Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration As Obama's VP

Raising Kaine has Jim Webb's statement.

Last week I communicated to Senator Obama and his presidential campaign my firm intention to remain in the United States Senate, where I believe I am best equipped to serve the people of Virginia and this country. Under no circumstances will I be a candidate for Vice President.

A year and a half ago, the people of Virginia honored me with election to the U.S. Senate. I entered elective politics because of my commitment to strengthen America's national security posture, to promote economic fairness, and to increase government accountability. I have worked hard to deliver upon that commitment, and I am convinced that my efforts and talents toward those ends are best served in the Senate.

In this regard, the bipartisan legislative template we were able to put into effect through 18 months of work in order to enact the new, landmark GI Bill will serve as a prototype for my future endeavors in government. This process, wherein we brought 58 Senators from both parties to the table as co-sponsors, along with more than 300 members of the House, gives me renewed confidence that the Congress can indeed work effectively across party lines and address the concerns of our citizens.

At this time I am also renewing my commitment to work hard to make sure that Senator Obama wins both Virginia and the presidency this November. He is a man who speaks eloquently about our national goals and calls for the practical solutions that must be put into place to obtain them. I will proudly campaign for him.

Well, there goes Obama's best non-Clinton option. I'm glad to see Webb out of contention, actually, as he's a real asset in the senate and that was one hell of a seat to win. The question now remains will Obama go in the Sam Nunn direction -- elder statesman to shore up perceived experience deficit while undermining the whole "you can't keep sending the same people to Washington and expect a different result" thing -- or does he go the Kathleen Sebelius route -- reinforcing his change and bi-partisan cooperation messages but doing nothing to assuage those concerned with his lack of foreign policy experience.

Over the past two weeks, the Obama campaign has been approaching issues from a defensive stance, conceding right-wing definitions of toughness and values in order to appeal to red state voters. Assuming he continues in this vein, my guess would be he's leaning toward an elder statesman model for VP, unless he decides ultimately to go with Clinton who brings a little bit of the best of both words to the ticket. I still don't think a Clinton pick is terribly likely but I must say, as time goes on, the upside of Clinton as VP seems to grow while the downside of picking her diminishes.



Display:


Please let it be Sebelius (2.00 / 1)

I really hope it's Sebelius and not someone like Nunn.  Or, if he does feel like he has to name an "elder statesman/foreign policy wonk," why not make it someone like Joe Biden or-even better-a retired General like Zinni who has been critical of the Iraq war.  

Actually, the more I think about it just let him pick someone already.  I'm officially sick of the speculation, including my own...


by HSTruman on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 04:59:24 PM EST

Re: Please let it be Sebelius (none / 0)

Why do you hope its Sebelous ?

- Just Curious .


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:01:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Please let it be Sebelius (none / 0)

Lori - for some of the reasons listed below.  I would particularly stress that I'm interested in politicians generally who have been able to win over independents and disaffected republicans in red states.  As such, I have tremendous respect for Governors Sebelius, Napolitano, and Schweitzer.  Heck, I also like Bredsen, who I believe is from your home state, although he's a little too economically conservative for me.  


by HSTruman on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:32:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Please let it be Sebelius (none / 0)

Why? I mean I admire her and all, but she's a very conservative (for a Dem) red state governor with a speaking style that makes John Kerry seem animated. And she can't even deliver her own state. I'm not sure why she's even on the list.


by ColoradoGuy on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:40:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Please let it be Sebelius (none / 0)

First, I would disagree that she is "very conservative."  She has a great record on environmental issues, for example, is great on choice, and has made huge investments in education as government.  Moreover, she made a political name for herself by standing up to the insurance industry when she was the state insurance commissioner, which was a big deal at the time and showed real political courage.

Second, I am extremely impressed by her ability to almost singlehandedly reinvigorate the Democratic party in Kansas.  It takes a pretty special politician to flip prominent moderate republicans to the Democratic party.  She not only did that, but got two prominent republican figures to run on the same ticket as her as LG.

I admit that her SOTU response was bad, but that's a thankless job.  Jim Webb was amazing, but almost everyone else struggles in that role.  I don't think that's representative of her speaking ability.    


by HSTruman on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:31:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

Has Joe Biden removed himself from consideration? If not, how come he's not on the short list around here?

Presidential caliber, foreign policy experience, a familiar face, a voice of reason and yet also a pretty fearless attack dog during a campaign... all the things you want in a VP, especially in a year when geography isn't the top concern. Sure on some levels he's an old Washington hand, but he's far more liberal than Nunn and not as purely symbolic as Sibelius. IMO.


"The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it." -- Dr. Horrible
by BobzCat on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:04:33 PM EST

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

Yeah, I like Biden much better than I ever liked Webb as a VP choice.
I think rather than going conservative, he needs a more progressive VP.
Sebelius could do the job, but we need her more in Kansas. Sorry Barack. :)
by skohayes on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:39:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Biden says he would accept the VP nod. (none / 0)

Biden has not removed himself and says he would accept. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/200 8/06/23/biden-id-say-yes-to-being-vp/


by howiekent on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:09:11 PM EST

Re: Biden says he would accept the VP nod. (none / 0)

Biden would be a great Secretary of State, though.


by Angry White Democrat on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:40:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From (1.00 / 1)

OMG IT IS OBVIOUS THAT CLINTON IS ONLY QUALIFIED VP CANDIDATE NOW!  Barry O needs to name Clinton as Vice President if he expects to win otherwise he can't win in red states like Virginia and Colorado and to prove hes not sexist pig!!! LOLZZZZ


by OMG LOLZZ on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:12:58 PM EST

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

The elder statesmen route is best. Pick Hillary or better choose Al Gore.  


by Makey on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:14:49 PM EST

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (2.00 / 1)

Al Gore has been painted as a loser in a way that Hillary hasn't.

Hillary is a perfect fighter which is a very large part of what a VP needs to do during a campaign

Say what you will about Hillary but no one says she isn't a tough attack dog type politician.


by dtaylor2 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:30:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Loser? (2.00 / 3)

Al Gore has been painted as a winner, because he won the popular vote in 2000, he won the Nobel Peace Prize, and he won an Academy Award, all within a decade.

We could only be so lucky to have him on the ticket.  You could say that he's passed the Commander-in-Chief test.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:34:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Loser? (none / 0)

Psssst.

He also won the Democratic primary.


Obama/Clark (still dreaming)
by spacemanspiff on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:40:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Loser? (2.00 / 1)

Obama's base includes a lot of non democrats.

Hillary is an easier sell because there is a clear case for offering her the VP because of how well she performed in primary.

Al Gore on the other hand has all the negatives for the GOP leaning and doesn't have the immediate positives.  For example the economic performance of the Clinton white house is more attached to Hillary than to Gore in most peoples minds by virtue of Bill  being so closely attached to Hillary.

With Hillary as VP Obama could make a very convincing I am the 2nd coming of Bill Clinton without the smutty stuff case.  Bill Clinton's legacy reaches far into the GOP ranks and would help Obama with the non democrat portion of his base as well as with much of the DLC wing.

This would allow a Clinton years vs Bush years comparison which would favor Obama to no end in an economic election.  


by dtaylor2 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:50:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Loser? (2.00 / 1)

You're making Hillary supporters look bad.

I'm sure their is a great pro Clinton argument but this isn't it.

Not even close.


Obama/Clark (still dreaming)
by spacemanspiff on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:04:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Loser? (2.00 / 1)

None of the other democrats bring the gravitas of a Clinton ticket.

Picking a non democrat would be problematic.

Gore is that man-bear-pig guy in many people's minds and doesn't bring enough positives to outweigh that in the center indys who previously voted GOP.

Obama's strength is how far into the conservative rainbow his support reaches.

The wrong VP candidate will cause that support to collapse.

Obama needs a VP who will deliver democratic support in swing states that he doesn't already have AND will fare well with his conservative end of the rainbow.

Hillary fits that bill as VP and Al Gore doesn't.

The new Al Gore isn't the centrist that ran for president in 1988 who would have been a good pick for Obama.

Obama really needs someone he doesn't like who represents people who don't like him and who can deliver the votes of those people in order to maximize his support.  

Hillary brings more to the ticket than anyone else...


by dtaylor2 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:31:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Loser? (none / 0)

The most convincing reason for not nominating Gore, IMHO is that Gore does not want to be VP again. Been there, done that, got a new life now.

A secondary reason is that if there is one Democrat the media hates worse than Hillary, it is Al Gore. Right now, they have to give him a grudging respect because he has had so much success in spite of the fact that they have trashed him every chance they got. If he ran for office again, all that would go out the window again - the media never admits they were wrong.

<snark>
If all you want is to get that Clinton mojo, nominate Bill Clinton. Sure, he could not succeed to the Presidency if anything happened to Obama, because of the 22nd Amendment. But to Obama supporters who buy into the smears about the Clintons being power mad potential assassins, that might be a plus.  
</snark>

Seriously, there are around 18 million reasons I can think of why Hillary would be an excellent choice. But I would like to see Dodd or Biden or Gore too. I agree with the people who argue for a familiar, experienced VP candidate. Obama can carry the "new and different" mantle all on his own. A VP that is more of a familiar, experienced hand would provide a comforting face in the election, and would also be able to provide sage advice in getting the new government off and running.


Your attempt to change the subject to "the issues" is irrelevant.
by itsthemedia on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:55:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Loser? (none / 0)

Speaking purely theoretically: the 22nd Amendment would have no application - it bars election, not succession.  Bill Clinton could be VP and, upon the unthinkable, would legally succeed as President.


by auronrenouille on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 12:20:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Loser? (none / 0)

Speaking as a Bill Fan I think you get my vote with Hillary or Bill as VP.  But I suspect you don't get Hillary voters with Bill as VP.

I think she has her own following which is different from Bill.

Obama has a lot of Bill's coaltion already.


by dtaylor2 on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 12:58:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Loser? (none / 0)

I agree.  He'd make an incredible vice president.  That being said, I think he really has moved on to a status that is too big for the role.  If he were to take the VP slot, he would lose a lot of the international clout he has built recently.  He's really become an elder statesman, and could best be used by an Obama administration in that capacity, the same as Bill Clinton or any other ex-president.

I've got a bet with my mom that he'll choose Hillary Clinton.  She thinks he's going to choose Evan Bayh.  My sister says it Sebelius, and my dad says it will be Hagel.

FWIW, I didn't bet a lot of money.  :-)


The universe is a casual place, not a suit-and-tie affair.
by mtnspirit on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 03:02:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (2.00 / 1)

Gore is hardly painted as a loser.  In fact, it's pretty difficult to find anyone who will admit that they voted for Bush over Gore these days or doesn't wish he had won.  


by Headlight on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 10:15:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

I predict Clinton will be the running mate.


by mikeporter on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:32:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

The chances of that seem so distant as to be comically small, but if you have some insight I hadn't thought of, I'd love to hear it.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:35:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

Really? It seems like a no-brainer to me. The event in NH last week was the audition, to see whether she (and by extension Bill) could function in a second banana role. And she passed with flying colors. Not least because there aren't any other good options, I think this is as good as a done deal.


by ColoradoGuy on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:41:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (2.00 / 1)

I still question whether Bill would agree to be fully vetted.  Do you really think he would let Obama poke around his finances to the extent that due dilligence would require?

Who knows, maybe I'm wrong...


by HSTruman on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:37:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

I don't see all the commotion regarding Bill.  Is McCain's wife fully vetted?  Or, better yet, Romney's wife (if he is the VP)?


by mjc888 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 08:02:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

You forget ... there are different rules for Democrats ... why do you think McCain calls the TradMed his "base"?


John McCain: Bush right to veto kids health insurance expansion
by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 11:18:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No other good options? (none / 0)

I don't see the logic there, either.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 10:09:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

Hey I am surprised that you would see the logic behind Sebelous and not see the one behind Clinton .

Frankly that is " comical ".

I can give you 18 million reasons why Clinton would likely be a leading candidate for VP and might be the one .

I don't really get the logic behind thinking Sebelous would be on the list and Clinton off.

If the Obama camp does not pick Clinton , forget about Sebelous or the AZ governor.


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:59:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

There is logic for and against both. Hillary has obvious advantages and disadvantages so does Sebelius.


by conspiracy on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:27:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

I am a guy.

Having a guy as a VP has advantages and disadvantages.

So Hillary Sebelius and Dtaylor2 all have advantages and disadvantages.

There are logical reasons for and against all three of us...


by dtaylor2 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:35:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

Does that mean you want me to spell them out or are you just being facetious for the thrill?


by conspiracy on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:40:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

Comparing Hillary who had slightly more than 50% of the democratic party members vote for her in the primary to Sebelius and imply that they are equals was facetious.

I was making the point in a manner that made it obvious.


by dtaylor2 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:04:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

Who said anything about equals? I happen to think her negatives cancel out her positives but that she is still a possibility. Sebelius has maybe weaker positives but far lower negatives. At the end of the day he is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. I don't think his decision will make much difference to the result of the election so he should pick whoever he feels most comfortable working with in the White House.


by conspiracy on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:33:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

Sebelius has a massive negative.

She reminds people that no one had heard of Obama prior to this election.

Very few outside our party know who Sebelius is.

Going into a massive recession with two unknowns one of which is talking like he ran the country better than Bill Clinton and could give him some pointers is not a wise move going into a general election.

Bill Clinton is economic gold in politics and all the GOP fiscal conservatives who are not sure of McCain know it.  Hillary pulls them in.

Sebelius just reminds them that two broke people are about to tell them how to run their businesses.


by dtaylor2 on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 12:55:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

Not sure about the governor but I think Obama himself is far from being ''broke''. Obviously he isn't in the same net worth league as the Clintons but her campaign finance problems and the debt she got into has taken at least some of the shine off the image of prudent fiscal managers. That being said I still think she is a possibility for all the reasons you have eloquently stated. However, in the final analysis her negatives with independents and her ability to motivate Republicans has to count against her. Not to mention Bill being the oversized elephant in the room. The last time I think any VP candidate actually helped a nominee win was Lyndon Johnson in 1960. The emphasis has now really become making sure the selection does no harm. I think it will be either Sebelius, Kaine, Schweitzer, Nunn, Biden, Clark or Clinton with one of the governors most likely since Obama is on record having said he doesn't think he needs help on national security and international affairs.


by conspiracy on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 03:29:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

The main thing I would have against Dtaylor2 is simple. Just picture the bumper stickers!

Obama/Dtaylor2 '08

Yuk

;-)


Your attempt to change the subject to "the issues" is irrelevant.
by itsthemedia on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:00:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

It would look better as Dtaylor2/Obama '08

=p


by dtaylor2 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:06:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

Senator Clinton has real advantages and is certainly qualified, but I don't really understand why picking Sebelius is such a nonstarter.  Sebelius, in her own right, has advantages over Senator Clinton.

For one thing, she isn't polarizing and in fact has a record of flipping republicans to democrats in a ruby red state.  She also has executive experience, something that neither Obama nor Senator Clinton possess.  Her  father was also governor of Ohio, which doesn't hurt either.  

I certainly respect folks who think Clinton is the better choice, but it seems sort of petty to dismiss Sebelius as an option merely because she's also a woman.  


by HSTruman on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:40:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

You can't bring up Sibelius without someone comparing her to Clinton.  People can't look past gender.


by MeganLocke on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 08:00:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

Picking Sebelius would be an absolute PR disaster.

This isn't only about qualifications, it's about how the public thinks.  Picking Sebelius would largely be preceived as a slap to Hillary, and his poll numbers could very well take a large dip.

Likewise, I'm surprised more don't see the obvious.  Forget about all the drama.  Obama and Clinton look good together.  They brand well.  They look like change.


by mjc888 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 08:06:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

Really? .. Why, just cause Chris Matthews tells you?  Who gives a crap what Chris Matthews thinks!!


John McCain: Bush right to veto kids health insurance expansion
by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 11:20:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd like to see your logic on that. (none / 0)

Huh?  I came up with all of this.  I'm a marketing guy.


by mjc888 on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 06:31:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I see the logic against Clinton (none / 0)

She's a strong figure, but she doesn't embody the kind of politics that Obama wants in his White House.

Further, it's never been proven that a vice president actually helps the ticket either way except in the insubstantials.  I would rather have someone who can do the job rather than someone who is put on the ticket to help with constituencies.  Putting Clinton on the ticket is tantamont to admitting that Obama has a serious problem with the Democratic base which made up her voters... which he doesn't.

The "18 million reasons" thing is pure and utter bunk, having nothing to do with vice presidential qualifications.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 10:13:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I see the logic against Clinton (none / 0)

You're right, the VP's demographic stats don't necessarily help that much in getting the president elected.  The concern troll in me, however, thinks that NOT choosing Hillary could possibly backfire.  Some of us old Hillary loyalists have thin skins and we're just hunkering down, waiting for the next perceived insult or slight.

Personally, I don't have the energy to keep ginning up faux outrage.  But lots of other people out there will drink their red bulls and go sign up for PUMA membership.

Suggestion for Obama -- if you don't choose Hillary Clinton, you might want to select someone who has been an outspoken supporter or ally of hers.  It will diffuse the uproar that will surely come.


The universe is a casual place, not a suit-and-tie affair.
by mtnspirit on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 03:16:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

Gore has said that if he reenters politics, it will be as a candidate for president.  That could be in 2016.  


by Headlight on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 10:28:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

I'm intrigued by Edwards as vp. Not the ex senator from NC, but the congressman from Texas. Hope to see some discussion about him.


by Fitz845 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:24:31 PM EST

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

Why him?

I thought he was pretty conservative and we'd totally lose the House seat.


"No government has the right to tell its citizens whom to love. The only queer people are those who don't love anybody." - Rita Mae Brown
by auboy2006 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:34:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

Chet Edwards?  No way.


by JustJennifer on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:43:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

I think it is a safe bet to say Sebelous would not be the VP , furthermore I believe she is not and would not be under serious consideration by the Obama campaign


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:26:56 PM EST

Why would you say that? (none / 0)

Obama likes her; she represents the kind of politics that Obama is espousing.

She's a fine candidate on paper.  What's the extenuating circumstance?


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:36:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would you say that? (none / 0)

Have you heard her speak? Ugh ...


by ColoradoGuy on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:43:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would you say that? (none / 0)

What's the extenuating circumstance?

Trick question?

Heh.


Obama/Clark (still dreaming)
by spacemanspiff on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:43:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would you say that? (none / 0)

" What's the extenuating circumstance? "

- She does nothing for Obama .


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:51:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would you say that? (none / 0)

Re-inforces his message like Gore did for Clinton?


by conspiracy on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:43:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would you say that? (none / 0)

As much as anything else, Clinton's pick of Gore showed that he was willing to have a well known, powerful equal, as his running mate. It was a contrast to Bush's choice of the feckless Dan Quayle.

If you want a parallel to Bill Clinton picking Gore, Obama should pick Hillary Clinton. She is easily as close to Obama on the ideological scale as Gore was to Bill. Maybe closer, because Gore was already well known for his environmentalism, and had to tamp his green rhetoric down in service to Bill's pro-business image. The only big difference between Obama and Hillary is healthcare, and frankly I don't think Obama cares all that much about healthcare policy. He is more about the process, so if Hillary follows his open government process and comes out somewhere else on the issue I do not think there would be much of a conflict.


Your attempt to change the subject to "the issues" is irrelevant.
by itsthemedia on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:08:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Er... (none / 0)

- She does nothing for Obama .

They're not dating, cripes.  


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 10:04:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's VP (2.00 / 1)

I think Nunn would be bad because he is a raging homophobe. There should be revolt from the base if he chooses Nunn.

Sebelius - I don't know how much she brings, but Obama likes her and that's always a big plus.

Biden is good too.

What about Reed? Anyone watch Reed on This Week?


by ajain on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:26:59 PM EST

Re: Obama's VP (none / 0)

Good thoughts as to Nunn.  He was also one of the 12 Democratic enablers of the great Clarence Thomas - - which should be an automatic, no-questions-asked disqualifier.  

Sebelius does nothing for me and doesn't seem to add much to the ticket - - she won't help carry Kansas.  However, the biggest reason to avoid her is the nightmare PR fiasco,a s someone mentioned upthread, that would ensue over such a direct skap in the face to Hillary and her millions of supporters.  Baaaaaad idea.  

If it's not Hillary, it should be Biden.  Jack Reed is a good choice except that we would lose the Senate seat.    


by wavery2001 on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 03:36:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's VP (none / 0)

That's "slap" in the face . . . duh  :)


by wavery2001 on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 03:38:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (2.00 / 1)

I used to be vehemently opposed to Clinton as VP, now I wouldn't mind at all.


by b1oody8romance7 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:36:11 PM EST

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (2.00 / 1)

I've thought for a month now that Obama would pick Biden.  Webb always struck me as more of an interesting choice than a practical one (he's such a feathered fish there's no telling how that would have played out).  

The big problem with Clinton is that she seems to drive away indies.  That phenom has shown up in every poll about the VP pick I've seen.  


by IncognitoErgoSum on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:40:07 PM EST

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

Driving away indys is exactly why it can't be Hillary. Biden is gaffe prone, but eh. I still like Wes Clark the best of the bunch though.


by Quinton on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:49:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (2.00 / 2)

Obama's problem with indy's is that his coalition has little in common and ANY VP cannot shine like Obama and will hurt his support with his base.

Liberal VP, conservative indy's freak out.
Conservative VP, liberal's freak out.

Obama will lose support with any VP.  The trick is that he has some support he can afford to lose and some VPs bring support with them and some VPs bring defense against swiftboating with them.

In these regards Hillary is a valuable asset to him.


by dtaylor2 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:19:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Jim Webb out... (2.00 / 1)

Eh, Nunn's probably pretty far down the list, if he's even still on it.

I still like Clark and Biden.


Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing glove.
by fogiv on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 05:53:47 PM EST

uh oh! (none / 0)

Can someone down in New South Wales go over to Shaun Appleby's house and check to see if he is OK after this news?


Our Moment Is Now
by mboehm on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:05:33 PM EST

Re: uh oh! (2.00 / 1)

Shucks is all I have to say.  Thanks for the thought, though.  After picking Senator Obama as nominee when he was such a long shot I was sure I was on a roll.  Sigh...  'Under no circumstances will I be a candidate for Vice President.'  Not much wriggle room there.

The notion of a VP carrying a concealed handgun always appealed to me somehow.  It would certainly have added some gravitas to the role of President of the Senate.


by Shaun Appleby on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:38:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why not Edwards? (2.00 / 1)

I think it's very strange for someone to put themselves back into contention after taking oneself out of contention, the way John Edwards did.  Perhaps just weirdness, but I thought it indicated that he'd been contacted, if not officially, then by some connected outsider.  Add to that the reports over the weekend that Edwards might be planning not just one but a series of debates against Rove in the next few months, I start to get the sense that he might not just be the best choice, he might already have been chosen.


Yes, I'm aware there's a possible misogynist reading of the myth. Sorry.
by Endymion on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:09:57 PM EST

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

Of course...Sen. Clinton might seem logical and would be the best...
But it would be a package with former President Clinton.
That won't happen...

There is a serious progressive(who helped broker the MI/FL weirdness)..
That just happens to be popular in an important State...

http://wexler.house.gov/


"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"
by nogo postal on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:30:33 PM EST

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

However...in my heart..
I Hope for Edwards...he has all ready made clear that it is not about him.
If Obama asked...and indicated that it would be a position of importance...an anti-Cheney..positive position of power and influence..
I believe Edwards would accept..
...

"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"
by nogo postal on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:38:35 PM EST

Todd -- why move more to the right? (2.00 / 1)

Nunn and Sebelius as the two best alternatives to you?  Why?

Both are to Obama's right, and Nunn is far to his right.  Neither is known as a problem solver in any way, with a record of constructive change.

Why not find someone whose politics match Obama's, whose ambition matches his?

(Not to mention that Sebelius failed her audition in her State of the Union response in January.  Flat delivery of empty rhetoric.)

Clinton or Edwards seem the most plausible for me.


by DFLer on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:38:44 PM EST

Evan Bayh (none / 0)

I just have a strange feeling that Bayh will be the pick. Does anyone know how Indiana picks Senate vacancies? Does the republican governor appoint the replacement, and if so, can he choose the party?

Personally, I like Biden. He is a strong foreign policy voice, and a great attack dog.


by jadegirl on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:44:36 PM EST

Bayh would actually be a good pick (none / 0)

After reading about Webb and Tailhook, Webb would have been a disasterious pick for Obama while he is trying to court women.


by puma on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:47:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I too prefer Biden over Bayh (none / 0)

however, because he is a perfect attack dog.


by puma on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:48:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I too prefer Biden over Bayh (none / 0)

Obama has already made Indiana competitive. Bayh would put him over the top. I don't see how McCain wins without Indiana.


by jadegirl on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:50:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I too prefer Biden over Bayh (none / 0)

Maybe, but Bayh is so . . . errrr, unexciting.


Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing glove.
by fogiv on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:04:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Evan Bayh (none / 0)

Living legend Mitch Daniels would choose the successor in Indiana, and can name a fellow Gooper.  That's an automatic disqualifier of Bayh, I think - - never mind the fact that he's not an inspiring option to begin with.  I like Biden too, and Hillary.    


by wavery2001 on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 04:04:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

A month ago, I would have laughed at the notion that Hillary would be the running mate... now, I'm not so sure...

Since Obama is completely pissing on the activists that helped get him the nomination, he might as well go all the way and put Hillary on the ticket.  He's pretty much running the same style campaign now... might as well have her come on board and assist.


by LordMike on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:07:34 PM EST

Allegedly (2.00 / 1)

Webb did not want Obama looking through his tax returns according to the reporting of Marc Ambinder, which may or may not be bullshit.  Webb certainly didn't do Obama any favors today as he could have just kept his opinion to himself instead of becoming the third Dem to take himself out of hte running. You don't see any Republicans officially take themsleves out of the running, with the exception of Lugar (who also took himself out of the running for Obama's VP slot facetiously).


by Blazers Edge on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:14:47 PM EST

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

Obama does not NEED to pick anyone based on what State they represent...
..yes I believe he has already made his choice...
Standing together in front of 85,000 at I. Mile High in Denver...
"Wake up people..it's a new dawn"

..if you ask where this is from..

"Shipping powders back and forth
Singing "black goes south and white comes north"
And the whole world full of petty wars
Singing "I got mine and you got yours"
And the current fashions set the pace
Lose your step, fall out of grace
And the radical he rant and rage
Singing "someone got to turn the page"
And the rich man in his summer home,
Singing "Just leave well enough alone"
But his pants are down, his cover's blown"

Make it here to Denver if you can...


"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"
by nogo postal on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:18:36 PM EST

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

This song has no political reference..
Jist a Monday night toe tap
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39SjyMvBb k4
"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"
by nogo postal on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:22:46 PM EST

Doesn't the "conventional" wisdom (none / 0)

now point to Clinton?  Todd and all these other bloviators were saying a month ago that Obama would only pick her if he could not "unify" the party.  I never bought this analysis to begin with but assuming that would be Obama's motivation for choosing Hillary as VP, since Obama is only up five on average on McCain, it's pretty clear that the party has some "unification" issues.  

According to Rasmussen demos, Obama is performing at a record-level against McCain amongst women (up by 12 overall, only down by 3 among white women), trailing by three among men, but leading by 5 overall.  The slim lead, despite the overwhelming advantage among women, suggests to me that there still are many undecided women voters.  She's easily the best VP for turning those undecideds into Obama voters.  It's more questionable whether Obama's "soulmate," Kathleen Sebelius, can deliver those undecided women into Obama's camp.  Who says Hillary isn't Obama's "soulmate" as well?


by Blazers Edge on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:22:55 PM EST

Re: Doesn't the "conventional" wisdom (none / 0)

No.  The conventional wisdom is that Obama isn't picking someone until the convention.  Clinton won't do a lot for Obama at this point, mainly because he's doing a pretty good job of unifying the party without her.  

I think what he needs to do is assess where the point of attacks are coming from, but there is little evidence that McCain is going to make any inroads on women voters or on hispanic voters on Obama.  The biggest deficit that is being identified is experience, and there are a host of possible candidates whose longer foreign policy experience would help there far more than Hillary Clinton's 8 years as a Senator.  Biden, Richardson, and several others could fill the bill with foreign policy experience.  


by Headlight on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 11:01:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama's best non-Clinton option. (none / 0)

Thanks for another chuckle, Todd.

What's the thing for DLCers and former Republicans?


by Beren on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:24:28 PM EST

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

Count on Senator Obama to surprise us.


by Shaun Appleby on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:41:20 PM EST

I like Biden or Warner (none / 0)

Esp. Biden because he is great at attacking the GOP in a way that most Americans will understand.


by highgrade on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 07:59:45 PM EST

NAY to NUNN (yes to Sibelius) PLEASE (none / 0)

FISA is a big enough slap at the Progressives. If it allows Obama to choose a more progressive VP that would be great.

If it signals selection of a retro man like Nunn, that would be really upsetting.

YEA to Sibelius.

NAY to Nunn


by MS on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 08:33:09 PM EST

Bob Graham. (none / 0)

reinforces and balances.


by neutron on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 08:36:20 PM EST

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (2.00 / 1)

Good.  I was worried about his temperament and the whole CSA thing.  Sorry, I just get weird vibes from the guy.

No VA running-mate as Kaine has not enough national experience.

Sam Nunn?  Jesus Christ.  What an insult to progressives, even liberals that would be.  And so much for new politics.

Joe Biden is a blowbag and narcissistic even for a long-term senator.

Sebelius.  Why would he choose her instead of Clinton? That would be crazy,and certain to piss off Clinton supporters.  How would Sebelius help on foreign policy?

Wes Clark would work and maybe John Edwards as well.  Evan Bayh is too boring and centrist but at least has experience.  Ted Strickland would be great but he is apparently out.

Here's an idea: HILLARY CLINTON.  You know, 18 million votes in the primaries; two-term senator; fundraising power; Armed Services Commitee experience; potentially first woman VP, would bring Arkansas and help a lot in Ohio, PA and Florida?

Why is this not a freakin' no-brainer?


by Thaddeus on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 08:36:29 PM EST

Because (none / 0)

he doesn't NEED Clinton and she's better off staying in the Senate.

Clinton would be the option if he needed her. He's won most of her voters, he's doing fine in Ohio and Pennsylvania. She can stay in the Senate where she can be more effective anyway.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 08:42:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Because (none / 0)

He doesn't need Clinton?  I assume you mean for the votes?  

I don't think he should assume the presidency.  

If anything, I am a bit in shock that McCain trails Obama by only a handful of points.


by mjc888 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 08:53:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Because (none / 0)

When VP Clinton is matched up with "generic candidate", there's no change in Obama's poll numbers.

I like Sibelius.


by MeganLocke on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 09:15:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Actually (none / 0)

I've seen some polls a month or so ago that showed with Clinton, his poll numbers actually marginally go down.

I expect that to be true with anyone though.

But my point was, he's got most of her votes. The number of people who will only vote for him if Clinton is on the ticket is so minute, it's not worth it.

Not for him and not for her.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 10:11:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Actually (none / 0)

On the flip side:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/04/c linton.poll/index.html?iref=newssearch


by mjc888 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 10:35:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

Absolutely. It is a f&^%$#@ no brainer to any other than the brainless and Clinton haters. It's hard to tell them apart at times.  


by ottovbvs on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 08:43:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (2.00 / 2)

People who disagree with you are not ALWAYS brainless.  Nor do they hate Hillary Clinton.


by MeganLocke on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 09:13:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

Because Sebelius doesn't draw attention to a perceived weakness of the candidate, which is military/foreign policy experience.

But her most popular ad in Kansas during her last election was this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPfxOtq5A Ig

<<Sebelius.  Why would he choose her instead of Clinton? That would be crazy,and certain to piss off Clinton supporters.  How would Sebelius help on foreign policy?>>


Obama/Sebelius '08
by evantakesall on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 11:15:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself (2.00 / 1)

Sam Nunn versus Hillary Clinton. To even say it is to demonstrate how ridiculous even considering Nunn is. Obama needs to get some excitement back in his campaign and the only person who brings EXCITEMENT is Clinton.  


by ottovbvs on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 08:41:12 PM EST

What about... (2.00 / 1)

Again I will ask, would anyone be surprised if Colin Powell is in the running for VP?  If there was ever a Republican-oriented politico that would carry on teh policies of Pres. Obama were he no longer President, I think Powell would.

Personally, I think Clak gives the best overall advantages...military families, some moderate republicans, he is a Hillary-camper so that may smooth some things over...etc.

Plus, choosing him does not empty the Senate.  Eye Blinking issues aside, he is also a good speaker.  He can talk well to the more conservative elements in the electorate.  Etc...

I would MUCH rather see Hillary end up as Majority Leader and puch Health Care from that position, with Clark as Pres of the Senate...talk about a 1-2 punch.

I would have LOVED to see a woman president as well...I wonder how many will see the VP slot as "consolation prize" and also actaully reinforce the idea of a "glass cieling"  (Whisper - "See ladies, you can still only go so far...)  YOu give Hillary the Majority seat in the Senate and that will go much farther in the furthering the cause of sex-equality.  (I have two daughters and I will be DAMNED if I want them to grow up into the work-world even I grew up in.  If Hillary is to be a sex-equality leader, then we must use her powerfull example both wisely and to BEST effect.)


by Hammer1001 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 09:34:31 PM EST

If he picks Sibelius I will have (2.00 / 1)

to drag myself over to the voting booth to support him.  He's got a more qualified and more eloquent woman in Hillary Clinton who received 17M+ votes and raised over $100M in the primaries.  He'd be better served not to overlook her for a woman with limited visibility and presence.  Elder statesman would be interesting but might overshadow him.   A strickland or a Kaine would be good...


by activatedbybush on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 09:48:56 PM EST

Re: If he picks Sibelius I will have (none / 0)

Have you ever considered that Hillary Clinton and Kathleen Sebelius have remarkably different political careers?

They are nothing close to being the same candidate.  And dismissing one because they both have vaginas is ridiculous.

If Biden had female genitalia, would you dismiss him too?


Obama/Sebelius '08
by evantakesall on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 11:05:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If he picks Sibelius I will have (none / 0)

I know that Sebelius is qualified in her own right, but I could see the argument that the selection of Sebelius would be pandering, and Obama would be portrayed as thinking that Hill backers will vote for anyone as long as they have a vagina. Not that that's the fact in real life; but that will be the media narrative and gives the deadenders even more reasons to be PO'ed. The same would have been true in reverse; for example if Hillary won the nomination and selected Howard Ford as her Veep, I would expect the same reaction


Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008
by zcflint05 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 11:33:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If he picks Sibelius I will have (none / 0)

I know that Sebelius is qualified in her own right, but I could see the argument that the selection of Sebelius would be pandering, and Obama would be portrayed as thinking that Hill backers will vote for anyone as long as they have a vagina. Not that that's the fact in real life; but that will be the media narrative and gives the deadenders even more reasons to be PO'ed. The same would have been true in reverse; for example if Hillary won the nomination and selected Howard Ford as her Veep, I would expect the same reaction


Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008
by zcflint05 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 11:33:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I would question his judgement (none / 0)

if he selected Sebelius over Clinton.   And it is true - Biden doesn't have a vagina - I am pretty sure about this.  But Biden also didn't get almost 18M votes in a national election.  He finished way out of the money.    So your analogy is not apt.    The stature gap between Clinton and Sebelius is yawning.  


by activatedbybush on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 08:42:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

"best non Clinton option"??? (1.00 / 1)

Webb is good, Clinton sucks. Webb brings things to the table, Clinton takes things away.


Bob Brigham Blog
by Bob Brigham on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 04:16:16 AM EST

Thanks for your intelligent analysis of the (none / 0)

candidates LOL


by activatedbybush on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 08:43:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks for your intelligent analysis of the (none / 0)

Simplicity.


Bob Brigham Blog
by Bob Brigham on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 09:57:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

...can be mistaken for ignorance if not careful (none / 0)


by activatedbybush on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 11:53:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb... (none / 0)

When are people going to shut up about Strickland (who removed his name from consideration some time ago)? Pro-lifers do not get to be on the ticket, period. (No, Sebelius is not pro-life except in the wishy-washy sense of personal disapproval, which every single pro-choice politician in this country has to espouse.)

It will not be Nunn; that's a smokescreen to demonstrate that Obama is making a thorough search. There's no way he's seriously being considered--that's a fuck-you to far too many constituents.

And while I don't think Clinton would be an utter disaster...the question remains, why? Why run with someone you don't get along with, someone who brings a lot of vocal opposition to the ticket, someone whose supporters talk a great game but will ultimately support you no matter who you choose, someone who has her own agenda, and someone whose presence squeezes you out of the spotlight? Why, when there are plenty of other viable options?

Sebelius would be absolutely fine. She doesn't need to carry a state (Obama's carrying plenty on his own), and she doesn't need to be a military genius--in what universe is Iraq going to be a losing issue without a frakkin' general or what have you on our side? And the "slap in the face" crowd is simply not living on planet Earth.

I think Obama's choice will be someone dishwater-dull and lily-white like Bayh or Vilsack, because I really don't believe he's man enough to make a daring pick. I hope he proves me wrong, because at the moment he's headed for a narrow win and a presidency that begins with almost no political capital.


by epenthesis on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 05:48:13 AM EST

Sebelius would be an uninspired choice (none / 0)

I agree, Beyh would be as well.   I would like to see Clinton because she I believe that she would be the best President (which is the main criteria for picking a VP), but I see the downsides for Obama as well.   I really like Mark Warner from VA.  Proven governor and entrepreneur, dynamic presence.    Ed Rendell could be a good selection as well.  I didn't think so at first, but liking him more now.  I don't know enough about McCaskill.  Could help in MO which would be big.  I think it would be a bit of a slap to Clinton and her supporters when she has indicated she is interested in the job and has more stature than McCaskill.   But if that's the right path to winning then sure.


by activatedbybush on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 08:47:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Webb Withdraws Himself From Consideration (none / 0)

While I would love to see Biden picked, I think Webb is opening the door to Clinton.


by Bob H on Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 06:01:51 AM EST