The Next Vice President of the United States.
Barack Obama’s announcement of his VP choice could come any day now. With the Olympics starting on Friday, and ending the weekend before the start of the Democratic convention, this coming week seems like an opitune time for him to announce. Further, it would end John McCain’s silly tantums, at least in the press’s eyes, as they will have something new to report on.
So who will it be?
The press has been talking up the following names:
Evan Bayh, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chuck Hagel, Wesley Clark, Tim Kaine, Sam Nunn, Ed Rendell, Bill Richardson, Kathleen Sebelius, Jack Reed, Chris Dodd
The political prediction markets and buzz have four candidates on the short short list: Evan Bayh, Tim Kaine, Joe Biden and Kathleen Sebelius.
Those is what the conventional wisdom says, but I think it is wrong.
And Sean at FiveThrtyEight concurs:
For my own gut sense, I have never been comfortable with the conventional wisdom surrounding Obama’s VP pick. There’s something nagging about it, and no hard numbers to support my feeling. Perhaps it’s the “think different” approach to many aspects of the campaign – the next-level social networking, the unprecedented 50-state massive organizer approach, the generalized no-leak culture among decision-makers, etc. It strikes me that in multiple important key ways, the Obama campaign has made conscious departures from the conventional wisdom norm.
There are many angles from which to approach who Obama will chose. If you are looking for “reinforcment,” the candidates seem to be Sebelius and Kaine. If you are looking for some to balance out Obama’s supposed weaknesses as a candidate, it seems the candidates for that are Clark, Biden, Hagel, and Nunn.
In the blogosphere, the conventional wisdom, as opposed to the Washington pundit conventional wisdom, is that Obama needs to pick someone who reinforces his core message of change rather than worrying about using the pick to allay people’s fears about his lack of national security experience. They point to Bill Clinton picking Al Gore to reinforce his own strengths. But I have never been a fan of these categories. For it seems many are overlapping. For example, one of Obama’s weaknesses is that he lacks executive experience. So is picking Sebelius or Kaine a reinforcing choice or a balancing choice? Or can it be both?
Indeed, when Clinton picked Gore, he was also balancing the ticket between a small state Governor with no Washington experience with a Senator in Gore with tons of Washington experience.
And then there is the thought of geographical balance and the notion that the VP should pick you up a state you would not carry on your own.
So what factors is Obama considering? Who will he choose and why?
My thoughts are that first, that Obama is not going to pick someone new that requires introduction to the country. He will pick a known steady hand, like Clinton did, like Dukakis did, like Carter did. Obama already has to fight the meme that he is too young and too new and too risky. He does not have to fight that battle twice with his VP Pick. So I think Kaine and Sebelius, or the more unknown Senators like Jack Reed or Evan Bayh are out of consideration.
So that leaves us with a different list, which, let’s say for argument, looks like this: Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Wesley Clark, Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, Chris Dodd, and Sam Nunn.
How can you say he could be considering a Washington insider??? Isn’t he about change?
Yes, he is about change. He will still be the Presidential nominee, and his campaign will still be about changing what is wrong with Washington. But his VP choice will be about reassurance. Much like George W. Bush’s choice of Dick Cheney was about reassurance. Indeed, if you recall the summer of 2000, the same uncertainty surrounded Bush’s resume and experience, and the same up in the air speculation and uncertainty about his VP pick existed. No one knew who Bush was going to pick, and no one knew what kind of VP he was going to pick. No one knew what the right VP strategy was for Bush. And then he went with Cheney as a reassurance, and campaigned on his own as Bush.
Further, Obama has not said the line he used in the primary against Hillary for some time, and that is: “are we just going to keep sending the same people to Washington and expect a different result?”
He is not using that argument against McCain, even though I think he should. So the absence of that line tells me that the next Vice President of the United States will be:
Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
And there is a good chance that he will shock the world and pick Hillary too. In fact, I think it is now more likely he will pick Hillary than it is that he will pick anyone else but Biden. I put her ahead of Kaine and Sebelius too.
Though people can bring up examples that the regional VP pick is a smart decision, I think it is too old school for Obama.
You brought up Cheney as a VP pick which is interesting since he was the one in charge of the VP selection for Bush.
Any who, maybe it is the fact that I’m from Delaware, but I would love Biden to be picked. I think he would bring a pit-bull quality to the campaign which would be very nice.
Like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic!
The one thing that a Biden choice would betray about the Obama Team thinking is the long-term consequences on that pick. You aren’t picking a 2016 successor if you pick Biden. It is certainly possible to be thinking about others for long term party leadership, which I’d have to think about.
I think Biden would be a good choice for him. He’s great as a surrogate. I’ve seen some people put forth Daschle’s name, which would also be a good pick.
I’m still holding out for Wes Clark. The contrast between Clark and McCain would be stark and the nation could see a REAL military leader.
I guess Edwards is down the memory hole…
Daily Kos banning people who talk about the Edwards love child story now(the coverup continues)
deceiver ^
Digg this, The John Edwards/Rielle Hunter story continues to, as they say, develop. You might even say it’s gestating. Whether the “legitimate” news likes it or not: Lee Stranahan, who posted the first (only?) serious, thoughtful analysis of the whole mess at the Huffington Post, has been banned from the Daily Kos for daring to talk about it there. Some Wikipedians keep trying to add the forbidden name “Rielle Hunter” to thoroughly relevant entries, and other Wikipedians keep taking it out. In the Wiki entry for the 1988 Jay McInerney novel Story of My Life, one brave soul has added…
I like to think that they’re blacking out the story out of respect for Elizabeth. I don’t think it’s right to give him any cover for being such a pig, but I can’t think of a better reason than to spare her any additional pain during this difficult time. Is it right? No, but it’s understandable.
“I’m still holding out for Wes Clark. The contrast between Clark and McCain would be stark and the nation could see a REAL military leader.”
Wes Clark?! He’s politicized himself FAR too much to ever be in the running for VP.
I’m actually somewhat happy about the Edwards fiasco from a purely political standpoint. Should Obama win he might have appointed Edwards as AG. Now that’s pretty much off the table.
I agree with Rebecca, Wesly Clark should be top on the list. He would provide Obama with national security credibility and is a die hard opponent of the Bush administration. He is a well known patriotic General with war time experience. His military doctrine of war as a last resort aligns well with the majority of the American population. His stance on civil rights, Washington gridlock and a change of direction are analogous to Obama’s.
I like both Biden and Clark, and I’m with you, DD, I’m not ruling Hillary out of the running. Talk about a news story!
Pandora,
You’re hotness is still blinding me — three days later!
LOL!
Seriously… I’m kinda leaning toward the Hillary as VP thing – Guess I’m over the primary! Geez, if Obama picked her would anyone even cover McCain anymore? They barely cover him now.
I’ve got a big picture of him selecting Wesley Clark, as in: please, do! General Clark was the man who managed not to start World War III only because a British general defied General Clark’s orders, and was the NATO commander who was
firedretired early by President Clinton due to his actions.And don’t forget that lovely photograph of General Clark having switched covers with Serbian General and still-hiding war criminal Ratko Mladic! 🙂
I don’t think that this is the kind of “national security experience” on which Mr Obama wishes to run.
If Mr Obama is smart, he’ll pick Bill Richardson.
“Geez, if Obama picked her would anyone even cover McCain anymore? They barely cover him now.”
Yup and yet liberals will still deny the media’s liberal bias.
Dana – I agree, Bill Richardson would be a good pick for him.
Progressives choosing a military general! How progressive! Everyone of them are “blue dog” , conservatives. Where’s the change?
With these choices, I pick Hilary!
Well I wouldn’t exactly consider electing someone based solely on “hope & change” to be “progress.”
The media made a big deal about how “unqualified” Bush was to be President, yet in 2008 it’d be hard to find someone any more unqualified than Obama.
BTW – Obama sure seems to have no problem acting like he’s already the President, but someone should remind him that he’s jumping the gun.
just like a —— to pull a gun….
Choosing Hillary would just confuse the Bots — they wouldn’t know whether to keep defending the racist and idiotic crap coming out of the McCain camp or to re-start their whinging about sexist media.
Calling out the race card was GREAT!
Nothing like watching Obama feel his erection soften.
Progressives choosing a military general! How progressive! Everyone of them are “blue dog” , conservatives. Where’s the change?
With these choices, I pick Hilary!
Picking Hillary how progressive why not pick fellow Blue dog DLCer Carper
BTW Mike W no one is more unqualified then Bush or more lost tan Mc Cain
Umm…exactly what ‘racist crap’ is coming out of the McCain camp? Even Obama said the McCain camp hadn’t been racist. Or is he just racist for not supporting Obama, since that seems to be the meme this election season?
Picking Hillary would be tragic…for Hillary. She should stay as far away from that ticket as possible. She has absolutely nothing to gain from it. If he loses, she decreases her chances of a 2012 nomination; if he wins, it’s destined to be a disastrous administration. There’s no way to clean up the mess GWB is leaving in four years. Whomever wins this election will likely serve one term and leave a miserable failure.
Clearly Pal Joe here saw the racist crap that he is here celebrating — perhaps he can sell you a clue.
Oh, so Pal Joe is now the McCain campaign? Someone is in desperate need of a clue, sweetheart, but it’s not me. As much as you may wish it, the McCain camp has not been the least bit racist during this campaign.
You should really try to be a little more careful about lobbing the ‘racist’ charge so freely. Apart from the fact that your need to pull the trump card that conveniently prevents you from having to answer legitimate questions about your candidate is a sign of intellectual immaturity, it cheapens the severity of true racism. People aren’t racist simply because they don’t see Obama as having the experience or the wherewithal to be president. They’re just thinking voters who want a little more than empty promises.
Dom, what would you consider racist? You had no trouble seeing and defining sexism when it came to Hillary. Where is that line when it comes to Obama? Be fair.
Personally I think McCain would have run the same sort of crap against Hillary, and I would have called foul.
Clues are $20 each, payable to Karl Rove.
I think racism is feeling disdain for a person solely on the basis of their race. Sexism is the same. Sexism was blatant during the primary, but it was mainly coming from the media as opposed to the Obama campaign (except for a couple of insensitive remarks made by Obama). Either way, the accusation of sexism does not end a debate like the accusation of racism and you know it as well as I do.
The cases of alleged racism are so vague they needed to be explained as ‘code’. It’s complete bullshit. For instance, in no instance has anyone from the McCain camp ever called Obama ‘uppity’, but that’s Gergen’s interpretation, so Obama supporters will jump on it. Show me McCain, one of his surrogates or a member of the media make a comment similar to ‘every time I see her on the television, I involuntarily cross my legs’ (courtesy of Tucker Carlson) and I’ll agree you have a case. Until then, I would suggest that people stop looking for racism where it doesn’t exist. It does nothing to help Obama.
Dominique has said this several times across our blogosphere… and everyone passes over it without comment….
“if he wins, it’s destined to be a disastrous administration. “
That is an emotional statement said without proof. I’m curious as to what physical evidence you have that it will be so, (are you and Hube joined at the hip)…..(sorry Matt for putting that image in your head)….
I’ll start you off on the defensive…. All this nations top economist are advising Obama and supporting him over McCain. McCain’s financial adviser is Phil Gramm, (another misogynist, thank you very much) who sneaked the deregulatory piece of legislation which allowed the entire nation’s housing market to fall…….
Therefore if McCain wins, ……” it’s destined to be a disastrous administration.”
“The cases of alleged racism are so vague they needed to be explained as ‘code’. It’s complete bullshit. ”
THANK YOU DOM! Here’s the thing, if you go around constantly looking for racism and expecting it at every turn, if you interpret every negative comment as potentially racist…..well you can find racism in ANYTHING if you’re willing to be that sensitive.
The ad with Hilton & Spears had nothing to do with race, and frankly it’s disgusting that people “find” racism” in that. It was meant to highlight Obama’s celebrity status and had nothing to do with any racial overtones of “white women, black man”
Obama is flat out saying “look, McCain’s trying to make you afraid of me because I’m black” (Which is entirely untrue) If that’s not playing the race card I don’t know what is.
I find the following two rules to be useful if you are white:
1. Don’t ever say “can I help you?” to a black person. It implies they cannot help themselves, or that they should not be there and you wish to help them move along. You are clearly a racist.
2. Don’t ever say “can I help you?” to a white person. It implies that you favor your own as part of a larger conspiracy to leave black people behind and on their own. You are clearly a racist.
This works in about 100% of the cases.
I find the following two rules to be useful if you are white:
1. Don’t ever say “can I help you?” to a black person. It implies they cannot help themselves, or that they should not be there and you wish to help them move along. You are clearly a racist.
2. Don’t ever say “can I help you?” to a white person. It implies that you favor your own as part of a larger conspiracy to leave black people behind and on their own. You are clearly a racist.
This works in about 100% of the cases.
Grow up, Mike. Race is an issue, just like gender would have been if Hillary had been the nominee. Just like McCain’s age. It’s all on the table.
“Obama is flat out saying “look, McCain’s trying to make you afraid of me because I’m black” (Which is entirely untrue) If that’s not playing the race card I don’t know what is.”
You got that right. You don’t know what playing the race card is. How about McCain’s new tag line? “John McCain: The American president Americans have been waiting for”.
American President? Why not: John McCain: The President Americans have been waiting for?
Nothing happens by accident in advertising. Every word is analyzed and debated to death. So what’s your spin on this?
“American President? Why not: John McCain: The President Americans have been waiting for?
Nothing happens by accident in advertising. Every word is analyzed and debated to death. So what’s your spin on this?”
That is the phrase that TESTED BEST. It says more about the audience than it does about the campaign using it.
Apparently you need to learn more about advertisting!
Frodo, the McCain camp is running on a wing and a prayer. They’re putting out these attack ads faster than McCain can stand up. I don’t think any of their ads our tested.
Tested best? On who? Their targeted audience? Hmmm… who are they? Every ad is targeted at a certain group, which is why Pepsi runs different ads on MTV than it does on CBS.
Oh, and I worked in advertising and marketing for years – quite successfully.
nem—Trust me, they have been tested. I know one of the people working on them
pan—Answering the phones at the agency doesn’t count. If you ever got beyond that….well, there’s a reason you’re not being sought to do it today.
“Frodo, the McCain camp is running on a wing and a prayer”
Really? Then what the hell is Mr. “Hope & Change” running on.
“You got that right. You don’t know what playing the race card is. How about McCain’s new tag line? “John McCain: The American president Americans have been waiting for”.
Pandora – You can’t seriously be saying that slogan is racist? Read the 2nd paragraph of post #28, or hell read my most recent blog post about the house apologizing for slavery.
Oooh… Frod “knows” someone! Well, I guess that settles that.
And stooping to insults – especially when you haven’t a clue – just shows you have no argument. It also shows you didn’t answer my question… who was the targeted audience for this ad? Come on, Frod, this is advertising 101.