March 28, 2008 12:15 PM
Obama/Bloomberg 08?
Chuck Todd, one of the best in the business as far as I'm concerned, sees some potential:
Those who love the Veepstakes will enjoy today's Obama speech, not for the substance but for the person who will introduce him: Michael Bloomberg. While the mayor says he's not endorsing anyone (yet?), this is the second time Bloomberg has given Obama a high profile photo-op (remember the meeting at that diner a few months back?).
Kos makes his top three VP picks here. Who would you draft to round out a Clinton or Obama ticket?
Obama/Richardson
Bloomberg will not be Obama's running mate. Neither will Richardson. The Dems will not run a black guy and a Jewish (possibly gay) guy nor will they run a black guy and a hispanic guy. Let's be real here -- the Veep candidate will be a WASP male.
Who's crazy now? Bloomberg a republican? Do they think Obama is that desperate for approval that he'll pick a Republican VP?
And do they think he's insane?
Didn't Bloomberg form an exploratory committee for an independent run for President already? And didn't the first and last meeting of that committee fall apart due to the complete lack of even a semi-coherent direction? And does Bloomberg offer anything whatsoever to Obama?
My pick would be John Edwards. I'd be happy with that. I don't think it's reality but I was a big Edwards fan before he dropped out. But I really don't have any other picks as long as it's clearly understood by Obama, and I think it is: no DLC. No more centrism. No more capitulacrats.
Obama - Wes Clark
Obama - Jim Webb
Daily Obama?
Of course, Clinton/Obama is a sure winner.
No Bloomberg. Please, Obama, don't be stupid.
Feingold - VP
Edwards - AG
Gore - EPA
Noam Chomsky - Sec of Defense
Howard Zinn - Labor Secretary
GW Bush - Latrine Cell Block 3 Leavenworth
Cheney - Honorary Flightless Quail, Kenedy County, Texas
McCain - Greeter, Walmart
Obama - Gore (is that allowed?? a former Veep becoming a veep again?)
Obama - Webb ( I second that)
Clark and Webb (VA's huge) as Orangutan said, maybe Zinni (from Pennsylvania). I also expect a Colin Powell endorsement/speech about how things went wrong with the war under Bush (troop levels, debaathification, laying off the Iraqi military, etc.). Biden would also be good but the home state of DE isn't aplus for him.
congressive @ 7:
As a proud resident of Wisconsin, I hope this doesn't happen. Besides we need someone in congress to kickstart the rubes when they get outta line...
Obama Dodd unless Dodd becomes Majority Leader, then
Obama Edwards which would lead directly to Edwards running (and winning!) in 2016
Actually, I like Edwards better now that I see that in writing and we have to have Dodd as Majority Leader.
[Please pick another handle. This one is already in use by a long-time poster. Thanks-Sitemonitor]
Obama/WhiteGuyFromTheSouth
Feingold, Edwards, or Dodd. Bloomberg, oh please no. I live in new york and he has made living here a place for only the rich. he's destroyed the great character of the city by letting the corporates take over.
Bill Richardson for sure.
Otay @ 6:
Double, no, TRIPLE DITTO!
I like the idea of an Obama-Sebelius ticket. Kathleen has done a great job running Kansas (despite a GOP state legislature) and shares Obama's bipartisan approach to politics. She can certainly help in the red states.
Edwards : VP
Wes Clark : Sec. Def.
Fitzgerald : Atty. Gen.
Kucinich : Sec. Ag.
Al Gore : EPA
Obama/Richardson
Obama/Dodd
Obama/Clark
Senator Jack Reed
Kathleen Sebelius
Jim Webb
Chris Dodd (if he doesn't take Tepid Tea's place as Senate Majority Leader)
Edwards
the New England states are already a given, Bloomberg won't matter.
NM Gov. Bill Richardson is the best counter against McCain's popularity in the South-West
Obama-Biden
Let Hillary run with Scaife on the Republican ticket in 2012
congressive #7
I agree on Feingold and Edwards. Love where you suggest Bush, Cheney and McCain can serve best.
Especially would like Edwards as VP. Think he got screwed when Obama came on the scene. Edwards would have been fighting it out with Clinton now instead of Obama. I like Obama but where did he come from? But maybe Clinton would have had a better chance against Edwards. She didn't count on a black guy who could speak well being her opponent. The people fell in love with him and that's the rest of the story.
I second the Clinton/Obama ticket. It would be a winner and he could make his chops as VP and run in 2016 when he's ready. Obama has been on the fast-track politically and maybe this would give him the time to hone his skills and gain more experience.
Obama/McCain
Now that would really throw the electorate into a tizzy!!
congressive @ 7:
Great List - especially the last three.
Personally, he may go with the Gorester for VP. Although Gore does not represent change and is more linked to the Clinton past, I think a lot of the country wished Gore was made President to make it feel like a do-over - with the chance for Gore to take over in 4 or 8 years. Although Gore has been VP before - this will be an historic moment - I am sure Gore would be proud of being the first Black/White President's VP.
JMHO.
Obama/Webb
Obama/Dodd
Obama/Feingold
Cabinet posts for Kucinich, Edwards, Gore, Richardson.
Screw Webb. He screwed us on FISA.
Dodd.
Why? FISA. And he's also good on the environment. Obama needs an enviro boost.
"I believe I'm the only [presidential candidate], along with Al Gore, who has called for a corporate carbon tax. You've got to tax polluters. You've got to separate the price differential so that we can move away from fossil fuels that do so much damage to our environment, to our economy, to our future, to jobs in this country. Until you deal with the issue of price, until you impose a corporate carbon tax, we will never get away from fossil fuels. It's the only way this can be achieved. You have to advocate that if you're serious about global warming." -- July 23, 2007, in a CNN/YouTube debate between Democratic candidates
Obama/Dodd '08.
John Edwards needs to be Attorney General and turned loose on this bunch of criminals in the WH now and put their sorry asses in jail or send them to the Hague to be tried for war crimes and genocide.
Wes Clark is a Hillary supporter so I doubt he'd be Obama's VP. I'm going to assume Edwards doesn't want the job (Attny General would be good for him though.)
1.Obama/Dodd (Dodd was my first choice for Prez anyway. He'd be a huge plus to quiet those "experience" doubts for Obama. Though I agree with everyone talking about Dodd as Senate Majority Leader. I would have no complaints about that.
2.Obama/Richardson (Takes care of any foreign policy doubts regarding Obama. But, as the first poster said, let's be serious, asking this country to vote for a black man AND a latino? That's too much change at once, which is why Sebelius, Hillary, McCaskill, etc would be out of the VP race as well.)
3.Obama/Webb (Balances out Obama's supposed "raging liberalism" with the much more conservative Webb and he obviously brings with him some serious military cred to battle McCain.)
congressive @ 7:
Can I second that emotion, in the words of Smokey Robinson.
But for real, I want Edwards and Gore in there and Feingold would be icing.
Why not a Obama Kucinich ticket?
Edwards is a loser and he doesn't matter. He is still holding on the 20 some delegates has chosen not to endorse. \
Edwards talks blablala but when it comes time to act he gets cold feet, just like the VP debate against Cheney and let Dick Cheney slide.
Ralph Nader as VP. Adds a more progressive flavor, prevents people from blaming him if Obama loses (which he would not, against McCain). Kucinich I'd also be fine with. If Clinton was the nominee and lost with Nader, Nader would of course be blamed...
President.........................................Barack Obama
Vice President..................................Jim Webb
Attorney General...............................John Edwards
Sec. State........................................Bill Richardson
Sec. Defense................................... Wesley Clark
Sec. Health & Human Services............. Hillary Clinton
Sec. Energy.......................................Al Gore
Sec. Peace (nee Homeland Security).....Dennis Kucinich
I think it's a little absurd and definately arrogant to suggest an Obama/Gore ticket. Why would an accomplished man like Gore agree to be second on a ticket with a novice politically speaking?
Gore/Obama maybe but I don't think Gore is interested in stepping back into this political quagmire.
i still want edwards... with obama, of course...
i keep remembering a carlos mencia joke i heard, that either obama or clinton will need to choose a mexican as VP for their own job security... heh...
hey, it was carlos mencia... and he's probably right...
I'm a big Obama fan and an avid reader of crooksandliars. Can someone post the link to the big crooksandliars Obama endorsement. Thanks!
1. Obama/ Clinton
2. Obama/ Biden
3. Obama/ Webb
obama/dodd
obama/webb
obama /feingold
Oh my god.
Not Bloomberg.
Bloomberg said the problem with the USSR is people were listened to too much, and there wasn't enough leadership and authoritarianism.
Quote "Well listening to the People has been tried, and it was the USSR and we all know how it turned out."
I mean, GUYS. GODDAMN.
I guess folks don't care that Webb screwed us on FISA.
battery positive @ 8:
Yes, that is allowed. The only qualification for becoming vice president is eligibility to be the president.
The reasons I like Webb are:
1. Turning Virginia blue is a HUGE win in a presidential election.
2. He's got the executive experience (as a secretary if not as a governor) to balance out the claims of Obama's youth and inexperience
3. Swing voters and fed up Republicans react well to him.
"Obama's attempt to oust Clinton and
block voting is undemocratic:
"As sure as Democrats know all about 'snatching defeat from the jaws of victory,' if you Obama elites keep trying to push Clinton out of this primary race you're going to end up with a much bigger problem. Clinton's voters will dig themselves in and protest your undemocratic actions by either staying home or voting for John McCain."
This was dumber than playing the race card for his radical pastor.
Obama/Kucinich would more guarantee Ohio for the Dems (Kucinich is from Ohio).
Since Ohio is a must for the Dems to win, it would seem Obama/Kucinich is by far the strongest ticket.
Obama is smarter than most people here and will get a Governor as his VEEP.
Senators are legislators and that talk puts the average joe to sleep. Just like Kerry/Edwards did.
The Dems are blessed that Obama is able to speak well and to liven up the crowd for a Senator.
A Governor as VEEP is the only choice because Governors's executiveness resonates more directly to average numbskulls than a Senator who bables about Legislation.
I don't even remember Edwards being that much of a help to Kerry in the first place. I don't even remember Edwards taking a bullet for Kerry. All I remember was Edwards letting Cheney off easy on his debate.
Bill Richardon's endorsement speech (after Teddy) was one of the best speeches from an endorser and rallied up to crowd.
Edwards is not an asset, he is vacant and abscent
Obama/Kucinich -- The First and Second Ladies would be HOT !!!
As for Hillary :
1) Clinton/ Lieberman
2) Clinton/ Alan Colmes
3) Clinton/ Lucy Van Pelt
Obama-Bloomberg would be bad. Obama-Richardson would be even worse. Not only does Richardson not get Obama anyone (just because he's Hispanic, that doesn't mean he automatically gets the Hispanic community, especially since Richardson isn't a Hispanic last name), the guy is a moron. If you don't believe me, allow me to share a personal anecdote:
My dad's friend is a rabbi. He was at a charity event in Los Angeles. So was Bill Richardson. Bill Richardson comes over to talk to someone at the table where my dad's friend is sitting. My dad's friend is introduced as "Rabbi so-and-so" and Richardson responds, I shit you not, "So, what do I have to do to win you people?"
Ruthless Last Throes People @ 12:
An Obama/Edwards ticket works for me.
Kucinich has executive experience. He was the Mayor of Cleveland, Ohio for god sakes!
tricia marshall @ 19:
We probably shouldn't pull Democrats from places where it's difficult to replace them with other Democrats.
I think Bill Richardson has the experience and would be a fine choice. I also like John Edwards as well. Or to counter the women who might be upset about not getting a Hillary nomination maybe someone like Barbara Boxer whom I think is awesome....
Rp
Obama will NOT win the Presidency . . .no matter who he chooses as VP; Bloomberg is a lousy choice for anyone.
Hillary/Obama if he can swallow his pride and accept it to win in the fall.
While I agree with all of you, these lists of potential governments are totally impossible in the world of reality.
If we were blessed with these cabinet lineups, I think the Army would just take over the White House (with the backing of the military industrial complex) because they would be looking at their loss of power + 500 billion dollars.
Bluesage @ 24:
This will not work. Al Gore knows what happens as a Clinton VP.
Mark Groubert @ 55:
This person knoweth of what he/she speaks!
Anonymous Source @ 36:
Nader's big ego would never allow him to play second fiddle. I doubt Bloomberg would take the position if offered either, but Obama/Bloomberg would certainly stand a better chance of beating Mc/Mormon in '08 than Obama/Nader would.
myshiba, how do you say Obama will not win the presidency? That is negative thinking and does us no good.
The thing that bugs me about Dodd is his vote for endless war. He has since apologized:
"I'm one who voted for it. I regret that. I wish I could have the vote back. I made a mistake."
I hope he wouldn't make the same mistake again.
SassySandy @ 57:
As Chelsea says, Hillary is no Bill . . . Hillary will make a much better President and so Obama has "no worries" as her VP.
Oh my god, not Bloomberg!! Obama, you have a brain, use it. Not Bloomberg!
Obama/ Richardson
Obama/Clark
Obama/Sebellus
Ted @ 60:
I am speaking realistically. Obama should take the VP spot now so he can definitely take the Presidency later (trust me).
myshiba @ 62:
I don't think you know the Clintons at all.
Fil @ 48:
Possibilities......
Gov. Bill Richardson (NM)
Gov. Brian Schweitzer (MT)
Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (KS)
Gov. Janet Napolitano (AZ)
SassySandy @ 57:
The reason people like Obama is because he doesn't have "experience" (the way Clinton does).
When will the machine realize thats not what people want? If they wanted the experience you speak of (which is a very specific kind) then we got plenty of it with this administration. Rumsfeld, Cheney, ect all had PLENTY of that experience, and look where it took us?
WE DONT WANT THAT EXPERIENCE. WE WANT WISDOM. THE ABILITY TO SIMPLY BE ABLE TO LIVE, LEARN, MOTIVATE, and LEAD.
Obama has shown that ability, so as you continue to define the narrative around a lie, you will simply destroy our one opportunity to regain some sort of functionality from our government.
myshiba, all the polls I've seen lately show that Obama does MUCH better against McCain than does Hillary.
The media always trying to hook us up with some right wing hackjob bastard as VP.
SassySandy @ 65:
I don't think he/she knows reality at all. Clinton won't win. Not now, and if she keeps this up, not ever.
SassySandy @ 65:
Hillary will NOT play second fiddle to Bill;
Hillary is the only Clinton that matters to me. They are NOT twins joined at the hip. Once Hillary is President, Bill will have to step aside. She makes her own decisions.
In my HO, as a disinterested observer, the only ticket that'll give the dems a snowball's chance is the one with both of them on it.
They've both screwed the pooch so horribly, there are no pups to sell.
Obama/Someone with Substance
That should even out the ticket well.
myshiba @ 64:
Realistically, it is extremely rare for a vice president to ascend to the presidency by election. In the post-12th Amendment era, it has only happened twice. One of them was George H. W. Bush. The other was Martin van Buren.
Ted @ 68:
Believe it or not, it's still early and McCain will definitely "self-destruct". Obama brings too much uncertainty for/to the electorate . . .so he therefore can't win in the general election.
Clinton/Jeb Bush
it's a natural
she's one of them and Bill will be happy when the neocons knock her off to put another Bush in office
Karen @ 74:
Obama will be a first, then.
Rancid, how can you say or imply that Obama has no substance. He has a lot of experience and substance. He was in the Illinois state legislature and has been a community activist for years. And before that he went to Harvard Law (and was a professor) and Columbia.
myshiba @ 77:
Well, a third, if it happens. But you said that it was "definite" and to "trust me" on that because you were speaking "realistically." Now you're down to just "trust me."
myshiba, how do you know that McCain will definitely self-destruct. He seems to be campaigning OK so far, and that's my worry.
I am willing to bet $100 it will be John Edwards. All other names mentioned have downsides.
- He can bring working class white voters.
-north/south factor. He balances the ticket.
-has wife and family. It is a plus in today's America . Bloomberg is not married.
-He is close to Obama'a age.
Unless someone else can bring so-called national security credentials, he is the best choice.
Ted @ 78:
Yes. He's a great rhetorician/orator. I'm implying he has much less substance than style.
There are plenty of people with similar backgrounds who have no substance. That's how I can say it.
golden joe @ 76:
Why don't you get serious (if you're an Obama supporter, your comment does not reflect well for him). The best thing that Obama supporters can do for themselves (Hillary supporters, too) is to speak rationally and intelligently at EVERY opportunity. This will make for a more meaningful primary contest. Thanks.
myshiba @ 75:
I'll tell you what Obama brings, votes!
Karen @ 79:
When I say "trust me" I mean that I really have confidence in a certain result; however, since I am not clairvoyant, my "trust me" carries little weight (obviously).
As for Clinton's possible VPs, I would suggest Gov. Napolitano. Make McCain have to fight for his home state. And I don't think that two women on the ticket would be a disadvantage. Bill Clinton picked Al Gore as his mirror image, and that worked well. :)
congressive @ 7:
noah chomsky would be a more appropriate choice for secretary of state with zinn at defense.
Karen @ 86:
An excellent prospect!
myshiba @ 85:
So, we've knocked out "trust me" too. No "definitely," no "realistically," and "trust me" carries little weight. What was that about speaking intelligently and rationally at every turn?
Look, the bottom line is that it MUST be Obama. If it's not him, the blacks will bolt the party big time, and the Dems definitely can not win without high black voter.
That's simple reality. So please forget Clinton.
And monkeys could fly out my butt.
Obama's choice of a running mate will indeed be fascinating, but I think he's a little too smart to pick another Lieberman, or somebody else from the enemy camp.
Bluesage @ 31:
Amen. I completely agree.
SassySandy @ 65:
I have met both Hillary and Bill several times over the years at fundraisers in AR. Hillary is a very smart and quite funny person who is very likable one on one. She has the reputation of also being very fair and cooperative so I think Obama would have no problems with Hillary unless his ego got in the way.
cray86 @ 67:
I would heartily agree. As familiarity breeds contempt, likewise experience breeds downright nastiness . Bush/Cheney nastiness. Nixon nastiness. LBJ nastiness. Clinton nastiness.
Experience doesn't make you a better president unless you already have it in you .
Ted @ 90:
Look, you don't know what the bottom line is--it's all speculation--so forget pretending that you do.
Karen @ 89:
I stand by my comment . . .intelligent and rational people will conclude that Obama cannot win the Presidency in 2008.
No Brainer: Obama/Colbert 2008 and beyond
rancid, it's hardly speculation that blacks will bolt if the nomination is taken away from Obama.
It's higher than a high probability that that is precisely what would happen. How can you realisticially argue that?
There has never been In the history of the USA such advances in corporate fascism as the last 20 years or so. Our country was born out of a desire to put power in to the hands of free people albeit freedom did mean something different then. Our country has grown mostly by small leaps rather than bounds of democracy however it did grow for the best. OF THIS I BELIEVE...NO ONE HAS DONE SO MUCH TO DESTROY OUR FREE COUNTRY THAN THIS REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION AND ITS LAPDOG CONGRESS. A worse Democrat President and Vice President could NOT be found anywhere to serve our country....its Gospel!
henry walace @ 99:
You are defintely a truth-teller!
myshiba @ 96:
Just like he couldn't win the Senate seat or come this far in the primaries.
I agree with RancidVenison. Political predictions like this are just educated speculation. Two weeks is an eternity in politics, and you never know what will happen.
People who think the Democrats have this one locked up because of the near-universal disgust with Bush are unwise to lull themselves into complacency.
People who say any person "can not" win tend to be advocating someone else.
If all of us Democrats unite behind Obama, and fight for him as the nominee, he can win. Same with Clinton.
Obama/Clark.
Obama/Clark.
Obama/ fuckin' Clark.
Look at what Clark as Veep gives credibility to with Obama:
It legitimizes his claim to be a united, and would be seen as a reach across the isle to the Hillary supporters who are currently besieged in their political Alamo, thus delegitimizing any protest votes on their part.
It gives the ticket a claim to experience of the sort that Hillary endorsed McCain for, including military experience.
It will shore up the white vote for him.
I reiterate - if he'll accept, Clark is Obama's man.
Ted @ 98:
What's your evidence concerning "the blacks?" And please don't give me poll results, as most polled answer in an ideal way, not the way they will actually act.
You think "the blacks" will back McCain? It's lower than a lower probability that that would happen.
Since we're invoking credentials as substance, I have a social science PhD; so I know a lot about how polls work.
Karen, unfortunately that's a big "IF". Blacks will NOT rally around Hillary if the nomination is taken from Obama.
Karen @ 37:
Webb caved on FISA. I can't get over that. There was no reason to do so. The public overhwhelmingly understands that privacy trumps security and that big companies don't need special protection from breaking our laws.
Karen @ 101:
You are absolutely correct but I think it is even wiser to unite behind a Democratic nominee that can win in November (Hillary Clinton). I guess we will won't agree on the nominee but I think that it would be folly for Obama to continue (IF he is as wise as his supporters say that he is). Wisdom says that he should offer to form a Clinton/Obama ticket so AMERICA can win in November.
*uniter, aisle, in that order.
Rancid, not only will blacks abandon Hillary, but if after all this the nomination is taken away from Obama, I think the Democrat party will have lost enough black voters to doom it as a losing party for at least a generation.
Better to stick with Obama (even if he were to lose) than have the Democrat party lose black voters for a long time.
myshiba @ 106:
By all means, go back to whence ye came (mydd). Or look at the Texas caucus - Obama is expected to pick up another nine delegates today.
Clinton could win November, though not with the blowout that an Obama (especially an Obama/Clark ticket) would bring. Unfortunately for her - and you - she isn't winning the nomination.
Ted @ 104:
Taken from him? He's won already? How did I miss that one?
Truth be told, I think a combined ticket (don't care who is who on the list) of the two front-runners would give the best shot.
Ted @ 108:
Black voters in the general election will vote for Hillary. They are not monolithic and they clearly know what is at stake for America.
Ted @ 104:
Indeed, it's a big IF. There's some evidence that the African American community will choose not to vote if Obama loses the nomination. There's also some evidence that Clinton's voters will vote for McCain. The question is whether either will take their respective detrimental actions in large enough numbers to throw the election to McCain. And frankly, we can't know.
We all need to make a concerted effort to back the Democratic nominee, whoever s/he is. And whether s/he wins will depend more on the kind of campaign that s/he runs than the various personal advantages and disadvantages bantered about by talking heads. Neither Obama nor Clinton was my first choice. In fact, my choices seemed to drop out in my order of preference. But I'll be supporting the Democratic nominee no matter what.
Obama/Gore
Obama/Richardson
Love Jim Webb but there is now way the Dems will give up a Dem seat in VA for him to run for VP
It is too late for the nomination to be taken from Obama, except through political machinations with the Superdelegates, or conniving the delegates to switch over from their vote-pledged status.
If that is done, it WILL tear apart the Dem party. If it is done, the Hillary-at-all-costs crowd can be happy to have cut off their nose to spite their face.
Wesley Clark for Def. Sec. as well....
Ted @ 108:
That's beyond speculation, and it borders on the absurd.
Karen, well you paint a pretty grim picture, that is, if the nomination goes to Obama, many Clintonites will vote for McCain, and if the nomination goes to Clinton, many blacks will stay home.
And despite you're touting all of us coming together, that's simply not going to happen -- so where does this leave us, President McCain?
RancidVenison @ 117:
By all means, Rancid, explain how you happen to glean this surprising revelation. Do you not think that African-Americans would have a legitimate grievance if the nomination were to be taken from 'one of their own' by a relatively conservative white woman through the manipulation of the delegates?
Tom @ 114:
The current governor of Virgina is a Democrat. Webb's replacement would be a Democrat. (Unless there are other procedures in Virgina of which I'm unaware, but if memory serves, the governor appoints.)
As for Webb's vote on FISA, I certainly understand the objection to him on that ground.
Embarking on a six-day bus tour of Pennsylvania, which holds the next primary on April 22, Obama said the race for the Democratic nomination was "a good movie that lasted about a half an hour too long."
Clinton pounced on the comment. "I like long movies," she said.
DID SHE GET A CHANCE TO SEE THE SHORT MOVIE ON HER TRIP UNDER FIRE?
veep....
---RICHARDSON... BRING IN THE SOUTHWEST AND HISPANICS
---EDWARDS... BRING IN THE WHITE GUYS
---CLINTON... BRING IN THE STRAIGHT JACKETS
.... AND FOR mccain ?
---MITT... BRING IN THE MORMONS
---HUCKABUCK BRING IN THE FUNDIs
---RUDY BRING IN THE CLOWNS
If Edwards gets the VP then Siegelman for AG. You think he might be go after corrupt repugs with vengeance?
Actually I think the mayor of Newark NJ, Corey Booker, ought to be a running mate of either Hillary or Obama. He's already campaigning for Obama in New Jersey.
He could appeal to conseratives on the basis of his work your way out of problems attitude, but with the help of the government, which would appeal to liberals.
I saw him on Bill Moyers Journal last night, and he seems to get rather inspired by his speech, but more like a good mentor/coach than a minister.
Ted @ 118:
People being polled say that now, but my bet is it's just belly-aching to try to swing the primaries. It's highly likely that, when the general starts, these folks will see McCain as the "great evil," despite whether they think so now or not.
Obama is the great uniter, right? So how can you say "all of us coming together" simply won't happen?
Ted @ 118:
The picture's not grim at all. :) No matter which candidate emerges from the convention, there will be some people on the losing side so bitter that they won't be able to bring themselves to back the winner. The real question is whether there will be so many of those that we lose the election because of them.
I tend not to think so. It's always a possibility, but again, it's really going to come down to the kind of campaign that the winner runs against the Republicans. Just about any Democrat has a chance to win the general election by running the right campaign. We're actually in pretty good shape this year.
We just can't be complacent. And for those of us to whom preventing the Republicans from occupying the White House again is an imperative, we should be prepared to work as hard as possible for the Democratic nominee. There are a lot of us who are just that prepared.
I get the sense that you are too.
So, not grim at all, I'd say. ;)
RancidVenison @ 124:
It'll happen if Obama is the nominee. Not so with Clinton. Nearly two decades of right-wing smears against her by Limbaugh and Co. will see to that.
Rancid, unfortunately of all the GOP contenders, McCain is probably the toughest for the Dems to beat because of his anti-conservative anti-GOP stance on a number of issues. (He's been the maverick going against the GOP and the media seems to love McCain.)
I don't think a lot of disheartened Dem voters will view McCain as "evil" -- or not enough will view him as evil.
In talking to a number of Dem voters, they seem to like McCain (precisely because he pisses off the right and the Rush Limbaughs').
getalife @ 5:
Ottenga una vita, get a life in, Italian is it.
First, it would be Obama/Clinton because he wins the delegate race.
Second, it wouldn't be Obama/Clinton because she endorsed John McWho gives a Rat's Ass what his name is, he doesn't know one damn thing about economics and he would have us in Iraq for ten thousand years, oh wait his name just came back to me, Less Jobs, More Wars.
Keep your eyes on the prize.
Get over Clinton, she is a fabricating Republican by another name.
And the more I think about it, Gov. Napolitano would make a good VeeP choice for Obama.
Executive experience.
Force McCain to fight for his home state.
Turning Arizona blue could help turn New Mexico and Nevada blue as well, especially if Gov. Richardson keeps pitching in on the campaign.
Turning that region blue offsets the need to pick up Ohio AND Virginia AND Pennsylvania.
Her appearance on the ticket helps calm the sense of sexism some of Clinton's supporters feel has hurt her campaign, and could assuage some of those not willing to support Obama at the moment.
Over the last month, McCain has gone from being behind the leading Dem contender, to beating him. He now has around a 65% approval. We already have a large risk of losing the White House.
If Hillary does not throw in the towel soon, we will only become less likely to win the White House.
Gotta be Obama-Webb, and here's why.
Karen @ 125:
I've already made it perfectly clear elsewhere that I, and about 160,000 other members of the CPUSA, will not vote for Clinton, or for Gore should the bizarre claims circulating that he's under consideration as a 'compromise candidate' prove true. We do indeed intend to force your hand; should Clinton be the nominee, not only will the African-American and youth blocs be alienated, but so will the 'far left' block that your party likes occasionally to throw a bone to while it tables impeachment.
The idea doesn't scare you? Think again: in 2000, the CPUSA had 13,500 members. Over eight years, our numbers have increased thirteen-fold, and we vote in lockstep just as much as our rightist counterparts in the 'Moral Majority'. Beyond which, you might lose one or two of those states that don't really count because they went for Obama.
Think again.
RueMorgue @ 119:
Well sure thing, there Ruey, although I don't see how it's "surprising" or a "revelation" as such. Nor do I buy your "manipulation of the delegates" as the only scenario, which you seem to think.
Did I say anybody would not have a grievance if the superdelegates decide the nomination -- which, unless one drops out, will have to happen?
So, in your view the nomination would be "taken away from" one of the two candidates' supporters. Again, neither can win without them.
By your logic, all women would have a legitimate grievance if Hillary does not get the nod, since she's "one of their own." Guess that means women won't vote, and there are a lot more women than black people.
Obama/Clark
RueMorgue @ 126:
No, it won't happen either way. Ted said so.
Ted @ 108:
No one can take something away from Obama that he doesn't have and he doesn't have this nomination, not yet and maybe not at all.
And, I'm confused here. Are you really saying that Black Americans will bolt the Democratic party if Obama is not annointed by a few speaking for all of us? So you are saying this is all about race and Democrats should be bullied to accept Obama to keep black people in our party? That seems like very divisive reasoning to me and I have a lot more faith in black people voting for their best interest like the rest of us and that would be a Democrat.
indiana goes to clinton!!!!!!!
Bluesage, where have you been? Of course many blacks will bolt (or at least stay home) if Obama doesn't get the nomination. I'm not saying that's good, that's simple reality.
RueMorgue @ 132:
If you want to be a baby and take your marbles home if you don't get your way, please do so.
If you need to threaten your way to victory, think a first time.
RancidVenison @ 135:
Obama....Clinton...Obama....Clinton.....Bloomberg! Fuck this.
This is why I posted:
Enough is enough! Time for some real change not 'SnakeOil'
Note I will not be cliking on any links to teh 'Big Man' Kos's site. That place is no longer somewhere progressives should be going.
Nothing left after the Oborg got through with it.
RancidVenison @ 139:
Sure will. I'll take the other 199,999 marbles with me and surrender the Democrats to the DLC and other right-wingnuts. Enjoy losing in November.
-bloomberg??- seems ridiculous... what, as some sort of 'voter compromise'?? the 'balanced ticket' is a myth. the repubs never gave us one (bush/quayle, bush/cheney - what the hell kind of 'balance' is that??)
no compromises... obama/richardson. or at least obama/edwards.
and bluegrass, who'se to say the Dems will be preceived by blacks as in their best interest over the GOP (after Obama is kicked off the nomination by Hillary)?
The GOP has a number of high ranking blacks who could be seen as attractive.
Webb . . .
Upsides:
Blunts McCain on the War Hero business.
Reagan Democrats will LOVE him (Reagan did, and there's great archival footage)
The Press Loves Him (and he's got professional cred with them - Emmy and all.
Definitely swings Virginia (chances are better than 50/50 without him, but not much better than 50/50) and may help on other swing states.
Virginia's Gov is a Democrat - Tim Kaine. So the Senate seat is safe (Kaine can either appoint Mark Warner, who's running for John Warner's seat, or appoint himself. Both could retain the seat with ease.)
Very smart, very articulate, drop dead gorgeous Asian wife.
Impeccable resume . . . war hero, policy wonk, Navy secretary, Assistant Sec'y of Defense, US Senator.
Tough-talking Populist
Attack dog (and Obama needs one)
Downsides:
None, really. Anyone pissed off about his FISA vote actually going to stay home or vote for McCain instead?
Kucinich . . . brings no votes, scares people, would make a terrible president and it shows ("department of peace?!?" Great Dennis, we all love you, but a pacifist is unelectable) and can't deliver Ohio (struggling to hold onto his seat now, for crying out loud). Will hurt not help the ticket.
Richardson . . . won't bring many Hispanics (most of whom WILL break for Obama). Eminently qualified, but there's a reason he didn't catch fire.
Edwards . . . As much as a segment of the party loves him, his resume is light . . never should have been on the Kerry ticket ("unite the party" yeah, right! Like anyone supporting Edwards in 04 would have voted for Bush over Kerry.) and again, doesn't bring in votes. Doesn't hurt, doesn't help much, either.
Sabelius . . . intriguing, but not really high enough profile, and if you're going to put a woman on the ticket . . . swallow hard and take Hillary.
Napolitano . . . See Sabelius plus Charisma-impaired.
Ted @ 138:
Ted, I know that seems like a likely scenario in the short run, but things are really heated up right now. There is plenty of time to cool down before November. Too early to call it "reality," methinks.
RueMorgue @ 132:
This is why I hate getting involved in the Obama/Clinton fight. No matter what I say, it'll piss off one of their petulant voting blocs.
Does it scare me that a group like yours is willing to let the Supreme Court be dominated by crazy authoritarians, the Iraq war to be in the hands of the neo-cons, and hand all executive policy to a hopelessly corrupt Republican Party yet again because of how the Democratic Primary turns out? Of course it does. Which is why I, for one, will never be complacent.
In the interest of full disclosure, I prefer Obama to Clinton, and I voted for him when my state's primary took place.
I also think our electoral system is hopelessly broken, and that we need a new one.
Until then, however, I'll work within an unfortunately fucked up "democracy" to prevent Republicans from continuing to ruin the world.
RueMorgue @ 141:
You have fun, too, and don't forget to think sometime. It's fun -- and fundamental.
Bloomberg would really suck.
Call me crazy but I think I'd prefer a Democrat with my new Democratic administration, thanks. That kind of tacking right and appeasing of Wall Street would set a bad precedent and give me pause regarding Obama's decision making in general.
Put me down for:
John Edwards,
Wesley Clark,
Sharrod Brown,
Bill Richardson,
Kathleen Sibelius,
in that order.
Rancid, and where do you think enough blacks would go in November if McCain selected Condi Rice as VP -- which is being more and more talked about.
newspaperbrat @ 51:
I'd clarify and say Obama/EXPERIENCED white guy from the South with national security credentials.
Jim Webb?
Comments are closed on this entry