A lot has already been written about vice presidential choices, but I would recommend to Obama to do something which is common in the UK: assemble and present a shadow cabinet before the election.
Usually, the vice presidential choice is made and public well before the convention. The media is less than thrilled to show a meaningless three day cheerleading event on their valuable frequencies, if there is no news being made. What would be better to define the candidate and make news by actually starting with cabinet post nominations?
These people can then speak out for Obama on their policy issues during the campaign and thus demonstrate their competence.
Of course there are risks to that strategy. His nominees could stumble. They could distract.
But on the other hand: Breaking with tradition like this would embody the very change Obama is promising before he even takes office. And it would guarantee a multiple times more air time for the convention and he could use it to subsequently dominate news cycles when he needs it, eg. having to distract from problems with his campaign, or simply as a way to change the dominating issue.
Follow me after the fold, who I believe should be on that team:
Vice president
Having defeated the first serious women contender for a major partys nomination, Obama would be well advised to build some bridges. Either by nominating a woman or by choosing a former Clinton supporter. The problems here are twofold: 1. The VP has to be loyal, absolutely loyal! 2. He should appeal to women.
That pretty much rules out Ted Strickland (anti-choice), Tim Kaine (anti-choice), Jim Webb (some past sexist language use).
Who's left? Mark Warner (we would loose a sure Senate seat), Ed Rendell (very poor showing in recent GE poll matchups), Janet Napolitano (I dont like it, but rumors about her sexual orientation are the last thing BO needs), Kathleen Sebelius (charisma challenged and rather weak speaker), Christine Gregoire (faces reelection, would loose face if "deserting" to DC), Brian Schweitzer (speaks Arabic and spent time in the Middle East which is a plus for straight thinking people, but maybe not in this campaign, maybe too much of an maverick and loose cannon and faces reelection this year).
Oh, and there is General Wesley Clark. A progressive, catholic but pro choice, Hillary supporter with lots of military and foreign policy cred, southern accent, humble roots, much improved speaking and campaign skills since his early stumble in 04. He can speak from his heart about religion like almost no other democrat. He was against the Iraq war from the start. As a former independent he embodies the unity message of BO.
He warned against a military attack on Iran before it was cool to say so in democratic circles!!!
He is against "Dont ask, dont tell", he showed personal courage and bravery in combat, his introductory 2 min bio ad in 04 was the single best political ad in decades. He is against government secrecy, illegal spying, telecom amnesty, torture, Guantanamo. Basically he comes down to our side on almost every political issue. Its no coincidence he was leading the early straw polls on dKos this election cycle.
He knows exactly what loyalty means. But his loyalty is foremost to his country. He won't suppport stupid policies if they would risk innocent peoples lifes, as documented by his opposition to an air war only strategy against Serbia. He didn't hesitate to give politically inopportune advice to the SoD Cohen and Bill Clinton, which ultimately cost him his job. But as a military man he knows what loyalty means and he respects hierachy. He won't have a problem staying in the background while BO gets all the raving reviews. He demonstrated this by opting to not run for president again this year.
For all those reasons I strongly believe, that Wesley Clark would be a formidable choice for a running mate.
Secretary of State
Maybe the second most important position in an Obama administration. And the choice here isnt that difficult: Bill Richardson.
His resume should have landed him in the White House, if he wouldn't be such a bad campaigner. His strenght is quiate background diplomacy. He excels in 1:1 talks. As a former UN ambassador he already knows lots of heads of state personally. He helped free hostages abroad two times. He showed true empathy and dedication in respect to the genocide in Darfur by threatening to boycott the Bejing Olympics.
He wants to get us COMPLETELY out of Iraq!
He really means it when he says that military engagement is the very last option to use, ever!
He shows and embodies the ethnic diversity of America.
He would also help with hispanic voters in NM, NV, AZ, CO, TX, FL and CA.
I did consider Joe Biden for SOS, but he is even more gaffe prone, is a typical liberal Northeasterner and we might loose a senate seat, while the female Lt. Governor of NM is a pretty sure thing in NM to replace Richardson.
National security advisor
The importance of the National Security advisor is underestimated IMO. Choosing someone incompetent leaves you with an event like 9/11. You better make sure, that this man or woman knows exactly what he/she is doing. Most importantly: He/she should understand that the National security isnt only threated by foreign powers, rogue nations and scattered terrorists. The national security is foremost threated by climate change. Having a dozen tornados in Kansas in one month is one thing, have that number everyday and public life may break down. You think that the current drought in the West is bad? Think again, caus you aint seen nothing yet. Oil at $130 will be seen as a heavenly price in retrospective when it has reached 200 or 300 dollars a barrel. Wars will be fought for oil and drinking water. The neglected cause of non proliferation of WMD will come back to haunt us.
In short: The national security advisor has to be a brilliant mind, a multitasking wonder with unquestionable judgement and foresight. In other words: It has to be Gary Hart!
If you dont already know why, please go and read this excellent biography of him:
http://www.bookrags.com/...
And dont start with his adulterous affair 20 years ago. Nobody wants to know what an old man did such a long time ago in a private bedroom. We are really over that stage in American politics and Governor Spitzer was only an extraordinary exception to this rule, because he actually broke federal law.
Electorally, he will also help a lot in his home state of Colorado and in the West in General. Wouldnt he have problems with the same demographics as Obama, he should actually be on the VP shortlist as well. But as a new economy, eco guy he wouldnt add much to Obamas appeal demographically.
Secretary of Defense
You may think about Chuck Hagel what you want, but he would make a great defese secretary. His pro-life leanings and otherwise socially conservative views will not have a lot potential in this post, since Obama will certainly direct him to abolish "Dont ask, dont tell". As SOD he wont make supreme court nominations, he will onely be one vote at the cabinet table with otherwise reliably progressive people.
But in that job, he will absofuckingly make sure, that we get out of Iraq as soon as safely possible. There is almost no democrat who I would trust as much on Iraq as I trust Hagel. His deeply felt conviction is, that we should learn from Vietnam and Iraq in that we shoulnt abuse our military by waging unnecessary wars. He wont be liely to be a HAWK at the cabinet table and actually give president Obama the needed cover, when deciding to take the diplomatic route in the future.
Electorally he would be a boon in the west, especially in his home state of Nebraska, where a second tier senate race looms. Imagine Hagel campaigning with Scott Kleeb against Mike Johanns!!! That would be an instant 5-10% boost for Kleeb.
A Hagel nomination will also perfectly fit into Obamas narrative of bringing people together, crossing the aisle and uniting America.
If Obama is more concerned about his base he should pick Clark, but I dont think he needs to.
There is also ample historical precedence for choosing a member of the other party as SOD (last time: Clinton/Cohen). Thats obviously almost forgotten after 8 years of George Bush.
I will make further diaries along the road about other cabinet posts.
Next up: Attorney General, DHS, Health, Labor, Education, Energy, Treasury...
Oh, and while these are four men and no women, the whole cabinet should obviously include a large percentage of qualified women. And there are more than enough in the US!!!