Anybody But Gephart

I have been reading the comments at Eschaton and Daily Kos, the two most popular liberal blogs, and I can tell you that most of the liberal commenters are really freaked out by the increasingly likely prospect that Dick Gephardt is going to be John Kerry's choice for vice-president.

As a liberal myself, I can tell you that I will be extremely disappointed if Kerry chooses Gephardt. This will be Kerry's first important decision since becoming the presumptive Democratic nominee. Choosing Gephardt would be so wrong on so many levels.

First of all, poll after poll has shown that Edwards is the preferred choice among both democrats and independents. Polls have also shown that a Kerry-Edwards ticket does better against Bush-Cheney than any other combination. I think it is also obvious that Edwards comes across much better on television than Gephardt.

Second of all, Gephardt is exactly the type of mealy-mouthed, unprincipled politician that gives the Democratic party a bad name. Unfortunately, so is Kerry, but we are stuck with him. I hate it when politicians adopt political positions to cater to special interest groups, rather than logically analysing the issue. Gephardt is a strong opponent of free trade and NAFTA, because that is what the labor unions want. I am a strong supporter of free trade and NAFTA, and actually agree with Bush and the Republicans on this issue. Many other liberals agree with me. Think Bill Clinton.

Gephardt is also a strong advocate of gun control, catering to the gun control nutcases. I believe the Second Amendment means what it says, and am opposed to gun control. I agree with Bush and the Republicans on this issue, as do many other liberals. Think Howard Dean, who has an A rating from the NRA. In my opinion, advocating gun control has caused huge damage to the Democratic Party, permanently alienating a large number of voters who would otherwise be sympathetic to the Democratic Party.

Finally, Gephardt has been a strong supporter of Bush's Iraq War. I know, I know, Edwards also voted for the war. But Gephardt has been much more outspoken and visible in his support of the war. No anti-war liberal will ever forget the pictures of Gephardt with Bush in the Rose Garden, backing Bush's war.

So why does it look increasingly likely that Kerry will choose Gephardt? Speculation is that Kerry just gets along better with Gephardt. The other main speculation is that Hillary Clinton wants to run for President in 2008 or 2012, and the Clintons are opposed to any vice-presidential nominee who would be a strong candidate for President in 2008 or 2012.

Anyway, we will probably know this week. I am hoping for Edwards, but I would be satisfied with Clark, Vilsack, or any of the other politicians the media has speculated about. But please, dear God, ANYBODY BUT GEPHARDT.





[edit on 7/5/2004 by donguillermo]

I agree with you, for Kerry to pick Gephart would be, in a sense, suicide. He's too much of an "Washington insider" (like that's a bad thing), and the people tend to not like that. Well, they don't like it in Democratic Candidates...Republicans can get away with anything.

As for the "voted for the war" issue, I don't hold that against the Democrats as much as I used to. I mean, they were presented with evidence that Iraq had massive amounts of Anthrax, Sarin, etc., and that they had the ability to deliver them into the American heartland. They were lied to like everyone else. Hell, even I thought Iraq had WMDs, though I didn't agree with the war.

I couldn't agree more!!!!! I have never liked Gephardt. For Kerry to pick him would mean it's back to "politics as usual"..the old school politics that just don't work anymore. IF Kerry has a chance to win this election, he will have to pick someone who is not affiliated with the old school liberalism that Gephardt represents.
joey

Everyone talks about Kerry picking Edwards. What if Edwards doesn't want
to VP? I think Kerry should pick Bob Graham from Florida.