Obama's running mate

[ecoli]

Will she be the next Ross Perot?

She's not rich enough, but I think her support base is bigger. The question is could she martial the grassroots support she would need to finance the campaign? Perhaps if she picked up some money (like Bloomberg?) because I don't see her getting much corporate support.

 

It's an interesting idea, but I think she'll be more afraid of splitting the Democratic party than she wants to be president. It'll piss a lot of people off.

 

She won't run as an independent. You think she has high negatives now, just watch what happens if she undermines the Democratic nominee.

The only reason I brought it up is because I wasn't the one to think of it.

 

However, I don't doubt that she's arrogant enough to want to do it.

 

Her unwillingness to concede yet, seems to suggest she's trying to put a powerplay over Obama. If Obama offers her the VP nod, it's going to be an uncomfortable position for Obama, who with Hillary and Bill at his neck all the time, it'll seem like he doesn't have the stones to do the job himself. It'll look weak if he has to share power with them.

 

OTOH, if he doesn't give her the nod, it'll alienate her many supporters (though he might alienate some of his own by doing do). It's a lose/lose for him, it seems.

[Pangloss]

Yup, thanks for passing it along. I hadn't heard it elsewhere. I will say that it was interesting seeing how badly this race put the Clintons at odds with their own party. That was a really unexpected twist in this campaign cycle, something nobody ever predicted. So I can see why some might see in that the possibility of an independent run.

 

By the way, I'm still predicting Bill Richards as VP nominee. It's the smartest play for victory in the fall, and it's also a good choice for after the victory. He's subservient, he's latino, and he's experienced.

 

One thing to watch for will be how long it takes Obama to decide. The longer it draws out, the greater the pressure will be to bring Hillary on board.

[PhDP]

I don't know if somebody pointed that out, but there was George Bushesque in Hillary's speech. The refusal to admit mistakes, the refusal to admit defeat, the stubbornness, it was as if she was unable to face reality.

 

It's sad, I was, initially, one of her supporter. I think she would've made a great president, nobody disputes her intelligence, and she's internationally respected. But after what happened in the last few weeks...

 

I admit it, I made a mistake, I should've supported Obama right from the start. We often talk about experience, but the guy ran such a great campaign. I wish he could choose his own VP, but I'm afraid Hillary is powerful enough to take the spot by force. Again (surprisingly), I'd go with Sir Pangloss on this; Bill Richardson seems like a good choice.

 

As a side note, I watched the speech by McCain Tuesday. wow. He sucks. He's one of my favorite republican, but what a poor orator. It won't be easy against an eloquent public speaker.

[john5746]

By the way, I'm still predicting Bill Richards as VP nominee. It's the smartest play for victory in the fall, and it's also a good choice for after the victory. He's subservient, he's latino, and he's experienced.

 

I agree, would be smart choice. Someone like Wesley Clark would be almost an admission that Obama is weak on the foreign front.

 

One thing to watch for will be how long it takes Obama to decide. The longer it draws out, the greater the pressure will be to bring Hillary on board.

 

Actually, I am hearing somewhat the opposite. IF Obama will pick Hillary, he needs to do it without the appearance of bowing to pressure. I am almost certain that they have been doing the analysis to find ANY candidate that will work besides Hillary. If her support is still strong a month from now, then He might be compelled to take her aboard.

[ParanoiA]

As a side note, I watched the speech by McCain Tuesday. wow. He sucks. He's one of my favorite republican, but what a poor orator. It won't be easy against an eloquent public speaker.

 

But the difference is I actually believe McCain.

 

Incidentally, I've noticed several people mention his inept speaking skills, but I didn't really get that. I don't know, maybe I'm easy when I think I'm hearing the truth, but he sounded fine to me.

 

I know I've been calling Obama to win, but I am starting to wonder whether or not he's going to look like a child compared to McCain when this really gets rolling. McCain has tons of experience and his message is similar to Obama's in terms of crossing party lines, and all that touchy-feely love stuff - only he has the republican resentment to prove it, and he certainly will come off as the wiser, older gentleman.

[Pangloss]

I don't know if somebody pointed that out, but there was George Bushesque in Hillary's speech. The refusal to admit mistakes, the refusal to admit defeat, the stubbornness, it was as if she was unable to face reality.

 

Yes, that's it exactly.

 

Also this is an interesting example of something that I think that one of the interesting outcomes of the Obama-Clinton battle. It's demonstrated to people of left-side persuasion that that stuff you just mentioned, that refusal to admit mistakes, that stubbornness, etc, those things aren't "Bush things", they're actually endemic to modern American politics. We need a president with a strong will and a firm commitment to recognize that these things, however necessary they may feel, however driven they are by opposing forces, are wrong and need to be actively engaged in battle. IMO we need that far more than we need a president who will fight for any specific political issue.

 

That's why I'm already leaning towards crossing my normal right-of-center inclination and voting for Obama. He's the only candidate who's shown any sign of recognizing this problem and doing something about it.

 

 

As a side note, I watched the speech by McCain Tuesday. wow. He sucks. He's one of my favorite republican, but what a poor orator. It won't be easy against an eloquent public speaker.

 

For what it's worth, the odd thing is he has historically been a really great speaker, just not over the last year or so. I've got a couple of really great speeches from him saved on my hard drive, which is more than I can say for most politicians. I don't understand it, it's like he's run out of gas or something.

 

Perhaps we can find an ironic clue to the reason in one of McCain's own speeches (and one of his best, IMO), which was delivered only two years ago:

 

When I was a young man, I was quite infatuated with self-expression, and rightly so, because, if memory conveniently serves, I was so much more eloquent, well-informed, and wiser than anyone else I knew.

 

-----------------------

 

Actually, I am hearing somewhat the opposite. IF Obama will pick Hillary, he needs to do it without the appearance of bowing to pressure.

 

Yes, he can't pick her right away, but no, he can't wait that long either, or pressure will build up. That was the assessment of ABC's George Stephanopoulos on World News last night, for what it's worth.

Edited June 5, 2008 by Pangloss
multiple post merged

[ecoli]

As a side note, I watched the speech by McCain Tuesday. wow. He sucks. He's one of my favorite republican, but what a poor orator. It won't be easy against an eloquent public speaker.

I don't know... I could see McCain being well spoken against Obama in debates and town hall meetings. Obama stumbles a lot when he's being interveiwed. He does well with a prepared speech, but that's not enough to win the Whitehouse.

 

____________________________

 

Another interesting motivator could be the 'female factor.' If McCain picks a female VP running mate, Alaska's governor, for example would be a probable choice, then Obama will most likely have to follow suit. The most obvious choice would be Hillary. If McCain thinks having Hillary as the veep will hurt Obama and help himself, he may force Obama's hand in that respect, just for that reason.

[Pangloss]

I believe Obama will pick his VP before McCain does. He's under more pressure.

 

(There's another prediction for you.)

[bascule]

Poll finds majority of Dems want Obama-Clinton ticket

 

:-( :-(

[iNow]

Correction: Majority of people who self-identified as Dems and who participated in the poll.

 

Not necessarily an accurate cross section of the population.

 

 

Either way, though... I find it rather distressing that it's as high as it is even with the above caveats.

[ParanoiA]

Correction: Majority of people who self-identified as Dems and who participated in the poll.

 

Not necessarily an accurate cross section of the population.

 

 

Either way, though... I find it rather distressing that it's as high as it is even with the above caveats.

 

Really? She got just under half the delegates. I'm actually starting to kind of like her. Embarassing, really.

[iNow]

Don't get me wrong, I actually like all three of them (Obama, Clinton, McCain) for various reasons. I just don't think having Clinton as the VP will achieve anything more than the amelioration of electoral angst. Sure, choosing her to e Obama's running mate will help in the general election, but after that, I don't think she'd be good in the role of VP. She's clearly a better executive.

[ecoli]

Don't get me wrong, I actually like all three of them (Obama, Clinton, McCain) for various reasons. I just don't think having Clinton as the VP will achieve anything more than the amelioration of electoral angst. Sure, choosing her to e Obama's running mate will help in the general election, but after that, I don't think she'd be good in the role of VP. She's clearly a better executive.

VP is an executive position, plus she'll get first dibs for the democratic nomination in 20whatever, probably whether or not Obama beats McCain.

[iNow]

VP is an executive position

 

Can you elaborate? I don't necessarily disagree, but I've always seen the VP as more of a figure head, one who can't even vote unless it's to break a tie.

[Sisyphus]

Can you elaborate? I don't necessarily disagree, but I've always seen the VP as more of a figure head, one who can't even vote unless it's to break a tie.

 

Most have been, but then again, Dick Cheney was Bush's closest advisor, chief architect of many important policies, and pretty much set the tone for the whole administration. Also, if you think about it, being "only" a tiebreaker is actually an advantage over a Senator. A Senator's vote only makes a difference if he's the "tiebreaker" anyway, but they have to be on record with every vote.

[bascule]

About this time last year I expressed my concerns that if Hillary ended up being VP on the ticket, she's a shoe-in for the Democratic nomination in the event the Democrats win.

[Pangloss]

VP is an executive position, plus she'll get first dibs for the democratic nomination in 20whatever, probably whether or not Obama beats McCain.

 

She would be 68 years old at the end of an 8-year Obama or McCain run. Almost as old as McCain is now.

[ecoli]

She would be 68 years old at the end of an 8-year Obama or McCain run. Almost as old as McCain is now.

How old was Margret Thatcher? Can we draw some parallels?

[Pangloss]

Well a quick check of the Wikipedia says Thatcher became PM at age 54, and left at 65. Hillary is currently 60. Of course, modern medicine has changed a great deal since 1990, and changes a great deal more every year.

[Riogho]

Obama would be one smart cookie if he picked Joe Manchin as his running mate. That is his only chance to carry West Virginia. A state that is normally blue, but has gone red the past two elections. Joe Manchin is an intelligent man, who is quick-witted, and a good speaker. Not as good as Obama, of course, you never want your VP to out-do you in anything. (Why bush picked cheney ). But he is a blue-collared worker which is the demographic that Obama needs to pick up on, and fast.

[Rev Blair]

I still think he should pick Steve Earle as his running mate, but I'm kind of twisted.

 

Anyway, I was thinking we might change the punctuation to read, Obama's running, mate.

[Mr Skeptic]

Wouldn't Obama be best off picking an older white female who isn't Clinton as his VP? But I don't really know who that might be.

[iNow]

That might be seen as a slap in the face. Clinton supporters would likely be outraged, and ask, "Why the hell didn't he just pick Hillary then?"

[Pangloss]

Obama would be one smart cookie if he picked Joe Manchin as his running mate. That is his only chance to carry West Virginia. A state that is normally blue, but has gone red the past two elections. Joe Manchin is an intelligent man, who is quick-witted, and a good speaker. Not as good as Obama, of course, you never want your VP to out-do you in anything. (Why bush picked cheney ). But he is a blue-collared worker which is the demographic that Obama needs to pick up on, and fast.

 

It's an interesting suggestion, but WV is not really considered one of the main potential swing states this year, although it is usually included in the second-tier group of 20-25 states that could swing with a few interesting developments on the campaign trail. It only has 5 electoral votes, though.

 

Interestingly, many political observers have been talking recently about how this election has a good chance of being a blowout, but the twist here is that it could be a blowout for either side. I can see the angle there -- both candidates are moderates and the 20-40% middle ground voters seem very undecided at the moment.

[CDarwin]

I don't see any Southern Appalachian region going for Barack Obama. That's where he's always done poorly and honestly, he might as well not even campaign there (here). He can still win states with regions in Appalachia (like North Carolina or Virginia) just because of the fact that biggest part of the population lives elsewhere. West Virginia and Tennessee have the largest proportions of their populations in Appalachian regions and he couldn't win them anyway, so there's not much point to choosing a West Virginian running-mate and thinking that is going to bring in any votes.

 

Maybe I'm wrong and West Virginia will surprise me, though. I know Tennessee won't.