And why can't Graham be the VP candidate? Just because he doesn't hold down the pole position doesn't mean he can't be in the race.

First, are we POSITIVE he'd win Florida, especially with Jebbie & Co. in charge? Because that is really the only arrow in his quiver (unless he really has some damning stuff on Bush re 9/11). Second, can he win Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota, etc.? Without those, Florida may be meaningless. And I'm not one of those who can crunch the electoral numbers easily, so maybe there are some better scenarios.

I hear what you're saying though, and I basically like the guy. Let's face it though, he's not Mr. Excitement. Are you saying you're endorsing Graham, or just throwing this out to gnaw on? Or are you saying he's our only shot, short of Clark jumping in? Lots to think about, but it seems an awful gamble to run someone just because he can deliver one state. Oh but what a key state it is.

I hear you, alias. It's not that I endorse Graham; it's that I think he definitely provides the Democrats with +5% versus the other guys (with the possible exception of Edwards).

He's been lulling the people of Florida into doing something sort of close to the right thing for a long time. I'm not even going to pretend that it jibes with my tastes in policy, but he has a sense of what Florida wants.

Given Florida's role in the 2000 fiasco, I would strongly prefer a candidate who can ensure that disenfranchising some people, and refusing to recount the votes of others, will not be enough to get G-Dub over the hump. I feel pretty safe in saying that Graham would get that done handily.

Pessimist,

If ever there was a candidate who had "VP Prospect" written all over him, it's Bob Graham. At this point, I would luuuuv a Clark/Graham ticket, but a Kerry/Graham ticket would also work very well.

Graham's never had to deal (yet) with the full brunt of the GOP/Wurlitzer attack machine. Could he withstand it well enough to still take Florida, by a margin Jeb couldn't steal? I like Graham, but I think that's debatable. I could see Dean, Kerry and Edwards (and Clark, perhaps) not getting as tangled up in the $200 million worth of Bushco attacks.

He's still my second choice for VP, however, behind Clark. Unless Clark demonstrates he doesn't really have the fire in the belly for the campaign, then Graham goes back to #1 for the VP nod.

So, does he have to win the nomination to pull in Florida? I mean, this isn't really a zero sum game. After the convention, if these candidates are worth anything, they'll be working their butts off for whomever wins the nomination.

If they don't, and everyone gets their nose out of joint from losing, then we're all going to lose anyway.

Whether Graham could win there or not, why make Florida the "do or die" state? It will cost a fortune for any non-Southerner to compete there, but why should the Democrats get sucked back into a 55-year-old southern strategy any more, except that it pleases the exclusive and elitist DLC wing of the Party? What other possibilities are there?

I think Dean could win Ohio's 21 EC votes if we want to focus on one state with a large number of votes. West Virginia(5) was close in 2000 as well.

Is it beyond reason to hope for a win in either Arkansas(6) with Clinton's help there, or Tennesee(11) with Gore's, both of whom will surely be working their asses off to make sure Bush doesn't get reelected? And there's no reason a non-Southern Democrat (perhaps especially Dean) couldn't win Nevada(4) and Arizona(8) in 2004 as Clinton did in 1996. (Missouri(11), Louisiana(9), and New Hampshire(4) all went to Clinton less than eight years ago as well and, I think, make better targets than Florida for both practical $$ and strategic reasons.) Anyway, the media is going to work Florida to death whether Democrats want to work it hard or not so there'll be lots of chances for a non-Southern Democratic candidate to capitalize on opportunities there as events warrant.

Eight years after Clinton won almost 112 more electoral votes and twelve states more than Gore did (including Florida) in 2000, it would be a shame for Democrats not to try to win several of them back next year.

Florida was close last time around with Gore who, it is universally agreed, didn't inspire. I liked him very much, but it was a drag to get out there and get motivated about his confusing, equivocating, and concessionary campaign. Fielding an inspirational candidate on a centrist Democratic Party platform and gaining even a few of the non-Florida states Clinton won may generate the momentum needed for that candidate to win Florida without making it a central (expensive) cause.

(And call me crazy, but I it's not out of the question that Georgia(13) could go Democratic in 2004 as it did in 1976 and 1992, if the candidate generates enthusisasm nationally.)

From Ohio leftwards (in the geographical sense of the term) you find a swath of middle-America red states where a huge hunk of the population is convinced* that they could be selling a lot of food to Cuba.

Is it worth the gamble? Punt Florida for a big basket of ag states? And maybe not even "punt," accept that you'll freak out the Cuban American old-timers vote, but at least take a shot at finding a pile of voters that are basically sick of the deal makers in their state being a bunch of bitter Batistas (or even sick of their parents ranting about a world long gone by.)

Gore+Nader was a pretty good margin, and Gore's stance on the dolphin-kid was not popular.

I wouldn't have the guts to do it, until late in the campaign if I was convinced that I wasn't getting any traction in Anita Hill country. But I suggest some research into agricultural issues and you'll be pretty surprised how, unnoticed by the beltway, this issue is coming to a head.

*rightly or wrongly, I'm not sure

One thing to watch in Florida is the possible switch over to computerized voting machines.

These machines are worrisome, wherever they may be used, because of their susceptibility to behind-the-scenes manipulation.

In states with a history of voting fraud, like Florida, there is all the more reason for concern.

Of course, the computers will be touted as a solution to the problems with other voting mechanisms.

One thing about Florida that doesn't get much attention, but should, is the rise of the Puerto Rican community withn the state. They are a perfect counterbalance to the Cuban vote, and their birth rate within the state is higher than that of the Cuban community.

As for what states the Dems can take in a Presidential election, it's still early, but whoever gets the nomination, it will require a coordinated effort by all of the big names within the party to take back the nation from these corrupt tyrants.

My humble opinion is that Ohio would be tough, Tennessee would be more likely to go Dem nationally as a result of the alleged voting irregularities in African-American communities in 2000 (especially Memphis) and the actions of the hard right in the state when it tried to get the budget deficit under control than due to any speeeches by Gore, and Georgia would go our way only if a majority of folks are thoroughly sick of their present leadership, which doesn't yet appear to be the case.

In Presidential elections, I think you have to take the northeastern corridor (making Pennsylvania essential), most of the midwest (Ohio and Indiana lost isn't great, but Michigan or Minnesota lost is a disaster), the West Coast, then fight for the close states like New Mexico, Arkansas or Florida.

This go-round, the Dems have the cpability to do pretty much what they did in 2000, Iraq war or no Iraq war. Activists on our side are very incensed, Jane and John Doe are suffering more often than thriving, we have a net loss of jobs coming to pass, and the promises of Bush in 2000 have becomes ashes in far too many mouths that are political independents or "moderate Republicans", leaving him with fear and revenge as his only allies among the general voting populace.

If we work hard and refuse to give the initiative away, there is no reason why we can't have a majority of electoral votes in 2004. One should not be naive about the price we'll have to pay. It will be very, very ugly - possibly the nastiest fight since the days of "Tilden or Blood" - but we can win, and with coordinated effort, we will.

As of a few days ago, Dean had over 1,400 Ohioans signed up through Meetup.

Columbus, OH (404)
Cleveland, OH (243)
Cincinnati, OH (234)
Dayton, OH (127)
Toledo, OH (106)
Akron, OH (103)
Canton, OH (43)
Kingsport--Johnson City, TN (39)
Athens, OH (26)
Youngstown-Warren, OH (26)
Chillicothe, OH (11)
Lima, OH (9)
Zanesville, OH (6)
Portsmouth, OH (4)
Mansfield, OH (3)
Steubenville-Weirton, OH (3)
Sandusky, OH (2)
Findlay, OH (2)
Marion, OH (1)
East Liverpool, OH (1)

The number is just a little lower than the national average by state. No one knows yet how this translates into votes or inevitability, but one could, reasonably, draw the conclusion that he is almost as well-positioned in Ohio at this point as he is in places where there is little doubt he would win.

Not to debunk my earlier argument (entirely) but the same Meetup averages hold true in Florida, so both states may be Dean's for the taking.

As Tom Slick pointed out Graham has never faced RoveCo nor Jebbie’s machine(s). Worst of all is that crafting a nomination to make up for a perceived deficit in 2000 gives RoveCo such wonderful fodder. Also second the statements that Graham could make several blue states competitive. Let’s not forget MN in 2002 – big GOP wins.

Also statements that Kerry and Clark could win FL are based on what? Kerry has never ventured outside MA and Clark has never run for anything. Gore did well in FL because both the AA and Jewish communities were energized. They were defeated by decrepit machines, voter disenfranchisement and butterfly ballots. (IMO there was other ugly stuff down there that has not been uncovered – absentee ballots shenanigans and some machine tabulations.) Let’s all hope they come out again in 2004, but they didn’t in 2002 and perhaps they didn’t because they know that it will not matter since it will be fixed again. Any strategy for the Dems that is dependent on winning FL is like playing for an inside straight – bad odds. Make AR, AZ, MO, NH, NV, TN and WV ground zero. Demographically Ohio should also be on the list but Democratic Party in the state is MIA.

Here is something more about computerized voting. It seems that there are ways to keep it under control.

California Action Alert: Support Auditable E-Voting

Touchscreen voting machines can increase accessibility for people with disabilities, reduce the cost of printing multilingual paper ballots, and make the experience of voting less confusing. However, these machines could also dramatically raise the stakes for election fraud. If integrity in the voting process is important to you, tell Secretary of State Kevin Shelley that you want a voter-verifiable paper audit trail and open source, publicly reviewed software in all of California's new touchscreen voting machines!

Bob Graham is the only Democratic Presidential Candidate in 2004 who is highly qualified and highly electable.
Electability- Southern Democrat- Last 3 Democratic Presidents(Clinton,Carter,and LBJ) were Southern Democrats- They came from Southern States. The other Democratic Presidential candidate to come from the South is Edwards.
Former Governor- Last 4 out of 5 Presidents were Governors- Carter,Reagan,Clinton,and Bush. The other Democratic Presidential Candidate who was a Governor is Dean. If 9/11 had not occured, and if national security was not a big issue in Presidential campaigns, I would have supported a Dean-Edwards ticket. Dean-Edwards campaign agenda will be balanced budgets,universal health care,universal college education and strong environmental and labor laws. Because NAtional Security is a number on topic with the American electorate, Democrats need a candidate who has strong national security credentials. ie Bob Graham- former Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Commitee,John Kerry-member of the Senate foriegn Relations Commitee- Vietnam Veteran,and Joe Lieberman- Former VP runningmate and member of US Senate Armed Services Commitee. Bob Graham was the only Democratic Presidential Candidate who has strong national security credentials to oppose and vote against the War in Iraq. Lieberman is a strong supporter of the War in Iraq, Kerry was critical of the War in Iraq but voted for the Iraq War resolution anyway.
Bob Graham's opposition to War in Iraq should help him appeal to Democrats who were against the War in Iraq.(Dean supporters). While Dean opposed the War in Iraq. Dean supported the War in Afganistan- Removing and Destroying the Talibans, Taliban Government was responsible for the 9/11 attacks . Dean believes that North Korea, which has nuclear weapons is a serious threat to the United States. Bob Graham voted against the War in Iraq because he beleived that the greatest priority for the United States in fighting the War on Terrorism is targeting and destroying International Terrorist Groups- Al Queda,Hamas,Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad, which were responsible for the 9/11 attacks and confront countries like Iran,Syria,and Suadi Arabia which give moral and financial support to these International terrorist Groups. Majority of the Americans and Democrats beleive that destroying International Terrorist Groups like Al Queda and confronting other Countries that support Terrorism- ie Syria is a greater priorty than regime change in Iraq. While Dean and Graham both opposed the War in Iraq, Democrats - The MoveOn.org Democrats should have selected Bob Graham because not only Graham opposed the War in Iraq,Graham as chairman of the US Senate Intelligence Commitee has Investigated Bush Administration for Intelligence Failures which led to the 9/11 attacks,and accused Bush of coverups in Saudi's role in 9/11 and Business Dealings between Cheney's Haliburton and the Suadi government. Graham also beleives that Bush should be impeached for misleading the American People about Iraq having nuclear weapons in order to justify the war in Iraq. Bob Graham will be immune for Republican attacks that he is weak on National Security and he is a looney liberal compared to Howard Dean. Bob Graham is a Former Two Term Governor and a Current Three Term US Senator from Florida. Florida is a higly competetive and a highly populated state in the USA. Whoever wins the popular vote in Florida will definetely receive 270 ev , which is needed to win the Presidency. Bob Graham is the most popular politician in Florida. He has in fact won 5 statewide elections in Florida- 2 times as Governor and 3 times as US Senator.

Democrats, no matter who the candidate- whether it is Graham,Dean,Kerry,Edwards,Liberman or Gephardt will be able to carry California and New York= 86 ev. Bob Graham and possibly John Edwards will be able to carry Florida= 113 ev. Any of those serious Democratic Presidential Candidates including Graham could have carried Illinios and Pennsylvania- 155 ev. The question now is While Graham able to carry Ohio and Michigan. Can Bob Graham who worked at 400 entry level (Blue Collar or White Collar jobs) under his Workdays program appeal to union voters in Ohio and Michigan. My guess is that Graham will be able to carry Ohio and Michigan= 192 ev. Graham also would have carried New Jersey, which is a Democratic leaning State in the North East and Massachusetts, which any Democrats is going to win any way. Graham now has 219 ev, he needs 51 more ev. Bob Graham,like any of other serious Democratic Presidential Candidates could have carried Washington State. 230. Graham and Edwards would been able to carry Tennesee and Graham and Gephardt could have carried Missouri.= 252 ev. Any of those Democratic Presidential Candidates also would have carried Maryland,Minnesota and Wisconsin. 282 ev. Gore carried California,New York,Illinois,Pennsylvania,Michigan,New Jersey,Massachusetts,Washington,Maryland,Minnesotaand Wisconsin= 213 ev. had he selected Graham as his Vp runningmate. Gore would have won the popular vote in Florida w/out a statewide recount or Supreme Court Interference or hearing the name Katherine Harris. = 240 ev. Lets assume that Graham lose Ohio,Tennesee,and Missouri. Graham would have won at-LArge States like District of Columbia, Delaware,and Vermont.= 249 ev. Graham would have easily carry Hawaii,MAine,and Rhode Island. 261 ev. and New Mexico,Connecticut,Iowa,Oregon,= 287 ev. Graham would have been favored to win all the states Al Gore carried in 2000 plus Florida- his home state= 287 ev. which is enough to win the 2004 Presidential Election. Their is a possibility that Graham would have carried West Virginia, which Dukakis carried in 1988 and Clinton carried in 1992 and 1996 with more than 50% of the popular vote. Besides Florida and West Virginia, Graham will be able to win Southern States like Arkansas,Louisiana and maybe Tennessee. and Graham also will be able to win swing Midwest States like Ohio and Missouri. plus Western States like Arizona and Nevada, which have strong Hispanic Populations(Suburbs of California.) and New Hampshire. Graham could win a net gain of 10 additional states which will be 108 more electoral votes. Graham along with a strong Vice Presidential Runningmate could easily receive 368 ev. compared to Bush/Cheney's 170. A moderate Democrat like Graham or Edwards can carry Arizona,Arkansas,Florida,Louisiana,Missouri,Nevada,New Hampshire,Ohio,Tennesee,and West Virginia.

Bob Graham - President
Wes Clark- Vice President

Two Southern Moderate to Liberal Democrats with strong National security credentials. The last Southern Democratic Ticket to win consecutive Presidential Elections were Clinton/Gore 1992 and 1996. LAst 3 Democratic PResidents are Southern Democrats. Wesley Clark will add charisma to the Democratic Ticket, and Clark's experience in the private sector, investment banker,and CEO of a technology firm will be a balance to Graham's experience in the government SEctor.
If Graham is unable to perform his duties as President ie He has to work at another job during his Workday's program, Wes Clark will be qualified to take over as President. The Graham/Clark ticket reminds me of the Reagan/Bush ticket. Graham and Reagan are former Governors of Heavily populated States. Clark and Bush SR are known for the work in the private sector, and their strong foriegn policy credential, Bush Sr was the head of the CIA. Clark was the former NATO general during the War in Kosovo. I would like to see Graham say MR Assad get rid of those Hezbollah Terrorist Camps in Syria... Similar to Reagans Quote- Mr Goberchov, Tear Down This Wall.

Graham/Clark foriegn policy team

Gary Hart- Secretary of Homeland Security
George Mitchell- Secretary of State
Sam Nunn- Secretary of Defense
Richard Holbrooke- National Security Advisor
H Carl McCall- United Nations Ambassodor
Sandy Berger- CIA Director.

Graham/Clark economic Team
Secretary of Treasury- Robert Rubin
NEC- Advisor- Franklin Raines
OMB- Jim Sasser

Graham/Clark- Law enforcement tean
Eric Holder- Attorney General
Raymond Kelly- FBI Director

Agriculture- JIll Long Thompson
Commerce- Charlene Barfansky
Education- Paul Vallas
Energy- Gary Locke
HHS- David Satcher
HUD- Ron Kirk
Interior- Frederico Pena
Labor- Alexis Herman
Transportation- Rodney Slater
Veterans Affairs- Bob Kerrey.

Graham/Clark.

Gore States= 260 ev
West Virginia(Dukakis88,Clinton 92,96) 265 ev
Florida(Graham's home state) 292 ev
Arkansas(Clark's home state) 298 ev