A cross party ticket

[DevotedDemocrat]

Do you think it will ever happen--in 2016 or in the future--where a Presidential nominee taps a figure from another party to be their VP nominee?

Consider that in 1972 Nixon had strongly considered dropping Agnew in favor of John Connally, who was still a Democrat, and thus having a Republican President with a Democrat VP

[Donerail]

I want Schweitzer/Paul, probably not going to happen though.

[windjammer]

Why would you want Rand paul? He's really conservative for a libertarian!

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

Christie/Cuomo doesn't seem far-fetched.

[Donerail]

Why would you want Rand paul? He's really conservative for a libertarian!

Because he's the best the Republican Party has to offer.

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

Why would you want Rand paul? He's really conservative for a libertarian!

Because he's the best the Republican Party has to offer.

That says something.

[windjammer]

Why would you want Rand paul? He's really conservative for a libertarian!

Because he's the best the Republican Party has to offer.

I don't understand you on him but I will respect your choice. If you think it's the best the Republican Party has to offern it's normal you think he would be a good VP.

[Lincoln Republican]

I have long been a proponent of cross party tickets.

However, in reality, they are impractical, except in times of national crises, i.e. Lincoln/Johnson.

There have been national unity governments historically, during World War I in Canada, and during World War I and World War II in the U.K., consisting of members of government and opposition parties.

With the polarizing politics in the U.S., I cannot see a cross party ticket coming to the fore anytime in the near future in the U.S.

[Mister Mets]

It's possible, but unlikely.

Kerry considered McCain in 2004. McCain considered Lieberman in 2008. In both cases, there was internal pressure from the base against this, even though it would have been strong electorally.

There are differences between the parties, so Democrats wouldn't want a candidate for national office who is pro-life, supports school vouchers and thinks the economy can be fixed mostly through tax cuts. Republicans wouldn't want a pro-choice Veep who wants to strategically increase spending as a way to build jobs.

There also aren't as many close friendships between potential presidential contenders.

And anyone who agrees to be on a cross party ticket will lose their chance to run at the top of the ticket.

A Cuomo is unlikely to be any Republican's Veep, as it would preclude him from running in 2020 or 2024.

It is possible if a politician decides it's worth sacrificing their political career to help a great man from another party to become President, or to prevent a moron from their party from ascending to the office.

[California8429]

Christie/Cuomo doesn't seem far-fetched.

This ticket could actually work...granted whoever was on bottom would have no future career barring an independent run. Granted the ticket probably would ensure a third party coming from the right or left anyway.

[Averroës Nix]

Any cross-party ticket would almost certainly be a horrible pairing running on all of the worst "centrist" ideas. Consider that the closest we've come to anything like this in recent decades was McCain/Lieberman.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I remember reading back in 2008, when McCain considered Lieberman, that some states would not allow a cross-party ticket to appear on their ballots. I'd like to know more on the issue.

I agree with Winfield such a ticket is extremely unlikely. However there are always speculations, just to recall few:

2004:

Kerry/McCain
Kerry/Hagel
Kerry/Rudman
Kerry/Chafee
Kerry/Cohen
Kerry/Specter

2008:

Obama/Hagel
McCain/Lieberman

[fezzyfestoon]

Considering the vast overlap in their political interests, it wouldn't surprise me. Any vapid show of "compromise" or some sort of contrived political "maturity" would likely be a PR coup with little to no repercussions depending on who exactly the candidates are. It would be a smart move in the current landscape. One that requires little to no actual action to advertise flexibility and political responsibility.

EDIT: After more thought however, I'm beginning to think the effects would be so short-term that party-line would still remain the standard in voting when it came down to it.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

The closest 2016 analogue to McCain-Lieberman would be… Clinton-Palin. Which would be the absolute best thing ever.

[DevotedDemocrat]

I wonder how a Clinton/Christie ticket would go, given Christie's generally broad national appeal AND the way he's alienated the GOP base. Christie could win a general election, but at the same time would never make it out of a GOP primary. Would rout the conservatives--Tea Party conservatives--while drawing to the ticket moderate GOPhers who would otherwise never vote for Clinton as well as independents who seem to like Christie.

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

Here's an idea: Christie/Crist

Try saying that 5 times fast

[TNF]

I wonder how a Clinton/Christie ticket would go, given Christie's generally broad national appeal AND the way he's alienated the GOP base. Christie could win a general election, but at the same time would never make it out of a GOP primary. Would rout the conservatives--Tea Party conservatives--while drawing to the ticket moderate GOPhers who would otherwise never vote for Clinton as well as independents who seem to like Christie.

This would never, ever happen. Christie is toxic to the entire progressive wing of the Democratic Party because of how he's handled public employees (specifically, teachers) in New Jersey.

[Liberalrocks]

Id love Clinton/Huntsman personally.