Democratic Convention Watch: Veepstakes -- Round 2

Thursday, June 19, 2008

Veepstakes -- Round 2

WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com

Below are the top choices from last week's poll. In parentheses after each name is the total percentage of votes each received. We'll do it again next week to further narrow the choices.

Opinion Polls & Market Research

Comments (16)

Logging you in...

Dashboard | Edit profile | Logout

Logged in as

0 Vote up Vote down

karen anne · 873 weeks ago

I seem to have missed the beginning of this. Why not Napolitano or Snowe (if she changes parties)? Surely both are more credible than Webb, with his sexist baggage, or Clark, who only ran as a favor to the Clintons.

Report

1 reply · active less than 1 minute ago

+3 Vote up Vote down

DocJess 71p · 873 weeks ago

Napolitano was part of the first round, and she only garnered 6.2% of the vote, so didn't make this round. On general principle, I didn't include any Republicans, but I give you my word, if Olympia Snowe changes parties, I'll run the poll again.

Report

+1 Vote up Vote down

Leah 85p · 873 weeks ago

Warner is OUT! He is running in Virginia and says he will not consider any other position.

Report

+2 Vote up Vote down

Oreo DemConWatch 47p · 873 weeks ago

I think Webb is probably out too. He co-sponsored a bill with John Warner for offshore drilling.

http://www.dailypress.com/news/nationworld/dp-loc...

Report

+1 Vote up Vote down

Oreo DemConWatch 47p · 873 weeks ago

And my money's on Wesley Clark with Sebelius in 2nd.

Report

+1 Vote up Vote down

Leah 85p · 873 weeks ago

Seems like they are dropping like flies! Rendell is not going be in the running because of the Farrahkan video, Strickland said NO, Ret. Gen. James Jones has been seen with McCain, Warner said NO, Gore is not interested, Dodd is having that bad press with his mortgage company, and Webb is a sexist and non-green. Kathleen SEBELIUS still looks like the best choice to me :)

Report

1 reply · active less than 1 minute ago

+1 Vote up Vote down

Leah 85p · 873 weeks ago

And there is no use even thinking about Hagel. The Dems aren't going to put a Republican one heart beat from taking over the White House.

Report

+1 Vote up Vote down

Matt 75p · 873 weeks ago

When it comes to VP, No never really means No. If Obama comes to any of these candidates, and says, "your country needs you, and I need you", it's very hard for them to say no, no matter what they've said previously.

Report

+1 Vote up Vote down

DocJess 71p · 873 weeks ago

The only people for whom I believe "no" is REALLY "no" are Edwards and Gore. I have Edwards pegged for Attorney General, and Gore pegged for Energy Czar. But I agree with Matt that, in general, "No" never really means "No".

There's a lot of scuttlebutt about Jim James, and I'm not sure whether his previous relationship with McCain would help or hurt the ticket. A lot of people would say "But he's an unknown": but then think back about what you heard 7 months ago about a skinny guy from Chicago with big ears.

Personally, I think Richardson is a good choice -- solid creds, executive experience, Cabinet experience, foreign policy experience, and incredibly smart.

Report

0 Vote up Vote down

tmess2 · 873 weeks ago

While you can't tell how much weight to put on rumors and the paid chattering class, Biden, Kaine, and Sebellius seem to be getting a lot of meniton along with Sam Nunn and John Edwards. For Edwards, no probably means no. For Gore, it's definitely "been there, done that."

Report

0 Vote up Vote down

dutchie · 872 weeks ago

It strikes me as odd that a website that has been putting so much effort in counting meticulously for so long would fall for the trap of doubling the resulting percentages from the previous poll.

Obviously, since you had two lists of 10 to pick from, and invited everybody to cast two votes, all percentages should have been halved, since they add up to 200 now (including the vote-percentages for those that didn't get enough votes to be included in the second poll).

Report

2 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

+1 Vote up Vote down

DocJess 71p · 872 weeks ago

I didn't actually "count" anything, I just took the top vote getters from each list. I put the percentages in to show what percentage of the vote each received within thier respective list.

Since this is a completely unscientific poll, it was done just to get the opinions of DCW readers, and was not meant as anything mathematical. There are veepstakes all over the web, and what is interesting to me is how different the outcomes are based on the readership at each site.

Report

+1 Vote up Vote down

Leah 85p · 872 weeks ago

I've been playing on the VeepStakes on MSNBC but they have put that one on hold until the end of next week because of Tim Russert. They probably won't be updating their Electoral Vote map either for a week or two.

Report

0 Vote up Vote down

JayZed · 871 weeks ago

Isn't it time for round three? We need to make sure that we pick a veep for Obama before he picks one for himself...

Report