MyDD :: VP selection would be very revealing

Obama is clearly in somewhat of a bind on this. How can he pick another woman and NOT Hillary? Especially one with zero experience on foreign policy. Bayh and Kaine would look like cynical political opportunism, especially Kaine. And 65 year old Biden with the hair plugs. Smart, yes, qualified, very much, good debater, yes-but what state does he bring-Delaware and observing Biden over the years I can say it's nearly impossible for him to keep that foot out of his mouth.

by handsomegent on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 08:14:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Where is Biden on your list? (none / 0)

I still think the idea that Obama needs foreign policy experience is silly. Did Bill Clinton need it?

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 08:35:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Where is Biden on your list? (2.00 / 2)

Yeah, that's why he picked Gore a senator and former congressman plus someone who was in the service to boot.

by handsomegent on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 08:48:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Where is Biden on your list? (2.00 / 1)

Also, we are in the middle of two wars. So yeah, foreign policy takes on a renewed importance. In 1992, we were in "peacetime" for the first time in almost 5 decades, so FP experience wasn't as important.

by rayj on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 10:08:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Bill Clinton was governor of a state (none / 0)

for 12 years, and AR attorney general for 2. Barack Obama has 3 years in the US Senate and a few in the mickey mouse State Senate. Big difference. Bill Clinton had experience, and so did his running mate.

by Lakrosse on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 02:31:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill Clinton was governor of a state (none / 0)

Sure, but Sebelius has that kind of experience. She could be VP.

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 08:43:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bill Clinton was governor of a state (none / 0)

Why does everybody accept the no experience thing?
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archive s/2007/07/presidential_experience/

<<In fact, he believes Obama "fares quite well when compared to his 2008 rivals" and provides this table for years in elected office by next November:</p>

* Obama: 11 years (7 state Senate, 4 U.S. Senate)

Clinton: 8 years (8 U.S. Senate)
Edwards: 6 years (6 U.S. Senate)
Giuliani: 8 years (two, four-year mayoral terms)
Romney: 4 years (one four-year gubernatorial term)
McCain: 26 years (4 U.S. House, 22 U.S. Senate)
Thompson: 8 years (8 U.S. Senate)

[...]

Kevin Drum, not too long ago, tallied the number of years of political experience each president since FDR had before he became president (up until Bush): 22, 23, 0, 14, 26, 18, 26, 14, 14, 22, 16. (The zero was Eisenhower.) By this standard, practically all of the major 2008 contenders are relatively inexperienced. (If we include Clinton's eight years as First Lady, her tally is far more impressive and in line with historical precedent, but I'm inclined not to count it.)>>

"They are ever so much nicer at Tiffany's!"

by epiphany on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 11:54:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Where is Biden on your list? (none / 0)

Actually, yes. If you look at Clinton's first few years in office you see that he had a steep learning curve and that more foreign experience would have prevented some mistakes.

You can certainly see the difference experience made in his later years.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Ernst on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 07:49:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

that sexist (2.00 / 1)

commenting on Biden's hair is just as sexist as those endless comments on Hillary's ankles.

"McSame: He's Constipated and Ready to GO!

by Al Rodgers on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 08:40:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: that sexist (1.00 / 1)

Oh please. Who actually stares at Hillary's ankles as opposed to the bizarre nature of Biden's head? And neither one is sexist in my book-just an observation so lighten up. And if you think looks don't count in politics, think again.

by handsomegent on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 08:51:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Oy (none / 0)

May you too have brain surgery for a brain aneurysm and try to cover up the scar, like Biden.

from 1988-he had brain surgery twice to repair aneurysms. No brain tissue was removed-the burst blood vessel was inside the cranium, but exterior to the brain.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.ht ml?res=940DE6D8133EF937A25751C0A96E94826 0

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.ht ml?res=940de5d81739f937a35756c0a96e94826 0

Brain surgery scars are messy. You'd like hair over them, even plugs. Here's an example:

http://www.pe.com/imagesdaily/2006/05-16 /uclabrain0516gvb_300.jpg

"There are two kinds of statistics: the kind you look up and the kind you make up" --Rex Stout

by LIsoundview on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 11:01:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oy (1.00 / 1)

He had them before his brain surgery. He was just prematurely bald.

by handsomegent on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 12:38:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oy (none / 0)

Link please.

by snark adam excuse on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 01:27:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oy (1.00 / 0)

Sorry, no link--just from memory that he had them before he became ill---just my ill attempt at humor.

by handsomegent on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 03:00:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Where is Biden on your list? (none / 0)

How can he pick another woman and NOT Hillary?

I see this claim a lot, but I just don't get it. You never see people asking "how can he pick another (man, white, senior, Senator) and not X," probably because most people don't rank people within various groups. Yet this weird "Hillary is the greatest woman" claim seems to go unchallenged.

That said, he'll catch a ton of crap no matter who he picks. But keep in mind that the VP is (1) usually a figurehead, and (2) someone who, if young enough, is the presumptive nominee in 2016. So we should really be looking at age here. If he picks someone old like Clinton or Biden, he's essentially refraining from making a 2016 endorsement.

I am not a crook!

by username on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 09:58:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Where is Biden on your list? (none / 0)

Please suggest your list under the categories. I am more interested in knowing how confident the campaigns really are. Do you agree that the VP selection would tell us how confident is each campaign?

You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat

by indydem99 on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 08:16:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Where is Biden on your list? (none / 0)

No I don't.

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 08:30:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP selection would be very revealing (none / 0)

Great diary!
Highly rec'd and mojo'd.

"But not me personally were those cheers for"

by QTG on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 08:18:06 AM EST

Whitman? (2.00 / 1)

Why would mcSame choose Walt Whitman?

isn't he dead?

I mean Whitman - isn't he dead.

"McSame: He's Constipated and Ready to GO!

by Al Rodgers on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 08:42:54 AM EST

Re: Whitman? (none / 0)

Yes, but he'd make McCain look young and lively.

by TCQuad on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 08:57:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Whitman? That is funny (none / 0)

I am talking about Meg Whitman Ebay founder that McCain cited as one of the persons he admires.

You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat

by indydem99 on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 09:32:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP selection would be very revealing (2.00 / 1)

After the primary ended, I thought there was no way we'd see a Hillary VP. It's one thing to try and unite the party, quite another to appear weak and politically scheming right off the bat. As Obama's been able to craft his own campaign, I think Hillary won't be a SOS signal anymore, rather a "we don't need her to win, so we can take her on without sending out a SOS signal".

In the range of confident to SOS, I'd probably rank them Clark, Hillary, Bayh, Kaine, Hagel on the Dem side and Pawlenty, Romney, Powell, Ridge, Lieberman on the Repub side.

by TCQuad on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 09:09:32 AM EST

Re: VP selection would be very revealing (2.00 / 2)

Hillary is not "SOS" - Hillary is unity.

by nikkid on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 09:52:36 AM EST

Re: VP selection would be very revealing (2.00 / 0)

And shininess, I hear -- "like polished gold!"

I am not a crook!

by username on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 10:00:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP selection would be very revealing (2.00 / 0)

Uprated as I don't see why this comment deserves a troll rating.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Ernst on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 02:24:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP selection would be very revealing (1.00 / 0)

same here. that TR should be removed.

by swissffun on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 02:33:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP selection would be very revealing (none / 0)

Obama will make a confident pick, he doesn't think he can lose, he will pick a VP who he thinks will make him a better President.

And that's why I'm predicting Sam Nunn.

by Dan Conley on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 10:10:21 AM EST

Re: VP selection would be very revealing (2.00 / 1)

I think Nunn would go over at the convention like a grenade.

If you want experience and skills, you go for Biden? Not sure what Nunn brings that Biden doesn't, but with a lot less baggage then Sam.

If you want the person to rip into McCain, you go for Senator Clinton or Wes Clark.

If you want to cure insomonia for the masses, you chose Evan Bayh.

On Nov 4th, Barack Obama officially ends the Southern Strategy....

by WashStateBlue on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 01:00:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP selection would be very revealing (none / 0)

I've been predicting Biden from the beginning, and still think he's the choice which would ruffle the fewest feathers. Love your idea of Clinton as the "SOS" choice, but I don't think that's strictly right, think there's a 10% chance he'll go in that direction, and I'd regard it as a smart pick.

I have no idea whom McCain will pick. Palin would have been a gutsy choice before she copped to trying to get her brother-in-law fired a few days ago. His safest pick would probably be Pawlenty, but who knows?

by IncognitoErgoSum on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 11:48:04 AM EST

McCain will pick Pawlenty (none / 0)

IMO. he is by far the safest, he does not alienate the conservative base, has never been in the Bush administration as has Tom Ridge, is young, and may not only help with one swing state, but a swing region. Tom Ridge would not help McCain get close in NJ, DE, MD or NY, but Pawlenty could help McCain in IA, WI, and of course, Minnesota. Personally, I'd rather see him pick Mormon Mitt, because Mitt's religion will hurt McCain in the south and possibly allow Obama a win in a few states, his former job of being Gordon Gekko will raise eyebrows among blue collar workers, and he's really not good for many regions, other than Michigan, which is not likely to go GOP that much. Whitman brings little, because she was unpopular in her state, and doesn't help McCain with any region, and has stances which would upset the conservative base.

With Obama, I still say Hillary. He needs party unity, and to pre-emp McCain picking a woman to try to get more female votes. She has name rec, fund raising abilities, experience, helps in OH, PA and FL. I think Obama knows he's in trouble, so she's his best bet.

by Lakrosse on Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 02:36:54 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.