MyDD :: Terry McAuliffe endorsed Tim Kaine for VP?!?!?!

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

Stop the presses!!!! I agree 100% with a comment of soyousay. I'm even going to give him some mojo for this one.

by MS01 Indie on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:40:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by soyousay on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:45:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You might not agree with this one....Joe Biden.

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

Actually, if Edwards isn't the pick, I don't really care who it is as long as it's not Hagel or Nunn. My guess is that it will be Clinton or Clark.

by MS01 Indie on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:47:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Since Hagel is a republican... (none / 0)

...anyone who supports him as VP would be considered a troll on this site...Not IMO though, I'm sick of that sort of thing.

by soyousay on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:55:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Since Hagel is a republican... (none / 0)

His name comes up from time to time. I always dismiss it as idle speculation.

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

by MS01 Indie on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:21:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Since Hagel is a republican... (2.00 / 1)

I can see (and potentially support) Hagel getting some kind of administration post, but I don't think he's VP material.

I'm as strong as a bull moose, and you can use me to the limit. - Teddy Roosevelt

by fogiv on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:32:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Unless (2.00 / 1)

he switches parties.

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

by nrafter530 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 10:09:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

A drink whenever Palin makes a Well-argued, Semantically Intact, Logical and Lucid Argument -- or WASILLA for short.

I love Biden, and I'd be thrilled to have him on the ticket. But I'm also open to the idea that Obama will throw in someone completely unexpected. To date he's had terrific political instincts and I expect that whomever he chooses will end up providing real balance to the ticket & furthering the campaign.

by January 20 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:01:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by Shaun Appleby on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:05:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I do, assuming Clark is Secretary of Defense, of course.

No Way. No How. No McCain.

Clark can't be Sec'y of Defense for a few more years.

by Denny Crane on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 09:34:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're right... (none / 0)

It's ten from his last active service isn't it? Sigh.

by Shaun Appleby on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 11:10:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You're right... (none / 0)

Wasn't his last active service in 2000?

No Way. No How. No McCain.

by Denny Crane on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 11:13:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You're right... (none / 0)

Something like that, well, he'll just have to be VP then, eh?

by Shaun Appleby on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 11:43:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You're right... (none / 0)

No objection from this corner. I love Wes Clark.

No Way. No How. No McCain.

by Denny Crane on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 11:24:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Sorry, 1 day later and... (none / 0)

...I have to change my position. I'm sad to say this because I respected Edwards. Google his name and you will see why. It may not be true but it seems like there's an awful lot of chatter...on some MSM sites too.

by soyousay on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 02:05:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry, 1 day later and... (none / 0)

It's the National Enquirer for pete's sake. They are the only source for this rumor. It may or may not be true, but I'm not going to base my viewpoint on them either way.

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

by MS01 Indie on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 02:16:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

agree, may be rumor nothing more (none / 0)

Whether it's true or not, Edwards is now a distraction. I seriously hope this story isn't true. He needs to resolve this immediately...otherwise his future with the Democratic party is done.

by soyousay on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 02:44:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: agree, may be rumor nothing more (none / 0)

This story isn't new. The National Enquirer tried to get traction with it months ago. It went nowhere. Now they claim to have evidence that Edwards visited the mother of his love-child. Still no real proof. Just allegations.

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

by MS01 Indie on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 02:48:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: agree, may be rumor nothing more (none / 0)

I won't post the link but Fox news claims they actually talk to the hotel staff after the alleged incident. I know Fox news would like to see Edwards fail but why would they lie about what the hotel staff says?

by soyousay on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 03:00:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: agree, may be rumor nothing more (none / 0)

Why? You really need to ask why? Faux News won a lawsuit in FL on the issue of truth in the news. They were sued by some reporters who were forced to put false information into a piece they had created. Faux's argument was that they were not required to publish the truth.

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

by MS01 Indie on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 03:07:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

How about this? (none / 0)

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/07/is_ hillary_out_of_the_veepstak.html

John Edwards may have gotten caught with his mistress and love child, Wes Clark stuck his foot halfway down his throat by seemingly belittling John McCain's military service, and Ohio governor Ted Strickland and Virginia senator Jim Webb have voluntarily withdrawn.

Like I said before, whether it's true or not, the story is out there.

by soyousay on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 03:13:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How about this? (none / 0)

"John Edwards may have"

and Clark did not stick his foot halfway down his throat. I actually think Clark is still the front-runner.

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

by MS01 Indie on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 03:19:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

not about Clark at all (none / 0)

This isn't about Clark...I was just trying to make the point to you that this story is in the msm.

by soyousay on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 03:23:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: not about Clark at all (none / 0)

I pulled the bit about Clark from the quote you posted. I get your point. Let me make mine clear. This is not a 'story' it is a rumor. Big difference.

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

by MS01 Indie on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 03:29:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Agree - a rumor (none / 0)

IMO, John Edwards should clear this up ASAP. Obama is great at stopping rumors; Edwards ought to do the same.

by soyousay on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 03:42:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How about this? (none / 0)

We also know how rumors of extramarital affairs kept Bill Clinton from becoming president, don't we? Oh, that's right. I'd forgotten. WJC got elected twice even with more substantial rumors out there.

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

by MS01 Indie on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 03:21:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How about this? (none / 0)

You make a good point; that being said, the bloggers weren't around back then.

by soyousay on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 03:24:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by Reaper0Bot0 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:40:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well, I've already voted for him to have that job once....

Re: Terry McAuliffe endorsed (2.00 / 2)

Terry isn't very strong in the strategy department, but who knows, maybe he's right.

by rfahey22 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:40:50 PM EST

Re: Terry McAuliffe endorsed (2.00 / 1)

Well, Warner won't do it, Webb shouldn't do it, so that leaves Kaine.

I think it's an interesting notion.

by Reaper0Bot0 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:42:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by JDF on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:47:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Kaine is the only good choice from VA. We need Warner to take that Senate seat, and we would lose that Senate seat if Webb took it.

I am not convinced that someone from VA is necessary though.

ENOUGH!

The problem with the Kaine pick... (none / 0)

...is that the "Obama doesn't care about women" meme will spread rapidly since Kaine is not good on choice. This will play into some existing narratives out there so I think there are better choices.

I would prefer we went with Bayh, Biden, Edwards or Gore with Biden being the least preferred of my choices.

Visiting the hopium dens proudly since 2007.

by AZphilosopher on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 10:31:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by Spanky on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:49:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Tim Kaine would be a good match for Obama because Kaine is catholic, and would not outshine Obama. Hillary would outshine Obama and she would also make him look very young in comparison to her. Kaine on the other hand is close to Obama's age and Virginia is in play.

My mom believed in Jesus, the Pope and FDR..... Just not necessarily in that order.

"Hillary would outshine Obama.."

What, she would wear metallic clothing?

Heck, they looked pretty good to me at that joint rally....

by WashStateBlue on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:53:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

A drink whenever Palin makes a Well-argued, Semantically Intact, Logical and Lucid Argument -- or WASILLA for short.

I seem to recall something about her gleaming like polished gold - perhaps that's the problem.

But seriously, you're right, they do look pretty damn good together.

by January 20 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:04:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by dtaylor2 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:08:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Metalic Obama/Clinton battle bots....I like I like!!!

ha!

by Jess81 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:21:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by soyousay on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:51:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Webb's book would be a problem or so I've been told. I haven't read it.

I saw an excerpt from it: the passage concerned a thai prostitute cutting a banana into sections with her vadge.

by Jess81 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:23:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

www.thingsyoungerthanmccain.com

Webb has said he absolutely will not serve as VP. He even refused to be vetted by the Obama campaign.

by LandStander on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:40:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Terry McAuliffe endorsed Tim Kaine for VP?!?!? (none / 0)

Mccain would be hoping to heavens Obama doesn't pick Clinton.

It gives him a fighting chance.

Terry is signaling Clinton won't be on the ticket and that would be a big mistake in my view.

Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.

by lori on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:46:56 PM EST

Re: Terry McAuliffe (1.66 / 3)

I'm hardly covering any new ground here, but I have to respond to that.

Senator McCain would love to have the old stalking horse of the Republican party back. A Clinton on the ballot will drive Republican turnout.

I want good solid data that demonstrates our gains will offset theirs. It's a reasonable thing to ask for.

by Reaper0Bot0 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:49:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Terry McAuliffe (2.00 / 3)

Believe me Obama on the ballot is plenty enough to drive turnout among republicans .

They don't need a Clinton on the ticket to turn out.

If he picks Clinton he would probably close down any chance Mccain has to win the election.

Clinton is not the same politician she was when she started the race.

However if he doesn't pick her he still would be the favorite but the Mccain camp would be crossing their fingers and hoping he doesn't pick her.

If you see republican operatives claiming they hope he picks her , they are scared to death he would do exactly that.

Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.

by lori on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:54:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Terry McAuliffe (2.00 / 1)

If he picks Clinton he would probably close down any chance Mccain has to win the election.

I think you could be right on this one. Also, it would put many anti-Obama sites out of business. The "kill two birds with one stone" effect.

by soyousay on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:01:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nah it wouldn't (2.00 / 1)

they would just become anti-Clinton or continue to be anti-Obama with the intent of getting him impeached or forcing him to resign so Clinton can be President.

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

by nrafter530 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 10:11:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

There are many LOYAL Clinton supporters (none / 0)

Some would become anti-Clinton, MANY would not. In reference to Obama...Obama supporters are in the tank no matter what, IMO.

by soyousay on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 07:49:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Most of the LOYAL Clinton supporters (none / 0)

have already, like her, endorsed Obama.

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

by nrafter530 on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 09:09:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Most of the LOYAL Clinton supporters (none / 0)

Not 30% according to the polls.

by soyousay on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 02:01:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Which polls (none / 0)

I haven't seen numbers like that in a month.

I've seen number showing he's winning 80%-85% of Democrats.

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

by nrafter530 on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 05:27:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Terry McAuliffe (none / 0)

If Obama on the ticket will drive GOP turnout, why did the latest WSJ/NBC poll show enthusiasm for McCain at around 14%?

Why the disparity?

I'm as strong as a bull moose, and you can use me to the limit. - Teddy Roosevelt

by fogiv on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:36:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Terry McAuliffe (none / 0)

I happen to disagree with lori, but your figure actually supports her argument - nobody is really behind McCain: his supporters are all just trying to keep the other guy out of office.

by Jess81 on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 07:48:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Terry McAuliffe (none / 0)

I intend to counter her statement that Obama on the ticket will drive GOP turnout---which means to insinuate (as I read it) that Obama would bolster their turnout numbers as much as the CW suggesgts HRC would. If this were the case, shouldn't we be seeing MORE enthusiasm for Obama's opponent? Further, why are Obama's number with Indys and Repubs as good as they are?

I'm thinking that a lack of enthusiasm for McCain will depress GOP turnout to some extent. Wouldn't a prevalent "I hate Obama and he must be defeated at any cost" attitude generate more than 14% enthusiasm for McCain?

Eh, maybe I misunderstood what she meant. Or maybe I'm misunderstanding "enthusiasm".

I'm as strong as a bull moose, and you can use me to the limit. - Teddy Roosevelt

by fogiv on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 11:41:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I already provided you data last week (2.00 / 1)

in a post. In Virginia, she was a bigger net plus than even Kaine.

Isn't Kaine starting to get some heat in Northern Virginia? It seems that many of the governors mentioned as VP candidates are finding themselves under fire. Even Palin has found herself embroiled in a "scandal."

by Blazers Edge on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:06:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Terry McAuliffe (2.00 / 1)

So you're still voicing your concern about the effect Clinton might have on the ticket without any reason.

Where is your empirical evidence to back up this statement? (And don't bother with your anecdotal "evidence" comprised of your Obamacan friends.) You take issue with people taking the opposite position without empirical evidence, so where's yours?

by LakersFan on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:38:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

How about a 58% untrustworthiness rating (none / 0)

for Hillary a few months back?

by ReillyDiefenbach on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 11:36:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How about a 58% untrustworthiness rating (none / 0)

A poll a few months ago is the best data you can come up with? Nice try, but as much as I don't trust current polls, I certainly wouldn't trust a poll that was taken a few months ago (which I don't even know exists since you failed to provide a link or source).

by LakersFan on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 03:25:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You wouldn't read anything negative (none / 0)

about Hillary then or now, so I'll not bother doing your electability homework for you.

by ReillyDiefenbach on Sat Jul 26, 2008 at 12:29:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Uprated to counter (none / 0)

chickenshit troll rating.

by ReillyDiefenbach on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 11:35:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I think (2.00 / 1)

If there is any solid evidence (to the campaign) that Kaine would be able to deliver Virginia, that there is no way he is not the VP.

BTW, is there any polling which shows numbers if Hillary is Obama's VP choice?

by highgrade on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:03:51 PM EST

Re: I think (none / 0)

I would agree with this. If we win Virginia we can afford to lose OH, FL, and CO.

by rfahey22 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:09:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama will not lose Ohio (2.00 / 1)

Considering McCain's liability on the economy - I just don't see, assuming Obama stops the globetrotting and hammers economic issues for the next three months - how McCain will win here. I am in Ohio and the GOP brand is in the toilet.

by highgrade on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:32:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama will not lose Ohio (none / 0)

I'm in Ohio, too... and all I hear about is how Obama's a muslim... or some people are more direct and just call him a n****r... yeah, racism is pretty blatant here... even in "liberal" cuyahoga county.

It profits a PUMA nothing to give their soul for the whole world... but for McCain? --Sir Thomas More (if he were here now)

by LordMike on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 12:26:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

yeah (none / 0)

but I heard the same thing when I lived in Queens and worked in Long Island until last week.

Needless to say if Obama loses Queens and Long Island, this election will be over...fast.

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

by nrafter530 on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 07:00:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: yeah (2.00 / 1)

Obama won't lose Queens because it's one of the most diverse places on the planet - literally: I think more languages are spoken there per square-mile than any other place on earth. Certainly than anywhere else in New York City.

Now imagine Queens with nothing but white people. Can you picture Obama winning that? That's Ohio.

by Jess81 on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 07:51:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

No (2.00 / 1)

I lived in white Queens, my neighborhood was 80%-90% white, and if white America is anything like white Queens, he's going to lose worse than Mondale...and the fact of the matter is, the reason most of them, in white Queens, won't vote for him is his race.

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

by nrafter530 on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 08:35:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Fox is obsessed with polling (none / 0)

Obama/Clinton v. McCain/Romney.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5ijClH oidEl8XEJMJoUooHU1R_nmgD924EQ9OA

Apparently, it's Obama by 3 over McCain one-on-one while it's Obama/Clinton by nine over McCain/Romney.

by Blazers Edge on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:12:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fox is obsessed with polling (none / 0)

Interesting that asked "Who do you think will win?" the reponse was more than 2:1 for Obama.

Motley Moose, Troll Free Blogging

by chrisblask on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:44:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Terry M. walked back (none / 0)

The walkbacks are getting kind of funny. Reaper, you may want to add an update.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0 708/McAuliffe_Kaine_for_VP.html#comments

by Blazers Edge on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:05:21 PM EST

Well, this isn't news....think about it. (2.00 / 1)

Kaine getting endorsed by McAuliffe for V.P. indicates to me that Kaine's not interested in the job (if McAuliffe got Kaine's okay on this before he spoke yesterday).

I can think of a lot more folks that would have significantly greater influence upon the Obama campaign than him...perhaps around 300,000,000 more Americans, in fact. On the list of folks that'd be listened to by the Obama campaign, McAuliffe's gotta' be somewhere around 300,000,001.

by bobswern on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:20:31 PM EST

Re: Well, this isn't news....think about it. (none / 0)

Nevertheless, I was happy with his choice of language: "We" are opening up 33 offices in Virginia is nice.

by Jess81 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:26:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

We.... (2.00 / 1)

Terry is no spring chicken, he is scrambling to get in the boat, cause he can spot a winner when he sees it...

The only folks that seem to be happy to be cursing as the boat pulls out are that embittered group..Gosh, I forget their name all of a sudden?

What was that name, some kind of animal or cartoon creature or old broken toy or?

My mom believed in Jesus, the Pope and FDR..... Just not necessarily in that order.

by WashStateBlue on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:34:31 PM EST

Re: We.... (2.00 / 2)

Yeah. Terry's clueless but he ain't braindead.

Just keep him the hell away from the DNC Chair. Please.

by Reaper0Bot0 on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 07:44:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Winner??? Rasmussen has the race at 3 pts. (2.00 / 1)

If Terry McAullife spots a "winner", as you put it, it's a secret to the rest of us.

Scotty Rasmussen was on CNBC today...said that the race has further tightened since Obama went to Europe. The % in his poll that see Barack as "risky" has increased dramatically. More worrisome, his polling in OH has McCain winning, 52%-42%.

His counterpart from the NBC/Wall St.Journal poll agreed; his poll found that respondents felt that McCain "agrees with our values" more than Obama, by a margin of 54-19%.

McAullife knows this stuff like he knows the back of his ass....trust me, he doesn't see Barack Obama as a winner. Given the GOP woes, he understands that Obama should have a 20-point lead right now.

by BJJ Fighter on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 01:09:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Speaking of walkbacks (none / 0)

You guys are hilarious: during the primary it was "Obama will lose by a landslide". Now that that's clearly not going to happen, it's "why isn't he winning by MORE? HE should be up by... 80 points!"

This is "why can't he seal the deal" all over again, with all of us just pointing to the scoreboard.

by Jess81 on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 07:55:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Winner??? Rasmussen has the race at 3 pts. (none / 0)

Hey BJ, I'm compiling the names of therapists to help you PUMA's through your collapse when Obama wins in the fall...

If you give me your location, I will hook you up....

Oh, and, please...no sharp objects, no belts....

Hate to sse you harm yourself in anyway.

My mom believed in Jesus, the Pope and FDR..... Just not necessarily in that order.

by WashStateBlue on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 09:04:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Terry McAuliffe endorsed Tim Kaine for VP?! (2.00 / 1)

That's just Terry telling people what they want to hear. He's at a Democratic party Committee meeting with a bunch of Virginia Democratic activists and he tells them that their governor would be a good pick for VP. It's called "playing to the audience" and McAuliffe does it for a living. But he's a professional cheerleader and shouldn't be taken too seriously.

by LakersFan on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 08:31:36 PM EST

Terry says a lot of things (2.00 / 2)

Clinton is increasingly looking like the best choice. Maybe Clark.

by JJE on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 09:21:39 PM EST

At this point, the pool is shrinking (2.00 / 1)

Dodd and Edwards are both out, due to ethical and moral considerations, respectively.

Strickland and Webb--both of whom would bring a lot to the ticket--have taken themselves out of the running.

We're getting down to Clark, Clinton, or possibly Biden. Biden is qualified, but let's face something we all know: he just talks too much. He would be insufferable as a VP nominee.

Kaine is pro-life, and would generate an incredible floor fight at the convention. Unfortunately, litmus tests can be troublesome.

by BJJ Fighter on Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 11:46:05 PM EST

Dont forget about Evan (2.00 / 1)

Bayh is a strong choice with executive experience. I believe he is a stronger candidate then some in the blogoshere give him credit for. And his name is not Hillary Clinton, always a plus.

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

by Brandon on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 12:12:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Very good point. But he's qualified!!! (none / 0)

Back in 2004, I supported Bob Graham for the nomination. Like Bayh, he was a two-term governor of a major state, and was serving his third term in the US Senate. AND---he had actually read the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, in its entirety. Based on that, he became one of 23 Senators to vote against the Iraq war resolution.

When he ran for President, not many people--especially those on the left--cared about any of this. They were too busy campaigning for Howard Dean, and later John Kerry. Bob Graham--he was just "so-oooo boring!!" Dean and Kerry gave great speeches, which just gave their supporters goosebumps!

I like Evan Bayh...but don't look for him to be on an Obama ticket. Substance and experience won't get you much these days.

by BJJ Fighter on Fri Jul 25, 2008 at 12:34:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Very good point. But he's qualified!!! (none / 0)

Ha! You and I have something in common - I was an early backer of Graham too and never could understand why he was invisible to the anti-war section of the party.

Although I don't know why you're throwing Kerry into this: by the time the left supported Kerry it was because everyone else had dropped out. Graham's candidacy was over before Dean's was. I mean really, "Kerry gives us goosebumps?" Nobody ever thought that. And people supported Dean because they liked his vision of the party: the 50-state strategy, and taking your arguments everywhere. The idea that there's no one in the country that can't be swayed by good ideas.

I wish you'd stop caracaturing everyone you disagree with - you could be an interesting person to talk to.