Back on 10 May, when the press was wondering aloud why Kerry was taking so long to name a running mate, I predicted that Kerry would hold out on naming names until a few weeks out from the convention to keep his nomination safe.
So for now, Senator Kerry's safest move is to make sure he get the nomination first, and doesn't put anyone else in the shotgun seat at least until it is too late to evaluate them on their performance on the campaign trail, as well as the public's acceptance of them as a major player. At that point in time, a few weeks out from the convention at the most, he can announce anyone, and be safe. At least safe from losing the nomination.
Not a tough prediction, but still, at the time there was a lot of grumbling in the press on why it was taking him so long. My guess as to why the delay then, still stands.
Kerry is such a lackluster candidate, and he enjoys so little real support even within his own party, that he is not likely to name a running mate until much closer to the convention. Any running mate who hits the campaign trail weeks or even months ahead of the convention is likely to look so much better than Senator Kerry by the time the convention rolls around, he (or She) would be in a fairly good position to upset the Senator and steal the nomination.
I didn't predict who would be chosen, because at the time, I didn't have enough access, or time, to evaluate where each of the prospectives stood on the issues. But I did say this about whom he
should pick
But if he intends on taking back the White House for the Democrats, he better choose a running mate who is as much anti-Kerry, as Kerry is anti-Bush.
and I still stand by that statement too. And actually, Edwards is a good fit for that requirement. Kerry is the ultimate Washington insider, he even speaks washingtonease every chance he gets, and doesn't understand that he's boring the hell out of anyone listening. Edwards is an outsider, barely one term in office and unlikely to be returned by the voters. Kerry is seen as elitist, and Edwards paints himself as the son of a mill worker, whatever that is supposed to mean (I've grew up with millworker's kids, and with white collar worker's kids. There wasn't any difference.) Edwards worked for his millions, Kerry didn't. Edwards is a southerner, Kerry is a Brahmin Bostonian, and there a pictures of him as a young man sailing out on the Kennedy yacht. Kerry served in Vietnam, Edwards hasn't spent a day in uniform (note the sudden dissapearance of military service as a measuring stick).
But Kerry's folks aren't playing it that way. They are stressing the
similarities, rather than the
differences. This is going to hurt them, a lot. No one will vote for Kerry/Edwards simply because they view Edwards as a young Kerry. They will be willing to take the very lugubrious Kerry as President in order to have the excitement of Edwards a heartbeat away;
only if they know that Edwards is a very strong counter to Kerry. Kerry/Edwards as bosom buddies is a losing proposition. It's not easy to believe, and the Repubs will point out every single mudsling that Kerry and Edwards threw at each other in the primaries. That they now get along like long-lost brothers will make Kerry look more and more like he's willing to do anything, say anything, embrace anything or anyone, in order to fulfill his "destiny" of being the President.
Bill Clinton was a supernova whose explosion propelled Gore into the national limelight, though Gore's own gravity slowed down his pace and cost him the presidency. Unlike Clinton, Kerry is a Black Hole. Edwards can add voters to the ticket, but not if he gets too near the Black Hole that is Kerry's public persona. Right now, the Kerry handlers have him very close to the event horizon. We'll know in time for the convention whether he gets dragged in or not.
Recent Comments