Obama VP Buzz

The VP speculation buzz today is that Barack Obama's VP vetting team, which includes Caroline Kennedy, former Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder and the former CEO of mortgage lender Fannie Mae, Jim Johnson, are seriously considering former military leaders among their shortlist.

From The AP:

North Dakota Sen. Kent Conrad told The Associated Press said the team asked him about potential candidates from three broad categories -- current top elected officials, former top elected officials, and former top military leaders.

Conrad would not disclose which names they discussed, and the Obama campaign has been keeping the process a closely guarded secret.

"We talked about many names," Conrad said, including "some that are out of the box but I think would be very well received by the American people, including former top military leaders."

Who are these former military leaders? First Read profiles one of the lesser known among those that were discussed.

Ret. Gen. James Jones, the former Marine-turned-NATO Supreme Allied Commander.

Jones, a Vietnam vet born in Kansas City, MO (swing state alert!), was a career military officer rising to one of the highest posts possible. Now retired, Jones has been critical of the number of troops currently in Afghanistan. He's been appointed to independent posts by both the Democratic Congress and the Republican-run State Department

Jones currently is the president and CEO of the Institute for 21st Century Energy, which is an affiliate of the US Chamber of Commerce, not exactly the type of organization a typical Democrat gets involved with. Potentially problematic is that he's on Chevron's board.

First Read goes on to provide a larger list of the names "bandied about with congressional Dems":

Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, John Edwards, Evan Bayh, Kathleen Sebelius, Ted Strickland, Mark Warner, Tim Kaine, Jim Webb, Bill Nelson, Jack Reed, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Tom Daschle, and Sam Nunn.

And interestingly:

Besides Jones, I'm told the two other names that invited extended discussion were Biden and Strickland.

If this list is an accurate reflection of the Obama campaign's thinking, it would appear that their strategy is to use the running-mate to shore up a perceived deficit in Obama's resume (i.e. national security) rather than to shore up any particular demographic group or region, although of course a couple of the candidates do kill a couple of birds.

Update [2008-6-10 17:17:8 by Josh Orton]: Strickland's thoughts on the idea - would he?

Asked on NPR's "All Things Considered" if he is auditioning to be Obama's running mate, Strickland said, "Absolutely not. If drafted I will not run, nominated I will not accept and if elected I will not serve. So, I don’t know how more crystal clear I can be."
Sounds like a strong "maybe."

Tags: 2008 Presidential election, Barack Obama, VP (all tags)

Comments

183 Comments

Re: Obama VP Buzz

I thought it might be Zinni, but Jones is certainly formidable?

It would be fun to see Joe Biden on the stump, the man is a razor!

Maybe he can apoligize for that damn bankrupcy bill (the Senator from MasterCard!)

Didn't know Jones was on the Chevron board, he'd better vet out well in that regard.

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 01:21PM | 0 recs
he can apoligize for that damn bankrupcy bill

That isn't the only time he voted for Bush's odius agenda.

If Obama picks any IraqDem for VP it will undermine one of his strongest positions against Bush/McCain.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 01:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

I wonder if Claudia Kennedy is a possibility. She seems to tick many boxes (Woman, Military, Clinton supporter). She was born in Frankfurt in Germany though so unless it was a military base that is considered US soil I take it that excludes her.

by conspiracy 2008-06-10 01:22PM | 0 recs
Military Base or Not, Doesn't Matter

She's still "natural born".

by Collideascope 2008-06-10 02:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Military Base or Not, Doesn't Matter

As natural born as McCain, who was born in the Panama Canal Zone.

by Adam B 2008-06-10 02:40PM | 0 recs
Correct

The 1st Congress made it abundantly clear back in 1790.

by Collideascope 2008-06-10 03:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Correct

Well, Congress can't really expand what the Constitution meant in this case, can it?  It can't a "35 year old" to include 32-year-olds.

by Adam B 2008-06-10 07:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

STOP THINKING THAT GENDER MAKES A DIFFERENCE.

Newsflash - many people voted for Clinton based upon her qualfications not her gender. One woman is not just as good as another.

by jrsygrl 2008-06-10 03:23PM | 0 recs
I Don't Think Gender Makes a Difference

And there's a woman on my Top 5 list for Obama's running mate.  But that woman isn't Senator Clinton, and I've seen it repeatedly posted (here and elsewhere) that if Senator Obama's running mate isn't Senator Clinton, then it had better not be any other woman.

So, clearly, gender does matter - to some.

by Collideascope 2008-06-10 03:33PM | 0 recs
Re: I Don't Think Gender Makes a Difference
  1. Hillary Clinton is immensely qualified - so her disqualification is without merit.
  2. To substitute another woman sends a distinct message, whether real or not, that anyone of that gender is interchangeable. If Obama's team doesn't get that perception is important in politics then they don't stand a chance in hell of winning; since manipulating perception is the name of the game (there is no way a country that voted for W is overwhelmingly intelligent & immune to manipulation).
by jrsygrl 2008-06-10 04:56PM | 0 recs
Re: I Don't Think Gender Makes a Difference

Please - if the only thing that rules out a VP candidate to you is their gender, keep it to yourself ;)

by Jess81 2008-06-10 05:27PM | 0 recs
Re: I Don't Think Gender Makes a Difference

Sibellius I'm assuming.  

At least she's my top pick at this point.

by Jess81 2008-06-10 05:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Meh.  Strickland really sounds like he doesn't want it.  It's a shame.  Obama/Strickland would wipe the floor with McCain.

by Skaje 2008-06-10 01:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

He's only been governor for 2 years and is very popular here in Ohio... I think he feels he owes it to Ohioans to stay and finish cleaning up the mess that Republicans have stuck us with over the last 20 years.

by LordMike 2008-06-10 01:32PM | 0 recs
Strickland blew it

when he stood behind Hillary and nodded diasaprovingly as she went nuts about Obama....

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 01:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Strickland blew it

Oooh, he stood behind the candidate he supported!

He's a menace.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-06-10 02:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Strickland blew it

I could handle that.  As long as he didn't actually say anything particularly vile about Obama it's water under the bridge in my book.

by Skaje 2008-06-10 02:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Strickland blew it

How about this:

Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland, a Clinton backer, says she'll win the Buckeye State. "I don't think Ohio is going to be taken in by the fluff," Strickland told The News in Cincinnati.

"I think it's a choice between a speech and a plan," he said.

http://www.buckeyestateblog.com/ted_stri cklands_demeaning_obama_comments


by Lefty Coaster 2008-06-10 04:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Strickland blew it

Could it be possible that he REALLY doesn't think Obama is qualified?

by jrsygrl 2008-06-10 04:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Strickland blew it

Nah! He was just blowing smoke for Hillary.

by Lefty Coaster 2008-06-10 05:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Strickland blew it

What's that in her hand as she "goes nuts"? Oh, it's a "Harry and Louise" flyer, pounding home a misleading case against universal health care with talking points nearly identical to those used by the Republicans to kill UHC the last time we tried for it.

Shame on Strickland for standing behind Hillary as she pronounced shame on Obama. He's a monster.

by itsthemedia 2008-06-10 07:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Strickland blew it

> He's a monster.

I mean Strickland of course. Not Obama, he's totally innocent and represents a new kind of politics. Even his scurrilous attack ads were very uplifting and gracious. You can put down your torches and pitchforks folks. Nothing to see here - move along.

by itsthemedia 2008-06-10 07:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Strickland blew it

I don't remember Obama going berserk over Hillary's numerous unfair innuendos and attacks.

But the point you missed is, Strickland bet too heavily on the wrong dog.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 08:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Strickland blew it

Gov. Strickland stands by what he believes in.  I think that is very respectable.  As far as VP goes, I think it is clear that he really really really does not want that. Just leave the man alone.  

by observer11 2008-06-10 09:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Strickland blew it

Every politician who can't be president wants to be VP -- even Hillary apparently.

And I doubt if Strickland cares whether I leave him alone or not.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 11:04PM | 0 recs
Silly season

North Dakota Sen. Kent Conrad told The Associated Press said the team asked him about potential candidates from three broad categories -- current top elected officials, former top elected officials, and former top military leaders.

In other words, just about everybody is under consideration at this point.

I understand why the corporate media, desperate for inane topics to jabber about, would jump on the "military leader" meme, but is a website like this one supoosed to be in their sorry league?

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 01:27PM | 0 recs
well, if John Kerry is on the list

I think that's a pretty good sign it's not very accurate.

by John DE 2008-06-10 01:28PM | 0 recs
My thoughts...

Hillary Clinton - Too much baggage.
John Kerry - Not smart regionally.  Old news.
John Edwards - Damaged goods.  Wish he wasn't tainted by the Kerry loss.  Love him otherwise.  Not a pit bull, however.
Evan Bayh - Douchebag
Kathleen Sebelius - Token woman alert!  Don't piss off Clinton or her supporters.
Ted Strickland - OK pick as Ohio is critical.  Don't know much else about him.
Mark Warner - Like Webb better.
Tim Kaine - Like Webb better.
Jim Webb - Like him but for Tailhook.  Need more details on that.  
Bill Nelson - OK pick but wonder if he can deliver his state.  If there's a chance, I'd say go for it.
Jack Reed - Don't know enough.  I'd genrally avoid anyone from the NE, however.
Joe Biden - Blowhard.
Chris Dodd - OK pick.
Tom Daschle - No.  Weenie factor too high.
Sam Nunn - Solid choice.  Barr factor adds appeal here.

One more thing, why all the damn Senators on this list?  I, like others, would prefer to avoid a Two Senator ticket.

by SpanishFly 2008-06-10 01:30PM | 0 recs
Re: My thoughts...

Some objections:

First, as a FL Dem, Nelson should be scratched.  He's weak and ineffective.

Second, while I don't think he's VP material, Biden is not a blowhard.  He's a sharp man and a good Senator.

Third, Nunn is way to conservative.

by auboy2006 2008-06-10 01:36PM | 0 recs
Re: My thoughts...

Waaayyyy too conservative.

by mady 2008-06-10 01:48PM | 0 recs
Re: My thoughts...

Reposted from another thread:

Hillary Clinton: I seriously doubt it, plus I honestly don't think she wants it.  She'll be senate majority leader.

John Kerry:  Huh?

John Edwards: Great choice, but he seems like he'd rather not.  My money's on AG Edwards.

Evan Bayh:  I hope not.  Good enough guy, but his surname should be "Blah".  Boring.

Kathleen Sebelius:  Don't know much about her.  SOTU rebuttal was a complete dud though.

Ted Strickland:  Eh, maybe.  Good choice in terms of strategery, but doesn't offer much else.

Mark Warner:  Great choice.

Tim Kaine:  Same as Strickland.  Good guy.

Jim Webb:  If not VP, a strong choice for Sec. Def.

Bill Nelson:  Trying to snatch FL?  Maybe.  Another strategery choice.

Jack Reed: Senator from RI?  Maybe a little too low profile.

Joe Biden:  Secretary of State Biden.  I can see it a mile away.

Chris Dodd:  Doubt it.

Tom Daschle:  Seriously doubt it.

Sam Nunn:  Political experience and strong credentials on national defense. Sorta risky, given his moderate to conservative history.

James Jones:  Huh?

by fogiv 2008-06-10 01:39PM | 0 recs
Nunn is too old,

and it takes away a HUGE edge for Obama against McCain. VPs are supposed to be qualified to be Presidents. While he is "qualified" in terms of policy, he is as old as McCain, and could be seen as "unqualified" in terms of health and age.

by Lakrosse 2008-06-10 02:25PM | 0 recs
Re: My thoughts...

I'm still hoping for Edwards

They always say they don't want it right up until the moment they are asked.

Veep would be a good place to start the second war on poverty.

by Skex 2008-06-10 02:31PM | 0 recs
Re: My thoughts...

How many Shermanesque statements would be enough to convince you? Ten, eighteen? thirty-five?

by itsthemedia 2008-06-10 08:05PM | 0 recs
Re: My thoughts...

When they announce someone else I'll be convinced :)

by Skex 2008-06-11 05:39AM | 0 recs
Re: My thoughts...

Why does everybody seem to think Clinton could be Majority Leader? Am I the only one who noticed that most of the Senate Democrats came out against her in the primaries? Plus, Harry Reid has not been hinting about stepping aside, there are numerous Senate Dems with 20-30 years seniority on her, well established networks, etc.

The other silly notion I keep seeing is Clinton (or Edwards) for SCOTUS. SCOTUS positions should not be handed out as consolation prizes or political patronage. Bush tried that with Harriet Myers, and even his own partisans rebelled. If Obama picks anyone for SCOTUS who does not have a long and distinguished record in Constitutional Law - as an appeals court judge, or a scholar - we should all be very disappointing. As a Law teacher, he should definitely know better.

Please, if you don't like her for VP, just leave it at that - stop trying to find imaginary bones to throw to her. It's kind of insulting.

by itsthemedia 2008-06-10 08:03PM | 0 recs
Re: My thoughts...

Think HRC would find it insulting?  I'm niether for nor against her as VP, though I lean more against for thematic reasons.  Honestly, I don't think either of them (BO or HRC) want it.  

That said, there's no doubt in my mind that she has an "asking price" for her support.  I'm of the opinion that that "price" involves the adoption of all or part of her healthcare package to his platform, the power to shepard said, and a fast-track to Senate Majority Leader (not an insta-appointment) or some other cabinet post (HHS maybe?).

Harry Reid's been slightly milqetoast anyway.  Who cares if HRC's a junior Senator?  She's got 35 years of experience right?  ;)

You're right about SCOTUS, niether JRE or HRC will be offered such positions (nor should they be).  

by fogiv 2008-06-11 07:47AM | 0 recs
Re: My thoughts...

Heh, no I don't think Hillary would be insulted to be Senate Majority Leader. She would probably kick ass at that job too. I just realistically don't see how she gets there in less than a decade or two. The Senate is very jealous of its traditions and independence. They are not going to dance to a tune the President calls, even if it is President Obama.

FWIW, I also do not think either of them want Clinton to be VP. But I also think the political pressures of holding together a fractious coalition may outweigh their personal desires. After Obama looks over all his choices, he may decide he has to ask Clinton. If asked, she may feel she has to accept.

Who knows, with the right ground rules, it might work a lot better than some folks are predicting. Obama is not such a wilting flower that he can't handle some strong personalities on his team.

And Bill? No problem - make him Middle East envoy and pack him off to Jerusalem. He might actually be one of the few people who can get the parties talking again. At the very least, it will keep him busy and out of trouble, right?

by itsthemedia 2008-06-11 10:27PM | 0 recs
Re: My thoughts...

You may be right on all counts there, and there's no doubt it would take an immense amount deal making, favors, and back scratching to get HRC into the majority leader chair within the next 4 to 8 years.

Of all the corollary spots she could be in line for, something tells me that's the one she'd desire most.  She's such a wonk, you know?  At the end of the day, she wants to push her agenda same as all the other pols.

by fogiv 2008-06-12 07:29AM | 0 recs
Re: My thoughts...

Please not Nunn.  Ugh.

by Skaje 2008-06-10 02:05PM | 0 recs
Re: My thoughts...

Nelson is the wrong person from FL. The local Repugs in NE FL fear nothing more than Obama picking gov/sen Graham. He would take away the age argument against McCain but he is great on every issue, very popular, and leaves the Presidency wide open on our side in 2016 which will make many Hilary supporters down here happy.

by nibit25 2008-06-10 04:19PM | 0 recs
Nunn's a homohater who

sabotaged Bill Clinton's effort to allow gays to serve openly in the military. He'd have to crawl on hands and knees over broken glass begging for forgiveness for me to ever consider voting for him. Oh, and he'd have to don assless leather chaps and march in the San Francisco gay pride parade!

by Ian S 2008-06-10 04:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Nunn's a homohater who

I'd pay cash money to see that.

Yes, Bill Clinton takes a lot of blame for "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." That old devil Bill - how dare he institute DADT? What nobody seems to remember is:

1) Before Bill, it was "We will spare no effort to root out Teh Gay, and give them Dishonorable Discharges."

2) He burned a huge amount of his political capital at the very beginning of his first term, trying to keep a promise he made in the campaign.

3) His original position was that people in the military should be judged by their performance on the job, and their private lives should be their own business.

4) He was undermined by people in his own party, like Nunn, and people serving under his command, like the very, very honorable Colin Powell.

5) DADT was a "compromise", but it got the issue of gays serving in the military into the public conciousness. Since then, the realization that there are gay people in our military and we have yet to be conquered by a nation with a straighter military, plus the silliness of the whole system has caused a gradual realization in the populace that Bill's initial position was the right one.

by itsthemedia 2008-06-10 08:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Former military leaders?  Who else besides Jones and Clark could be under consideration?

You know, someone somewhere is thinking about this.

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell, a Republican who served under President Bush, said Friday he may not back the GOP presidential nominee in November, telling CNN that "I am keeping my options open at the moment."

Okay, doesn't mean much. But there's more:

Powell also offered praise for Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, calling him an "exciting person on the political stage.

Hmmm.  Powell had this to say:

"I will ultimately vote for the person I believe brings to the American people the kind of vision the American people want to see for the next four years," he said. "A vision that reaches out to the rest of the world, that starts to restore confidence in America, that starts to restore favorable ratings to America. Frankly, we've lost a lot in recent years."

There's no doubt in my mind that Powell would love to right some wrongs, given the opportunity.  

by fogiv 2008-06-10 01:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz
I couldn't imagine Powell even being considered, considering his ties to Bush and the run up to the war.
Maybe he should write a book (okay, that was mean).
And if Obama appoints a Republican for VP (a lot of people have floated Hagel), I simply will not vote for president.
There are too many talented Democrats to even consider a republican on the ticket.
by skohayes 2008-06-10 02:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Honestly, I don't think he'd pick a repub either.  Still, I'm sure some people are considering it.

by fogiv 2008-06-10 02:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

If Powell is on the ticket - then I have officially changed my stance from I'll choke on it & probably vote for Obama to let the GOP get credit for the mess about to be made worse I'm not participating in this garbage.

by jrsygrl 2008-06-10 03:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Some are there out of respect, like Kerry?

Other, like Warner, Sebelius, Bayh are the real deal, and are probably under serious consideration?

Oh, and I actually LIKE the idea of Jones, or Zinni, a non-poltician (as non-politician as you can be being a general, which is pretty political) with actual ON THE JOB foriegn policy experience?  Running NATO is pretty much being a Governor of a large political body?

Plus, you want to talk to these guys, you are also going to have to repair the military and maybe you choose from inside the ranks for Sec of Defense?  Though I think Biden is the natural pick there....

I saw Zinni interviewed after that book he wrote with Tom Clancy.

He was great, talk about a straight shooter?

McCain USED to have the gravitas, he kissed it off when he kissed Robertsons, Falwells and Bush's backsides....

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 01:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Isn't Zinni from Pennsylvania as well?

by jkfp2004 2008-06-10 01:38PM | 0 recs
McCain USED to have the gravitas

No. He's always been the same corrupt empty suit.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 01:41PM | 0 recs
Jones sounds awful, but Sebelius

deserves a good hard look:

But when she felt it necessary, Sebelius fought -- and often won. She vetoed a bill that would have required voters to show photo identification before voting, citing disenfranchisement concerns. She issued an executive order making it illegal to discriminate against state employees on the basis of sexual orientation. Three times in four years, she opposed legislation that would have restricted abortion access even though one of those bills passed the Kansas legislature by a two to one margin. Most recently, Sebelius offered a third veto to a bill that would have paved the way for the construction of two new coal-fired units in western Kansas, and she did it primarily on environmental grounds, a stance that a decade ago would have amounted to political suicide.

"Elected leaders are supposed to look at the big picture, at issues that may not affect citizens immediately but are extremely beneficial to the long-term condition of our society. Moving toward renewable energy provides opportunities for better-paying jobs, while helping to address concerns caused by global warming," she said of her decision.

Her position was held up by one vote in the statehouse.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/10 /kathleen-sebelius-complet_n_106219.html

by david mizner 2008-06-10 01:41PM | 0 recs
Sebelius would be a good choice.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 01:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Sebelius would be a good choice.

I have heard these two have chemistry, a conservative Catholic woman from the midwest and a black man from Chicago?

Yeah, she was flat as a pancake in her response to the SOTU, but you gotta give props to a woman democrat who wins in Kansas.

I would not be surprised at all if Obama picks her, even if it pisses off the Hillary supporters.

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 01:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Sebelius would be a good choice.

And her father was governor of Ohio.

The lackluster response to the SOTU address doesn't really concern me. Jim Webb did a pretty good one, but it's not a forum for shining. She's not super flat. A little flat, but that's okay.

by david mizner 2008-06-10 02:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Sebelius would be a good choice.
Don't base your opinion of her only on the SOTU reply (which I thought sucked too).
She is great at fighting Republicans (I'll bet she drives them crazy in the state house), and is pretty popular here in Kansas.
Unfortunately, we still need her here. Kansas has a long way to go yet.
by skohayes 2008-06-10 02:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Sebelius would be a good choice.

Ahh something we can agree upon. I would be surprised either if he doesn't care about pissing people off and alienating massive amounts of voters who could actually be realistically won over. The markings of a great campaigner there.

by jrsygrl 2008-06-10 03:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Sebelius would be a good choice.

All of those choices will piss someone off. Even lots of someones. Does that mean Obama should choose no one?

Your argument is ridiculous.

by BrighidG 2008-06-10 03:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Sebelius would be a good choice.

So let's pick the biggest group of them all - the most easiest voters to get on the Democratic side & piss them off on the potshot theory that we can convert a few lifelong Reagan/Bush Republican - Tell me again about how TX is in play??

by jrsygrl 2008-06-10 05:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Sebelius would be a good choice.

If people aren't going to vote for Obama because he picked a woman as his VP, then screw em.

by Jess81 2008-06-10 05:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Sebelius would be a good choice.

Facts?

Anything to back up that statement?

Your feelings =  /  = The feelings of everyone who voted for Clinton.

by BrighidG 2008-06-11 01:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Sebelius would be a good choice.

Oh come on - use common sense - you don't think women will feel alienated if the appearance is given that a token woman is being thrown on the ticket as though that is good enough...Seriously - it isn't a far stretch here to determine that is how people will feel.  Additionally, based upon others responses the issue is more about not caring how they feel versus the fact that people will feel that way @@.

by jrsygrl 2008-06-13 01:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Sebelius would be a good choice.

the same Sebelius who praised her son's creativity in selling a board came that makes-light of prison rape?? great judge of character your candidate has demonstrated throughout this campaign. oh, and he's actually got Nunn on his VP short-list. The same Nunn that blocked gays in the military in 92-93. And people wonder why the LBGT vote isn't as wowed by Obama as some may hope.

by swissffun 2008-06-12 03:25PM | 0 recs
The same Hillary who....

voted with McSame to invade Iraq -- and even praised him during her own campaign?

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-12 06:32PM | 0 recs
My Pick Is Obvious

But it's not up to me!

The obvious choice is Clinton.

The dark horse is McCaskill.

It will be one of those two.

I wonder if a number of white male Dems on this blog are projecting with respect to the no. 2 spot. The most successful female candidate in history was less behind in pledged delegates than superdelegates who ultimately sided with Obama. Clinton's deserving of much due consideration.

Is the thinking from some of you that a white male allays racial fears among the electorate?

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-06-10 01:43PM | 0 recs
Obama can't pick an IraqDem.

So Hillary's out.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 01:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama can't pick an IraqDem.

So the moderate half of the party gets shutout?

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-06-10 01:52PM | 0 recs
So the moderate half of the party gets shutout?

You can call voting with Bush many things, but "moderate" isn't one of them.

But yes, they should all be shutout if only because choosing one of them would undermine Obama's criticism of McSame's judgement for marching to war with Bush.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 01:59PM | 0 recs
Re: So the moderate half of the party gets shutout

Pish posh. When someone votes their conscience, it's not political expediency. It's their prerogative.

I'm going to pay real attention to the VP pick because if it's another liberal like Obama I'm bolting. The magic center doesn't care about who sent us to the war. They're past that. They just want as peaceful and expeditious an end as possible.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-06-10 02:08PM | 0 recs
Re: So the moderate half of the party gets shutout

Well, McCain would certainly give us that...

oh wait... no he wouldn't... so where exactly are you bolting to?

by JDF 2008-06-10 02:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama can't pick an IraqDem.

The Idiot 'I enable war' faction...yes.  At least I hope so.

Choosing a VP who plays politics with war is counter to Obama's message.

by lojasmo 2008-06-10 02:52PM | 0 recs
Re: My Pick Is Obvious

Hey, I'm not sure Hillary wants it?  Bill does, but why would she want to be number two again?

"Is the thinking from some of you that a white male allays racial fears among the electorate?"

Actually. I like Richardson and Sebelius, but I am walking on Eggshells lest I piss off the Clinton supporters?

Really, I have heard that Clinton folks would be insulted if he took Sebelius?

I also like Wes, which I think Clinton supporters might like?

Besides, I truly do think Bill would have trouble with the vetting process, he might even refuse to let them look at the contributors to the library?

I think that is a stumbling block for Hillary, sadly.

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 01:49PM | 0 recs
Re: My Pick Is Obvious

Holy Cow?  You've gone a little crazy with the question marks?

;)

by fogiv 2008-06-10 01:56PM | 0 recs
Re: My Pick Is Obvious

At least it's NOT ALL CAPS!

(wink!)

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 01:58PM | 0 recs
Re: My Pick Is Obvious

LOLZ.

by fogiv 2008-06-10 02:07PM | 0 recs
Re: My Pick Is Obvious

You don't vet the Clintons.

And Sebelius is the most boring thing since sliced bread had a baby with a French loaf and produced the Kaiser roll.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-06-10 01:57PM | 0 recs
Re: My Pick Is Obvious

"You don't vet the Clintons."

Why?  

Too much they don't want seen?  

I'm sorry to tell you, Barack Obama is now the titular head of the Democratic Party?

If you are wanting a place on HIS ticket, you will be vetted?

See, that's the point, why I think this is not a good match?

Clinton supporters ONLY want her on the ticket for one reason: They think he is incompetent, and SHE should be president?

It kills the deal even before it comes together?

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 02:01PM | 0 recs
Re: My Pick Is Obvious

Your liberal use of question marks leaves much unanswered.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-06-10 02:10PM | 0 recs
Re: My Pick Is Obvious

I readily admit to being a liberal, and a questioning one at that!

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 02:12PM | 0 recs
You don't vet the Clintons.

And that will be Obama's best excuse for not choosing Hillary.

He can't be expected to take a blind chance on the Clintons' dealings.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 02:01PM | 0 recs
Re: You don't vet the Clintons.

What dealings?

Helping the global economy through private charity?

Seems shady.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-06-10 02:13PM | 0 recs
Re: You don't vet the Clintons.

Then, why not open the books?

But, I am more worried about the Library contributors and the business dealings Bill had post his Presidency?  They were flat broke, and in debt from the Republic Lynch mob, but I think Bill might have made some questionable deals with some rather unattractive characters.

Still, that doesn't disqualify her, but refusing to open the books DOES in my mind.

It's like a job interview, where when asked for references, you refuse.  Or, you black out part of your work background.

Seems to me, if the Clinton's want "Special rules" compared to everyone else, that's not Kosher.

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 02:18PM | 0 recs
What dealings?

Clinton Library Got Funds From Abroad

Bill Clinton's Business Ties Face Scrutiny

The last thing Obama needs is another Clinton scandal bogging him down.

The Clintons have to be vetted and come clean if she wants to even be considered for VP.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 02:28PM | 0 recs
Sebelius is the most boring thing

VPs aren't supposed to be exciting. They're supposed to deliver something tangible to help the nominee win.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 02:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Sebelius is the most boring thing

VPs deliver shit.

They brand the candidate. That's all.

There are some exceptions. Clinton delivers a brand and votes.

Any other VP candidate would simply be branding Obama in excess of some quality or in some perceived deficiency of his.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-06-10 02:12PM | 0 recs
Clinton delivers a brand and votes.

To Bush/McCain. Hillary is the one thing that can unite the GOP.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 02:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton delivers a brand and votes.

That's a tired line.

Clinton unites all Democrats. Obama's having trouble with even that.

And there are plenty of cross-overs from the Republican side who will vote for Clinton over McCain.

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-06-10 02:25PM | 0 recs
Clinton unites all Democrats

Her supporters, at least the sane ones, are already uniting behind Obama. By August there will be fewer PUMAs than Naderites.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 02:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton delivers a brand and votes.

Clinton unites all Democrats...

Haven't been to Kos lately, eh?

Really, BOTH Obama and Clinton have their opposers on each side. Let's stay truthful.

BTW, I am happy with Senator Clinton on the ticket EXCEPT for a couple of facts:

1. All you Clinton supporters want her on their because you think SHE should be President, not Obama, and that is a match made in hell.

2. Bill

I love the Big Dog, but you can only have so many Alphas in the room, and no one is going to accuse Hillary of not being an Alpha.

That makes 3 Alphas, and even Kennedy would have had trouble if LBJ came as a duo.

I think Bill is a loaded hand grenade with the pin pulled, any gaffe he makes will throw the campaign off message, and god help us if he thinks Hillary is right and Obama is wrong on some issue?

Nope, I think it is so problematic, I can't see it.

Of course, one of my favorite books of the last 5 years was "Team of Rivals" if you get my drift.....

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 02:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton delivers a brand and votes.
  1. So?  What does that matter to you...is it b/c you don't want anyone appeased?  That should make you HAPPY that a portion of the party is able to compromise & will feel more secure with ticket - secure like maybe you feel now.
  2. So now the VP/President shouldn't just complement each other they should just be clones of each other? Maybe Obama needs someone who is capable of standing up & guiding him if he needs it.
by jrsygrl 2008-06-13 01:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton delivers a brand and votes.

Buzz off Troll

You are the banned troll Universal

Universal = Zeitgeist9000

by Lefty Coaster 2008-06-10 04:26PM | 0 recs
Re: My Pick Is Obvious

If you 'don't vet the Clintons'

Then they don't get on the ticket.  Period.

by lojasmo 2008-06-10 02:53PM | 0 recs
Re: My Pick Is Obvious

Yeah b/c Bill Clinton doesn't know how to win a G/E - oh wait a minute come to a think of it he is the only Democrat recently who HAS won a G/E (2 in fact)

by jrsygrl 2008-06-10 03:31PM | 0 recs
Re: My Pick Is Obvious

Years ago I could dunk a basketball. Now I can't even touch the backboard.

by spacemanspiff 2008-06-10 03:41PM | 0 recs
Re: My Pick Is Obvious

Yeah Clinton's legacy is so ancient - I mean the same GOP players from when he was running aren't even involv - oh wait never mind @@

by jrsygrl 2008-06-10 04:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Zin ni

From Penn.

Yup, also lots of background with Israel.

His son is also a marine, served a tour in Iraq.

Here's James Jones wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Jam es_Jones

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 01:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

No that's interesting.  I didn't know all that about Zinni.  He's much more a possibility than I would've previously thought.

by fogiv 2008-06-10 01:58PM | 0 recs
Strickland already said that about Clinton

when he was asked if he'd like to be her VP.

by slinkerwink 2008-06-10 01:54PM | 0 recs
Reality Check

Wait until it's official that Hillary isn't on the ticket, then you will see a huge cross-over vote.

Not puting Hillary on the ticket will be a deal-breaker for many of her supporters just like it would have been if she won the nomination and didn't put him on the ticket.

Somehow, it appears that he thinks everything is ok and Dem's will automatically support him in the end. That may have been the case in other elections but this time is different.

What would Obama supporters do if the situation was reversed? Exactly what many Hillary supporters will do if she's left off the ticket: they will stay at home, leave the party, vote for McCain.

by mmorang 2008-06-10 01:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Reality Check

"Wait until it's official that Hillary isn't on the ticket, then you will see a huge cross-over vote."

Yes --  of Republicans  voting for Obama.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 02:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Reality Check

NEVER.GOING.TO.HAPPEN.

Best to actually try and solidify real actual votes then fantasy votes.

by jrsygrl 2008-06-10 03:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Reality Check

There Republicans and Democrats in every election who cross over. With things so screwed up all around it's to be expected more Reeps will do so than Dems in this election.

People are going to be trudging to the polls to vote for McLame and running to vote for Obama.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 08:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Reality Check

Uh yes things ARE screwed up, however if common sense & bad times impacted a major crossover of Republicans - Kerry would be running for a second term now.

by jrsygrl 2008-06-13 01:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Reality Check

We're not talking about common sense. We're talking basic selfish greed -- "Why are things so screwed up for ME?"

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-13 02:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Reality Check

Uhh things were PLENTY screwed up individually back then & those people STILL voted Republican

by jrsygrl 2008-06-13 05:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Reality Check

Lots of people don't care about "things" being screwed up unless things are screwed up for them.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-13 10:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Reality Check

Yeah I get that but ironically the people who are the most adversely affected by the GOP policies tend to vote Republican.  So things have been most screwed up for them for quite some time & even in the last election they voted for Bush.  Do you see where I am coming from?

by jrsygrl 2008-06-19 09:09AM | 0 recs
Do you see where I am coming from?

I refer you to my sig.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-19 09:24AM | 0 recs
Re: Do you see where I am coming from?

I see your sig but your initial premise was that people are being screwed & will vote as such. And my point is that isn't new, and in fact the people being the most screwed have a history of voting GOP...

However I will say that the party needs to make sure the election focuses on the economy. The GOP is doing everything they can to make it about the war/defense (which isn't popular BUT for some reason the GOP is still viewed better in that light) If people are forced to think about themselves & their  current hardships they will inevitably vote Democrat.  Having a Clinton on the ticket will remind people of when they were doing well financially.  But arguing on the war front is a mistake - the party won't win that argument even though the GOP's legacy here is horrible.

by jrsygrl 2008-06-19 08:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Do you see where I am coming from?

If Bush/McCain want to make their disasterous foreign policy the centerpiece of their campaign because it's their least weak issue, let them.

Obama will clean their clock on whichever issues they choose to make a last stand on.

by Beren 2008-06-20 08:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Do you see where I am coming from?

I understand that but I think to a certain extent we are allowing them to make this more the focus of the campaign. It is to the party's benefit to continuously keep the focus shifted to the economy & how we are personally feeling. It occurred to me that even by picking a military VP we are allowing the focus to see there vs. the economy.  We aren't going to out military John McCain & we don't need to. Just keep the focus on people's pocketbooks & that is much more likely to resonate with voters. The GOP knows this which is why they are trying to keep Obama talking about the war.

Also what is everyone's thoughts about the stupid issue regarding the removal of those 2 women with Muslim headscarves on, from camera view, at the Obama rally. It wouldn't surprise me if this was a manufactured incident ala the GOP..(send them in to cause controversy either by being on camera or being moved). This seems right up their alley.

by jrsygrl 2008-06-20 09:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Do you see where I am coming from?

The economy is the issue which everyone cares about and Obama is campaigning on it. McBush can't be stopped from talking about what he chooses. And if he thinks foreign policy is his least lousey issues that doesn't mean it's a good one for him.

As for "Scarfegate," it was done by a couple of unpaid volunteers and Obama has apologized for it. Itr's over. The media has already moved on to whatever today's stupidity is.

by Beren 2008-06-20 09:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Do you see where I am coming from?

First of all the media was still talking about the whole scarf issue yesterday so doubtful they have moved on.  Secondly by focusing on picking a VP with military experience the signal is obvious.  Whatever, just trying to discuss another perspective on the campaigning.

by jrsygrl 2008-06-20 09:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Do you see where I am coming from?

I saw the scarf nonsense mentioned one time yesterday. None  today.

Just because the media is focusing on a military VP doesn't mean Obama is. Today they say he's focusing on Edwards and Nunn. Whatever the media talks about is no doubt just misdirection from the Obama campaign. Obama's campaign won't let the cat out of the bag until a week before the convention -- or at the convention after he's been officialy nominated, the way it used to be done.

by Beren 2008-06-20 10:38AM | 0 recs
Re: Do you see where I am coming from?

I don't know what to tell you. I had the tv on barely intermittently yesterday & I kept hearing it over & over again. I had alot of conference calls so I couldn't have it on very often...

It is what it is. The GOP's strategy is cumulative in nature. And from what I can tell it is more then JUST the media who is speculating/suggesting a military VP. Take a look at this diary for one. I am suggesting it may be the wrong place to focus the agenda.  And I don't know why picking Edwards (who I supported initially in the primary) would somehow be more beneficial then putting Clinton on the ticket.

by jrsygrl 2008-06-20 02:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Do you see where I am coming from?

"And I don't know why picking Edwards (who I supported initially in the primary) would somehow be more beneficial then putting Clinton on the ticket."

It's just gab. They know nothing.

by Beren 2008-06-20 08:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Do you see where I am coming from?

Are you referring to the speculation on this blog or in the media? B/c I was referring speculation on this blog about Edwards being the VP pick vs. Clinton.

by jrsygrl 2008-06-21 05:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Do you see where I am coming from?

Nobody outside of obama's selection team know anything about who his VP might be and it wouldn't surprise me if they themselves don't try to misdirect speculation.

by Beren 2008-06-23 10:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Reality Check

I think Hillary's talents would be wasted as VP. I'd rather see a cabinet position.

by skohayes 2008-06-10 02:23PM | 0 recs
I'd rather see a cabinet position.

I say bury hillary on the supreme court.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 02:35PM | 0 recs
Re: I'd rather see a cabinet position.

Which is another position that has more power than VP.

But no one - NO ONE - runs for anything after being a justice.  Is she ready to retire?  I doubt it.

by Jess81 2008-06-10 05:37PM | 0 recs
Re: I'd rather see a cabinet position.

Nobody turns down the chance to be one of The Nine for life.

by Freespeechzone 2008-06-10 08:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Reality Check


I think Hillary's talents would be wasted as VP. I'd rather see a cabinet position.

I disagree - I think Hillary Clinton's political talents which are considerable, are greater than her policy talents.

But I do find it strange that there are people who insist on her being VP, even though that's a position with no authority, but are all "pshaw" when it comes to Secretary or Justice, which are positions that have considerable power.

Maybe they know what I know - her talents lie in getting elected and not in enacting policy.

by Jess81 2008-06-10 05:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Hey mmorang, will you answer the same way as above about vetting?

Should Hillary and Bill submitt to a complete vetting for Hillary to qualify for the ticket?

Including Bill turning over the names of the contributors to the library AND to his charity fund?

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 02:03PM | 0 recs
Eh

I doubt it will be any of the former military leaders (Clark, Jones or Zinni). All would probably have some questionable things in vetting.

I also don't think Obama will pick another senator. IMO he will pick a governor. Most likely a redish state governor.

So my guess would be Mark Warner, Tim Kaine or Kathleen Sebelius. Edwards and Biden could also be picked.

by Populista 2008-06-10 02:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Eh

One thing I wonder is why Mike Easley never shows up on the Democratic governors of red states list.

Personally, I loath Easley for his support of the death penalty, but he is a fairly popular governor of a red state that could potentially be a battle ground state. Even if Easley couldn't win NC for Obama as VP, he could at least make it a hard fight for McCain.

by letterc 2008-06-11 12:39AM | 0 recs
For so long we've heard that Hillary would

be an unwise choice because she represents the "old way of politics," whereas Obama represents a "new kind of politics." If the names listed are indeed in the mix, the "old way of politics" concern cannot be said to apply to Hillary alone. Therfore she, with 18 millions reasons behind her, should be at the top of any shortlist.

by Rumarhazzit 2008-06-10 02:09PM | 0 recs
Cong. Sestak (Admiral/Battle Group Commander) - VP

Obama should pick Congressman Joe Sestak from Pennsylvania.... it's a logical choice.  Sometimes when you are not initially mentioned, that is when you are being silented vetted.

Sestak fills out the ticket, given his background and the demographics he represents.  He balances out Obama's perceived weaknesses, and can bring PA - a must win state for us in the general election into the Democratic column. Sestak is extremely popular in southeastern PA, where 40% of the vote comes from in PA.

For those who don't know Sestak's background, he's a former 3-Star Admiral, who ran successfully for Congress in 2006, after completing 31 year military service (he's the senior military veteran in Congress and the highest-ranking military officer ever elected to Congress).

Sestak had a series of commands, the last one being command of the George Washington carrier battle group (30 U.S./allied ships, 100 aircraft, and over 15,000 sailors/marines) that conducted combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. Sestak also served as President Clinton's Director of Defense Policy at the White House on the National Security Council.  After 9/11, the Navy selected Sestak to head-up and become the first Director of "Deep Blue", the Navy's anti-terrorism unit.  He's a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy (2nd in his class) and has a Ph.D. in Political Economy and Government from Harvard University. (wasn't McCain 2nd from the bottom?)

Everything that the McCain/Republicans can throw at the dem ticket on military, foreign policy, and terrorism -- Sestak has actually "walked the walk" on these issues for 31 years!!!!

When Sestak served in the Clinton White House, he worked with, and remains close to Obama's two top foreign policy advisors: Tony Lake (who was Bill Clinton's National Security Advisor), and Susan Rice (an Assistant Sec. of State under Bill Clinton).

Sestak was also out front back in the spring of 2006 in calling for our military to re-deploy out of Iraq for our country's overall better security (he had already publicly called for redeployment out of Iraq several months before that collective group of generals decided to go public with the NY Times). Most importantly, Senator Obama has adopted Sestak's 16-18 month redeployment plan to get us out of Iraq.

Sestak also fills out the demographics that Obama has had trouble attracting with Senator Clinton's supporters. He's Catholic and comes from one of those really large PA, hard-working middle class families (he's has 8 brothers/sisters).

Sestak was also one of the Netroots-endorsed candidates in 2006. He's also been out front in calling for the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell".  

Lastly, even though he's been a Hillary Clinton supporter, he's always been extremely positive about Senator Obama whenever Sestak appears on any of the national tv/radio shows (he's definitely well-liked by the press). Sestak can bridge the divide between the Clinton and Obama factions of the party.  

I think Sestak has the street-cred that many others lack.  His selection would balance out some of the perceived "weaknesses" of Obama and put PA one of the 3 key swing-states (FL, Ohio, and PA) into the dem column.

by sswimtri 2008-06-10 02:14PM | 0 recs
Sounds Interesting

I love posts like this.

I follow politics enough at the 'rock star headliner' level so I know most, if not all, of the names being bandied about pretty well (except Jones - thats way left field).  And to be honest, none of them thrill me or at least none of them seem to me to be that perfect fit (a la Clinton/Gore).

But I love a post like this when it brings someone new in the picture who I really didnt know much about who sounds quite interesting.

Without knowing anything else than whats in your post, Sestak sounds quite interesting.

by pattonbt 2008-06-10 09:41PM | 0 recs
It's Wesley Clark

It has always been Wesley Clark.

I'm psychic

by USArmyParatrooper 2008-06-10 02:18PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Wesley Clark

Ya think?  Picture the two of them side by side.  Their demeanors and dispositions.

Obama/Clark is like "I'd like an order of optimism with a side of Andy Griffith charm.  Sunny side up."  Who the hell is going to be the attack dog?

Also, does anyone else think that "General" anyone is just a bad idea?  I hate heavyhanded symbolism.

by Jess81 2008-06-10 05:41PM | 0 recs
Re: It's Wesley Clark

Picture them side by side? You got it.

Free Image Hosting at allyoucanupload.com

Free Image Hosting at allyoucanupload.com

Obama/Clark is like "I'd like an order of optimism with a side of Andy Griffith charm.  Sunny side up."  Who the hell is going to be the attack dog?

Hardcore Clinton supporters seem to view Obama as a backyard bully. I think such a notion as absurd, but people do have their perceptions.

In any event Obama has NO problem going after John  McCain. The gloves have already started to come off, and when the general is in full swing you'll see the attack dog.

John McCain has military experience, but it's the kind that does NOT involve organizational level leadership. It does NOT help with policy issues. On the other hand Wesley Clark's experience DOES involve moving the big pieces and policy issues. Have you heard him debate about Iraq? He's flawless and he always makes sense.

Also, does anyone else think that "General" anyone is just a bad idea?  I hate heavyhanded symbolism.

"General" anyone when our new leadership will have the daunting task of withdrawing our troops? Yeah, that idea sucks. Now please explain what you're talking about with "symbolism."

by USArmyParatrooper 2008-06-10 06:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

I love Biden. He was my second pick behind Obama!

Come on, do the right thing and get my man Joe on the ticket.

by Darknesse 2008-06-10 02:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Best sig line ever?

by JDF 2008-06-10 02:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Wes Clark.

I don't feel any of the other military leaders have enough name recognition.

by devoted1 2008-06-10 02:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Obama/Clark'08

Would look awful good on my Jeep bumper!

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 02:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Those that would do Obama the most good...in order

1. Hillary...like having Joe Montana as your backup quarterback

2. Ted Strickland - Ohio ('nuff said)

3. Biden - Great campaigner

4. Bayh - Clinton light (not a bad thing actually)

5. Warner - Might put Virginia in play (bad for us though as we are about to sen Warner to the Senate)

6. Bet the rest as the field..

Off this list...Wes Clark would be a great choice...

by SaveElmer 2008-06-10 02:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

I think it will be Clark as well.

- NATO commander/General

  • Clinton supporter
  • opposed the war
  • Seems pretty progressive
  • Has run for President himself

by rossinatl 2008-06-10 02:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Also, from the south, and plays well in Conservative land.
I have watched him on Faux, and he knows the territory.

My question is, does he know Obama and does Obama know him?

Some of the other names obviously have a strong personal connection to Obama and his team (Sebelius being one in that category).

And, yes, he is a Clinton supporter, but does that help with that side?

If its not Hillary, will anything help to mollify her supporters?

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 02:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Didn't Obama say that this process would be private with no media access and that any rumors or reports or speculation would be false?

It's been pretty obvious that Obama would have to pick someone with a military background for this slot since this is where he's very vulnerable to the GOP.

by Juno 2008-06-10 02:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Could be why Clark and Richardson are NOT on this list....

Obama could be leading folks astray.

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 02:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

This is coat trailing. An unknown general with zero experience in politics for VP. Are we crazy. Not really since this is undoubtedly bs.  

by ottovbvs 2008-06-10 02:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

I think running NATO is pretty political, let alone being a 4 star general.

How much previous political experience did Ike have?

And, if you don't think David Petreius is looking at the WH in 2012 or later, guess again.

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 02:59PM | 0 recs
Given that Clark is not on the list....

I think it will be Clark.

by lojasmo 2008-06-10 02:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Given that Clark is not on the list....

I very much doubt it.

by ottovbvs 2008-06-10 02:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Given that Clark is not on the list....

but Kerry IS on this list which makes it bogus

by joe in oklahoma 2008-06-10 03:49PM | 0 recs
Must be a slow news day
these guys bring absolutely nothing.
Not almost half the delegates, not 18 millions votes, not the women vote, not the blue collar vote.
by dcrolg 2008-06-10 02:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Must be a slow news day

Nobody brings 18 million votes to the ticket.

by spacemanspiff 2008-06-10 03:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Must be a slow news day

Obama and Clinton split women.

I think you want someone who carries older voters, which Obama emphatically does not.  He's got women covered, believe me.

by Jess81 2008-06-10 05:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

If you say Wesley Clark to middle america, his name resonates.

Considering we will be in a war with Iran come August, picking Wesley Clark makes perfect sense.

by devoted1 2008-06-10 03:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

"Considering we will be in a war with Iran come August"

if that's the case, Obama can win with ME on the ticket (oh wait, I would have to be vetted? Does that include interviewing all my ex girl friends?
Uh-oh....)

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 03:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz
Also - Clark moves the ticket to the right bringing into the fold the Clinton voters without alienating the "libruls".
Folks, we are still in a "Post-9/11" world. Just because things have calmed down in Iraq and we are 7 years removed from the events of 9/11, doesn't mean that the world can't change between now and November.
Clark on the ticket will counter the Republicans forthcoming attack on BO's credentials as a soft "lets get the terrorists some therapy" liberal.
by devoted1 2008-06-10 03:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

I still believe that Kerry would be a perfect running mate for Obama (he's been my choice for quite some time now).

Though I'm not sure if that would hurt the ticket.  It's an option worth exploring.

by RussTC3 2008-06-10 03:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

OMG- Kerry??? Please God no.

Leave him the forest with the rest of the Ents.

Obama needs to chose someone who conveys strength. Kerry does the opposite.

by devoted1 2008-06-10 03:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Hate on Kerry all you want, but the fact remains that he got the most votes EVER for a Democratic presidential nominee.

He made mistakes, no doubt.  The gay marriage issue really hurt him in key states (such as Ohio) and you rarely beat an incumbent president during war-time.

by RussTC3 2008-06-10 03:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Kerry would counter Obama's message of change. If anyone leader in the Democratic party represents the party of old, its John Kerry.

by devoted1 2008-06-10 03:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

I don't deny that. It's just that there was something about Kerry that was very reassuring.  I just wish he would have been stronger and more forceful on his positions.

In the end, it likely wouldn't be the right choice, you're right.

by RussTC3 2008-06-10 03:21PM | 0 recs
Not another Senator

I think picking another Senator is a bad choice.  I think he should go with a governor or someone from military.

He is not my favorite, but I think Rendell can help ameliorate some of the problems he has with older voters.

by monkeyga 2008-06-10 06:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Barack Obama / Scarlett Johanson 08

by spacemanspiff 2008-06-10 03:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

OK, Clark seems on a roll here.

Does anyone want to venture an answer to my question:

If NOT Hillary, is Wes the best choice to mollify her supporters?

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 03:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz
It would help. Because Wes is probably the best person to bridge the gap. You could logically see him in multiple joint appearances all across the country with both Bill and Hillary. But at the same time lets not forget that Bill threw him under the bus once already so he can clearly disassociate himself from their baggage. Wes go work Appalachia and take Bill along. Wes go work the border and Hillary will meet you.
How about this have both Hillary Clinton and Samantha Power nominate him at the convention. Who else could accomplish that.
by Judeling 2008-06-10 03:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Does Samantha have a connection to Wes?  

I had forgotten all about poor Sam, I think she has learned when she asks a reporter for "off the record" better get it in writing...

by WashStateBlue 2008-06-10 03:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Red state governor:

Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen

by Peregrine 2008-06-10 03:16PM | 0 recs
Who?

Never heard of him.

Obama shouldn't choose a virtual unknown.

by Lefty Coaster 2008-06-10 04:01PM | 0 recs
Two degrees of separation

Kerry courted McCain...Obama considers Kerry...

Change we can believe in!

by Upstate Dem 2008-06-10 03:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Two degrees of separation

Dumbest. Post. Ever.

by spacemanspiff 2008-06-10 03:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

the fact that Kerry is on the lsit amkes me doubt the veracity of the list...and Clark and Napolitano are not on it, which raises further doubts.

Clark, Zinni, Napolitano, Webb, Sibelius are all good choices.

Hillary? be real!  why would Obama want 2 veepees? why would he want to spend 4 years looking over his shoulder to see what the Billary are up to? can you really trust Bill to stay out of things?

Obama is the embodiment of chill
the Clintons are the embodiment of drama

by joe in oklahoma 2008-06-10 03:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Clark is my first choice, Warner 2nd.  Napolitano looks good on paper, but she's not that exciting. I know Clark isn't necessarily exciting, but he comes across as a regular guy when you meet him. His resume is pretty incredible too. By the way, I have been reading here for a few years but just decided to start posting. Enough sitting on the sidelines!

by vibber419 2008-06-10 05:12PM | 0 recs
the Billary reference was uncalled for

They're not the enemy anymore. Hillary dropped out. She endorsed Barack Obama. She asked her delegates to support him at the convention.

Dude, it's over. Let go of the primary anger. It's the general election.

Think McCain.

by slinkerwink 2008-06-10 06:28PM | 0 recs
Speculation is lots of fun,

but it has no effect on the outcome.

by Lefty Coaster 2008-06-10 03:57PM | 0 recs
Guys, this is so simple.

Look, who does Obama do awfully with?  I mean, there is one demographic that he's just wiped out on across the board.

OLDER VOTERS.  They don't like him.  Don't trust him.  He's going to need a VP that they do like and who has the effect of saying "see this guy?  I know him.  He's alright.  You can trust him even though he's got a funny name."

I think if you look at the ticket through that lens, certain choices pop up (like Joe Biden and Sam Nunn) and certain ones fade to the background (like Bill Richardson).

Anyway, personally, I like Sibellius.

by Jess81 2008-06-10 05:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

VP Slot or Write-her in

Our beloved candidate has been shunned so many times by both the Democratic establishment and has been so disrespected by so many of Sen. Obama's surrogates and supporters.  Although Hillary has asked us to support Sen. Obama but to show our strength of "Eighteen million cracks" of the glass ceiling We should:  Sign Lanny Davis' Hillary Clinton for VP Blog.  If our candidate Sen. Clinton is not offered the VP slot then we should write her in on the ballot in November instead of voting for McCain.

by tom2842 2008-06-10 06:20PM | 0 recs
Guess what Clinton said on CNN?

"It would be a GRAVE ERROR not to vote for Obama."

by slinkerwink 2008-06-10 06:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Okay - when Lanny Davis is done with the petition, we'll look at it and see exactly how many votes we'll lose if Hillary Clinton isn't the VP.

I'm guessing 10,000 names on the petition at the most.  Which breaks down to 200 per state.  Votes for McCain swing, so that's a net of 400 votes for McCain, per state.

I think we can absorb that.  I'm tired of being extorted, and tired of being told that I deserve to lose the right to choose because I didn't vote for a woman.

by Jess81 2008-06-10 06:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Her gender is irrelevant. You get to choose who you vote for in the G/E. You aren't being extorted; a case for why it could be a big mistake not to pick Clinton as VP is being made. I know it is a horrible thing to do and all but please bear with us @@

by jrsygrl 2008-06-13 01:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Real Talk

Strickland's hell no I don't want it speaks volumes!! He's not sure if Obama can carry Ohio and the last thing he wants is to get embarrassed if he loses if he's on the ticket.

by nzubechukwu 2008-06-10 07:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

D'oh!

by spacemanspiff 2008-06-10 08:35PM | 0 recs
Sam Nunn is compltely unacceptable as VP!!!

Supported Don't ask Don't Tell. Indeed was one person responsible for undermining any attempt to overturn the previous policy and then LED support for codifying the law. Voted to restrict appeals by death row inmates, never met a military program he didn't like, has always opposed efforts to make the rich pay their fair share of taxes and is in favor of school prayer.

Is this who we want as Obama's wingman? I think NOT!

by HisRoyalHighness 2008-06-10 08:42PM | 0 recs
The Jones rumor: headfake or dogwhistle?

Hilarious, either way.

by RonK Seattle 2008-06-10 08:53PM | 0 recs
by obsessed 2008-06-10 09:46PM | 0 recs
None resonate with me

I dont know why but none of the candidates being thrown about really resonate with me.  Its nothing I can articulate, but I dont see 'home run' written on any of them.

I just dont want a quick decision.  I think the more time Obama takes the better (at least with a deadline of the republican convention).  I think picking too quickly after such a tough primary with raw feelings still about would not be wise.  I think a time out period would be welcome.  Plus it would allow Obama some sink or swim time one on one against McCain.

In the end it has to be Obama defeating McCain, not Obama and his VP beating McCain, so Obama might as well start now assuming the mantle of leader.

Plus, I think Obama should save the VP pick for a better media play day.  Say the day after McCain picks his running mate or during the republican convention.  Something that steals McCains media narrative and any bump he could get.

Couple of interesting bits from this news at least:

1) No Schweitzer.  He seemed to be a hot pick.

  1. No Richardson.  Which I am glad about, I dont think he would be good (although I genuinely like Richardson).
  2. Jones - wtf?  Who the hell is this guy?

In the end, I think Obama will pick someone from left field.  I dont think an unknown would be bad as long as they are solid.  It would give the media a few days to obssess on dems again trying to learn about the new guy/gal.

by pattonbt 2008-06-10 09:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Clark, Clark, Clark or Clark.

If he doesn't want it then Warner.

by PSUdan 2008-06-11 05:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

I like Clark but he isn't a good campaigner.  I like him as a person though & think he'd  be an interesting nom. as SOS.

by jrsygrl 2008-06-13 02:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama VP Buzz

Actually, I think We're all Democrats.I haven't had a single discussion on this issue from anyone.I'd be pleasantly suport  the man who is really democratics.

by anasky123 2008-06-26 01:20AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads