If I were an Obama adviser, my advice would be to get Hilary Clinton as his running mate. So would a whole bunch of people, I know she's a rather obvious choice. Since Obama won, my anti-Clinton feelings are already fading away with every McCain appearance that I see. The Democrats need to win, this country can't take anymore war monger, tax break to the richest, pro big oil Bush-Cheyney policies.
Obama-Clinton, that's the ticket!
arghghghghghghhgghghghghhghghghhghghghghghghghghghghghghghghghghghghghghghghghghghghhghghhghghhgasp......arghghghghghghghghghghhghghghghghghghhghghghgh
ReplyDeletearghghghhgggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
ReplyDeletetakes large breath...
ReplyDeletearghghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhghhgghghghghghghghghghgh
I'm not sure what Hillary brings to the ticket, except a lot of baggage from the past. I like her. She seems like a competent, intelligent woman with lots of good ideas, but lots of people around here hate her because her last name is Clinton. They're afraid Bill will sneak back in there and do nasty things in the oval office. Or maybe they're afraid she'll balance the budget, cut unemployment, end the war, and get the economy back on track. Who knows?
ReplyDeleteI think Hillary brings votes to the ticket, Obama barely beat her. I don't really like her as much as a lot of people do but she is by far a lesser evil than McCain. The polls showing a close race between Obama and Mccain really blows my mind. I understand the very wealthy being for Mccain, I guess a lot of voters don't really comprehend how bad they've been screwed by the Republicans. It's kind of like when Bush won the second time, the people that voted for him deserved what they got. Too bad the people that voted against him had to suffer right along with the fools (excluding wealthy and oil people) that voted for him.
ReplyDeleteI've gotta disagree with you on this one. Putting Hillary on the ticket would be a tactical error for Obama - the minute he names her as his running mate, the Republicans will begin running ads with sound bites of her statements from the primaries, talking about how McCain is more qualified to be commander in chief than Obama, and how all Obama has is a speech he gave before the war. And Bill has a lot of baggage related to his presidential library and the people who have donated to it - Obama has already said that anyone he picks as his running mate will need to be vetted, but Bill is balking at being vetted.
ReplyDeleteI don't see it happening - most of Hillary's supporters have already started lining up behind him, and the stragglers who haven't are mostly deranged racists who probably wouldn't vote for Obama if he named Jesus Christ as his running mate. I suspect that more than a few of them are Limbaugh Democrats who are just trying to stir up animosity to keep the party divided. Personally I'd love to see him pick Edwards, but Edwards has already nixed that idea. It might end up being someone like Joe Biden with a lot of foreign policy experience, but I hope he picks someone who shares his philosophical outlook.
Big Tex, I like it when someone disagrees with me, believe it or not.
ReplyDeleteI'm usually dead set on something when I post it but not so much on this one. I really thought that Edwards would add a nice balance to the ticket as well. You really seem to know your stuff when it comes to politics so I respect your opinion. Besides Biden, who could he get?
It might be a pretty good move for McCain to get Clinton. :) What do you think about that statement?
i have to agree with my cuz on this one..and has nothing to do with him being kinfolk...is is for change, and having her on the ticket is not change, it's the same ole same ole...
ReplyDeleteI like edwards on the ticket although im not crazy about him..i like webb and i like richardson..but no way will american put a black man and a hispanic man in the white house..
While we're dreaming, Ron Paul or Kucinich would be nice.
ReplyDeleteThanks Tex. I couldn't see McCain asking Clinton to be his running mate. Putting aside their political differences, while he would probably get more crossover independents and Dems to vote for him if he had Hillary on the ticket, that would be offset by the Republican votes he would lose. The more hardcore Republicans really hate Hillary, in a way that surpasses my ability to express it in words. And from Hillary's perspective, with things as they are, she has least some chance of being viable as a presidential candidate in the future. But if she signed up to be McCain's running mate, she'd probably have to wear Kevlar pantsuits the rest of her life. She's already pretty much guaranteed to be the scapegoat if Obama loses somehow, but something like that would make life ten times worse for her.
ReplyDeleteAs far as who Obama would pick, John Edwards and Ted Strickland (he's Ohio governor) have already unambniguously said they don't want it. It probably won't be Hillary, and I wouldn't see Gore doing it either - he's been there, done that. I would be inclined to say that he should pick a woman, but Hillary has reportedly said that she'll throw a pissy fit if he picks a woman and it's not her, because she'll be deprived of her chance to make history. If he did, I could see him picking Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius, who is a good match with him politically. There are a few other good possibilities as well - Arizona gov Janet Napolitano and Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill would be high on the list. Somebody wuld doesn't get much mention, but who I think would be his best choice for unifying the party, would be Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln. She's a Hillary supporter from her wing of the party, and a Blue Dog Democrat. Having her on the ticket would give it philosophical balance, regional balance, gender balance, and racial balance. And since the governor of her state is a Democrat, her temporary replacement in the Senate would be a Dem too, so the party wouldn't lose a seat there. And you have to admit, she's got a very presidential-sounding name. :-)
Richardson would be a good pick because he would help Obama with Hispanics, he comes from a swing state, and he's also got a buttload of foreign policy experience. His downsides are that he's as boring as a tree stump, and Jackie's right - having two minorites on the ticket might be more than some Americans can handle, even for some who don't have a problem with Obama's race.
Webb is an intriguing possibility - he's also from a swing state (Virginia), and he has crossover appeal that could really help Obama in the Appalachian region where he did so poorly during the primaries. Virginia will already be close, and if Obama can take the state it would be a huge win for him. Webb also has experience on his side - e used to be secretary of the Navy under Ronald Reagan. Obama has a coule of other strong options from VA as well - besides Webb, he could also take Tim Kaine, the current governor of the state, or Mark Warner, a popular former governor who's now running for Senate. Warner's a longshot because he's already on the ballot for the Senate race, but Kaine is a definite possibility.
Then there's Wes Clark, who would be another strong choice in my opinion; Sam Nunn, who a lot of people are bandying about but I'm not sold on; Chris Dodd, who is pretty bland and wouldn't bring much politically to the ticket, but who would be an excellent VP; Ed Rendell, who would virtually guarantee Obama a win in PA, but he should be able to win that state anyway, and Rendell is also a bit of a horse's ass with a loose mouth; and probably at least a handful of other people who don't immediately spring to mind. As you can probably tell, I've put a lot of thought into this. :-) I'm planning on writing an extended post on this in the near future, or perhaps a series of posts, so that's where a lot of this is coming from.
As for Kucinich, he strikes me as a good guy with honesty and integrity who is perfectly suited for Congress and the role that he currently plays in the political mix, but I don't see him being an effective executive. Ron Paul is likewise one of the most honest politicians out there, and there are areas of overlap in our beliefs, but I disagree strongly with some of his beliefs too. I think that libertarians like him are right on social issues, but wrong about the idea that government shouldn't regulate businesses. I think that if left unchecked, the power of multinational corporations is just as much of a potential danger to us as the power of the federal government, with the added downside that we at least get to elect our government.
Anyway, I've probably said more than enough about all this. I hope I don't cause your web site to explode with this long-winded post! :-)
Big Tex, wow you obviously know a whole lot more about this than I do. I'm not familiar with some of the people that you mentioned but Wes Clark, I didn't think of him. He might be a great choice for vice president. I voted for him in a Democratic primary. He's got the military thing going for him, that would help quite a bit since it's McCain that they have to beat. I remember thinking back then "This guy is actually saying what he thinks, not what he thinks people want to hear."
ReplyDeleteWes Clark would have had a much better run in 2004, but he surrounded himself with too many Clinton people, and they badly overmanaged his campaign. I would have been much happier if he, Edwards, or Dean had gotten the nomination that year - I think any of them (yes, that includes Dean) could have beaten Bush, and the last 3+ years would have been so much better for the country. And I was disappointed when he didn't run this time around - my guess is he stayed out of the race because he knew Hillary would be running. I'd be pleased as punch if he got tapped to be Obama's wingman. There are a few others that I'd put higher on the list, but he's still a good one.
ReplyDelete