"Fuck Face" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Is John Kerry going to be the democratic nominee?
>
> Or is there still a chance for John Edwards?
It will be a Kerry/Edwards ticket.
--
-My Real Name
"Bob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> <Blutak> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> I think the democrats should think long and hard before putting Edwards on
the
> ticket as the vice presidential candidate. The republicans would have a
field
> day portraying such an inexperienced politician in the president's seat.
I doubt it. This is the same party that teamed Bush Sr. with Dan Quayle.
--
-My Real Name
"Bob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Mr. N" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> Edwards doesn't have near the political experience that Quayle had when
running
> for VP.
And yet Edwards is ten times the man Quayle ever was.
I'll take Edward's experience over Quayles any day. If you want to continue
to claim that Edwards' youth and 'inexperience' is irrelevant compared tot
that of Dan Quayle's, I'd encourage you to continue that strategy as it
would help Edwards immensely.
--
-My Real Name
"JC Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected]
> Edwards is great, but choosing a VP is all about strategy. Edwards isn't
> exactly lighting up the south right now
Actually he really is.
> and I don't know that Kerry is going to fixate on the south necessarily in
his bid for the presidency.
Kerry has said many times (when asked about his appeal as a northerner to
southern states) that he saw the value of balancing the ticket with a VP
candidate from the south.
> Gephardt is very appealing in that he has huge union support, something
> Kerry lack.
Kerry just picked up the AFSCME endorsement, withdrawn from Dean, so wrong
there too.
--
-My Real Name
"JC Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Mr. N" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> I'm not wrong at all. Gephardt is the one VP choice who can rally union
> support from the widest base possible.
And Gephardt has endorsed Kerry, effectively transferring the support of his
union base.
I don't think Edwards is a 'given' either, but given Edwards more than
respectable showing (and not just in the South), the idea has appeal. I
have heard a lot too about Edwards popularity being a result in part of his
positive message and vision as he's expressed them on the campaign trail.
Here in Washington State Edwards even did well, and he's campaigned here
scarcely at all.
--
-My Real Name
"TexasFireGuy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I realize I'm doing it as well, but do you all realize you just fed the
> troll?
If you think this guy is a troll, then I suggest you don't know what a troll
is.
Not all conversation starters are troll bait. Sometimes a question designed
to elicit responses is simply a good way to get a discussion on a new topic
going. It's a GOOD thing.
--
-My Real Name
"Fuck Face" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Is John Kerry going to be the democratic nominee?
>
> Or is there still a chance for John Edwards?
>
> Who would make a better candidate against Bush?
>
> Who should be the VP candidate? Gephardt? Dean? Clark? Gore? Hillary?
Kerry's already got this wrapped up, Edwards is the obvious choice as
VP........
"JC Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Fuck Face" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Is John Kerry going to be the democratic nominee?
>
>
> Yup. It's well over.
>
>
> > Or is there still a chance for John Edwards?
>
>
> Not a chance.
>
>
> > Who would make a better candidate against Bush?
>
>
> Either one. Hard to say.
>
>
> > Who should be the VP candidate? Gephardt? Dean? Clark? >Gore? Hillary?
>
>
> Clark, Gore or Hillary??? Not a chance. Gephardt, Edward or Bill
> Richardson are the likely candidates.
>
> -JC
>
Edwards has garnered excellent press on his ability to campaign during these
primaries and with his ability to communicate a message and southern
connections it would make him ideal. I suspect that Gephardt would be seen
as too old......
"Bob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> <Blutak> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> > > > Who should be the VP candidate? Gephardt? Dean? Clark? >Gore?
Hillary?
> > >
> > > Clark, Gore or Hillary??? Not a chance. Gephardt, Edward or Bill
> > > Richardson are the likely candidates.
> > >
> > Edwards has garnered excellent press on his ability to campaign during
these
> > primaries and with his ability to communicate a message and southern
> > connections it would make him ideal. I suspect that Gephardt would be
seen
> > as too old......
>
> I think the democrats should think long and hard before putting Edwards on
the
> ticket as the vice presidential candidate. The republicans would have a
field
> day portraying such an inexperienced politician in the president's seat. I
> suspect the two main reasons that Edwards is in this race in the first
place are
> 1) he had doubts that he could win reelection to his senate seat and 2) he
has
> Clintonesque political ambitions ... with almost no experience.
>
Kerry's experience though would negate much of this possible
negative.....and Edwards would bring other desirable attributes. many have
been impressed by how he has performed in the primaries.......
While many suggested Clark, i'm not sure he is an effective political
campaigner.....
"Mr. N" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Fuck Face" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > Is John Kerry going to be the democratic nominee?
> >
> > Or is there still a chance for John Edwards?
>
> It will be a Kerry/Edwards ticket.
>
> --
> -My Real Name
>
>
I realize I'm doing it as well, but do you all realize you just fed the
troll?
And this is what makes this election so pathetic.
The focus is on nominating the most electable person and not on the best person
for the job.
The last election was won by the marketers and you see what we wound up with.
In a culture where illusion is more important than substance I expected nothing
more.
--
Mark
N.E. Ohio
Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens, A.K.A.
Mark Twain)
When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the suspense.
(Gaz, r.moto)
"Mr. N" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "JC Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > [email protected]
>
> > Edwards is great, but choosing a VP is all about strategy. Edwards
isn't
> > exactly lighting up the south right now
>
> Actually he really is.
>
> > and I don't know that Kerry is going to fixate on the south necessarily
in
> his bid for the presidency.
>
> Kerry has said many times (when asked about his appeal as a northerner to
> southern states) that he saw the value of balancing the ticket with a VP
> candidate from the south.
>
> > Gephardt is very appealing in that he has huge union support, something
> > Kerry lack.
>
> Kerry just picked up the AFSCME endorsement, withdrawn from Dean, so wrong
> there too.
I'm not wrong at all. Gephardt is the one VP choice who can rally union
support from the widest base possible. I like Edwards BTW and am not
against him getting the VP slot. But I don't think it's a given that he's
going to get it. Bob Graham is another name that's worth considering BTW.
-JC
<Blutak> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > > Who should be the VP candidate? Gephardt? Dean? Clark? >Gore? Hillary?
> >
> > Clark, Gore or Hillary??? Not a chance. Gephardt, Edward or Bill
> > Richardson are the likely candidates.
> >
> Edwards has garnered excellent press on his ability to campaign during these
> primaries and with his ability to communicate a message and southern
> connections it would make him ideal. I suspect that Gephardt would be seen
> as too old......
I think the democrats should think long and hard before putting Edwards on the
ticket as the vice presidential candidate. The republicans would have a field
day portraying such an inexperienced politician in the president's seat. I
suspect the two main reasons that Edwards is in this race in the first place are
1) he had doubts that he could win reelection to his senate seat and 2) he has
Clintonesque political ambitions ... with almost no experience.
"TexasFireGuy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Mr. N" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "TexasFireGuy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> > > I realize I'm doing it as well, but do you all realize you just fed
the
> > > troll?
> >
> > If you think this guy is a troll, then I suggest you don't know what a
> troll
> > is.
> >
> > Not all conversation starters are troll bait. Sometimes a question
> designed
> > to elicit responses is simply a good way to get a discussion on a new
> topic
> > going. It's a GOOD thing.
> >
> > --
> > -My Real Name
> >
> Did you happen to miss all the posts he had prior to this one?
>
Or the ones after this one, for that matter?
<Blutak> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > I think the democrats should think long and hard before putting Edwards on
> the
> > ticket as the vice presidential candidate. The republicans would have a
> field
> > day portraying such an inexperienced politician in the president's seat. I
> > suspect the two main reasons that Edwards is in this race in the first
> place are
> > 1) he had doubts that he could win reelection to his senate seat and 2) he
> has
> > Clintonesque political ambitions ... with almost no experience.
> >
> Kerry's experience though would negate much of this possible
> negative.....and Edwards would bring other desirable attributes. many have
> been impressed by how he has performed in the primaries.......
Not if Edwards is portrayed as one heartbeat from the presidency.
> While many suggested Clark, i'm not sure he is an effective political
> campaigner.....
I agree that Clark would be a disastrous campaigner for the democrats, but he
would make a better president than Edwards in my opinion.
"Mr. N" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "TexasFireGuy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > I realize I'm doing it as well, but do you all realize you just fed the
> > troll?
>
> If you think this guy is a troll, then I suggest you don't know what a
troll
> is.
>
> Not all conversation starters are troll bait. Sometimes a question
designed
> to elicit responses is simply a good way to get a discussion on a new
topic
> going. It's a GOOD thing.
>
> --
> -My Real Name
>
Did you happen to miss all the posts he had prior to this one?
"Mr. N" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Bob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > <Blutak> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> > I think the democrats should think long and hard before putting Edwards on
> the
> > ticket as the vice presidential candidate. The republicans would have a
> field
> > day portraying such an inexperienced politician in the president's seat.
>
> I doubt it. This is the same party that teamed Bush Sr. with Dan Quayle.
Edwards doesn't have near the political experience that Quayle had when running
for VP.
[email protected]
<Blutak> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> "JC Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "Fuck Face" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > Is John Kerry going to be the democratic nominee?
> >
> >
> > Yup. It's well over.
> >
> >
> > > Or is there still a chance for John Edwards?
> >
> >
> > Not a chance.
> >
> >
> > > Who would make a better candidate against Bush?
> >
> >
> > Either one. Hard to say.
> >
> >
> > > Who should be the VP candidate? Gephardt? Dean? Clark? >Gore? Hillary?
> >
> >
> > Clark, Gore or Hillary??? Not a chance. Gephardt, Edward or Bill
> > Richardson are the likely candidates.
> >
> > -JC
> >
> Edwards has garnered excellent press on his ability to campaign during
these
> primaries and with his ability to communicate a message and southern
> connections it would make him ideal. I suspect that Gephardt would be seen
> as too old......
Edwards is great, but choosing a VP is all about strategy. Edwards isn't
exactly lighting up the south right now, and I don't know that Kerry is
going to fixate on the south necessarily in his bid for the presidency.
Gephardt is very appealing in that he has huge union support, something
Kerry lack. Richardson can really stir up the interest of the Latinos and
makes him a very interesting choice IMO.
-JC
"Fuck Face" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Is John Kerry going to be the democratic nominee?
Yup. It's well over.
> Or is there still a chance for John Edwards?
Not a chance.
> Who would make a better candidate against Bush?
Either one. Hard to say.
> Who should be the VP candidate? Gephardt? Dean? Clark? >Gore? Hillary?
Clark, Gore or Hillary??? Not a chance. Gephardt, Edward or Bill
Richardson are the likely candidates.
-JC