Discuss possible running mates. You can start here. And, of course…
I think we should raise the goal to $30,000. You can do it.
Open Thread
This post is in: Election 2008, Site Maintenance
Open Thread
Reader Interactions
112Comments
Comments are closed.
El Cid
First recommendation: Please let Barack Obama emerge as the Democratic candidate before trying to so quickly submerge him in a group again.
Michael D.
Did you actually watch TV last night or read any news sites?
El Cid
Michael D: I sure did, but not everyone is a politics junkie and blogging addict (maybe I’m wrong and there was huge news viewership, I dunno), and to really establish such things it will take some time — I figure the next 2 or 3 weeks to really have in sink in widespread.
jake
What underpants gnome made that list? Anyone who suggests, Clinton, a Republican, any sitting Democratic senator, or any other woman needs to be dragged off by the guy with the hook.
Make it stop!
Richardson
I have a great idea for an Obama running mate – Absolutely any natural born American citizen over the age 35 who is not named “Clinton”.
Michael D.
El Cid: Ahhhh, I misunderstood what you were saying…
SGEW
I firmly believe that Senator (and now Democratic Presidential Nominee [ye gods that feels good]) Obama will make a wise, shrewd, classy decision that will leave us all amazed at his political acumen. He is, in short, smarter than us.
But, so saying, here’s a good list of who not to choose (IMHO):
– Sen. Clinton. I need say no more, yes?
– Sen. Webb. Beware the man who can easily be labeled sexist. Not to mention the notion that he himself would hate the job itself.
– John Edwards. The guy made Dick Cheney look like a sympathetic character in that VP debate. And it would be a touch to much babyface on one ticket.
– Mayor Bloomberg. This one’s just silly. I’m fairly pleased with his tenure as my mayor, but he would simply be national ticket poison.
TheFountainHead
My money remains on Mark Warner. Why? I just like the cut of his jib, and I think Obama does too.
4tehlulz
VP:
Webb > Napolitano > Sebelius > Richardson > Brian Schweitzer
Cabinet:
SecDef: Hagel
SecState: Richardson or Biden
Homeland Security: Dodd
Treasury: Paul Volcker
UN Ambassador: Bill Clinton
El Cid
Clearly, there can be no other choice than Glenn Beck.
4tehlulz
Shoot. Forgot about Warner. I’d put him between Webb and Napolitano on my list.
jon
James Howard Kunstler. Who else perfectly fits the mold of someone who offsets the hope and change Obama offers than a man who says that there’s little hope and we’re stuck in a situation that cannot change?
He’ll definitely take away some of McCain’s “I’m grumpy and you people are messing up the world” appeal as well.
fecapult
Warner stands to pick up a newly vacant senate seat in Va – Do you pick him as VP, knowing full well that the senate seat would then in all likelihood go to Jim Gilmore?
carsick
When it came to skating in the pairs competition for the Olympics, I forget, did Nancy Kerrigan choose Tonya Harding as her partner?
El Cid
Will Obama have the guts to choose the only man who can save this nation, nay, the world, nay, the Universe — Ron Paul???
Sasha
I said it here but it bears repeating. Governor Brian Schweitzer. He is a genuine rancher and gun toting liberal who has his own foreign policy. 52 years old, he takes his dog to work in his official state S.U.V., supports abortion rights, opposes school vouchers, and hates that Real ID crap. And he is a Roman Catholic. He even speaks Arabic. If you don’t know him, there is more here.
4tehlulz
Hillaryis44 just reeks of SAME PERSON posting, doesn’t it?
4tehlulz
Saving the universe is a state issue. Vote Ron Paul.
Sasha
My that’s quite the white male cabinet you’ve got there 4tehlulz
jprice vincenz
Dump Webb–interesting idea, but we’ll probably lose VA to the GOP. There are some sane voices in VA, but it’s pretty much a 52 to 48 state when you factor in all the mouthbreathers and fundies. Let’s whitle past Dixie and just let them unite behind McSame. Sebelius is good but IMO makes it a bit too much of a midwestern ticket. I’m going with Napolitano, since the SW has been trending libertarian/anti-Bush Crime Family/Dem for a few years now. Napolitano could unite some of the Rust Belt (Obama’s home turf) with her area (AZ, NM, and maybe into CO); build that onto what we will get anyways, the two coasts, and that regional/gender coalition might make it pretty easy for us. Plus, a female would bring the Clinton people back on the res.
sunny
Bill Richardson, hands down. He can bring in the Hispanic vote and help put Obama over the top without having to depend on Hillary’s deranged supporters.
Plus, he deserves a reward for taking a chance in defying the Clintons by endorsing Obama so early.
Crusty Dem
the loss of a D senate seat make Webb and Warner out. My favorite is Dodd, though I admit it’s an unlikely choice. I think the advantage for HRC is that there’s no compelling choice among democratic VP hopefuls, and if she really wants the job, there’s no one that’s a better choice than her. I’m still hoping she doesn’t want the spot, I honestly don’t know why she’d want it, but if she really does, I don’t see how she doesn’t end up with it. Ugh.
PaulW
For Obama, the smart move would be to avoid Hillary at all costs for the Veep spot. Because she would – consciously or subconsciously – sabotage the whole thing from the inside.
Of former candidates from the primaries, Richardson makes the most sense: good resume, and former Clintonite who nonetheless broke ranks to back Obama. Chris Dodd and then Joe Biden would be the next three. Edwards would bring the media attack drones out to snipe about his g-ddamn haircut.
There’s been buzz for Wesley Clark and/or Sen. Webb, but someone else noted that it makes Obama look desperate to drag in somebody with military experience and thus play to the eventual GOP sniping that he himself is inexperienced.
Personally, I’m getting to the point where I’m thinking we could abolish the position of Vice President altogether. Cheney has proven it’s an office that can be abused…
Dennis - SGMM
Jon Stewart. He would help with the Jewish vote and the debates would be faboo.
Otherwise, agree with Sasha that Brian Schweitzer should get the nod.
Dennis - SGMM
Wouldn’t the White House be a bit crowded with three people who each think that they should be president?
jibeaux
Well, I was with you up until the end, there…
Cris
Schweitzer doesn’t want to leave Montana, and Montanans don’t want Schweitzer to leave.
patrick
Richardson would be my first choice….help the latino vote, shore up the “foreign policy inexperience” argument.
OR, look for a moderate republican w/foreign policy experience and military background…maybe a minority…someone like Colin Powell. I think that would sway a lot of the more conservative independents…
the bones to throw the clintons: sect’y HHS for Hillary, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court for Big Bill.
sunny
John Edwards for Attorney General.
4tehlulz
*yawn*
Scotty
Could someone please tell me what Hillary hopes to accomplish by trying to be VP that she could not accomplish tenfold if she stayed in the Senate? Technically if Obama puts her on the ticket and they do win in November he wouldn’t have to listen to a thing she or Bill would say, so I ask again, what would being VP accomplish?
Dennis - SGMM
Clintonistas have declared that choosing any woman other than the Sun Queen would be a slap in the face. Personally, I think that Clinton and her flock of harpies need to be slapped in the face, back-and-forth, back-and-forth, until they return to their senses and remember that they are Democrats.
4tehlulz
Well, John Kennedy was assassinated in November and….
Kirk
My list is too long and uncertain. Instead, I’d like to note what I think are valid parameters – limiters on who can and will be selected.
I do not expect Obama to choose a Senator from a state which has even or better odds of replacing that Senator with a Republican. As a general rule, “home state” senatorial VPs only adds a point or two to the swing. Add in the loss of ability to shut down the filibuster – a real possibility in 2009 – and it makes that choice strategically unwise. This still leaves several Senators – and for that matter, there are some strong Representatives as well, though they carry even less vote.
I do not expect Obama to choose any governor of a state which has even or better odds of giving that state a Republican governor in the next election, unless the governor is nearing term limits and unable to run for re-election. While not as critical as the Senate, Obama’s been running as a “50 state” candidate, and weakening a state to strengthen his own position isn’t in keeping with that mindset. The possible exception – and I don’t think she’s high on the list – is Napolitano. Quite simply, she nullifies McCain’s home state advantage, and that’s got a subtle strength all its own.
I do not think Obama will choose one of his competitors, but I’m not as certain of that. There are three that provide strength, but for the most part all his opponents ran as ‘old school’ DLC. All three would in some way “tarnish the hope”. Still, Edwards, Richardson and Clinton may be on the list.
There are also some non-current politicians and others who might be being considered. Two, just for example, are generals Zinni and Clark.
My “short” list is down to 20 possibles, too many to list, and certainly too many to say, “Oh, THIS one.” At least with my parameters it’s not a couple hundred people.
cleek
on the blog on HillaryClitnon.com, the majority of the posts are urging her to run as an independent.
since i can’t think of a better way to ensure a McCain win, i wonder how many of those people are trying to earn McCain Points…
Gebghis
The anti-Hillary vitriol is getting old. It’s time for it to be put aside. I was a Hillary supporter but I’m HAPPILY voting Democratic. I’d like for Obama to win, so if you have a better VP candidate than Hillary, present them on their merits. If you haven’t already acquired the skill, it’s a good time to learn to be gracious in victory.
And the price of victory may well be having Hillary as VP. She has demonstrably the largest voting bloc of all other VP candidates combined. With her on the ticket, it will be much more difficult for the right wing to smear Obama – she’d be a perfect foil and she’d allow Obama to remain above the fray.
For those of you who can’t let it go I ask one thing – are you willing to risk electing President McCain? I’ll understand if you don’t want to answer that, so dodge the question if you must – but it’s a serious question.
If Hillary isn’t the VP candidate, I’m still voting Obama. Whatever complaints you have about how she treated him during the primary are nothing compared to what the right wing is going to do this fall.
Thanks in advance for the civil replies. Best….G
sunny
I don’t think she wants it at all. I think she wants him to reject her so she and her deranged supporters have yet another reason to go ballistic on him and try to ruin his chances in Nov. Then she gets to come back and run in 2012.
Or something. Whatever she wants it’s not good.
jibeaux
Hillary ClitNon, cleek?
Misogynist.
Dennis - SGMM
That’s a smart bunch of people. The fact that she couldn’t, at this point, get on the ballot doesn’t deter them one bit.
4tehlulz
I was too intimidated by the SHINY RED CANDYLIKE CONTRIBUTE BUTTON to read the comments.
sunny
When Hillary concedes that Obama won this primary fair and square and stops trying to undermine him by lying about the popular vote, yet another talking point she’s handed the Repukes, THEN I will stop criticizing her and not before.
Notorious P.A.T.
Just got a letter from Uncle Sam telling me I’ll get $300 in stimulus. I’m seriously considering giving it all to Barack.
But–but–but I thought they were all about advancing women in this country?!?!?!?
Napoleon
Look, VPs do not win elections. I think the meme of LBJ helping JFK in Texas is BS. Texas was solid Dem in 60.
Therefore he needs to pick someone who does not call into question his judgment (see Quale, Dan) and does not have another political cost. Everything else is fluff and does not matter.
With that in mind he should NOT pick any of the following:
HRC – a disaster in waiting and in any event will be valuable in the Senate passing healthcare.
Webb – is valuable in the Senate on Iraq issues.
Strickland – Ohio reapportionment after 2010 is performed by 3 state officials one of which is him, one the now troubled SOS position and the last held by a Republican. Take him out of Ohio and you lessen the chances the Dems control reapportionment and therefore it will cost the Dems seats in the house down the road.
Warner – we would potentially be loosing a Senate pick up opportunity.
Dodd – His seat would then go to the Republicans (only an idiot would take a senator from a state that has a Republican govenor).
El Cid
And by that I’m sure you were just emphasizing the month of November, and the fact that elections took place in November, and anyone who reads more into it than that is a deranged person.
Scotty
If by some chance Obama does lose, because of Hillary’s deranged supporters, and she wants to run again in 2012 how does she reconcile with the Obama supporters she theoretically fucked over? I can’t help but think that that would be the worst possible option for her. But then again, I doubt she really cares what the outcome for the party would be.
cleek
gack. i make that typo every time i try to type Clinton. it’s one reason i prefer “Hillary” – it’s easier for me to type.
4tehlulz
“Senator Clinton, the Republicans are circulating footage of you touting Senator McCain’s and your qualifications for president while stating that Senator Obama is unqualified. Why are you even on this ticket?”
No. She disqualified herself from the VP spot the minute she did that.
SPIIDERWEB™
Barney Frank or Henry Waxman would do fine.
Scotty
You’re joking, right?
D.N. Nation
Let’s see…
Taylor Marsh: Hillary won the popular vote! (note: Taylor, natch, doesn’t show her math)
Hillis44: When will Obama concede?
No Quarter: (nothing…site down again)
Top of the morning, Hillblogs!
El Cid
Stop obsessing over what Hillary-backing blogs are saying.
Larime the Gimp
As a native of AZ, I’d love him to pick Napolitano and screw McCain in his own back yard, but she IS a single woman rumored to be a lesbian. I have no problem with that, but how many barriers can we take down at once?
Jake
Yeah, I’m with El Cid on this one. Let’s let Cole read the Hillary-backing blogs, so we don’t have to.
Still, I have to say that she hit an all-time low for me last night when she asked her supporters to give her money.
Also, anyone else notice the goofy lemmings in the stands right behind Hillary during her speech? One dude was waving the American flag so hard I thought his arm would fall off. My wife and I couldn’t stop laughing at some of those folks.
w vincentz
All the buzz is that Barack has to sit down and talk with Hillary. I say, let here stew. Wait, Barack. Let HER come to you. Then offer Sec of Health and Human Services.
For VP, I’m hoping a former Hillary supporter from Ohio, PA, or Indiana.
Just my opinion.
zzyzx
BTW, No Quarter and their allies forgot the first rule of a whisper campaign – NEVER give concrete details.
They’re now saying that, “The Michelle Obama Rant Tape was filmed between June 26th – July 1st 2004 in Chicago, IL at the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition Conference at Trinity United Church: specifically the Women’s Event.
Michelle Obama appeared as a panelist alongside Mrs. Khadijah Farrakhan and Mrs. James Meeks.”
OK, you’re now saying that people watching the tape somehow got confused between Louis Farrakhan and his wife – strike one. Secondly, you’re forgetting about google. There are articles about this event. It wasn’t held at the TUCC Church – strike two. Thirdly, read the article. It’s a pretty detailed description of the event talking about a lot of the speakers, and it somehow missed the wife of a senator going on a long anti-white rant (and when No Quarter comes back up, you should read what the rant has now become. It’s like the laundry list of what racists think AA’s talk about, including saying the solution to black on black crime is to have them attack whites instead.) to a cheering crowd. All of these reporters covering Jackson’s NASCAR comments and not one noticed the rant of the wife of a Senator, someone who was about to give an important speech at the Democratic convention in a few days. FAIL!
Chris Johnson
Personally, I want to see Obama making up his own mind who is RIGHT for VP, at which point I’ll pay special attention to his reasoning about WHY.
He’s gotta know better than me about this stuff, and he’s in a position to make the call based on the merits rather than power politics a la Clinton.
Fucking gamesmanship has got us INTO the position where Obama is overflowing the stadium that’s gonna be used for the RNC while McCain speaks to a Holiday Inn.
Obama does not have to make decisions based on gamesmanship. If there is ANY actual purpose or merit to the VP position in this post-Cheney world, he’ll be making the decision based on what is actually right.
carsick
Tonya Harding.
jibeaux
Funny tweet
From Hotdogsladies:
SGEW
Gebghis,
I have been aghast at the idea of a Hillary Clinton nomination for years now, due to: her surprisingly inept Senate campaigns (and I’m one of her constituents), her human rights record (the cluster bomb ban, the land mine treaty, the Palestinians, her rather weak waffles on “enhanced interrogations”), her foreign policy record (the A.U.M.F. and the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment), and her connection to “The Family.” I can (barely) stand her as my Senator, but I simply hated the idea of her attempting to become the Democratic presidential candidate.
However, I would have voted for her in the general election without any qualms whatsoever. A Republican president would be too much of an unmitigated disaster for our nation and the world. No doubt.
And I would fully support her as the VP candidate if I believed that it would increase our chances in November.
But (and this is a big but [settle down, punsters]), I am totally unconvinced that having Sen. Clinton on the ticket would help Obama’s chances. In fact, I believe that she would be a significant disadvantage for the Dem team. The reasons for this are numerous, and have been said before on this site and across the spectrum of political commentary (and will be said again, ad nauseum).
Is she a bane or boon for the ticket? Who knows? This is not a question that can actually be definitively answered scientifically or with any absolute knowledge by any of us.
But you know who I trust to make that decision? The presumptive Democratic nominee. That guy’s got some serious fucking smarts. If he says she’s a good bet and picks her to solidify his chances for the general, I’m all in.
Chris Johnson
And can someone explain why Hillary would even be GOOD as a health secretary? I understand health care is among her talking points but I don’t see what difference that makes. Is it possible that there’s specific other people who would actually get stuff done in health care, compared to Hillary who might fuck it up? Health care is important too, our system is dragging down our nation and our economy.
Explain why Hillary would be even effective as a health care secretary. I think you may be playing into her messianic bullshit when in fact she might be useless in that role.
Dennis - SGMM
Chris Cilliza has a short, dispassionate post mortem on the Clinton campaign in today’s WaPo.
Worth a read.
cfaller96
I know this is a somewhat rhetorical/stupid question, but how arrogant and entitled must you be to insist that no woman can be Obama’s VP, unless it is Hillary?
My advice to Obama: wait. For at least a month. Say nothing, hint at nothing. Then somewhere in the middle of July, announce Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius as your VP pick. Then watch as the reasonable Clinton supporters (i.e. MOST of them) flock to you, while Hillary and her meaningless band of idiots froth at the “insult” of it all.
Wait at least a month to allow tempers to cool down. Then pick someone not named “Clinton”.
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
If Edwards is AG then I would suggest buying stock in Depends because BushCo will be crapping their pants something chronic.
TheFountainHead
There’s also this angle. If Obama offers her the position, and she refuses, he gets painted as weak. If Obama offers the position and she takes it, he gets painted as weak. There’s one option here folks.
John Cole
Ed Rendell.
What can I say- I have always liked the guy, it will lock up PA, and really help with Hillary voters.
SGEW
By the way (is this OT or not? who can tell anymore?),
I just watched Terry McAuliffe’s interview on The Daily Show. That guy is fucking out of his mind.
One thing on which we can all agree: Sen. Clinton’s campaign team must never again work for our side. Yes?
Dennis - SGMM
I’d agree with you wholeheartedly, and add that Rendell is a demon campaigner too, but I don’t want to look like a suck-up.
kwAwk
Scotty Says:
This is what I’m having a hard time understanding from Obama supporters. Obama runs a campaign to minimize the votes of strongly Democratic states and instead focuses on building a delegate lead in heavily Republican states which he can’t carry in November. Decries any attempt to claim he can’t win the big Democratic states as wrong even though that is exactly what his campaign strategy is for the Primary, avoid the big Democratic states he can’t win and focus on the Repub states. His strategy in those big states is to play the delegate game focusing on and succeeding is getting a higher percentage of the delegate count than his popular support would allow even proudly succeeding in NV and TX.
His campaign team also works relentlessly to disenfanchise Florida and Michigan by working against allowing them to have revotes in June because they are afraid he’ll lose. You can make the case all you want that Florida and Michigan should have had their January primaries disallowed, but that isn’t an excuse for blocking them from a revote.
Then at the end we have to hear all of the entitled whining from Obama supporters that says if Obama can’t win the election it is all Hillary’s fault? Geez, get over yourselves guys. If anybody is responsible for this fracture in the Democratic Party it is the Obama campaign who have actively behind the scenes worked to thwart the will of Democrats. But really Obama can’t win the General Election in this environment he has nobody to blame but himself. And he certainly has no right to demand the endorsement of Hillary Clinton or the vote of anybody.
If you really want to talk about mistakes made in this campaign, you might want to look no further than David Axlerod’s giving this interview for this article.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/03/AR2008060304268.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2008060203207
Hell, he even says that it was his own vision, and not Obama’s, to focus the Democratic campaign on personality and not policy. Remember all those charges of a Personality Cult? We’ll now Axelrod admits to it and even takes credit for it. Amazing.
4tehlulz
Shorter kwAwk: BAAAAWWWWWWWWW
Napoleon
And we have the first delusional post in this thread.
tattoosydney
Does anyone else hear an annoying buzzing noise?
passerby
These are the comments that I would second:
“Bill Richardson, hands down. He can bring in the Hispanic vote and help put Obama over the top without having to depend on Hillary’s deranged supporters.
Plus, he deserves a reward for taking a chance in defying the Clintons by endorsing Obama so early.”
The importance of the Hispanic vote is being underestimated (or unrecognized)–immigration issues and xenophobia and all that. But, Obama’s already behind a xenophobe 8 ball. So, I say, let’s march over the fallen to turn over a new leaf.
It’s time for the adults (and anyone else who wants to grow up) to take the lead.
“For Obama, the smart move would be to avoid Hillary at all costs for the Veep spot. Because she would – consciously or subconsciously – sabotage the whole thing from the inside.”
Furthermore, some percentage of Hillary supporters are hard-wired and will not vote for Obama regardless. Obama has demonstrated how to campaign without the naked pandering to the electorate. Why start now.
Sebellius has caused quite a stir and some Kansans have referred to her as “awesome”, but her SOTU reply left me unimpressed. meh…
T
kwAwk
Napoleon Says:
Delusional for taking David Axlerod at his word?
Otto Man
I’m still pulling for Clark, but Rendell has been my second pick for a while now.
It’s not just Pennsylvania and other Rust Belt states where he’d help. Remember, Rendell’s Jewish and could do some good work with elderly Jews in Florida.
El Cruzado
Duh, Al Gore.
Pity the guy won’t accept the job though.
eglenn
I don’t know if you can count him totally out. Some of the head-to-head polling puts Obama-Edwards as a +10-12% difference in PA and OH. Of course, they also have Huckabee as McCain’s strongest choice. Not sure how that would play with the hardcore Publican base…
montysano
Speaking of the popular vote contortions, did anyone else notice that, early in the evening, MSNBC was running a popular vote count that showed HRC with more votes? Then, later in the evening, it was gone. But it pissed me off that MSNBC was hyping the HRC narrative. I used to really like Olbermann, but sadly I realize that he’s just another bobblehead.
As to VP? Sebelius.
eglenn
Georgia and North Carolina may be a bit of a surprise this year. Barr is polling 6% in NC and up to 11% (!) in Georgia and, depending on which party’s vote he poaches, could be a spoiler.
DougJ
I just gave a hundred bucks, but right after I did, I saw this Michelle Obama “get whitey” video and it makes me wonder if maybe Hillary should be the nominee after all.
DougJ
Fuck, they took it down.
Notorious P.A.T.
Because she has received more money from health insurance companies than any other candidate, Democrat or Republican.
Whoops, that’s a reason why she SHOULDN’T get that job. Sorry!
cleek
there’s a good chance the Dems will be able to score Dole’s NC Senate seat this year, too. don’t want to pass that up.
fight in all 50 states.
georgia pig
Schweitzer>Rendell>Richardson
Likeable guys, won’t compete with Obama. Schweitzer has more long term potential.
ImJohnGalt
Ummm….can you show me the David Axelrod quote in that sentence?
I thought not.
I don’t get it, so perhaps you can elaborate for me. There are two candidates, with very little space between them from a policy standpoint. On those spaces (with the exception of health care, and I think he has a better chance of getting his incremental proposal passed), Obama has been more in tune with the electorate (cf: Iraq).
Unless the Clinton supporters abandon Obama almost completely, which I just cannot see happening (except perhaps within those people who feel a serious “cult of personality” that you so deride in Obama supporters), your argument makes no sense.
Democrats came out for the primaries in almost record numbers, and these are just the party memebers who are passionate. This would bode well for *any* Democrat running in those states. Or are you seriously arguing that Obama doesn’t have a chance in NY because Clinton won the primary there?
AggieGal
I wish people would stop saying how Bill Richardson would pull in the Latino vote. Most Latinos don’t know who the heck he is. Plus, most Latinos voted for Hillary. And right now, Bill Richardson’s name is mud with them. PLUS..he doesn’t have a last name like Garza or Rodriguez, so Latinos won’t necessarily go out and vote for him on that account.
kwAwk
ImJohnGalt go read the article. It is an obvious gloating victory rant from Axlerod and the Obama campaign told from their point of view. He is quoted many times in the article along with other Obama staffers.
In fact what the article does is verify that pretty much every criticism of the Obama campaign by Clinton supporters is true.
SGEW
You have crossed the Rubicon. You are now officially Orwellian.
Get drunk and/or high and spend the day in bed. Better yet, hit the gym, take a long walk in the park, watch some birds, take many, many deep breaths, and then get laid. You’ll feel better tomorrow, hopefully with some perspective.
Thanks.
The Moar You Know
kwAwk: Obama won, and there’s nothing you can do about it.
But please do keep spewing your bawling butthurt, it’s amusing as all hell.
cintibud
Lieberman
Then lock him in a closet for the next 8 years
montysano
kwAwk said:
A revote would have = primary chaos forever. MI and FL had to suffer some punishment for moving their dates. If not, next election we’d see primaries creeping ever backwards. No one was disenfranchised; they were punished, and rightfully so. Get your facts straight.
The Moar You Know
KwAwk – gotta actually hand it to you, that’s a good article, but your spin on it is pretty delusional. It’s a great overview of how the Clinton campaign failed to recognize that things had changed on the ground since 1992, and how the Obama campaign didn’t try to match Hillary’s strengths. It’s fascinating, and not a “gloating victory rant” by any means – more like a “we kept expecting the Clinton campaign to come in and destroy us, but they never even bothered to try until it was too late”.
Here’s a real quote from the article, since you didn’t provide one:
That’s the story of these two campaigns in a sentence.
kwAwk
As far as the space between the candidates I happy that you agree that their proposals are vastly different, that is a step in the right direction. As to whether he is more likely to get his proposal passed? Umm…Democrats are likely to have 230 seats in the House and 56-58 seats in the Senate this years, it isn’t going to take too much to get either passed. So we should go with the stronger proposal.
As to whether Obama will win New York I would say that he will, though not to the extent that Clinton would have. Where he is really hurt is Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida and Ohio. States that aren’t as solidly blue. It will take a lot of Iowas and Colorados to make up for the 84 electoral college votes in those states.
As far as being more in step with the American people on Iraq as has been pointed out, Obama’s record is the same as Hillary’s record when he actually had to take the vote. That isn’t much of a difference.
Fulcanelli
Just tossed 50 well spent balloon bucks to Obama. After that speech last night, if I had 10 times that I’d do it. More to follow…
Skeptic
If Obama chose anyone other than Clinton as his running mate, that might be his biggest mistake. He would be running the battle all over again; with 45% of Democrats not supporting him, his chance of winning is almost nil.
kwAwk
The Moar You Know Says:
I think that where your analysis fails is that really the difference between the Obama campaign and the Clinton campaign lies is that Obama’s strategy was geared towards winning the primary and Clinton’s campaign was geared towards winning the General in November.
As such Obama’s campaign is now after spending a year tearing the party apart is now dependent on the Clinton campaign to bring the party back together. Even JC noted this yesterday.
What I’m not sure of is if the Clinton’s really have any responsiblity to do this. If you run as the ‘bring everybody together magic unity pony’ do you really have the right to whine about how the opponent you defeated didn’t help you bring the party back together?
Democrats, led by Axlerod and Obama, are evolving into the Republicans. Personality over policy. Politics of fear. Vote for us or John McCain will be our doom isn’t that far of a stretch from “Vote for us or the terrorists win!”
breadnbeer
The CNN list is pretty ridonkulous, unless you enjoy the status quo establishment candidates.
Edwards, who is probably tired of running for VP, might be better as AG or head of the EPA.
I’d rather see Russ Feingold, Ralph Nader or Dennis Kucinich as VP (honestly).
But I think he will bow to DC establishment-think and select Sebelius, Webb, Clark, or another tired old white male conventional dog, but I’m hoping he surprises us with a genuine fresh (as in atypical thinker) VP – that would be change.
And make Samantha Power National Security Advisor.
Oracle
VP Dark Horses:
Tim Kaine
Bill Bradley
Gary Hart
Phil Bredesen
Tim Roemer
Oracle
That must be the mindset that leads to this:
BFR
Right. Here’s a sampling of keywords you won’t find in that article:
-Iraq
-AUMF
-Kyl Lieberman
It’s pretty unbelievable.
SamFromUtah
James Howard Kunstler. Who else perfectly fits the mold of someone who offsets the hope and change Obama offers than a man who says that there’s little hope and we’re stuck in a situation that cannot change? He’ll definitely take away some of McCain’s “I’m grumpy and you people are messing up the world” appeal as well.
Unless he’s changed in the last couple years, he also has plenty of Islamofascist-fear and contempt for “open borders” too, which should appeal the the Malkinite trogs.
veteran novice
Since people are nominating people for the cabinet, and I see John Edwards’ name mentioned for AG, I will chime in with my own opinion that I would like to see an honest, competent aggressive republican appointed as AG. Because I would like to see prosecutions in at least the most egregious cases of government abuse, such as the Justice Department scandal itself or the prosecution of former AL governor Don Siegelman, not to mention torture, and if those prosecutions happen there will be constant rant from the right that any prosecution of Bush officials is politically motivated. I love John Edwards and voted for him because of his strong advocacy, but that may be a weakness in the types of prosecutions I would like to see take place.
Patrick Fitzgerald perhaps, or David Iglesias, or someone of that ilk would work for me. There has to be at least a few republicans who still understand and respect the law.
Original Lee
How about:
Oregon governor Ted Kulongoski (former Marine, Catholic, from Missouri, has served in all 3 branches of government)
Rep. Mark Udall of Colorado
Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania
I’m kinda against Obama picking another Senator, just ’cause the race has been pretty Senator-heavy already.
DonnaInMichigan
Appoint Hillary Ambassador to Iran
Jay
Please not Rendell. There is video out there of him practically drooling over Farrakhan that would absolutely torpedo the campaign. I hope Jim Johnson-who, as MoDo pointed out, missed the dirt on Ferraro’s mobbed up hubby-doesn’t miss that.
Kalief from New Jersey
Honestly after 17 months of watching the “Clinton Machine” in action I’m extremely dissappointed in both Bill and Hillary. I’ve gone from someone who would have supported them in a heartbeat and without hesitation, to someone who will never support or trust them again. Her campaign has targeted the “white working-class” voter, a voter that everyone seems to believe is essential to Obama becoming president in November. That’s another debate I’d be happy to have. But now after losing to Obama, she’s attempting to use these voters as leverage to “get what Hillary wants”. What about the millions who didn’t vote for her? What about what they want? Honestly I think that Obama stands to lose more than he does to gain from choosing Hillary as VP. I kind of like Wesley Clark myself but it should be Obama’s choice and not the most popular loser.
sildan
As much as I’d like to see someone from CO, not Udall. We need him in the Senate.
David
Holy crap, what does a guy have to do to get a comment published around here?
He cannot pick Hillary. Whether or not you think it would show a stunning lack of judgment, it certainly would stunt the party’s growth and ability to get past the Clinton era.
Besides, if anything ever happened to Obama, conspiracy theorists would never tire of blaming her.
He’s got to pick someone like Evan Bayh or Bill Richardson: strong on diplomacy and/or defense, and someone who’s been around awhile.
Then give Hillary a meaningful Cabinet post — one where she can actually get something done.
ImJohnGalt
I read it from beginning to end, and stand by my question. I see a opinion writer asserting Axelrod’s “strategy”, and absolutely nothing to back up his assertion. I wonder if David Broder was writing this under a pen name?
Uh…how does “with very little space between them from a policy standpoint.” get distorted into “vastly different”? Are you a native english speaker?
Ah yes, because as we’ve seen, Democrats (especially “Blue Dog Democrats”) tend to vote in a bloc. Seriously, do you even *follow* politics? While Obama has not taken much money from the healthcare industry, candidate of *both* parties are beholden to the health insurance industry, which employs millions of people directly and indirectly. Any change in the current system will, of necessity, have to be incremental. That was one of the MANY flaws in Clinton’s first attempt at reform, although there, she empowered the biggest Insurance companies at the expense of the smaller ones.
Not if Hilary gets out there and campaigns for the Democratic Presumptive Nominee. Which of *course* she’ll do, right? Right? Because she’s a Democrat above all else.
I used Iraq as an example (Kyl/Lieberman? Hello?). But here are a couple of more examples of where I think he’s more in tune with the electorate, and certainly has a more adult policy stance.
– [koff]”Obliterate Iran!”[koff].
– We need a Gas Tax holiday. and economists are elitists – I never listen to them! [except for when I used them to justify my health care plans]
My point is merely this: Obama can represent the millions of people that voted for Clinton by ensuring that he integrates some of her policy issues are into his party platform. He is under no obligation to make her part of his ticket. Anyone who insists upon that is as much a part of a “cult of personality” as they are undoubtably claiming Obama supporters be. He has already reached out to her by implying she could champion the health care package, a clear sign that he’s willing to move on his current policy stance.
Obama is *not* going to lose Michigan or Ohio. I’ll eat my hat if he does. Based on Rendell’s comments of today, I daresay he’ll be working overtime in PA to ensure that he doesn’t lost there either.
FL? Well, it’s unclear that Clinton would have won in the GE there anyway, so I’d rather a candidate that has all sorts of ways to win without it than a candidate that was relying heavily on it.
JR
We out here in Texas, yes Texas, military country, salute Senator Obama!
Those of us who fought in the trenches against the false innuendo and the like, put forth by the Clinton Liberal machine against Senator Obama are now ready to take on ‘Mad Bomber McCain’!
And we don’t want the ‘Shrill Clinton’ anywhere around Senator Obama.. We fought for Change and Vision, not for stale business as usual. The ‘right woman’ is up in Washington now and she will guide and watch over ‘Our’ stalwart. There are too many talented people out there that would enhance Senator Obamas ticket, and work as a team, not to undermine.
Gay Veteran
“look for a moderate republican w/foreign policy experience and military background…maybe a minority…someone like Colin Powell”?!?!?
yeah, just what we need, another war criminal as vice president
Gay Veteran
James Howard Kunstler?
I like his writings about Peak Oil, etc. But check out his latest article about Iraq. Pathetic warmongering.
JR
Senator Hagel please call Senator Obama at your convenience.
Mr. Edwards, (never mine)
Senator Biden will be in touch.
Senator Clinton & the Mr. $50,000 a pop on the speaking circuit.
Governor Richardson shave and gets us count on the Hispanic vote.
Caroline Kennedy is there any RFK in you?
Mr. Clark would you remember what you where doing here?
Senator Hagel will send a plane.(a dozen roses for the Mrs.)
I like Atticus Finch too.