Kerry's VP

[Wakie]

I think any one of these 8 could possibly get the VP nomination.  Each has their own strengths.

Edwards has loads of charisma, is somewhat known, and would help in the South.

Hillary has name recognition and is much loved within Democratic circles.

Graham would be a boost in FL.  And we all know how important FL is.

Gephardt would bring a great deal of labor support.  He could also serve to unify Congressional Democrats (which was something Clinton never had).

Bayh helps the moderate image.  He also brings additional support from the Industrial Midwest.

Feingold is one of the most active Senators in Congress.  He alone opposed the Patriot Act.  Putting him on the ticket would secure Wisconsin.

Vilsack is the popular Gov of Iowa.  He would secure Iowa and would help in other Midwestern states which are traditionally Republican strongholds.

Richardson would be worth a significant number of votes in New Mexico (where he is Gov).  His Hispanic ethnicity could also be played up to help win over some of the growing Latino vote (helping in such key states as CA, FL, NV, and AZ).

[Gustaf]

Which are the "traditionally Republican strongholds in the Mid-West"?

[HoopsCubs]

I think any one of these 8 could possibly get the VP nomination.  Each has their own strengths.

Edwards has loads of charisma, is somewhat known, and would help in the South.

Hillary has name recognition and is much loved within Democratic circles.

Graham would be a boost in FL.  And we all know how important FL is.

Gephardt would bring a great deal of labor support.  He could also serve to unify Congressional Democrats (which was something Clinton never had).

Bayh helps the moderate image.  He also brings additional support from the Industrial Midwest.

Feingold is one of the most active Senators in Congress.  He alone opposed the Patriot Act.  Putting him on the ticket would secure Wisconsin.

Vilsack is the popular Gov of Iowa.  He would secure Iowa and would help in other Midwestern states which are traditionally Republican strongholds.

Richardson would be worth a significant number of votes in New Mexico (where he is Gov).  His Hispanic ethnicity could also be played up to help win over some of the growing Latino vote (helping in such key states as CA, FL, NV, and AZ).

I'd take Bill Nelson over Bob Graham anyday.  And, if given the choice, I think Kerry would too.  Bayh wouldn't allow the ticket to win his own state.
HoopsCubs

[Wakie]

Which are the "traditionally Republican strongholds in the Mid-West"?

Kansas, Nebraska, and the Dakotas come to mind.  Missouri and Iowa are states which can waver one way or the other.

[Gustaf]

Which are the "traditionally Republican strongholds in the Mid-West"?

Kansas, Nebraska, and the Dakotas come to mind.  Missouri and Iowa are states which can waver one way or the other.

I didn't know that these counted as Mid-Western. But there seem to be no unanimous view on what states are in the Mid-West.

[12th Doctor]

I doesn't matter.  Whoever the VP chioce is, they will collapse under the wieght of the top of the ticket.

[Gustaf]

I doesn't matter.  Whoever the VP chioce is, they will collapse under the wieght of the top of the ticket.

A VP choice can make a difference, but if it isn't a close election it probably won't matter much.

[Wakie]

I've always classified the states as follows ....

New England = ME, CT, MA, VT, NH

Mid-Atlantic = PA, NY, RI, NJ, DE, WV, MD

South = VA, NC, SC, GA, FL, MS, AL, LA, AR, TX, TN

Industrial Midwest = OH, IN, KY, MI, WI, MN, IL

Midwest = IA, NE, KS, ND, SD, MO, OK

Mtn States/West = MT, ID, NV, CO, NM, AZ, UT, WY

Pacific Coast = CA, OR, WA, HI, AK

[Gustaf]

I've always classified the states as follows ....

New England = ME, CT, MA, VT, NH

Mid-Atlantic = PA, NY, RI, NJ, DE, WV, MD

South = VA, NC, SC, GA, FL, MS, AL, LA, AR, TX, TN

Industrial Midwest = OH, IN, KY, MI, WI, MN, IL

Midwest = IA, NE, KS, ND, SD, MO, OK

Mtn States/West = MT, ID, NV, CO, NM, AZ, UT, WY

Pacific Coast = CA, OR, WA, HI, AK

OK. I remember reading somewhere about someone touring 18 states in the Mid-West (!). The problem with your division is that it doesn't take political patterns into account. Like having Kentucky and Illinois in the same category.

[Gustaf]

I think my division (not worth much since I'm not an American) would go something like this, trying to include voting patterns to some extent:

Northeast: ME, MA, CT, VT, NH, NY, RI, NJ DE, MD

Steel States: WV, PA, OH

Mid-West: IA, MN, WI, MI, MO

South: VA, NC, SC, GA, MS, AL, AR, LA, TX, TN, KY, OK

Farm States: NE, KS, ND, SD

Western States: ID, MT, UT, WY, CO

South-West: NV, AZ, NM

Pacific: CA, WA, OR

This does not make that much sense geographically, but some politically. It leaves out Alaska, Hawaii, Florida, Illinois and Indiana, who cannot be classified in this way. Colorado is also a bit of a swing state I think.

[elcorazon]

I think my division (not worth much since I'm not an American) would go something like this, trying to include voting patterns to some extent:

Northeast: ME, MA, CT, VT, NH, NY, RI, NJ DE, MD, DC

Steel States: WV, PA, OH

Mid-West: IA, MN, WI, MI, MO, IL, IN

South: VA, NC, SC, GA, MS, AL, AR, LA, TX, TN, KY, OK, FL

Farm States: NE, KS, ND, SD, AK

Western States: ID, MT, UT, WY, CO

South-West: NV, AZ, NM

Pacific: CA, WA, OR, HI

This does not make that much sense geographically, but some politically. It leaves out Alaska, Hawaii, Florida, Illinois and Indiana, who cannot be classified in this way. Colorado is also a bit of a swing state I think.

I added the states you left out.  I think Indiana is an anomoly, being a solid Republican state in a region of states that lean democratic, but go either way.  I also think Florida is an anomoly being a "southern" state with very different demographics that keep it in play for democrats, despite the region's having become quite republican. I included Alaska as a Farm state and Hawaii as a Pacific Coast state.  NH is also a bit of an anomoly, as is Maine being more right leaning or centrist than the rest of the overwhelmingly left leaning region.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

[Gustaf]

I think my division (not worth much since I'm not an American) would go something like this, trying to include voting patterns to some extent:

Northeast: ME, MA, CT, VT, NH, NY, RI, NJ DE, MD, DC

Steel States: WV, PA, OH

Mid-West: IA, MN, WI, MI, MO, IL, IN

South: VA, NC, SC, GA, MS, AL, AR, LA, TX, TN, KY, OK, FL

Farm States: NE, KS, ND, SD, AK

Western States: ID, MT, UT, WY, CO

South-West: NV, AZ, NM

Pacific: CA, WA, OR, HI

This does not make that much sense geographically, but some politically. It leaves out Alaska, Hawaii, Florida, Illinois and Indiana, who cannot be classified in this way. Colorado is also a bit of a swing state I think.

I added the states you left out.  I think Indiana is an anomoly, being a solid Republican state in a region of states that lean democratic, but go either way.  I also think Florida is an anomoly being a "southern" state with very different demographics that keep it in play for democrats, despite the region's having become quite republican. I included Alaska as a Farm state and Hawaii as a Pacific Coast state.  NH is also a bit of an anomoly, as is Maine being more right leaning or centrist than the rest of the overwhelmingly left leaning region.

The states I left out? Are you referring to the fact that I forgot about D.C.? That would be in the Northeast, of course. I agree that Hawaii should be a pacific state, of course. Alaska is not geographically a farm state, but politically, that's why I left it out. NH and Maine aren't as serious anomalies as Illinois and Indiana and Florida. Illinois is heavily Democratic right now in an area of tossups, bot on second thought it can still be put up there b/c it isn't long-term Democratic in that sense. Indiana is still off though.  

[opebo]

Indiana is not so anomalous.  True Illinois and Michigan lean Democrat, but Ohio and Missouri lean Republican.

Lets see if I can contribute a list of states by political region:

Northeast: ME, MA, CT, VT, NH, NY, RI, NJ DE, MD, DC, PA

Mid-West: IA, MN, WI, MI, MO, IL, IN, OH, WV, NE, KS, ND, SD

South: VA, NC, SC, GA, MS, AL, AR, LA, TX, TN, KY, OK, FL

Western/Mountain States: ID, MT, UT, WY, CO, AR, NV, NM

Pacific: CA, WA, OR

HI and AL are not actually part of any region.

These are all political regions, as opposed to economic or even cultural.  I realize I'm elminating the Southwest, dividing it between the Mountain and Southern (some call Texas 'Soutwestern').  For now however Texas fits the South in voting tendencies, and Arizona fits the Mountain pattern.  NM is the only truly Southwestern state in the sense of what the southwest may someday be - a tossup region.  WV could fit in the South or the Midwest, but not the mid-atlantic.  I tossed it in with the midwest cause its more of a swing state.

[opebo]

Oh and I assume Edwards for the VP.  Slimy though he is.

[Gustaf]

Indiana is not so anomalous.  True Illinois and Michigan lean Democrat, but Ohio and Missouri lean Republican.

Lets see if I can contribute a list of states by political region:

Northeast: ME, MA, CT, VT, NH, NY, RI, NJ DE, MD, DC, PA

Mid-West: IA, MN, WI, MI, MO, IL, IN, OH, WV, NE, KS, ND, SD

South: VA, NC, SC, GA, MS, AL, AR, LA, TX, TN, KY, OK, FL

Western/Mountain States: ID, MT, UT, WY, CO, AR, NV, NM

Pacific: CA, WA, OR

HI and AL are not actually part of any region.

These are all political regions, as opposed to economic or even cultural.  I realize I'm elminating the Southwest, dividing it between the Mountain and Southern (some call Texas 'Soutwestern').  For now however Texas fits the South in voting tendencies, and Arizona fits the Mountain pattern.  NM is the only truly Southwestern state in the sense of what the southwest may someday be - a tossup region.  WV could fit in the South or the Midwest, but not the mid-atlantic.  I tossed it in with the midwest cause its more of a swing state.

Well, if you broaden the Mid-West to include that many states, like KS and NE, it ceases to be a region of swing states and then Indiana and Illinois fit in well. The anomaly lies in Indiana being heavily Republican, no other state is. And I think it's wrong to call MO or OH lean Republican, just like I wouldn't call MI lean Democrat. Remember, I'm taking a really long perspective on this.  

[elcorazon]

I think my division (not worth much since I'm not an American) would go something like this, trying to include voting patterns to some extent:

Northeast: ME, MA, CT, VT, NH, NY, RI, NJ DE, MD, DC

Steel States: WV, PA, OH

Mid-West: IA, MN, WI, MI, MO, IL, IN

South: VA, NC, SC, GA, MS, AL, AR, LA, TX, TN, KY, OK, FL

Farm States: NE, KS, ND, SD, AK

Western States: ID, MT, UT, WY, CO

South-West: NV, AZ, NM

Pacific: CA, WA, OR, HI

This does not make that much sense geographically, but some politically. It leaves out Alaska, Hawaii, Florida, Illinois and Indiana, who cannot be classified in this way. Colorado is also a bit of a swing state I think.

I added the states you left out.  I think Indiana is an anomoly, being a solid Republican state in a region of states that lean democratic, but go either way.  I also think Florida is an anomoly being a "southern" state with very different demographics that keep it in play for democrats, despite the region's having become quite republican. I included Alaska as a Farm state and Hawaii as a Pacific Coast state.  NH is also a bit of an anomoly, as is Maine being more right leaning or centrist than the rest of the overwhelmingly left leaning region.

The states I left out? Are you referring to the fact that I forgot about D.C.? That would be in the Northeast, of course. I agree that Hawaii should be a pacific state, of course. Alaska is not geographically a farm state, but politically, that's why I left it out. NH and Maine aren't as serious anomalies as Illinois and Indiana and Florida. Illinois is heavily Democratic right now in an area of tossups, bot on second thought it can still be put up there b/c it isn't long-term Democratic in that sense. Indiana is still off though.  

I just meant the states you felt didn't fit it.  I don't think Illinois is THAT heavily democratic and yes I admitted Indiana was out of character here, but the only place it would make sense & it IS contiguous is to throw it in with the south.  I view all of the other Midwest states as winnable by both sides.  True more lean democratic, but they are all in play.  Illinois, I would agree is the least likely to vote republican, but it could happen, just not if the election remains close.

[opebo]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, if you broaden the Mid-West to include that many states, like KS and NE, it ceases to be a region of swing states and then Indiana and Illinois fit in well. The anomaly lies in Indiana being heavily Republican, no other state is. And I think it's wrong to call MO or OH lean Republican, just like I wouldn't call MI lean Democrat. Remember, I'm taking a really long perspective on this.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ok, good point about the midwest, though I do think MO and OH do lean Republican, and MI leans Dem.  Let me revise:

Northeast: ME, MA, CT, VT, NH, NY, RI, NJ DE, MD, DC, PA

Mid-West: IA, MN, WI, MI, MO, IL, IN, OH, WV

South: VA, NC, SC, GA, MS, AL, AR, LA, TX, TN, KY, OK, FL

Western/Mountain States: ID, MT, UT, WY, CO, AR, NV, NM, NE, KS, ND, SD, Alaska

Pacific: CA, WA, OR, HI

I simply moved those extremely Republican Great Plains states - NE, KS, SD, and ND to the Western Mountain region.   Also moved HI to Pacific and Alaska to Mountain.

[Gustaf]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, if you broaden the Mid-West to include that many states, like KS and NE, it ceases to be a region of swing states and then Indiana and Illinois fit in well. The anomaly lies in Indiana being heavily Republican, no other state is. And I think it's wrong to call MO or OH lean Republican, just like I wouldn't call MI lean Democrat. Remember, I'm taking a really long perspective on this.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ok, good point about the midwest, though I do think MO and OH do lean Republican, and MI leans Dem.  Let me revise:

Northeast: ME, MA, CT, VT, NH, NY, RI, NJ DE, MD, DC, PA

Mid-West: IA, MN, WI, MI, MO, IL, IN, OH, WV

South: VA, NC, SC, GA, MS, AL, AR, LA, TX, TN, KY, OK, FL

Western/Mountain States: ID, MT, UT, WY, CO, AR, NV, NM, NE, KS, ND, SD, Alaska

Pacific: CA, WA, OR, HI

I simply moved those extremely Republican Great Plains states - NE, KS, SD, and ND to the Western Mountain region.   Also moved HI to Pacific and Alaska to Mountain.

That's much better! Now, I agree that MO and OH might lean Republican NOW, but not in the longer perspective.

   General   Ohio      Missouri   
1948   45%   49%   -4%   41%   4%
1952   55%   57%   -2%   51%   4%
1956   57%   61%   -4%   50%   7%
1960   50,00%   53%   -3%   50%   0%
1964   38%   37%   1%   36%   2%
1968   43%   45%   -2%   45%   -2%
1972   61%   60%   1%   62%   -1%
1976   48%   49%   -1%   47%   1%
1980   51%   52%   -1%   51%   0%
1984   59%   59%   0%   60%   -1%
1988   53%   55%   -2%   52%   1%
1992   37%   38%   -1%   34%   3%
1996   41%   41%   0%   41%   0%
2000   48%   50%   -2%   50%   -2%
Sum         -20%      16%


This table over percentage of the vote for the Republican candidate shows that both OH and MO are usually very close to the general result, thus they're tossups. The column to the right of each state is the result for the nation minus the result for the state. So a negative result indicates that the state was lean Rep, a positive that it was lean Dem. At the bottom is the sum for all election years since WWII.

[© tweed]

Where's Wesley Clark?  Big ticket on defense in Kerry/Clark, picking up some vets.  Might also take Arkansas there.

What about Gov. Bredesen as VP?  He would pick up TN, and 11EV's, almost for sure.

[PD]

I think that he will choose Edwards.

[NHPolitico]

Bayh would be the smart choice, but I don't think he'd agree to it.  Edwards is the best available athlete. He's young, he's a Southerner, he's energetic, he's new to DC politics, he's got a history with black voters, etc.

[ilikeverin]

I'd like Bayh, but that's just because I'm a Hoosier (at heart, at least), and I didn't live with Quayle so I don't know better


Yesterday, I had a potatoe for dinner.  Mmmmm.

[MAS117]

miamiu do u live in delaware?

[Platypus]

I think it will be Edwards, but who could pass up voted for their governor? Vilsack would actually make a pretty good candidate, assuring Iowa, and increasing chances in MN and MO, andmaybe OH.

My geographic definitions:
OUTLYING: Hawaii, Alaska
FAR WEST: Washington, Oregon, California, Nevada
MOUNTAINS: Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico
CENTRAL: North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas
MIDWEST:Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois
SOUTH: Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Kentucky
EAST: Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, DC, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, New York
NEW ENGLAND: Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, maine.

Some states can switch around a bt, like TX, OH, NY, NJ, NV and KY.