean as a running mate, since he added so little according to the Conventional Wisdom. How many people who would vote Democratic just because Dean was on the VP slot? Not many, I would think.
Then I read this piece in The New Republic on Joe Trippi, Dean's campaign manager:
https://ssl.tnr.com/p/docsub.mhtml?i=20031117&s=scheiber111703More than anyone else, Dean and Trippi have revolutionized American politics. Clark has too, but only to a certain extent, and in some part he has done so in Dean's footsteps. With Dean on the VP slot, we'd have the following advantages:
(1) We'd get Joe Trippi. This guy is a fucking hero. Thank God he's a Democrat! He's 100x better than the punks wasting Clark's talents and assets. Clark could fire everyone and have Dean's people run everything.
(2) We'd have two anti-war outsiders who, when speaking of the Bushies, have some of the meanest mouths in the country. Clark could throw the red meat out there well-done, with Dean turning it out extra rare.
(3) We'd have--let's be honest--nearly all the Dem grassroots roped into one. The other guys, with partial exception of Kucinich, have tiny grassroots support.
(4) We would not have to worry about an inconsistent ticket. Dean and Clark have, if you pay attention, nearly identical political views. There are small points of divergence, but they are tiny. (E.g., whether to scale back middle-class tax cuts too)
(5) We would build a bridge between two often acrimonious groups who are basically divided by loyalty and committment instead of ideology: Deanies and Clarkies. This would be very good for the unity of our party.
(6) We'd have--and this is most important--a HUGE group of talented, devoted Deanies working for Dean still, and for Clark, someone who they usually find attractive, though not as much as the Good Doctor. We would have a grassroots army that would FINALLY dwarf the gang of crazies the GOP assembles.
(7) We'd have two strong-willed, smart, rational gentlemen bouncing ideas off each other. I think they would make a fantastic leadership team. They complement each other very well.
(8) Dean anywhere near the White House would drive the wingers nuts. And he would make sure that Clark constantly stays negative when talking about the GOP.
(9) They would transform our party: (a) the grassroots would have propelled BOTH candidates, not DLC ninnies; (b) Clark would counter the wimpy, false image the GOP has cultivated; (c) Dean and Trippi would bring in organizational power that McAulliffe fails to bring; (d) we'd have two fighters to look up to, instead of folks triangulating out of (sometimes) convienience and (sometimes) necessity.
(10) Their demographics complement each other perfectly. Having both of them--but especially Dean--up there would minimize Green defections.
(11) Oh, the debates, could you imagine the debates. Clark is perfect to go against Sissy Bush. And Dean would not only give Cheney a few heart attacks, he'd be the Good Doctor and help him revive afterwards.
(12) A selfish reason. As much as I think Clark is the better candidate, I can't bring myself to dislike Dean that much--in fact, everytime I see him on TV, I'm ready to cheer. Especially when he used that great line: "I don't want to listen to the fundamentalist preachers anymore!"
(13) They would raise so much fucking money.
I'm sorry, Kerry and Edwards just can't do all that. And Deanies, Clark is the best VP choice, should he choose to accept it.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
