True. I can't say I know enough about him to disagree. It seems like a reasonable concern. I just think they complement each other really well as fresh and vigorous opponents of the war. I also think his military background and general personality would really help with working class whites and moderate Republicans looking for an alternative. And I'd love the help in Virginia. Are you talking about his grabby hands? I've always thought that would be a problem for him if he ever became a serious contender in a national race. His weird false claim to have been drafted by the Kansas City A's would be a problem too. Or were you talking about something else? More forcefully? He didn't come out for him at all. I think Obama would get over that. I also think Obama can't be too pissed since it was probably mishandled on his part. And his comment in their last debate about there being a woman, a black, "and then there's John" seemed to catch Edwards off guard and really offend him. But I think they could get past any problems if it was a good fit and Edwards wanted the job, which I agree he probably doesn't. I'd love for him to wind up with a cabinet post though. Agreed. He also lost re-election. Agreed. I only really know her from her response to the State of the Union which was flat, but I've read all of that about her and she seems like a good, strong contender. Plus he opposed the war from the start. I think that's a quality of Obama's that's been overlooked in terms of how powerful it will be in a race against McCain and it would be nice if it were shared by his running mate. Agreed. Too DLC too. The upside is he might make McCain spend time and money in Indiana. Great analysis. If you have names for dark horses from the west or border south, post them so you can get the credit if you're right.
Would Bill Nelson from Florida be interested? That might help Obama pick up Florida which goes a long way in deciding an election.
Kathleen Sebelius Sam Nunn can be a Leo McGarry type of vp candidate. If the blue collars need name recognition that badly, I guess you have to consider Clinton, though you would like someone with a bit more experience in government (executive), rather than just politics (and there is a difference). Ed Rendell should be considered. He would lock up Pennsylvania, and he isn't completely uncharismatic like a lot of the other choices (Ted Strickland, Phil Bredesen, etc.). Brian Schweitzer doesn't really offer anything on the "electoral map," and who knows how he would handle a spotlight bigger than Montana's. The corpulent Judas wouldn't hurt, really. Hopefully Wesley Clark learned something from 2004. Webb, Bayh, and General Zinni (who knows) are interesting.
If Obama were to pick Biden, Clark or Webb, it could show that he's weak on foreign policy and is trying to make it up with his VP. It would look bad. Kinda like saying, I may not be experienced, but if I die, the guys who comes in will be. It was the Dukakis/Bentsen, mistake. Never pick a VP that voters like better than you, see Kerry/Edwards. I think he's going to pick a governor. A likable governor that has a history of working across party lines. The West and Midwest seem to be the battleground that Obama likes, so I picked Richardson with Sebelius comes in close second on your list. Surely there is a reason why Gore and Kerry both passed Richardson over, but, I kinda think we would know about it by now if there was. Sebelius is a Lady (heal the party) elected in a Red State. Bayh, Biden, and Dachle are too boring and don't signify change. I think Wes Clark is an invention of the press. He's never won any elections. Webb is too risky for not enough upshot. (I think Kaine is the more likely Virginian, he's also from Missouri.) The reasons not to pick Clinton are numerous. Edwards was a horrible vp candidate last time and would be even worse this time. Along with Sebelius and Richardon, my short list includes Fast Eddie Rendell (Pennsylvania, Jewish, former Clinton Supporter), Kaine (Governor of Virginia and from Missouri, early supporter), Schwietzer (West, Small State, Change), Napolitano (Lady in the West).
I picked Richardson because of what he brings electorally as a western governor. While I like Webb a lot and think he would be a good choice, I wouldn't want to leave that Virginia Senate seat open.
I agree with this and was about to post it. This is also an argument for not picking Biden, Clinton and other senators. Obama can't make the changes we need alone. He needs a good senatorial majority with strong leaders. Hillary might make a very good leader of the Senate. Many on the bbs dislike her and accuse her or being too aggressive and too old style politics, but she gets along pretty well with the other pols in the Senate. She might be able to be a strong senate leader of the type that has been praised often in the past. I'm now back to Wesley Clark. I still think McCain has only the replay of the terrorists are coming to get you. Other than that the GOP has no particular issues to run on. I think ordinary people are starting to see through the GOP economics for the wealthy thing. I suppose it is possible that such a strong majority is against the Bush militarism and the Iraq War that you don't need to balance the ticket with a soldier and you can just let MCCain run around scaring folks about engaging in perpetual war.
Yeah, I picked Richardson as well, but the republicans would make this election about race only. Lob!
I tend to think so, particularly with the only her and McCain qualified to be Commander in Chief. I tend to think Bill is also a problem with picking Hillary. I think she can unify the party, but I like having her in the Senate. At least unlike VA the Dems should probably hold the seat in NY. If Hillary really wants it and it is the only way the Clintons and their supporters would work their asses off for the party, than maybe Obama should choose her. FWIW George Stephanopolus sp? thinks Hillary would take it if offered and thinks Obama might offer. Steph thinks Hillary might negotiate for it.
You wouldn't leave it open. Kaine, the Democratic governor of Virginia would appoint a replacement. Same is not true for Evan Bayh. The governor of Indiana is a Republican, thus if Bayh were picked, which he wont be, his replacement would be a Republican. I forgot to mention earlier, I'd also be happy with Gore or Jimmy Carter as Obama's VP. But I may be alone on that.
Darn it. And Major claims to be an independent. So that brings me down to Evan Bayh and a few obscure Democrats that I ever agree with. Policy-wise, I don't mind Harry Reid, but he's been tied to crime and corruption as many times as Edwin Edwards.
Vice Presidential candidates have historically been chosen to balance geographic or shore up support in shaky large electoral college states. It's the glitzy announcement, but it would mean a whole lot more to me to know who the nominee's choices for Secretary Of State and Attorney General and Chief-Of Staff would be. They have a lot more influence on actual policy than the V.P. I would want to read a full report of pro's and con's of the list but as a fist though I voted Wesley Clark for exactly the opposite reason that Serious Black opposed him. I think a large percentage of voters would feel more comfortable with the ticket if it represented more experience in military affairs. From what little i saw of him as a candidate he seemed like a pretty sharp dude and would have the military standing to attack McCain on policy without looking anti-hero. Your VP nominee needs to be your attack dog on the campaign trail.
Personally, I would like someone with military credentials to compliment Obama. I personally want Zinni, but I wouldn't mind Clark. Politically, he should probably pick a Governor in a Republican state like Sibelius/Strickland/Kaine. Any of those three would be good -- even Strickland, who, while bland, would tip Ohio in the Dem's favor.
Even with this, I'm confident Webb can win re-election in Virginia and I can't say that about any other Democrat likely to run for the seat.
I also think Zinni would be an interesting choice. However, while he's extremely bright and a great writer, I don't know how he comes across in public or as a speaker.
totally disagree, this worked for bush in picking cheaney, and the repubs didn't even hide the fact that dchain was there to help bush navigate d.c. that being said, I'm a big fan of biden. the only problem is he is from delaware and the dems may need to go regional on this like they did with jfk and lbj.
Obama: No Need For Foreign Policy Help From V.P. Posted April 7, 2008 | 07:52 AM (EST) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/obama-says-no-to-foreign_b_95357.html?view=print Last night at a fundraiser in San Francisco, Barack Obama took a question on what he's looking for in a running mate. "I would like somebody who knows about a bunch of stuff that I'm not as expert on," he said, and then he was off and running. "I think a lot of people assume that might be some sort of military thing to make me look more Commander-in-Chief-like. Ironically, this is an area--foreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain." "It's ironic because this is supposedly the place where experience is most needed to be Commander-in-Chief. Experience in Washington is not knowledge of the world. This I know. When Senator Clinton brags 'I've met leaders from eighty countries'--I know what those trips are like! I've been on them. You go from the airport to the embassy. There's a group of children who do native dance. You meet with the CIA station chief and the embassy and they give you a briefing. You go take a tour of a plant that [with] the assistance of USAID has started something. And then--you go." "You do that in eighty countries--you don't know those eighty countries. So when I speak about having lived in Indonesia for four years, having family that is impoverished in small villages in Africa--knowing the leaders is not important--what I know is the people. . . ." "I traveled to Pakistan when I was in college--I knew what Sunni and Shia was [sic] before I joined the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. . . ." "Nobody is entirely prepared for being Commander-in-Chief. The question is when the 3 AM phone call comes do you have somebody who has the judgment, the temperament to ask the right questions, to weigh the costs and benefits of military action, who insists on good intelligence, who is not going to be swayed by the short-term politics. By most criteria, I've passed those tests and my two opponents have not." There are a number of interesting things about Senator Obama's remarks. If Senators Clinton and McCain have not passed "those tests," likely they will be surprised to hear it. Secondly, even though I've researched and written on Hillary Clinton's trips abroad and consequently been critical of her claims, my estimation of her foreign travels is that they were sometimes quite a bit more than a dance, a briefing and a tour. What Barack Obama's remarks last night in San Francisco reveal, however, is his self-confidence--to the point of cockiness--right now. This is exactly the same demeanor on display last week in Pennsylvania. So Bill Richardson and Joe Biden--to name two with foreign policy experience--should put aside any transient veep thoughts. Another area--and this one is policy--in which Obama is not an expert is energy. Case in point is his ode to ethanol, which he delivered last week on his Pennsylvania bus tour at Molly's Amerigreen gas station in Manheim. This does not mean that he's going to give Al Gore the veep call--and by the by, Obama never said at the Wallingford, PA town hall meeting that he might offer Gore a cabinet position. He was very careful not to reply in the affirmative when he took the question about whether he would consider Gore. Obama said, "I will make a commitment that Al Gore will be at the table in figuring out these [global warming] problems." Well, at the table is one of Obama's favorite locutions. I've heard him say on several occasions that all Americans will be at the table one time or another. Obama's table is going to be a long one. Last night Senator Obama had a few more words on the subject of choosing a vice president. "That last thing I'd say about a vice president is--obviously, you want someone who can be president and who shares a broad vision of where I want to take the country; don't have to agree with me on every particular, but shares with me a bias for opening up government, adding a rational discourse about how we're gonna solve problems, a bias towards empowering individual citizens." Those seats at the table again. Note Obama's delicate sentence constructions. Never a gender pronoun--a he or a she--anywhere. The San Francisco fundraiser was Senator Obama's fourth and final of the day. He had made appearances earlier in Atherton, Marin and around the corner at another Pacific Heights mansion. Even the Obama Campaign, I suppose, can never have too much money. The folks who came out on Sunday were not the very rich, even though these events were for people who have "maxed out" their donations. The very rich have long since given. The fact that so many middle class Californians are giving $2300 to Obama shows both the depth of prosperity in the state and the allure of the scent of victory.
It's also possible that he picks a white person who has not completed college to shore up support among that voting block.
