Who Should Be VP?

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

Webb might me able to swing Virginia in an election that Obama would win anyway, but I doubt it. Edwards had no effect on North Carolina and Obama would be much better advised to batten down his hatches in Pennsylvania and Michigan. I keep hearing how BHO can win in Virginia, but as a lontime resident of the Commonwealth, I think it's more dicey than people like Tim Russert or Chris Matthews seem to understand. He needs to first secure the states that Gore and Kerry won and then go after a swing state like Ohio. Besides, Webb would not be able to hide his wife anymore if he were Veep candidate. He hid her so well in his Senatorial campaign that I had to do internet research to figure out who she was 2 years ago. She's Asian and she's quite a bit younger than he is, which is fine with me, but he was hiding the fact from Virginians for some reason. Some pollster said something to him. He love her not very long time. I'm just saying.

Wasn't she "hiding" because she was pregnant for much of the campaign?

[70Chip]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Wasn't she "hiding" because she was pregnant for much of the campaign?

Why would you hide that? What screams "family values" louder than a wife with a baby bump? No, he was poll reading. He fancies himself an expert on the inhabitants of this region and he determined that the good people of Virginia would reaxt negatively to an Asian wife. I would have put her out front, but he endeavored to keep her a secret. Whatever.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

Why would you hide that? What screams "family values" louder than a wife with a baby bump? No, he was poll reading. He fancies himself an expert on the inhabitants of this region and he determined that the good people of Virginia would reaxt negatively to an Asian wife. I would have put her out front, but he endeavored to keep her a secret. Whatever.

So if you don't parade your wife like every politician you're hiding her? What if she didn't want to be part of his campaigning? Are we picking the wife or the guy running for office?

[12thMan]

I think Obama goes with either Kathleen Sebelius or Chuck Hagel.

Kathleen Sebelius, as has already been stated, can definitely help Obama with the female vote. Especially now that many feminist feel, rightfully or wrongfully, that their girl has been given a raw deal by the media and the good old boy network trying to elbow Hillary out of the race. Or at least so they claim. So someone like Sebelius may go a long way to heal the rift between Obama and many Hillary supporters who have vowed to support McCain if she doesn't get the nomination. One other plus to her being a Governor and not a Senator is, the last time two Senators were on a winning ticket was Kennedy and LBJ; 1960

Chuck Hagel. Like Sebelius, Hagel has that mid-west appeal coming from Nebraska. He's one of the few Republicans that have been very vocal in opposing the war and has been equally critical of the Bush Administration's handling of it.

On the other hand, he has publicly praised Obama for some of his foreign policy ideas. Also, I think Obama would further demonstrate his desire to change Washington, as he puts it, by having a bi-partisan ticket with Hagel as a running mate. This would shake up the establishment on so many levels and give Obama instant credibility. The downside to this ticket is, of course, the second man in charge is Republican and that can't sit well with top brass Dems.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I think Obama goes with either Kathleen Sebelius or Chuck Hagel.

Kathleen Sebelius, as has already been stated, can definitely help Obama with the female vote. Especially now that many feminist feel, rightfully or wrongfully, that their girl has been given a raw deal by the media and the good old boy network trying to elbow Hillary out of the race. Or at least so they claim. So someone like Sebelius may go a long way to heal the rift between Obana and many Hillary supporters who have vowed to support McCain if she doesn't get the nomination. One other plus to her being a Governor and not a Senator is, the last time two Senators were on a winning ticket was Kennedy and LBJ; 1960

Chuck Hagel. Like Sebelius, Hagel has that mid-west appeal coming from Nebraska. He's one of the few Republicans that have been very vocal in opposing the war and has been equally critical of the Bush Administration's handling of it.

On the other hand, he has publicly praised Obama for some of his foreign policy ideas. Also, I think Obama would further demonstrate his desire to change Washington, as he puts it, by having a bi-partisan ticket with Hagel as a running mate. This would shake up the establishment on so many levels and give Obama instant credibility. The downside to this ticket is, of course, the second man in charge is Republican and that can't sit well with top brass Dems.

Very goods points IMO. I wonder if Sebelius would make some Hillary supporters feel they're being patronized? Anyway, her most ardent supporters may not join the Obama camp no matter what. Hagel is pretty fascinating to me. I get the sense he's at an age/stage of life where the petty partisanship no longer influences his policy, and yet because he is not a sycophant he cannot become a heavyweight in the Senate. I think if the white house or a serious cabinet position is not on the horizon he will bow out of political life.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I think Obama goes with either Kathleen Sebelius or Chuck Hagel.

Kathleen Sebelius, as has already been stated, can definitely help Obama with the female vote. Especially now that many feminist feel, rightfully or wrongfully, that their girl has been given a raw deal by the media and the good old boy network trying to elbow Hillary out of the race. Or at least so they claim. So someone like Sebelius may go a long way to heal the rift between Obana and many Hillary supporters who have vowed to support McCain if she doesn't get the nomination. One other plus to her being a Governor and not a Senator is, the last time two Senators were on a winning ticket was Kennedy and LBJ; 1960

Chuck Hagel. Like Sebelius, Hagel has that mid-west appeal coming from Nebraska. He's one of the few Republicans that have been very vocal in opposing the war and has been equally critical of the Bush Administration's handling of it.

On the other hand, he has publicly praised Obama for some of his foreign policy ideas. Also, I think Obama would further demonstrate his desire to change Washington, as he puts it, by having a bi-partisan ticket with Hagel as a running mate. This would shake up the establishment on so many levels and give Obama instant credibility. The downside to this ticket is, of course, the second man in charge is Republican and that can't sit well with top brass Dems.

And what about McCain's veep?

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by The Goat

And what about McCain's veep?

I think McCain wil go with Charlie Crist or Jindal.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I think McCain wil go with Charlie Crist or Jindal.

If you were McCain, who would you pick?

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

If you were McCain, who would you pick?

I honestly don't follow the Republican contest(s) as ardently as I follow what's going on with Democrats. If I were McCain, I would go with Bobby Jindal.

Just from a practical point of view, I think race and color is important and something they can no longer afford to ignore. The Republicans have a long way to go to remake their image, this is something their top ranking members have recently stated, in fact. (see Tom Davis)

One of the issues they face is attracting people of different races and people of color. America is becoming more and more racially diverse. That's a fact regardless of your politics. It's just a matter of time, not sure how much time, before the racial gap between whites and non-whites in America will be as close as we've ever seen it; it narrows daily.

On the flip side, Republicans to date, have one minority in the Senate and none in Congress. Bobby Jindal is, to the best of my knowledge, the only minority Governor in the GOP.

Putting him on the ticket could be their opening to appealing to more minorities as well as attracting more into the fold for future elections. Could Jindal be the future face of the GOP? Not sure, but how many people of color will vote for McCain this fall simply because a person of color is standing next to him at the convention. I'll betcha more than had previously considered voting Republican. They just have to start thinking beyond this election cycle and begin to draw fresh, new, diverse blood into their party. If the GOP is smart, which I think they are, they will figure out a way to get Jindal on Mac's ticket.

[saden1]

Chuck Hagel? The man who lacked the courage to speak up until he announced his retirement? The guy who has a 90% lifetime conservative rating from ACU? The guy who voted for the war? On a democratic presidential ticket?

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by saden1

Chuck Hagel? The man who lacked the courage to speak up until he announced his retirement? The guy who has a 90% lifetime conservative rating from ACU? The guy who voted for the war? On a democratic presidential ticket?

Absolutely. Yes he voted for the war, but he has also spoken out against it since and has admitted his vote was a mistake. As far his lifetime conservative rating, well Obama has been rated as the most liberal guy in the Senate by some of these ratings. It could be a match made in heaven. Many view him as having strong foreign policy credentials.

Look, there are downsides to every ticket. Ultimately the nominee has to set the tone and the agenda for the campaign. Hagel is definitely on Obama's radar.

[12thMan]

Just to be clear, I'm in no way suggesting that Jindal only brings a racial dynamic to this ticket. Clearly he's an accomplished politician.

The people of the Gulf region, many of whom are still struggling from Katrina, might feel Jindal inside the Beltway could make a difference in their lives.

[SmootSmack]

Do you think some of those same people in the Gulf region might think "Wait a minute you just became Governor of Louisiana less than a year ago, and now you're suddenly off to Washington. What about us?"

I could see Jindal being a keynote speaker at this or the 2012 convention and then being a Presidential candidate in 2012 or 2016 (depending on what happens this year)

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Do you think some of those same people in the Gulf region might think "Wait a minute you just became Governor of Louisiana less than a year ago, and now you're suddenly off to Washington. What about us?"

I could see Jindal being a keynote speaker at this or the 2012 convention and then being a Presidential candidate in 2012 or 2016 (depending on what happens this year)

Well, to some extent, the same can be said about Obama. Obviously there's a difference between a departing Senator and a departing Governor. But Jindal could make the argument, "now I'm inside the Beltway. I can make a bigger difference. I'll never forget the fine people of Lousiana, you're the one's who gave me my start. I determined to fight poverty, etc. "

But yes, I can see him lining up the White House in '12 or '16.

[SmootSmack]

I think we should just have an Obama/McCain ticket or a McCain/Obama ticket and call it a night