There are currently 13 users and 239 guests online.
Obama's VP
Submitted by Factchecker on Tue, 2008/05/13 - 12:58pm.
Is it to soon to resume speculating who Obama's running mate will be? Though I'm not much of a Carville fan these days, I see the Ragin' Cajun mentions one of my favs, Gen. Wesley Clark. Bill Richardson of course would still be a great choice too.
I'm not crazy about Hillary as a pick, mostly because I don't think that would be the best strategy to win required non-Dems, though it would help bridge the two Dem camps back together. Carville also mentioned two others that I would call strategic choices in Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and Michael Bloomberg.
IF he's the nominee, it seems like he would have to offer it to Clinton as a courtesy and a "healing gesture," but I seriously doubt she'd even consider it.
Clark sounds good to me. Helps the ticket in the South and beefs up Obama's foreign policy/national security cred. Not so sure about Richardson. I liked him going in, but his primary performance left some big question marks about his ability to do the job if necessary. Whoever it is has to be able to do the job.
Sebelius sounds like Mondale/Ferraro 2.0. I believe Reagan won every state except Minnesota. (Yes, Wikipedia says Reagan got the highest number of electoral votes ever recorded.)
If by some miracle Clinton gets the nomination, Obama would be a good running mate, as would Clark.
My guess is that both the R and D VP will be somebody whose name has not been mentioned much.
Submitted by Sean_Braisted on Tue, 2008/05/13 - 5:45pm.
If Clinton gets the nomination, Obama will either be dead or it would be on the floor of the convention, which would be a great opportunity to allow the delegates to chose the nominee.
Submitted by Sean_Braisted on Tue, 2008/05/13 - 5:47pm.
If you want to get a person who plays to your weakness, the Scots-Irish Senator from Virginia would be perfect. Park his ass in Appalachia to help stem the loses in those parts of Virginia and North Carolina so that victories are possible.
I'm not sure about Strickland, he just got into office and has a ways to go in cleaning up the mess of the last jackass to hold the Governorship. Maybe Evan Bayh to appease the Clintonistas.
Submitted by tennesseevalues... on Tue, 2008/05/13 - 7:03pm.
Webb as VP only 2 years into his first term as senator? If people think Obama has no record what will they make of Webb? I don't think that sounds like a good idea. First, that means the Dems (assuming they win in November) would be giving up two members of the Senate-- effectively relinquishing the majority back to the GOP pending special elections to fill the new vacancies in Illinois and Virginia. While Illinois might be a "safe" seat for the Dems, Virginia is not. If you're going to sacrifice two senators on Inauguration Day, the safer choice is Clinton from New York, but I don't see that happening.
Submitted by Sean_Braisted on Tue, 2008/05/13 - 8:45pm.
Well, if you think experience in Washington is the only thing of importance in choosing a President, you'd be right. Having been a Navy Admiral is pretty darn impressive in my opinion.
We wouldn't relinquish the majority, as Obama/Webb would step down until after the inauguration, when the Democrats had strengthened their majorities in both the House and Senate. Illinois would be an easy pick, and they might have a backbencher ready to go in Virginia...not sure. But with Mark Warner running for Senate, and Webb in the VP slot, it would really strengthen the Democrats' chances at picking up that state in November.
Submitted by WhitesCreek on Tue, 2008/05/13 - 6:40pm.
The Clintons will not be veeps for Obama. That would be extremely stupid of Obama and he has yet to indicate he is capable of such a lapse in judgement.
Richardson would be my first choice, both for what he brings in geography and for what he brings in Demographics, but most of all for what he brings in the skills necessary to take the Obama legislative agenda to Congress.
Sebelius would be next...She's a she and quite talented. After that I don't have a clear picture.
Everyone else seems to be too valuable where they are, except for Wes Clark, who I don't see in that role somehow. He does bring the military experience that Obama lacks, but that's a perception game and can be played very well without Clark, but it sure is easier with him.
Submitted by jfortneysr (not verified) on Wed, 2008/05/21 - 7:04pm.
Years past we have taken the common wisdom and speculated on VPs. First Bush with Quayle, then Clinton with Gore- both stepped outside conventional wisdom.
I like Richardson as VP. He or Biden brings the gravitas for foreign policy- and Richardson helps in a demographic that can turn two red states blue.
I hadn't thought about Wes Clark in a while. He might be a good one, but I'm more inclined to go with a Clinton supporter who can help heal the rift that has developed between the two camps. I like Richardson for Secretary of State. Yeah, I'm serious. I like what he did with the U.N. and he did some other good things. His demographics would probably be good for dealing with the folks to the south of the border.
Pam Strickland
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut
Submitted by bobaubin on Tue, 2008/05/13 - 11:52pm.
Bill Richardson would be my personal favorite, but a Hillary supporter would help heal the party like Ed Rendell, Jane Harman, Wesley Clark, Diane Feinstein or Bill Nelson. Another personal favorite would be John Lewis of GA, I know it would be two black men, but if people aren't going to vote for Obama because he is black the VP is not going to change their mind. I could see Kathleen Sebeilus, Janet Napolitano, Barbara Boxer, or Nancy Pelosi as good candidates as well.
My top 5:
1. Bill Richardson
2. John Lewis
3. Kathleen Sebelius
4. Wesley Clark
5. Janet Napolitano
~ Bob Aubin
------------------
"When we've been told we're not ready or that we shouldn't try or that we can't, generations of Americans have responded with a simple creed that sums up the spirit of a people: Yes, we can." ~ Barack Obama
Submitted by olepossom (not verified) on Wed, 2008/05/14 - 12:32am.
The guy nobody mentions, the superdelegate who hasn't endorsed, the guy with no skeletons, the guy who toyed with Clinton, then Richardson, the guy who would eat up any rethug in a policy debate. Jeepers, has anybody here heard the name Bredesen before? He is the anithesis of Obama-- the LBJ to JFK, the Agnew to Nixon (maybe that goes too far).
But he moves Tennessee back into the Democratic column, and hits right hard at us here in Appalachia.
Think about it y'all, why hasn't Phil endorsed anybody yet?
Submitted by olepossom (not verified) on Wed, 2008/05/14 - 12:34am.
So I thought about a moment more, and the biggest reason it won't be Phil is because Campfield says it will be Phil. But could this be blind Stacey's acorn?
Submitted by Carole Borges on Thu, 2008/05/15 - 10:47am.
Though I have often hoped Richardson would be the next Secretary of State, I think his gentle intelligent personality matches Obama's nicely if he were chosen as VP. He can also be tough as nails though. His negotiation capabilities are already proven. I doubt Edwards wants to be VP, but they say anyone who is asked feels obliged. On the other hand, it would be great if Obama created a cabinet-level poverty position. No one could be better suited to drive a war against poverty than Edwards. Of course the obvious post he might want is attorney general. That would also be a good spot for him.
Submitted by Pam Strickland on Tue, 2008/06/03 - 11:56am.
As I've said before, Edwards was my first choice last time and was up their with Richardson this time.
Richardson would do good in any of the places mentioned, but I don't think him as VP would really help Obama. Might hurt given the hard feelings with the Clintons after his Obama endorsement.
As for Edwards, don't waste him as VP -- which he's said he'd never do -- but give him a high profile important job. He deserves it, and he would do well. Let him pick.
Pam Strickland
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut
Submitted by NSB (not verified) on Fri, 2008/05/16 - 2:12am.
VP= Governor from the South. John Edwards= Attorney General, Joe Biden= Sec of State. Gen. Clark= gets Dumbrumsfields old job. Dennis Kucinich= Dir. of ALFP (Alien Life Form Program) Hillary Clinton= New Host of The View, Wolf Blitzer= Press Sec, gets to answer his own questions, has easy transition into new job.
Submitted by BongoBib (not verified) on Thu, 2008/05/22 - 3:58pm.
A woman would be a wise decission, Kathleen Sebelius, Clair McCaskill or Jane Harman all have the required qualities and experience in each their own way,but maybe save Kathleen Sebelius for an even more substantial post.
Submitted by Justin Crowley (not verified) on Sun, 2008/06/01 - 11:47pm.
Chuck Hagel (R) for Obama's VP
- agrees with him on illegal immigration and most importantly the war
- can criticize the current administration and make the Bush-McCain link better than the possible Dem choices
- gives the appearance of unity with not just Democrats but Independents and Republicans
- Hagel has experience in international affairs, military, economy, and pure life (age) that Obama lacks
- his differences on domestic policy would only feed the strength of Obama being able to compromise with those who share a different opinion
- not a dream ticket, but rather a real ticket, one provided to a country who desperately needs to merge rather than diverge
Submitted by Mr. Joe (not verified) on Tue, 2008/06/03 - 11:29am.
A "diverged" country will never vote for a split ticket. Many Dems won't want to cast a vote for a ticket with a Republican on it, and the same goes for the Republicans.
Submitted by Elly (not verified) on Sun, 2008/06/08 - 6:50pm.
A formidable ticket would be an Obama/Sebelius ticket. Jim Webb would be good one too but sebelius would be better. Webb would make a great Defense Secretary.. or and adviser on defense issues and foreign affairs. This will ensurre that the ladies have a voice int he next admistration and they will no longer feel invisible. and Sebelious would ensure that we get the state of kansas and the women votes country wide.. and also help in reaching out to the working class folks who looks like they have been hesistant of Senator Obama candidature.
We want to keep all the strong Senators where they are and build several on that. We'll need some with backbones soon there as well as in the House and we'll need overwhelming majorities if we're to fix all the Bush messes.
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."
Hunter S. Thompson
IF he's the nominee, it seems like he would have to offer it to Clinton as a courtesy and a "healing gesture," but I seriously doubt she'd even consider it.
Clark sounds good to me. Helps the ticket in the South and beefs up Obama's foreign policy/national security cred. Not so sure about Richardson. I liked him going in, but his primary performance left some big question marks about his ability to do the job if necessary. Whoever it is has to be able to do the job.
Sebelius sounds like Mondale/Ferraro 2.0. I believe Reagan won every state except Minnesota. (Yes, Wikipedia says Reagan got the highest number of electoral votes ever recorded.)
If by some miracle Clinton gets the nomination, Obama would be a good running mate, as would Clark.
My guess is that both the R and D VP will be somebody whose name has not been mentioned much.
If Clinton gets the nomination, Obama will either be dead or it would be on the floor of the convention, which would be a great opportunity to allow the delegates to chose the nominee.
Senator Webb of Virginia
Ain't won Va since LBJ
Gov Strickland of Ohio
It's Ohio stupid
If you want to get a person who plays to your weakness, the Scots-Irish Senator from Virginia would be perfect. Park his ass in Appalachia to help stem the loses in those parts of Virginia and North Carolina so that victories are possible.
I'm not sure about Strickland, he just got into office and has a ways to go in cleaning up the mess of the last jackass to hold the Governorship. Maybe Evan Bayh to appease the Clintonistas.
Maybe Evan Bayh to appease the Clintonistas.
Ugh. I voted for Hillary but I despise Bayh. Next candidate, please.
Webb as VP only 2 years into his first term as senator? If people think Obama has no record what will they make of Webb? I don't think that sounds like a good idea. First, that means the Dems (assuming they win in November) would be giving up two members of the Senate-- effectively relinquishing the majority back to the GOP pending special elections to fill the new vacancies in Illinois and Virginia. While Illinois might be a "safe" seat for the Dems, Virginia is not. If you're going to sacrifice two senators on Inauguration Day, the safer choice is Clinton from New York, but I don't see that happening.
Well, if you think experience in Washington is the only thing of importance in choosing a President, you'd be right. Having been a Navy Admiral is pretty darn impressive in my opinion.
We wouldn't relinquish the majority, as Obama/Webb would step down until after the inauguration, when the Democrats had strengthened their majorities in both the House and Senate. Illinois would be an easy pick, and they might have a backbencher ready to go in Virginia...not sure. But with Mark Warner running for Senate, and Webb in the VP slot, it would really strengthen the Democrats' chances at picking up that state in November.
*
The Clintons will not be veeps for Obama. That would be extremely stupid of Obama and he has yet to indicate he is capable of such a lapse in judgement.
Richardson would be my first choice, both for what he brings in geography and for what he brings in Demographics, but most of all for what he brings in the skills necessary to take the Obama legislative agenda to Congress.
Sebelius would be next...She's a she and quite talented. After that I don't have a clear picture.
Everyone else seems to be too valuable where they are, except for Wes Clark, who I don't see in that role somehow. He does bring the military experience that Obama lacks, but that's a perception game and can be played very well without Clark, but it sure is easier with him.
Years past we have taken the common wisdom and speculated on VPs. First Bush with Quayle, then Clinton with Gore- both stepped outside conventional wisdom.
I like Richardson as VP. He or Biden brings the gravitas for foreign policy- and Richardson helps in a demographic that can turn two red states blue.
Someone pointed this out elsewhere, but I think it's worthing bringing attention to here.
E.J. Dionne Jr. of the WaPo: Link...
I hadn't thought about Wes Clark in a while. He might be a good one, but I'm more inclined to go with a Clinton supporter who can help heal the rift that has developed between the two camps. I like Richardson for Secretary of State. Yeah, I'm serious. I like what he did with the U.N. and he did some other good things. His demographics would probably be good for dealing with the folks to the south of the border.
Pam Strickland
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut
Just a guess
Sam Nunn
Military expert, brings gravitas, conservative (for a Democrat), only 69 years old.
Can he pull Georgia?
Can he pull Georgia?
Nope. That's a lost cause.
I was thinking of Nunn, too.
I'm going to nominate Joe Biden. Smart as a whip, great debater, knows foriegn policy inside and out.
____________________________________
Less is the new More - Karrie Jacobs
He represents the state of MBNA, too bought into the banks/credit card companies, can't be trusted.
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."
Hunter S. Thompson
Sam Nunn is too old school.
Biden........I don't think he would. Maybe in the Cabinet.
I like Webb, but I'm not convinced.
Pam Strickland
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut
Bill Richardson would be my personal favorite, but a Hillary supporter would help heal the party like Ed Rendell, Jane Harman, Wesley Clark, Diane Feinstein or Bill Nelson. Another personal favorite would be John Lewis of GA, I know it would be two black men, but if people aren't going to vote for Obama because he is black the VP is not going to change their mind. I could see Kathleen Sebeilus, Janet Napolitano, Barbara Boxer, or Nancy Pelosi as good candidates as well.
My top 5:
1. Bill Richardson
2. John Lewis
3. Kathleen Sebelius
4. Wesley Clark
5. Janet Napolitano
~ Bob Aubin
------------------
"When we've been told we're not ready or that we shouldn't try or that we can't, generations of Americans have responded with a simple creed that sums up the spirit of a people: Yes, we can." ~ Barack Obama
I think it will be a white male. I'd like to think that's not necessary, but my guess is that Obama won't take chances.
The guy nobody mentions, the superdelegate who hasn't endorsed, the guy with no skeletons, the guy who toyed with Clinton, then Richardson, the guy who would eat up any rethug in a policy debate. Jeepers, has anybody here heard the name Bredesen before? He is the anithesis of Obama-- the LBJ to JFK, the Agnew to Nixon (maybe that goes too far).
But he moves Tennessee back into the Democratic column, and hits right hard at us here in Appalachia.
Think about it y'all, why hasn't Phil endorsed anybody yet?
So I thought about a moment more, and the biggest reason it won't be Phil is because Campfield says it will be Phil. But could this be blind Stacey's acorn?
...and if Obama asked, it would take Bredesen until November to make a decision.
Well done, sir.
1) No sitting Senators. We need the Senate majority too badly.
2) Kathleen Sebelius no doubt. A loyal Dem with great credentials and coattails for the disappointed women primary voters
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."
Hunter S. Thompson
Though I have often hoped Richardson would be the next Secretary of State, I think his gentle intelligent personality matches Obama's nicely if he were chosen as VP. He can also be tough as nails though. His negotiation capabilities are already proven. I doubt Edwards wants to be VP, but they say anyone who is asked feels obliged. On the other hand, it would be great if Obama created a cabinet-level poverty position. No one could be better suited to drive a war against poverty than Edwards. Of course the obvious post he might want is attorney general. That would also be a good spot for him.
Richardson has shown that he's not a good campaigner. VP candidates needs to be able to campaign with extremely rare off days.
Pam Strickland
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut
As I've said before, Edwards was my first choice last time and was up their with Richardson this time.
Richardson would do good in any of the places mentioned, but I don't think him as VP would really help Obama. Might hurt given the hard feelings with the Clintons after his Obama endorsement.
As for Edwards, don't waste him as VP -- which he's said he'd never do -- but give him a high profile important job. He deserves it, and he would do well. Let him pick.
Pam Strickland
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut
VP= Governor from the South. John Edwards= Attorney General, Joe Biden= Sec of State. Gen. Clark= gets Dumbrumsfields old job. Dennis Kucinich= Dir. of ALFP (Alien Life Form Program) Hillary Clinton= New Host of The View, Wolf Blitzer= Press Sec, gets to answer his own questions, has easy transition into new job.
A woman would be a wise decission, Kathleen Sebelius, Clair McCaskill or Jane Harman all have the required qualities and experience in each their own way,but maybe save Kathleen Sebelius for an even more substantial post.
Chuck Hagel (R) for Obama's VP
- agrees with him on illegal immigration and most importantly the war
- can criticize the current administration and make the Bush-McCain link better than the possible Dem choices
- gives the appearance of unity with not just Democrats but Independents and Republicans
- Hagel has experience in international affairs, military, economy, and pure life (age) that Obama lacks
- his differences on domestic policy would only feed the strength of Obama being able to compromise with those who share a different opinion
- not a dream ticket, but rather a real ticket, one provided to a country who desperately needs to merge rather than diverge
A "diverged" country will never vote for a split ticket. Many Dems won't want to cast a vote for a ticket with a Republican on it, and the same goes for the Republicans.
A formidable ticket would be an Obama/Sebelius ticket. Jim Webb would be good one too but sebelius would be better. Webb would make a great Defense Secretary.. or and adviser on defense issues and foreign affairs. This will ensurre that the ladies have a voice int he next admistration and they will no longer feel invisible. and Sebelious would ensure that we get the state of kansas and the women votes country wide.. and also help in reaching out to the working class folks who looks like they have been hesistant of Senator Obama candidature.
OBAMA/Sebelius '08
Personally, I think Democrats ought to stop thinking in terms of removing more D seats from the Senate (Clinton, Webb, etc., and Obama already).
We want to keep all the strong Senators where they are and build several on that. We'll need some with backbones soon there as well as in the House and we'll need overwhelming majorities if we're to fix all the Bush messes.
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."
Hunter S. Thompson
Post new comment