This is what I'm looking for. The more I read about Al Gore's 2000 campaign, I feel pain for the years of chaos that followed but it's hard to think the guy was robbed when he did everything he could to fuck up his chances. Too much Beltway think.Mister Tee wrote
I know I'm several days late on this, but in case Sabin still wants an answer to his question re: Gore choosing a different VP...
Bob Graham would have been a far more neutral way to boost himself there. Which was important, because Lieberman singularly antagonized significant portions of the would-be Democratic coalition. Gore was already viewed with suspicion by leftier portions of the Dem party, but he might have won them over with a Kerry or (then un-scandaled) Edwards
I've since watched a few clips of Bob Graham and I still feel like I have no idea what he looks or sounds like. Seems smart but one of the few people who makes Al Gore look like an alpha dog. Honestly, real Tim Kaine vibes. Which means he was probably the perfect choice. It's hard for me to look at John Kerry and think that any Democratic ticket needs this man... although you're right about New Hampshire. The biggest problem that I see with John Kerry is that Al Gore was clearly trying to paint himself as not a liberal (it was still that era) and Kerry makes that harder. As for Edwards, there's no way he could've been an option. He'd only been in the Senate for a little over a year by the time of the convention. Also, I know Clinton and Gore were two southerners on the same ticket, but they had very different energies. Gore and Edwards sort of looked and sounded the same. That would've been very weird. On the other hand, a running mate needs to be able to boost the candidate and attack the opponent. Edwards was useless for Kerry in 2004 (at least, so I've heard). Maybe he'd be a better fit for Gore and the issues of Gore's election?
Tell me if I'm wrong here. My thinking over the years has become if a candidate can't find a veep that actually helps the ticket, there's something wrong with the candidate. I don't think any of us at the time thought that Pence was a significantly stronger running mate selection than Tim Kaine but in hindsight Pence married then-skeptical evangelical support to Trump in a way that has yet to wane while Tim Kaine did little to bleed "progressive" support (in 2000, they were liberals). But it's hard to say who Hilary Clinton could've chosen that wouldn't have done her some harm.Mister Tee wrote
It's not so much any of the other veep possibilities would have electrified the ticket; it's that Gore violated Nixon's dictum, choosing the running mate who DID hurt him.
A rambling point but the fact that I don't see any option that electrifies Gore's candidacy says more about Gore than them. I didn't see that at the time. I was so in the tank for this guy in 2000...