Who would be good running mates for our top three?

[PresidentObama]

If I had to place money on it, I would say Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or John Edwards will be the Democratic nominee for 2008. Based on the fact they lead all polls and fundraising, who do you think would make good running mates for our top three candidates?

I would say Senator Hillary Clinton should go with Gen. Wesley Clark. Not only because of the strong ties between the two, but because Hillary would have the name recognition and experience; while Clark would be a credible voice on the war and foreign affairs that are so important to our victory in 2008. Second choice for Hillary would be Bill Richardson.

I would say Senator Barack Obama should go with John Kerry. I doubt Senator Kerry would want to risk his seat in the Senate though if it didn't look like a slam dunk for the Democrats. But Obama's voice and message of change matched with Kerry's experience and leadership, they'd make a very powerful team. Second choice for Obama would be Joe Biden.

I would say Senator John Edwards should go with Senator Barack Obama. I think with both campaigns not taking money from lobbyists or PACS, and neither with a whole lot of Washington experience, they could offer a fresh team that aren't career politicians. They could argue they'll work outside of the broken system to bring new change to the country, instead of the same old status quo we see in politics today. I really think an Edwards/Obama ticket would be our strongest chance of any combination, IMHO. Second choice for Edwards would be Richardson or Dodd. Not sure, it's a tie for me.

So those are my tickets I want for the top three: Clinton/Clark, Obama/Kerry and/or Edwards/Obama.

I'm pulling for Edwards though as the nominee.

Who do you want/expect the candidates to pick as running mates?

[slick8790]

1. I think Kerry on a ticket would be the kiss of death for democrats in 08....n/t

[PresidentObama]

4. That's crazy. Why? I don't he will be, but still....

He would only add to a ticket, not take away from one.

[slick8790]

5. He couldn't win against bush...arguably the worst president ever.

Why do you think he would contribute anything to a ticket matched against a percievably more competant republican?

[robinlynne]

6. He won against Bush already!

[slick8790]

11. Did he?

He lost both the popular vote and the electoral vote. I wouldn't call that winning.

[PresidentObama]

13. Ummmm, obviously you don't follow the news.

Since November 2004. The evidence is there, you just choose to ignore it.

[slick8790]

17. Three million popular votes.

3 million. That's how many votes kerry had less than bush. he didn't win by any stretch of the imagination.

[PresidentObama]

18. So despite all the evidence John Kerry was cheated, you're openly ignorning it?

Republican in hiding?

[slick8790]

22. Right.

I'm actually George Bush just waving my accomplishments in the face of all you commie pinko liberal democrats.

But seriously, are you honestly saying kerry was cheated out of over 3 million votes? Yes, there is evidence of fraud, but not that much. the dem in 04 should have blown bush out of the water. they should have DESTROYED him. but as disgusting as it is, the people voted, and john kerry was soundly defeated in the popular vote. as katz said other places in the thread, gore was robbed, kerry lost. the fact you can't see the difference is incredible.

[PresidentObama]

24. The fact that you ignore facts is incredible n/t

[PresidentObama]

7. Dumb. Just dumb. Proof he "lost" to Bush?

Last time I checked more and more evidence is popping up that he didn't lose at all, and quite the opposite. I guess Gore lost too, right? *sarcasm*

Give me a break. And FYI, none of the top contenders for the GOP nomination are more competant than Bush. They'll all be Bush on steriods, which scares the shit out of me.

[slick8790]

10. Proof?

George bush is in the oval office, and won by 3 million popular votes. It doesn't matter whether they'll be bush on steriods because so many people aren't bothered enough to look and realize that.

[PresidentObama]

12. And Bush is in the White House, and Gore won. Your point.

Kerry won. Get overself, and your right wing talking point that he didn't.

[slick8790]

14. Gore won.

He won the popular vote by 500,000 votes, and would have won the electoral college had the recount not been stopped. This is NOT the same as John kerry losing the popular vote by 3 million votes, and the electoral college.

Maybe you should get over yourself and realize john kerry was a mediocre candidate and stop ignoring the facts.

[Colobo]

16. Exactly. Gore was robbed. Kerry just lost.

[PresidentObama]

20. Kerry wasn't robbed? My god, some DUers are blind.

Kerry was just as robbed as Gore, it just didn't surface till after he conceded. Ask John Edwards, he knows something fishy happened in Ohio and other places. Kerry shouldn't have conceded, he didn't lose.

[Colobo]

15. I'm with you, slick. Kerry lost.

[PresidentObama]

21. So what proof do you have? Versus all the evidence that has surfaced that Kerry was robbed.

[Colobo]

27. If he was truly robbed, he should have fought. He didn't.

So, even if he was really robbed, it doesn't matter. He accepted the official results.

[robinlynne]

32. It does matter. It is going to happen over and over again. Happened in 2006.

13 congressional candidates stood up and contested. But congress decided not to investigate.

[Tom Rinaldo]

25. Jeeeze, let Kerry2008 nominate Kerry for VP and move on

OK, register your disagreement first, but the thread didn't ask for a debate on Kerry, just for who YOU think makes sense as running mates. Obviously Kerry isn't on your list.

Somehow I am not shocked that Kerry2008 has a positive appraisal of Kerry for the 2008 ticket.

[Olney Blue]

2. I think Clark would be a good VP for any of the top three!

[LWolf]

3. Clinton/Lieberman.

Obama/Robertson (Pat)

Edwards/Kucinich or Boxer

[rwheeler31]

8. Edwards, Fiengold

dream ticket.

[electron_blue]

9. I think whoever gets the nomination will choose a much less well known runningmate

and not anyone currently in contention. This seems to be how it usually goes with both parties.

[Arugula Latte]

19. Edwards-Obama is my dream ticket.

Well, my true dream ticket is Feingold-Edwards or Gore-Feingold or any combo of that, but that ain't gonna happen.

Obama-Edwards would be cool, as well.

[Ediacara]

23. Wes Clark or Bill Richardson

[liberal N proud]

26. Any of the other top three

Or anyone from the entire field of Democratic candidates.

Ideally, the winner of the nomination would select one of the top three and place most of the others in key spots in the cabinet. The Democratic field of candidates has never been better.

[JDPriestly]

28. Edwards/Obama -- excellent choice.

I like Clark, but I think he should be Secretary of State or Defense.

[PresidentObama]

29. Isn't it though?

It's a winning ticket.

And yes, Clark deserves a spot in the Cabinet.

[Hawkowl]

30. Howard Dean, obviously

He brings the organization and the probably the largest polictical clout.

[PresidentObama]

31. Keep him in the DNC!! He's doing a good job.

We need him where he's at!!

[Hawkowl]

37. What for 2 months?

The convention is in August 25-28 and the election in November? Typically the DNC then chooses a new chair. Dean would then be out of a job. This way he has an excellent shot at Pres in 2016.

[Stop Cornyn]

33. Edwards/Obama is our unbeatable golden ticket. Hillary would pick Clark. Obama/Dodd?

[PresidentObama]

34. I think Edwards/Obama is the best ticket.

Clinton/Clark would be VERY strong as well!!

[Stop Cornyn]

35. Clinton/Clark would be very strong in many states but Hillary/Anyone kills us in the South.

[surfermaw]

Edwards & Gore, or Biden

You got to pull some red states.

[surfermaw]

36. Edwards & Gore, or Biden

You got to pull some red states.