March 30, 2004
AT LEAST IT GIVES HIM TIME TO RECONSIDER:
MAY DATE TARGET FOR DEM MATE (Brian Blomquist, March 30, 2004, NY Post)
John Kerry is looking to name a running mate early - by the end of May - to help raise money, build momentum and serve as an attack dog, sources said yesterday.Kerry's advisers believe they can send out their No. 2 to hammer President Bush and quickly respond to Republican charges - in a fashion similar to Bush's use of Vice President Dick Cheney, who's been giving hard-hitting anti-Kerry speeches.
They can't be this stupid. They are not going to pick a veep four months before anyone is paying attention and then send this unknown out to be the attack dog, so that the first impression voters get of them is that they're a hatchet man/woman. Posted by Orrin Judd at March 30, 2004 7:48 PM
They're so convinced that "rapid response" is the path to the White House that they're completely ignoring the fundamentals. Also, have you ever known anyone who announced "I'm tough" or "I'm a fighter" to be either tough, or a fighter?
Posted by: David Cohen at March 30, 2004 7:51 PMMaybe they'll just pick a stalking horse with a convenient medical problem that will flare up two weeks after Dick Cheney's next heart attack.
Posted by: Random Lawyer at March 30, 2004 8:26 PMPaging Jerrold Nadler...
Posted by: oj at March 30, 2004 8:32 PMIf they go through with this, the Democrats will have taken selection of the Veep candidate out of the hands of their party convention - which is just about the only useful thing the convention performs. If the VP is already selected (in the type of "smoke-filled room" politics that Democrats are said to abhor), there won't be much of a reason for Joe and Jill Democrat to watch the convention in August ... and that might mean that Kerry won't get the traditional bump in the polls that usually comes at convention time.
Are these people making all the wrong moves on purpose? Probably not, but it seems that way.
Posted by: John Barrett Jr. at March 30, 2004 8:33 PMWho was it Reagan named in 1976? Schweikert of Pennsylvania? (I do remember he was the Arlen Specter of his day.)
Posted by: Raoul Ortega at March 30, 2004 9:05 PMRaoul:
Yes, but he felt he had to appeal Left and try to get the PA delegates in order to carry the convention--it wasn't a choice that had the general election in mind.
Kerry obviously has the nomination so he has to think of November--assuming that, unlike W he's incapable of picking someone who'd be a good president and the heck with the election.
It almost has to be a woman or Bill Richardson.
Posted by: oj at March 30, 2004 10:02 PMYeah, but it can't but anyone who upstages Kerry, who is nothing if he is not vain.
Why do I keep seeing Dan Quayle?
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at March 30, 2004 11:59 PMAl Sharpton would be perfect.
Posted by: genecis at March 31, 2004 10:13 AMAl Sharpton would actually be a good pick for Kerry, though he'd upstage JFK instantly (which might not be a bad thing, given Kerry's foot-in-mouth disease.) The guy is a natural for getting attention, and for coining memorable soundbites. The drawbacks to Sharpton, besides his grandstanding, are obvious: he has at least as many skeletons as Kerry, and I don't many people wanting him a bullet away from the Presidency.
Posted by: John Barrett Jr. at March 31, 2004 11:17 AM