There has been some speculation (here and elsewhere) that Kopell's first question in the WMUR-ABC debate on Dec 9, "
So I would like all of you up here, including you, Governor Dean, to raise your hand if you believe that Governor Dean can beat George W. Bush" has Vice Presidential implications. (Transcript
here, requires anonymous registration)
Specifically the presumed implication being that none of those other candidates can be the VP pick now since none but Dean raised their hands, having thereby provided Koppel with a juicy vote of no confidence. Of course it would look bad to be able to point to the VP-pick and say, "Look, they don't have confidence in Dean!"
On the other hand, George Bush Sr. called Reagan's plans "voodoo economics" and now his kid are one (a voodoo economist that is). Bush Sr. ran with Reagan, and though it was brought up and even entered the political lexicon and was a more fundamentally critical comment than not raising your hand for your opponent, Reagan obviously still won, and more obviously chose Bush in spite of the criticism.
Does the reaction (not answer) to Koppels imperative request (not question) invalidate the other candidates as VP picks.
I ask this as a Clark/Dean/Dean/Clark person (is that like drinking the gatoraide?) I thought Koppel's question was very low and divisive in a non-informative way. In fact, I don't know what to think of Koppel now, I have not watched Nightline in years... is he just like this now? I guess not watching him I still thought he was a little better than most, funny how that works. Anyway, it didn't occur to me at the time that it might be the sort of thing with longer-term implications, but I did think everyone should have raised their hand and said "anyone up here can beat Bush" (true or not). My point being that Koppel's question worked as divisive flamebait even though I recognized it as such, which begs the question how divisive... are Dean and the other candidates divided now.
If you care to vote or post, I'm interested in your position.
Often I have felt that I should not give my own answer upfront (I give it in comments more often if at all), unless my position is certain enough to be a bias that should be declared. But people often think a question is an advocacy, so even though I'm not really sure how much it affects the VP pick and don't think I have a significant bias, let me give my opinion here: I don't think it disqualifies them, but I understand and see the possibility, and since it's an emotional issue, not a policy one, I think it will be determined by how people feel about it, about their impressions, so I'm asking dkos what it thinks. Personally, I hope to God it's not that significant if only because Koppel should not be allowed to cause that much havok with such a poor quality question.