That’s the ticket
How about this for a Democratic ticket in ’04:
Dean/Feingold
What do you think?
Archives
- January 2022
- September 2021
- June 2020
- June 2018
- February 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- June 2004
- May 2004
- February 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
- October 2003
- September 2003
- August 2003
- July 2003
- June 2003
- May 2003
- April 2003
- March 2003
- February 2003
- January 2003
- December 2002
- November 2002
- October 2002
- September 2002
- August 2002
- July 2002
- June 2002
- May 2002
- April 2002
- March 2002
- February 2002
- January 2002
- December 2001
- November 2001
- October 2001
- September 2001
- August 2001
- July 2001
- June 2001
- May 2001
- April 2001
- March 2001
- February 2001
- January 2001
- December 2000
- November 2000
- October 2000
- September 2000
- August 2000
- July 2000
- June 2000
Sounds great–except I think we need Feingold too much here in Wisconsin! How about this scenario: Feingold/?? in 2012 (sounds so futuristic, but it’s really not that far away), after Dean wraps up his two-term administration.
did you want a winning ticket, or just one that you could vote for without getting ill in the voting booth? While I dont completely buy the “balanced ticket” argument in terms of geography – i do think that ideologically, you can forget the ENTIRE south with your suggestion.
As long as it’s not Dean/Feinstein…
I don’t completely buy the South argument. There are states that will mindlessly vote for dubya no matter what, and there are states that are in play. Though we may think the Southerners won’t vote for Yankees, what we’re forgetting is that 50% of the electorate that doesn’t vote. Motivate them to vote for Anyone But Bush and you win no matter what state you’re in.
I wasn’t speaking of the region in terms of GEOGRAPHY – of course southerners vote for yankees – like REAGAN, the first BUSH (Texas my ass, we all know he’s from Connecticut) – but to get a majority (i.e. electoral votes) your ticket needs to show something other than liberals. GORE is a southerner, and didnt carry any southern states in 2000. Getting the right candidates is a tad easier than motivating the non-voters to do a “Anything but Bush” – people prefer to vote FOR someone, than against someone.
BJ: The thing is, despite the right’s screaming, Dean isn’t much of a liberal. He’s pretty centrist, except on the war, and lots of people don’t like that. He’s certainly much more of a fiscal conservative than Bush. And I think Dean will be showing his colors soon.
That idea gives me a big stiffie.
“despite the right’s screaming, Dean isn’t much of a liberal’ —- do you mean Lieberman??? I know what you mean, overall. (Capital punishment, gun control, etc he doesnt have traditional liberals views – but at least they are thought-out and nuanced – not that I agree with them). But at the moment, he IS stressing his liberal views – look at his page for African Americans – it talks about Civil Unions! As far as the war goes – again, he’s stressing that as his Big Liberal Credential. But for him to win, he’s going to have to start (very soon) talking about HOW to deal with the occupation; about how he isn’t an idealogue, but a pragmatist who gets things done. While I wasn’t necessarily impressed THAT he got Gore’s endorsement, i have to admit I am impressed at how he went about it – I’m glad to see that one of the NINE is actually showing some smarts!