[AmishDude]

Gephardt is a safe choice, it's true, but he isn't the DU choice because he's a loser, he doesn't please minorities and he has a long inside-Washington record. Gephardt would lead Kerry to a respectible loss.

Vilsack will probably deliver a flattered Iowa, but since he comes from hick-land, he'll be portrayed as a golly-gee populist.

The bottom line is that Kerry has to (1) win almost all of the Gore states and either win (2a) Florida [unlikely] (2b) Ohio or (2c) both NV and NH. Ohio is the big target. In that case, I suppose Gephardt will be the obvious choice, but his union support is overrated and the union guys who always vote Democrat will continue to do so but I don't see any union-type sympathizers jumping ship just because of Dick Gephardt.

[Torie]

Kerry had no perfect bullet perfect choice, but if I were him, I would pick Gephardt. I would do it, because I think he would make a competent president, and will be a competent campaigner, who knows the issues. This stuff about who can do what with whom, where, is all overdone. The key is to find the long distance runner, who has gravitas, and will do no harm. It is Kerry himself, or exogenous events, or Bush malapropisms, who will have to swing the swing into his column.