2008 VP Power Rankings: July 2nd
Posted on July 1st, 2008 at 10:57 pm by PD AdministratorJust a mini-update, because the VP Power Rankings change about as often as Ryan Seacrest whitens his teeth.
Republicans
1. Mark Sanford - He’s a conservative darling, and fits the profile well, if McCain cares to appease the grassroots. The question becomes, does Mac Daddy really care about the conservative base?
2. Mitt Romney - Wealthy, polished, wealthy, already has some national name ID, wealthy, tireless, wealthy, and negates questions about McCain’s weakness on economics issues. Oh, and did we mention he’s wealthy?
3. Bobby Jindal - He’s a complete long shot, but we’ve not seen a long shot get this much buzz since Geraldine Ferrarro in ‘84.
The GOP Darkhorse
Sarah Palin - Great back story, very charming and likable, and serves smack dab in the middle of a drilling-where-the-greens-don’t-want-to-drill state. That state happens to be Alaska. She’s got a bit of a “hottie” buzz about her, but like we said, she’s from Alaska.
Democrats
1. Evan Bayh - He’s the poster boy for Moderate Democrats, plus he’s vetted and experienced. If Obama wants to add very popular, moderate balance, this IS the best pick. By the way, he’s moderate.
2. Evan Bayh - He’s such a good pick, we think he occupies spots #1 and #2.
3. Sam Nunn - He’s also moderate, and very experienced, and also fits the ‘insider’ model that is common with Veep picks. He’s also been out of politics for 10 years, and does the ‘change’ candidate want an old-school Beltway insider? He may need one, and Nunn is just as good as any of them.
The Dem Darkhorse
Al Gore - He’s never been more respected around the world, his pet issue has never been more important, and it would be the ultimate sacrifice for country and would cement a rare place in history. Here’s one for you - who are the only two men to serve as Vice President under two different Presidents?
15 Comments
Leave a comment
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
I voiced my opinion just before these rankings went up. I still think Biden or Gore are the best choices, though I have various thoughts about the possiblity it would actually happen.
I’d put Biden at a 6 out of 10 and Gore at a 2 out of 10 as the odds they’d get offered the slot.
Yes, if Gov. Sarah Palin wants to serve her country nationally, she needs to move to a REAL state to be worthy. Only big states like Illinois, Florida, New York, etc, have real leaders.
Besides, what is Alaska anyway? A national park? A territory? Is it even part of the U.S.?
I’m sure Alaska is a fine place, and I’ve heard great things about Gov. Palin.
But lets be realistic for a moment - Alaska brings very little to the table from an electoral college standpoint. Very few people know who Sarah Palin is.
She could very well be a superstar, but under the microscope of a VP vetting process, who knows what could emerge.
I’m sure there are some incredible leaders in Alaska. But alas, Alaska has a very small voice in Presidential politics.
Alaska’s (population) size is irrelevent and raising that as a prohibiting factor on Palin is ridiculous.
Palin’s voter appeal/voter base, just as McCain’s, Obama’s and Hillary’s transcends geography.
It is so absurd for people to keep bringing up, oh Alaska is too small. Get real.
I don’t think that a state’s population is irrelevant, but it also is being overblown as the main reason why she is a long shot candidate.
Alaska is a red state with three electoral votes. If you can get someone with similar appeal and voter base in a place like Florida, Ohio or Pennsylvania, why choose Palin?
There was an article I read somewhere (if only I could remember where!!!) about Alaska’s Gov. Palin and she would actually survive the nit-picking microscope process for the VP spot quite well. She’s had some history of actually standing up for what she felt was right and represents the conservative end quite well which would go well with Johnny being not-so-conservative. It’s just that name recognition part that poses the biggest problem.
I’ll see if I can find the article I read and post the link.
I’d love to read it Fabs, please drop the link if you find it.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11258.html
I’m not exactly technically savy, so if it doesn’t show as an actual link, gotta love good ol’ copy & paste.
I greatly appreciated the changes Jason, and I feel these power rankings reflect reality to a much greater extent.
Now, I’ve been waiting for an opportunity to voice my easing on my Romney concerns. I don’t know if this will stick or not, but at the moment I believe he would be an acceptable choice for VP. Largely due to the fact that he is at least SAYING the right things, and definitely brings fund raising to the ticket (or so we are led to believe).
This should not be construed as an easing up on the club for greed, or an endorsement of the way Romney conducted himself in the primaries. But a lot of people genuinely believe Romney is pro-life and pro-family and he himself says he is, so for now, I will take him at his word.
There are however some Washington, Media, Upper-Class, and Academic elites that really due resent the fact that folks like me make up the majority in our party, and look down on us. They do wish to move our party to the left socially, and I will not tolerate it.
It is important that those of you who fall into the category above to understand that the only reason we are so passionate about those issues is because it is a matter of right and wrong. Surely you can understand how I don’t give a flying pig about federalism when human lives and the family structure are at risk.
So for at least one more election, we should put our differences aside and work for the issues that we can agree on. The Democrats will be united and it will take the full Conservative Coalition to beat them, and yes, that even means we need some Paulians. Let’s find some common ground and give it one more go, for old times sake.
You will need the Paulites, but you won’t get them with or without Romney.
The problem I have with Romney is that I never beleived he was Pro-Choice in the first place. I think that is worse than actually being Pro-Choice and then switching your opinion. You just don’t hold the high positions he has held in his church and still manage to be Pro-Choice. It would kind of be like your local Catholic Cardinal running for office on a Pro-Choice platform. It just doesn’t happen. Even Harry Reid (also a Mormon) is Pro-Life. So I have problems with his credibility one way or the other. Not to mention problems with some policies (read: Health Care) as well.
Nope. Don’t think you are going to get many Libertarian votes this time around. Better luck next election though…
There were two vice-presidents who served under two different presidents: John Calhoun and George Clinton….what do I win?
Can’t see Gore becoming the third, would welcome it though
Chris, you are absolutely correct, I completely forgot that Mister P-Funk himself was VP under two different Presidents.
Good catch!
not bad for an Englishman…I spend too much time reading sites like this!
Wow, I didn’t know we had PD fans across the pond. Brilliant!
Other than Romney, I think it’s foggy of you to think Sanford and Jindal are still in serious contention. If this were about revving up the base, Huckabee would still be in the mix, but it’s become about competing in purple states, which is why Romney and Portman top McCain’s list.
You’re right on Bayh, and Nunn. Biden’s up there too.