Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Veepstakes: Scouting the Governors

The Fix had the unique opportunity yesterday to sit down with four governors mentioned as potential vice presidential picks for their respective parties this November as part of the PostTalk show.

In our conversations -- edited video versions of which you can find below -- an interesting but far from surprising trend emerged. The more serious the chances of a governor being chosen as a runningmate, the more cautious and less open he (or she) was in discussing their interest in the post.

Take Gov. Sarah Palin (R-Alaska), for example. Perhaps the most popular governor in the country, the reform-minded Palin is mentioned on some of the long, long short-lists for vice president if Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) is looking for a woman to balance the ticket in the event that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) manages to win the Democratic nomination.

Asked whether she would be interested in national office, Palin responded: "Yes." She added that "being able to be in a position to help our nation, how amazing an opportunity would that be." Palin quickly added that she was well aware of the unlikely prospects of being picked this time around. "Absolutely I would say at this point I would say an impossibility," she said.

Contrast Palin's bluntness with the more tightly-held ambitions of three other governors -- Mark Sanford (R-S.C.), Kathleen Sebelius (D-Kan.) and Tim Pawlenty (R-Minn.) -- all likely to be in the final pool of potential picks and none willing to say anything that might remotely spoil their chances.

Sanford, ever the reluctant politician, said he has never thought about running either for president or vice president and is not currently campaigning for the office.

"If you followed my vote record in the Congress you would see very clearly that I had no intention to run for another office for the rest of my life," Sanford said. "I've never particularly worried all that greatly about the appearances of things."

That is not to say, however, that if offered the post, Sanford would not be interested. "There's a difference in interested in it and dealing with the lightning strike if it it happens to come," he said before adding: "It's not where I am right now."

Sebelius was similarly circumspect when asked about her interest in serving as the second in command to Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), who she endorsed and has campaign for not just in Kansas but across the Midwest.

"I'm interested in him becoming the president of the United States," said Sebelius. "I am going to do anything I can to help him do just that."

Sebelius, who is in the middle of her second term as the governor of the Sunflower State, did acknowledge it was "surreal" to be mentioned as a vice presidential pick, but she laughed off The Fix's suggestion that her answer signified a "definite maybe" as to her interest. (Scroll down for the full Sebelius video interview)

Pawlenty -- widely seen as the current leader in the McCain veepstakes -- detailed his long relationship with the senator (the two have known each other for nearly two decades) and his loyalty during the darkest days of McCain's campaign. But he offered little insight into his own prospects.

"I support him because I believe he will be a fantastic president for the country, not because I need or want another job," said Pawlenty. Scroll down for the full video of our Pawlenty interview.


Want more from any/all of these interviews? Click here for Palin and here for Sanford.

.

By Chris Cillizza  |  February 26, 2008; 12:00 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Rendell: 'The Media Does Not Like the Clintons'
Next: Virginia Primary Predictions Revisited (Finally!)

Comments

bxqk pjqcimt chduinx gtove
http://ratetiti.fcpages.com/zyprexa-lilly-drug-rep-detroit.html zyprexa lilly drug rep detroit

Posted by: zyprexa lilly drug rep detroit | August 21, 2008 5:45 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: lexapro use in teens | August 21, 2008 3:00 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: geodon caused anxiety | August 21, 2008 2:25 AM | Report abuse

diakcu zyoqiun jvbamri bhjkvu
http://ratetiti.fcpages.com/paxil-law-suits.html paxil law suits

Posted by: paxil law suits | August 21, 2008 1:50 AM | Report abuse

nwfjlmy tzrxi liantj bevx
http://ratetiti.fcpages.com/buspar-and-headache.html buspar and headache

Posted by: buspar and headache | August 21, 2008 12:11 AM | Report abuse

hgtb mukodz bxyho
http://thebunio1.exactpages.com/discontinue-risperdal.html discontinue risperdal

Posted by: discontinue risperdal | August 18, 2008 5:11 AM | Report abuse

dekrg bvzlfjg rwodsbz wkjmc
http://loangov.envy.nu/nicotrol-zyban.html nicotrol zyban

Posted by: nicotrol zyban | August 17, 2008 8:33 PM | Report abuse

dekrg bvzlfjg rwodsbz wkjmc
http://loangov.envy.nu/nicotrol-zyban.html nicotrol zyban

Posted by: nicotrol zyban | August 17, 2008 8:33 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: natural hair loss solutions | August 17, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: zyprexa and agranulocytosis | August 17, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: paxil short gut syndrome | August 17, 2008 10:28 AM | Report abuse

cflym qcle nfcykp
http://grenaeiny.100freemb.com/effexor-xr-375-mg-side-effects.html effexor xr 37.5 mg side effects

Posted by: effexor xr 37.5 mg side effects | August 17, 2008 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: cymbalta maximum dosage | August 17, 2008 12:10 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: cymbalta maximum dosage | August 17, 2008 12:09 AM | Report abuse

lidu pcxg jbzcuo
http://idioyyinv.25am.com/budeprion-sr-and-effexor.html budeprion sr and effexor

Posted by: budeprion sr and effexor | August 16, 2008 7:43 PM | Report abuse

tdcy hplqvz rtcqj eaif
http://newhaven.builtfree.org/levitra-performance.html levitra performance

Posted by: levitra performance | August 16, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

tdcy hplqvz rtcqj eaif
http://newhaven.builtfree.org/levitra-performance.html levitra performance

Posted by: levitra performance | August 16, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: hearing levitra | August 16, 2008 4:07 AM | Report abuse

cfoajry qkmcyew wfyn lxcbz
http://youngercam.00freehost.com/effexor-medication-chat.html effexor medication chat

Posted by: effexor medication chat | August 16, 2008 3:21 AM | Report abuse

nlmq zcvfsn gcpadh vmynf
http://youngercam.00freehost.com/salt-zyban-wellbutrin.html salt zyban wellbutrin

Posted by: salt zyban wellbutrin | August 16, 2008 2:33 AM | Report abuse

gauq luxrby srxiv tfxpgli
http://youngercam.00freehost.com/elavil-side-effets.html elavil side effets

Posted by: elavil side effets | August 16, 2008 1:57 AM | Report abuse

vpeblgm tcpd
http://imnipiteh.150m.com/started-me-on-30mg-buspar.html started me on 30mg buspar

Posted by: started me on 30mg buspar | August 15, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: zyprexa effectivness | August 15, 2008 9:40 AM | Report abuse

fgwb obijq flbcr cqprk
http://armsasdrcd.1freewebspace.com/is-prozac-associated-with-weight-gain.html is prozac associated with weight gain

Posted by: is prozac associated with weight gain | August 15, 2008 7:10 AM | Report abuse

fgwb obijq flbcr cqprk
http://armsasdrcd.1freewebspace.com/is-prozac-associated-with-weight-gain.html is prozac associated with weight gain

Posted by: is prozac associated with weight gain | August 15, 2008 7:09 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: how propecia works | May 12, 2008 10:02 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: how propecia works | May 12, 2008 10:02 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: buy online ultram | May 11, 2008 8:26 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: buy online ultram | May 11, 2008 8:25 AM | Report abuse

amcxor iyxk oqyuwc urznejt
http://www.yourhealthforum.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4542 buy cheap ultram wall

Posted by: buy cheap ultram wall | May 11, 2008 7:56 AM | Report abuse

amcxor iyxk oqyuwc urznejt
http://www.yourhealthforum.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4542 buy cheap ultram wall

Posted by: buy cheap ultram wall | May 11, 2008 7:56 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: 50 mg ultram | May 11, 2008 6:29 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: ultram overdose | May 10, 2008 11:20 PM | Report abuse

lptagv swnf uzhqrdk uoylgda
http://www.yourhealthforum.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4587 cheap online ultram

Posted by: cheap online ultram | May 10, 2008 11:20 PM | Report abuse

lptagv swnf uzhqrdk uoylgda
http://www.yourhealthforum.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4587 cheap online ultram

Posted by: cheap online ultram | May 10, 2008 11:17 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: overdose ultram | May 10, 2008 4:19 PM | Report abuse

zludsc nerlvg
http://www.yourhealthforum.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4463 drug effects more side ultram

Posted by: drug effects more side ultram | May 10, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

pgba vqilzm jerfnuhbz oekt spom onwadb fxrknaqc http://www.ouyclmrkp.tyhcou.com

Posted by: qhbr kjztmelau | April 16, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

sqwm ijhrmpgz hwvjifzc ynimrloc negw wbcruhx jrsxifhu

Posted by: vykeht pyrg | April 16, 2008 11:31 AM | Report abuse

A good thing to look at, concerning Pawlenty's Dracoian methods of leadership is the following MPR article, where Pawlenty and his fellow Republican Minority Leader attacked Republicans, forcing them out of their leadership/committee positions, for voting to override his veto. http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/02/26/seifert/ .

Posted by: gouldnen | February 27, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Pawlenty is clearly not a nice guy. But, only Minnesotans would know that. I'm conservative by the way, and, sorry to say, I voted for him the first term. He is not pro-life, or a moral social governor as he is represented to be, he's about as far from it as you can get. All Pawlenty has been concerned about is giving a billionaire a ballpark, and his own ascension to the Presidency. He drove changing the law to override the voice of the taxpayers, for the purpose of providing a 700 Million dollar taxpayer loan to his Billionaire buddy, and said that taking the voice of the people was "a lot of fun". He now has a 1 Billion dollar state deficit looming based on his protecting the billionaires. His no tax pledge just scares the Minnesota people, they have never paid so high of taxes on their homes, now being taken by foreclosures. I don't think the national people should have to suffer the policies that Minnesotans have had to over the past 6 years. Pawlenty is spending his time in Washington and running for VP with McCain, doing everything McCain wants him to do, whenever he wants him to, while ignoring a billion dollar budget hole in Minnesota. As another poster said here, his campaigns have been so corrupt that he has been cited and fined for breaking the law. A Governor who claims we are a nation of laws.

Posted by: gouldnen | February 27, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Pawlenty has the cleanest mind in politics, he changes it everyday.

Posted by: gouldnen | February 27, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

For the Democrats, Wes Clark would be my first choice. He would make an unusual pick, has a strong anti-war record and whilst he is not a great public speaker Obama could use Clark's experience as an argument to back up his foreign policy credentials. The idea of "building a team for change" (maybe he could also state a few of the names he would bring into his cabinet who had experience, vision, etc).

Sibellius comes over well in her interview and might put Kansas into play - Schweitzer, who Chris didn't mention, speaks well and is a strong personality.

Edwards has not done enough since he left the Senate to justify the ticket space.

I can see an argument for Gephardt but I would say Obama would be best to stay clear of "Hill-types" to re-enforce his argument that he is different. This is the two senators problem a few people refer to above.

It's a shame that Mark Warner is engaged elsewhere - he would have been a good pick (then again, I was disappointed he stayed out of the race this time around). Kaine is okay but a little workmanlike - he seems competent and hard-working but doesn't stand out for me.

For the Republicans I'd agree that John Warner would be an interesting choice though I seem to recall that he wanted to retire to spend more time with his family. Also his age could be a factor - as could his increasingly maverick stance on the environment towards the end of his time in the Senate.

Pawlenty and Sanford both come over well in Chris' interviews and whilst Crist would make an interesting choice, he is perhaps too interesting for the Republicans with McCain on the ticket.

I somewhat suspect he'll go with somebody like Governor Perdue of Georgia. A solid red-state conservative. It's an uninspiring selection though...

Posted by: 0207084b | February 27, 2008 10:04 AM | Report abuse

Mark,

Interesting article by Clark. As usual it is well thought out and argued.

I think Clark would be an *interesting* pick for Obama. He definitely provides the foreign policy and military gravitas. But he's not above being a magnet for criticism.

I worked for Clark when he was a Colonel. He could be a bit of a pain to work for, but it wasn't too big a deal because I think he made us better. I don't think that I ever met a finer officer during my time in the Army (and I worked with two future Chiefs of Staff, including the current one). I felt that if the Soviets came through the Fulda Gap (I'm dating myself here), Clark was the guy I wanted to be there.

But he was certainly not above Army politics, and I think actually thrived on them (one part of the "pain to work for"). Because of that, he made plenty of "enemies" within the Pentagon. Some of them came out of the woodwork in 2004, and I would guess that a lot more would complain about him if he is on the ticket. That said, I don't know how much they could say that would detract from his obvious skill in his fields of expertise.

Overall, I think he would fairly easily weather the "office politics" issues, and would likely be a good pick for Obama.

Posted by: J | February 26, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

I think Obama should choose Jack Cafferty. They both look down on women and Cafferty has been a huge advocate for Obama. He could use the Cafferty File against McCain every night just like he has against Clinton. Hell they could even get the racist rednecks to buy into it because they hate women worse and Jack is a know woman basher. Hey, if it ain't broke, don't fix it, Right?
Obama/Cafferty '08

Posted by: brigittepj | February 26, 2008 07:48 PM

===
Too funny! This post made my evening. Even my teen-age son has made comments on how he thinks Cafferty hates women!

Posted by: badger3 | February 26, 2008 8:32 PM | Report abuse

McCain's VP: Remember, this guy is 71 years old, and if he's elected, the actuarial tables say there's a reasonable likelihood his VP will be president. Likewise, he might decide at 76 not to run for re-election. So he needs to pick someone who's mature and can be seen as a possible president -- probably a governor -- Haley Barbour?

Obama has a different need: he has to balance his young age and lack of foreign policy/national security background. Wesley Clark could be a good choice, or Bill Richardson. I hadn't thought before about the drawback of a "2-senator" ticket, but if that's not a problem, Biden would be an excellent choice. Either Richardson or Biden would also be a good choice for Secretary of State. Webb is a bit of a loose cannon, and I do not think Obama will choose someone relatively green like Kaine, Napolitano or Sebelius.

Posted by: jac13 | February 26, 2008 8:25 PM | Report abuse

a minneapolis liberal/socialist writing here - and, as you may have guessed, not a big fan of pawlenty.

but... most moderate/independent/swing voters aren't going to dismiss mccain because his veep had a veto over-ridden on a bill in minnesota. most people won't think that he personally made the bridge collapse.

pawlenty is a very good debater and, until you get to know him, comes off as a likeable enough guy. he's young and smart and quick-witted and, best i can tell, has no chance of any, real skeletons coming out.

pawlenty, i hate to say it, would be a good pick.

Posted by: moore104 | February 26, 2008 02:56 PM

====
Moore104...I too am from Minnesota. I'm a moderate DFL gal (not overly liberal). I voted for Hatch, but I think Pawlenty seems more moderate this term than his first term.
He comes across very likable. He has pretty high approval ratings in the state. Maybe if McCain picks a Governor from a Blue State like ours...it might make McCain attract more Independents. I too think he'd be a good asset to McCain's campaign.

Posted by: badger3 | February 26, 2008 8:23 PM | Report abuse

I wouldn't mind McCain picking Rick Perry, for no other reason than it would allow Kinky Friedman to trot out all his one-liners again, like:

I was walking through Austin the other day, and I noticed 'Gee, that is a great statue of Rick Perry'. Then I realized, 'Wait! That IS Rick Perry!'

Posted by: steveboyington | February 26, 2008 8:22 PM | Report abuse

As a charter member of the 'skinny-geeks-with-bad-haircuts' club, I think it's about time we were represented on a national ticket - Go Pawlenty!

Posted by: malis | February 26, 2008 8:10 PM | Report abuse

It would be a very good idea for either Obama or Clinton to pick a governor, not another senator.

For Clinton Richardson would be perfect (he does need to lose the beard though).

Michigan governor Jennifer Granholm is tall, would look good with Obama.

BTW, when are you going to remove the comments box that is below the "click here to post a comment?" Filling in the box and clicking on 'submit' gives an error message.

Posted by: dotellen | February 26, 2008 8:03 PM | Report abuse

Wesley Clarke would make a great SecDef and Sebelius a cabinet member but as for VP choices for Obama look no further than retired General Eric Shinseki.

Posted by: wfox | February 26, 2008 8:02 PM | Report abuse

The more I see of Sebelius, the more I like her. She would bring some great experience, a passion for education and an even greater penchant for reaching across the aisle to Obama's campaign. As a moderate on most domestic issues, I also really like the idea of a red state Democrat.

Obama/Sebelius 2008!

By the way, harlemboy's post made fall over laughing. Excellent.

Posted by: mcmakev | February 26, 2008 7:52 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of Gen. Clark:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/114690

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 26, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

I think Obama should choose Jack Cafferty. They both look down on women and Cafferty has been a huge advocate for Obama. He could use the Cafferty File against McCain every night just like he has against Clinton. Hell they could even get the racist rednecks to buy into it because they hate women worse and Jack is a know woman basher. Hey, if it ain't broke, don't fix it, Right?
Obama/Cafferty '08

Posted by: brigittepj | February 26, 2008 7:48 PM | Report abuse

I feel obligated to point out that NONE of the current Presidential candidates have yet to figure out how to fix the above mentioned issue....so what better issue to use to benchmark for a complimentary running candidate than a problem you can't solve yourself.

Posted by: percival37co | February 26, 2008 7:09 PM | Report abuse

Okay ladies and gents,,,moderate Independent here...I have read a great deal about the unfounded supposition and illogical conclusion and misinformed ideas posted already to point this out.
In point of fact the degredation of the value of the dollar is responsible for 95% of the inflation rate experienced in the previous 3 years. As politics is now the primary contributing factor of worldwide perception of strength ( and our national currency ) Who is the perfect choice to help fix the overextended subprime ill planned fiscal management of these preceding years....Mistake me not, this must be done.

Posted by: percival37co | February 26, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

it will be Wesley Clark unless there is some unknown problem in his background ...

you mean like getting fired from your job as general?

Posted by: kingofzouk | February 26, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

Wesley Clark would be a great choice for Obama, for all the reasons stated above, plus he is close to the Clintons, and choosing him might help heal the rift between Team Clinton and Team Obama.

But Obama should at least consider Janet Napolitano, the popular woman governor of Arizona who has shown she can win "red state" votes

Posted by: dkiley | February 26, 2008 6:58 PM | Report abuse

HELLO. Obama is not going to pick a woman .. it will be Wesley Clark unless there is some unknown problem in his background ... IT IS A PERFECT TICKET ....

Obama picks a Miltary Man and a Southerner takes away McCain's biggest weapon against Obama and forces McCain to choose a Southerner even though it is naturally a Republican stronghold because he can't affford losing Southern States if the Democrats have a Southern on the Ticket but he does not.

Which means McCain cannot pick a Northern or an Easterner which would be better for him. If he had no concerns about the South.

Posted by: artpiccolo | February 26, 2008 6:54 PM | Report abuse

It's obvious; Obama will pick Tom Daschle.

Posted by: pab9c | February 26, 2008 6:45 PM | Report abuse

Hey, if McCain wants to lure some of the gay vote away from the Democrats, he could choose from among many gay Republicans...some closeted; some, uh, not-so-closeted:

Sen. Larry Craig (ID)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (KY)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (SC)
Rep. David Dreier (CA)
Rep. Patrick McHenry (NC)
Rep. Jim McCrery (LA)
Former Rep. Mark Foley (FL)
Gov. Charlie Crist (FL)
Former Rep. Ed Shrock (VA)
Josh Bolten (White House Chief of Staff)
Condi Rice
Matt Drudge
Armstrong Williams
Posted by: harlemboy | February 26, 2008 04:49 PM

-------------------

LOL Very good Sir.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | February 26, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

Wesley Clark for VP on a potential Obama ticket... excellent idea. I had the opportunity to visit with Gen. Clark for about 20 minutes along with a couple other people during the last election cycle. One of the group was grilling him on his stand on Iraq, and I thought he did an outstanding job of clearly communicating his position and respectfully disarming/disagreeing with the agitator. I would certainly support that ticket!

Posted by: kelder | February 26, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

For Obama, I'm most interested in unlikely candidates that will bring in Republicans and voters unsure of Obama's high pressure decision making.

John Warner of Virginia, the ranking Republican on the Armed Services Committee, Richard Lugar, the ranking Republican on Foreign Relations, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, all fit this bill. Senator Warner, imho, would make a great choice despite key differences in one another's platform.

John Edwards makes for a young, good looking ticket, but reinforces Obama's perception as inexperienced with global and serious issues.

I don't know if she would accept, but Hillary Clinton would help with raising money and turning out women voters. I think she would be a drag, though, in trying to bring Republican and moderate independents into the fray. She may want to become to first women Majority Leader in the Senate in 2010. And in 2016, she'll be much younger than McCain is now.

Bill Richardson would be an interesting choice. Obviously, he would be a big help in mobilizing Latino voters. Not sure what effect going double minority would have... Great foreign affairs experience.

For John McCain, I think Rudy Giuliani makes a lot of sense. It emphasizes toughness and experience, especially under pressure.

I'm interested in others' opinions about how John Warner pairs with Barack Obama.

Posted by: dawgstarman | February 26, 2008 6:39 PM | Report abuse

a toxic economic mix

Only took the Pelosi congress a little over a year to get those results. One thing the Dems are very good at - the threat of economic disaster.

Posted by: kingofzouk | February 26, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

"It's a toxic economic mix the nation hasn't seen in three decades."

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080226/economy_twin_evils.html

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 6:10 PM | Report abuse

kIM IS A LIB :)

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | February 26, 2008 6:02 PM | Report abuse

"The Florida Governor's last name is CRIST not CHRIST."

For Crist's sake, get it right.'

teehee

Posted by: drindl | February 26, 2008 5:37 PM | Report abuse


Carter carried all of DC. MN, GA, MD, WV and RI - a total of 49 electoral votes compared to Reagan's 489. that is a real squeaker, alright. Are you one of those "Gore won" nutjobs?

I am confident that Obambi can match these results.

mondale did almost as well - he carried MN and Dc only for a total of 13 EV to Reagans 525. another Squeaker?

then there is Mcgovern, he managed MA and Dc for a total of 17 to 520 for Nixon.

so there you have it - the result of nominating ultra-libs - soon to repeated.

Posted by: kingofzouk | February 26, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

For Obama, it's U.S. Congressman Jim Cooper (D-TN) 5th District (Nashville) Why?

- Cooper has no (and never will) ethical or moral issues.

- NO ONE probably in DC, much less the Congress, has as comanding knowledge of the Federal Budget, and the real truth about our fiscal state, as Cooper.

- He has become an extrodinary expert on Foreign Affairs and Military Strategy.

- He is from a Southern state, Tennessee, which traditionally votes for the Republican ticket. A moderate Southerner might be able to pull Tennessee and enough Southern states along.

- He's extremely likeable, is affable and hard not to admire and respect.

- He's a hard-nosed, but fair, negotiator.

- He's all substance; not reteric.

- If you don't want to hear or know the truth, do NOT ask Cooper. A breath of fresh air in politics.

- Go to his U.S. House website. You'll find out a lot about recognizing, "The Gentleman from Tennessee."

James B. Gray

Posted by: jbgray | February 26, 2008 5:33 PM | Report abuse

"Under Clinton: up 227%

I thought corporate greed was bad."

I've certainly never said that, zouk. Is that what you think? How stupid of you.

The rest of your post is just more idiotic strawmen.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 5:27 PM | Report abuse

i still don't understand taht the media is bias for obama. Not to this obama supporter. Of course they must acknowledge reality. If msnbc pulled a fox on him who would watch? Credibility?

Of course the media must report this story and rise. Bias? Why would they not? How would they look then, if obama keeps winning and they keep trashing him, like they did. He is not bush. Bush should get trashed daily, and his party. Because of actions. Obama's current action is winning states. How can the media find a way to twist that? We have seen their tricks. Good thing no one's buying it anymore. How did clinton win new hampshire? Then they use those same crying and "the media is bias" technics before every election? It get's old, when it's an obvious ploy

This whole contest is being fought in the media by the gop (clinton included). Sad day in america

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | February 26, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

Hey, KingofZouk, Carter actually won the presidency in '76, and was barely squeaked out by Reagan in '80, so I don't know what pipe you're smoking from saying that he only won DC and Illinois.

Posted by: greenmountainboy | February 26, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

"Republicans are going to try and paint him as a wild-eyed liberal who is a combination of George McGovern and Jimmy Carter."

no need, he has done that for himself.

Posted by: kingofzouk | February 26, 2008 5:19 PM | Report abuse

i still don't understand taht the media is bias for clinton. Not to this obama supporter. Of course they must acknowledge reality. If msnbc pulled a fox on him who would watch? Credibility?

Of course the media must report this story and rise. Bias? How did clinton win new hampshire?

This whole contest is being fought in the media by the gop (clinton included). Sad day in america

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | February 26, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Under Clinton: up 227%

I thought corporate greed was bad. Are you Libs getting confused again?
Is NAFTA good today or bad?
Is the war worth voting for and funding today or not?
Maybe I should check back after the next primary when it will all be different again.
Is hillary inevitable still?
Is BJ clinton still the first black president or now a confirmed bigot?
Is Liebermann the VP candidate or out of the party? you go away for a week and everything changes.

since Obambi has now won every Red state in the Dem primaries and none of the blue states, does that mean he is favored to win the general election or will he only carry DC and IL like his soul mate Mcgovern and Carter did?

since neither candidate can actually acheive the required delegates to win, does that mean the Dem party is going to self-destruct again, like 1968, and end up fighting amongst itself as little children do, a trait exhibited most glaringly on this blog, where grown adults argue and rant like fools?

a most interesting and tumultous party you have. which hillary will we see tonight - the attack dog or the crying victim? will Obambi finally answer a real question with a real answer?

Posted by: kingofzouk | February 26, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Richardson was such a poor candidate, though. People don't vote for resumes.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Things that make you go HHMMMMM

"Clinton's Continues Her Unrequited Romance with Conservative Media
by DHinMI
Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 01:05:57 PM PST
If there's anyone alive who would not trust the vast right wing conspiracy, one would think it would be the person who coined the term, Hillary Clinton. Nevertheless, the Clinton team, especially Bill Clinton have courted the conservative media since beginning of her first term in the Senate.

Ben Smith laid out the details a few weeks ago:

From Rupert Murdoch to David Brooks to Matt Drudge, her campaign courted them with every instrument at its disposal, including targeted leaks and Bill Clinton's legendary personal charm.

But when Sen. Clinton's campaign started to stumble, those hard-won friends were the first to go. Murdoch's pet tabloid, the New York Post, repudiated her and endorsed Sen. Barack Obama. The Drudge Report rode her decline as gleefully as it watched her rise. And the pundit class moved from its grudging respect for Clinton into an infatuation with Obama...

Clinton's successful outreach to the right had three pillars: the conservative columnists who had begun to see her as the tough-minded centrist of the Democratic field; the media baron Rupert Murdoch; and the most powerful man in American political media, Matt Drudge, whose Drudge Report often sets the agenda for television coverage and broader political perceptions.

And if the conservative base hated her, many members of the conservative elite did not.

Some of the conservative elites thought she was OK because she initially supported the Iraq war, and as it went sour, she never apologized for her earlier support. But, according to Smith, the columnists turned on her because the demands of a competitive nomination fight required her to move too far away from their position and toward the position of the 70% of the American public who want us out of Iraq. It's unclear why Murdoch turned on her, but the Post endorsed Obama, and took this shot at Bill Clinton (whose foundation had even given a job to Murdoch's daughter-in-law):

"Bill Clinton's thuggishly self-centered campaign antics conjure so many bad, sad memories that it's hard to know where to begin. Suffice it to say that his Peck's-Bad-Boy smirk -- the Clinton trademark -- wore thin a very long time ago," the paper wrote.

And Drudge?

Drudge "seems obsessed with making Hillary Clinton our next president," [New York Magazine] observed.

Some in Clinton's circle date the change in the tone of the Drudge Report to Oct. 22, when The New York Times published its own front-page look at the campaign's courtship of the website. The piece further elevated Drudge's stature. It also turned his professed affection for Clinton into conventional wisdom.

The Drudge Report soon shattered that conventional wisdom.

On Nov. 25, Drudge floated the rumor she was having a lesbian affair with an aide over the teasing headline, "Don't Go There."

Why bring this up today? Because of this:

Clinton tells '700 Club' that some critics have asked for her forgiveness

Hillary Rodham Clinton this morning makes her first ever appearance on Christian Broadcasting Network's The 700 Club, CBN correspondent and blogger David Brody tells us.

That's right, Hillary Clinton did an interview for The 700 Club, the television show where Pat Robertson spews crazed and hateful rhetoric about anyone who's not an ultra-conservative evangelical Christian for a viewership of ultra-conservative evangelical Christians.

What did she say?

But Clinton's fight against Obama goes deeper than the mailers being sent to voters.

Obama has been pulling crowds as large as 20,000 at some of his rallies. His charisma, charm and message of hope often have people in the audience crying -- literally.

"I think there is a certain phenomenon associated with this candidacy," she said during the CBN interview. "I am really struck by that because it is very much about him and his personality and his presentation."

But she warns that "it dangers or oversimplifies the complexity of the problems we face, the challenges of navigating our country through some difficult uncharted waters. We are a nation at war that seems to be forgotten."

And while it's no surprise that audiences are enchanted by Obama, it may surprise some that the media is taken by him too.

"I think that certainly is the topic of a lot of conversation, probably for good reason," she said. I think it's again a disservice first to the voters in the Democratic primaries, then to voters in general not to hold each of us to a very tough standard because we're trying for the toughest job in the world."

After being burned once by the VRWC, Hillary Clinton allowed herself to get burned a second time. And she keeps going back, talking to media outlets that have long been hostile to her, that cater to audiences that include almost nobody who will vote for her.

Campaign regularly do things unpopular with some constituency in an effort to court support with another constituency. A campaign will do something that comes with negatives because, they estimate, the negatives will be outweighed by the expected positives. But what possible good can come from wasting 25 minutes for an interview on the show made infamous by Pat Robertson? And what good does it do her to parrot rightwing talking points about how we're a nation at war, as if the "experience" of George W. Bush and former Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney hasn't been a disaster and proven that whether or not one has experience, the country should be led by people who at least have sound judgment.

If Hillary Clinton fails to win the nomination--and right now just about every indication and trend is that she won't--one of the most fascinating subjects for the campaign autopsy will be why the campaign wasted so much time courting the conservative press, and why they were so naïve that they thoughtthe conservatives wouldn't turn on her like they always do.

UPDATE Obama also did an interview with the same reporter from the 700 Club just prior to the South Carolina primary. I don't see any point in him having done that interview either. However, it was not a part of a pattern of reaching out in futility to the conservative media, as has been the case with Clinton.

Permalink :: Discuss ("


Clinton is a republican now. Not because anyone calls her on it. But by her words and actions. She is th elast conservative left standing. What would bush have done with the clinton presidency to hide behind? Would he have been impeached? What about his pardons (bush's)? Would he have been so bold? Fear the yale plan

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | February 26, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Another vote for Richardson here.

People who won't vote for him because he's Hispanic won't vote for Obama because he's black, anyway.

Let those people vote for Ron Paul :P

Obama-Richardson 08!!!

Posted by: alarico | February 26, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

"Haven't we seen productivity improvements over the last 5 years that haven't been reflected in wages?"

No need to boost wages when corporations can "do more with less."

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

JD writes (to promote wage inflation)
"the answer then, is productivity improvements, a cheaper dollar, and better education/training so we're higher up the foodchain, skills-wise."

Haven't we seen productivity improvements over the last 5 years that haven't been reflected in wages? Dollar is already cheaper than its been in 35 years. I guess education/training is the answer...

Posted by: bsimon | February 26, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

As a matter of Realpolitik, it is sadly true that this country probably just isn't ready for a double-minority or double-groundbreaking ticket, so I think that effectively eliminates Bill Richardson or any woman as Obama's VEEP pick. If he would agree to do it (and I don't think he's so close to the Clintons that his ambition would be so thwarted), Wesley Clark makes a lot of sense as Obama's running mate. Helps plug a perceived hole about being soft on defense or on national security, and gives a respected general's lustre of experience to Obama's perceived need for some adult supervision. You can't do it all with a VP pick, but Clark adds about as much as Obama can reasonably hope for. Plus he's articulate and attractive, and in today's politics, that too counts for a lot.

Posted by: dreichmann | February 26, 2008 04:05 PM

Amen!!! It is obvious that the Republicans are going to hammer on the theme that Obama is dangerously naive about national security issues. Having a 4 star general who opposed the Iraq war from the beginning as his running mate will help insulate Obama as much as it is possible to from these charges.

It would also be a very intellectual ticket - president of the Harvard Law Review and a Rhodes scholar who speaks about 5 languages. Clark also has a great deal of executive and diplomatic experience. As US Southern Command Commander and NATO Commander, he dealt with senior military and political leaders in South America and Europe. He was also part of the Dayton Accords negotiating team. He earned the Silver Star in Vietnam. Obama has not yet really been defined nationally and the Republicans are going to try and paint him as a wild-eyed liberal who is a combination of George McGovern and Jimmy Carter. Running with a four star general will help counteract that. It is very hard to portray a general as a wild-eyed liberal who cannot be trusted with national security. Some of that would rub off on Obama - the "he can't be that far left if he's running with a general" image. To top it off, Clark was an early and enthusiastic Clinton supporter - picking him would be an outreach to Clinton's followers (Clinton would never agree to be VP and no one in their right mind would want her as VP).

Posted by: jimd52 | February 26, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

burke: "All I know of Sebelius is her response to the SOTU speech... boring, very boring. BOH could do better."

burke, thanks for backing me up on this. Her speech was delivered in a soothing, sleep-inducing monotone. At least with Tim Kaine or Jim Webb we get some emotion. Maybe that plays in Kansas -- the nonthreatening, mothering Democrat -- but to oust the GOP from the WH it's going to take more than that. Give her a Cabinet post.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

"I can see you in your arrogant Lib way have decided that the President is solely responsible for the DJIA. just like you can control the weather, can control our enemies by talking, can control oil prices, can set wages, can lower health care costs with hope, can decrease tuition by giving out money for tuition, can win wars by losing, can win elections by lying, etc.

If we only had the power you think you have, there wouldn't be any more problems in the world. then it would be safe to elect a Dem president.

but until we can actually control the weather and talk our enemies into surrender and basically spend our way to nirvana by taxing the successful and rewarding the failures, we will have to stick with reality."

this from the moron who blames every single bad thing on the planet on a narrowly Democratic Congress elected less than two years ago. Truly hilarious. In other words, more projecting by the king of projections. He never fails!

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

All I know of Sebelius is her response to the SOTU speech... boring, very boring. BOH could do better. Geographically speaking, I think he should look midwest or west. Gephardt isn't a bad choice, or Bayh. I'm not sure that BOH should choose a woman... certainly don't rule one out, but I don't think it brings anything to the table but the risk of [explitive] govt critics discussing what happens when you elect a minority and a woman.

On the other side of the fence, Martinez would be a complete disaster for Mac as the indpendents would start to leave. Snow is a good choice. I think that a more independent minded person will be key. A choice of a hard line conservative won't fool anyone and just make the job so much more difficult. Mac does have something to gain by choosing a woman or minority, but Swann would probably get eaten alive by the time November rolled around.

Posted by: burkemic99 | February 26, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

spectator uses the same measure he did yesterday for wealth. you are going to use that stat for something right? eventually it may even make sense.

I can see you in your arrogant Lib way have decided that the President is solely responsible for the DJIA. just like you can control the weather, can control our enemies by talking, can control oil prices, can set wages, can lower health care costs with hope, can decrease tuition by giving out money for tuition, can win wars by losing, can win elections by lying, etc.

If we only had the power you think you have, there wouldn't be any more problems in the world. then it would be safe to elect a Dem president.

but until we can actually control the weather and talk our enemies into surrender and basically spend our way to nirvana by taxing the successful and rewarding the failures, we will have to stick with reality.

Posted by: kingofzouk | February 26, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

dave - thanks for your comment - well laid out.

rpy1 - I did have two folks in mind who would hurt the BHO ticket.

BR - as Andy intimated, a TV dud.
HRC - draws fire, could bring out record R turnout from the Rockies to the Appalachians.
---------------------------------
Obviously there are many who would detract from the ticket but who no one in his right mind would consider; e.g.: Boxer, DK, Barney Frank - the list of bad choices in both parties is VERY long.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 26, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse

"There's also something called intelligence but liberals are born without the capacity for it so I don't expect you to understand."

In zouk's bizarro world, intelligence is displayed by posting non sequiturs, insults, cut and paste jobs, and unsupported laundry lists of talking points.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

There's also something called intelligence but liberals are born without the capacity for it so I don't expect you to understand.

Posted by: kingofzouk | February 26, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

"the possibility of a Dem president is being priced into the market."

Interesting comment.

Let's use the DJIA as a proxy for zouk's "market." Under Clinton: up 227%. Under Bush: up 17%.

Feel free to choose another "market," zouk. Pork bellies, maybe?

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Hey, if McCain wants to lure some of the gay vote away from the Democrats, he could choose from among many gay Republicans...some closeted; some, uh, not-so-closeted:

Sen. Larry Craig (ID)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (KY)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (SC)
Rep. David Dreier (CA)
Rep. Patrick McHenry (NC)
Rep. Jim McCrery (LA)
Former Rep. Mark Foley (FL)
Gov. Charlie Crist (FL)
Former Rep. Ed Shrock (VA)
Josh Bolten (White House Chief of Staff)
Condi Rice
Matt Drudge
Armstrong Williams

Posted by: harlemboy | February 26, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

' Were better off without you, Claudia.'

Since you clearly can't handle the english language well, brian, perhaps you should be the one to move.

The government has no obligation to help promote the health of its citizens, but it is generally considered to be in a nation's interest to have a low childhood mortality rate and fewer epidemics. There's also something called compassion but republicans are born without the capacity for it so I don't expect you to understand.

But perhaps even you can get that children are major vectors in any epidemic and keeping them healthy is key to keeping the rest of the population healthy.

Posted by: drindl | February 26, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

"all a result of the election of the Pelosi/Reid congress"

This is how one responds to facts when one doesn't like the facts: with nonsense.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

randygoetz - "The override of the veto is of seismic proportions"

It may have been seismic but it was felt only by those in MN. From an outsiders position, the perception is that his work since 2002 balances the recent event out. Now both sides can argue any story they want on whether he was a successful gov or not, but this one issue is not going to break him in a national election. R's would argue that he balanced a 4.3 Billion dollar deficit without raising taxes and got re-elected in 2006. He certainly has his issues but that storyline goes over well with a lot of people.

Posted by: dave | February 26, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Oh lordy. Well, it'll be fun to watch Pawlenty climb over Norm Coleman to try to get VP status. I'll get the popcorn.

Posted by: jessica.nunn | February 26, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Hillary would not want to be Obama's VP (she's already had to live in the shadow of a less qualified man in the White House), and if the point of his campaign is a break from the past, he doesn't want Hillary (you don't think if he picks her we won't end up talking about that damn blue dress again?).

However, when it comes to change, better to go for the gusto and pick a woman -- I like Sibelius and Napolitano both. What about Christine Gregoire?

Posted by: greenmountainboy | February 26, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

inflation: historically high
housing market: historically bad
oil prices: all-time high
consumer confidence: crumbling

Facts, zouk, facts. Don't bother responding.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 04:10 PM

all a result of the election of the Pelosi/Reid congress. everything was going well before that. the possibility of a Dem president is being priced into the market. Of course, pain will ensue. It will all return to sunny days once Obama is revealed for the charlatan he is and the market abandons the idea that he could possibly win. the thought if hillary winning is already out the window.

Posted by: kingofzouk | February 26, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

bsimon, the answer then, is productivity improvements, a cheaper dollar, and better education/training so we're higher up the foodchain, skills-wise.

Posted by: JD | February 26, 2008 4:32 PM | Report abuse

JD writes
"Inflation is good for some, hurts others. It's especially good for those who want the federal debt to shrink in relation to GDP."

I could go for a little wage inflation.

Posted by: bsimon | February 26, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

How about Bobby Jindal?

Posted by: russell.strother | February 26, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

My Greatgrandmother is rolling over in her grave. In her opinion the Commonwealth IS the South, or at least all the good parts of it.

Posted by: AndyR3 | February 26, 2008 03:11 PM

Ha! Remember, as Blarg will tell you, I'm in NoVa, that's practically a different state. In fact, given Hampton Roads, the Valley, Piedmont area, and the hayseeds in Danville/Martisville, it's practically 4 states.

As for you Zouk and Spec, you really ought to stand down, both of you are right. Inflation is good for some, hurts others. It's especially good for those who want the federal debt to shrink in relation to GDP. Of course it hurts others, so there's no right or wrong answer.

Posted by: JD | February 26, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

As a Minnesotan I would say that Gov. Tim has been spending a little too much time running around the country campaigning for McCain (and himself in the process?). The Democrats (and six Republicans) in the Minnesota just dealt him a severe blow. Within the first two weeks of the 2008 legislative session, they passed a huge tax increase for roads and bridges (yes we need new ones in Minnesota)...which he vetoed. The veto was overridden within just a few hours! You need to understand how seldom the legislature does that in Minnesota. The override of the veto is of seismic proportions. He did a bad job of managing his party and the process from long distance. The Dems and some from his own party just steamrolled over him...may he RIP.

Posted by: randygoetz | February 26, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

From what I understand, Ted Strickland, the only decent governor Ohio has had for a long time, is agitating to try and get Hillary to pick him for VP if she gets the nomination.

Considering how important Ohio is for any presidential campaign, it makes sense.

To him, anyway.

Posted by: elder118 | February 26, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

McCain needs to be careful not to pick someone who really looks young -- the Dan Quayle comparisons will appear instantly.

Obama/Clinton would be a winner but it won't happen. Not only wouldn't Clinton ever take it, there's no way Obama would want to create the most powerful "second spouse" in history.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

I'm glad Chris didn't mention Montana's Governor, Brian Schweitzer (D), in this article.

The Governor, while being fluent in Arabic, having solid ideas and thinking outside the box for solutions, has proven to be more interested in appearing at media events promoting himself for some future endeavor than building quality relationships with the 'common citizens' of the Big Sky state as he should.

Running mate selection is a key issue for the Presidency, especially for two of the remaining candidates: a McCain VP realistically needs to be prepared to take the help at some point in the next four years given the Senator's age; and, an Obama VP should be able to bring some experience to the table (without being a behind-the-scenes political engineer/strongman like Cheney has been). Clinton won't lower herself to VP, so Obama best look elsewhere. I'm with Sen. Dodd today, though, it is time for Sen. Clinton to lead the way in uniting the Democratic party and avoid dragging the party down with attack ads to try to keep herself afloat.

Posted by: kelder | February 26, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

So let's review:

inflation: historically high
housing market: historically bad
oil prices: all-time high
consumer confidence: crumbling

Facts, zouk, facts. Don't bother responding.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

"didn't this moonbat proclaim yesterday that inflation was good for the nation? indeed he did."

really, sfb, now where did i say that?

Your drivel is bad enough without resorting to putting words in your betters' mouths.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 4:06 PM | Report abuse

As a matter of Realpolitik, it is sadly true that this country probably just isn't ready for a double-minority or double-groundbreaking ticket, so I think that effectively eliminates Bill Richardson or any woman as Obama's VEEP pick. If he would agree to do it (and I don't think he's so close to the Clintons that his ambition would be so thwarted), Wesley Clark makes a lot of sense as Obama's running mate. Helps plug a perceived hole about being soft on defense or on national security, and gives a respected general's lustre of experience to Obama's perceived need for some adult supervision. You can't do it all with a VP pick, but Clark adds about as much as Obama can reasonably hope for. Plus he's articulate and attractive, and in today's politics, that too counts for a lot.

Posted by: dreichmann | February 26, 2008 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Inflation: worst since 82.
Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 12:52 PM

didn't this moonbat proclaim yesterday that inflation was good for the nation? indeed he did. that's Liberal economics for ya. It changes day to day depending on the latest poll, just like all thier ideas.

I was actually for inflation beofee I was against it. - Spectator the dim

Posted by: kingofzouk | February 26, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

"McCain's candidacy will provide an interesting dynamic to this year's election, especially if running against Obama. There may be a considerable number of states that have traditionally gone red or blue that might shift to the other side. It will be interesting to see if a Republican could win California and lose Georgia, for example."
-------------------------------------

I agree.

Pennsylvania may be in play for McCain. It would be a trade with Ohio.

California may also be in play, but less likely than PA.

Western states with a low/non-existent black population may be closer than the pundits believe. Obama may surprise in Republican states.

Industrial Northeast states with Black-white "issues" may tip to McCain with moderate/conservative democrats voting Republican.

On the other hand, the Iraq War is a political nightmare and the economy is troubling...Obama could win in an electoral rout.

Its just one persons opinion.

Posted by: Digital_Voter | February 26, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

I agree with several posters who said Obama's best choice would be someone with "experience." Since Hispanics have not voted overwhelming for Obama, and might be favorably inclined toward McCain b/c of his relatively moderate position on immigration, Richardson - executive experience, foreign policy expereince, and Hispanic - might be a good option.

I don't see the upside of McCain selecting Relin or Snowe - he doesn't need to shore up his position with moderates. I, too, think a southerner would be a plus - any thoughts on a woman from the south, other than Texas's KBH, who isn't interested?

Posted by: -pamela | February 26, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

msithnv: Forget Crist. There is no way the GOP will allow a rumored-to-be-gay single man on the ticket. Not gonna happen.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

AndyR3:

Plus Richardson just grew a beard, which hasn't been a hot look for our nation's executive duo since Harrison sported one in 1893.

Aside from that and his stump-like personality, I actually think he's still a compelling choice for VP. He's a governor, he's got prior experience as a diplomat and White House confidant. And (though it depresses me a little to say it) I think he's "white" enough to not offend the sensibilities of Demobigots out there who couldn't stomach most of the other plausible Latino candidates.

Posted by: ablackstormy | February 26, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

You did not mention the most qualified governor on the Democratic side - Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico. He would be a great pick for Presidential candidate Barack Obama. First, he is well liked in the West and holds sway with the Latino community. Second, he knows Washington from an executive position in the cabinet. Third, he has the international credentials and experience that will help President Obama and our country.

Posted by: dbancroft | February 26, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

This is everything you need to know about Tim Pawlenty: when he was a Minnesota state house rep, he came to my high school to speak to our government class. When asked a question about universal health care (this was right after Clinton's health care failure), he used himself as a prime example of someone who didn't need healthcare -- a healthy 30 year old family guy. My intelligence, to say the least, was a touch insulted.

He hasn't done anything as governor to change my view of him as a man who cares less about his state than about his own personal power. Not that that is much different than other politicians, of course. The bad thing is, he covers his ambition up pretty well by playing the part of the everyman.

Posted by: minnesotacharm | February 26, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

That board game just boosted my opinion of Sebelius. I found her SOTU response to be soporific.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Interesting choices for McCain of course none are likely to be his choice.

Remember the purpose of the VP spot for McCain is to strengthen his chances of winning the Presidency.

Why would McCain pick anyone other than a southerner?

The answer? He wouldn't. Look for Governor Rick Perry of Texas or Gov Crist of Florida.

Posted by: msmithnv | February 26, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Brooks, you should go meet some RISD students sometime. I would be willing to bet his project was one of the tamer ones.

Posted by: AndyR3 | February 26, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

When Sebelius spoke after the State of the Union, I didn't get the "ooo ahhhh" feeling about her. And, is anyone else but me worried about that board game that her son is selling? The "Don't drop the soap" game about prison? I seem to be the only one that thinks it was not such a good idea.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/wayoflife/01/28/dont.drop.soap.ap/

Posted by: brooksmf224 | February 26, 2008 3:27 PM | Report abuse

drek0002 writes
"As far as the republicans wanting Pawlenty-please, have him, he's yours."

drek, you do realize that, if Pawlenty goes, Molnau gets his job?

Posted by: bsimon | February 26, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

JD,
"2) Virginia isn't really all that southern, either."

My Greatgrandmother is rolling over in her grave. In her opinion the Commonwealth IS the South, or at least all the good parts of it.

Posted by: AndyR3 | February 26, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Richardson is out for the simple fact that he is Hispanic. There are alot of people out there who will be willing to vote for a black man for president, but having a Latino as the VP too would be too much to take.
Not to mention the fact that Richardson was an utter Failure as a National candidate. His debating skills are poor and IMO doesn't come close to living up to his impressive resume.

Posted by: AndyR3 | February 26, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

I must respond to Claudia Long's comments about SC Governor Mark Sanford. I'll begin by asking: Claudia, do you work & pay for your own health care or do you live on a welfare system? It is my belief that government has no real responsibility to provide health care for it's citizens. That's why we have open markets, b/c people are responsible for their own healthcare. Parents are responsible for their children's healthcare. Why should a working family who works hard, pays their own bills & provides healthcare for themselves & their children also be held responsible for someone who does not work hard, pay their own bills and relies on a welfare system to do so? Explain this to me,in your view, why government is responsible for the healthcare of it's citizens? People, parents and yes, even seniors are responsible for their own healthcare. This is capitalism, so if you don't like it move on to Canada. Were better off without you, Claudia.

Posted by: bryant_flier2006 | February 26, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

Kaine brings important geographical balance to the ticket -- he's a young governor of a conservative southern state.

Posted by: jennsabe | February 26, 2008 02:34 PM


1) Virginia is only very mildly conservative
2) Virginia isn't really all that southern, either.

Also, for those pitching Biden, Dodd, etc I'm not sure it's a good idea for the ticket to go senator/senator.

Posted by: JD | February 26, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Here Are The Results of SurveyUSA Election Poll #13401

Geography Surveyed: Texas
Data Collected: 02/23/2008 - 02/25/2008
Release Date: 02/25/2008 4:00 PM ET
Sponsors: KRLD-AM Dallas, KTRK-TV Houston, KTVT-TV Dallas

The 'Ayes' of Texas Are Upon Him: Obama Now Atop Clinton -- In a Democratic Primary in Texas today, 02/25/08, 8 days till votes are counted, Barack Obama moves ever-so-slightly ahead of Hillary Clinton, though at the edge of the margin of sampling error, according to a SurveyUSA poll conducted for KTRK-TV Houston, KTVT-TV Dallas and KRLD-AM radio Dallas. Today, it's Obama 49%, Clinton 45%. Compared to a SurveyUSA tracking poll released one week ago, Obama is up 4 points, Clinton is down 5 points.

Interactive Tracking Graphs: SurveyUSA's interactive tracking graphs, a SurveyUSA exclusive, allow you to see the movement within the critical demographic subpopulations. Among Hispanic voters, Clinton led by 33 points last week, leads by 13 points today. Among women, Clinton had led by 27, now by 11. Among voters younger than Barack Obama, Obama had led by 6, now by 22. In North Texas (which includes Dallas and Fort Worth), Clinton had led by 2, now trails by 19. In East Texas (which includes Houston), Obama had led by 5, now leads by 18. Among registered Democrats, Clinton had led by 14, now by 2. Among voters focused on the Economy, Clinton had led by 5, now trails by 11. Among those who attend religious services regularly, Clinton had led by 7, now trails by 15. Among Pro-Life voters, Clinton had led by 1, now trails by 14. Among seniors, Liberals, voters in Central Texas, South Texas and West Texas, Clinton's support is holding.

Filtering: 2,000 state of Texas adults were interviewed by SurveyUSA 02/23/08 through 02/25/08. Of them, 1,780 were registered to vote. Of them, 704 were determined by SurveyUSA to have already voted in the 03/04/08 Democratic Primary, or to be likely to vote on or before Election Day. Of the 25% of respondents who have already voted, it's Clinton 51%, Obama 46%.

Asked of 704 Likely & Actual Voters
Margin of Sampling Error for this question = ± 3.8%

Posted by: MoreAndBetterPolls | February 26, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Good report, however these potential Veep candidates may be out-of-luck because they're a lot more attractive than the Hag from Hell (thank you, sawargos) and Magoo.

Posted by: filoporquequilo | February 26, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

I believe that NM Gov. Bill Richardson would be an excellent choice in particular for Sen. Obama. Why no mention of him?

He's had tangible social and economic accomplishments as governor. This is particularly true with respect to health care coverage extension and promoting economic development in the state.

He has in-depth foreign policy knowledge of the key issues and a vision, as well as diplomatic savvy and experience. (The two are related but different; during his own presidential run, Gov. Richardson got credit for his diplomatic forays, but not as much for his substantive policy knowledge and vision of "New Realism".)

Sen. Obama in particular will need someone with foreign policy gravitas as a counselor, special envoy and as a bulwark against likely attacks on foreign policy inexperience by Sen. McCain's campaign.

Finally, Gov. Richardson could help Sen. Obama in the Southwest and among Hispanics -- a group that Sen. Obama is making inroads with, but which he'll need to really solidify and expand into prior to Nov.

Posted by: fow2s | February 26, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

PatrickNYC is on the right track. Obama will be such a groundbreaker that he needs someone to complement his perceived weaknesses and McCain's strength; geography is relatively unimportant this time.

While Clark would be good, his poor performance in the Pres race last time gives me pause. I think Richardson is the best combination of executive experience, foreign affairs background consistent with Obama's views emphasizing negotiation, and the Hispanic angle. He also would offset the "cool" of Obama and would likely reassure those for whom two steps forward (e.g., Sebelius) might be a bit much.

rem1

Posted by: rem1 | February 26, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

a minneapolis liberal/socialist writing here - and, as you may have guessed, not a big fan of pawlenty.

but... most moderate/independent/swing voters aren't going to dismiss mccain because his veep had a veto over-ridden on a bill in minnesota. most people won't think that he personally made the bridge collapse.

pawlenty is a very good debater and, until you get to know him, comes off as a likeable enough guy. he's young and smart and quick-witted and, best i can tell, has no chance of any, real skeletons coming out.

pawlenty, i hate to say it, would be a good pick.

Posted by: moore104 | February 26, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

On the Dem side, I think Obama will go with a senator for veep. Because he is running on the change message against more experienced senators, the electorate's hesitation to elect senators is playing against Clinton, and I predict will also play against McCain because of his seniority.

So, I don't knock the idea of Sebelius, but I don't think it is a key ingredient to pick a governor. I think three senators fit the bill better:

1) Biden - for his foreign policy credentials (though he might be best deployed as SecState)
2) Chris Dodd - for his decades of service to his country, plus for his fluency in Spanish. He could spend the fall wooing the Latino vote in key states like Florida and the southwest.
3) Claire McCaskill - to demonstrate the need of democrats to compete in red states as well as blue, and particularly, to deliver Missouri which has proved to be the bellwether state in presidential elections.

Thinking ahead strategically to an Obama presidency, the Senate will be the key battleground for all of the legislative battles to come. Because of the filibuster/cloture rules, here is where all of the skill of the administration will need to be focused. The veep will be the president of the Senate and will likely work closely with his or her former colleagues to shepherd the legislation through. Therefore I see a great strategic advantage in having a former senator as veep. Biden and Dodd especially are well respected and have worked across the aisle for decades. And McCaskill comes with both administrative competence and that sunny Midwestern optimism that fits the Obama message so well.

Posted by: optimyst | February 26, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

For McCain he will need to shake up the ticket somewhat and Palin does that, I just think the experience thing might be a problem. The other major women candidates in the GOP are senators from states that would put Democrats in their place if they left (Snowe etc). However, If you want a female governor that fits with McCain I would go with Jodi Rell from Connecticut. That might be the winning combo for him.

Obama's choice should and will be Wes Clark, IMO. He is strong in everything that Obama isn't and will play well in the South AND in the Midwest. Plus he was against the war from the beginning. IN addition it will help to appease the Clinton folks by taking one of their supporters. Not to mention with the current Kosovo situation seeming to grow and grow Clark's work in the region could be an asset. If not him then maybe Sebelius. Kaine is out, he only won VA because of Mark Warner's coat-tails. Might as well take Edwards who is smarter, better looking, and is a better attack dog for the campaign.

Posted by: AndyR3 | February 26, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

I'll second Mark in Austin's comment that Obama is likely to take the Texas primary (God willin' and the creek don't rise -- meaning he is not photographed fornicating with a goat at tonight's debate). There's no doubt he'll take the most delegates, and in the somewhat meaningless popular vote he will also come in somewhere north of 50%.

I think that Gov. Sebilius is an enticing VP choice. I also think that Gov. Napalitano of AZ is similarly attractive. While Sebilius could put KS in play, Napalitano puts the less-Red and larger AZ into play, which cleverly distracts McCain by forcing him to spend extra time in his home state. It also helps keep the Renzi issue alive. If I were McCain, I would least like to have to face Napalitano on the ticket for the above reasons.

Posted by: Stonecreek | February 26, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

Dick Gebhardt? Interesting strategy- try pair the most dynamic, engaging politician to come along in years with a guy with zero charisma, thus achieving a net neutrality. I will place money on that not happening.

As far as the republicans wanting Pawlenty-please, have him, he's yours. I'm one of the Minnesotans who is thrilled that 6 R's crossed party lines in the house to override his veto of the transportation bill (91-41). Maybe now that he won't get to have his way with everything (assuming the temporary spine transplant takes hold) the VP job will look more enticing and we can get rid of the condescending creep.

Posted by: drek0002 | February 26, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Why wouldn't McCain pick someone like Ileana Ros-Lehtinen or Sen. Mel Martinez? I would think a hispanic republican from Florida would make McCain quite formidable.

Posted by: Gsmalfel | February 26, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

I think someone said basic rule of thumb a VP pick isn't going to bring a state with them....
I would only say that I am certain that if Senator Bob Graham was on the ticket in 2000 he would have certainly been worth 547 votes in the State of Florida and we'd most likely be at the end of the 2nd term of President Al Gore....

Posted by: jashenderson82 | February 26, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Mark,
I think Pawlenty is marginally better qualified but Palin is a better governor (IMO). Pawlenty's public service career includes serving as a criminal prosecutor, Eagan City Councilmember, and ten-year member of the Minnesota House of Representatives, including four years as House Majority Leader and gov since 2002. Palin's public service includes two terms on the Wasilla City Council, becoming a two-term mayor and manager of Wasilla, being elected President of the Alaska Conference of Mayors and gov in 2006. My perception is that Pawlenty has been a pretty good governor (bridge issues aside) but Palin is better.

Posted by: dave | February 26, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

If bringing a woman to the republican ticket is important, I think I would rather see Olympia Snowe than Gov. Palin. While the Governor's popularity in her state should not be overlooked, Sen. Snowe has considerable national experience and has good name recognition in the Northeast, a region McCain might view to be in play.

Another interesting possibility is Chris Cox, the current chairman of the SEC. Despite his Y chromosome, he may be attractive for his popularity in California, which may bring that state into play.

McCain's candidacy will provide an interesting dynamic to this year's election, especially if running against Obama. There may be a considerable number of states that have traditionally gone red or blue that might shift to the other side. It will be interesting to see if a Republican could win California and lose Georgia, for example.

Posted by: eriknfrias | February 26, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Don't forget about Va. Gov. Tim Kaine as a V.P. contender on an Obama ticket. Kaine brings important geographical balance to the ticket -- he's a young governor of a conservative southern state.

Posted by: jennsabe | February 26, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

To corral the retard vote, either party would be wise to pick King of Zouk as a running mate. The tinfoil he wears on his head is much flashier than Pawlenty's mullet.

Posted by: bondjedi | February 26, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

Chris:

I'm surprised Gov. Palin didn't haul you back to the woodshed for your blunder. And I'm sure your Alaska readership of The Fix just plummeted when they heard you say that Alaska was not a big state. It is the BIGGEST state!

Posted by: optimyst | February 26, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

'Obama/Sebelius 08'. Nice ring to it.'

does indeed.

Posted by: drindl | February 26, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

I think Obama would be wise to pick Wesley Clark, shut up the weak on defense talk.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | February 26, 2008 2:29 PM | Report abuse

you're a nasty little piece of racism, bridget. why don't you go hang out with the other white supremacists at the stormfront website?

lewyn? jeezus. dick gephardt? he's been dead for years. he's the only one who doesn't know it.

Posted by: drindl | February 26, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Pawlenty's sole asset is that he's telegenic. He received under 50% of the vote in both of his runs for governor. He failed to deliver Minnesota for McCain in the caucuses. The Republicans in the legislature are starting to rebel. His Transportation chief (also his Lt. Gov.) is widely seen as a disgrace to the state (think bridges) yet he continues to keep her on.

And as noted in an earlier post, he's had a number of ethical problems that would surely resurface.

On the other hand, I'd love it if McCain would take Pawlenty off our hands!

Posted by: KathleenK1 | February 26, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

I think the Sebelius pick is interesting but I'm not sold on it for several reasons...
One, if it's for "making history" reasons, you already have that at the top of the ticket - there's no need to add more to that story - and frankly that's usually pretty insignificant as I still am not sure what votes Joe Lieberman brought to the ticket.
I also have no idea if this would put Kanas "into play" but even if it did the election will not hinge on Kansas.
Finally, I just feel like Obama needs to add some more balance - someone with more experience, preferable foreign policy related would really balance out the ticket.
Just not crazy about it....

Posted by: clark55 | February 26, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Obama shouldn't pick someone who would hurt the ticket -- do you have specific folks in mind?

Posted by: rpy1 | February 26, 2008 02:12 PM

Hillary comes to mind for obvious reasons. The GOP will play all her quotes from the campaign against Obama. While I love Russ Feingold he will not play well in any red states. Same for Boxer or Feinstein.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | February 26, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Mark - it's interesting to hear your take on the Texas primary. You mentioned that Obama shouldn't pick someone who would hurt the ticket -- do you have specific folks in mind?

Posted by: rpy1 | February 26, 2008 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Basic rule of thumb: a Vice President is not going to bring a state with them. Barring a scandal, the VP's major impact will be his success or failure in the Vice Presidential debate.

Given that, I don't think either nominee would be wise to pick someone without national political experience - either a very experienced governor or a high-profile legislator.

On the R side, two words: FRED THOMPSON. Thompson is nationally known enough to help with the conservative base. And even though he did not distinguish himself during the primaries, his record in two-man elections is spotless. His emasculation of Huckabee in the South Carolina debate shows that when he goes on the attack he does well.

On the D side, I'd pick Dick Gephardt. Not particularly charismatic but he won't make any gaffes or lose any votes.

Posted by: lewyn | February 26, 2008 2:08 PM | Report abuse

"The Florida Governor's last name is CRIST not CHRIST."

For Crist's sake, get it right.

Posted by: bsimon | February 26, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

How many states did Geraldine Ferraro win for Walter Mondale back in 1984?

Also - The Florida Governor's last name is CRIST not CHRIST.

Posted by: Digital_Voter | February 26, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

dave, I was only comparing her to Pawlenty, not "the field". Do you think Pawlenty is the better governor or is otherwise more qualified than she?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 26, 2008 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Mark_in_austin - "Palin seems much better than Pawlenty, between these interviewees, IMHO."

Palin, as much as I like her and as highly as I think of her, does not have the experience to be a heartbeat away from the presidency (yet).

Posted by: dave | February 26, 2008 1:35 PM | Report abuse

I had supported dodd as obama's vp, due to his strong patrioic fisa stance. today dodd came out in support of obama, yet decline interest in the vp slot. Saying he would rather head the banking comitte.

to bad, altough it's probably for the best. I respect the man's wishs. Two senators on the same ticket is not ideal. Obama needs patriotic americans he can trust, and needs to be on the look-out for republcains posing as democrats to sabotage. He needs people with a spine.

I appriecate what dodd did and said today. More powr to the man. Histroy will smile on the patriots and frown on the red coat traitors for profit.

Good luck senator dodd, whatever your next move is. He paved the way for a govenor or a women. hopefully it's not richardson or biden or some other "moderate" who stood by as bush and the gop destroyed our country. Even now the di fi rockafeller moderates are with the gop.

Obama needs to draw a line in the sand with biden and di fi and rockafeller reid. Are you a republcain or a democrat? Are you with america or yourself (money)?

The democrats cannot put through their agenda with the gop voting as the borg, with SOME democrats siding with them. A line must be drawn. I want all republcain with a (r) next to their name. So we can see the sabotuers for profit clearly. Put it all on the table.

Posted by: JKrishnamurti | February 26, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Obama need look no further than the ringing endorsement he received yesterday.

Obama/Farrakhan 08' - Now THAT has a nice ring to it.

Posted by: brigittepj | February 26, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

claudialong - 'The GOP governor, who has repeatedly decried spending by fellow Republicans who control the Legislature, is looking to save $22 million by axing the coverage for about 70,000 low-income children in the state.'

My question is how you provide health coverage for any child for $314.29 per year? It seems to me that we should either sign everyone in the country up on this program and end our "healthcare crisis" because it's so inexpensive or there are some problems with the numbers and the context in which they are presented.

Posted by: dave | February 26, 2008 1:25 PM | Report abuse

Sebelius is the perfect fit.

She is a winning Democrat on her second term as governor.

The Obama people need search no more.

Obama/Sebelius 08'. Nice ring to it.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 26, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

Lunch time in Austin.

I think BHO is going to carry both the popular vote and the delegate count in TX now. Previously I thought they might split. Recent polls, turnout for early voting, and news stories in TX papers support my "new" opinion.

So McC should pick a highly qualified person who does not hurt his ticket. He has the potential to run a very strong race against BHO. He cannot afford a "Quayle". More important than ideology for McC's VP will be the actual capability to effectively govern. Palin seems much better than Pawlenty, between these interviewees, IMHO.

BHO is conversely faced with a tough race against McC. He too should pick a highly qualified person who does not hurt the ticket. Sebelius is not disqualified from this discussion, I think.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 26, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

sorry for the double post--forgot this:

'Portman was criticized in the campaign for his law firm's work for Haitian dictator Baby Doc Duvalier, '

'According to columnist Robert Novak, Portman is President Bush's choice for Vice Presidential running mate for Senator John McCain, as he would reassure conservatives, balance McCain's age with youth, and secure the swing state Ohio.'

Posted by: drindl | February 26, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

"In what might more reasonably be read as a threat than a promise, the man who has done more than anyone else in the Bush administration to promote free-trade deals that undermine protections for workers, farmers and the environment -- and that have saddled the U.S. with crippling trade deficits -- declared that, "John McCain is the right choice for Ohioans... to get our economy back on track."

Portman failed to mention what got our economy off track. Gee, might it have had something to do with the failed trade policies he has promoted?

That bit of economic realism was not the only missing element in the announcement that came from the McCain camp today. Portman was identified in the release as "a Cincinnati native (who) represented Ohio's second district from 1993-2005. After leaving Congress Portman went on to serve as the United States Trade Representative, a position with the rank of Ambassador. From 2006-2007 Portman served as Director of the Office of Management and Budget. He is currently of counsel with the Cincinnati office of the law firm Squire, Sanders & Dempsey."

Opps. Forgot to mention that Portman's name is at or near the top of most lists of prospective running mates for McCain.

If Portman does end up on a McCain ticket, it will send a powerful signal that the Republican who seek to maintain their grip on the White House -- and a federal government they controlled with little challenge for most of the past eight years -- have neither the ideas nor the inclination to "get our economy back on track." Indeed, Portman, an unquestioning supporter of unregulated free trade and McCain's promise of "100 years of war," is someone who is all too ready to run on the unofficial McCain platform of "Less Jobs, More War."

Posted by: drindl | February 26, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

"In what might more reasonably be read as a threat than a promise, the man who has done more than anyone else in the Bush administration to promote free-trade deals that undermine protections for workers, farmers and the environment -- and that have saddled the U.S. with crippling trade deficits -- declared that, "John McCain is the right choice for Ohioans... to get our economy back on track."

Portman failed to mention what got our economy off track. Gee, might it have had something to do with the failed trade policies he has promoted?

That bit of economic realism was not the only missing element in the announcement that came from the McCain camp today. Portman was identified in the release as "a Cincinnati native (who) represented Ohio's second district from 1993-2005. After leaving Congress Portman went on to serve as the United States Trade Representative, a position with the rank of Ambassador. From 2006-2007 Portman served as Director of the Office of Management and Budget. He is currently of counsel with the Cincinnati office of the law firm Squire, Sanders & Dempsey."

Opps. Forgot to mention that Portman's name is at or near the top of most lists of prospective running mates for McCain.

If Portman does end up on a McCain ticket, it will send a powerful signal that the Republican who seek to maintain their grip on the White House -- and a federal government they controlled with little challenge for most of the past eight years -- have neither the ideas nor the inclination to "get our economy back on track." Indeed, Portman, an unquestioning supporter of unregulated free trade and McCain's promise of "100 years of war," is someone who is all too ready to run on the unofficial McCain platform of "Less Jobs, More War."

Posted by: drindl | February 26, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

The Republicans need to target a closely contested state such as Ohio, which they must carry to win the presidency. For McCain, then, the obvious choice is Rob Portman of Ohio. He's a former congressman, U.S. Trade Representative, and director of the White House Office of Management and Budget. He's popular and respected on both sides of the aisle on Capitol Hill. With all of that domestic and international experience, and with his relative youth (he's 53, nearly 20 years younger than McCain), Portman would be a solid choice for McCain. Reportedly, Bush wants McCain to select Portman. But will Portman's close ties to the Bush family disqualify him?

Posted by: harlemboy | February 26, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse

I concur bsimon. The underfunding of roads in MN for years by Pawlenty has to be a huge negative. Plus the string of bad econmonic news has to sting. Ie the loss of Macy's regional headquarters, Wilson's Leather and the soon to be departed Northwest.

Posted by: vladtheimpalertepes | February 26, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

egc52556 writes
"Is it helpful for Obama to pick a running mate before he has the nomination secured? Would the selection of the "perfect choice" help him overcome Clinton?"

No and no. Going backwards, the race is over, though the Clinton campaign does not yet know it. Regarding the former, the eventual nominee needs to pick a running-mate based on the general election & the prospect of governing in the event of a win - not based on the primary battle. For one thing, there is a not-insignificant group of voters that think they should run together (though I would hope they do not).

Posted by: bsimon | February 26, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

I caught Pawlenty's act on FNS this past Sunday. If possible, he struck me as more vapid than Dan Quayle. Plus, his mullet might be an asset in Minnesota, but I am unsure how well a hockey haircut will go over outside Minnesota and North Dakota.

Posted by: bondjedi | February 26, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

I would prefer McCain go with Huckabee, that will turn off the indies. He'll never go with Christ, the closet stories will kill his base.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | February 26, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Charlie Crist will not be on the ticket. Where he will be is the ever growing GOP closet.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone think McCain's choice of veep will in any way offset this kind of economic news?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23349559/

Inflation: worst since 82. Housing market: Worst since the 80s. Consumer confidence: in the pits. Not good.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

I really wish CC had gotten Crist (another CC) on interview--I'd like to have seen his take---of course he might not have been available to be interviewed, because as the true front runner in veepstakes '08 he has to be the most evasive.

Posted by: chadibuins | February 26, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Is it helpful for Obama to pick a running mate before he has the nomination secured? Would the selection of the "perfect choice" help him overcome Clinton?

Posted by: egc52556 | February 26, 2008 12:47 PM | Report abuse

cscagle: I am sure many Democrats are hoping for Sanford too! Because while he might satisfy the GOP base, he sure won't help pull in any indies.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Spectator2: I'd be lying if I didn't say that I'm hoping for Sanford!

Posted by: cscagle | February 26, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

csagle and patrick: your suggestions are far too sensible for the current GOP.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 26, 2008 12:32 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if McCain will pick someone who looks so young, making more of a contrast to his age. While Sebelius looks like a natural for Obama.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | February 26, 2008 12:25 PM | Report abuse

McCain would be a fool not to pick Palin: she's young (counters McCain's age) and she's a woman (blunts the charge that the GOP is the party of old white men). Presuming that Obama is the Dems' nominee, Obama's weak point thus far is women. Women have been voting for HRC consistently. It is reasonable to presume that many (not all) vote for her simply because she is a woman. Adding a young, conservative woman to the GOP ticket helps undermine Obama's and the Dems' base heading into the fall.

Posted by: cscagle | February 26, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Mark Sanford, another 'compassionate conservative'

'COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) -- Tens of thousands of low-income South Carolina children granted health care coverage last year would lose the government-paid insurance under a budget plan unveiled by Gov. Mark Sanford on Monday.

The GOP governor, who has repeatedly decried spending by fellow Republicans who control the Legislature, is looking to save $22 million by axing the coverage for about 70,000 low-income children in the state. It's the latest salvo in a political fight he lost last year when lawmakers overrode a veto that would have done the same thing.'

....

'According to a story in yesterday's Fort Mill Times, Sanford totally did not fund a program that feeds about 5,500 seniors in South Carolina.

"The problem is, the governor is trying to cut senior funding," Myrna Hamilton said. "It will be a disaster for low income seniors."

Hamilton, a township resident, has become an activist for senior issues in recent years since being appointed to the Silver Haired Legislature, a program set up by the Office on Aging to engage seniors in the government process and to advocate for senior issues. Until she began going to a local senior center run out of Unity Presbyterian Church, Hamilton said, she didn't realize how bad things can get for some seniors.

"The funding is important for seniors," she said. "It literally means life or death for some of them."

Posted by: drindl | February 26, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

ah yes, pawlenty, friend of abramoff...

'A similar culture of corruption surrounds Governor Pawlenty and his closest associates. Consider that:

In 2002, Governor Pawlenty hired Tim Commers to be his campaign manager. In a scandal similar to that involving Hoplin and Krueger's group, Commers was found by the Minnesota Court of Appeals to have engaged in telemarketing fraud for misrepresenting to donors in fundraising calls that his political action committee was another well‑known pro-life group.

In 2002, the Pawlenty campaign circumvented state campaign financing laws by illegally coordinating $600,000 in television ads with the Republican Party. The Pawlenty campaign received the largest fine in state history for its lawless behavior.

Thousands of senior citizens were ripped off by the largest subsidiary of a telecom company on whose board Pawlenty sat. Even though everyone knows that telecom companies are often besieged by fraud, Pawlenty claimed he never bothered to look into the company's practices.

Pawlenty was paid over $60,000 from a political ally whose companies were sanctioned by numerous regulators and never disclosed it on mandatory reporting forms. Pawlenty claimed that he forgot what he did to earn the money.

Pawlenty's campaign treasurer was found by an administrative law judge to have engaged in fraud by falsely representing that he would save the homes of homeowners in foreclosure. Krueger announced in September that the treasurer was resigning after being sanctioned for his role in the "equity stripping" scheme, but Pawlenty's campaign finance reports currently show that the treasurer's company was paid over $9,000 between October, 2005 and December, 2005 for handling Pawlenty's campaign finances. Pawlenty year end report states that his campaign still owes Esau $6,153.35 for services rendered.'

Posted by: drindl | February 26, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Chris, did Gov Pawlenty show any signs of stress? The MN legislature was preparing to overturn his veto of a transportation bill (which they succeeeded in doing). He's now known around here as Governor "I'd rather have another bridge fall down than raises taxes" Pawlenty.

Posted by: bsimon | February 26, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company