Browse By

Running Mates 2008: Democratic Ticket Tracking Statistics (Updated for January 2007)

For more than three months, we’ve been running a shop containing bumper stickers, buttons and magnets that support various Democratic running mate combinations for the presidential race in 2008. Obama-Edwards 2008? Sure. Gore-Kucinich 2008? OK. Kucinich-Richardson 2008? I don’t understand that pairing myself, but we’ve got it too, just in case. In fact, our goal is to offer just about every possible combination of presidential and vice presidential candidate from among the apparent contenders. That way, YOU can tell US what a reasonable 2008 ticket would look like.

In November, when I started reporting trends in our sales for various Democratic tickets, every single one of the combinations of running mates promoted on a bumper sticker, button or t-shirt we had sold included Barack Obama as either president or vice president. By the middle of December, only one Democratic ticket not including Barack Obama accounted for at least one percent of all running-mates sales, and that was the woman-centered Clinton-Pelosi ticket.

Have matters changed in the past month? Let’s find out. As of today, the following are running mate combinations (placed in President-Vice President order) that garnered at least a 1% share of all sales, making them the major contenders in the hearts of our customers for a 2008 Democratic presidential ticket:

Gore-Obama: 36.1%
Clinton-Obama: 15.0%
Biden-Obama: 10.5%
Edwards-Obama: 10.2%
Obama-Clinton: 5.8%
Obama-Richardson: 3.8%
Obama-Edwards: 3.7%
Clinton-Pelosi: 3.5%
Clark-Obama: 1.9%
Obama-Feingold: 1.3%
Obama-Bayh: 1.0%

Barack Obama is still in each one (but one) of these tickets, excluding the Clinton-Pelosi ticket (which increased slightly in share this month). That’s some showing, although it’s interesting to note that the lion’s share of Obama-inclusive items name him as a Vice Presidential candidate. The most popular presidential candidate among those buying Democratic ticket items is Al Gore (36.1%), followed by Hillary Clinton (19.2%) and only then Barack Obama (17.6%) and John Edwards (11.2%). Obama is far and away the most popular Vice Presidential candidate named (74.4% of the time), followed at a very distant second by Hillary Clinton (6.4%), Bill Richardson (5.1%) and John Edwards (4.8%). Next to nobody (less than 1%) thinks of Al Gore as a veep any more. Apparently, it’s the top job or nothing for Al Gore in people’s hearts.

The following tickets each garnered less than a 1% share of all running-mates sales, but at least a few people (or one person) thought the ticket would be a good one:

Kerry-Edwards (again?)

That seems like a lot of possible tickets, but keep in mind that there are nearly 200 possible running-mate combinations. Nobody has shown any desire for a Gore-Clinton ticket, or for a Clinton-Boxer ticket. The preferences shown by our customers are far from random.

As time passes and contenders declare their candidacies or non-candidacies, these considerations will become less abstract and more grounded in practical possibility. I promise to check back in a month or so with an update…

… but in the meantime, let’s take this beyond a question of sales. Let me ask you: what is your Democratic dream ticket for 2008? What do you think the ticket will actually be?

3 thoughts on “Running Mates 2008: Democratic Ticket Tracking Statistics (Updated for January 2007)”

  1. Mary from Texas says:

    I have always admired Hillary for her intelligence and health care efforts and was pulling for her for 2008, but I think the republican’s vicious hatred of her (on the same level as the dems of Bush) will work against us in 2008 if she is the cadidate for President. I could see her as a VP running mate and Barack as the presidential nominee as our best chance take the whitehouse. Barack brings a fresh, uncorrupt, diverse, more moderate look to the democratic party and definitely the whitehouse while Hillary could still provide a familiar face and comfort to the left base. As many people, I had not heard of Barack Obama until the dem convention and I was blown away by him. I had the feeling that he was destined for greatness and that he has exactly what our country needs right now. In my opinion, this is the ticket that has the best chance to win. After that maybe Obama-Edwards. But Obama needs to be the presidential candidate to jump start the Democratic Party and give us the “Audacity to Hope”!

  2. Frank .E says:

    Well, ’08 presidential candidates should in fact be wisely selected by Democrats, if not, they would loose it to Republicans. Regarding Obama and Clinton, I think it’s a good match for presidential and vice presidential candidates. But the issue is that who is going to be the what. Clinton is good some certain things but not in all things. I like Clinton as a woman (emotional) in Senate who, and has the experience in the White House. But when comparing her and Obama (rational)in many aspects, you would come to a conlution that Obama has the Audacity for the hope which the Americans, not only the Americans but also of the world are seeking. Clinton is good, but I think Obama is better. If the democrats do not want to loose the presidential election, I think they should nominate Obama as their presidential candidate, while Clinton becomes his vice president. the reason is this, I think most Americans do not want a woman president for now because of security reasons. i think the Americans need someone who is rational and not emotional. So the best candidates for the Democrats are Obama-clinton. Obama has what it takes to lead Americans forward.

  3. Iroquois Honky says:

    Wait a minute…Obama has “audacity” and “hope”, whatever that means. And audacity and hope are not emotions but are…”rational”?

    And Clinton has “experience” which is classified as “emotional” …but not “rational”?

    And “audacity+hope=rational=good president” while “experience=emotional=bad president”?

    And women can’t be president for “security reasons”???? What reasons are those? Women automatically belong to al-Qaeda, or something?

    None of that makes any sense.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!