MyDD :: VP.

VP.

by canadian gal, Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:47:39 PM EST

Today has been a pretty bad day at MyDD. Lots of flame wars and trolls bashing Obama and Clinton. Feh.

So I thought I would lighten things up a bit and give you all my very unscientific prediction on whom I think will be selected as Vice President. Recently on Meet The Press, Obama listed the qualities he'll be looking for in a VP:

"I'm going to want somebody with integrity. I'm going to want somebody with independence - who's willing to tell me where he thinks, or she thinks, I'm wrong. And I'm going to want somebody who shares a vision of the country: where we need to go - that we've got to fundamentally change not only our policies, but how politics work, how business is done in Washington."

"I think the most important thing, from my perspective, is somebody who can help me govern. I want somebody who I'm compatible with, who I can work with, who has a shared vision, who certainly complements me, in the sense that they provide a knowledge base or an area of expertise that can be useful. Because we're going to have a lot of problems and a lot of work to do."

So I let me put it out there: I think Hillary Clinton will be selected as the VP. Why?

1. UNIFYING THE PARTY
Many dismiss this at their peril. Selecting Clinton would provide Obama the opportunity to get Clinton supporters enthusiastically behind the ticket. This includes votes, activists and volunteers.

2. COLD HARD CASH
Other than Obama, Clinton was the second highest campaign cash generator in history. This combined with recent reports that her supporters have been dragging their feet in opening their wallets to him would help bolster the coffers.

3. MAKING HISTORY
Okay so Obama will be making history if elected no matter what. But not only would putting Clinton on the ticket make history because she is a woman. But just as important - a former first-lady to a highly popular two-term president.

4. ITS TOO QUIET
Why aren't the Clinton's out stumping for Obama? Because they haven't been asked. Isn't that strange? I know its the dog days of summer - but still - it seems that almost every name (including frakking Republicans for pete's sake) are being discussed as possibilities but her. The old bait and switch?

5. POLLING DATA
The most recent polling that I have seen. HRC is a greater net plus than Strickland in Ohio, Edwards and Easley in NC, and both Webb and Kaine in Virginia. Therefore, she outperformed five prominent dems in their home states. Only Warner outperformed her in the state of Virginia. Now certainly the Obama campaign has done its internal polling - and my totally unsubstantiated guess is that they came out with similar numbers.

Now I might note that I am not crazy about this idea since I think HRC would be better served as a powerful voice in the senate, however Obama added something to the above quote from MTP that made me feel a bit better about it if she is the choice.

"I'm not interested in a vice president who I just send off to go to funerals. I want somebody who's going to be able to roll up their sleeves and really do some work."

What do you think? A Dream-Ticket?

Tags: clinton, obama, vp (all tags)

Permalink :: 169 Comments :: Post a Comment

let's keep it kind kids - okay? (2.00 / 10)

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:48:50 PM EST

Why not? (2.00 / 5)

Barack & Hillary running together... My dream come true. :-D

Help Clintonistas for Obama help Democrats win! :-)

by atdleft on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:05:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Will not happen (none / 0)

The Clintons will never allow themselves to be vetted, for good reason. The Obama people have not asked for any information, which is pretty telling. Enjoy your fantasy if it pleases you.

by ReillyDiefenbach on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 09:45:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (2.00 / 5)

Bah. Things have worked to perfection, these deep divisions can only be repaired by a truly unifying candidate.

That is why I humbly accept my party's nomination as its vice presidential candidate.

by rfahey22 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:51:58 PM EST

Obama/Rfahey '08! (2.00 / 6)

I won't ever vote Democratic again unless Rfahey is on the ticket! Anything else is a slap in the face to Rfahey and to all of his supporters, i.e., me.

by Dumbo on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:37:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama/Rfahey '08! (2.00 / 2)

Dumbo, I want you to know that you're going to be my Chief of Staff.

by rfahey22 on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:15:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Yo boss. (2.00 / 1)

Anything you say, but I'd still prefer to be Ambassador to Tijuana.

by Dumbo on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:48:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama/Rfahey '08! (2.00 / 1)

I agree we have to draw the line somewhere. It's either Rfahey or nothing. Maybe Dumbo

by Politicalslave on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:54:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama/Rfahey '08! (2.00 / 1)

How would you like to be Press Secretary? There are a lot of patronage positions that need filling.

by rfahey22 on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 01:06:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama/Rfahey '08! (none / 0)

hey. i thought i would get that spot?

(sulking)

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 01:10:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama/Rfahey '08! (2.00 / 1)

Hey, I wanted to give you a plum Foreign Secretary position, or maybe an ambassadorship (sure, that last one is appointed by the president, but I'm bringing in some votes, he owes me one). A divided vice-cabinet cannot stand.

by rfahey22 on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 01:13:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Don't think so (none / 0)

he'll be it as caving to pressure and be framed as a weak and feeble leader who can easily be manipulated and blackmailed.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:52:09 PM EST

Re: Don't think so (2.00 / 3)

I don't know if it would at this point. Two weeks ago, perhaps. But now he appears strong enough that he could do something like this and it would be perceived as courageous and honorable rather than cowardly and hypocritical.

If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.

by vcalzone on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:58:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nicely said... (2.00 / 4)

I really think this would take the wind out of McBush's sails when it comes to "wooing" any Hillary Clinton Democrats. By picking Hillary, I think Barack will be able to solidify large enough leads among blue-collar workers, Latinos, & women to swing Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana, West Virginia, Arkansas, Florida, New Mexico, & Nevada to the blue column this fall. And of course, as VP she can help a whole lot in helping President Obama craft a good policy agenda as she works Congress to pass it.

What's not to like? :-)

Help Clintonistas for Obama help Democrats win! :-)

by atdleft on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:12:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nicely said... (none / 0)

"What's not to like? :-)"

Her husband at innumerable press conferences.

I have lost a lot of respect for Bill in the last 12 months.

by ProgressiveDL on Thu Jul 31, 2008 at 11:27:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It would be a sign of strength (2.00 / 3)

and self-confidence if Obama picks a running mate who is powerful and competent and popular instead of one who is unknown.

Clinton had the confidence to pick Gore and Kerry had the confidence to pick Edwards. There is no reason that this year's nominee should find it necessary to pick a candidate who isn't a star in his/her own right.

by Radiowalla on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:09:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Because it has been spun (none / 0)

that he needs her to win, which he doesn't, so if he picks her, we're going to have months of "Obama can't stand on his own, he needs the Clintons, he's bowed to pressure, what happened to change?" and so on.

the media will do whatever it takes to elect John McCain. He's in a catch-22, but picking Clinton is not going to help him.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:11:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Don't think so (2.00 / 1)

What are you talking about? Who is going to accuse Senator Clinton of blackmailing Senator Clinton. The same people who are accusing Obama of having gone jogging when he didn't visit troops in Germany, despite the fact that he had done so in other countries and previously?

by Jeter on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 02:09:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Don't think so (2.00 / 1)

I was going to fix the name shere, but that's not even the point. Think in terms of someone saying that any chosen VP nominee has blackmailed a weak Obama into being his VP choice.

by Jeter on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 02:11:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

highly recc'ed (2.00 / 3)

you hit nail on every head.

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:52:20 PM EST

Re: VP. (2.00 / 7)

Obama gets to pick his VP. I will support that choice, whomsoever he chooses. If he doesn't choose Hillary, or if he privately offers her the spot and she privately turns it down, or if he publicly offers her the slot and she accepts it, or if he publicly offers it and she publicly turns him down, I will support the ticket. If he doesn't offer her the spot either publicly or privately, I will support the ticket.

by QTG on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:52:49 PM EST

Re: VP. (2.00 / 3)

I agree with you. I'm not sure whether she wants the spot, but if she does, she should have it.

I do think that he needs to offer privately at the very least, if he hasn't already.

If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.

by vcalzone on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:00:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

she asked privately (none / 0)

before she dropped out of the race (this was a good deal of why she was in to the end, I suspect. some backers never gave up hope).

He politely declined her strongly worded offer (err... not meanly worded. strongly)

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 10:35:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

really? (2.00 / 1)

do tell.

what did she say exactly in this private conversation where she asked?

(now that i know you're an inside man - ill be coming to you for all my info.)

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 10:58:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm not, but I know a little birdie... (none / 0)

Basically, she came in and demanded the Vice Presidency [in her position, a pretty good move. she made the best case she could for it], and Obama politely declined (the whole thing got rumored in the papers shortly before Clinton exited).

After that was declined, Clinton seemed to go a bit off the deep end (comparing civil rights to letting Florida voters count). I figure it was probably just the stress (and for all the bitching, I do believe that it's all water under the bridge -- people who see ClintonHate everywhere... well, I don't see it!)

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 11:27:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

ah rumoured in the papers... (none / 0)

that's to bad - i really thought i had a 'source' - damn!

oh and btw - the clintonhate thing - you really could have fooled me.

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 11:42:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

oh, you do have a source (none / 0)

I'm just noting that it ALSO got in the papers. ;-)

who, lil ol' me? nah, I just have a penchant for stirring up trouble. You'll note after one of the "reasons I don't like Clinton's presidency" I shortly thereafter penned a "reasons I like Bush's Presidency" (on a dare, admittedly), and also a "reasons I like Clinton's presidency".

Guess which one had a response-diary reach the rec list?

I figure a lot of people were being overly clever (Obama has a tendency to that too...), and in the cold light of "it's over already" are starting to sober up, on both sides.

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 11:52:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

but will you... (none / 0)

support the pick who he accepts if they ask and turn it down?

nah - just joshing with you!

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:19:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Finally (2.00 / 4)

a diary giving a good explanation on why Clinton should be selected.

As opposed to diary after diary of brainless idiots ranting and raving about the end of the world and how Obama hates women!!

Props to you Canadian Gal!!

by southernman on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:54:58 PM EST

Re: VP. (2.00 / 10)

Far be it for me to accuse anyone of having too much 'hope' CG. I'm not sure I buy the rationale for your prediction. But, as I've typed many times before and I'll type her again, if Obama can work with Clinton and they can figure out an appropriate and meaningful role for the ex-Pres she is connected to, no other pick would be half as exciting. All this is to say, I'm not sure you are right, but I very much want you to be anyway.

The future is unwritten

by Strummerson on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:56:16 PM EST

Re: VP. (2.00 / 2)

Stop being so concerned about what Bill Clinton we'll be doing. He's a busy guy, and obsessing over Bill is a right-wing talking point.

by LakersFan on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 01:35:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (2.00 / 1)

I disagree. I think if Hillary serves as VP Bill will be under a different kind of scrutiny and his activities will reflect on the administration. There is potential for distraction and disruption. I also think he could be a tremendous asset. But that requires some definition of his role. I am not 'worried' about this. I simply think that the is an issue that will need to be negotiated appropriately if this hypothetical partnership would function optimally.

And stop throwing the 'right wing talking point' cliche to try to discredit what you don't agree with. It's boring and facile. First, just because some on the right argue something does not immediately render it irrelevant. Second, this is hardly a regularly repeated notion among the republicans.

The future is unwritten

by Strummerson on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 01:47:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (2.00 / 1)

I think Bill will continue being the former President of the U.S., running his foundation, making speeches and raising money. What the hell else would he be doing? There's no reason to think he's going to close up his office in Harlem and stop doing that work if Hillary is VP.

I don't call something a right-wing talking point because I disagree with it, I say it because it is a right-wing talking point and I think it's very important that Democrats not repeat GOP lies and talking points because it damages our party in the long run.

(And in case you missed it, there were many Republicans during the primary obsessing over "What will Bill do roaming around the White House with all that time on his hands.")

by LakersFan on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 02:01:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (2.00 / 2)

If you think that Bill Clinton's activities and the attention they receive will not change if she serves in the executive branch, I don't know what to tell you. That seems unlikely enough to register as naivete. Raising the fact that this is as an issue that will require attention does not repeat any right wing lies. And there were plenty of democrats who also raised this during the primaries. In some senses, I think HRC as VP would create a slightly more complicated situation. Bill is not a neutral guy. He's either a tremendous asset or a serious liability. You don't ignore or neutralize a figure like that. You engage them. Personally, I'd have him work with his old buddy Blair on the Israel/Palestine conundrum. But regardless, all I am suggesting is that it would benefit everyone if he had an official or semi-official defined role. Nothing about this suggestion contributes to republican disinformation or strengthens it. I merely suggest confronting a hypothetical so that it becomes a strength instead of a hazard. If Obama wants HRC, I think he's prudent enough to attend to this issue.

The future is unwritten

by Strummerson on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 02:13:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (2.00 / 1)

Yes, there were of Democrats who repeated every right-wing talking point known to man during the primaries in their efforts to defeat Hillary Clinton. And I told them to stop that crap during the primaries too. It's incredibly short-sighted strategy to ever repeat a GOP talking point.

And I'm not the least concerned about Bill. Like I said, he's a busy guy.

by LakersFan on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 02:39:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (2.00 / 1)

If both democrats are raising it and republicans are raising it, how do you determine that the former are merely repeating the latter and being played by them, as you seem to insinuate here. And you still haven't responded to the possibility that republicans can be right about some things some times. All in all, I think that my contention has clear merits, regardless of who is saying it and for what purposes. 'He's a busy guy' is an astoundingly oversimplification. And your piety in attempting to silence people with a cliche that implies an offensive association verges on the unethical. I recommend fostering engagement and working toward consensus through actual argument over enforcing conformity by impugning the purity of your interlocutors. Your choice of course. But as you see from this exchange, your tack has utterly failed to engage or convince me. I clearly have not persuaded you either, but you proffered the objection (or dictated the correction). Didn't fly here. Just created senseless antagonism. I wish you better luck and strategy for our next encounter. Maybe that one will offer us the opportunity to learn something from one another.

The future is unwritten

by Strummerson on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 02:50:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (1.00 / 2)

At least now I understand where our fundamental disagreement lies: I don't believe Republicans are be right about anything any time.

And I really didn't bother to read the rest of your diatribe. Big words don't impress me, they simply indicate that the writer thinks highly of themselves. (And try paragraph breaks. They make even the most arrogrant screeds more readable.)

by LakersFan on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 02:58:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (2.00 / 1)

you

didn't

read

it,

how

you

know

it's

diatribe?

Had you read it, you might have noticed a conciliatory wish at the end.

I choose my words for precision, not ego. Not knowing me, I'd question how you could even guess at my motivations. Would you like me to simplify for you?

And I congratulate you on your partisan purity. It's clearly very important to you. I prefer critical engagement. My preference is to be a thinking citizen and not merely an apparatchik.

This has been unpleasant and unproductive.

Good night and good luck.

The future is unwritten

by Strummerson on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 03:06:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (none / 0)

I agree with you. I think Bill could be a tremendous asset, but he could also be a distraction. Bill and Hillary are such enormous personalities that a lesser man might shy away from such a choice. I just happen to think that Barack Obama is a really smart man and is big enough to be the President even if Hillary and Bill are in the picture.

"And I scream at the top of my lungs, what's going on?"

by Hollede on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 03:58:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (none / 0)

The future is unwritten

Since Bill was president, I doubt that he can be under any more scrutiny than when he was president. Boy, these people talk as if Bill Clinton did not occupy the white house for two-terms as POTUS. You know, it's just the Job the Obama is trying to get elect to.

Come on, folks, get a grip! You talk as if you're a republican or something.

by Check077 on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 11:07:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (none / 0)

Wow. Keep repeating 'the republican' smear instead of paying attention to what I actually wrote. I'm not afraid of Bill being scrutinized, or suggesting that he can't withstand scrutiny, which is something that vetting determines. But please don't argue that this situation is commensurate with his own presidency. It would be fundamentally different.

Please pay better attention. My comment argues in favor of the HRC pick, if Obama thinks it would be workable. I simply state a belief that its workability would depend on several factors, including engaging Bill Clinton as an asset to ensure that this unprecedented situation (charismatic former pres. as spouse of a VP) works out optimally and does not become awkward or distracting. I nowhere cast doubt that this is possible. If workable, it would be the best of all possible worlds.

But I also think that the only one in a position to determine workability, and the person responsible for determining it, is Obama himself. This does not make me a republican or a parrot of right wing talking points. I offer no criticism of either Clinton here, but respect for their dynamic capabilities and charisma. Of course, if you are simply trying to fill spots on your enemies list or artificially attempting to prolong the primaries, I guess anyone is fodder for smears and distortion. But your method bears more resemblance to republican tactics than my argument does.

The future is unwritten

by Strummerson on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 11:19:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (2.00 / 4)

I don't think it will be Hillary.
I don't think it will be Kaine, either.
My reasoning? I think that that would be too predictable. Not enough 'wow' factor.
I don't think it will be anyone that has been bantered about in the media and blogs.

Honestly, I would be ok with Hillary as VP.
I would be ok with Kaine as VP.
I would be ok with most of the names tossed out thus far being VP...I just don't think that any of them WILL be VP.

I could be wrong.
Thankfully, my day-job does not rely upon my political crystal-ball readings.

And, yes...it has been a pretty nasty day.
The 'haters' from both sides showed up to wag various body parts in each other's faces....and to slam both our Presidential Candidate and our fine Democratic NY Senator.
A Shameful display from both PUMAz/McTrolls and Overzealous Obama Supporters.

Just 3 more months.
3 more months.

by Kysen on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:58:57 PM EST

Re: VP. (2.00 / 5)

Who could bring the WOW surprise factor if not Hillary? I'd love it if it were Edwards, but next to him, I think Hillary is the only other one that brings it to the table immediately.

If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.

by vcalzone on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:02:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

im also with vcalzone. (2.00 / 6)

i think HRC would be a wow pick. maybe even too much wow. ;)

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:05:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: im also with vcalzone. (2.00 / 1)

I think that my 'wow' was not clear.
I did not mean 'wow' as in 'impressive' (which, certainly, Hillary would be)...I meant 'wow' as in 'surprising' (which, in my opinion, Hillary would not be).

I think, for no reason other than it happens to be what I think, that Obama wants to do the unexpected when it comes to selecting his VP. If for no other reason than to choose someone not expected would, indeed, be a change.

Again, I could be wrong.
I certainly am not entertaining bets on the subject.
;)

by Kysen on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:09:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Amazing (2.00 / 1)

Why can't he just pick his own VP and let it be? I am sick and tired of people whining because he may or may not pick Clinton. He won the primary and HE alone decides, end of discussion.

by hocuspocus on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:04:21 PM EST

i agree. (2.00 / 2)

why are people whining about this? now if you had read my diary - you would see that i am attempting to not invoke a flame-war but rather a light-hearted chat on this matter.

(oh - and as i said in the diary - psst above - im not crazy about her on the ticket)

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:07:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Disagree with the money one. (none / 0)

First off, she's still in crazy debt. And she didn't raise that much to cover it in June.

Secondly, he seems to be doing just fine with money right now. I don't think he needs some financial incentive to pick anyone.

"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 Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:05:07 PM EST

Re: VP. (2.00 / 2)

You gave good reasons why you think it will be Hillary. What I find kind of funny is that you quoted what Obama said he was looking for and then completely ignored that in your reasons. It's almost as if you said, "Here's what Obama wants from his pick, but here's what I think he should really want." How about adding to the diary to show how Hillary matches the points he listed as desirable in a VP.

"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." Samuel Johnson

by MS01 Indie on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:09:41 PM EST

lol - good point. (2.00 / 1)

but save for the working well together - which clearly there is no data for - i extrapolated from his comments. anyway - this is supposed to be a light hearted diary to cleanse ourselves from the icky day here. ;)

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:14:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: lol - good point. (2.00 / 1)

I took it in a light-hearted way. I was wondering if you deliberately ignored the requirements Obama had laid out in an effort to make it more amusing.

"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." Samuel Johnson

by MS01 Indie on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:26:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

My Dream Ticket (2.00 / 3)

Obama/Adama '08. Brings the military experience, gravitas, makes a great attack dog, gets us even more diversity (though some could complain about putting a token Caprican on the ticket). It's bullet-proof (though Adama is sketchy on some civil rights issues).
Seriously, though, I like Hillary. I like many people who are not Hillary. I hope they pick someone good for both the campaign and the job based on the best info they have. Look forward to seeing who it is.

by Cincinnatus on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:10:07 PM EST

Re: My Dream Ticket (2.00 / 1)

Frack Yeah!!

;)

by Kysen on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:14:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well, it's strictly Obama's choice. (2.00 / 5)

My first pick is HRC. But, I'd certainly settle for a good three or four others regularly-mentioned these days, and perhaps one dark horse, not mentioned too much: Bob Graham, the former Senator (from) and Governor of Florida. He has just about next-to-perfect cred's, all the way around. From an extremely critical state, too. (Extensive foreign policy, armed services and intelligence experience, etc.) I'm really surprised he's not being mentioned more frequently.

All of the above being said, the three mentioned today, making note of Jerome's post earlier, are Bayh, Kaine, and Sebelius.

I find all of them to be exceptionally boring. Kind of a who's who of "Who-to-Choose-If-You-Don't-Want-to-Rock -the-Boat" list, IMHO.

The biggest hypocrisy in these conversations is comments referring to these people being "outsiders." Bayh, as others have noted, was the freakin' head of the DLC!

Anyhow, if it's boiled down to these three flavors:

1.) Vanilla, or,
2.) Vanilla, or,
3.) Vanilla...

...then I'd be truly disappointed if one of these folks actually ends up on the ticket.

I'm a former Hillary supporter, but I'd be just as fired-up (or almost as much) with Clark, Biden, (Bob) Graham, or maybe, Richardson (I don't think he's got the greatest public presence, and that's my only reservation as far as he's concerned).

Lastly, I think Bloomberg may have been under more serious consideration, at least early on, than most people realize. But, that's pure speculation on my part.

At the end of the day, IMHO, there are many better choices than Sebelius, Kaine and Bayh...but, that's only my opinion...and that and four bucks will buy you a venti latte...

by bobswern on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:10:31 PM EST

Agreed... (2.00 / 2)

Mostly. My "shortlist" just looks a tad different:

1. Hillary Clinton

Wes Clark
Mike Easley
Ed Rendell
Joe Biden

Biden's a good guy with great real world know-how... BUT he's gaffe-prone and carries a little baggage (think "plagiarism"). Both Rendell & Easley are popular Governors with executive experience who can help bring in the blue collar vote (Easley more in the "Sun Belt" Southeast, Rendell more in the "Rust Belt" Northeast). Clark REALLY boost Obama's foreign policy street cred while simultaneously serving as an effective "attack dog" that can rip McBush to shreds. And finally, Hillary's still my #1 because she's the all-around smartest pick.

But whoever Obama picks for VP, it isn't affecting my choice to pick him over McBush. :-)

Help Clintonistas for Obama help Democrats win! :-)

by atdleft on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:26:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

does ANYONE like Rendell? (none / 0)

city machine politican from Philly, which is helpful for turnout, but still...

We've had republican governors who were better than he was!

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 10:43:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (2.00 / 2)

I don't care who Obama picks as long as it is not a complete piece of crap. I like how I referred to the VP possibility as a random object. I thought about changing my words, but thought it would be more fun to imagine Obama announcing he was going with Mr. Slinky as his running mate. The GI Joe fans would be furious, and I can't imagine what the pretty pretty pony crowd would be doing come Denver.

Maybe this makes me boring during the current flame war going on here, but I am voting for him and his VP is just fodder for the media as far as I am concerned.

Sorry for being boring:)

by Xris on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:12:42 PM EST

Re: VP. (2.00 / 2)

All of these diaries on the VP choice are interesting, if for no more reason than to see what the obvious trolls have to say in the comment threads. The comments range from amusing to disgusting to enlightening. I've enjoyed reading them. I've definitely learned some things about little-known names on the imaginary short-list. I've laughed out loud at some of the comments and made faces at others. That's all well and good, but it doesn't really mean anything.

In the final analysis, people don't vote for the person who is in the second spot on the ticket. People are voting for a president, plain and simple. The only requirement for a VP choice is that they don't hurt the ticket and that they can be viewed as a possible replacement if the worst happens. Even that second requirement isn't all that vital, look at Dan Quayle.

We've all had lots of fun with these diaries and will probably continue to until the choice is announced. Heck, even after that, we will probably be reading about it for days afterwards.

"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." Samuel Johnson

by MS01 Indie on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:21:05 PM EST

I just pray he doesnt choose Bayh (2.00 / 1)

That would be a disaster IMO. We don't need someone that is going to induce sleepiness before he's even introduced.

by highgrade on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:23:31 PM EST

Re: I just pray he doesnt choose Bayh (2.00 / 1)

Seems like most veep candidates just disappear after they're chosen.

Bayh would just do it much more quickly than most.

by Bush Bites on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:09:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Can I get a ruling (1.33 / 3)

Why is it so easy to hide rate comments just because I said I don't want Hillary Clinton as VP?

I don't want her as VP, I believe she will drag down the ticket. Hide rate incoming.

"Is there no keeping with class in whom we mingle with anymore?"

by Brandon on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:23:46 PM EST

Re: Can I get a ruling (none / 0)

mojo because I am a rebel like that

by Xris on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:25:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

lol. (2.00 / 2)

you might want to look into this guy's history a bit before doling it out though. check out his sig line... he called HRC leatherface multiple times, her supporters feminazis and said that the reason she is a senator is because of her husband. and im pretty sure lance bryce is his sockpuppet.

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:34:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Can I get a ruling (2.00 / 1)

Actually, the language in this comment is vastly different from the language in the comment that got HRd.

As such....it will probably stand.

by Kysen on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:25:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Can I get a ruling (2.00 / 2)

yes you can say it. but that is not what your comment said. and dear brandon/lance your sig line and leatherface comments were enough evidence that most here needed.

i think you would be better served at www.redstate.com
they share your hatred for hillary and her supporters and i think you would fit in quite well there.

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:28:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Because you were... (2.00 / 3)

Behaving in an ugly, insensitive, misogynistic, & downright trollish fashion. If you don't want HRs, you need to learn to show more respect to your fellow Democrats here. I disagree with a number of users here, but we never HR each other simply because we don't act like thuggish trolls.

Help Clintonistas for Obama help Democrats win! :-)

by atdleft on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:29:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Meh (none / 0)

Today has been a pretty bad day at MyDD. Lots of flame wars and trolls bashing Obama and Clinton.

No -- that's a more-or-less typical day at MyDD. This place is a joke, and if you can't roll with it, it's unhealthy for you to be here.

by username on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:27:02 PM EST

Re: Meh (2.00 / 1)

While there is some validity to your comment...today was particularly noxious.

As such...I would say that it was a 'less typical' day here on MYDD.

by Kysen on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:29:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Wrong answer (none / 0)

get a gang together, tag team HR any ideas that you dont agree with and only what you want, it seems to work out well for some people here.

"Is there no keeping with class in whom we mingle with anymore?"

by Brandon on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:29:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Dude (2.00 / 3)

you run around saying Leatherface and trashing Clinton all the time. That's no better than Catfish's antics.

by JJE on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:33:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Catfish (none / 0)

does not get everything he or she says hide rated regardless of what he or she says.

"Is there no keeping with class in whom we mingle with anymore?"

by Brandon on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:38:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Catfish (2.00 / 1)

Nor do you.
You both, as with everyone else, get TRd/HRd when your comment is TR/HR worthy.
Believe it or not...not EVERYTHING you type, no matter how hard you try, is HR worthy.
You are not a victim, you are not a martyr, you are not oppressed....you are troll.
Your comments make it quite clear.
I don't care who you support.
It's quite simple, really.

by Kysen on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:43:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wrong answer (2.00 / 1)

So it would be better if everyone was abusive and divisive and spewed bile at every perceived slight? Better to use Republican insults and juvenile language when speaking of fellow Democrats? Better to make a complete and utter jackass out oneself whilst trolling one thread after another?

No thank you.
I'll leave such JackTrollery to JackTrolls such as yourself. And, when those of your ilk push it too far...I will gladly provide the HR to remove the vomitus you spew.

It's really quite easy.
Don't write Trollish material, don't get TR/HRd.
Most with a modicum of intelligence learn the rules fairly quickly....others...well...you know.

by Kysen on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:36:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wrong answer (none / 0)

So it would be better if everyone was abusive and divisive and spewed bile at every perceived slight?

No, but it would be better if more people saw MyDD as the joke that it is.

I'll leave such JackTrollery to JackTrolls such as yourself.

Sorry, wrong answer. Like I said before, if you can't learn to laugh at the joke, it's probably more healhty for you not to come here too often...

by username on Mon Aug 04, 2008 at 03:51:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (2.00 / 2)

Agreed that there was a disheartening vibe around here today (hated that we had to rehash the primary wars so thoroughly) but this is a good way to overcome it. I personally think Tim Kaine would be a good choice for Obama. I think he's the kind of politician that people like as they get to know more. And his solid, regular guy vibe would be a good match for Obama's flash. But the scenario you outline CG would be a super exciting one too and would make a lot of people happy. Can't wait to see what happens. Thanks for the diary.

by wasder on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:32:16 PM EST

Clinton is the smartest choice (2.00 / 4)

electability wise. She brings more than she might cost. I believe a recent poll (that I cannot find right now) showed Obama/Clinton beating McCain/Romney more soundly than just O/Mc, which should quiet the "but we don't have any data" crowd (I was one of that crowd until I saw the poll).

However, I think she's not the front-runner for the VP. I think personal comfortability and concerns about her (and Bill) overshadowing and going off-message will trump cold political calculation.

by JJE on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:32:20 PM EST

this is it (2.00 / 2)

which shows Obama/Hillary beating McCain/Romney in a landslide, more than Obama v. McCain. Just go down the page a bit and its there.

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:36:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Much obliged (2.00 / 1)

by JJE on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:52:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Depends on the meaning of stumping... (2.00 / 2)

Hillary has actually been quite active on Obama's part stumping; they've actually appeared together four times by my count (two private fundraiser events, two public events), which is more than he has appeared with any other politician. She's been speaking in front of labor groups that endorsed her during the primary and asking them to throw their support behind Obama.

Obama and Bill are a different story.

by Blazers Edge on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:38:54 PM EST

Re: VP. (2.00 / 2)

I agree 100%. Rec

by Politicalslave on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:41:57 PM EST

As for Obama's statement of his (2.00 / 2)

VP qualities, the three points that would capture HRC are:

"who has a shared vision": I interpret this statement to mean political beliefs though some may interpret it to mean the "way Washington works" though he already said that earlier.

"who certainly complements me, in the sense that they provide a knowledge base or an area of expertise that can be useful": I think even her biggest critics would acknowledge that HRC is incredibly intelligent and would provide Obama with a "knowledge base" in certain areas that would be useful.

"who's willing to tell me where he thinks, or she thinks, I'm wrong": this one probably captures HRC the best. Frankly, I have tough time seeing anyone but Biden on Obama's list as someone meeting this element of his test.

by Blazers Edge on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:45:47 PM EST

Re: As for Obama's statement of his (1.00 / 1)

By his statements, she is clearly not to task. He wants an agent of change, which is not Hilary. He wants someoen who compliments him, certainly not Hillary Clinton. Third part, yeah, that actually is her.

She would bring a lifetime of experience to the White House, and so would John Mccain if I remember correctly, to bad Obama is only bringing a speech, where did I hear that drivel before?

He can win without her, and the best way of not alienating his people is to avoid her at all costs. She didn't burn the bridge, she blew up every available bridge.

"Is there no keeping with class in whom we mingle with anymore?"

by Brandon on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:52:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (2.00 / 1)

If anyone remembers me (I took some time off during the heat of the primaries, lol), I have not been one of the Clintons' biggest fans. I was one who called her Billary and worse. However, now that the primaries are over, now that the dust has settled, there is no better pick than HRC for veep. It solves so many problems in one fell swoop. The people who will be angered on the right probably wouldn't have voted for Obama anyway, and the ones angered on the left will probably vote for Obama despite Clinton being on the ticket. We may lose a few independents, but we may also gain some. It's the right choice. I just hope that Hillary's supporters won't be too angry if Obama misses this obvious choice; he's a great man, but not perfect.

by PittsburghPete on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:48:35 PM EST

Re: VP. (none / 0)

I doubt it's going to happen, mostly because it violates the first rule of VP selection, namely, do no harm.
Hillary is someone who the Right loves to hate, and if they can't generate passion in opposition to Obama, they can certainly do so against Hillary. They've got a hundred negative ads they're just waiting to run. (Not that this is Hillary's fault, it's just the effect of the name 'Clinton' on a significant chunk of the electorate.)
VP selection rarely helps the candidate on the ground. (Quick, name the last VP candidate who had a major impact on the outcome of an election). So this is more about the media narrative than about any significant electoral gains. And the media narrative on a Hillary Clinton VP selection would be brutal. Considering the MSM spends a LOT of time these days finding ANY excuse to fault Obama and the campaign, do you really think this would get a positive spin in the press?

Also, something I've seen posted about the VP selection process really bothers me. The notion that Hillary 'deserves' the VP slot. NO ONE, under any circumstances, is owed that job, just like no one, under any circumstances is owed the presidency. There are plenty of arguments for Clinton on the governance front, and there are some arguments to be made for her based on political factors (though, in my view, the negatives outweigh the positives politically).

And finally, I don't believe the PUMAs would be satisfied with her as VP. The Cult of Clinton has grown a life of its own (kind of the flipside of Clinton derangement syndrome), and I doubt that putting her in the VP spot would make them happy. The arguments would simply shift to how she is portrayed in the campaign, where she stumps and when, why she isn't more visible, she should be out-front, the ticket is upside down, etc, etc.

Honestly, I couldn't care less about who is selected as VP. The campaign has done a pretty damn good job so far, so I trust their judgment.

by EvilAsh on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:57:05 PM EST

please no flame wars.. (none / 0)

and your point kind of contradicts itself. on one hand you say no one votes based on vp and then the other suggest (albeit gop talking points) that her as vp would cause people to vote the other way. which is it?

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:06:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: please no flame wars.. (none / 0)

That's true, I should've been more clear.
The VP selection can negatively impact the top of the ticket much more than they can help. For example, if Obama were to choose Chuck Hagel, it is unlikely that people will vote for Obama just because he's on the ticket, but I can see the selection of a republican turn off a LOT of people. Enough to not vote for Obama? Maybe, maybe not, but it's a move that could definitely hurt him more than it helps.
Hillary is and has long been a polarizing figure. She elicits STRONG responses, both positive and negative. However, since the VP slot is more sensitive to negatives than positives, then it's likely that selecting her would do more harm than good, politically speaking.

by EvilAsh on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 01:48:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (2.00 / 2)

You are right about one thing Canadian Gal - I will only vote for Obama if HRC is on the ticket.

And I know tons of HRC supporters that feel the same way (true there are tons of PUMAS who won't even do this) - but let's face it, there are no Kaine, Sebilius, etc...supporters that are out there that feel the same way....that are saying they won't vote for BO unless one of them is the VP....

And before I get troll rated again for the 50th time - the reason so many HRC supporters feel so passionately about her is the same reason so many BO supporters feel passionately about him:

*SHE TOO was a history making candidate
*the damn primary went on for ? how many years?
*She won the popular vote and sprinted to the finish line (while he limped).

So many of us believe she was cheated out of this by the DNC.

Never before would I have considered voting for anyone but the Dem candidate - but this year is different. This year, as a Woman, I will take a stand and use my vote as a Protest if she is not on the ticket.

So - I really, really, really HOPE like hell you are right.

by nikkid on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:58:52 PM EST

I respect your opinion (1.50 / 2)

You are out of line about her being cheated, she lost, by any measure. But I, as an Obama supporter, will not and cannot vote for any ticket with Hillary Clinton on it, and I know "tons" of Obama supporter who feel the same way.

"but this year is different. This year, as a Woman, I will take a stand and use my vote as a Protest if she is not on the ticket."

I will protest if she is, as will other, what exactly is your point. he can loose the people closest to him or he can loose people willing to jettison a candidate based on sex. I am opposed to everything about Clinton, everything.

"Is there no keeping with class in whom we mingle with anymore?"

by Brandon on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:05:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I respect your opinion (2.00 / 2)

It is just as nonsensical to not vote for Obama if Hillary is chosen as VP as it is to not vote for Obama if Hillary is not chosen as VP.

Just goes to show that there is plenty of nonsense from both 'sides'.

by Kysen on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:07:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

They're both right (none / 0)

I know people who won't vote for him if he chooses Hillary and ones who won't vote for him if he doesn't.

That and his race, and frankly party affiliation, is why I think he's toast in November.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:15:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: They're both right (2.00 / 1)

Wait, so, what you are saying is....Obama will lose in November because he is black, a Democrat, and may or may not choose Hillary as his VP?

That's about as 'out there' of a comment as I've seen all day....and it's been a doozy of a day for 'out there' comments!

by Kysen on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:21:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Honestly (none / 0)

yes.

He'll lose because of the combined opposition from racists, Republicans, and Hillary dead-enders.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:24:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

ohy vey. (2.00 / 1)

the sky is falling!

if you honestly believe this then why did you support him over other candidates? isn't it about winning?

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:26:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I didn't (2.00 / 1)

I supported Richardson, then Edwards, then Obama...once it got down to Obama and Clinton and McCain was the presumptive Republican nominee, I sorta gave up and supported the candidate I thought would make a better President...Obama, but quite frankly, I didn't think either would win against McCain.

Then the divisiveness started and that ended that.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:28:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (2.00 / 2)

One would hope that, as a Woman, you would have more sense than to vote for McCain.

by Kysen on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:06:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

your vote is yours. (none / 0)

i dont agree with you - but i do not want the flame wars restarted here. so kingly please omit the primary stuff? thanks.

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:10:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I could live with Bayh or Biden. (none / 0)

Kaine worries me.

I don't think it will be Hillary.

by Bush Bites on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:01:48 AM EST

Some caution (2.00 / 2)

I think she would be great as VP. But I have some serious concerns about her too:

1) Mixed message. Obama's whole message is change. Hillary evokes nostalgia more than change (even though a Hillary Presidency would mean major change)

2) Bill. Throughout the primary campaign Bill Clinton proved himself a mixed bag. In small towns he was great. But in high-profile moments, he didn't really help Hillary - even if his statements were twisted. Would Obama feel comfortable with Bill Clinton on the stump? I don't know.

3) Money. Hillary Clinton is still in a lot of debt. She would have to work to pay off that debt even as she raises money for the Obama ticket.

4) Mobilizing the GOP. She mobilizes Republicans who despise her. While many Republicans despise Obama as they do every Democrat, Hillary Clinton inspires a unique brand of hatred on the right.

5) Independents. While there are plenty of Independents that admire Hillary Clinton, there are many who loathe her. She fires up the Democratic base, and that may be enough this year. But she could turn off Independents.

Hillary Clinton would a lot to the ticket: experience, a huge and loyal support base, potential money, party unity, passion for health care, leadership on the economy. These are real benefits. But the costs are there too and we cannot ignore them.

by elrod on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:15:27 AM EST

Re: Some caution (none / 0)

Again if one could negotiate a way to

1) make sure Pres. Clinton stays out of the news.
2) know exactly what went on with the library

I have no problem with it. The thing I fear though if it is a "break glass" situation, is that both conditions will be rejected and the campaign will either have to roll the dice with Pres. Clinton making unwelcome news (which might even be spun into a negative judgement issue) or roll the dice with having major defections (I'm not sure we're here yet--I'd like to see a whole summer of polling).

There's no hurry to pull the trigger on the VP yet. In fact if I were considering Sen. Clinton, I would wait as long as possible just to try to see what percentage actually is defecting and see if I could avoid the Pres. Clinton issue all together.

Even if I was 100% sure I was taking Sen. Clinton, I would wait until Tues. of the convention to announce (if I could keep it close-hold until then) because the press would go crazy if Pres. Clinton's speech were made by the husband of the VP candidate.

The press has an obsession with Pres. Clinton and would drown out a whole week or two with any sort of scandal, real or manufactured. So, I don't think the restrictions are optional.

Visiting the hopium dens proudly since 2007.

by AZphilosopher on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 05:13:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: VP. (2.00 / 2)

I think there is a greater chance than ever before that Hillary may make the VP rolls, but the polls that you mention mean nothing... The republican attack machine hasn't touched her since February, and the right wing media became her best friend since then, too.

All that helped rehabilitate her image, which is good... however, they've had years to prepare for her and unleash heck... it wouldn't necessarily be so pretty after even a few weeks....

I do not know what will happen at this point...

If Kaine helps Obama win Virginia then he's worth it, regardless of any negativity...

If McCain goes with Palin or (heaven help us) Carly Fiorina (ugh! She exported every job she could to India and ruined HP in the process), then you go with a female candidate...

I think if he does pick Hillary, he should do it as a surprise at the convention... that would get big press!

by LordMike on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:15:54 AM EST

actually i fully agree. (2.00 / 1)

and i would add one point - if mccain goes with palin and obama goes with anyone else but clinton - i think its serious trouble. in fact - i would say that mccain/palin is trouble even for an obama/clinton ticket.

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:23:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: actually i fully agree. (2.00 / 1)

Palin is on her way to scandal city, but I find it interesting that women would flip sides to vote for a woman who is pro-life over a man who is pro-choice.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:25:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

good point. (none / 0)

but from what i have heard of the 'scandal' its nothing. but i honestly dont thin he would pick her - she has the highest risk/reward of any potentials for him.

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:54:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Heres what I'd love to see (none / 0)

McCain/Palin wins, McCain leaves, Palin becomes President and buts a Scalia on SCOTUS.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 01:01:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: actually i fully agree. (2.00 / 2)

That's why I certainly hope that McCain does what he promises and announces his VP early... then, we can counter. Palin is scandal bound at the moment, but Fiorina is not... and, although her tenure at HP was disastrous on every level, many people will claim that any criticism (no matter how valid) on a woman who "broke the glass ceiling" would be "sexist" even if it isn't.

The reason why I bring up Fiorina is that some people are suggesting that McCain may do something different... they already are saying they need someone rich with rich friends... that puts Romney and Fiorina in the ballgame... she's an "outsider", too...

Since McCain's entire base strategy is