Talk Elections

Here is my shortlist for both Senator's McCain and Obama in choosing a running mate.

Vice Presidental Canidates for Senator McCain
Mitt Romney
Bobby Jindal(maybe)
Mark Sanford
Jon Huntsman
Tim Pawlenty
Meg Whitman

Vice Presidental Canidates for Senator Obama
Mike Easley
Blanche Lincoln
Even Bayh
Joe Biden(Maybe)
John Breaux
Ed Rendell
Ron Wyden

Is this who you would have them put on their shortlists if you were advising them or who you think is actually on their shortlists (if a shortlist even exists yet)?

Yeah kind of.

Ummm....that was an either/or question, not yes/no.

My advisory shortlists:

John McCain (in no particular order):
Governor Bobb Jindal (LA)
Governor Mark Sanford (SC)
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX)
Governor Jon Huntsman (UT)
Senator Judd Gregg (NH)
Senator John Thune (SD)
Governor Tim Pawlenty (MN)
Senator Joe Lieberman (CT)

Barack Obama (in no particular order):
Senator Blanche Lincoln (AR)
Senator Bill Nelson (FL)
Governor Phil Bredesen (TN)
Governor Mike Easley (NC)
Governor Tim Kaine (VA)
Governor Ed Rendell (PA)
Senator Evan Bayh (IN)
Governor Bill Richardson (NM)
Governor Kathleen Sebelius (KS)

I think that McCain has to pick Garrison Porter if he's to have any chance at electoral victory. :P

I'm really surprised no one really has mentioned Blanche Lincoln yet?

The whole female-from-Arkansas thing is going to eliminate her, she'd be the ultimate snub to Clinton.  She does have a nice last name to go with Obama's, Obama's team loves that sort of stuff.

What does Rob Wyden bring to the ticket besides being a West Cost, pro-gay marriage, anti-death penalty, Jewish, safe-state liberal?

and add John Thume for McCain.

Wayden comes across as quite a moderate if you look at his record, and he coud help in Nevada, New Mexico, and Colorado.   

I've seen Wyden in action, and while he's a think in the Daniel Patrick Moynihan mold (look at his health care and tax plans) he's also quite a poor public speaker. His brand of Portland liberalism won't really help Obama outside of Boulder or Denver in Colorado.

Overall, that seems like a solid list. I'd guess that at least four of those names (Pawlenty, Romney, Sanford, Huntsman) for McCain are on his short list.

I'm putting my money on either Romney or Sanford for Micky C and Biden or Easley for the Big O.

My short lists for the candidates.

For Obama --

former Sen. Sam Nunn
Sen. Joe Biden
Gov. Bill Richardson
Sen. Blanche Lincoln
former Gen. Wesley Clark

If Obama has a weakness, it's in military or foreign affairs.  Four of these fill that gap.  One also has executive branch experience.  I never thought of Lincoln but she could be an intriguing choice.  As for what the Clintons think, the heck with them.  As the presumptive nominee, Obama is pretty much in charge of the party now. 

For McCain --

former Gov. Mitt Romney
Rep. Eric Cantor
Gov. Mark Sanford
former Sen. Bill Frist
Rep Marsha Blackburn

Various reasons for each.  Romney and Cantor for economic expertise (Cantor's on Ways and Means), Sanford and Frist as someone who could step in as President, Blackburn to add excitement to the ticket.  All, I think, would help shore up the base without alienating moderates the way someone like Huckabee might. 

marsha blackburn is creepy.  i dont know if it his her stepford wife persona or her right wing views or a combination of both that weird me out.

hey maybe william cohen is on both short lists.

How about these other VP canidates for both McCain and Obama

Senator McCain
Charlie Crist
Tom Ridge
Meg Whitman
David Peteraus(Maybe)

Senator Obama
Brian Schweitzer
Anthony Zinni
Bob Casey
Bill Nelson
 

No way would Patreaus fly, he would make McCain look even more warlike and even less about the economy.  McCain's argument to have a general at the helm would require him refuting his own argument that the surge has succeeded and the war is winding down.

Bob Casey is inexperienced (elected what, two years ago?) and pro-life, choosing him would be obviously a pandering political decision for Pennsylvania since there is no other reason why Obama would choose him, meaning Obama is being a "traditional" cheesy politician with the most important decision he could possibly make.  His being pro-life will piss off a lot of women who are already ruffled by Hillary's loss.  Obama has to be undeniably committed to women's issues to minimize defections.

Obama/Zinni sounds funny and it sounds like the general Obama is most interested in is Jim Jones, but I don't have much else against the guy.  He did endorse Bush in 2000, showing some 'error in judgment' if nothing else.

Hmm. I hate the idea of him as VP, but it doesn't make it a bad idea. He's the ultimate in safe picks, inoffensive, too old to be threatening, unexciting, has a tough guy entry on his resume, and of course, from Florida. It does mean sacrificing a Senate seat, though.

On second thought, forget it. He did his best to boost Hillary and make Obama's life hell during the Florida delegate credentialing mess.

Jones has appeared at both McCain and Obama events, and is said to be "close" to McCain.  Firstread called him "the new Mike Bloomberg":

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/06/26/1169349.aspx

I still think Zinni is somewhat more likely as an Obama running mate.

Jones has also appeared at Obama events and was the only general in the leaked list right before Jim Johnson got sacked (partially, we can presume, for not keeping a lid on the list, and partially for his Countrywide connections).

With regard to Senator Obama, I still maintain my belief that an older, white man with a solid grasp of foreign policy is his wisest move.  This can be a mainstream liberal or a conservative Democrat, but it cannot be a far left liberal or a New Englander.  That leaves out Jack Reed and John Kerry, both of whom I like a lot.

Joe Biden fits.  Sam Nunn fits.  Dick Gephardt fits.  The knock on the latter two is that they are too old.  And that Obama will then be unable to claim McCain is too old.  But I have yet to hear Obama say that, though many of his idiot supporters think it's worth bringing up ad infinitum. Unfortunately for them, McCain is old...but in good health and possessive of a sound, if unspectacular mind.  So I really don't think it hurts Obama to choose an older man.  In fact, it serves him well because his youth and inexperience give many Americans  -- even some Democrats -- pause.  Independents and moderate Republicans had the same qualms about one-term Governor George W. Bush.  But when he added Dick Cheney to the ticket, people felt he had the right guy to turn to for advice. (This was pre-9/11 of course and while some of us had clues as to how downright evil Cheney could be, his grandfatherly image and his wise handling of the first Persian Gulf War left many "on the fence" voters in a reasonable comfort zone with voting R in 2000.)  That is what Obama needs now. 

Biden and Nunn are the guys to add that to the ticket.  Why not Gephardt?  Well, I thought he would be great -- until one of you reminded me that he actually drafted the Iraq War resolution.  Unless he offers a major, very public mea culpa, his presence on the Obama ticket would look incongruous.  And that's being generous.

Biden keeps getting flak for a variety of things.  His Neil Kinnock ripoff is ancient history and he has owned it, apologized and moved on.  But does he mouth off and bloviate too much?  Probably.  Yet after his "neat, clean and articulate" gaffe very early in the primary...whoever "handled" him had him striking exactly the right balance. Remember the one debate question where he was asked about his tendancy to being long-winded and wonkish?  He answered the question with one word and got a long laugh and round of applause from the audience. Approaching this tendancy with the right mix of good humor and learned restraint could be very effective.  And remember, the VP is the attack dog.  Biden can do that and do it well.

Personally, I think the only legitimate knock on Sam Nunn is that he isn't an attack dog, he's a teddy bear.  But otherwise, I like him on the ticket and more -- I think he'd make a solid President if, God forbid, that became necessary.

The others?  Evan Bayh is young like Obama and we'd lose his seat in the Senate to a Republican.  He's beloved in the Hoosier State, but not enough to win it for Democrats. 

Ted Strickland is a GREAT IDEA because he has some foreign policy experience from his time in the House.  He helps in southern Ohio and could be an example of someone who might swing a state for a candidate.  But he has ruled himself out. You will have to decide if that means he's really out or if he would reluctantly take the job.  I can tell you that his Lt. Governor, for whom a relative works as an advisor, would love for Strickland to take the job...LOL. 

I like Bill Nelson.  A lot.  A liberal, but not too far left.  An astronaut and a former military man.  But can he be an attack dog?  You Floridians know him best.  My take is that he's too "nice".  And with Florida a likely, if not solid, McCain state, I don't see how Nelson helps.  The question is, would he help nationally...calming some independent nerves over Obama's inexperience?

Please don't promote Bill Richardson any more.  He's my biggest disappointment from the primary.  Lackluster doesn't begin to describe his campaign performance.  Piss-poor would aptly characterize his speechmaking and debate showings.  I can't agree enough that his resume is impressive and his performance in various jobs -- Congressman, Governor, UN Ambassador -- has been good.  But if your campaign skill reminds people of Jim Stockdale during the 1992 Perot campaign, it's not a good sign.

Everyone else has either said no thanks or comes with a significant liability.  Edwards failed once already.  Sebelius looks like a pander and is a terrible speaker.  McCaskill is just as inexperienced as Obama. Wes Clark has taken himself out of the running by saying something really, really stupid. Eddie Rendell may or may not be corrupt, but ask any Pennsylvania Republican and they'll say he is.  He's also a fat guy, like me.  And there are more than a few politicial advisors who say no one who is obese can win a national race in these days of television.  Fair? Not at all.  But probably true.

Have I missed anyone?  Yeah, I know.  Hillary Rodham Clinton.  And I don't have an adequate answer for that, except that I think she would much rather be Senate Majority Leader, Attorney General, UN Ambassador or even possibly Supreme Court Justice. And my guess is she and Obama have already talked about that.

So that leaves Biden.  And Nunn.  At least in terms of "on the radar" names who balance Obama in terms of being foreign policy wonks, older and more experienced, yet not too liberal or too "elitist".  Most of the governors have no serious foreign policy experience.   Mark Pryor, like Obama, is pretty youngish.  He's a portly fellow and he probably has been too friendly to the Bush administration on the Iraq War and on matters like habeus corpus and torture. Senator Webb and former Governor Warner have taken themselves out of the running, like Strickland. Warner also suffers from a lack of foreign policy gravitas.

"Off the radar" names could include an anti-Iraq War general or admiral.  Or a member of the House of Representatives with a good foreign policy or military resume.  But don't count on former Admiral and current Congressman Joe Sestak.  He's known for having a temper that would make John McCain blush. The point about Anthony Zinni's last name seeming a bit too "vowelish" after the name "Obama" is silly on an intelligent, deeper level.  But face it, it has merit in our current, shallow culture.

I also reject suggestions that Obama will cross party lines and snag a Republican like Richard Lugar or Chuck Hagel.  Both are so conservative on social issues as to irk too many Democrats...even some conservative Democrats. But I do maintain that either, or both, could be a natural cabinet choice.  Say, Lugar for Secretary of State and Hagel for either D-O-D or Veterans affairs.

Have I missed anyone? 

Daschle

I was trying to forget.  ;-)

Well, as far as I can see -- there's nothing to be gained.  Daschle is a failed candidate in South Dakota, so I think it would be unwise to choose him.  It would be rather like McCain tapping Connie Burns or George Allen.  Hey -- Burns & Allen -- whaddya know?  Say g'night, Gracie...

That's my question? Why would Daschle be even seriously considered?   

Daschle is close to Obama, and Obama-world is filled with former Daschle people.  He's an air force veteran with many years of experience in Washington, which would help balance out Obama's lack of experience.  Not saying I think those things are the most important considerations, but that would be the rationale.  Of course, whether you consider him depends on whether you think "he lost his most recent statewide election" is disqualifying or not.

How about Dick Celeste?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Celeste

I think he's been out of elected office for too long.

The GOP has several untapped superstars. Craig, Horseley, Gibbons, Foley, Allen(Rob Allen from Florida), Crist, Gannon and Curtis all strike me being some of the best possible veep choices for McCain.

Top Three

Obama:
Schwietzer
Sebelius
Easley

McCain:
Jindal
Romney
Pawlenty

Obama will pick so no name white southern populist.

Nunn has been out of office since 1997. I think his recent experience as an Ambassador and academic helps to mitigate those concerns. And besides, whoever is tapped for VP is going to be in the spotlight anyway.

 Exactly.  And I don't think that should be a disqualifier.  In fact, being out of elected office for a long while might be a positive thing in some respects.  Anything negative that happened in the past is "ancient history" and the candidate can also say he or she has "had a change of heart" regarding controversial votes.

I also considered Governor Celeste, because as U.S. Ambassador to India (no cushy task), he has some cachet as a foreign policy guy.  However, though a two-term Governor, he left office as a fairly unpopular one and would be unlikely to help much in badly-needed Ohio.

What's more, as U.S. Ambassador to India, it was likely Celeste's job to (at least to some extent) assuage and appease Indian sensibilities.  If he was perceived as a particularly pro-India ambassador, his position on the ticket could be viewed as threatening by Pakistan.  Since Obama has actually taken a position on Pakistan to the right of John McCain, this could be viewed as overdoing it. 

But I agree with your overarching idea -- many of the people who served in elective office in the 80's and 90's are well worth considering for VP slots and cabinet jobs in both parties.
Nunn has been out of office since 1997. I think his recent experience as an Ambassador and academic helps to mitigate those concerns. And besides, whoever is tapped for VP is going to be in the spotlight anyway.

Celeste has a very broad range of experience that covers foreign relations (ambassador, member of Council on Foreign Relations), economics (establishing a consulting firm), military/security (sits on various boards including Independent Strategic Assessment Group, co-chair of Homeland Security Porject), health care (was in charge of DNC's health care plan in '93), and public service (director of the Peace Corps).  But he'll be almost 71 on election day and I don't know, he might look even older than McCain.  The age issue is a big one.

My feeling on age differs from most folks here.  Could be because I am an olde pharte, I dunno.  But see my earlier post.  I don't think Obama is assailing McCain for being too old, though clearly Obamaniacs and surrogates are.  It's a stupid reason to oppose a candidate.  Now if McCain is unhealthy, that's another issue.

As to Obama's running mate, I still say the more snow on the roof, the better.  It will calm a lot of voter jitters. 

I agree, though I'm certainly not a geezer like JSojourner. :)

Celeste has a great resume. Here's a recent picture: he's in the middle.
()

His health should be the foremost concern (as it should be for any candidate, regardless of age). And at any rate, he has a solid resume and is a jack of all trades. I'm surprised he hasn't been mentioned yet by the pundits. Also, regarding his lack of popularity: after Taft, I'm sure most Ohioans are nostalgic for any past Governor.

Also, how about another older dark horse: Gaston Caperton? Two term Governor of West Virginia, President of the College Board. http://www.collegeboard.com/about/association/presidentbio.html

It's true that Obama is not explicitly making the case that McCain is too old to be president.  He's not doing so because it would be in bad taste, and because he doesn't need to.  Plenty of voters will independently conclude on their own that he's too old.  Thus, there is a slight drawback to Obama picking a running mate who's over 70: He legitimizes the idea that even old geezers are capable of running the government (doesn't really matter that Obama was never explicitly arguing otherwise).

I see this only becoming an issue if a large portion of the electorate feels that Obama will somehow leave office before his term is up.

It doesn't matter if they think he'll leave office before the term is up.  If Obama picks a running mate who's as old as McCain, he'll effectively be making the statement "No, McCain is *not* too old to be president" (otherwise, why would I be picking someone his age as my VP?)".  This might persuade some people into thinking "Gee, I guess McCain really isn't *that* old...."  Of course, the number of votes that might actually switch because of this is miniscule, but the same is true of all VP considerations.

I certainly see the logic, but I don't think that people expect the VP to be running the government (no more Cheneys ;)). If concensus was that Obama picked Celeste because he was setting him up for a run at the Presidency in 2016, then this could be a concern. I mean geez, George Mitchell is considered by some to be a contender for VP. He's certainly a stretch, but if we're looking at candidates based on their merits, I think someone like Celeste or Caperton have positives that override this issue. As long as they can still drive and walk on their own (with great facility), the Obama campaign is probably good with an older pick. And the people that think McCain is too old probably wouldn't vote for him anyway. Have there been polls on this?

Also, I think we've got to think out of the box. A lot of the "younger" VP options seem rather weak to me - with the exception of Schweitzer.

I don't think we're that far apart on this, and I agree that Obama might pick an older running mate, and that other considerations might override this issue.  But, to clarify, part of the point I was trying to make is that it doesn't matter if people "expect" Obama to leave office early or if people expect the VP to run the government.  The standard line that presidential candidates always make is that they're picking someone who *could* take over as president if the need arose, so whoever Obama picks, the implicit message he's sending is "This person could run the governement if the need arose".

I disagree, it's going to be an under-the-table issue for the Obama campaign.  There are clearly a lot of voters who are uncomfortable with McCain's age and it's a legitimate health issue.  There's no point in Obama looking ageist (looks bad when he's appealing to older voters) and McCain can spin back any direct mentions of age with youthful witty remarks.  But if Obama picks someone that age, it makes it seem like age is less important.

It'd be as if McCain chose a black running mate.  Now all the apolitical racists (more than one would suspect exist and are registered) are more free to vote towards their inclination.  Ageism has more rational health reasons than racism, but I think it's about the same as far as understanding the impact of an elderly Democratic VP goes.

Top Three

Obama:
Schwietzer
Sebelius
Easley

McCain:
Romney
Sarah P(Gov of AK) I don't remember how to spell last name
Jindal

My VP Shortlist:

John McCain:

Romney
Crist
Sanford


Barack Obama:

Easley
Biden
Rockefeller

in reality, obama's short list should only consist of one name:  mark warner.  he is the perfect pick.

1. he would almost certainly lock up virginia
2.  he would probably help among rural voters nationwide
3.  he is pro-business, which is refreshing...since obama is about half a communist.

Your so good for comedic relief, you know.

I listened to a Sibelius speech, sort of. She put everyone to sleep including myself. She had nothing to say, except some partisan mutterings. She also has an abortion doctor thingie percolating. I don't know if there is anything there, but it's there.

Is this a joke?  I can't tell with you.  I don't mean to demean your points, I'll respond to the first two if it's serious.

completely serious

Too bad Warner said he didn't want to be VP.

My Obama shortlist would be:

Biden
Bayh
Kaine

Barack Obama:

Senator Joe Biden of Delaware
Governor Mike Easley of North Carolina
Senator Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia
Governor Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas
Senator Jim Webb of Virginia
Governor Brian Schweitzer of Montana*

---

John McCain:

Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina*
Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota
Governor Charlie Crist of Florida
Congressman Mike Pence of Indiana
Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut

NOTE: Asterix denotes who I would select if I was the Chairperson of Barack Obama's or John McCain's Vice Presidential search team. However, knowing them they would select some random unknown to "balance" the ticket, such as Congressman Rob Portman of Ohio for McCain or Congressman Earl Pomeroy of North Dakota for Barack Obama. 

Mike Pence may actually be a good choice for McCain.  I think Indiana actually has a better chance of going to Obama than Florida and Pence could help McCain here. 

Instant Karma - Webb effectively took himself out of the running like Strickland did, saying that he would not accept if offered.

Also, why not Kent Conrad if Obama is hunting for experienced chaps from North Dakota?  He's pretty popular there and was one of the few Democratic senators to oppose the Iraq war from the start.  Otherwise, and with the possible exception of Rockefeller (West Virginia is the definition of a bad state for Obama and he doesn't need a last name after his that screams "insider political family" that badly), I agree with your list and your two choices for each.  Those are the two I would select if I was in charge of each campaign.

Obama:
Reed
Biden
Sebelius
Napolitano

McCain:
Portman
Ridge
Pawlenty
Graham --  this prissy fellow  loves being McCain's lapdog.

How could I forget? Thanks Lunar for picking that up :). However, I wouldn't be surprised even if the Obama camp has kept Webb on their shortlist, despite Webb withdrawing his name from contention. Although I might sound dazed and confused, I really wouldn't be surprised if Webb is still on the list.



I added Jay Rockefeller on Obama's list primarily to bring much needed experience to the ticket an Obama led ticket. Although I doubt Rockefeller's name is currently on Barack Obama's Vice Presidential shortlist, Rockefeller in a sense would have been the perfect choice for some. Not because of Senator Rockefeller's vast experience as Governor of West Virginia and Senator from West Virginia but also politically, as he is seen more so moderate than Barack Obama, thus I feel he would have been a good selection for Obama.

However, as you said Lunar, Obama does not need a running mate who's last name screams "political insider". If Obama did select Rockefeller as his running mate it would cause a fair bit of controversy because of it, thus Rockefeller is probably not on Obama's Vice Presidential shortlist because of it. Though numerous other factors could contribute to Rockefeller's name not on the shortlist.


Yay! I feel so delighted that somebody agrees with my Vice Presidential shortlists and selections for Barack Obama and John McCain respectively. I never knew I could have much influence :P.

I'd also put a lot of money on Reed and Huntsman because I"m sure the house is underbetting them.  Although these are all great candidates, the board tends to overemphasizing candidates like Webb/Strickland/Biden/Sebelius and Sanford/Crist/Pawlenty and under emphasize Reed/Schweitzer/Conrad/Jones and Thune/Hunstman/Portman/etc.

Not a single bad choice on either of those lists (except perhaps Lieberman).  I certainly think Sanford is the best choice (although Hutchison is a great one as well), and Schweitzer would be wonderful too (although I still prefer Easley).

Actually, Reed has been getting more and more buzz recently, and is now all the way up to 7.9 (and 5th place) on Intrade for the Dem. VP nomination.  Huntsman, however, is still getting little to no buzz.

BUMP

Reid has taken himself out......but damn I didn't know he was ever "in".

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080714/ap_on_el_pr/reed_obama;_ylt=AptmFGzfl8nkA6mD09bI_Tis0NUE

I think you mean "Reed", not "Reid".

Anyway, that statement doesn't go nearly as far as the Shermanesque denial from Strickland.  "He's not interested" doesn't necessarily mean much.  Biden also said that he wasn't interested, and didn't really want it, but then when he was asked if he would accept the job if offered, he said yes, he would take it if Obama actually offered.  Other people, like Edwards, have publicly said they're not interested, while privately telling people that they're open to it.

He also says that he hasn't been asked for vetting info.  Again, I'm not sure how to read that.  The Obama campaign has asked people not to reveal if they're being vetted, and I'm not sure if they've gotten through everyone on the list for vetting information anyway.

They all [mostly] say they're not interested.  There's no flip-flop required for accepting at this point.  I wouldn't count him out yet, he might have been asked by Obama's team to say he's not being vetted (along with other potential dark horse candidates) while the obvious ones are free to talk about their vetting process.

But yeah, his odds in my book just went down.

My shortlists:

McCain: Rell
Obama: Biden

;)

Obama:
Biden
Schweitzer
Sebelius
Kaine
Bredesen

McCain:
Lieberman
Thune
Romney
Crist
Sanford

Biden is probably my #1 pick for Obama. He is exactly what Obama needs, a foreign policy expert who can also be an attack dog against the right-wing smears. Biden is a tough guy, and that's what the Obama ticket needs.

I think Obama picks either Sebelius or Bayh and McCain Romney or Pawlenty, some time after he´s back from his trip to Europe/Middle East, which would be in the first week of August.

LMAO @ Sebelius.

Obongo has already got the bitches' (women) vote, so I'm having a hard time seeing how exactly this church lady in a powersuit will help him.   Are they expecting Kansas and Nebraska to be battlegrounds?   lol

Biden.   One thing about arrogant East Coast blowhards--especially the working class, ethnic, urban, Catholic types, apart from being gaffe-prone,--is the potential for massive skeletons in their closets to be unearthed once they come under intense media scrutiny.    It comes with the territory with these wiseguys due to the "i'll scratch your back if you scratch mine" environs they were brought up in.  They are easily corruptible.