Ticket Strength As Sole Criteria: Which combination Pres.&VP would win biggest?

[John Q. Citizen]

Choose your 2 dream candidates based solely on electibility and explain why they would have the best shot at winning in the 08 general election.

My choice is Gore/Clark. We already know Gore can win, and he looks to do even better this time. Clark is a great campaigner and he would be a strong hands on VP in US foreign policy, the perfect foreign policy/military credentials in the executive branch. This argument has been made by one segment of the Democratic party, the DLC, for a long time, that the Dems have to look tough on defense. General Clark would appeal to those voters the DLC are most concerned about. Plus, the progressive wing of the Democratic party have come to

So the Dems would be running one of the foremost visionary thinkers of our day, whose also the guy who won in 2000 and should have been our president anyway, a man who was both brave enough and smart enough to speak out against the Iraq tragedy before we were swept to war. He knows what it takes to run a campaign, and he learned a lot from his last campaign. He has name recognition already sewed up and he's just a natural to be the President.

And Clark VP ha enough military medals to make any red blooded American girl and her beau drool with envy. The guy is one of the foremost military leaders of his time. And he also had the foresight and good sense to argue against the Iraqi mis-adventure. We could hold the whole Northeast with these guys, (and New Hampshire) as well as continue with inroads into the south and mid west.

We take the West Coast. We might be able to get Tennessee this time. We definitely get Florida. And maybe Virginia. Yes to Ohio.

I think they could win with 57% of the vote. A landslide. And the electoral college by a wide margin. And long coat tails down ticket to get some breathing room.

It would represent change, very real change to the country, without a whole lot of resultant fear as too to much change too fast. In fact that ticket would be percieved as fighting the fast changes of global warming. I think it's a ticket that would have broad approval for a whole lot of reasons.

[TerdlowSmedley]

1. Edwards/Obama

[John Q. Citizen]

2. Why?

[Clark2008]

6. That ticket has absolutely no strength in the areas we need the

most help: Southern and mid-Western white males. We have to win a goodly portion of this voting bloc in order to flip any purplish-red states to acheive Electoral College success.

Edwards is not a Southerner's Southerner. He's seen as "too pretty" to white male swing voters in the Heartland - not tough enough on foreign policy or strong enough, physically.

Obama, it's sad to have to admit, is not going to pick up any of these voters, either - even though I like and respect him, I know what his weaknesses are - and popularity amongst the group above is one of them.

Sorry - I see that ticket as a major flop.

Gore/Obama would be fine - but Edwards/Obama would only appeal to women and young people, who still, despite our best efforts, don't get out the vote like white males.

[montanacowboy]

3. GORE/FEINGOLD

TWO MEN OF THE HIGHEST INTEGRITY - NO ONE COULD BEAT THEM; AND FEINGOLD WOULD ACCEPT THE VP SLOT I SINCERELY BELIEVE

WHO ELSE BESIDE THESE TWO MEN CAN TAKE THIS COUNTRY OUT OF THE DOWNWARD SPIRAL IT'S IN AND RESTORE OUR PLACE IN THE WORLD?

NO ONE

[Riddler]

4. Edwards/Clark

Likable, intelligent, compassionate, ethical, honest, and an unquestioned military background. There are no 2 repukes on earth that can match up with them.

[FrenchieCat]

9. Those two will never appear on the same ticket......that's a guarantee!

Edwards would have to get his gravitas elsewhere. Maybe Edwards/Richardson....although that ticket would look backwards to many.

[John Q. Citizen]

7. But why do you believe Fiengold would run stronger than Clark in the general?

One tenent of the DLC stratedgy says the Dems need to look strong on defense. Clark fills the bill on that and is also agreeable to pro-peace lefties. In fact many of his fans are pro-peace lefties.

I like Feingold. But why would he be stronger on the ticket than Clark in your opinion?

I think almost any combination of Democrats could probably win in 08. But I think a Gore/Clark ticket strikes a balence based on the backgrounds and experiences of the 2 candidates.

I also think that any candidtae would do well with Clark in the VP spot. He's my hottest VP prospect.

[PresidentObama]

5. I have a few....

Gore/Clark, Gore/Obama, Gore/Kerry, Clark/Kerry, Clark/Obama, Clark/Edwards, Edwards/Obama, Edwards/Clinton, Clinton/Obama, and finally Obama/Clinton!!

[FrenchieCat]

8. In terms of electoral strategy strength, you may be right.

Although I'd like Clark as President.

But Clark on the ticket would reinforces Gore's national defense stance (as Gore without this kind of reinforcement on the ticket looks weaker--remember the "thank Goodness Gore isn't President" after 9/11?--Bullshit, but bullshit perceived as true by many at the time) and make Gore appear stronger.

Clark would provide the ticket with a more moderate/independent appeal although progressives, many of them, like Clark. That ticket has just enough association with the Clinton years without the baggage of a Hillary. Plus Clark was right on Rwanda, one of Clinton/Gore's biggest mistake in Foreign policy. Clark helps gain constituency that Gore didn't have enough of in the south last time he ran.

Clark's a pitbull. He'd defend Gore much more effectively than any other.

Clark is competent and intelligent and has consistently shown a track record of sound judgment.

So yes, if Al Gore chose to run, Wes Clark would make him that much stronger.

Frankly, I don't see how any other politician would give Gore the type of strength that he would need to survive media attacks if he chose to run.


Considering that Giuliani is polling high (40%) with the repugs simply because he was the mayor of NY at the time of 9/11 (regardless of everything else about him that should really be making him a non-contender) screams to us that we cannot ignore national security as a strength required to win the Presidency come General Election time.

That being said, I don't know if Al Gore will run (so far it isn't very hopeful), and I don't know if he would understand Clark's strength and make that decision......the press might push Edwards at him for the optimistic bent as they did in 2004, or Bill Richardson for that Hispanic/diplomatic edge (Richardson better than Edwards, but less superior in terms of military gravitas compared to Clark).

[John Q. Citizen]

10. Gore has already defeated the media. He has exited from his battle on top of the heap.

They won't mess with him again too badly. He's already kicked their ass.

Anybody who got the nomination would be crazy not to invite Clark. He's a diplomat also. Put that guy to work!

[FrenchieCat]

15. The media cannot be defeated until it is reformed....

and so it goes, the media does damage how and where it wants to. They are a force to be reckoned with no matter how much we want to think that this isn't quite the case. Unfortunately, it is. :(

[AndyTiedye]

12. Edwards Brings Nothing to the Ticket. Forget Edwards

The only reason Edwards even gets considered as a VP is because of the "rule" that
you must always have a Southerner on the ticket or no Southerner will vote for it.
(A "rule" that only applies to Democrats, for some reason).

We got wiped out in the South in '04 even with Edwards on the ticket. What good is he?

[AndyTiedye]

11. 57 Percent of the Actual Vote for a Democrat is Barely Enough to Win

57% of the vote. A landslide.

Subtract 7% for the Repiglicans' built-in Electoral College advantage
and another point for fraud, and we're not even winning with 57%.

We need 60% or better.

[John Q. Citizen]

13. Well, Gore already won, so I meant with a net showing of 57%. after subtracking

for the bleeding of votes.

[election_2004]

14. Clark/Sebelius

Would still put several purple and red Southern states into play.

Would be strong on foreign policy and have the added bonus of a Governor on the ticket.

Would still excite the soft supporters of Hillary Clinton who solely want the chance to vote for a woman, with Kathleen Sebelius in the V.P. slot.