For John Kerry?

I'll look for a link, but CNN quoted him as saying "he would entertain it." He went on to say something to the effect that "I cannot envision any circumstances under which I would accept it." That's a NO, but not a definite NO.

Oh well, just found it interesting that he wouldn't just say "no" outright.

I've heard a number of the talking heads speculate about this over the past couple weeks. I don't believe it. Or Hillary for that matter.

It's seems to me the safest choice would be Edwards. But really, how much does the VP choice matter anyway? It should matter for obvious reasons but I doubt it does. Remember Quayle?

In terms of a link, http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/....tm/index.html. The last line mentions Def. Sec., and maybe that's what I heard, but I could've sworn it was for VP.

Edwards is a favorite of mine, but practically speaking, he brings no electoral votes to Kerry. Dick Gephardt, on the other hand.... Or Bob Graham for that matter.

Not so sure about Graham. CNN this morning was talking about exit polling in florida yesterday showing Edwards twice as popular as Graham for the VP choice.

Although McCain offers an intriguing alternative....My God can you imagine the howls of indignation from the flying-monkey right if he did!!! Shoot, Lush Limpballs' head would explode!!!! Same with Insanity and O'Really!!!

Come to think of it that would be good fun!!!

Go John Go!!!!

You're not still on the Clark bandwagon are you?

Edwards, Graham or Gephardt won't be the VP? Edwards is a likeable guy, but I suppose that could be a problem for Mr. Excitement, err, Sen. Kerry. McCain gives you the same issue, but goodness, the benefits you would get from it.

If McCain is Kerry's VP, I'll get excited for that ticket.

KL: Thanks for the info on Graham v. Edwards in FL. Graham is a good guy though.

you know this WAS real. McCain's Chief of Staff says "No way" now. But I think he was toying with the idea.

But this brings me back to the inherent problem of this two-party system. John McCain is NOT a Republican. The 2000 election showed that much. But where does a mainstream politician go? Independent? Yeah, and become irrelevant? I think not.

What is more accurate is that ultra conservatives have hijacked the Republican party. Pat Robertsons followers started at the grass roots local level with county and state Republican party activities, and built on that to the point where they national part has been taken far to the right of where it was. McCain and Jeffords would have been mainstream Republicans during the 60's and 70's. Now one is an independent and one has been marginalized.

There was a time when there were conservative and liberal wings of the Republican party. Remember Ed Brook, Jacob Javits? NYC mayor John Lindsey was a liberal Republican, and that's what current mayor Bloomberg is, but he is an endagered species and probably won't ever be elected to office outside of the state of NY.

Today, we have a single conservative Democrat in the Senate, and a few moderate Republicans. Other than that, the parties are very polarized, which is a great loss for all IMO.

oc

But I like the idea of TWO war veterans going up against TWO chickenhawks....

__________________
The last time this country mixed politics with religion, people got burned at the stake.