Why Dean or Clark for VP?

[mikehiggins]

I beleive the two most effective VP candidates would be Dean and Clark. Of the two, I think Clark would be the most acceptable to the party as a whole though I could certainly live with the Doctor. (Maybe during the debates Dean could give Cheney a quick physical and let the country know if the Master of Evil even has a heart and if it is likely to blow out anytime soon.)

Both men bring something to the race that nobody has been in a position to offer before; an organised, dedicated national network of committed (and some near fanatical) supporters who are ready, willing and able to take to the streets on a moment's notice in support of their candidate. At a time when the traditional Democrat power bases are weakening (unions, local political "machines", etc) the dedication of the grassroots organisation on a national basis can make the difference for 2004.

Clark and Dean have 'em, nobody else in the US comes close. If Dean is the VP, the Clark people will still follow Clark in backing the ticket, getting the vote out and raising funds. If Clark is the VP, I assume the Dean people will do the same.

Either way, the cause of increased democracy will be served.

And the chances of kicking BushCo to the curb will be enhanced.

[Beer Snob-50]

1. I love the idea of Clark for VP

He seems level headed (not that Dean isn't)and comes from the South. He also gives that extra "gravitas" concerning foreign policy and defense issues. The biggest downside to Dean IMHO is that he is from the same area of the country as Kerry.

[IronLionZion]

2. Dean said he would accept if asked

but I think Kerry wants to get a Southerner to offset his being from Massachusetts. Clark said he won't accept VP.

[mikehiggins]

5. Once again, Clark did NOT say he wouldn't accept the VP nod

He said he wasn't interested in it. He has also pledged to do whatever he can to help Kerry get elected. If Kerry asks him to serve he will.

One thing Clark has learned over the last few months is that the media pundits and talking heads (they aren't journalists--they only play them on TV) are just as much the enemy as anyone at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. You can no longer expect to see and hear the same candor and forthrightedness in his interviews that hurt him so much in his own campaign.

Now he says what he wants to say, and what advances the campaign, not what they want to hear him say.

[AntiCoup2K4]

3. Might want to edit your subject line, Mike?

Looks like you meant to say "Why NOT Dean or Clark for VP?"

And for the record, I agree either of them would be a much better choice than another DLC puppet such as Breaux or Bayh (two names often mentioned), and much more logical than 2 senators (with Edwards)

[mikehiggins]

6. Nah, I meant exactly that.

It is a positive statement that either of these two men would be the better choice for VP than any of the other names mentioned, and for a very specific reason that I do not think has been adequately considered.

The whole grassroots operation operates under the radar screens of the traditional "pundits", much like the Chrisitian Right crusaders did in the process of taking over the GOP. Enlisting them fully by running with their "leader" can be a big help to Kerry.

[bif]

4. To add some life to the ticket?

Kerry's so stiff, that having either one on the ticket might help energize the voters.

[in_cog_ni_to]

7. HOMELAND SECURITY!

We already know that Homeland Security is THE issue for the chimp. It's what his campaign IS. It's all he's got. Wes Clark is the only candidate who can slam this administration for everything it has and has not done, before and after 911. Kerry can concentrate on domestic issues while Wes Clark is out slammin' the shit out of the chimp on his failed leadership. Yup, Wes Clark is the guy....Perfect, in fact. :loveya: