« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Veep Speculation Thread
I've said before that early Vice Presidential speculation, while sometimes entertaining, is mostly useless. This is largely because those who talk the most about it usually don't know anything, while those who know the most about what's going on usually don't talk.
However, this election year is different for VP choices, as it is in so many other areas. So, welcome to the Veep Speculation Thread!
Here are just a few starter questions.
Which candidate has more at stake in his selection?
Which candidate will name first?
When do you think each candidate will name?
And, of course: Who will get the nod for each party?
Let's talk about these and other questions as you think of them.
Off-topic: I am going to be largely absent from these pages for the next several weeks. We've got a major software release coming up, so development and testing are kicking into high gear today. I'll try to respond to comments as the opportunity presents itself.
Advertisement
Comments (16)
Given current polling data, Obama has more to lose from his selection, and McCain has more to gain. Therefore, I'd expect Obama to be cautious in his choice and McCain to be a bit more daring.
Undoubtedly, Obama will. The Democratic Convention is before the Republican Convention, and there is strategical advantage in seeing who the other side picked first. McCain will definitely wait until after Obama has named his VP choice before naming his own, wild rumors be damned.
I think Obama will wait until the convention. McCain will make his selection either the week after the Democratic convention, or during the Republican convention.
I've got no idea, for either side. For each name that comes to mind, I can tell you why that person won't get the nod. Yet, someone has to get the nod.
July 22, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
As for Obama, I'd narrow it down to three contenders - John Edwards, Joe Biden and Kathleen Sebelius. Romney can sometimes be a smarmy bastard, and if he pulled that act in a debate with Sebelius it wouldn't really play well. I like Biden's fire, but Obama doesn't want any distractions and Biden is one to not have a proper filter at times. However given that Obama is "unknown" I think Edwards will get the nod here. Then Edwards and Romney can debate who has better hair.
July 22, 2008 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hasn't Edwards stated emphatically that he has absolutely no interest in the VP slot?
July 22, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
My understanding is he 'flip-flopped'. If asked, he will serve. (I would prefer Edwards as Attorney General.)
July 22, 2008 2:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmm. Interesting. I like the idea of him as VP, I had just ruled it out along with Al Gore pretty early.
July 22, 2008 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I believe he later walked back from that stance. Basically he wanted AG, but I don't think he's getting that role because it would be seen as too political given he's ran twice to be Democratic Nominee for President and was the Democratic VP candidate in '04. What else could he do in the administration if AG was off the table?
He's been vetted by the Rove machine and has basically been campaigning for the last four years so I assume he kept his nose clean so there should be no surprises with him there.
July 22, 2008 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Edwards has acknowledged being on list and 'vetted'. He just wants to be 'someone' of prominence on the 'team'. While I still think he would be good AG, I no longer think he would be good VP with Obama. Just my opinion.
July 22, 2008 7:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
We are having a Bobby Jindal conversation over here.
July 22, 2008 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
And I put my thoughts over here:
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/07/who-should-obama-pick-for-vp-a.php
Romney and Crist for McCain, possibly Pawlenty and Mark Sanford of SC.
Biden, Richardson, Edwards or Dodd for Obama, possibly McCaskill (but needed in the Senate) or Sebelius.
July 22, 2008 6:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I forgot to post my own answers. :-)
- They're equally at risk with their picks. Both have resume holes that they need to fill.
- Up until this week, I'd have bet a month's pay that Obama would name first. But now, McCain may be so desperate for positive news that he might name before the Olympics. Having said that, I still believe Obama will name first.
- I think Obama will name his choice in the week after he returns from his trip. McCain is likely to wait and see who Obama names; that will determine when he announces. If Obama drops a big name in the #2 slot, expect a McCain announcement shortly thereafter.
- Dem pick: Absolutely no clue. But the field of contenders has shrunk some. At this point, my guess about the short list is Reed, Biden, Clinton, Edwards, Sebelius.
My personal pick is Kathleen Sebelius. Sharp, crossover appeal, good exec experience, great campaigner, works well with Obama. I think Jack Reed (who was not on the radar a month ago) may be getting a looooong look. John Edwards is a known quantity, but that may work against him this year. Joe Biden would be nice, except he has Rendell-itis. (Or does Rendell have Biden-itis? Either way, they both are incapable of self-editing.)
And then, there's the proverbial 800-lb gorilla in the VP room: Hillary. Yes, I know all the reasons she shouldn't get it. I've blogged about it here and elsewhere. BUT...you don't waste precious time vetting someone if they're not a short-lister. Even with all the baggage, the primary fight, and POTUS 42, Hillary Clinton has a better shot than I'd like to admit. Objectively, there are a lot of arguments in her favor - and a lot of people pushing for her.
GOP pick: Mitt Romney. Easy call there. He's younger than McCain (but then again, so is water). More importantly, he's made-for-TV. Successful as a businessman and former MA governor. He might be able to help turn Michigan red, as the Romney name still carries tremendous clout there. Writing off his personal $42M campaign debt is a big plus. Finally, he's familiar with John McCain, having spent much of the last three months with his lips planted on McCain's posterior.
Other possibilities: Charlie Crist (too much personal stuff), Bobby Jindal (ditto), Tim Pawlenty (having popularity issues in his own state, and defines "vanilla"). Longshots...maybe Sarah Palin?
July 22, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's the Crist personal stuff? The fact that he's just now getting married?
Everyone hates Romney in Massachusetts and in virtually every state where he campaigned he got less popular as voters got to know him. Crist at least seems to be popular in Florida. But McCain seems to want a suck up and knows Romney brings money and lots of Mormon volunteers.
July 22, 2008 6:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Romney is NOT hated in Michigan. True, it's due to his father having been a very popular governor. But the Romney name in Michigan is a big deal. I believe Massachusetts to be lost to McCain, so it's not really part of the discussion.
Crist's personal stuff is the still-circulating gay rumors. They're under the radar, but still out there amongst the Reichwingers.
July 22, 2008 6:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton had to be on list and 'vetted'. If she wasn't at least on list, he would have even more difficulty with her supporters.
I believe Bill has pretty much lost her any chance she made of had.
July 22, 2008 7:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think this underestimates the trademark Clinton survival instinct and political charm.
Also, I believe Obama to be a classic pragmatist. If he feels that the best way to win the WH is to put HRC on the ticket, he'll do it.
Again, I wouldn't pick her. I don't think she's a good fit for a large number of reasons. But honestly, over the last month, has any potential Dem Veep had their stock go up faster, except maybe Jack Reed?
July 23, 2008 10:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
I was just musing on the lack of women in high offices of U.S. politics during my lifetime, and I've been voting since Carter. It's really shocking that in 200 plus years of this country's history, women have had such a poor showing of it. But at least I see women leaders in other nations. This country is still very chauvenistic.
To realize that is rather painful.
July 22, 2008 8:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
First, I certainly agree with what you're saying.
Now, just for fun, compare the number of women with the number of blacks in high federal office.
July 23, 2008 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment