Barack's VP choices with poll

After canvassing in the ice and snow this weekend for Barack Obama in Rhode Island, I have gotten myself pretty sick.  It was not the cold weather as much as shaking numerous hands (how do professional politicians stay healthy?)

Anyway, watching the Clinton campaign flailing this weekend, I am pretty confident that this race will be over on March 4.

After we have selected the nominee, the nominee selects the running mate.  So, who will it be?

Why am I so confident that Barack Obama will be our nominee?  

He does not need to win Ohio and Texas, he just needs to keep it close enough that it makes it mathematically impossible for Hillary Clinton to catchup with the delegate count with the last remaining races (unless she wins 75% of the vote in PA, which is impossible).

And what do the latest polls tell us of Ohio and Texas?

"Momentum is rapidly swinging Barack Obama's way in Ohio," according to a new Public Policy Polling survey.

Sen. Hillary Clinton's lead over Obama has been cut to four points, 50% to 46%. Just a couple weeks ago Clinton held a lead over 20 points in some polls.

Key factor: "Obama is benefiting from the decided nature of the Republican contest. That's increasing the number of Republicans and independents who plan to cast their ballots in the Democratic primary next week, and Obama leads those groups 80% to 13% and 64% to 33% respectively. Clinton actually has a 56% to 40% edge among self identified Democrats."

http://politicalwire.com/...

Two new polls from the American Research Group:

   * Texas: Obama 50%, Clinton 42%
   * Ohio: Clinton 49%, Obama 39%

http://politicalwire.com/...

As I mentioned above, the Clinton campaign is flailing.  Next you will hear that she has shaved her head, attacked Barack's car while shouting, "I drink your milkshake!"

OK, so who does Barack Obama select as his running mate?

Check out the poll with, who I think, is on Barack's short list.

Update -

There are quite a few people that I have left off the poll but I cannot edit or update it (darn it, dKos).

This list could be over 100 people long if I include every Democratic governor and senator currently in office (most likely VP candidates, especially those from red states).  

•  To quote someone else earlier this week:

  Winning Texas and Ohio for VP
  Not Counting Chickens for Sec of State
  No Placing Cart Before Horse for Attorney general

  by dansac on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:07:36 PM PDT

  •  I approve this message

    by insects8mybrain on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:09:47 PM PDT

  •  i know but I just help but look forward

    by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:23:00 PM PDT

    •  Why not Janet Napolitano?

      I don't think she's ever in your poll and she'd be great.

      by dbratl on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:45:06 PM PDT

      •  she is number 2

        take a look

        by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:47:48 PM PDT

        •  Takes someone really important . . .

          . . . to miss an obviously clear as the nose on your face option like that!

          :)

          Sorry about that.

          by dbratl on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:32:36 PM PDT

          •  I do think that he will pick the KS Gov

            by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 02:13:52 PM PDT

•  I am a Wes nut

  Gotta be him

  by wuod kwatch on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:07:44 PM PDT

  •  He endorsed HRC

    which may make him go to the back of the line

    by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:08:22 PM PDT

    •  Not if he hasn't attacked Obama harshly n/t

      by vawolf on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:09:46 PM PDT

      •  good point

        by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:12:55 PM PDT

        •  but he's a crappy politician

          and that DOES put him to the back of the line.  Should he have a role in a Dem Admin...yes, should he be on the ticket...no.  

          by hollywood politcaljunkie on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:21:28 PM PDT

          •  Sec of Def or VA

            by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:22:06 PM PDT

            •  Clark can't be Sec Def...

              the rules for that post say you have to have been out of the Armed Forces for 10 years (I think?)...either way, he hasn't been out long enough.  But he could be a Nat Sec Advisor or something

              by hollywood politcaljunkie on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:30:55 PM PDT

              •  Rules set by Congress

                which change changed by Congress

                by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:35:27 PM PDT

              •  How would that actually work?

                Let's say, hypothetically, that Obama nominated Clark.  If he went through the nomination process and the Senate signed off on it, would he be arrested for illegally being Secretary of Def, or what?

                by aztecraingod on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:38:03 PM PDT

                •  Maybe Congress would be in contempt of itself

                  Good question, though.

                  by Omir the Storyteller on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:45:01 PM PDT

                •  Congress can sign off on it

                  like they did with Marshall

                  by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:49:17 PM PDT

    •  I doubt Obama would place too much weight on

      that if and when he needs to make a decision. I believe he respects Hillary a great deal, supporter-frenzy to the contrary.

      by PatsBard on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:11:12 PM PDT

    •  Obama shouldn't be about loyalists.

      That's a game the Clintons play.

      by cjallen on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:11:34 PM PDT

  •  He would quiet

    a lot of the "not experienced enough to be commander-in-chief" talk.

    I do think it would be very helpful to have a VP that is strong on foreign policy/military.

    by pattisigh on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:12:58 PM PDT

    •  but it would be nice

      to pick someone who didn't blow it on the invasion of Iraq.

      by elmo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:13:56 PM PDT

      •  Indeed

        Clark was on CNN as a pundit warning against going into Iraq... he was against the war before he was against it.

        He also has vital creds on military, foreign relations and economic experience that would really counteract a lot of the inexperience claims against Obama, without him loading on an 'insider' into the campaign.

        I think he would be a phenomenal choice, personally...

        by Aike on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:41:13 PM PDT

        •  Military experience is a good add.

          President Obama would be inheriting a war, an exhausted and depleted military, an absence of allies, and (lest we forget) more than a couple of wacky folks out there who would like to see us harm.

          As a Southerner, Clark also would help with some border states and independents. I see a 30+ state win.

          by pat208 on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:01:22 PM PDT

        •  all you'd need to do

          is google his statements from when he was running for President. There's plenty of positive stuff about invading Iraq. I recall him as being sort of like Kerry: invasion was a good idea, badly executed.

          by elmo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:08:54 PM PDT

•  President Obama will usher in

  a new progressive era for these United States

  by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:07:46 PM PDT

•  I think it's fair to work with Clinton

  And makes the most sense.  but My personal order of choice would be

  1. Howard Dean

  2. Bill Richardson

  3. Wesley Clark

  4. John Edwards

  5. Hillary Clinton

  by 4democracy on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:09:01 PM PDT

  •  How could I have forgot Richardson?

    by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:10:04 PM PDT

    •  I doubt he'd take it.

      He's got a better job than Veep as Gov of NM.

      by Feanor on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:12:19 PM PDT

      •  Isn't he in his last term as Gov?

        by Wisper on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:14:02 PM PDT

        •  Yep. Richardson is my fav pick for VP

          He can insulate Obama against the 'inexperienced' attack.

          He is very well respected in the Latino community.

          He is the Gov. of a large western state.

          His Sec of Energy credentials more than qualify him to be a top adviser on Green economy issues.

          As an expert diplomat, he could be sent out 'from the office of the presidency' on high-level meetings with heads of states that we dont along with currently.

          by BlueGenes on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:17:42 PM PDT

          •  I expect it will be either Richardson or Clark

            by jmcl89 on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:26:36 PM PDT

          •  Is the country ready for 2 people of color

            on a national ticket?

            I think we've made tremendous progress, but I wonder how that would play (really not being a concern troll here -- I've been supporting Obama since he announced and I like Richardson a lot).

            by terjeanderson on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:32:56 PM PDT

            •  I don't think Richardson's race...

              ...would be a big deal to anyone willing to vote for Obama in the first place.

              by jmcl89 on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:54:04 PM PDT

          •  New Mexico's not large

            unless you mean by area.  It's the third smallest Western state, ahead of only Wyoming and Idaho (and Alaska and Hawaii if you count those as Western).

            by nightsweat on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:36:55 PM PDT

      •  He'd take it.

        He has too much interest in foreign policy matters to pass it up and remain governor.

        by jmcl89 on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:18:15 PM PDT

      •  That's how I feel about Christine Gregoire

        People around here have floated her name as a possible high-level pick for Obama, but personally, I don't want her going anywhere but back to Olympia for a second term as Washington's governor. I kinda like having her right where she is.

        by Omir the Storyteller on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:46:56 PM PDT

  •  Clinton or edwards wouldn't get the nod

    I know everyone is big on Edwards, but I don't see him getting a Veep nod.  And I'm not even goign to touch the HRC situation with a ten foot pole.

    I also want to remind everyone that is making this a partisan argument that Barack would likely make a statement with his VP choice.  Think beyond the Dem party with nominations...  Yeah, I know some of you would not approve of that but how else do you underline CHANGE in the general by remaining partisan in who you'd consider for a VP?

    by jpfdeuce on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:17:58 PM PDT

    •  it will be a Dem

      because he is a Dem

      by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:24:24 PM PDT

      •  Lincoln Chafee.

        by cjallen on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:27:09 PM PDT

        •  he is excellent

          but he may want to run for Gov as a Dem in 2010

          by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:28:30 PM PDT

          •  He doesn't exactly exude machismo

            ...and he quit the Republican party so you don't get that 'bipartisan ticket' spin either.

            by jeroly on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:40:43 PM PDT

            •  he is teaching at Brown right now

              and it fits well for him

              by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:42:50 PM PDT

      •  There is no law that guarantees this

        If there is someone from the other side of the aisle that he feels more comfortable with than the buzz names that are being put up - then that's his choice and I respect that.

        by jpfdeuce on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 05:33:10 PM PDT

  •  Personally

    I'd like Dean to stay on as DNC chair and finish his 50 state strategy.  He REALLY gets it. Doing so will put us in a really good position to win a lot of elections at all levels of government for some time.

    I'd be very happy with a VP Richardson or Clark.  I don't think Clark would do it though given his support for Hillary.  I think Richardson would really shore up Obama just by his vast experience.  I've always thought that, simply based upon resume, Richardson was far and away the most qualified candidate for the presidency.  He would make an equally good VP.

    by madmsf on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:56:03 PM PDT

•  I believe the proper term is "retired general"

  I could be wrong, and you can't change the poll anyway, but I thought I'd mention it.

  by PatsBard on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:09:34 PM PDT

  •  You are right

    but I cannot edit the poll!

    :(

    by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:11:30 PM PDT

•  Edwards all the way!

  The two of them would make a great team, and it would set up Edwards nicely to take over in 2016.

  by Ivoryox on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:10:44 PM PDT

  •  and the rumor that he would be Barack's AG

    hold no water?

    by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:11:56 PM PDT

    •  Edwards?

      Why not promote Patrick Fitzgerald to AG?

      by Wisper on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:14:43 PM PDT

      •  OH YES!

        I love that idea...

        As long as he appoints someone as great as he is to Chicago!!

        by sheddhead on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:17:46 PM PDT

        •  Sure...

          I’d be happy with Edwards as AG—but happier to see him as VP. At first I would have bet that his nominee would be Clinton, simply because I thought if he was going to run on a platform of bringing people together and healing our country, I figured he’d have to start with his own party. (A Clinton defeat isn’t going to sit well with some of the party’s elders.) Furthermore, despite all the criticism over how the Clintons have conducted themselves throughout this campaign, it won’t be good for the party if they have a black eye after this is over. I thought it would be good for the party if he picked them up, dusted them off and tried to help Americans remember what it was we liked about them in the first place. However... Given the way she has acted these past couple of weeks, I’d be surprised if he picked her.

          by Ivoryox on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:21:42 PM PDT

          •  I don't see her wanting it either

            by hollywood politcaljunkie on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:29:15 PM PDT

            •  It would seem that way n/t

              by Ivoryox on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:32:14 PM PDT

          •  There are other bones to throw her that

            have more teeth than VP.

            A cabinet position, Majority Leader, SCOTUS?

            by DrWolfy on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:41:02 PM PDT

            •  More teeth?

              A Cabinet position would be a dead-end job for her.  It ends when the Administration ends if not sooner.  At that point what is she going to do, go back to the private sector or re-run to be a Freshman Senator (again)?  

              Majority Leader is not something at the President's disposal to hand out.  That has to be elected by the Senators of the majority party.  And even assuming Reid steps down (which I pray that he does) she will have a hard time over-stepping Dick Durbin.

              SCOTUS?  Seriously?  Why not just walk down Pennsylvania Avenue with a tanker of gasoline and light the Senate on fire.  You talk about meltdown.  Unless there are 67+ sitting Democratic Senators, you nominate Hillary Rodham Clinton to the Supreme Court of the United States and the fucking fur will FLY!

              If the Obama Adminisration is as successful as we hope, the VP office should be a virtual on-deck circle for the 45th President of the United States.

              by Wisper on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 02:24:55 PM PDT

              •  At which time....

                HRC will be how old?

                If the Obama Adminisration is as successful as we hope, the VP office should be a virtual on-deck circle for the 45th President of the United States.

                Answer: 73

                by DrWolfy on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 03:57:18 PM PDT

                •  Crap...

                  Bad math...

                  69

                  Still, a bit on the old side for a prez.  But hey, St. Ronnie did it.

                  by DrWolfy on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 03:57:58 PM PDT

    •  We need to rescue Eliot Spitzer from

      the mess in NY.  He'd be an awesome AG.  And he's more qualified than Edwards.  Make Edwards "poverty czar" or something, if not VP.

      by cjallen on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:16:52 PM PDT

      •  Edwards for AG, then SCOTUS nominee later

        I think Spitzer would make a better Dir of FBI.

        by BlueGenes on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:19:04 PM PDT

        •  You don't give up being Governor of New York

          to take a cabinet job.

          by jmcl89 on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:24:38 PM PDT

          •  If you're in the mess he is you might.

            by cjallen on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:28:00 PM PDT

            •  He could always take a cabinet job down the road.

              If he doesn't get re-elected.

              by jmcl89 on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:52:03 PM PDT

              •  If you're smart, you think of an escape route

                that doesn't include losing an election.

                by cjallen on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:55:35 PM PDT

        •  Holy Crap!

          That would be awesome.  Spitz would tear that place up!

          We need a virtual cabinet website where we go in and build a "Fantasy Cabinet".

          Eliot Spitzer, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigations.

          God Damn!!  Why didn't I think of that?

          by Wisper on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 02:30:02 PM PDT

      •  Or maybe Secretary of Labor

        Not a very high profile position, but Edwards would do a good job I think.

        by jj32 on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:19:59 PM PDT

      •  How about Edwards for Labor? eom

        by jeroly on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:41:33 PM PDT

        •  I think we could find someone better.

          If we're going for a political type, why not Edwards' campaign manager David Bonior?  He was good with labor.  Why not Dick Gephardt?  Besides, Labor would be too little for a guy like Edwards, I think.

          by cjallen on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:46:41 PM PDT

    •  "Not qualified for AG...

      No criminal experience," say attorney friends who supported Edwards. They say "No way he's AG."

      "He'd be perfect for the Solicitor General," they add approvingly. Not as high profile as AG, but very important.

      by pat208 on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:58:30 PM PDT

      •  Well I think we've seen what AG's with

        'criminal experience' have done (now if they could just serve some hard time for it).

        by Sacramento Dem on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:06:34 PM PDT

  •  hell no.

    no more vp slots for Edwards.

    He's got better things to do.

    Besides Obama wouldn't ask him.

    by cosbo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:15:23 PM PDT

•  First take HIllary off ballot in Ohio & Texas

  because I don't like her running against our Obama.

  Then let Ohio & Texas voters choose Obama VP, using this ballot.

  PS--Wes Clark's vile reference to "New York money people" running our Mideast foreign poicy disqualifies him. Most voters don't appreciate bigotry.

  by wtu on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:13:11 PM PDT

  •  yes but

    unlike Sen. Maccacca who managed to censor for years any news media mention of Jews in his background -- Clark said up front in the last election cycle that he was proud to be 1/2 Jewish.  While it doesn't excuse the "NY money people," it may soften it a bit.
    And I do wonder how a smart man (I don't mean Maccacca) could say such a dumb thing.  Unless he really is naive and really meant "New York" when he said "New York."

    by Tamar on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:37:21 PM PDT

  •  Oh christ,,,

    a new low.  "Our" Obama?  He's not mine, buddy.  You can have him.

    And frankly, I find your entire post offensive.

    Hillary happens to be a Democrat, in case you've forgotten.

    by Miss Blue on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:21:16 PM PDT

•  The senior senator from your state

  Sen. Jack Reed. I dont know if he wants to be VP, but I think he would be a good choice.

  by jj32 on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:13:20 PM PDT

  •  I like him but

    I'm thinking that he will look outside of New England

    by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:14:44 PM PDT

    •  I keep hearing that Obama told some

      newspaper editorial board that he would be looking for someone with military expertise. I dont know if that's true, but it makes sense. Reed certainly fits that, and certainly cancels out the "experience" argument against Obama. I think Obama is going to go with a "safe" pick(which is not a bad thing), an older, white male with military/foreign policy.

      by jj32 on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:23:03 PM PDT

      •  reed and whitehouse

        would be replaced by a Republican governor.  Just sayin'.  

        by sheiladeedee on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 02:09:07 PM PDT

        •  Whatever Mob Crony is now in the RI-Gov Mansion

          would pick a GOP replacement at his own peril!

          Rhode Islanders would turn on both of them at the next available ballot box.

          Chafee was a singular exception because of his personal character and the near-legendary status of the Chafee name in that state.

          by Wisper on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 02:31:57 PM PDT

        •  Well, see, Reed is up for re-election this year

          I assume he would not run if he is chosen for VP. Hopefully, Dems could find someone to run in time. If they could, then they would keep the seat Dem.

          by jj32 on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 03:25:07 PM PDT

          •  Actually, I'd forgotten that he's up this year

            Easy to do, not a whisper about an opponent for him.  He can probably count on being reelected forever, like TF Green, John Pastore, Claiborne Pell, John Chafee...  

            by sheiladeedee on Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 06:13:20 AM PDT

•  who would we like to see

  running for President in 2016? That's the question.

  by elmo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:14:49 PM PDT

  •  Easy Question

    So here's the easy answer: Al Gore

    by Wisper on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:15:28 PM PDT

    •  doubt Gore

      would want to invest another 8 years as second banana.

      by elmo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:29:00 PM PDT

  •  Sheldon Whitehouse,

    Russ Feingold.  Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (SP?).  I think I like them.

    by cjallen on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:20:14 PM PDT

    •  Whitehouse is worse than Chafee

      as a Senator except for who he caucuses with...

      that reminds me, doesn't Hillary Clinton caucus with the Democrats?  Why doesn't she say, "I won't because caucuses are undemocratic?"

      by jeroly on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:43:26 PM PDT

      •  I haven't been disappointed so far.

        From what I've seen, he seems good.  I like him more than either Hillary or Obama.

        by cjallen on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:48:44 PM PDT

      •  What?

        Whitehouse is a virtual rockstar on the Judicial committee.  He grilled Gonzo like a fucking kabob!

        I can't quite see him as presidential (yet) but worse then Chafee?  What ever you are smoking, I want a hit!

        by Wisper on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 02:27:03 PM PDT

        •  1. Chafee supports Clinton...

          Chafee supports Obama.

          2.  Whitehouse voted for Kyl-Lieberman.

          by jeroly on Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 06:28:22 AM PDT

    •  I am surprised I have not seen more

      of her name.

      She is a great Rep, and could help deliver Florida.

      She was one of the minds behind the rubber stamps and is still very young.

      Also - female.

      She would make a good choice.

      by DrWolfy on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:38:01 PM PDT

  •  It will be someone no one is even talking

    about now. I mean, four years ago, nobody knew who Obama was, and now he is strongly positioned to be the Democratic nominee.

    by jj32 on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:24:43 PM PDT

    •  you get a let up

      running for president if you've been VP for eight years. That's what I was thinking about.

      by elmo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:30:16 PM PDT

      •  ack, make that

        leg up.

        by elmo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:30:49 PM PDT

•  Tim Kaine.

  Tim. Kaine.  That's who it's going to be.

  by Pegasus on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:16:25 PM PDT

  •  good choice

    by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:16:53 PM PDT

  •  I hope not

    He still has a lot to prove in VA.  At this point he is just a smaller version of Mark Warner.

    Most of his VA initiatives are stalled or dying, he's juggling all kinds of budget issues, he hasn't really worked any major deals out with the GOP Statehouse.

    He rode in on Warner's coat tails and he's still earning his own stripes.

    I like him, don't get me wrong, but Virgnia already realizes its in a bit of a governmental denouement after the Warner Administration.

    But that WOULD be a good cabinet pick.  He can only serve one term as Gov-VA so it would be good for him to step up on the National Stage as a Secretary of HHS or Energy or something.

    by Wisper on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 02:35:02 PM PDT

•  They all have issues.

  I just don't know anymore. I almost am leaning Edwards, since at least it would galvanize some of the fractured Democratic base. But I just don't know. I'll bet the Obama team is sweating this decision, too.

  by chicago DEM on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:21:26 PM PDT

•  If Obama is really the candidate for Change

  His choice of VP will probably blow our pants off from the surprise.

  by Lepanto on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:23:38 PM PDT

•  Joe Biden

  Shores up a perceived weakness of Obama's.  They are friends, and, while Biden has ruled out being VP for Clinton, he has not ruled out being VP for Obama.

  Also fairly attractive to Southern whites and corporatists.

  by aravir on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:25:23 PM PDT

  •  Why I like Biden

    He's a kick ass attack dog who can be ruthlessly tough while seeming down to earth, he exposes Rethug bullshit with common sense, matter of fact lines.  He would have Obama's back, and he's going to need that.

    On the down side, he doesn't win us a state like VA or OH...but tough to say if that ever works out that way because of a VP pick anyway.

    by hollywood politcaljunkie on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:27:40 PM PDT

    •  I find it very interesting that Biden

      has gotten such a great reputation as a "kick ass attack dog," (a compliment, of course) given his spineless chairing of Clarence Thomas' confirmation hearings.  He was just awful and let the Repubs get away with anything.  I lost all respect for him then and have only started liking him again in the last few years.
      In addition, he's known for his "foot in mouth" problems.  

      by Tamar on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:44:14 PM PDT

      •  Look at the bright side

        If he says yes, and Obama wins, he's off Judiciary, and Chris Dodd becomes Chairman of Foreign Relations.

        by aravir on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 02:46:02 PM PDT

        •  good point

          But we lose the "leg up" value of the vice president

          by Tamar on Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 06:01:16 AM PDT

          •  There's alway Chris Dodd, but

            I don't want to lose him from the Senate.  Biden I don't mind losing.  My first choice would be Sebelius, except that I think she may be more valuable where she is now.  But it wouldn't upset me if she was the one.

            by aravir on Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 10:28:10 AM PDT

  •  Come on

    Biden should already be thinking if his new business cards should read:
    Joseph Biden, Jr - Secretary of State or
    Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr - Secretary of State

    That's about the only decision left to be made in my mind.

    by Wisper on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 02:37:03 PM PDT

•  A few other names to consider

  Definitely too early to be playing this game -- we still need to nail down the nomination

  That said, I'd definitely enlarge the list beyond some of the names you have:

  Sen. Jack Reed -- strong military cred, solid with blue collar Democratic base, although RI doesn't really add anything to the ticket

  Retired General Anthony Zinni -- intriguing possibility, opposed Iraq war

  Senator Joe Biden -- impressed everyone on foreign policy in the primaries

  Sen. Bill Nelson -- a little conservative for my taste, but would be useful in FL

  ex- Sen. Sam Nunn - has zero attraction to me, but I've seen his name mentioned in other places. Has done good work on nuclear proliferation since leaving the Senate

  Sen. John Kerry -- I don't see it, think his time has come and gone, but he has huge name recognition and would be fun to see him go out to get revenge on the swiftboaters

  Gov. Brian Schweitzer -- great populist appeal, good campaigner, would play well in the mountain west

  Sen. Sherrod Brown or Gov. Ted Strickland - both could put Ohio in play. Brown would play well in mid-western industrial states. Strickland's moderate and  religious background might help reach some swing voters who would be attracted to McCain

  ---

  I'm sure there are others. I'm guessing in a campaign against McCain Obama will opt for a VP with strong military/ foreign policy experience. I'd love to see a woman on the ticket -- although most of the viable female candidates are governors with little foreign policy/military cred, or senators with limited time in office. Othar than a long shot like Claudia Kennedy, I can't think of many women meeting that need.

  by terjeanderson on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:30:36 PM PDT

  •  Great choices all, although no women?

    by hollywood politcaljunkie on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:32:57 PM PDT

    •  I was adding to the list in the poll

      I think Sebilius, Napolitano and Clinton are the most likely women - couldn't think of another realistic one to add to the list

      I've always wondered why Blanche Lincoln has never been thought of as a national name - southern female Senator, seems popular at home. Not sure how good she would be (as a campaigner or a VP) but my contacts with her in DC were always quite positive

      I did float Claudia Kennedy, but that seems like a real stretch to me

      by terjeanderson on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:37:54 PM PDT

      •  Chris Gregoire (gov. of Washington)

        but like I said above I want to keep her as governor. It's looking like she'll beat Dino Rossi (again) for a second term in Olympia, and she's just getting going good over here.

        by Omir the Storyteller on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:52:21 PM PDT

  •  Biden is a good call!

    Excellent defense credentials and has the experience that so many people fear Obama lacks (unnecessarily).

    by chicago DEM on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:33:29 PM PDT

  •  Sam Nunn will be 70 this year.

    Two years younger than McCain, anyway. Otherwise a brilliant choice.

    Schweitzer good strategic choice also.

    Bill Richardson's resume checks all the right boxes, but he just couldn't get the public excited about his campaign.

    by HeyMikey on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:14:06 PM PDT

•  Get well!

  by chicago minx on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:31:10 PM PDT

•  Psssssttt

  It's "Retired" General Wedsley Clark, not "former" (once a general always a general. .. )

  by hummingbird4015 on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:31:58 PM PDT

  •  OOOps in my Pssssstttt

    That would be "Wesley Clark"  sorry for the typo.

    by hummingbird4015 on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:33:21 PM PDT

•  Chuck Schumer

  If it doesn't screw us up to much for him to pass the DSCC over to someone else, he would be great.  He's a great traditional fundraiser, he would be an absolutely vicious attack dog (freeing Obama to stay above the fray) and his presence on the ticket would counteract the below the radar claims about Obama being anti-Israel or Muslim or a sleeper cell (and we know these attacks will continue).  

  Obama/Schumer '08!!!  It has a nice ring to it...  

  by Number 8 on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:35:09 PM PDT

  •  Good idea, but Obama proved support for Israel

    in this letter to our UN ambassador about Gaza:

    Dear Ambassador Khalilzad,

    I understand that today the U.N. Security Council met regarding the situation in Gaza, and that a resolution or statement could be forthcoming from the Council in short order.

    I urge you to ensure that the Security Council issue no statement and pass no resolution on this matter that does not fully condemn the rocket assault Hamas has been conducting on civilians in Southern Israel for over two years. All of us are concerned about the impact of closed border crossings on Palestinian families. However, we have to understand why Israel is forced to do this.

    Gaza is governed by Hamas, which is a terrorist organization sworn to Israel's destruction, and Israeli civilians are being bombarded by rockets on an almost daily basis. That is unacceptable and Israel has a right to respond while seeking to minimize any impact on civilians.

    The Security Council should clearly and unequivocally condemn the rocket attacks against Israel, and should make clear that Israel has the right to defend itself against such actions. If it cannot bring itself to make these common sense points, I urge you to ensure that it does not speak at all.

    Sincerely,

    Barack Obama
    United States Senator

    In addition, from the Jerusalem Post:

    Obama: Palestinian refugees can't return

    By HILARY LEILA KRIEGER AND TOVAH LAZAROFF, MIAMI

    Palestinian refugees belong in their own state and do not have a "literal" right of return to Israel, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Monday.

    "The outlines of any agreement would involve ensuring that Israel remains a Jewish state," Obama told The Jerusalem Post and other members of the Jewish and Israeli press on a conference call. He reiterated his support for a two-state solution, but said, "We cannot move forward until there is some confidence that the Palestinians are able to provide the security apparatus that would prevent constant attacks against Israel from taking place."
    His conversation with reporters and his support for the Israeli position on refugees came on the heels of scurrilous charges that Obama is secretly a Muslim who received a radical Wahhabi education.

    Obama concluded the phone call by stressing how wrong the accusations were.

    by wtu on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:39:29 PM PDT

  •  Fuck that

    The day Schumer comes out to explain his asshat votes on Mukasey, FISA, Alito, Roberts, AUMF and not to mention his back-room meddling in the KY-SEN race is the day I consider Schumer for anything other then "Someone who needs a good primary challenge!"

    by Wisper on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 02:39:36 PM PDT

•  Claire McCaskill! eom

  by jeroly on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:38:48 PM PDT

  •  2 first term senators on the ticket?

    I like McCaskill - but with even less time in office than Obama, I think the "inexperienced" narrative might take over the campaign

    by terjeanderson on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:40:22 PM PDT

    •  Or...Obama would look experienced by comparison

      "Twice the experience of my running mate."

      by wtu on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:42:30 PM PDT

  •  2 problems...

    Missouri needs her, and the senate needs her (although she voted with the bad guys on FISA - can anyone explain that to me?)

    Also I agree she is not much more experienced than Obama, which might backfire.

    by Aike on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:43:38 PM PDT

•  Obama

  will choose someone for VP who complements him during the campaign, and who will be a trusted adviser during his administration.

  We'll probably all be slapping our foreheads saying "why didn't I think of that?!" when he announces his running mate.

  by pvlb on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:46:15 PM PDT

•  I'll repeat what I've said before.

  Obama can go two different routes...

  1.  The safest option would be to choose an older, reassuringly experienced white male from a red state.  Wesley Clark, Tom Daschle, and Jim Webb are his top choices.

  2.  A riskier route would be to choose a young outsider to reinforce his message of change.  Tim Kaine, Janet Napolitano, and Kathleen Sebelius are all Washington outsiders--popular governors from red states, but with little national experience.  Kaine might be a bit safter because of his gender, but his lack of experience is still a risk.

  In my opinion, Daschle would be the strongest candidate because his status as a congressional veteran would make him an influential figure (Think Cheney, only without the evil).  He's been a great surrogate for Obama thus far, an infulential supporter within the campaign, and running a young outsider with a congressional insider is similar to the Kennedy-Johnson ticket in 1960.

  However, Obama-Sebelius would probably be the most dynamic in terms of change.  She'd help in states like Ohio and Missouri, make Obama appear more moderate to swing voters, and possibly win over women soured by a Hillary defeat.  And both have strong roots in Kansas...

  I'm torn between the two.

  (I also like Obama-Hagel, but I know everyone will hate me for that and it probably won't happen)

  by Namtrix on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:51:53 PM PDT

  •  Your kinda thinking like me

    I have a feeling that Obama will go more with someone who can help him work Congress than one who would help him win an election.  Like a Tom Daschle, Sam Nunn, Chuck Robb, George Mitchell.  Yeah, most of us wouldn't like any of those, but they definitely know how to work the Congress.

    BTW...you hear Hagel on Blitzer's show?  He didn't rule out endorsing Obama over McCain.

    by marcvstraianvs on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:58:20 PM PDT

  •  Obama-Sebelius

    is the ticket.

    Daschle will either be Treasury Secretary or Chief of Staff. I hope he is CoS but essentially plays the role of Cheney (less evil). On the ticket though? It ruins his whole message.

    by Populista on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:06:30 PM PDT

  •  a crazy thought

    Here's another choice that meets your criteria: Tom Ridge.

    A pro-choice Republican.  Former Congressman and popular governor of Pennsylvania, where John McCain is sure to be very competitive in November.  Vietnam vet.  Homeland Security.

    As a resident of PA, he'd not be my first choice, but I immediately thought of him upon reading your comment.

    by TyWebb on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:07:17 PM PDT

•  Gov. Tim Kaine of Virginia

  Good choice, puts a Red State (more purple than ever) into even more serious play.

  by The Trucker Pundit on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 12:59:49 PM PDT

  •  excellent choice

    by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:07:56 PM PDT

•  My guess is...

  Gaydolf Titler!

  by GermanAmericanDem on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:00:09 PM PDT

•  Obama/Edwards ?

  That ticket would win in a landslide, but two reasons it won't happen:

  1. JRE's reluctance to run for VP again/Elizabeth's health/Obama more likely to want Edwards as AG

  2. North Carolina is a solid red state, I doubt even Obama could win it in November

  Perhaps more likely Obama goes with a female governor or senator

  by AussieforObama on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:00:43 PM PDT

•  Russ Fiengold

  I call him the the lone patriot, for his vote against the patriot act

  by forgore on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:01:21 PM PDT

•  Bob Graham

  This must be the sixth poll of this in the last two days.

  by Paleo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:05:07 PM PDT

•  Just so we're clear

  running around in the cold won't in and of itself make one sick. Usually it requires contact with the mucous membranes of another infected individual. I hope at least that part is a happy story.

  by mrblifil on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:56:57 PM PDT

  •  Whatever caused this

    it sucks.

    Last night I had the shivers and then this morning I had a fever.

    It must have been just coincidence that this happened after spending a full day outside in winter conditions

    by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 02:04:53 PM PDT

    •  Well in winter

      people tend to close the windows, and infectious agents are more contained, and therefore easier to catch. Feel better soon!

      by mrblifil on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 02:06:52 PM PDT

      •  My fever is gone

        my head still hurts a little.

        So, I guess I should go to work tomorrow morning.

        I hate taking sick days, I feel like a loser when I do.

        by aaraujo on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 02:11:37 PM PDT

•  Sam Nunn n/t

  by Patrick B on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 02:03:43 PM PDT

•  I notice no one has mentioned Zinni

  by Wisper on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 02:40:52 PM PDT

•  I expect his VP choice to be someone that can

  help the ticket get elected. I don't think the Northeast or far west will be in play and I doubt there is much hope for us in the south (outside of VA). AZ won't be in play so I wouldn't expect their Governor to make the cut. The intermountain west just doesn't have enough Electoral Votes to make it worthwhile IMO. I come back to Clinton/Gore in 1992, I think two candidates from the midwest could really help solidify that region for the Dems in the GE. I would love to see Feingold but perhaps another statewide politician from the region would make more sense.

  by Sacramento Dem on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 02:59:14 PM PDT