Barack Obama
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 03:33:32 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2008 Elections
  Barack Obama
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6
Author Topic: Barack Obama  (Read 20275 times)
dazzleman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,777
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #100 on: October 22, 2006, 05:06:06 PM »

I wonder who he'd pick for his running mate.
I think Gore would make the most sense

Other posibilities:
Clinton
Edwards
Clark
Feingold
Richardson
Warner

I don't see anybody who already ran for president and almost won accepting the VP nomination.  I sure don't see Hillary accepting the VP nomination.  She was already co-president; why would she settle for VP?
Logged
Boris
boris78
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,098
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -1.55, S: -4.52

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #101 on: October 22, 2006, 05:08:56 PM »

I wonder who he'd pick for his running mate.
I think Gore would make the most sense

Other posibilities:
Clinton
Edwards
Clark
Feingold
Richardson
Warner

I don't see anybody who already ran for president and almost won accepting the VP nomination.  I sure don't see Hillary accepting the VP nomination.  She was already co-president; why would she settle for VP?

And she'd add absolutely nothing to the ticket, except polarization and an excuse for conservatives to come out to polls. She's from a state that Obama's already guaranteed to win.

Bayh, Warner, Biden, Clark, or Richarson would be the best possiblities. Each of the aforementioned candidates either brings experience to the ticket or is from a swing state. Edwards would be awful; he added nothing to the ticket in 2004 and would do nothing to add to it in 2008.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #102 on: October 22, 2006, 05:10:38 PM »

I wonder who he'd pick for his running mate.
I think Gore would make the most sense

Other posibilities:
Clinton
Edwards
Clark
Feingold
Richardson
Warner

I don't see anybody who already ran for president and almost won accepting the VP nomination.  I sure don't see Hillary accepting the VP nomination.  She was already co-president; why would she settle for VP?

Well, Hillary isn't as likely, for one thing the 2 Senator thing, but I figured I'd mention her, anyways. What about Obama/ Bill Clinton, though?

Gerald Ford did almost become VP in 1980.
Logged
Saxwsylvania
Van Der Blub
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,534


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #103 on: October 22, 2006, 05:11:25 PM »

Except Bill Clinton's not eligible...
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #104 on: October 22, 2006, 05:14:04 PM »


He can't be elected President, but he is still eligible to become President, and so can be elected VP (assuming that the partisan Republican majority on SCOTUS doesn't rule otherwise).
Logged
dazzleman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,777
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #105 on: October 22, 2006, 05:15:30 PM »

I wonder who he'd pick for his running mate.
I think Gore would make the most sense

Other posibilities:
Clinton
Edwards
Clark
Feingold
Richardson
Warner

I don't see anybody who already ran for president and almost won accepting the VP nomination.  I sure don't see Hillary accepting the VP nomination.  She was already co-president; why would she settle for VP?

Well, Hillary isn't as likely, for one thing the 2 Senator thing, but I figured I'd mention her, anyways. What about Obama/ Bill Clinton, though?

Gerald Ford did almost become VP in 1980.

That was an interesting case.  I doubt that it was as close as people thought.

Ford considered Reagan's VP offer because Henry Kissinger had impressed upon him that given the country's national security position, it was imperative to defeat the Democrats, and it was his patriotic duty to do what he could to help.

But Ford put conditions on joining the ticket that were unacceptable to Reagan -- he wanted day-to-day responsibility for foreign policy and fiscal policy.  Plus he demanded that Reagan appoint Henry Kissinger as Secretary of State.

I'm guessing that Ford didn't really want to be VP at that point, but rather than say no, he put impossible conditions on his acceptance.  That's a tactic I've used in many situations.

Both wives were firmly against it.  Nancy Reagan didn't want to see Reagan compromise the powers of the presidency to get Ford on the ticket (she was right), and Betty Ford was in the early stages of recovery from alcoholism and pill addiction, and needed another stint back in Washington like a hole in the head.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #106 on: October 22, 2006, 05:22:39 PM »

Obama would lose for much the same reasons as Kerry. The Republican nominee would push them off message by smearing them with distorted Senate votes

Ummm, and I bet you don't think John McCain's 26 years of Senate votes will be a problem either?

McCain's image is already defined as moderate (whether or not that's the case), Kerry's wasn't, Obama's isn't.

The Democrat's best chance in 2008 is Bill Richardson. Pair him with a charismatic bottom of the ticket (Obama would work here) and the ticket can pretty much only be defeated by McCain.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #107 on: October 22, 2006, 06:21:23 PM »

Obama does not have the experience needed to be President.  It is too short and all legislative.  If he does get the nomination I certainly will not be voting Democratic in 2008 and whether I vote Republican would depend upon who their nominee is.  It would make 2008 be for me much like 2000 was where I eliminated Gore from consideration early but it wasn't until the last week that I decided to vote for Nader instead of Bush.  The sole difference is that while I still would not consider voting for Gore, I could see myself voting for Obama in 2012 or 2016 once he's gotten some more experience.
Logged
NHPolitico
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,303


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #108 on: October 22, 2006, 07:30:27 PM »

I wonder who he'd pick for his running mate.
I think Gore would make the most sense

Other posibilities:
Clinton
Edwards
Clark
Feingold
Richardson
Warner

I think Obama-Clark would be the strongest ticket, with Obama at the top. Both are opposed to the war (I'm pretty sure that is Obama's view), and Clark is white and gives a military background to the ticket's resume. I presume that Warner would not be available to be VP, either, otherwise he's a moron.
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #109 on: October 22, 2006, 07:34:52 PM »

Obama's best VP choice would be Biden IMO.  He's stong in Obama's weak areas and vice-versa.  Of course we're getting ahead of ourselves.
Logged
tulip
Rookie
**
Posts: 91


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #110 on: October 22, 2006, 08:35:43 PM »

I like the sound of a Bayh / Obama ticket.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #111 on: October 22, 2006, 08:52:57 PM »

This can't be happening. I went to Yahoo this afternoon and saw "Obama considering '08 run." This guy is ridiculous. Let him run and lose.
Logged
TheresNoMoney
Scoonie
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,907


Political Matrix
E: -3.25, S: -2.72

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #112 on: October 22, 2006, 09:09:24 PM »

And once his views are known, much of the bloom is sure to go off this rose.

Please specify which of his views you are referring to.
Logged
nini2287
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,616


Political Matrix
E: 2.77, S: -3.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #113 on: October 22, 2006, 09:26:28 PM »

Obama's best VP choice would be Biden IMO.  He's stong in Obama's weak areas and vice-versa.  Of course we're getting ahead of ourselves.

Agreed.  Bill Richardson would also be quite good, although I worry a bit about the Black/Hispanic combination.
Logged
Moooooo
nickshepDEM
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,909


Political Matrix
E: -0.52, S: 3.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #114 on: October 22, 2006, 10:15:06 PM »

2008 is going to be intersting.  Since Warner has dropped out Im sorta' leaning towards Edwards.  If Obama jumps in, though, Edwards stock would go way down because he would no longer be the 'charisma' candidate.
Logged
agcatter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,740


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #115 on: October 23, 2006, 08:15:40 AM »

Good lord people, Obama for President? Obviously a bunch of Dems went to him and said "save us from the Hillary disaster because no way can we talk her out of running".   

You gotta love the media hype on a guy who has served a total of two years in national government.  It's just plain funny.
Logged
elcorazon
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,402


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #116 on: October 23, 2006, 09:48:43 AM »

Good lord people, Obama for President? Obviously a bunch of Dems went to him and said "save us from the Hillary disaster because no way can we talk her out of running".   

You gotta love the media hype on a guy who has served a total of two years in national government.  It's just plain funny.
How many years in national gov't did W have?  or Clinton? or Reagan? or Carter?
Logged
agcatter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,740


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #117 on: October 23, 2006, 10:27:36 AM »

Hillary will never allow this guy to get going.  I'm sure the Clinton smear machine is doing the research as we speak.  The Clintons will never allow anyone to get in the way of their ambition.

God help him.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #118 on: October 23, 2006, 11:45:11 AM »

Hillary will never allow this guy to get going.  I'm sure the Clinton smear machine is doing the research as we speak.  The Clintons will never allow anyone to get in the way of their ambition.

God help him.

And part of me is cheering them on so we can bring Barack's ego back down to planet Earth.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #119 on: October 23, 2006, 04:15:17 PM »

How many years in national gov't did W have?  or Clinton? or Reagan? or Carter?

All had at least six years as Governor before taking office, three of them in some of the largest states in the country. Obama has two years serving in the Senate, four by the time he'd take office. No President, hell, no major party candidate for President has had less experience before taking office. Let Obama simmer in the Senate for at least one re-election campaign and see whether he actually is something more than charisma in a suit.
Logged
elcorazon
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,402


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #120 on: October 23, 2006, 04:24:00 PM »

How many years in national gov't did W have?  or Clinton? or Reagan? or Carter?

All had at least six years as Governor before taking office, three of them in some of the largest states in the country. Obama has two years serving in the Senate, four by the time he'd take office. No President, hell, no major party candidate for President has had less experience before taking office. Let Obama simmer in the Senate for at least one re-election campaign and see whether he actually is something more than charisma in a suit.
last I checked governor's NOT a national office.  Not saying those guys weren't qualified, just saying that Obama's lack of NATIONAL experience is no different than MANY Presidents.

No doubt he's inexperienced.  You know what.  I've been operating on the angle that the voters are a bit too focused on surface issues, but you know what, maybe the voters are actually going to be perceptive in this case.  Maybe they (I) wil say that all these "insiders" with "experience" are getting us deeper and deeper into trouble, so maybe getting someone not so entrenched in "national politics" is a good thing.

Bring a fresh attitude to Washington.  I actually think that (the fresh non-Washington approach) is a bigger reason that governors do so well, relative to Senators, as opposed to the Executive vs. Legislative distinction.
Logged
Defarge
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,588


Political Matrix
E: -3.13, S: -0.72

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #121 on: October 23, 2006, 11:18:10 PM »

Obama's major problem is that he's peaking now.  If he sits in the senate for another 4 years, he won't have the momentum to win the nomination.  Add to that the fact that Democrats will (knock on wood) probably win the White House in '08.

There's no better time than now for Obama.

There's no other time than now for Obama.

That said, if Obama enters the race, barring Gore running, Obama becomes a big contender for the status of "anti-hillary."  Kerry, Biden, and Dodd at this point have no chance.

The race comes down to Richardson, Bayh, Obama, Edwards, maybe Clark, and Hillary.  One will be the nominee, and odds are one will be VP.

How it shakes out depends on what happens this November.

Democrats win back both houses, Hillary and Obama gain.

Democrats fail miserably, Bayh, Richardson and Edwards gain.

I hope Obama runs, if only to make it more dramatic Smiley
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #122 on: October 23, 2006, 11:58:20 PM »

Kerry peaked in March 2003 here:


Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #123 on: October 24, 2006, 12:54:35 AM »

How many years in national gov't did W have?  or Clinton? or Reagan? or Carter?
Obama has two years serving in the Senate, four by the time he'd take office. No President, hell, no major party candidate for President has had less experience before taking office. Let Obama simmer in the Senate for at least one re-election campaign and see whether he actually is something more than charisma in a suit.

I'll discount the general-presidents such as Grant and Eisenhower in my reply, but you know  Obama's four years in the U.S. Senate and eight years in the State Senate is more than another president's two years in the U.S. House and eight in the State House of Representatives.  I am of course referring to another Illini, Lincoln.  Not that I intend to support Obama in 2008 as I agree he could use more seasoning.  Besides, Obama's hinting at a possible Presidential run at the start of a book tour reminds me a bit too much of Colin Powell and his book for my tastes.
Logged
Nym90
nym90
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,260
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #124 on: October 24, 2006, 01:01:28 AM »

Actually Carter only had 4 years as Governor of Georgia, and I'd argue that his inexperience showed when he got into office.

Experience is important in being a succesful President, although I'd argue it is nearly irrelevant in terms of being a succesful candidate.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.067 seconds with 13 queries.