Obama veepstakes sneak peak

Comments

1. ted on Feb 29, 2008 6:14:59 PM:

   Yeah, if he picked Sam Nunn, I'd rip the Obama sticker off my car.

1. Andoni on Mar 1, 2008 8:57:19 AM:

   I've heard Nunn's name too, and I've said NO, NO, NO, for the very same reason. Democrat Nunn stabbed Democrat Clinton in the back when Bill was trying to allow gays to serve in the military. Nunn is still homophobic. Nunn is also only 2 years younger than McCain and looks old. So if one of the advantages Obama brings to the campaign is youth and turning the page, Nunn detracts from that.

   Here are my choices for Obama's VEEP, Al Gore or General Anthony Zinni. I've read these suggestions recently, but Gore was independently my idea since Iowa. Both would bring experience in the military/crisis handling of things that may allay some voters' fears.

   Why might Gore do this? For the Party to assure victory in Novemeber; because he believes in Obama and the historic change/symbol that it represents for the country and the Party and he really wants to help and be part of this history; he himself would make history by being a 3 term or 4 term VP; and finally maybe Obama would promise him to be in charge of an integrated global warming/alternative energy effort by the US. If he's VP with designated powers I believe he has more influence than he does now, Nobel Prize, Oscar, and all.

   General Zinni is a well respected leader who could diminish an advantage McCain might have in the minds of people who feel legitimate concerns about military defense and preparedness. I don't think you can do anything to change the minds of those voters who are bigoted or closed minded Republicans and simply use "defense" as an excuse. However, people who are objectively concerned about the country's military safety would/should have their minds put to ease with Zinni in the number 2 spot.

1. Craig Hickman on Mar 1, 2008 2:07:09 PM:

   Bill Richardson is not an obvious choice unless it's all about pandering to the Latino votes in California, New Mexico, Arizona, Florida, and Texas in the general election. I'm not so sure that's wise unless some internal polling suggests Obama can't get enough of the Latino votes in California to keep that state blue.

   It remains my belief that in an Obama vs. McCain race, white men are going to decide the general election, especially in battleground states. White men in battleground states are by and large going to vote for McCain. If Obama wants a chance to get a healthy chunk of their vote, his runningmate will need to be a white man. Preferably one with active military experience and no Washington history for which he can be skewered. Zinni fits that bill to a T. Unfortunately, he has claimed he'd never run for any political office.

1. Geena the Transgirl on Mar 1, 2008 2:50:28 PM:

   How about Biden?
   He has the global foreign policy experience, which will still be Obama's weak point in the general election.
   Biden made some embarrassing comments about Obama. Becoming a vocal advocate on the ticket could help bring an end to the Ed Rendell, Bill Clinton string of comments that have brought some polarization to the party.
   

1. R on Mar 1, 2008 3:44:02 PM:

   It either has to be a woman or a vocal clintonista.

   And please, no puffy doughy old white man from the good-ole-boy-network.

   I think McCain is going to pick one of the female senators (KayBaileyH or SusanCollins) and plant themselves in Michigan/Ohio/Pennsylvania. It's all about the Electoral Map. The Republicans can only win if the Red States fall in line as expected and they swipe a big northern state.

   Despite his expert negotiating prowess, Richardson is a lowsy campaigner, has rumors of womanizing, and a bit too many cases of insensitivity.

   Janet Nap, can't deliver AZ now that McCain has won and besides an unmarried 50-something butch-y governor isn't exactly marketable. So much for Turning AZ Blue in 2008.

   Zinni and Wesley Clark have Admiral Stockdale written all over them.

   Boxer is too wacky (though I love her). Murray and Cantwell are a tad underwhelming. McCaskill is too new (though she would be great). The MN and AR female senators are not all that impressive either. Landrieu probably can't bring LA, although if she were positioaed as the Veep to Fix Katrina, there's some mileage in that.

   So that leaves Feinstein. A bit long in the tooth, but she has cases of that black hair dye. She also has some husband-y ethics issues and is probably too conservative for the Obomaholics. She has the experience, though that would mean two senators on the ticket. And to speak the unspoken, she has stepped into power under crisis before. That alone makes her a good choice, although conversely, it does raise that awful scenario in folks' minds.

   If a female is essential to match McCain's female, and the Dems don't want to give up a Democratic CA senate seat (Ahnuhld appoints), there's always Rising Star Sebelius. Though Kansas isn't really an electoral prize, she probably wins MO and maybe IA (though I don't expect IA is a big worry).

   Unfortunately, I imagine we will be subjected to Obama-Rendell. Pennsylvania is a must. He has been a Big Hillary Guy. He successfully blocks McCain from stealing OH and MI and PA. Yuk. Another big puffy doughy old white good-old-boy.

   2-1 = Obama-Rendell
   4-1 = Obama-Feinstein
   5-1 = Obama-Sebelius
   8-1 = Obama-Richardson