Obama-Kaine vs. McCain-Romney? Are These The Tickets?
Dan Schnur, who was John McCain's communications director in 2000 is not much impressed by either Obama's or McCain's choices for VP.
I don't much care who the Republicans pick. Obviously, I prefer the weakest possible candidate and Romney just may fit the bill.
But what about Schnur's point about Kaine. He does lack national security credentials. Would we be better off with some general or at least Jim Webb (who, sadly, took his name out).
I like Kaine alot. He's a good governor, a progressive, a Catholic, and he speaks Spanish fluently. He is also wicked smart. But is he the best we have?
I think the Obama folks need to hear from us BEFORE they make this critical choice. No point grousing after Obama makes the pick. They read TPM. We should mouth off now.
MJ:
How can 'we' have any say in the matter when 'we' are not privy to the vetting information and documents for each candidate?
After all - a sound judgment requires access to ALL information which informs a final decision - and you and I are not in any position to have that kind of access.
Just a thought.
July 31, 2008 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
When I started working for a Congressional committee many years ago, a senior staffer expressed to me his view that the "only people with a right to an opinion" are the people in the room (when a decision is made, that is).
I privately disagreed at the time, and feel the same way 22 years later.
Because interested Obama supporters can't be privy to what comes out in the vetting process, any Obama campaign staffer taking the trouble to surf around on the internet to get a flavor of netroots thinking on VP would, I would assume, take suggestions offered not as "pick so-and-so" but as "please consider or look into so-and-so".
The approach to reporting at the mother ship which Josh has pioneered is testament to how valuable information and suggestions can and do come from just about any place or source. Even the internet.
My thoughts, as a (white male, FWIW) northern Virginia resident who thinks very highly of Tim Kaine, continue to gravitate towards either Napolitano or Richardson as the person I would like to see Obama have as his running mate.
Not that Kaine is particularly charismatic, either, but Napolitano and Richardson both offer more in the way of pertinent government experience. We don't need more "electric" on the ticket. In fact, less in that way might be more.
July 31, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um, MJ, aren't you even a little put off by Kaine's endorsement of Lieberman and his "faith-based opposition to abortion"? Really, here's a candidate who will completely suck the wind out of Obama's sails. But hey, if the Obama campaign wants to spend the rest of the summer and fall becalmed, it's their call. Let's hope they have plenty of people on board ready to row.
July 31, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
The choice of an anti-choice running mate will likely seal the deal for women who were Sen. Clinton supporters and who think of Sen. Obama as misogynistic.
I garrr-ohn-tee ya that it will seal the deal for me.
July 31, 2008 12:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tankard,
agreed, picking an anti-choice running mate would be political suicide.
July 31, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
MB:
Not only that, but that would also sacrifice the governorship of Virginia to a Republican - not a welcome thing with redistricting coming up neat year in that state.
Kaine is not a viable choice for Obama - or the party.
July 31, 2008 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know I always seem to be saying "no, no, no" about every possible Veep. But Kaine believes that marriage should be "between a man and a woman," and I just don't think that's a progressive stance.
Also, remember that Obama had some trouble with the homosexual community during the primaries, given his association with Donnie McCurken.
To pick some one who is against same sex marriage rights seems an unnecessary insult to a group of voters who we should be counting on to vote their interests by voting with us.
July 31, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know I always seem to be saying "no, no, no" about every possible Veep.
That's OK, destor. Nobody listens to us anyway.
August 1, 2008 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I still like Bill Richardson more, though he's probably not the best attack dog or even a decent campaigner. But he can help geographically and has been in the White House before as energy secretary and ambassador.
I do like Kaine, but he is also young and not very experienced, which would give McCain more fire. Plus, I think if Obama's looking to carry Virginia, he may be able to do it without Kaine on the ticket. I can't say whether VA or guaranteeing NM (which leans blue) and picking up CO is better though.
July 31, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Obama should choose Farrakhan just to drive the Republicans and the right wing insane.
Well, there's my facetious post for the day.
I'd like to see Obama pick a dyed in the wool liberal. The Liberals have to take the country, (and their reputation, back) this could be a start.
July 31, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
JohnW1141: Who do you consider a dyed in the wool liberal these days?
July 31, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
American Dreamer asks'
"JohnW1141:
Who do you consider a dyed in the wool liberal these days?"
Well, since my idol, Paul Wellstone died, I guess Kennedy, Boxer, and the socialist Bernie Sanders.
Joan Claybrook, head of Public Citizen for VEEP!
July 31, 2008 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like Kaine, but he should not be VP. I think this notion that he needs to pick a Governor is a crock. The obvious choice at this point is Joe Biden. My personal choice would be Russ Feingold. I would stay away from people lacking in national and international experience. That is Obama's most prominant political vulnerability, and he should address it.
Biden will help him govern, would be able to step in immediately as President if anything were to happen to Obama, he is very experienced, knowledgeable about foreign policy, military policy and national security issues, and is well respected by his colleagues on both sides of the aisle. And he will be a very effective campaigner, even if he occasionally runs his mouth.
Feingold is perceived as too liberal, and without geographical diversity, but he is a maverick, with impeccable grades when it comes to integrity, national security policy, election reform, and a slew of other issues. He would will help with the Jewish voters in South Florida, he would help solidify the left, and he would help with the Clinton crowd. He is articulate, plain spoken, from the midwest, and would make a phenomenal President.
My two cents.
July 31, 2008 4:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wouldn't pick a sitting Senator unless the state he/she is from is DARK DARK BLUE. We need every Senator (60?) and can't chance losing one seat.
No sitting Governor where redistricting can be an issue.
Joan Claybrook head of Public Citizen.
Ralph Nader, Senator Susan Collins or Olympia Snow (whichever is pro choice), Anthony Zinni,
Caroline Kennedy.
July 31, 2008 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Zinni is worth looking into. Obama nedds someone on the ticket with good foreign policy (or high level military) credentials. Who does tha leave? Biden? Clark?
That a guy can be seen as having put his foot in his mouth for having told the truth in a nonpajoritive fashion is rather disturubing. But, that is the view of Clark in the MSM. Wish they'd stick up for our guy that way, now that Johnny's campaign is getting ugly.
Please, NO conservative Dems. (This includes the current gov. of VA.) It sends a message that the promise of change is just BS.
July 31, 2008 11:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
kcrook says;
"Please, NO conservative Dems. (This includes the current gov. of VA.) It sends a message that the promise of change is just BS."
WOW, do I agree with that.
August 1, 2008 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink