Note: The following endorsement was written by Lowell, co-signed by RK "front pagers" Rob, James Martin, Chris Guy, and "The Grey Havens."
With the New Hampshire primary less than a day away, I have decided that it is about time for me to get off the fence. But before I do, I want to make clear that I am impressed with all four serious Democratic candidates -- Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Barack Obama and Bill Richardson. I am convinced that any of these people would make far better presidents than any of the Republicans, and I don't mean that as a backhanded compliment. Also, it's important to note that all of these candidates are close enough in terms of ideology that this isn't a major factor in my analysis.
Truly, the Democratic presidential field in 2008 has been extraordinary, which no doubt explains why most Democrats are so satisfied with their candidates (as opposed to the Republicans, who are not nearly as happy right now). Having said that, we're not nominating four candidates, we're nominating one, so we have to choose. After going back and forth for months, my mind is finally clear.
Why have I come to this decision, and why have I come to it now? Several reasons.
1. The headline in this Washington Post article, "GOP Doubts, Fears 'Post-Partisan' Obama," truly grabbed my attention. As did the analysis that followed:
Exploiting a deep well of voter revulsion over partisan gridlock in Washington, Sen. Barack Obama is promising to do something that has not been done in modern U.S. politics: unite a coalition of Democrats, Republicans and independents behind an agenda of sweeping change.
True, candidates in the past have claimed to be "post-partisan," "compassionate conservatives," "Third Way" or whatever, but most have ended up being just as hyper-partisan as ever. For the sake of our country at this dangerous and challenging time, that needs to change. First and foremost, we need to move away from the "red" states and the "blue" states, the divided America of Karl Rove style "wedge issue" politics. As Obama says, "there's not a liberal America and a conservative America; there's the United States of America."
I have become convinced that Obama can lead that change and can bring this nation together. In many ways, Obama embodies change -- he's young, mixed race, from a different background (grassroots community organizer) than many candidates. But more than his biography, the "Teddy Roosevelt Progressive" in me has become increasingly captivated by Obama's eloquent articulation of change.
I think the American people are hungry for something different and can be mobilized around big changes, not incremental changes, not small changes. I think that there are a whole host of Republicans, and certainly independents, who have lost trust in their government, who don't believe anybody is listening to them, who are staggering under rising costs of health care, college education, don't believe what politicians say. And we can draw those independents and some Republicans into a working coalition, a working majority for change.
That's exactly what we need, a "working majority for change" - big change. Just as Teddy Roosevelt busted the trusts a century ago, while expanding the rights of workers and protecting the environment, we need a president today who will push back against the out-of-control power of giant, multinational corporations, while combating climate change and keeping America safe.
I believe Barack Obama has as good a chance of anyone to accomplish these things, not by polarizing people or screaming at them, but by forging a powerful, broad coalition -- a movement -- that transcends the partisan box we currently find ourselves trapped in. As Jim Webb says, the old labels of liberal and conservative no longer apply. That sounds pretty "post-partisan" to me, and it sounds a lot like Barack Obama's saying as well.
2. It's time, as Andrew Sullivan wrote in November, to say "Goodbye to All That" Sullivan's main argument is that it's time to move beyond the enervating and self-destructive "culture wars" of the 1960s:
Obama's candidacy in this sense is a potentially transformational one. Unlike any of the other candidates, he could take America-finally-past the debilitating, self-perpetuating family quarrel of the Baby Boom generation that has long engulfed all of us. So much has happened in America in the past seven years, let alone the past 40, that we can be forgiven for focusing on the present and the immediate future. But it is only when you take several large steps back into the long past that the full logic of an Obama presidency stares directly-and uncomfortably-at you.At its best, the Obama candidacy is about ending a war-not so much the war in Iraq, which now has a mo-¡mentum that will propel the occupation into the next decade-but the war within America that has prevailed since Vietnam and that shows dangerous signs of intensifying, a nonviolent civil war that has crippled America at the very time the world needs it most. It is a war about war-and about culture and about religion and about race. And in that war, Obama-and Obama alone-offers the possibility of a truce.
I'm all for a truce, for a decrease in polarization, and for the return of a "vital center" in American politics. As Evan Thomas wrote recently in Newsweek, "Partisan warriors may love our polarized political culture," but "Everyone else is turned off, and tuning out." That's not acceptable, and we must change that. I believe Barack Obama's the man to do so.
But it's more than that. As Sullivan writes:
Consider this hypothetical. It's November 2008. A young Pakistani Muslim is watching television and sees that this man-Barack Hussein Obama-is the new face of America. In one simple image, America's soft power has been ratcheted up not a notch, but a logarithm. A brown-skinned man whose father was an African, who grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii, who attended a majority-Muslim school as a boy, is now the alleged enemy. If you wanted the crudest but most effective weapon against the demonization of America that fuels Islamist ideology, Obama's face gets close. It proves them wrong about what America is in ways no words can.
That's a powerful image, a powerful argument, and one that has had a great influence on me. It was with that Sullivan article, in fact, that I began moving from Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama, with a few detours to John Edwards passionately populist, anti-corporate campaign (Edwards for Attorney General in an Obama administration!).
3. Increasingly, it's looking like Virginia's February 12 primary might matter after all. For months, I simply assumed that the Democratic nominee would be determined by February 5 at the latest. Not anymore. Given this, I've decided to join with Tim Kaine, Bobby Scott, and Doug Wilder in supporting Barack Obama. I have the greatest respect for John Edwards and Hillary Clinton, and will enthusiastically support either if he or she is the nominee. Having said that, I am now firmly and enthusiastically in the Obama camp.
4. The knock against Obama is that he doesn't have enough "experience." To that, I would point to Obama's life experience, as opposed to "inside-the-Beltway" experience. I also would note that, as we've seen the last 7 years, "experience" isn't everything. If it were, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld would have been a superb vice president and Secretary of Defense, respectively. Instead, they were disasters. Meanwhile, despite Obama's supposed "lack of experience," he managed to make the right call on Iraq, one that many of us -- myself included -- didn't manage to figure out at the time. To me, that's not a prerequisite by any means, but it's a leading indicator that Obama has the type of judgment we need in a president. Having said all this, I would certainly hope that Obama -- if he's the nominee -- will consider people with foreign policy, national security, and/or military experience like Jim Webb or Wes Clark as his running mate.
5. Finally, I've concluded that Obama's a winner (see Iowa, and soon New Hampshire, if the polls are at all accurate) in large part because of his amazing ability to draw new people, young people into the political process. Obama's always had amazing political and oratical skills, but he seemed to get off to a slow start in 2007. Now that it's 2008, he really seems to have hit his stride and find his voice. I've decided that I like that voice very much, that I could be very happy hearing it for the next 4 years, hopefully 8 years.
But the most important thing is winning back the White House, reversing the terrible damage of the Bush/Cheney/Delay years, and starting to move this country forward, together once again. I am convinced that Barack Obama is the one to lead that movement, which is why I will do whatever I can to make sure that on January 22, 2009, I hear the following historic words ring from the U.S. Capitol:
"I, Barack Obama, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."
I promised her that we would soon have a Luo President...let's not make me a liar ;o)
Lowell, Did you know you can sign a virtual pledge card on facebook by joining the I Pledge My Vote for OBAMA in the VIRGINIA February 12th Primary which (with your explicit permission) will allow facebook to forward your info to the campaign saving a tremendous amount of volunteer time as well as money identifying supporters.
For posting an obviously false comment, I troll-rate thee.
I do, however, wish you all the best and continued success, and congratulate you on the real accomplishments you have made (e.g., promoting Webb). But as someone with wide ranging Democratic tastes, I can no longer participate in a promotional blog.
Second, this blog deals with many different elections and issues. You can always avoid the presidential election diaries if you find them distasteful because some are pro-Obama.
Third, please offer some proof of your accusation that a poll has been slanted, or that reporting of polls has been slanted.
Fourth, you are free to write and post dissenting diaries. If you feel that polls that favor Obama were over-reported you were (and are) free to post rebuttals demonstrating that someone else was doing better in the polls.
I'm going to assume that you just need some time to works through the five stages of grief.
Astonishing surge in South Carolina.
It could be virtually over by tomorrow evening if Obama secures a double digit win in New Hampshire. Hillary's donors would disappear. Obama's coffers would quickly be replenished by enthusiastic supporters, and he would be in an excellent financial position for Super Tuesday.
Edwards has also shown a bump in the polls nationwide since Iowa, so it would be good to have him around to ensure that the progressive agenda gets a solid airing, even as Clinton suffers a historic collapse.
Shoot, just look at the whole genesis of RK in the first place. 'Raising Kaine.' As in, it was created to support a specific candidate rather early on in the '05 contest. Nothing wrong with Lowell picking his horse in a race.
There' nothing bias about the reporting here. And even if you feel it is, it is a COMMUNITY BLOG. Post a response!
Besides, it will be pretty sad if you left. I like reading your comments and your diaries.
Even though almost all of us here supported Webb in 2006, those supporting Miller were allowed to make their case and dialog during the primary process, so long as they did not distort or lie about Webb, in which case they were engaged and challenged.
I do not disagree with Lowell's choice, but I do disagree with what I see as an over-reaction by some of our readers, who fling themselves out the door, dramatically throwing baby out with bath water, striding offstage to read other blogs, sure RaisingKaine has made a commitment (rather than just Lowell, and some others).
Come on, folks, Lowell has his preferences and will write articles supporting his choice, I have no doubt. But where has he announced that any opposing opinion will no longer tolerated? I hope and believe that will not be the case. The only limitation I see coming will be AFTER the selection of the Democratic nominee, whom RaisingKaine will then of course support officially. Period.
That said, I like Obama, but I would prefer Edwards more. Obama is my second choice. Edwards/Obama would be good with me.
Has anyone else noticed that Edwards is getting unbalanced, under-coverage by the Main Stream Media, despite:
1) Coming in second in Iowa, beating Sen Clinton
2) being the only candidate in the most recent Rasmussen survey to gain greatly in his support-up 9% (Hillary lost support, and Obama stayed relatively static.)
3) In another recent poll Edwards was shown to garner the highest level of support (of all the Dem candidates) when pitted against each of the GOP candidates. He was also the only Dem candidate that would beat each of them if the election were held today.
4) He won the latest debate in NH (arguably of course).
5) He avoids platitudes and speaks openly and precisely about what he believes and what he wants to do as president.
I find it strange that Washington thinks is is wrong for common people to fight for their economic interests. It is okay for big corporations to do that, of course, but individuals should be reasonable and keep sacrificing themselves over and over and over again.
Hmm, maybe the Edwards supports should have a roll call here :)
Get off the blogs and work for Edwards in VA
Whoever did better in Iowa, Edwards or Obama, was going to be anointed as the 'stop Hillary' candidate. That happened to be Obama.
Sucks to be us (Edwards supporters). But that was how we all knew it was going to go. He ran a hell of a good race and beat Hillary, but then the darndest thing happened and Obama did the same thing only more so.
The best you can hope for is that Hillary might place 3rd again in NH, in which case she'll be branded as a loser and her money will dry up. With her huge staff, the burn rate will send her into capitulation pretty quick. But Edwards ran a leaner ship in the first place and can outlast Hillary in that respect, so it's not impossible that we could end up with an Obama vs. Edwards race for a while. If Edwards can manage to win either Nevada or South Carolina then who knows what might happen?
But that's mostly wishful thinking. Even if Edwards places 2nd in NH and Hillary drops out quickly, NOBODY takes 1st place in both Iowa and NH without winning the nomination. Once Obama wins tomorrow, that's effectively it.
It's been a nice run but Obama is obviously going to walk away with this thing. He has my congratulations.
We still have Feb 5 states to go.
I may be thinking wishfully, but I am still holding out hope for Edwards. Slim hope...but it is there.
Obviously there is some judgment involved here because a lot of diaries that oppose Lowell views get excluded for other reasons: low quality writing, nonsensical arguments, (too much) profanity, ad hominem attacks, and so on.
On the whole though I trust Lowell. I think he has a pretty good track record and he's earned that much consideration.
And Lowell has NEVER removed or criticized what I have posted on the front page.
Please be sure to sign up at My.BarackObama.com and join our various groups like:
Tim Kaine Supporters for Obama
Rappahannock Region for Obaama
Fired Up! Ready to Go!
I mostly was for Edwards in this race, but I'm really happy that Obama won Iowa, I think he's going to win the whole election and I'm pretty happy with that. The momentum is pretty clear now.
When Obama takes first place in NH tomorrow, the race is effectively over. Obama is already taking on the image of a historical figure. Nobody can compete with that. I think he's going to make a good President.
Pretty much I'm with the Obama bandwagon at this point as well. I wanted a good 'stop Hillary' candidate and I got one here.
My prediction for federal leadership in 2009:
President - Barack Obama
Vice President - Jim Webb
Sec. Defense - Chuck Hagel
Sec. State - Joe Biden
Attorney General - John Edwards
Senate Majority Leader - Hillary Clinton
Senior Senator from VA - Mark Warner
Junior Senator from VA - Tim Kaine (Would he name himself?)
Webb really isn't interested.
I think Kaine would make an interesting choice for Veep.
Wes Clark for Defense.
Biden for State.
John Edwards for Attorney General, Solicitor General, or Supreme Court.
Dodd for Senate Majority Leader.
Couple that with the fact that Webb simply doesn't enjoy campaigning the way some politicians do, and I'd be surprised if he accepted.
The candidate would have to "Draft Webb" by giving him the duty speech: i.e. he'd have to tell Webb that it was his duty and no one else could it. I don't think we're at that point.
"This is like the conundrum -- there's no good answer," Webb said, laughing nervously. "I'm not in any way actively interested in doing that."
Not exactly what you'd call 'Shermanesque.' He's not lobbying for it but is hardly discouraging it.
I think that Webb is going to be lobbied hard by Obama's campaign to do this. Obama will be looking for a running mate who fulfills the following:
1. Southerner on the ticket
2. Provide serious defense and military bona fides
3. Proven, vetted candidate who knows how to win a tough election
4. Will not overshadow the top of the ticket
Jim Webb is the only candidate who walks in the door meeting all of these standards with a big following among the national party base as well. Wesley Clark gets you some of those criteria, but he has never actually won an election. Also Clark made a big thing about endorsing Hillary Clinton, which won't put him on Obama's short list of pals. Obama and Webb have worked together on legislation and have good opinions of each other. Webb's populist, bipartisan bent also meshes extremely well with that of Obama. Certainly both Webb and Clark will be seriously discussed by the campaign. But I think Webb has the edge in those respects.
If he really intends to keep going with this whole emulation of Andrew Jackson, agreeing to take a spot on the ticket would be the natural next step. I would imagine that if Obama said to Webb 'I want you to be in charge of getting us the hell out of Iraq,' Jim Webb would sign right up.
I just don't think Webb's heart is in it.
If Webb does go for it, I'll be behind him all the way.
If we were to make a list of prominent Republicans who haven't done anything particularly evil in the last 6 years, who are more or less in agreement with us on Iraq and have stood up against the Bush administration, who would be on it? Because that's the list Obama will be looking to for Republicans to give appointments to. Guys who bucked the party line under Bush.
- Chuck Hagel
- John Warner (sorta)
- Christie Todd-Whitman
- Lincoln Chafee
Chafee is officially an independent right now so I don't know if he even counts. Warner is in poor health and probably too old to run a department. Hagel is going to be a guy Obama will be considering for an appointment to prove his bipartisanship. Hagel's specialty is defense issues and he's with us on Iraq so I bet he'll get offered that spot. Giving a Republican a post as big as that would be a strong sign that Obama isn't kidding around.
Maybe there are others whom I'm forgetting?
I really, really, REALLY want to dislike the guy...but he makes it hard sometimes.
Richard Haass, currently the President of the Council on Foreign Relations, also is someone I'd like to see considered for a post. He was Bush Sr's Middle East expert on the NSC staff (and hence helped inform Bush Sr's correct decision not to 'go to Baghdad' in 1991), and served as director of policy planning at State under Colin Powell. Read his book "The Opportunity" if you have a chance -- it's a good framework for where I'd like to see US foreign policy headed in the next administration.
And of course, if Obama is the nominee, Webb would be the perfect choice for VP (in my book anyways). I'll write more on that later.
More to the point, I think it would be bad for the party to have another Republican running the Pentagon as soon as a Dem is elected -- it'd just be conceding that Republicans are the party of defense, which I think we all realize is a farce.
Get Hagel to run CIA or some intelligence gig, I'd be cool with that.
BTW, I also think we'd do well to make Bill Richardson our Ambassador to the UN, if he would agree to it. Some might call that a step down from being a Governor but he'd be a good man for the job. That's been part of a path to the Oval Office before, in any event. I'd do it if I was him.
Director of the EPA - Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
Head of FEMA - Haley Barbour (would he take it? I dunno. Dude proved himself in that capacity after Katrina and could competently manage a federal agency. Hard to see how his abortion views, etc. would be an issue in that post)
P.S. Why must we title new appointed executive coordinators Tsars? As on office, Tsar, the Russian take on Caesar, doesn't have the greatest record in Russian history. What is up with aristocratic titles in a democracy anyway?
I'm proud to be from Illinois and proud to be an Obama supporter.
Lynn
All these attributes, we came to know of and can attribute to Jim Webb. The Webb for Senate campaign was a bell weather for what we are seeing right now. Jim Webb is my favorite Senator for sure. He has a vision for remaking the body politic both within the Democratic party and for the country as a whole. I believe he can be convinced to run as Vice President with Obama at the helm.... given a negotiated understanding that "Change we can Believe in" includes Webb's themes of Born Fighting populism. I look forward to that development.
In the mean time I want to thank Lowell and company for "Raising Kaine" and their thoughtful endorsement of Senator Obama for President. It is the best thing for our country right now and for the future!!!
I like Edwards and I think Obama doesnt have the back bone to stand up to the DLC and the GOP. He has already proved that with his record.
But Tim Kaine believes in Obama and I am a big fan of the Governor. So I can't slight Lowell too much for the choice.
Obama has the ability to unite like no other candidate this country has ever seen, except for maybe Bobby Kennedy.
Once it became apparent that Governor Richardson did not stand a chance of grabbing the nomination (this was many many months ago), I began to support Senator Obama, but I did not want to be "an Obama guy" because I did not want to be disappointed if he did not win and I wanted to be a full supporter of whomever the nominee became.
But since there is no doubt in my mind that I will vote for Obama on 12 February, and I truly want him to be president, I am an Obama supporter. Here's why:
1) Our choice for nominee is between 3 senators. I always thought a governor would make a better president (first Warner, then Richardson), but between 3 members of congress, I'm inclined to support the one who has spent the LEAST time in Washington. Don't get me wrong, I tend to believe in "the system." I like Washington politics, but I also think that part of the system is having a President who is at least slightly at odds with the congress. Clinton accomplished far more good in his 6 years with an opposite-party Congress than Bush did in his 6 years with a friendly Congress. This isn't to say that I want a Democratic President and a Republican Congress, I just think Obama does not consider himself "one of them" nearly as much as Senator Clinton.
2) No candidate has come anywhere near Senator Obama in support for Virginia. Ever since Governor Kaine endorsed him last year, Senator Obama has hit us up for fundraisers and enjoyed support from Democrats statewide. In return, he has shown love for the Commonwealth. Most importantly, he activated his supporters to help Philip Forgit for Congress in the special election, an election that Rahm Emmanuel, the DCCC, and all the other Presidential candidates dutifully ignored.
3) I'm stereotypically young. Senator Obama inspires my generation and has gotten us politically active (for Democrats) in a way no one since Bobby Kennedy has done. Senators Clinton and Edwards simply do not turn out young voters the way Senator Obama does. I firmly believe a Democrat WILL win the presidency this November, but the fight for the White House will be a whole lot easier with young voters actually turning up.
I look forward to an Obama victory on Tuesday, and I look forward to voting for him in the (hopefully relevant) Beltway primary on February the Twelfth.
I am willing work very hard.
there are DEMOCRATS who still hold stupid beliefs. The power has only diminished a little. It is like a bed of coals that has a layer of ash on top of it. All one needs to do is stir it up and the fires of racism will heat up.
Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina Democratic primaries will be approx 50% African Americans.
No, he might not carry Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, or Tennessee, but no Democrat would probably carry those states.
He could carry Virginia, just as Wilder did. He could carry Florida, which is a racially and culturally diverse state; and he could carry Ohio. Those are all states Democrats did not carry the last time but which could turn blue. And Obama certainly wouldn't lose any of the other states the Dems did carry.
I'd say his shot is pretty good regardless of his race.
Conservative, pro-lifer, Bushites that my wife knows are pondering if they are going to vote for Obama.
The old "Southern Strategy" block won't vote for Obama. You are right. But the much younger and less racist generation don't mind.
Think about. Even in Virginia, George Allen went down for making bigoted remarks.
And don't forget Iowa. A predominantly white state threw its support of Obama.
If Edwards won the nomination, the SUSA polls suggest that it would be an electoral blow-out on the order of Reagan vs. Carter. Whereas with Obama, the polls suggest that we kick butt and win all over the place but maybe a few states still go Republican. I can deal with that just fine.
Enough with the hyperventilating, unless you have some actual data to back it up. We're gonna do great with Obama.
People who are open to voting Democratic will not reject Obama because of his skin color.
Obama - 50
Clinton - 30
Edwards - 17
It's shaping up to be a blow-out for Obama.
Yeah, we live in a 'fantasy world.' A world of facts, research and hard data about which candidates voters in Southern states declare that they intend to vote for in the primary.
Obama has the ability to unite like no other candidate this country has ever seen, except for maybe Bobby Kennedy.
I'd be happy with either of them in the white house next year.
I don't think this is over yet - I fully expect Obama to win big in New Hampshire and for Edwards to win big in South Carolina.
That keeps them both in the race, and Clinton has deep enough pockets and strong enough support that she can stay in even if trailing by huge margins.... at least until Super Tuesday.
I just want to see the third ranked Democrat in each state continue to do better than the first ranked Republican in that same state!
I wanted Obama to represent in the Senate for a full term before running for the oval office, but perhaps I was wrong and the time for sweeping change is now.
I am just afraid that no matter who gets elected in November, they will be stuck with the horrible mess left behind by the current fiasco/administration. We are about to fall into recession, we have huge loss of face from pre-emptive war policies and no-compliance with multi-lateral decisions, and we are stuck in a two wars we cannot win (Iraq and the so-called "War on Terrorism" that is as silly as a war on freedom or a war on love).
The next public servant in the oval office is going to be burdened with all this crap... and may very well get some of the blame for it in the eyes/minds of our media-mislead, ADHD public. That would be sad.
Now, these polls ARE old by about a month. Recently, all polling has been focused on Iowa and NH. But, as you can see, South Carolina will not go to Edwards. It would be a monumental upset.
If Obama wins, NH, he wins SC. no doubt.
Kaine endorsed very early. Kaine's been on the road for Obama, a lot. Kaine's term is up and doesn't have a logical next job set up. Kaine is governor of a swing state. There seems to be some personal affinity, even friendship between the two.
Kaine's a very strong campaigner and the ticket of Obama-Kaine-Mark Warner for Senate could quite easily wrench Virginia out of the GOP's clutches.
It would hand Bill Bolling the Governor's mansion which would actually complicate the RPV's chances in 2009.
1) The favorite (McDonnell) would then have to defeat a quasi-incumbent Bolling in a nasty primary.
2) The Democratic State Senate could keep Bolling from doing any real damage during his ten months in office.
3) The Democratic candidate in 2009 (Moran or Deeds or someone else) would have the advantage of campaigning on a podium with President Obama, Vice President Kaine, Senator Webb, and Senator Mark Warner standing behind him. That's one hell of a flying wedge.
Unlikely, I know, but as long as we're daydreaming . . .
Even if Kaine isn't Veep I think we can look for him to get a choice appointment in an Obama administration, perhaps an ambassadorship.
Expect people like Webb, Clark, Kerrey, and other Foreign Policy buffs to be on Obama's VP short list.
Why Webb works is that he, like Obama, easily comes across as an "agent of change" and an "anti-establishment candidate" who hasn't been "corrupted by Washington" yet.
Problem with Webb, of course. He doesn't have much elevted experience, and if it were Obama-Webb, the total years of Washington experience as an elected official between the two would be six years. This is especially a problem in McCain is the GOP candidate. And Webb is VERY independent, maybe too independent for a #2 spot.
But if the Obama Camp doesn't think Webb's lack of elected experience is a problem, and thinks they can keep him under control, he's probably ideal.
Kaine just doesn't add that much to the ticket. Don't get me wrong, he's a very good governor. But I think Obama would be better served by addressing his lack of FP experience.
Just sayin'...
I think Obama can win with any decent Veep choice and once Kaine was elected Veep he'd rapidly mature into an easy presidential nominee for 2016. I'm not sure Webb would want to run for president in 2016.
You raise good points, I guess I'm just looking at the long game.
Is Kaine probably a better long-term investment? Possibly. But I think Webb is best for the now.
Unlike our Chicken Hawks currently in the White House, Jim Webb is an adult. He also has the virtue of believing in the Constitution.
I think Webb could advise Obama from the Senate if he chose.
Don't get me wrong, I don't oppose a Webb Veep-ship, I'm just not convinced that he's interested.
So, let it be Kaine if he wants it to be Kaine. Did anyone else know who Joe Lieberman was prior to his selection? How familiar was the public with Dick Cheney, Al Gore, Dan Quayle, George H.W. Bush, Geraldine Ferraro, etc.. before they were VP candidates? And did any of them prove instrumental in the victories of their presidential counterpart?
Obama's biggest vulnerability is lack of experience in foreign affairs and defense/military issues. That is absolutely the main thing he will be trying to address with his pick of a running mate. Like Bush Jr. had that problem and so chose Cheney. Or Reagan when he picked Bush Sr. (military experience, former Director of CIA).
This presents a pretty short list. Kaine is a good guy who could have made a fair running mate for another type of candidate on the top of the ticket (like if John Kerry was the nominee again). But he doesn't address Obama's biggest vulnerabilities.
- Jim Webb
- Wesley Clark
- Sam Nunn
We've got a pretty short bench in that whole area at the moment. Even Nunn is 70 years old and would have been a good pick for Gore in 2000 but I think he's probably too old now.
If I asked you to list who the Democratic party's leaders have been on defense issues in the last year, who are they? Is there even anyone on that list except for Jim Webb?
Hey, if it was Jim Webb, then Kaine could name himself as Webb's replacement in the Senate. I'd be pretty happy with 'Senator Kaine.'
Will Webb's decision not to endorse make him a more viable option than Clark?
Not taking an opinion. Just opening it up for discussion.
"I'm Joe Biden and I'm running for Vice President."
Biden might have made a good running mate for John Edwards. Because then we'd have already had the Southerner on the ticket. But Obama is from Chicago. The fact that he is not from the South has been Joe Biden's great personal conundrum for this last decade or so. It was what led him to put his foot in his mouth a year or 2 ago by making the claim that Delaware is actually a part of the South and that he is a Southerner because Delaware was a slave state.
That was not his most flattering moment.
Moments like that contribute to Biden not being such a hot pick for a running mate even though he is clearly qualified for the Presidency. He ran so far in the back of the pack as a Presidential candidate that none of his flubs in 2007 were even news. So we've all sort of forgotten about how he can make his supporters wince. Biden has these awkward moments from time to time where he looks like a monumental asshole (not that I think he really is one) and if I were at the top of the ticket I would not want to be living in fear of him making news like that.
I want to thank you for stepping up. I don't know if my gentle courting made any difference, but I am glad to see you with Barack.
I have never been so excited about a candidate in my life! My feeling is that this guy is going to be the best thing to happen to American politics in my life time. Sorry if that is sappy.
I just can't get over the excitement of a grassroots organizer running for President!
Go Barack !
I want someone who can overpower the system.
That said, my favorite Senator would make a great VP.
Fired up and ready to go!
In fairness I hope you try extra hard to make sure the other sides are heard as well - given your admitted bias towards Obama. It's your blog, but that's just my 2 cents.
BTW, in regards to the discussion on Chuck Hagel above, please be advised that he was one of the major forces against the Kyoto treaty, who actually flew to Kyoto to obstruct the negotiations and who backed the resolution for the Senate to oppose it. He is one of the major reasons why the U.S. and the world are still so far behind in the fight against climate change.
So please keep that in mind next time anyone suggests him as a Democratic running mate -- not in my party!!!
If all this spin on blogs of the youth gets Obama the D nomination, I Just hope you show up in November to vote. As the records show, the youth are great in the beginning but slack off at the end. Even staffers fail to vote, claiming they were too busy.
If you all succeed in getting Obama nominated, you just better vote in November.
Do NOT allow another Republican in the WHITE HOUSE for at least 25 years, because that is how long it will take the Democrats to straighten this mess out.
OR
are you being sarcastic, pointing out, outlandish out of date thinking.
I am over 50 so I am slow to get jokes????
This 50 year old menopausal woman gets it.
But OoooBAHMah! He is one tall cool drink of man. So fashionable and soooo articulate! His beautiful words set millions to tears, filling hearts with Hope(TM) and yearning for Change(TM). He will lead us into the Future(TM). He's not just a Man but a Movement! Like JFK! Like RFK! Like MLK! (Wait a minute -- who ARE those people? Aren't they from, like, 40 years ago? Whatever.) OMG! Oobahmah! If it feels this good getting used, come on and use me UP!
Fact is we need to keep this race competitive for another four months at least so other states will have meaningful primaries and also so the GOP doesn't have an opportunity to batter our presumptive nominee for a long stretch. Think of it, the DEM convention goes first. Our nominee gets a nice little bump -- which lasts until the media frenzy over the GOP convention. That gives the GOP an opportunity to 1) invent a fantasy Bush legacy or 2) spin enough hoohah about their own Change(TM) candidate to make the sheeple forget about the 8 long, terrifying and weary years of the Bush regime. And aren't we all reaching a point where we're all just so gosh-darned glad it's almost over that we'll do anything to feel better now? That's Change(TM), right? And Huckleberry is so personable and he's a preacher! A Christian(TM)! He plays guitar with Joe Scarborough and Chuck Norris likes him! Don't you just love Huck and Chuck? He's got Family Values(TM). He lost all that weight! Who cares if he can't find Pakistan on a map! We don't need to go THERE! He HATES Illegal Aliens! He shoots birds! He's real aMERcan!
And so it goes. Chose carefully, folks. And keep the party going.