tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8501813829494244463.post7762607219376799411..comments2023-09-25T06:43:37.778-05:00Comments on Buddy's Books and Bait: It's a No-Brainerdewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09994806228197136821noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8501813829494244463.post-86661610382280395452008-05-20T21:50:00.000-05:002008-05-20T21:50:00.000-05:00DEW, I agree this would be a great match.What a no...DEW, I agree this would be a great match.<BR/><BR/>What a novel idea, selecting a VP who the voting public (and not mearly political insiders) are familiar with. What do you think about a more open selection process and public vetting of the VP candidates in the future? <BR/> <BR/>I have always been rather uncomfortable with the idea that in actual terms the voting public has no choice in the VP and simply must trust the candidates and the party. As the focus is, understandably,on the presidential candidates themselves the media, as well as the opponents, are often of little help on this issue. <BR/><BR/>I am not suggesting that we return to the old days when the runner up (traditionaly a member of the other party) is made VP. However, a system in which the person who came in second during the party primary race (Clinton in this case) is given the VP position on the ticket would appear to be more democratic. <BR/><BR/>CSP 2003Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com