45

The Green Vice President: Indulgent Speculation

While Cynthia McKinney has not locked up the Green Party nomination yet, she is well on her way to sealing the nomination.

Which leads one to wonder – who will she select as her running mate? Based on previous GP rules, the Presidential Nominee names whom they want to be their VP, and the Delegates vote it up or down (at least that is how it was told to me).

So here is a speculative list of potential Vice Presidential running mates if Cynthia McKinney gets the nomination:

Jared Ball – Jared Ball of DC was a very promising GP Presidential candidate up until he dropped out of the race in January to endorse Cynthia McKinney. Ball, a Communications Studies Professor, an independent journalist, a veteran of the first Iraq War and a hip hop activist, would bring the “Capital Resistance” component of his campaign to the McKinney campaign. He would be a tireless campaigner, and an all African-American Green Party ticket would be a very interesting aspect to the 2008 “race”. I see Ball as a real possibility.

Mike Gravel – His campaign for President as a Democrat got him a fan base but no party support (probably due to calling all the other candidates ‘losers’ and challenging the establishment). He then sought the Libertarian nomination and got shoved aside by Bob Barr. Gravel could bring to the McKinney ticket a nationally known “name” (with youtube videos) and probably pick up voters who are younger, anti-establishment, but turned off by the ‘seriousness’ of Ralph Nader. I have huge respect for what Gravel did as a Senator during the Vietnam War (had a role with ending the draft, for one), but I don’t think he would be the best choice as a running mate. He could even drag the ticket down.

Kat Swift – Kat’s youth and veteran Green Party activism would give the Green Party an all female ticket, supporting the Green Party’s value of “feminism” and potentially appealing to a broad segment of the electorate that may not be turned off by Obama, McCain, Nader, Barr, and all the other men on the ballot in November. Its too bad the Green Party won’t be on the ballot in Texas, Swift’s home state.


Rich Whitney – Rich Whitney’s major impact on the Illinois Governor’s race (10%) put the Illinois Green Party on the map. Putting Whitney on the ticket would help in Illinois, where McKinney should have a good showing already, might make sense. Whitney also has campaigning experience, fund raising experience (his 2006 campaign has already donated several thousand dollars to the McKinney campaign), and almost 350,000 votes in 2006 could add to the ticket.

Jesse Johnson – Jesse Johnson is a Third Party champion after two huge statewide campaigns for Governor and U.S. Senate with the West Virginia Mountain Party. In 2007 the Mountain Party “merged” with the Green Party and became the WV affiliate of the GPUS. Johnson has a lot of appeal among Greens, especially those whom he has met first hand, but he does not have the history of Green “Party Activism” that others do. While he would bring some color to the ticket and could influence votes in the “Obama-challenged” Appalachian region, I don’t think he is the strongest choice for Veep.

Matt Gonzalez – Unfortunately he’s taken. (Plus, per the U.S. Constitution the Prez and Veep must have different home states and now that McKinney hails from CA Matt would thus be ineligible.) Ralph Nader scored possibly the best Green running mate possible when he tagged Gonzalez to be his Veep. The former President of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors who almost defeated Gavin Newsom to become Mayor of San Francisco is a Green Party legend and hero.

Kent Mesplay – Another veteran Green Party activist and organizer who has run for major political office several times now. Mesplay would bring to the ticket a solid environmental / ecological component, which based on the four pillars (Grassroots Democracy, Peace, Social Justice, Ecological Wisdom) is probably McKinney’s weakest position. Mesplay would fill a hole in that area and in that ticket. Oh, wait, he’s a California resident as well…


Sedinam Kinamo Christin Moyowasifza-Curry
(aka SKCM Curry) – While SKCM Curry is the only “declared” candidate for the Vice President slot on the Green Party ballot, I have to again point out that she is a California Resident, thus can not be McKinney’s running mate. Curry is a Green Party activist in South Central LA. A video of her in 07 can be seen here.

Cindy Sheehan – “Peace Mom” Sheehan is a “Green Leaning Independent (GLI)” who was heavily recruited to seek the Green Party Presidential nomination herself. She would greatly add to the already strong anti-war positions of McKinney, as well as creating an all-female ticket, but she is running an Independent campaign for U.S. House against Democrat Nancy Pelosi. In California. Oh, right, she can’t be the Veep.

Other (unlikely) possibilities:
Winona LaDuke – 1996 and 2000 Veep on the Nader ticket, Native American from Minnesota. Ain’t gonna happen.
Pat LaMarche – 2004 Veep on the Cobb ticket, who surpassed 10% of the vote in her 2006 bid for Governor of Maine. She has been campaigning for Jesse Johnson. Does that take her out of the picture? Maybe not, but she would be an extreme long shot pick.
Ralph Nader – the “Dream Ticket” that never happened.

Who do YOU think should be considered for the Veep slot if McKinney gets the nomination?

Ronald Hardy

45 Comments

  1. Gravel is a joke. No one will take her seriously with him on the ticket.

  2. Someone can correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe any state prevents ballot access for two running-mates from the same state … and it might be unconstitutional for any state to try (given that states cannot add to the constitutional qualifications for federal office).

    The Constitution simply says that members of the Electoral College cannot vote for candidates for both offices who are “inhabitants” of their own home state.

    The term “inhabitant” is also used in the qualifications for Congress, and I believe it has been interpreted to mean that the candidate must be living in the state on the day of the election. This is a lower standard than “resident” or “domiciliary.”

    So if we were to nominate two candidates from California, and if some surprising turn of events were to make it remotely likely for our ticket to win a plurality in California, I’m sure one of our candidates would bite the bullet and rent an apartment in some other state.

  3. There are several good ideas. I like Jared Ball quite a bit, but an all female ticket might be the thing to peel off disgruntled Hillary supporters, among many reasons. Cindy Sheehan would be fabulous, but I wouldn’t want to pull her out of her race against Pelosi.

    It seems like for a bit there was an issue with Cheney, because he lived in Texas, but somehow claimed residence in Wyoming to avoid the problem.

  4. What about Howie Hawkins? That might be interesting. Or John Eder of Maine.

  5. I would be open to serving as the Vice Presidential candidate if asked. I do believe I would bring a lot to the campaign.

    However, I can tell you that neither McKinney nor any other GP Presidential candidate has approached me.

  6. Bob Barr offered the VP spot to Gravel. He turned it down because he didn’t think a former Senator should be VP to a former Congressman. The same rule would apply to McKinney. Besides, if Gravel went Green it would be his 3rd party in 6 months.

  7. From a danish left/ green view a Mckinney/ Whitney is the perfect choice.

    Man, White, Mid-west, from a big state and many votes.

    John Elder !! Yes. But is he in the business any more ?.

    Henrik Hansen Denmark ( Danmark)

  8. I don’t think Gravel would accept a VP slot either, but they would make a phenomenal team. Gravel has some truly unique ideas and it’s sad that another poster relegates him to “joke” status. The only reason he has been so marginalized is because he speaks the truth.

  9. Green in Brooklyn: Yeah; my previous post was kind of legalistic, but really, since all of us were taught in school that the President in VP can’t be from the same state, the parties generally try to comply with this. Also, “geographical balance” is generally considered a good thing in and of itself.

    I just posted my response because a lot of Ron’s speculation was about people from California, and if anyone thinks there is a really strong case for one of them, such that the geographical stuff shouldn’t matter, I do believe it can be worked around.

    The law of residency and domicile is, in any case, based on a lot of archaic assumptions that don’t make sense in the modern world.

  10. Wow…you hit a home run with this one Ron. 11 comments, and none of them from the lunatic fringe…except me maybe.

    I love the idea of an all female ticket. I love the idea that SKCM Curry has taken the initiative to seek that nomination.

    I love the idea of Rich Whitney and Jared Ball and Jesse Johnson mainly because I believe any of them would actively run for Veep, while Cindy or Alan would understandably want to campaign in their districts as much as possible. We need a Veep candidate whop can spend a lot of time traveling and visiting Greens across the nation.

    Gravel would bring a LOT of attention to us, and while there are a LOT of differences between Greens and Libertarians, we share a lot too. One of Gravel’s issues is the National Initiative. While I have not looked it closely, I do believe it might fit into the Green Positions at least as well as our “Wall Street to Main Street” campaign.

    All have a lot to offer, but again, to me, what I hope for is a candidate who can and will travel the nation campaigning as hard as they can. If I get that, I’m a happy camper.

  11. ~Waving at Henrik~

    Good of you to stop by. Thanks for your comments!

  12. “The law of residency and domicile is, in any case, based on a lot of archaic assumptions that don’t make sense in the modern world.”

    If I remember right, Elaine Brown’s “residency and domicile” got her (wrongfully in my opinion) kicked off the ballot in her race for Mayor of Brunswick, GA.

    Residency can be manipulated by both sides, and a paid legal team can create headaches for those who don’t have the resources to fight it in court.

    But I agree that California has some of the best prospects for the VP slot. McKinney could make a pretty strong case for her residency being Georgia, not California, given her history there.

  13. On your list of 12, you have 3 who are unlikely…I concur…there are also 4 others who reside in CA, again this shortens the list.

    Of the remaining five, I also cut two others for a variety of reasons. This left me with Kat Swift, Jesse Johnson, and Rich Whitney.

    Kat Swift would provide the ticket with the important youth/college voter appeal, she is the strongest candidate to gain the support of the GLBT community, also her long history of GP work, would give us a candidate that “hard line” members could support.

    Jesse Johnson would bring a “moderate” side to the ticket. Although his platform is “true” Green…he does touch on topics which are more mainstream. I feel that Jesse would attract more non-Green voters, which can’t be discounted in a General Election. I think Jesse and his message would play pretty well to the general electorate in South Carolina.

    The things Rich Whitney brings to the table can’t be overlooked. Proven success at the state level, popularity in a larger state, fund raising ability, and a Party building mentality. Can’t really find anything negative, other than a lack of “face time”, and name recognition beyond the progressive movements.

    I admit I am biased in favor of Kat Swift (She is still active in the presidential race!) but any of these three would be candidates I could get behind and support through November.

  14. Way to bring me down with the residency reminder! I would have liked to see Kent Mesplay as the VP, but I think we should meet the requirements of the office whenever possible to show our sincerity to actually serve. We could also move them, but I’d prefer not to. So that knocks the Californians off my list.

    I like Jared Ball, but he dropped off of the presidential race to spend time with his family. I don’t know if he’d have much more time to give to a VP race. Hopefully he runs for something locally.

    The Gravel idea is interesting, but others have brought up his disinterest in the VP slot. Plus, he’s already switched parties once this year. He doesn’t have much party loyalty, and wouldn’t focus on building up the party at all.

    Kat is a nice person, but her debate performance shows she’s not ready for the highest office in the land. Her campaign tends to be unprofessional, though unorthodox and possibly appealing to some segments of the population. Let’s get her on the Austin city council.

    I collected thousands of signatures for Rich Whitney. I protested outside the debate site that barred his presence, and even screamed in the face of the sitting governor to do so. He’s one of the best and most successful candidates the Greens have had. But I can’t support his placement as VP. He’s already gearing up for the 2010 gubernatorial race. Everyone in Illinois is furious with Blagojevich, and if he runs again and gets the nomination, Whitney has a serious chance for the governor’s mansion. A VP race would distract him from that and tire him out. Sorry, he’s ours!

    I’ve been impressed with Jesse Johnson. It’s too bad he’s not a long time Green, but I think he’d do.

    Pat LaMarche wouldn’t run again. I don’t know about LaDuke, but I’d doubt it.

    Although I would have enthusiastically supported Nader as our VP, it’s not going to happen.

    I’ll second Henrik’s suggestion of John Eder. What about Jason West? Next to the dearly departed Matt Gonzalez, he’s one of our most well known elected Greens.

  15. When Mike Gravel left the Dems, he said he wanted to be a “fusion” candidate for both the Libertarians and the Greens. If he would accept a spot with McKinney, he’d make a big splash. Given that he wouldn’t accept the second spot on the LP ticket along with Barr–a real shame in my opinion–I doubt he would be VP for McKinney. (If drafted, and if McKinney were willing to take the VP spot, he might be willing to take the top spot; but that’s not a realistic possibility.) (Gravel is no “joke,” either.)

    Does anyone have authoritative / reliable info regarding why Nader wouldn’t accept the GP’s nomination this time?

    For me a “dream” GP VP would be Dennis Kucinich if he could be convinced to defect. Honestly, he’s too good for the Democratic Party–I wish he would leave it!

    One other possible big name catch: Jesse Ventura.

  16. JASON WEST!

    Great idea! I hope his name is brought up as a prospect. New York is apparently coming full force for McKinney this time around. West would also help with the LGBTQ vote given his run in with the law to conduct same sex marriages as Mayor of New Paltz.

    He is young though – is he 35 yet?

    With Whitney – wouldn’t a national campaign raise his name recognition even more in Illinois and help him with his 2010 campaign?

    I like Kat as well.

  17. I agree with Ronald that having Whitney as the VP candidate would raise his profile even more in Illinois. Right now – he’s my pick.

  18. Yeah; anyone who wants to make a case for one of the California options would be advised to examine the state-by-state ballot access legal issues and do a cost-benefit analysis of any legal action that might need to be taken. (Our ticket has, alas, very little chance of actually winning California, so ballot access is the main issue.)

    There’s also the possibility of choosing an alternative candidate for “troublesome” states, like the Socialist Workers Party does.

    As I understand it, McKinney moved to California to attend school, so she would certainly have a strong case for claiming Georgia residency, even if she no longer has a residence in Georgia. However, UC students from out of state generally establish California residency so they can pay in-state tuition.

    This stuff can get really ludicrous. Look at Ralph Nader. From everything I’ve ever heard, the man has lived in D.C. since before I was born. Yet he remains a “resident” of Connecticut.

  19. >> Zeleni said: “Kat is a nice person, but her debate performance shows she’s not ready for the highest office in the land. Her campaign tends to be unprofessional, though unorthodox and possibly appealing to some segments of the population. Let’s get her on the Austin city council.”

    Agreed 100%. She does seem like a nice person, she is radical, and she supports everything to which the GP base is attached. However, those are not sufficient qualifications to run for president, even for a 3rd party. Frankly, I’m not sure what motivated her to run for president. I moderated the GP presidential forum in Washington, D.C. a few months ago and I was amazed at how nonexistent her public speaking and campaign skills were. The impression I got was “this person should be running for city council, not president.”

    Ultimately, it doesn’t really matter who the VP candidate is, not even for a major party ticket, let alone a third party ticket. Virtually nobody outside the campaign & the relevant party knows who the VP candidate is anyway. One thing the VP candidate IS good for is to function as a stand-in campaigner on radio talk shows, college campuses, etc., and based on my experience in the rough & tumble of presidential campaigns, I think Kat Swift (excuse me…..kat swift) would be eaten alive by people on the other side of the microphone in a general election, and by Matt Gonzalez and Wayne Root, for that matter, should some sort of minor party VP debate or forum be set up.

    Also, not even being on the ballot in the home state of the VP nominee (in this case Texas) is a BIG minus and would further push the GP away from the so-called “grown-ups table” of presidential campaigns.

    As for California, there are a few states that, by law, do not permit pres. & VP candidates from the same state to be on the ballot. Unconstitutional that may be, but it will prevent the VP name from being on the ballot and the GP will have to choose a stand-in in those states. File a lawsuit and wait a few years if you don’t like it. The more rational alternative is simply to nominate someone who isn’t registered to vote in California. Ignoring this issue is something groups like the Socialist Workers Party do. Again, if you want to sit at the “grown-ups table” you avoid things like this.

    My own choice would be Jared Ball, if he’s willing and able to take on the job. He is an effective public speaker (hell, he’s a professor of communications with a Ph.D. in the subject), sufficiently radical to fit in well with the McKinney campaign and the GP base, is personally appealing & likeable, has a small but devoted following himself, has some name recognition in the District of Columbia area because of his show on the Pacifica station here, and you could easily imagine him taking on Gonzalez and Root at a major public debate……what’s not to like?

    I think something along the lines of a McKinney/Ball ticket would be the strongest entry the GP could toss into the ’08 campaign.

  20. David, I totally agree with your opinion of how the situation regarding the Pres. and VP coming from the same state should be resolved.

    As to Kat Swift, she does have her supporters, she does connect with a segment of the population, and she does have an agenda many can agree with, and support. If you want to know her motivations, she spells them out pretty well in the youtube video posted on her website.

    Ironically, both you and Zeleni mentioned her public speaking presence as a huge negative, but in California, where the “Debate that Matters” was held, Swift gained 5 delegates, two more than Jesse Johnson or Kent Mesplay. In DC, where a forum was held, Kat took 1 of the 13 delegates…again she obviously hits home with some people. As a friendly jab I have to point out that in Maryland, Kat had her second highest delegate count to date, 3 out of the 16.

    I agree that Texas not having ballot access is a huge negative for nominating Kat as the VP. It is big enough that even I would have to consider it before locking a vote. This is also the reason that I put Rich Whitney on my short list.

    Jared Ball is a solid choice for VP. I won’t campaign for him to get the “nod”, but if he were to get the nomination, I would support it.

    The three VP choices I posted were picked as if we are sitting at the “grown-up table”. Kat, college students/young people/party building. Jesse, “toned down” radical ideas/more mainstream ideas/and being a trained actor doesn’t hurt “stage presence”. Rich, popular in a big state/fund raiser/party builder/proven campaigner.

  21. Having “an agenda many people can support” doesn’t make one a great candidate. All I know is what I see, and what I saw in person from Kat Swift is someone who is in way over her head running for president. I’m not sure what the compelling force was for her to go from the city council arena to the presidency of the United States in one election cycle.

    I’ve been at this for about 35 years and I’ve seen consistently that one of the very fundamental qualifications for any candidate, at any level, even a 3rd party candidate, is good public speaking ability (preferably excellent instead of good) combined with content, i.e. a deep command of the issues at hand. Sadly, she displayed neither at the forum I moderated. Maybe she just had an off night, but if she did, it was a REALLY off night. I’ve seen her in video appearances, though, and I’m afraid I don’t think this is a misjudgment. I cannot imagine this person speaking to national media, hostile radio station hosts around the country, etc. for months on end and credibly representing the GP while doing so, sorry.

    As an example of a woman whom I think DID fill the bill four years ago…….I didn’t support her in 2004 but I’ll give Pat LaMarche credit for being a very savvy, experienced, inspiring campaigner who was (more or less) operating on all cylinders at the national level. Except for her indirect urging of people in swing states to vote for John Kerry when she was on Amy Goodman’s Democracy Now! (what a gaffe), she generally gave the impression of being a competent spokesperson with a deep knowledge of a wide variety of issues, as well as someone with demonstrated and significant leadership under her belt.

    I was quite impressed with Jesse Johnson as a potential VP nominee when I heard and watched him at that forum. I think either he or Ball would be a fine choice.

  22. Sedinam Kinamo Christin Moyowasifza-Curry moved to Washington State. Hmmmm…..

  23. Votewilder:

    I am following Iwilder around.

    I hope no one would seriously consider Mike Gravel. I don’t like his behavior after dropping out of the Democrat convention. Just playing games to see how he can prop himself up and keep Nader and the greens down. Not a good choice.

    I would like to see Cynthia McKinney choose Reverend Jeremiah Wright as her running mate.

    Supporting and propping up Reverend Jeremiah Wright would affirm the right of black people and the black church to speak out against racism.

    If Cynthia McKinney chose Reverend Wright as her VP, it would be the ultimate proof that she is more real about racial justice than Obama and the Democrats.

  24. Wow….Rev. Wright…that would be an interesting choice. Kinda hard for the media to ignore that!

    I’ve no idea where his head is at as far as other issues go, but of course, ultimately, the Presidential nominee chooses his or her running mate I believe.

  25. Votewilder:

    Gregg, glad you like my wild idea about Rev. Wright. Not sure it is workable. But, sure would shake things up.

    Also, I forgot (and you guys forgot) my favorite pick: Rebecca Rotzler of New Paltz.

    Rebecca was being drafted for president, though it was not the right timing for her, and I think she really supported Cynthia McKinney making a run.

    Rebecca Rotzler was already an elected official (Village Trustee and Deputy Mayor). She is well-liked, a good problem solver and very diplomatic.

    I actually think that Rebecca Rotzler would be a good complement to Cynthia McKinney, because Cynthia is known for being so bold and outspoken, and Rebecca is known for saying things in the calmest, modestly profound manner.

  26. Rotzler supported a New York Green’s attempt to run in the Democratic primary against Clinton. It was his secret intent to “take my supporters with me” when he lost to Clinton.

    Rotzler at a minimum kept mum if she did not actively support this attempt to deceive the voters on New York. For whatever it is worth, and it’s not much, I think that alone makes Rotzler a poor choice. I think her judgment is poor at best.

  27. Votewilder:

    Wow. That is a stretch. Take one decision in a campaign – actually to support someone else’s campaign – and dismiss someone for it. Wonder if all the other candidates have perfect track records? On everything?

    Anyway, there is so much to Clinton/Dem primary that story – good and bad – beyond the outline you gave.

    The real fact is that a long time green and long time friend of Rebecca thought he had a good electoral strategy. And, she did not abandon him on his journey.

    There is no doubt of Rebecca’s greenness.

  28. I didn’t say she wasn’t Green. I questioned her judgment, and still do. Sorry. We can’t agree on everything.

  29. I’d like to see us looking at the VP slot as a potential way to raise the profile of a future presidential candidate. Future focus is one of the Ten Key Values, after all.

    Or, as suggested, raise the profile of a candidate who will run for Governor in his/her home state in 2010.

    In that sense, I would have much preferred that McKinney work more closely with the Greens in her VP selection process.

  30. I like the idea of raising the profile of a Green who plans to run for another office. Does anyone know if Pat LaMarche felt that her being Cobb’s Veep nominee helped her run for Governor, and no, I am not being snide. If it helped her, imagine how much more it might help say a Rich Whitney were he thinking of running for Mayor or some such thing.

    I do like the idea of an elected Green too. Cara Jennings? Isn’t she the woman who started the Radical Cheerleaders and is mayor of a city in Florida?

    I also do agree that closer communication with Green Party leaders might be a good idea, but I have no idea that they are not already talking. To be honest, more often than not I feel like I know almost nothing about what’s going on, and I take time to look into stuff as best I can so I can report it here.

  31. Well, one of the reasons Pat was interested in running in 2004 was very specifically to raise her profile for her 2006 gubernatorial run, if I remember correctly.

    She had future focus!

    Now, whether that experience actually helped or not…only she could say.

    Another name to toss in mix, probably not being considered, but Jill Stein from MA performed very strongly when she ran for Governor and got a whopping 19% when she ran for Secretary of State in 2006.

    I like the idea of an all female ticket – not only because Feminism is one of our Ten Key Values but because ex-Clinton supporters might be interested. Jill is East Coast, from a state with a decent number of popular votes and a state where it pretty much is guaranteed to go Democrat so the “spoiler” issue wouldn’t be a factor…

  32. Hereby coming out of the closet as to my blog screen name/real name.

    To add to my earlier post – how about Dennis Kucinich as VP?

    DK is not getting much love from his colleagues in congress in regards to his 35 articles of impeachment. Cynthia McKinney and DK were and are idealogical twins, and good friends as well, making many appearances together at anti-war events, etc.

    It would help to make impeachment a larger issue for the campaign, and have the side effect that at the end of the day, in the unlikely event that Cynthia loses, we have a Green congresscritter in Ohio, not to mention providing a possible swing vote in the swingiest of swing states.

  33. Someone mentioned Roseanne Barr as a VP candidate, since Roseanne said on her blog that she was thinking of voting for Cynthia McKinney.

    (Is anyone here collecting a list of suggestions?)

  34. Suggestions are being thrown around left and right here! I saw a comment at third party watch about Roseanne Barr, suggesting she could be a VP.

    Personally I disagree completely. She has no political experience. She has no history with the Green Party. She has no record of activism on issues such as climate change, peak oil, ending the war(s), grassroots activism, universal health care, social justice, etc.

    If Cynthia McKinney is the GP candidate, she brings elected experience and federal government experience to the ticket, a level of legitimacy that the Green Party needs. I believe she needs to select a VP that brings an equivalent amount of experience and legitimacy (Kucinich was mentioned – not bad but also not likely to happen), or a VP that is a on the ground GP Activist that shores up her platform on one of these key issues – Environment, Energy, the War, or Social Justice.

  35. I feel the need to add again that Cynthia McKinney can easily declare her residency is in Georgia, putting any and all of these California Greens in the running.

  36. Anyone else have any VP names that have been floated? I am going to make a poll in a day or two, and want to list everyone ever considered, mentioned, or drafted…

  37. I think Jill Stein from my home state of Massachusetts and Rich Whitney from Illinois are the two best choices for VP. Both have state-wide campaign experience and have done very well. Having a former Congresswoman and a credible former gubernatorial candidate will give us the best potential to gain support this year.

    I think Obama will draw a lot of Green-leaning voters, so we need to put together the best team possible.

    Heck – why not make Stein VP and have an-all female ticket! That will get us some attention!

  38. I have to say that the Green Party should endorse/nominate the Ralph Nader/Matt Gonzalez ’08 ticket. It would help the Nader/Gonzalez campaign to focus on other states they’re not on the ballot. Plus with them polling at 6% you have a real chance of getting on the Google/YouTube national debate and able to promote a Green Party agenda.

    Now I know some of the hardcore activists are against the idea, but I think that’s the best possible solution. Any other ticket and the Green Party at best gets 300,000 votes. If the delegates do decide to go that way then I believe Cynthia McKinney needs to choose Rich Whitney.

    A man with campaign experience and allow Cynthia McKinney to teach Rich Whitney the ropes for a 2012 bid for the Green Party nomination. But I still say Nader/Gonzalez ’08 is the ticket to nominate, it’s all about getting the media exposure. It’s critical to get the message out to the masses of America.

    I predict the Google/YouTube debate will be the most watched National debate in the history of the United States. Especially if Ralph Nader & Bob Barr can break the 10% barrier. Both have 6%, they’re almost there.

  39. Prediction: Whitney will NOT be the VP nominee. McKinney will be announcing her VP pick Friday morning. Whitney will be moderating the debate Friday night. I would hope the preferred VP candidate of the presumptive nominee wouldn’t be moderating the debate. Although Whitney will still be very fair and respectful to all candidates, it wouldn’t look very good. Not that I have any inkling who will actually be the VP pick.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.