With all of the excitement regarding the V.P. search, I'd like to take a few diary entries to go over some possible long shot picks. These men/women have not been talked about very often as candidates, but may make some difference if selected. Today's, John Breaux, the 3 term retiring senior senator from LA.
For all those who are drooling about a McCain possibility, I think John Breaux is a better choice. For one, there's the obvious, he's a Democrat. Much of the outrage that would come from the liberal wing of the party, can be avoided with a Breaux nomination. Not all of it, but much of it. He's a centrist, moderate to conservative Democrat.
There are other reasons too. Louisiana goes from a slightly lean R state to virtually locked in the Democratic column. It will be incredibly tough for Bush and, more importantly Cheney, to criticize him. Bush has a name for him, "Johnny B Good." Pretty tough to criticize a guy you've been desperate to be friends with for a long time. I would also argue that Breaux would be a better choice than Evan Bayh who is often talked about as a possibility. Bayh may/may not push IN into Kerry's camp, but even if he does, from what I know of Bayh, he's not known virtually anywhere else. Breaux, arguably could put AR, TN, and, VA into serious contention, and will eliminate the main argument in states like FL and MO, that the Democratic ticket is full of big spending, raise your tax liberals. Breaux is reasonably well known, well liked, and would be a perfect balance, especially if Kerry does what he should. If Kerry decides to run liberal, as he should, and he wants a moderate to conservative V.P, Breaux may make a better choice than Bayh or McCain.
Breaux's nomination will work if Kerry does what he should do halt the run to the middle. Kerry is a liberal. If he runs from that, then Breaux is no help to him. Two centrists on the ticket does nothing. However, if Kerry remembers that he himself is a liberal Democrat, Breaux, the moderate, would be a very powerful choice.
I know there are those that want a solid liberal ticket. Breaux, despite his centrism, has proven that he is a solid Democrat. In 2001, Bush courted him hard trying to get him to accept a Cabinet position, so the GOP guv could name a replacement. Breaux refused. In 2002, Bush was forced to praise Breaux while campaigning against Mary Landrieu. What did Breaux do? He appeared on stage with Landrieu, railing against Bush's attempt to sell out LA workers. Breaux was next to Landrieu for the last week of the campaign, and likely made the difference. You can't rail against John Breaux in LA and expect to win. Bush was forced to play nice towards him, tying up his message.
I am not endorsing anybody, I just feel that there should be some discussion about people who could make excellent nominees that aren't getting the attention. Breaux hasn't ruled it out the way Richardson has. He doesn't have the "loser" distinction, as Gephardt does.
Discuss, please discuss. John Breaux of LA. Could he be the missing link, IF, and this is a big if, IF Kerry stops the foolish run to the middle that he has begun? I think if that happens, Breaux would be a home run choice. He's a strong Southern Democrat, takes 9 EV's from Bush and virtually gives them to Kerry, and, perhaps most importantly, tongue ties the Bush/Cheney campaign. Virtually no argument that Bush/Cheney have thrown at John Kerry would work against John Breaux, if he is on the ticket, they probably will not work against Kerry either.
Please discuss. i'd like to hear opinions, positive and negative.