is it just me, or do all of the VPs suck?

[© tweed]

the fields seem pretty poor this time around, far worse than 2000 or 2004.  can't put my finger on why.  maybe because I'm more of a cynic and nihilist this time around, or maybe I'm onto something.  especially with Webb withdrawing his name from consideration.

[Keystone Phil]

Yeah, the field does suck.

[Boris]

They suck especially for Obama because no one really fits the description of what he needs (who's interested/being considered): someone with perceived experience who is relatively old (but ideally young enough to run again in eight years) who opposed the Iraq War from the beginning.

Maybe I'm stressing the Iraq War thing too much, but Obama consistently asserted his moral authority over Clinton on that issue via his opposition to the war from the beginning. so it looks somewhat hypocritical to choose a person who voted for the iraq war. but maybe i'm the only one who thinks that.

[© tweed]

Russ Feingold fits all of your criteria perfectly although he'll never be chosen for obvious reasons.

[Lunar]

Webb was a crappy choice too if you consider some of the awful thing's he's passionately argued about in the past (that a co-ed military would be the end of the armed forces and "a horny woman's dream"). 


The selection is worse this time because obvious Washington insiders are excluded.  Which means you are required to select an "outsiders" who are obviously less experienced on average.

[HardRCafé]

Sounds like someone forgot about Carly Fiorina!

[Mr. Morden]

They suck especially for Obama because no one really fits the description of what he needs (who's interested/being considered): someone with perceived experience who is relatively old (but ideally young enough to run again in eight years) who opposed the Iraq War from the beginning.

Reed is the only one who fits that description (among the plausible options).

[MatthewZD]

It seems like each person that's been mentioned has something about them that could be a problem. 

For example -- Romney's flip flopped a bit too much.  Jindal and Palin are too young and inexperienced.  Nunn is too old.  Crist is too single.  Biden and Dodd are DC insiders.  Pawlenty and Easley are not well known.  Romney and Clinton don't get along with their parties' presumptive nominees.  Clinton and Gingrich are, well, Clinton and Gingrich. 

There's no one perfect problem-free possibility for VP.  What McCain and Obama have to ask themselves if the pluses outweigh the minuses.

[Padfoot]

I think its just you,  IMO both candidates have a great field to choose from.

[AltWorlder]

Yeah, there's so many possibilities out there.

[WalterMitty]

2004 was pretty awful too.

the finalists were gephardt and edwards.  ugh.

[Keystone Phil]

2004 was pretty awful too.

the finalists were gephardt and edwards.  ugh.

And the mighty Tom Vilsack!

[Flying Dog]

2004 was pretty awful too.

the finalists were gephardt and edwards.  ugh.

Don't knock the Gep.

[Mr. Morden]

2004 was pretty awful too.

the finalists were gephardt and edwards.  ugh.

Remember the great "Dewey wins" cover we had from the NY Post?:

[Хahar 🤔]

2004 was pretty awful too.

the finalists were gephardt and edwards.  ugh.

Remember the great "Dewey wins" cover we had from the NY Post?:

LOL.

[Associate Justice PiT]

It seems like each person that's been mentioned has something about them that could be a problem. 

For example -- Romney's flip flopped a bit too much.  Jindal and Palin are too young and inexperienced.  Nunn is too old.  Crist is too single.  Biden and Dodd are DC insiders.  Pawlenty and Easley are not well known.  Romney and Clinton don't get along with their parties' presumptive nominees.  Clinton and Gingrich are, well, Clinton and Gingrich. 

There's no one perfect problem-free possibility for VP.  What McCain and Obama have to ask themselves if the pluses outweigh the minuses.

     Neither is Nunn, Crist, Biden, or Dodd. You have to be aware that most Americans don't know any politicans outside their homestate except sitting & former Presidents & VPs. Being picked causes your name ID to instantly shoot up to 95% anyway.

     I will have to say though that with the exception of Pawlenty, Sanford, & maybe Thune, everyone that McCain is considering would be really awful to pick, many for reasons that aren't their own fault.

[MarkWarner08]

I completely agree. Where have all the Schuyler Colfaxes and Dan Quayles gone?

[J. J.]

I think that both parties have good candidates for VP.

[Ogre Mage]

People say this every four years.  In fact, most years they say it about the Presidential candidates too.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

It is not just you Tweed, it is I as well.

The calibre of the Vice Presidential candidates on both Democratic and Republican sides is terrible, worse than 2004, and we all know how bad that was for the Democrats, alas the ticket of Kerry/Edwards. Primarily due to both candidates needing to select Washington "outsiders" to balance the ticket, to comabat their Washington "insider" status. I have a growing suspicion that Senator Obama and McCain will both make Kerryesque mistakes and I might not be the only one.

[MatthewZD]

It seems like each person that's been mentioned has something about them that could be a problem. 

For example -- Romney's flip flopped a bit too much.  Jindal and Palin are too young and inexperienced.  Nunn is too old.  Crist is too single.  Biden and Dodd are DC insiders.  Pawlenty and Easley are not well known.  Romney and Clinton don't get along with their parties' presumptive nominees.  Clinton and Gingrich are, well, Clinton and Gingrich. 

There's no one perfect problem-free possibility for VP.  What McCain and Obama have to ask themselves if the pluses outweigh the minuses.

     Neither is Nunn, Crist, Biden, or Dodd. You have to be aware that most Americans don't know any politicans outside their homestate except sitting & former Presidents & VPs. Being picked causes your name ID to instantly shoot up to 95% anyway.

     I will have to say though that with the exception of Pawlenty, Sanford, & maybe Thune, everyone that McCain is considering would be really awful to pick, many for reasons that aren't their own fault.

Instead of "not well known" I should've said "virtually unknown".  That would apply to Pawlenty, Easley, Sanford, Crist, and Thune.  Nunn might take a bit of memory jogging, but I would imagine that Biden or Dodd might be a little more familiar having recently run for the Democratic nomination. 

Even so, I doubt we'll ever see another complete unknown a la Dan Quayle, thanks to 24/7 news coverage and the internet. 

[Associate Justice PiT]

It seems like each person that's been mentioned has something about them that could be a problem. 

For example -- Romney's flip flopped a bit too much.  Jindal and Palin are too young and inexperienced.  Nunn is too old.  Crist is too single.  Biden and Dodd are DC insiders.  Pawlenty and Easley are not well known.  Romney and Clinton don't get along with their parties' presumptive nominees.  Clinton and Gingrich are, well, Clinton and Gingrich. 

There's no one perfect problem-free possibility for VP.  What McCain and Obama have to ask themselves if the pluses outweigh the minuses.

     Neither is Nunn, Crist, Biden, or Dodd. You have to be aware that most Americans don't know any politicans outside their homestate except sitting & former Presidents & VPs. Being picked causes your name ID to instantly shoot up to 95% anyway.

     I will have to say though that with the exception of Pawlenty, Sanford, & maybe Thune, everyone that McCain is considering would be really awful to pick, many for reasons that aren't their own fault.

Instead of "not well known" I should've said "virtually unknown".  That would apply to Pawlenty, Easley, Sanford, Crist, and Thune.  Nunn might take a bit of memory jogging, but I would imagine that Biden or Dodd might be a little more familiar having recently run for the Democratic nomination. 

Even so, I doubt we'll ever see another complete unknown a la Dan Quayle, thanks to 24/7 news coverage and the internet. 

     I agree that Biden & Dodd are somewhat better known, but I wonder how much. Neither were at all successful in their runs for president.

     I mean, would it really be a significant advantage to be known as "that guy who was in the debate with Hillary & Obama" over not being known at all?

[YRABNNRM]

2004 was pretty awful too.

the finalists were gephardt and edwards.  ugh.

Remember the great "Dewey wins" cover we had from the NY Post?:

I still have that issue. It's a great read.

Anyway, all the great choices for VP (and I guess even President) take their names out of consideration or are out of the question.