(Please forgive that groan-inducing pun in the subject line. I just couldn’t help it).
I know this site is all about down-ballot races, but I noticed that the topic of the Veepstakes became rather popular as it spun off from the thread on coattails. So, I’d like to open up the floor to discuss the matter . . . from the specific vantage point of how it affects the dynamics of the down-ballot races. I’ll start with the example of one of my favorite blue-trending states, Virginia:
The names of the Virginia Triumvirate (Warner, Kaine, and Webb) have all been tossed around as VP candidates here in the blogosphere. But, there are problems with picking any one of them. Most obviously, Mark Warner is running for senate this year, and taking him out of the running for that will leave us with no strong candidate. And if we don’t take that Virginia senate seat, there is no way we can get anywhere near the magic number 60.
Moving on to Tim Kaine, the first disadvantage of picking him is the fact that the Lt. Gov. of Virginia is a Republican– and not a moderate one, either. In addition to that, Kaine is not exactly a compelling presence on the stump. In Drew Westen’s recent book The Political Brain, Westen uses Kaine’s 2006 rebuttal to the State Of The Union as an example of what Democrats have been doing wrong in terms of presentation. Apparently, Kaine presented himself in a way that seemed de-fanged, reminiscent of “Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood.” I had to agree with that when I saw Kaine’s introduction to Obama at the state Jefferson-Jackson Dinner a few weeks back. He just doesn’t come off with any oomph, if you know what I mean, and we need an attack-dog on the ticket. Furthermore, Kaine rode into the governorship on Mark Warner’s coattails. I highly doubt that his own coattails are as long, or that his pull statewide is that strong.
Finally, getting to the man who was “Born Fighting,” Jim Webb. He can definitely sucker-punch the Republicans into oblivion, and appeal to voters whose top concern is national security. And, as a writer by trade, he gives great speeches that get people fired up. So where’s the downside? Well . . . my lingering concern is that, while Webb would be replaced by a Democrat temporarily, no Democrat in Virginia is strong enough to hold that seat in a special election. And, behind the scenes, the loathsome, rapacious miscreant known as George Felix Allen has been plotting his comeback. Replace Webb with a weaker candidate and we just might see Mr. Macaca back in his old senate seat. And, if that isn’t a chilling enough image . . . remember that, before his defeat, Allen had every intention of running for president. If he gets back into the senate, he will use it as a springboard to a national run, be it in 2012 or 2016.
To sum up the above paragraphs: Virginia is currently in a delicate stage of its development toward blueness. Its political ecosystem must be left intact, and it will trend our way naturally.
I yield the floor!
i had to create an account just to say ‘thank you’ for that phrase.
more power to your elbow!
If Obama goes on to win the nomination he needs to address the national security issue & his lack of foreign policy experience by picking Sam Nunn (D-GA) as his running mate. Nunn was senator of Georgia from 1972 to 1996. He is by some the leading democrat when it comes to national security. His work to eliminate nuclear wastedumps & keep nuclear weapons out of terrorist hands has received critical acclaim. Plus he has a independent streak & he won’t let Obama veer too far to the left & bring him back to the middle. Obama may have to compromise on some of the issues he supports for Nunn to consider being his running mate, but Nunn would be in my book the leading candidate for VP for Obama. If he needs an attack dog on the ticket with him on the failed policies of the GOP look no farther at former Senator Max Cleland (D-GA). Cleland is the poster child of the GOP dirty tactics against democrats with the famous ad linking jim to Osama bin Laden & Saddam Hussein. Cleland would serve as a rallying cry for dems scross the country. His heroic service to his country in Vietnam attaining the rank of Captain at the age of 25 can neutralize McCain’s advantage of having served his counry with honor & integrity. Cleland who is 65 years old would be a great asset to Obama.
The tradition is for Governors to be the head of the ticket, and Senators take the Veep spot. (Edwards, Lieberman, Gore, Bentsen, Mondale, Eagleton, Muskie, Humphrey, Johnson, Kefauver, Sparkman, Barkley, Truman, just from our side — not to forget Dan Quayle, Bob Dole, Richard Nixon.)
And for over a century, Governors have defeated Senators. Just ask former
Gov Bush, Gov Clinton, Gov Reagan, Gov Carter, Gov Roosevelt, Gov Coolidge, Gov Wilson, Gov Taft, Gov Roosevelt, Gov McKinley, Gov Cleveland, Gov Hayes.
This year the Democratic nominee will be a Senator for sure, so to “balance” the ticket and keep close to the winning tradition, we need a Gov, or perhaps a General as the Number Two. (Gov Adlai Stevenson of Illinois could tell you how popular a General can be).
Mark Warner seems like a strong possibility for Veep, despite being otherwise occupied. His record of working with Repubs in the VA Lege to get things done nicely complements Obama’s unity message. The linking of a black man and a white man from the ex-Confederacy would send an appealing message of its own.
Warner has a lifetime in executive positions, so it’s not clear that he would enjoy being one of 100 Senators. “Your country needs you, your party needs you, you will be one heartbeat away from the most important job in the country.” He’d take it.
That should not be the end of our hopes to take that Senate seat. Warner’s coattails would be just as strong with him as Veep.
Surely the Democratic bench is not completely empty. Without knowing much about them, I’d consider the man Webb beat for the nomination back in early 2006, or the candidate who came so close to winning the Attorney General spot that there was a recount, or at least talk of a recount. Politics abhors a vacuum. A candidate would appear, and become a strong contender.
And the vacancy would occur too late for ex-Sen Allen to jump in the race. The nominees for Senator will have been chosen by the time the Democrats meet in Convention in Denver. I’d assume the vacancy, if Warner stepped up to take the Veep slot, would then be filled by some Virginia Democratic Party executive board or hastily called convention.
McCain is going to run as Captain America in the General Election & Obama needs to have someone who can offset his weakness… his lack of experience on National Security. On the other issues, education, economy, trade to name a few, Obama will run circles around McCain in the general election if Obama wins the nomination. That’s why Sam Nunn in my opinion would be the best possible choice for him. I’m not saying that that he needs someone to carry a state, or a certain segment of the populaion, he needs someone who can offset his weakness. McCain is going to run on National Defense & nothing else. McCain is a one trick pony.
I agree with your Warner and Kaine analysis, but I still think Webb is a good risk as taking the White House is more important than this one Senate seat and there would be time for whoever is placed there by Kaine to develop the advantages of incumbency. The upside, that Webb helps the Dem nominee take Virginia, and shores up national security bona fides, far outweighs any concern about the seat.
Other possibilities — for Obama he definitely needs some assistance with national security credentials and some experience. There are those that say he should choose a Governor because they have executive managerial experience, but the VP has NO influence running the White House (Cheney being the exception due to the inadequacies of the current occupant). So in addition to Webb my list would include:
1. Wes Clark — while can’t guarantee a state, he does have his own political base from his own campaign. Definitely good on National Security and the War — may be good in debates. He did endorse Clinton, however.
2. PA Gov Ed Rendell — Definitely gives the Dem nominee assurances of carrying PA, and Rendell is great on the stump, but he also can be so off the cuff that he put his foot in his mouth. An interesting choice but sould be risky.
3. Senator Joe Biden — Doesn’t bring any new states with him as Delaware is safe Dem, also has foot in mouth disease, but completely helps with the experience and national security factors and would do very well in any VP debate.
4. Former Rep. Tim Roemer — This former Congressman is well respected, was a member of the 9/11 Commission, and possibly could bring Indiana with him. Problem is that he has no national constituency.
For Hillary Clinton, Webb is also good but not as bebeficial as he would be for Obama. Others:
1. Senator Evan Bayh — He would probably bring along Indiana, was a Governor and is solid. Problem is he is boring on the stump.
2. Wes Clark — With McCain as the opponent he works with both candidates.
3. Former Senator Sam Nunn — This Georgian and Defense expert would help with southerners and national security issues, but he probably wouldn’t even take his own state for her. He has been out of the national spotlight for a long time.
4. Senator Russ Feingold — A long shot here but it would help Clinton with the progressive wing of the party, Feingold is excellent on the stump and it ensures Wisconisn in the Dem camp. Negatives are not a national security expert, despite his central anti Irag invasion role, and could muddle Clinton’s message as he is not always a team player.
There are others but these are the ones that interest me. I know Bill Richardson isn’t on the list, but he was such a poor national campaigner for himself I think he hurt his VP chances.
Bob Graham is the most popular politician in Florida history by a wide margin. I lived there while he was Governor and a lot of it does not figure but that is the fact. Graham was a Governor of a major, major state. He was a Senator and Chairman of the Intelligence Committee. He opposed the war in Iraq and knew that Geirge W. Bush’s excuses were hot air and neo-con wet dreams rather than solide intelligence. Sam Nunn brings the strengths of John McCain, just less of them. Not a military hero. Not partisan enough.
Graham is a far better choice if you want a former Southern Senator out of politics. The clincher: Florida has 27 electoral votes and Geotgia has 13.
That said, let’s discuss some of the other, non-Virginia names from purple states that have been bandied about.
Montana: Brian Schweitzer’s name comes up relatively often. As an actual Montana resident (for now), I can comment on this. One, like in Virginia, the Lt. Gov of Montana is a Republican, though he’s old and pretty innocuous. Two, Schweitzer might help us carry Colorado and maybe Nevada and expand our margins in Oregon, but he probably won’t be enough to actually tip Montana blue in the GE. Two, Schweitzer is progressive for Montana, but he’s still pretty conservative for the nation at large. I’m not sure he has the fighting spirit we’re looking for – his business is running the State of Montana, and he’s safe for the job for as long as he wants it. Our best attack dog from the West is Jon Tester, who’s been doing a terrific job campaigning for fellow Democrats in Oregon and Idaho, and has the sort of personality we need on a national ticket. Downsides: not much national experience, plus (unless Schweitzer appoints himself) we almost certainly lose Tester’s Senate seat to Rehberg, who holds it for at least two terms. Upside is that we might pick up Rehberg’s house seat in the bargain, but it’s an uneven trade, and doesn’t help us build our Senate majority.
The other name I’ve heard mentioned often is Ted Strickland. He’s got the sort of experience we need, and an “all Midwestern” ticket might be good (play up the Americana), plus he could help us win in Ohio. He’s also nicely photogenic, though I’m not sure how he stumps. Downside is that he’s pretty DLC, and has been mentioned primarily as HRC’s running mate when our nominee will probably be Obama. (He’s also endorsed HRC in the primary). Upside is that Obama may want to take someone older and more conservative to “broaden his appeal”, as JFK did in 1960, and if so, Strickland or (ugh) Ben Nelson might be top choices.
Sibelius and Napolitano have been mentioned, but I don’t think it’s a good idea. Sibelius isn’t aggressive (or progressive) enough, and we lose her seat if she leaves. We need Napolitano to run for McCain’s seat once her term is up in 2010. Taking her away now takes away our best chance of getting that seat, and won’t make AZ go blue in the GE.
Who else? Easley’s been mentioned, but nobody thinks he’ll get it, though they may be wrong. Breseden isn’t interested, nor is Freudenthal. Pretty much every D incumbent governor of a red state needs to stay where they are at this point, or we lose the seat to a Republican. Feingold would be fantastic, but maybe not “mass appeal” enough, though Wisconsin is not exactly a liberal state. We’d need someone similar to replace him, though, to balance out ol’ Moneybags Kohl (Tammy Baldwin would be great, and could probably do it). Maybe John Lynch, but I think he likes his safe Governor’s seat too much. Barbara Boxer would be good, but she’s from California, which would alienate the rest of the West, and there’s a real possibility the seat could go R if the Governator decides he wants to be the Senatnator instead (still, I’d rather have him appoint himself now than run against Boxer and win.)
That’s my $37.50.
Senator Daschle.
-Strong supporter from the beginning
-Balances the ticket experience wise
-He’s a nice guy, people like him, he fits Obama’s “Come together and get things done” message
-It would be a nice slap to Bush&Co. after pulling all the tricks and loops to defeat Daschle symbolically.
Other VP Picks I find realistic and/or reasonable
-Kathleen Sebelius
I don’t want Obama to pull US Senators out of the senate, we have to shoot for 60, or as close as we can get.
she’s from the southwest, mccain’s homestate, which will help blunt his edge there. as a woman she’ll help unite the party by bringing back some of the women, understandably angry that hillary lost, and she’s young enough to lead the party in eight years.
brings the same strengths as Jim Webb (without having to give up a Senate seat in exchange): ‘strong daddy’ figure with foreign policy/military cred who can act as the attack dog and enforcer, freeing Obama up to keep on hoping and transcending everything. Webb is better on the stump (contrast Webb’s SOTU response last year vs. Clark on the campaign trail in 2004), but Clark always impresses me as a talking head on TV, so I know he has the communication chops. I know he’s in the Clinton camp, but I doubt Obama would hold a grudge over that, and adding Clark to the ticket might also help bridge the divide with Clinton people (since I assume Hillary herself wouldn’t want the #2 slot and probably has something else in her sights, like senate majority leader). One negative is he doesn’t really boost us in any particular swing state (except maybe Arkansas), but I think, like Obama himself, he gives a more diffuse boost that’s felt everywhere in the swing states and even the red states.
Webb would be a strong 2nd choice; he isn’t #1 mostly because of the senate seat issue but also because he seems like a bit of a hothead: not just that might not be as strong on message discipline as Clark, but there might be some f-bombs or punched noses on the campaign trail. Bill Richardson would be my 3rd choice: doesn’t exactly seem like the ‘strong daddy’ type or have the reliable communication skills, and New Mexico doesn’t have the EVs that Virginia does. But he brings the gigantic resume, foreign policy experience, great energy policy, and helps us a lot with the western states and the Latino vote.
This discussion is making me like Wesley Clark and Max Cleland.
First, neither of these people are currently serving as an elected official. We need not be worried that their seats might be lost.
Second, both of them give that national security/war experience factor that Obama needs to offset McCain on.
Third, I’ve been a fan of Wesley Clark since 2004.
With both Obama and Clark, and of course the Clintons campaigning for Obama in the general election, I think there’s quite a good chance we’ll actually be able to win Arkansas.
And besides, it becomes easier to make some inroads to the South, to break the Republican’s chokehold on it.
As for Cleland, he’ll be useful for getting out the vote for two different groups of people: our party base, which hates the Republicans for their swift-boating Cleland (and coincidentially installing Chamblass who’s also up for re-election this year), and veterans/army people. (And if they try swift-boating again, I think people have had enough of that crap.)
Clark on the other hand, gets the second group, as well as adding a general (no pun intended) aura of respect and honor to our P/VP ticket.
Virginia has a quite good chance of turning blue this year, due to enthusiasm, coattails, and its being a weak red state in the first place anyway.
Florida…well, it’s not really part of South, but it doesn’t really follow any rules anyway. I haven’t figured out Obama’s chances, with Clark or Cleland, against McCain, in Florida yet.
As for the other Southern states, I don’t think we’ll be able to pick them off unless there’s an outpouring of enthusiasm plus copious help from John Edwards that might give us North Carolina, or some near-impossible miracle stringing together the presidential race and the Senate race in Mississippi.
Now, as for the West, which people have been talking more about in this thread, I think Obama himself has some chance (though not necessarily a good one) of putting some weak red Western states into play. Well, first, I predict that New Mexico will swing blue this cycle, along with its Senate seat. Colorado is definitely winnable as well. Nevada and Arizona I don’t know enough about. As for the rest of the West, while I’d absolutely love to see us win states like Wyoming and Idaho, at the current time it seems unlikely.
As a sidenote, however, even with that unlikeliness in mind (to keep us from being disappointed), our presidential and vice-presidential nominees should still go to each and every state to campaign.
No offense to Clinton fans here, but this person offers some interesting commentary on the electoral process: http://jinchi.blogspot.com/200…
“The map above [showing LBJ’s 1964 election] is typical for American presidential elections. In 15 of the 25 elections since 1908, the winner of the presidency won over 75% of the states. The races in 2000 and 2004 weren’t normal; they were aberrations.”
Well, I wouldn’t call 40% of elections (15/25) to be “aberrations”, but I
wouldlike to see how many presidential elections were nail-biters to see whether nail-biters are aberrations.But so, maybe everything that I’ve said so far about states being unlikely to be winnable is junk. Though, if there is any truth to this, I credit it to the Rove 50%+1 strategy: create a strong enough core group of voters who will vote for your party no matter what, and completely lose touch with everyone else. Most polarizing strategy ever. And that’s why he’s deserves no respect.
Going back to my earlier topic, though, I think Obama has an appeal to independents and disillusioned Republicans that will serve him very well in Western red states. For whatever reason, I have a gut feeling that “being a red state (relative to the current Republican Party)” is less entrenched in their history than it is in the history of the Southern red states. Thus, they’re more receptive to an independent-minded candidate.
Of course, McCain also gets bonus points for being independent-minded.
How would we run close to center but, instead of being perceived as pandering to opinions, actually be perceived as being independent-minded? I have to admit, one nice thing for McCain is that he already has this image cut out for him. We need to work on that on our side.
(I can try to help with that one, since I am (at least I feel I am) a centrist Democrat with somewhat maverick tendencies. Though of course I’m far from representative of the country…)
That’s not to say though that we haven’t done anything–in fact, some of the Democratic candidates I admire, Obama newly included, have used a message of unity, nonpartisanship, and actually trying to do the right things and make the best decisions regardless of partisan or opinistic affiliation.
Cf. this article: http://dsadevil.blogspot.com/2… .
Wow…that was a long and rather disorganized rant about a bunch of topics.
Upon (re)reading some of the posts, I’ve come up with two lists:
First list: people not currently serving in elected office that could be great additions to our ticket
Wesley Clark
Max Cleland
Bob Graham
Tom Daschle
Sam Nunn
Second list: people currently serving in or running for elected office that we’d like to keep a hold of, though they’d probably also be great additions to our ticket
Bill Richardson
Janet Napolitano
Mark Warner
Jim Webb
Ben Nelson
Kathleen Sebelius
I don’t know much about Sam Nunn, but of the first list, I’d say Wesley Clark is probably my top choice. Bob Graham might be my second, based on my just now reading his Wikipedia biography. Clark complements Obama’s vision and charisma with experience in national security and issues of war.
Why not Max Cleland?
I think he could go back and challenge Chambliss for that Senate seat. In fact, I’m starting to think he SHOULD.
we’re looking for an almost impossible combo – executive experience, foreign policy experience, and a good chance to lock up a swing state, but the four above have all those qualities.
richardson and graham seem like the best but they share the same negative – lacklustre performance on the presidential trail. also richardson has rumors to overcome. graham may be too old – certainly not likely to be a presidential candidate in the future.
clark helps in arkansas and with foreign policy but he is not well known.
webb has foreign policy exp, and helps with a swing state.
it seems hard to believe that there isn’t a single politician in virginia who could hold the seat in 2010 if webb were to move on. what about congressman boucher or state sen creigh deeds? they would be able to raise money fairly easily as incumbents and they seem like pretty good matches for va. or gov kaine could appoint a caretaker and run himself in 2010.
also, i disagree completely with the argument that if a person is backing one candidate in the primary, they wouldn’t be a good match for another candidate. general clark is not dissing obama when he supports clinton – they just have a longer friendship.
For the reasons you mention – plus I’d throw in that Webb’s probably not tempermentally suited to be the vice presidential nominee. It needs someone who’s comfortable being number 2, and I think his unique voice is more valuable in the Senate.
I’m floored by some of the names discussed here though. Nunn?!? Waaaay too conservative, and how can a candidate running on “change” pick an old boys club powerbroker who retired a dozen years ago. Biden? Kind of has that Webb problem – he’d go off the reservation from time to time. Plus he’s probably too cozy to a variety of business groups (like the credit card companies) that’d annoy party regulars. Tim Roemer? Again way too conservative – and the only situtation in which a Democrat would Indiana would be in a landslide.
People who I’d suggest:
Tom Daschle – Would be a great pick, except for his vote on the war, so I’d rather see him as Chief of Staff.
Kathleen Sebelius – Competent executive, would fit with the Change message, and could appeal to a key demographic Obama’s doing relatively poorly with (older women). And I think a lot of you are making way too much of the SOTU response. The 1988 keynote was far worse, but didn’t kill Bill Clinton’s career.
Wesley Clark – Has proven to be an adept campaign surrogate for Hillary Clinton, and that’s what you want on the campaign trail. Plus of course he has all kinds of pluses that he’d bring to the campaign re: national security and foreign policy.
Bill Richardson – Competent executive, foreign policy experience, not the world’s most inspiring speaker, but probably a safe pair of hands.
Bob Graham – If he’s still interested in electoral politics, sure, for the reasons listed in posts above.
And maybe Brian Schweitzer. I really don’t know much about him, but I like what I hear.
Pennsylvania’s governor has 0 chance of being Obama’s VP nominee after “White folks won’t vote for Obama”
This of course was after Iowa.
Roemer does have friends in the party, but remember that he ran against Governor Dean for Party Chair. Picking him for Veep would risk re-opening a breach among the party leadership at an awkward time when unity will be needed. But the real reason he’s not a good choice is that he isn’t pro-choice.
I was SOOO going to come on here and suggest Chet, but didn’t know the precedent for House members being on the ticket. However, his district would very likely be lost.
I am really starting to like the idea of an Obama/Napolitano ticket. Went online last night and saw some YouTube ads from her last gov campaign and, by far, she has the sexiest voice of any politician….am I alone in thinking that? I think she would be a better choice than Sebelius, at least.
A running mate with a military background will obviously be on the short list. Clark, Webb, I’ve seen Zinni mentioned some places. What about Claudia Kennedy? I know she’s backing Clinton, but so is Clark and picking a running mate who supported Hillary would be seen as bringing the party together. Maybe I’m just wanting a female on the ticket with my Napolitano and Kennedy mentions, haha.
I have a feeling, don’t really know why, that Hagel might be mentioned some in the media. I would hope like hell that Obama doesn’t offer him the spot, considering Hagel is pretty damn conservative (Iraq views aside), but I could see Hagel in the Cabinet. Do any of you see Obama offering a Republican the slot?
I just really hope it’s not a bland choice.
I thought about Daschle too, but he might not even bring along SD’s 3 Electoral Votes, but he is an asset. I think he would be a great Chief of Staff — he knows Congress, ran the Senate for a while, so he has some management experience, and most importantly he will know whose calls to return first and what issues should get to the President’s desk.
As for Sebelius, I think her performance after the State of teh Union speech this year has basically taken her out of the running.
I live in Chet Edwards’ house seat and I would love to see as VP (as highly unlikely as that is). Under Texas law, after the filing deadline (with a couple of technical exceptions that don’t apply here), new candidates can not be put on the ballot in a race where filing was open during the regular filing period (as opposed to if the office wasn’t up this year, but a vacancy accrued after the filing deadline but before the August cut-off). The only exception to this is if the person who is nominated either dies or is found to be constitutionally ineligible to hold the office (such as no longer living in the state). This is what killed the Republicans when Delay quit in 2006.
But the good news is that in Texas, a person is allowed to run for either President or Vice President and another office at the same time. This has been used many times: Lyndon Johnson (for whom the law was written) ran both for President and Vice President while running for re-election to the Senate. Lloyd Bentsen ran for President in 1976 and Vice President in 1988, while both times running for re-election to the Senate. And lastly, Phil Gramm ran both for President and Senate re-election in 1996. Interestingly, everyone of these examples easily won re-election for the Senate, regardless of if their top of the ticket race was successful. Therefore, Chet could (and would basically have to) run for re-election while running for VP. Being associated with a very liberal (at least by central Texas standards) Presidential candidate would hurt him, but luckily he is running against a nobody Republican who is so weak that Chet would still easily win (but with a reduced margin).
To carry this fantasy further, if Chet was elected VP, he would then have to resign from the House. There would be a special election, which we would probably lose. The only Democratic state legislator in the district is Jim Dunnam of Waco. He is Chair of the state house Democratic Baucus (basically making him Minority Leader). He would be our best hope, but probably would rather stay in the state House in hopes we pick up the last 5-or-so seats there so he would be come Speaker (which is ultra-powerful in Texas). Also he would probably lose because he would get buried in the northern part of the District (basically ultra-conservative suburbs of Fort Worth) which has relatively high turn-out. Also the party structure where (Waco) is fairly weak and almost non-existent in most of the rest of the district, so I can’t see us being able to win a special election.
It seems there would be more pressure on Obama to select a woman VP (which has often been suggested) than for Clinton to select a non-white VP (which has essentially never been suggested, because every mention of Bill Richardson is instantly forgotten by the human mind).
On one hand, if Obama is nominated, he will have done so with the support of women voters, so you might say we’ve got ’em already. On another hand, the idea of a woman president has been such a dominant theme of this campaign, it would seem foolish to simply close the door on that, and in so doing encourage some folks to lose interest and stay home.
There’s no end of crusty old chickenhawks for Clinton to run alongside. Although I’d hope she’d have the good sense to pick the least crusty possible example, rather than the Dixieland Reconstruction-era candidates that seem to be favorites thus far in the SSP VEEPSTAKES.
Compelling female governors (for example) are somewhat harder to come by. I don’t really buy into Sibelius, as I’m not sure what she brings to Obama that he doesn’t already have, besides her gender. Napolitano would make more sense. Also, if you believe Obama can beat McCain, that doesn’t mean McCain is suddenly vulnerable in his Senate seat, so VP today could be a better gig than loser of a Senate race tomorrow.
It’s not clear that Obama’s VP would have to be a governor, since this race has given governors the thumbs down throughout. It would be a nice extra, especially considering the nation’s female Democratic governors are largely from “the purple states”, while (excepting those just elected), our female Democratic senators are from the blue states.
In a way, the “sweet spot” might be held by Blanche Lincoln — established in office, and from the state of guess who. I’d probably advocate for her, with J-Nap as second choice.
Although, obviously, the executive branch already has plenty of female know-how, as proven by http://www.girlpower.gov/
not us citizens:
granholm
mel martinez (for gop)
single: (i don’ think a single person will ever be nominated for P or VP)
napolitano
crist
they’ve lost their own state
daschle
cleland
no chance of winning their state:
sebelius
bayh
nunn
daschle
bredesen
napolitano (at least against mccain)
running themselves
warner
gregoire
so we still have:
richardson, webb, clark, graham, strickland, bill nelson, lincoln, ritter
I’m tired of the Democratic Party thinking they need “moderates” to win. We need candidates that will actually deliver a clear contrast to the failed ideas of conservatism, not someone who will present the same ideas watered down.
He has decades of experience in the Senate, and in the comittee on foreign policy. He has a mostly-liberal voting record, but he’s still well respected by conservatives. He’s recognizable because he’s on TV a lot. And in 8 years he’ll be too old to run for president. The biggest criticism on Obama is that he’s not experienced enough. Biden will provide “experience” to the ticket. Also, picking a VP won’t help you win their state. It didn’t help Kerry in the Carolinas.
Is it on youtube?
Obama certainly doesn’t need anyone with charisma — he needs someone older and with esp. national security experience. Graham is about 70 years old, but hey, so is Senator McCain. Graham would be, in many respects, our side’s Cheney in that he’d be the experienced older guy in the administration, and someone who would not run for President himself. Oh yeah, and the Florida thing you mentioned 🙂
Graham would be a good choice for many reasons. And we might remember that at one point there were at least a few Democrats around the country who wanted him to be President. His age would be his main drawback.
As I stated on an earlier thread, Ritter is pro-life. Yes, we’re a big tent party . . . but we’re talking about the national ticket here. I don’t see the GOP clamoring to run Olympia Snowe on a national ticket. We must never, ever run someone who does not support a woman’s right to choose.
Furthermore, Ritter was involved in a car accident that killed a man in Africa, while Ritter was a missionary over there. That’s probably the biggest skeleton anyone could have in a proverbial closet.
If we’re going with a Western governor, I’d have to say Schweitzer is the best pick. Yes, I know, Montana has a GOP Lt. Gov. (although the Repubs have pretty much disowned him,) but the thing about Schweitzer is, he’s got a galvanizing personality. In my estimation, his ability to get apolitical citizens to pay attention, get enthused, and vote Democratic is the second-best of anyone in the whole party . . . with the best being Obama himself. Furthermore, Schweitzer is a real tough guy. The right wing smear machine will be thoroughly unable to feminize him, the way they did to our ticket in 2004. Adding to all that, Schweitzer is young, sharp, and energetic enough to carry Obama’s legacy forward after two successful terms. Any of those stale old guys mentioned above has no chance of being president himself down the road (and probably lacks the desire to do so, anyway). If Obama is the “Reagan of the Left” in terms of his ability to move people, he needs someone to be a “George H.W. Bush of the Left,” so to speak, to hold onto the White House and keep the good governance moving come 2016. And, frankly, surveying the landscape and concluding the ill-advisedness of picking any of the Three Virginians, Schweitzer is the best one out there to fulfill that role.
These are my personal choices
Sen. Claire McCaskill
Gov. Janet Napolitano
Gov. Kathleen Sebelius
My take on generals is no way. After reading Harry Truman’s dissection of every president who was previously a general, I have to give generals a thumbs down.
Democrats will never again have a ticket that consists of two white males and since Hillary will not be the nominee there will be a lot of pressure on Obama to choose from the many qualified Democratic women for the slot.
Hillary might be the best choice for Obama because it will avoid many problems with disappointed supporters.
After Hillary, the Governor of Kansas, Kathleen Sebelius looks really good and might actually put Kansas in play.
There is a small possibility that Obama might choose Bill Richardson or Wes Clark but I don’t see him picking Edwards.
Obama needs to look beyond the election as well and choose someone who can be the next President after him. If he wants to secure a legacy he would be better off with someone young enough and healthy enough to run in 2016.
but not very succesfull.
Although George H. W. Bush’s only elected experience was as a House member from Texas.
Jack Kemp and William Miller were Congressman.
John Nance Garner, but he was Speaker of the House.
Blanche Lincoln however, could be hammered on possible “corrupt practicices” such as recieving hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of farm subsidies to not grow certain products under the name of “Blanche Lambert” (her maiden name).
Many people who would help him out in the South, like Sam Nunn, would really be detrimental to the Democratic ticket and probably end up hurting it. Bob Graham may be too old, though his perfect chance was in 2004 (he would have a nominee who could win). Sebelius would be a good choice except for her dismal SOTU response. John Edwards? He’d help out on the ‘toughness’, ‘ideas’ and ‘substance’ front, but not so much on the national security front. It’d also be a very liberal ticket, but then again, Obama will be attacked about it regardless, as anyone to the left of Atilla the Hun is a flaming liberal to Republicans. Chet Edwards? Now that’d completely kick ass.
Obama/Edwards, regardless if his first name is John or Chet.
If Obama tapped Mark Warner to be his VP, the obvious choice for the Senate race would be former Lt. Gov. Don Beyer. Beyer chaired Warner’d fundraising PAC, Forward Together, and is currently helping Obama. He narrowly lost to Gilmore in the Governor’s race, and would love another crack at him. The Warner fundraising network would love to get behind Beyer. And he would win overwhelmingly, as most Virginians have seen the light, and are kicking themselves for ever electing Jim Gilmore to be their Governor when they could have had Don Beyer.
With Warner on the ticket, and Beyer on the ticket for the Senate seat, Virginia would go strongly for both.
Webb won his Senate seat due to Allen’s loose lips. He’s a bit of a loose cannon…lacks the temperament for the VP job. He came on the scene and got lucky, winning with a lot of help from Warner on the campaign trail.
We’ve seen some candidates younger than General Clark who had that ‘attack-dog’ personality mentioned above among the recent crop of candidates who are veterans, but the ones I’ve really liked and can think of off the top of my head didn’t win. Paul Hackett. Bill Winter. Greta Cammermeyer.
Nunn would be even worse as Secretary of Defense than as Veep, and that’s saying a lot. I doubt if he’d take the Defense without a commitment from the President-elect to leave Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell alone. He thought even that much was a disgraceful smirch on the machismo of the military.
do you know anyone good on defensive and good on everything else?
would be not anyone who jeopardizes a Senate seat. We need 60, point blank period. Napolotino (butchered that spelling, sorry!) and Sebellius have great Senate opportunities in 2010, lets not go there. Plus, anyone else think McCain could retire in 2010 if he loses the presidency? He is old, has clearly wanted to be president (2000) and may be ready to retire since his shot at the presidency is over. There is nowhere left for him to go but down.
I really cant think of any great woman politicians who could be VP choices except ones who jeopardize Senate seats… He should pick Snowe, I really like her 🙂 Wouldnt vote for her if I lived in Maine, but still really like her.
. . . is it a good thing that Biden will be too old to run in 8 years? Isn’t the whole idea to build a lasting legacy?
Also, Kerry didn’t win NC because he picked the wrong North Carolinian. I never saw what anyone thought was so great about Edwards, other than the fact that he looked like a Ken doll. His record in the senate was play-it-safe, by-the-numbers DLC. And despite doing that (or, perhaps, because of it,) he was unpopular in his home state. Remember, Edwards chose not to run for re-election to the senate because he knew he couldn’t win. If Kerry had been savvy about running an actual campaign, he would’ve picked Gov. Mike Easley if he wanted to win North Carolina.
howard dean. gov, movement candidate, opposed the war from the start. i’m a vermonter,so i’m biased, and i know he’s doing too good a job as dnc chair, but hey, it’s a thought.
Lest we forget was a House member and was pushed for the job by Tip O’Neill.
Other than that and actually elected all I can think of is Schuyler Colfax who was from the 19th century. One of Grant’s VPs, I think. Checked it. Yup, Speaker of the House. Also James Sherman, Taft’s VP.
Also a good description of Evan Bayh.
I liked John Edwards vastly more in the last two years or so. I thought he was a lacklustre choice for Veep, at the time.
even a Fox News poll said that, HAD Edwards chosen to run for re-election, he would have won handily. The reason why he chose not to run for re-election was so that the Democratic Party of North Carolina could choose a successor (but they didn’t do a very good job of that, having a pro-free trader Bowles vs. an anti-free trader Burr). Weren’t we bitching about Lieberman not giving up his Senate seat for his veep run in 2000?
Don’t you remember that Edwards was the #4 most liberal in the Senate? (#1 and #4 right)? Truth was, he was never an unpopular senator (but not a terribly popular one, in the Snowe/Conrad 80% ratings).
Truth is, VPs don’t carry states anymore; they really haven’t since maybe LBJ (who was carrying a still-solid dem south) or Muskie. Edwards didn’t lose North Carolina, though NC was the only southern state where the dem % INCREASED from ’00 to ’04, it was Kerry who completely blew the election.
…I forgot about Phil Breseden and Mike Easley.
What are their personalities/accomplishments/famous points like? Do they mesh well with Obama? with Clinton? What kind of advantage would they bring to the ticket? Would they also be able to carry their own state, or help carry some other state?
Also, main problem with Brian Schweitzer is that he’s also up for re-election this year, and we’ll need to find someone in Montana to keep that seat. (That’ll be a lot of action in the Mountain West–competitive races in WA-08, OR-05, ID-01, ID-Sen, WY-AL, WY-Sen-Special, and then MT-Gov.)
I’m still inclined to think Richardson would be best. I think Richardson would go a long way toward improving Obama’s standing with latinos. Having him on the ticket gives latinos the opportunity to vote for their first (1st latino VP candidate) and helps reduce any latino distrust of an african american candidate. I think Richardson secures New Mexico for us. Plus, being latino and a western govenor, it will help us be more competitive in Neveda, Colorado and may force McCain to spend some time and money competing in Arizona if latinos move toward an Obama/Richardson ticket. Richardson also has an impressive resume that would bring foreign policy credentials.
My second choice would be Wesley Clark. He’s not a Washington insider, which goes along with Obama’s theme but sided with Clinton so it’s a nod toward healing that rift. Plus Clark gives the ticket an opportunity to show McCain as an old, entrenched, insider candidate who has been in Washington too long. He helps with AR and perhaps MO and IA. With the military credentials, I think Clark helps with VA and MD too. Plus he brings the military credentials.
Having lived in NC for seven years,I still like Edwards but he won’t turn NC Blue. For every NC voter that likes him, theres one that hates him. In NC he can be seen as overly ambitious and hypocritical. I think Edwards would help in OH, PA, MI, WI. He will help Obama with rural lower and lower-middle class voters and with those in the old industrial cities of the midwest. I think Edwards helps with the mid-south too (AR, MO, TN, KY, VA, WV). Edwards may help with middle FL too. A little poorer than Southern FL outside Miami, a little more independent and a bit more southern thant he southern FL folks. He knows how to talk with these voters and I think there are more people in these states willing to bend on the social issues than there are in Dixie. Edwards isn’t a particular draw for the west, women or lations which could be a problem.
If you want a fighter, then Max Cleland (D-GA) is the guy that can do just that. Cleland is a CENTRIST democrat who can take it to the republicans on their failures on foreign policy, domestic policy, the failing economy. He can peel off a great number of veterans who are attracted to McCain. Cleland have always fought for better care for veterans veterans who has lost limbs, physicallt scarred & mentally disabled & he can address the growing problem of homeless military vets who are staying on the street. And he can appeal to blue-collar voters who live in rural areas. I agree that he should run for the senate again in november against Saxby Chambliss, but e said he wouldn’t but he didn’t close the door on a return to politics. Instead he is thinking about throwing his support behind fellow vietnam war veteran Josh Lanier (D-GA).
Both are excellent choices. Rendell shores up PA.
. . . is just like Howard Dean, but from a region of the country that isn’t already in the bag. After reading this interview, I became convinced that Schweitzer has to become a national player, since he fundamentally understands the nature of the electorate. And his appeal to those who hunt and fish– the proverbial “joe sixpack”– extends beyond the Mountain West. I spent last weekend in western Pennsylvania, and it occurred to me that residents of areas like that will probably find it hard to identify with urban candidates. Someone with a more rural background, who actually knows how to “speak the language,” rather than trying to be something he’s not and ending up looking like a fool (e.g. Kerry in the hunting jacket, Dukakis in the tank,) just might bring crucial swing voters on board. Think about it– the rural parts of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota . . . the proudly contrarian, independent-minded parts of New Hampshire and Maine . . . an appearance or two by Schweitzer could solidify support for our ticket, rather than leaving the swing voters swinging in the wind until election day.
Just my $.02 on a Friday morning . . .
. . . is just like Howard Dean, but from a region of the country that isn’t already in the bag. After reading this interview, I became convinced that Schweitzer has to become a national player, since he fundamentally understands the nature of the electorate. And his appeal to those who hunt and fish– the proverbial “joe sixpack”– extends beyond the Mountain West. I spent last weekend in western Pennsylvania, and it occurred to me that residents of areas like that will probably find it hard to identify with urban candidates. Someone with a more rural background, who actually knows how to “speak the language,” rather than trying to be something he’s not and ending up looking like a fool (e.g. Kerry in the hunting jacket, Dukakis in the tank,) just might bring crucial swing voters on board. Think about it– the rural parts of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota . . . the proudly contrarian, independent-minded parts of New Hampshire and Maine . . . an appearance or two by Schweitzer could solidify support for our ticket, rather than leaving the swing voters swinging in the wind until election day.
Just my $.02 on a Friday morning . . .
If he had won that congressional seat, he’d definitely be in the running for VP!
they are out of the box, have a ton of foreign policy expertise. otherwise – richardson, webb, clark, graham, strickland, bill nelson, lincoln
Sorry, I just had to highlight that line.
But in seriousness, I think that the Texas Dems should work long and hard building up a good bench in places like TX-17 and TX-22 so that when Edwards and Lampson leave office we’ll be able to fill these seats with strong, competent legislators who can run successful campaigns in strongly red territory.
Thank you for mentioning her name! Even before Sebelius’ retch-inducing speech, I always thought Kaptur would be the strongest female candidate for VP.
The National Journal just rated Barack Obama as the most liberal senator. While Obama is plenty liberal, he certainly is not more liberal than, say, Russ Feingold. The National Journal uses gravely flawed methodology, and I personally have never found the National Journal to be a neutral observer of the political scene. Steve Benen at the Carpetbagger Report has some insight on the matter:
http://www.thecarpetbaggerrepo…
thank God there was no MSM back then.
oh come on, we all know why kerry chose edwards, he was eye candy for kerry’s wandering eye. kerry could not live on catsup alone 😉
Clark does not bring a state to the table in the electoral college, and the inside scoop on him is not positive. Having been a general is not the same as having been a Governor. Obama needs a COO, a Governor or former Governor.
Richardson has a great resume, but insiders in DC say he won’t “vet”…too much of a frat boy.
Napolitano is a tiger, terrific on the stump, dealt with immigration issue, but can’t deliver her state.
Strickland has been too much of a Clintonite…but might be a decent choice.
Mark Warner would be a great choice to carry Virginia and other red states, and be the “COO” to Obama the “CEO”. That would be the strongest ticket, and Don Beyer would step in and run for Senate and win in Warner’s place.
Graham and Easley are interesting possibilities, although Easley was tarnished by having appointed Nifong, the crooked prosecutor in the Duke LAX case.